Hi Walrus,
You're making a list of assumptions about me and photoreading, and I recommend that you do not do that. A long response doesn't necessarily mean I'm defending it. The response looks 'long' because i included your quotations. Additionally, I'm partly wanting to know what you're asking, while at the same time clarifying based on what I know. I'm no expert in photoreading. There's still a ton about Photoreading that I don't know about and so I'm still testing out this stuff. In particular, I have yet to come across things like spontaneous activation.
What specifically do you mean by worthless? How can even the least bit of anecdotal evidence be considered worthless? And what do you mean by sad examples??
It's clear to me that Paul hasn't abandoned photoreading. He's incorporated some of the other stuff into it (i.e. some qigong related techniques for mental preparation) and techniques like direct learning were applied to photoreading.
At the very least, I know that Dr. J Michael Bennett contributed to the photoreading program with the skittering technique.
As for studies, I don't know of any.
I may be wrong, but I really get the impression that no matter what evidence is shown to you, it won't really mean much, or that you'll be quick to think it's worthless.
I'd be really interested to see some serious investigation as well, but I'm not sure your definition of it is the same as mine.
-Jason
