Ishnar:
I agree with you about the timing point. Changing two variables like that is not a good idea. However, I don't like the term pseudoscience and your analogy is not very accurate.
My purpose for describing the experiment was to generate some enthusiasm for testing the system -- not to describe a comprehensive method to do so.
Also, I think 1 month is an adequate use time to judge the system (possibly even up to 6 months). If someone makes a claim then the average consumer is not going to expect to reap those benefits 5-10 years down the road -- that is silly.
Anyway, I think the burden to prove the system is on Learning Strategies because the evidence is stacked against them.
I do believe that people use a small percent of their capability (and that photoreading type speeds are possible). But I don't believe that these people have figured it out.
Below are some questions that I leave to the reader to decide..
* What does it say about the system when a Photoreading instructor performed worse then average readers?
* Why is Paul Scheele and Pete Bisonette not in the Guines Book of World Records when they can read as fast or faster then Howard Berg?
* Is it reasonable to believe that they can teach most people to read as fast as the fastest reader in the world?
* What can be originally credited to Paul Scheele in this system?
* Why do they only guarantee a 3x faster reading speed?
* Why have they not did a ton of scientific studies to counter these types of questions?
* How strong is the argument that the system works because they are a licensed private school?
* What achievements has Paul or Pete made outside of this system and have they demonstrated its effectiveness in some other field?
* How many people on this forum claim to have "really got" the system as described?
