Talk:Stephen E. Braude

Criticism
The section on parapsychology seems to consist almost entirely of criticisms, without Braude's side of the story or anyone else defending him. It needs serious work. The Grossman stuff is woefully deficient for example. Braude, in that work, relies mostly on experimental fieldwork from people who studied Home and Palladino in depth, not just on anecdotes, and he gives a cogent defence of that evidence, including why occasional fraud (which Home at least was never caught in) doesn't mean all the unexplained phenomena attributed to the medium can be written off124.171.39.121 (talk) 02:56, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I can't say that I found the article overly critical today, but independent reliable sources are prefered to primary or self-published ones, meaning that there is more likely to be criticism from the mainstream as well. — Paleo  Neonate  – 09:59, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Mainstream scientific opinion is overwhelmingly critical of parapsychology. Wikipedia can only reflect this opinion and avoid false balance created by giving weight to counter-opinions from the fringe. - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:39, 14 February 2020 (UTC)