User talk:Carter82

Edits that change a page from critical to positive or vice versa should probably be discussed on the talk page first. Christopher (talk) 18:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

It's not so much critical to positive, as it simply appeared one sided and misleading in the first place. Critical involves balance. Cooper, has no formal qualifications in parapsychology, his PhD is in psychology and thanatology. Given he is a chartered member of the BPS, it would be sensible to refer to him as a 'psychologist'. I have seen him give lectures, and observed his research, and research method teachings, again, pseudoscience 'supporter' is unjust. He does not support pseudoscience (and has voiced this), but is a heavy supporter of science, and the scientific method. His MRes degree was in social science research methods and advance statistics. Information I included regarding Blackmore to create a balance argument, has now become a 'half-cut' argument, and is misleading and suggesting Osis and McCormick were wrong. You would have read this since it has been deleted. There is so much on this bio alone that is wrong, unjust, and misleading - but to what end? That isn't even Cooper's website... Why don't you contact these people? Happy to talk to you on this phone about this, I can clarify further.Carter82 (talk) 08:47, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Don't just copy and paste the welcome randomly. —ClickerClock (talk) 09:20, 10 November 2017 (UTC)


 * And your answer to this deceptive 'biography' is what?&mdash; Unsigned, by: Carter82 / talk / contribs
 * On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes ( ~ ) or by clicking on the sign button: SigButt.png on the toolbar above the edit panel. (You can indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line.) Thank you. Christopher (talk) 19:59, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Christopher, with the greatest of respect (which ironically this bio has not received), could you answer the points above (or attempt to) with diverting to mundane points about the editorial intricacies of Wikipedia?--Carter82 (talk) 21:52, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

PhD research on the afterlife?
I have updated your article. I listened to your interview and your complaints about your article. Can you let me know about your PhD research? Psychic writer Theresa Cheung says you are doing "PhD research into afterlife communication". There is no scientific evidence for an afterlife so I am not sure how you could be doing PhD research on it. Does she mean you are studying claims about afterlife communication? I suspect you may be doing something on thanatology. Can you clarify if this is correct or not? Thank you! DangerZone (talk) 02:29, 23 November 2017 (UTC)