Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id WAA21243 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Wed, 17 Apr 2002 22:37:58 +0100 Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 17:31:57 -0400 Subject: Re: Subliminal advertising Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed From: "Wade T.Smith" <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <NEBBKOADILIOKGDJLPMAAEJECOAA.email@example.com> Message-Id: <8B7DDFF7-524A-11D6-9556-003065B9A95A@harvard.edu> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
On Wednesday, April 17, 2002, at 04:17 , Lawrence DeBivort wrote:
> How do
> you know it doesn't work?
Because none of the studies attempting to show that it can, showed that
Admittedly, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but, these
were careful studies, and, as well, the 'original' subliminal
advertisement, the drive-in theatre urban legend, was exposed as a
complete fraud not too long ago.
Frauds are, well, pretty poor evidence of something working.
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 17 2002 - 23:20:57 BST