I have been involve in psychic experiments, and run a paranormal website. I have seen/participated in telepathy experiments achieve well above average hit rates. I have also seen/participated in precognition experiments with above average hit rates.
Both of those experiments had consistently higher hit rates than chance. There are psychic experiments out there that now defy billion to one odds, yet the skeptic community is allowed to write them off as chance.
Defying Billion to one odds on long term psychic project should not be written off, and anybody who does so without at least looking at the possibility is wrong.
I think almost any psychic experiment would yield results above chance, unless it was run by hard core skeptics who are not even trying.
Go ahead and "make" someone call you on the telephone who might not normally, or do something to just prove it to yourself.
I do not believe that thoughts travel by magic, but are transmitted and received by a process yet unknown. The "yet unknown" would be interesting to talk about, but sciforums has to many "anti-possibility" trolls who think we have maxed out our scientific potential as humans. I feel sorry for them. I have seen positive results beyond some peoples imaginings, but it must be harder to accept as someone just looking at results on paper.
View one such experiment in Wired.
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2005/07/68216?currentPage=all
I don't expect the trolls to actually read these links however, as it would interfere with time they can be calling people cranks and demanding more proof, when statistical proof is too great for sane people to ignore.
Okay.. Trolls turn.
From the wired link you provided:
"The lab has many detractors who have found fault with Pear's methodologies and dismiss the work as entertainment, comparing the results to motorists who wish for a red light to turn green and think that because the light changes they caused it.
Stanley Jeffers, a professor of physics at York University in Toronto, attempted to conduct experiments that were similar to Pear's, but couldn't replicate the results. Researchers at two German labs, working in cooperation with Pear, also were unable to replicate results using the same equipment that Pear used."