|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
 Posted - 01/16/2006 : 06:50:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by skepticpsychic
Review of the “amazing” Randi
First, again, thanks for your feedback and insights. I did go to Randi's website and read the conditions of his $1,000,000 challenge, as well as some of the applications from the, ah, psychic hopefuls. This perusal has been very enlightening, on many levels.
First, I do have new respect for the challenge itself. I could find nothing objectionable to the methodology. Being “adversarial,” however, I can understand why someone like myself would not be interested in participating. The perception of being an enemy (yes, I know, he says “adversarial but not enemies” but unfortunately according to my American Heritage Bible, adversary = enemy) might frighten away people like myself who have experienced the adversarial attitudes of both Christians and skeptics alike. Lest we forget people like me were burned at the stake not too long ago?
Actually, I will have to correct you in a few things.
1) adversarial does not mean going to an extreme such as cooking the books to prove the other guy wrong.
2) The "Burning Times" (1550-1650) were inspired by the Maleous Malficarium (sp). And psychics were not the group targeted. It's pretty well shown that the people put to death were outsiders, unpopular, and mostly very much Christian. Burning at the stake was a fairly uncommon fate. Hanging was the usual punishment. Some of the old herbalists and midwives were singled out. All told, 30,000 were killed.
3) The salem witch trials was a limited hysteria which one researcher has made a strong argument was the effects of ergot poisoning.
quote:
I myself would prefer a platform that isn't adversarial. John Edward, for example, was part of an extensive study done at the University of Tuscan. I haven't read the entire study yet, but the fact that he was willing to submit to these blind tests tells me is he willing to be scrutinized. I can understand why he would prefer an atmosphere that was not adversarial to begin with.
I am interested in the old fraud's study by University of Tuscan. Do you have a link to it or is it published in a journal I could get my hands on? I'd like to examine the controls on the test.
While I do believe that psychic things happen, I am highly skeptical of people who claim they can do it on command. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
 |
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2006 : 07:51:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by skepticpsychic
Your group of skeptics seem a pretty even mix of fundament fringe (do we really need to use profanity to call John Edward a douche bag?); the hard-nose ?old journalists,? (I consider Randi in this category); the bibliophilic, attention-to-detailers (making sure we follow protocol to the tee) and my favorite, those willing to explore the mystery (thus pissing off the fundamental fringe). Thank you, I have learned something from everyone.
Wow! And in just 3 plus days of posting. But I suspect with your skills you knew this prior to becoming a member. Fundamental Fringe?
quote:
I have to admit, I did not thoroughly read your website before I joined. I confess to laboring under the assumption that we were going to be skeptical about everything: the war, politics, religion, etc. I was surprised to find that psychics are your pet project! Good thing I don?t take myself too serious! Don?t you love the synchronicity that led me to you? : )
This thread was your pet project. You were the one making positive assertion about your psychic ability. Did you expect to find a choir here?
quote:
On a scale of 1 to 10 in producing a forum where you achieve the desired outcome you claim to seek in your ?Who We Are? statement, I?d rate you a 7.
I'll sleep better now.
quote:
However, room for improvement exists.
Agreed, and for a lifetime, I hope.
quote:
Focusing on debunking psychics because you think we are a danger to society gives us power even we don?t claim to have. Just as you can?t disprove something that is not falsifiable, working ?for? something you are ?against? dilutes your efforts.
You were the one making the claim of having psychic ability. We were only trying to get you to think critically about this claim.
quote:
Have you become like the Christians? (Believe me, if I am not getting from the skeptics, I am getting it from the Christians.) Do you think you are right because [you have the statistical information to prove it/the bible tells you so] and the [psychics and Christians/psychic and skeptics] are wrong because [they can?t prove it/they don?t believe in the bible] and vow to do everything in your power to save the world from the [insane psychics and religious charlatans/pagan skeptics] because in your estimation we are [cowards/heathens]? If so, I have what I hope is a constructive suggestion.
Do you believe that you are right, because you believe that you are right. Again, you are the one who made the claim. To use your analogy, did you expect us to march lock step in support of your claim.
quote:
Con Rev®, that process handed down to me by my imaginary friends, is about the ultimate self-scrutiny. Trust me, it?s a full-time job. And for all the training and empirical experience I have at it, I can only give myself about a 6.5, above average but still so much to learn.
The Bible does not need to be debunked. It?s proven to be only as good as its interpreter. Psychics aren?t destroying the world. Like everything, there are bad ones and good ones. Skeptics aren?t the end all and be all, because the world is far more mysterious than what you would like to admit.
You seem a little sensitive about having your abilities and psychics in general scrutinized.
quote:
My advice is to use your wonderful skepticism to think critically of your own domain. That and a good sense of humor could help save all our lives.
btw. John Edward is the "Douche-bag of the Universe" I saw it on South Park. Now, that made me laugh. |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2006 : 08:37:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
btw. John Edward is the "Douche-bag of the Universe" I saw it on South Park. Now, that made me laugh.
Biggest Douche in the Universe...that was the award he got. South Park also mentions how he wires the studio audience with hidden microphones before the show so he can get as much info as possible...and of course they mention the art of cold-reading. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2006 : 08:59:43 [Permalink]
|
skepticpsychic, we get, and are all kinds in here. I don't think that we have any sort of a specality except as individuals -- we will discuss anything and if research is required, we will do it. Speaking for myself, if a topic is one that I know little about, I will just ride along without comment.
A great many people do what you have done; come in here without first researching the fora. They don't test the waters, as it were, and too often leave in anger when they realize that it is hard to bullshit us. These fora are tough ones, and we will go after firmly correct each other for unsupported claims and the vauge statements that usually accompany them at least as quickly as we will anyone else.
But that's neither here nor there. The main reason that I doubt psyhic claims is simply that no emperical evidence has ever been produced in their support beyond ancedote, and ancedote is no evidence at all. Unfortunatly, a great many others either believe or want to believe (much the same thing) and this leaves them wide open to the attentions of the likes of Edward, et al.
Do psyhic abilities exist? I give the same answer as to the 'Does God exist?' question: No. But I qualify it by conceding the remote possibility simply because it is a big-beyond-imagination universe, and maybe somewhere......
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Subjectmatter
Skeptic Friend
173 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2006 : 09:58:06 [Permalink]
|
JohnOAS you are a cheat and a rascal! You saidquote:
Originally posted by JohnOAS
I've picked a rational, real number greater than one and less than 1 million.
But you never specified that the number lies in the set of natural number or the set of integers. As such there is an infinite number of possibilities.
As for skepticpsychic, may I remind you that a skeptic does not seek to judge people, only evidence. A 'holier than thou' attitude is likely applauded in religious fora, but is discouraged here.
That being said, of course you are welcome to share the journals of your psychic experiences which you claim to have kept. I am sure I speak for many here when I say I would be glad of the opportunity to peruse it. |
Sibling Atom Bomb of Couteous Debate |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2006 : 10:52:25 [Permalink]
|
Humbert wrote: You can't think in terms of "right" or "wrong" in cases like this, my friend. Really, the number 592,404 is significant for you in some way. I'm feeling it very strongly. If not yet, maybe sometime in the near future. I want you to write the number down and carry it in your wallet. Keep it fresh in your mind throughout the day and make an effort to look for it to pop up. Also, remember that it isn't always the whole number all at once that has significance. Often, pieces of it will emerge here and there, like echos of music, or ripples on a pond. You must be open to it or you'll find that you miss it when it comes.
Ha! That was great. Especially funny for me ‘cause this holiday season a close friend of mine who is also a member of the Church of Jesus Christ and Latter Day Saints (Mormon, but liberal Mormon) were having one of our conversations about religion. These conversations are always very friendly and very much for the purpose of understanding each other's unique point of view. But occasionally one of us will cross the line into preaching. He did so by asking me to seriously ask myself what it would take for me to believe in God and then meditate on that question and answer several times a day over the period of a week, and try to notice any occurrences that seem unusual, and then report back to him. I actually think he was more interested in the possible occurrences than in converting me to God-belief, but nonetheless, I got a little pissed. He had difficulty understanding why that was an inappropriate request or why I wasn't willing to do it until I spelled it out for him.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2006 : 10:56:18 [Permalink]
|
R. Wreck wrote: I think, though, that what I really dislike about all the nonsense spouted on the occasion of someone's death, is that it reinforces the belief in magic and illogical thinking, and at a time when people are most vulnerable to it. And these beliefs have real, negative, consequences to the entire society.
A lot of people I know who believe in life after death but who openly express doubts in that belief actually get noticeably frightened or hostile when I discuss the matter with them. The whole notion that “If I really die then my life has no meaning.” I've tried to explain to them how I give my own life meaning, but that really isn't convincing enough for them. I've also known atheists and agnostics who resent their lack of belief (though they cannot seem to convince themselves of anything else) and do self destructive things or destructive things to others out of their own nihilism. Beliefs in an afterlife are other spiritual stuff is so prevalent; I'm inclined to think it has a practical, positive purpose for people of a certain psychological makeup, possibly even most people. You seem to regard it as some sort of mental disorder. Indeed, often religious beliefs lead to destructive behaviors, but is that the case all or even most of the time? I don't see how you can argue that considering all the great humanitarian workers of the world who are religious (like one whose birthday is being celebrated in America today). In fact, the first Humanists were Christians. And if mere beliefs in these things isn't inherently harmful, then are you really criticizing the correct thing? Isn't it really acting on beliefs that are contrary to evidence in a way that is harmful that is the problem?
Also, what would be easier to irradiate or reduce in our society: destructive dogmatism or all spiritual beliefs? Why bother trying to get rid of the latter, when ridding ourselves of the former is both easier and solves the problem?
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2006 : 11:02:16 [Permalink]
|
Skepticpsychic wrote: I confess to laboring under the assumption that we were going to be skeptical about everything: the war, politics, religion, etc.
*makes a sound of perplexity similar to Scoopy Doo* Why would we discuss war, politics and religion under a thread about psychic abilities? I must have dreamed that 11 page debate we had on this forum about banning smoking, which had nothing to do with debunking psychics.
Skepticpsychic wrote: Have you become like the Christians? Do you think you are right because [you have the statistical information to prove it/the bible tells you so] and the [psychics and Christians/psychic and skeptics] are wrong because [they can't prove it/they don't believe in the bible] and vow to do everything in your power to save the world from the [insane psychics and religious charlatans/pagan skeptics] because in your estimation we are [cowards/heathens]?
I was sort of enjoying this post (despite its lecturing tone) up until this paragraph. What a naïve simplification of both Christianity and Skepticism.
Skepticpsychic wrote: In 1955, Albert Einstein wrote his last manifesto with Bertrand Russell. In it, sounding like psychics, they predicted a world infested with nuclear weapons and warned us that the next big war, more than likely fought with nuclear weapons, from a scientific perspective could literally destroy the earth and the ecosystems necessary to maintain life on the planet. They implored leaders to understand the need to commit to finding new, creative, unifying, nonviolent solutions to our conflicts. Gosh, for such a died-in-the-wool scientist, Albert sure sounded like a prophet back in ‘55.
Hmmmm… warning about the dangers of nuclear weapons and destruction to the environment? Sure sounds more like a scientist than a prophet to me.
The Bible does not need to be debunked.
Given the (growing) number of fundamentalists in America who use the Bible to justify hatred and ignorance and whose beliefs often trickle into the mainstream culture, and who often are active in creating public policy, it certainly DOES need to be continuously debunked!
Skepticpsychic wrote: Skeptics aren't the end all and be all, because the world is far more mysterious than what you would like to admit.
End all be all of what? According to skepticism, the world is highly mysterious, because skeptics are always saying we don't have the answers and debating with people who claim to have the answers. It doesn't get any more mysterious than “I don't know.” Sheesh.
But here we see skepticpsychic's main problem:
I frankly am not interested in removing the mysterious from my life just because some guy who used to be a magician says I am a coward because I decide to live with it.
She is confusing “mysterious” with “spiritual” or “supernatural” elements.
I don't even think she was criticizing skeptics in that post. I think she was criticizing anti-religious hard-core material atheists. (Like my beloved husband, Sagan bless him.)
Dontcha all love how she just swooped in, chatting rather minimally on only one topic, and then wrote a broad review of the whole forum that we didn't even ask for, categorizing us as individuals and rating us as a group? That was just swell.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 01/16/2006 11:05:14 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2006 : 11:44:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
skepticpsychic:
I confess to laboring under the assumption that we were going to be skeptical about everything: the war, politics, religion, etc. I was surprised to find that psychics are your pet project!
I'm sorry but the above quote only demonstrates that you did not look over other categories and threads. Right now there are lively discussions going on in the religion folder, pseudo-science and others. The political folder is probably our most popular. Creation/evolution does very big business. Psychics, while interesting, are hardly our focus.
quote:
skepticpsychic:
Focusing on debunking psychics because you think we are a danger to society gives us power even we don?t claim to have. Just as you can?t disprove something that is not falsifiable, working ?for? something you are ?against? dilutes your efforts.
Oh gee. I think you may be feeling that our regard for John Edward has something to do with how we regard all claims made by all psychics. And yes, we are skeptical of those claims. But I didn't offer you a test here to debunk your claims. I suggested it as a way for you to verify your claims. Again, I am sure we could come up with a method for doing that that would satisfy you by minimizing the effect of any possible bias that any of us may have, including you. I am serious about this. Any approach to an investigation with the intent to debunk would likely not be a fair investigation. A skeptic must have an open mind. That is exactly what separates us from the often-heard charge that we are cynics. Personally, I would love to see some evidence for psi.
quote:
skepticpsychic:
Skeptics aren't the end all and be all, because the world is far more mysterious than what you would like to admit.
The world does still hold many mysteries, and the quest for knowledge is always ongoing. I doubt that anyone here would deny that. The question becomes what is the best way to investigate those mysteries if they are investigatable at all. We only offer a method for investigation that includes the scientific method and critical thinking. While not perfect, they do have the advantage of providing a methodology that minimizes bias. They are only tools.
If your goal is to demonstrate that psi happens or that your claims have merit, you cannot make and end run around a proper investigation. If your goal is to simply satisfy yourself, then don't expect us to view your claims as anything more than claims. And if your goal is to make money, and if you are of the John Edward variety of psychic, he has demonstrated that there is a lot of it to be made if you play your cards right…
And, by the way, I think John Edward is a genuinely evil man.
I think he is a megalomaniacal sociopath. My contempt for him is only exceeded by my disgust, knowing that I have to breath the same air that he does. It is my belief that calling him a douche-bag, a sometimes useful appliance, would be a few steps up for him, so I won't call him that. He feeds on the pain of the vulnerable and lives a lavish lifestyle paid for by the people he harms. The world might only be a very slightly better place if he did not exist, but that is good enough for me… And while we are at it, Benny Hinn is right there with Edward's on my short contempt list as well. And he does not profess to be a psychic. How I feel about those guys has nothing to do with their job description. It has every |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2006 : 12:35:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by skepticpsychic:
I absolutely respect your right to be skeptical, to ask hard questions, to look for certainty in whatever way you can in this crazy world.
I for one am not looking for certainty. I use skepticism as a tool to come to terms with the uncertainty that surrounds us.
quote:
I frankly am not interested in removing the mysterious from my life just because some guy who used to be a magician says I am a coward because I decide to live with it. Can you respect me for that? If not, you are as bad as the Christians and part of the problem.
I understand you're happy with your interpretation of reality and don't want to change it. Just don't get so huffy when we (at your request if I remember correctly) point out other possible interpretations, and how you can challenge yourself to see if your interpretation is valid.
So goodbye, good luck, and say hello to Ghandi and Elvis for me. |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2006 : 12:53:13 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox:
Beliefs in an afterlife are other spiritual stuff is so prevalent; I'm inclined to think it has a practical, positive purpose for people of a certain psychological makeup, possibly even most people. You seem to regard it as some sort of mental disorder. Indeed, often religious beliefs lead to destructive behaviors, but is that the case all or even most of the time? I don't see how you can argue that considering all the great humanitarian workers of the world who are religious (like one whose birthday is being celebrated in America today). In fact, the first Humanists were Christians. And if mere beliefs in these things isn't inherently harmful, then are you really criticizing the correct thing? Isn't it really acting on beliefs that are contrary to evidence in a way that is harmful that is the problem?
Magical thinking leads to bad public policy. It makes it easy for conmen to operate. And worst of all it leads some to believe that committing some atrocity will punch their ticket to everlasting bliss. If you're going to give spiritual beliefs the credit for humanitarian acts, then you also have to acknowledge when those same types of beliefs are used to justify the worst behaviors. Historically the bad seems to have outweighed the good. And are spiritual beliefs really necessary to humanitarianism? Many are motivated to do good things because they believe that it is the best thing for humanity, not because some god told them to do it in order to get to heaven.
quote:
Also, what would be easier to irradiate or reduce in our society: destructive dogmatism or all spiritual beliefs? Why bother trying to get rid of the latter, when ridding ourselves of the former is both easier and solves the problem?
I suppose one could say that we should start with eliminating destructive dogmatism, but as long as their are unfounded spiritual beliefs, there will be the soil that the destructive dogmatism grows in. It is not hard to recognize most scams and cons, and people are regularly warned about them, yet they still fall for them. Why? Because they believe they can get something for nothing. I contend that magical thinking is the same. As long as you believe in magic, you are in danger of letting that belief either lead you down the path to destructive dogmatism, or at least to supporting it. Sure, in many people it is a benign belief, for them personally, but when politicians and "spiritual leaders" exploit it to further their own agendas, then it becomes a problem. |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
Posted - 01/16/2006 : 18:46:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Subjectmatter
JohnOAS you are a cheat and a rascal! You saidquote:
Originally posted by JohnOAS
I've picked a rational, real number greater than one and less than 1 million.
But you never specified that the number lies in the set of natural number or the set of integers. As such there is an infinite number of possibilities.
Guilty as charged. As it turns out, I did pick, from all the infinite possibilities, a natural, integral number. What are the odds of that? (rhetorical question) Naturally this is still no proof that I am not a cheat and/or rascal. 
quote:
Humbert wrote: You can't think in terms of "right" or "wrong" in cases like this, my friend. Really, the number 592,404 is significant for you in some way. I'm feeling it very strongly. If not yet, maybe sometime in the near future. I want you to write the number down and carry it in your wallet. Keep it fresh in your mind throughout the day and make an effort to look for it to pop up. Also, remember that it isn't always the whole number all at once that has significance. Often, pieces of it will emerge here and there, like echos of music, or ripples on a pond. You must be open to it or you'll find that you miss it when it comes.
I'm really feeling all holistic now. I'm just going to get myself a ginger, jojoba and nutmeg tea, then I'll be right back to sit under my pyramid frame and ponder your post some more. The number is in my PDA, BTW, does that count? Can spirits/ghosts/con men read binary data directly from RAM chips? You're right about the eerie coincidences piling up. As it turns out, all of the digits in "my" number are arranged (albeit in slightly different arrangement and quantities) on the keyboard I'm using right now!
|
John's just this guy, you know. |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 01/17/2006 : 01:54:41 [Permalink]
|
| I'm sorry to say Skepticpsychic's post sounds like it was written before she started. I thought our information on how to evaluate her data certainly wasn't being dismissive of the potential results. And to think we spend more time on debunking psychics than we do on politics or the latest wedge strategy move is just plain silly. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 01/17/2006 : 02:17:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by skepticpsychic
I was surprised to find that psychics are your pet project! Good thing I don't take myself too serious! Don't you love the synchronicity that led me to you? : )
While other have already pointed out how this is just false, notice how skepticpsychic chalks up this perceived coincidence to "synchronicity." Really makes you wonder how many of those other "unexplainable" coincidences she attributed to her powers ever really even were coincidences, and not simply a result of seeing something which was never there to being with.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 01/17/2006 02:19:32 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
