|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
 Posted - 10/28/2006 : 15:27:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
May I make a suggestion FE6666? Based on what I see in the above post, your English is actually pretty darn good. On the other hand your original post here is close to unreadable. So it might be helpful to write something up in English.
I would also stick to one subject at a time when doing that.
Also, who owns the copyright on the article/essay?
As far as I can see, the original is in the link to the guest book of the SP in this thread ('gastenboek' = 'guest book'). SP is the 'Socialist Party' in the Netherlands. So probably the copyright is with Frank Eeden, and given his name here FE6666 is probably Frank Eeden. So the copyright would be his own.
I might try to comment on the OP later. At this point I really don't feel like it since it is such a badly written amalgam of topics. So we might want to single out a few topics. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
 |
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 10/28/2006 : 16:59:07 [Permalink]
|
Yeah filthy you have nothing to support that invisible floating fat babies that only I can see and detect actually control the entire universe is NOT TRUE.
Jeez get with the program! |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 10/28/2006 : 17:04:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by FE6666
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
FE6666, I do not believe in psychics; none of them. Until and unless their 'abilities' can be supported by empirical evidence, they are all no more than another ripoff of the gullible, albeit a ripoff of ancient vintage. Ancedotes are not empirical evidence. So, did Jomanda take Randi up on his challenge?
So, what do you think about Piet Borst refusing to research Jomanda's energised water ? Ancedotes is at least something. You have nothing to support you believeconviction 'Jomanda is not working'. Do you think that your believeconviction is worth more than the one of others ? If the world is all about the hand of father and the believeconviction 'emperical evidence', it is a very small (flat) world.
So you say, but I really don't have any 'beliefs.' I certainly have some convictions, but those can be changed as easily as being shown that I am wrong. My world is far from flat.
I have yet to find a psychic that can do that.
So tell me, has her 'energized' water been tested in a reputable laboratory? And if so, where can I find the results?
|
"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! 
|
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 10/28/2006 : 17:06:23 [Permalink]
|
No, Frank, you apparently completely misunderstand your responsibility when it comes to making a claim of truth. It is your claim, so it is not up to other people to disprove it. It is up to you to bring in the necessary evidence to prove the claim. And when it comes to evidence, contrary to your statement, anecdotes are nothing.
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/28/2006 : 17:40:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
If (emperical)evidence will be deliverd about Jomanda, will you (be able to) believe in Jomanda ? So, what do you think about Piet Borst refusing to research Jomanda's energised water ?
If the evidence were strong enough, I'd certainly open my mind a bit. But it'd have to be pretty damned good. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." I'm sure you've heard that one.
I had never heard of Piet Borst and didn't think anything of it 'till you mentioned it again. So, I looked him up. Looks like the gentleman runs a medical research lab. Labs of this sort turn down projects they consider irrevelent every day. Surely she could have found an alternative.....
|
"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!
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 10/28/2006 : 17:42:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by FE6666
I think you misunderstand reality. I am not Jomanda. Furthermore, you might claim Jomanda is not working. That is your claim, so in line of you own argumentation.....(or you might 'think' that what you can demand from others can not be demanded from yourself, because you might feel different than others).....it is not to other people to disproce your claim.
I don't think any of us ever heard of this "Jormanda" until you came here and started telling us how wonderful she is. So it is your claim. We don't need any evidence that she is lying, since you haven't provided any evidence that she's honest. Claims made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
quote:
If the world is all about the hand of father and the believeconviction 'emperical evidence', it is a very small (flat) world.
Is that why you latched onto this fantastical story? You find reality depressing as it is and so must believe in something "more?" What if there is nothing more? Do you care nothing for truth? Apparently not, because if you cared at all about the truth you would demanding to see evidence just the same as we are.
You must prefer fiction.
|
"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 10/28/2006 17:42:32 |
|
|
|
Chippewa
SFN Regular
USA
1496 Posts |
Posted - 10/28/2006 : 19:01:07 [Permalink]
|
Good old Wiki explains all the mumbo jumbo succinctly:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jomanda
All I can say is, for one who supposedly knows all; at least Jomanda gives neither credence nor derision toward Shemp. In fact, she doesn't even mention him. Yes, he was not Curly, but Shemp did not try to be another Curly. We can accept him simply as Shemp without fear or ridicule. 
|
Diversity, independence, innovation and imagination are progressive concepts ultimately alien to the conservative mind.
"TAX AND SPEND" IS GOOD! (TAX: Wealthy corporations who won't go poor even after taxes. SPEND: On public works programs, education, the environment, improvements.) |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 10/28/2006 : 19:28:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
I don't think any of us ever heard of this "Jormanda" until you came here and started telling us how wonderful she is.
Those of us who read Randi's newsletter on a (semi) regular basis heard of Jomanda some time ago:I don't seem to see in there anywhere that Randi himself talks about any formal testing of her. Must be more recent. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 10/28/2006 : 20:04:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
I don't think any of us ever heard of this "Jormanda" until you came here and started telling us how wonderful she is.
Those of us who read Randi's newsletter on a (semi) regular basis heard of Jomanda some time ago.
Oh, that Jormanda. Yeah, I remember Randi mentioning her now. 
Ok, I suck at remembering names. If FE666 had just said "that psychic who conned that Dutch TV star into rejecting medical treatment and dying of cancer," well then I would have know who the hell he was talking about.
|
"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 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 10/28/2006 : 20:27:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
So, what do you think about Piet Borst refusing to research Jomanda's energised water ? Ancedotes is at least something. You have nothing to support you believeconviction 'Jomanda is not working'. Do you think that your believeconviction is worth more than the one of others ? If the world is all about the hand of father and the believeconviction 'emperical evidence', it is a very small (flat) world.
Frank:
We can surely dismiss any claim that Jomanda (or you) makes unless there is evidence provided.
This is how logic works. You make a positive claim, then you provide evidence to support that claim.
Logic does NOT work like you seem to think it does. None of us are under any obligation to "disprove" Jomanda.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 10/28/2006 : 21:03:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by FE6666...quote:
Originally posted by me...
No, Frank, you apparently completely misunderstand your responsibility when it comes to making a claim of truth. It is your claim, so it is not up to other people to disprove it. It is up to you to bring in the necessary evidence to prove the claim. And when it comes to evidence, contrary to your statement, anecdotes are nothing.
I think you misunderstand reality. I am not Jomanda.
I didn't suggest that you were. In fact I called you "Frank", and although I might be making an incorrect assumption in doing that, it clearly indicates that I didn't think you were Jomanda.
quote:
Furthermore, you might claim Jomanda is not working.
I didn't make a claim of any sort about Jomanda.
quote:
That is your claim, [. . .]
No it's not.
quote:
[. . .] so in line of you own argumentation.....(or you might 'think' that what you can demand from others can not be demanded from yourself, because you might feel different than others).....it is not to other people to disproce your claim. Your believeconviction.
I don't expect anyone to disprove my claim because I didn't make a claim.
quote:
It is up to you to bring the necessary evidence to prove your claim that Jomanda is not working.
No, it's not.
quote:
I might not give evidence as up to your great expectations (but I think nothing will be enough for you), but it is at least something. You have nothing !! Fantasy.
You seem pretty certain that you won't be able to provide evidence that will meet others' expectations. And if you're that certain, it seems likely that you won't.
quote:
What was my contradicting statement ?
I have no idea what you're talking about.
So far you sound like a common run-of-the-mill troll, Frank, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for a short while because it appears that English is not your first language. Please keep in mind that people come in here all the time parading their oddball fantasies and demanding that it is up to the resident skeptics to prove them wrong. (See any of the threads by Michael Mozina or ergo123 for prime examples.) They believe their fantasies should be accepted as truth unless proven false, yet they misunderstand, just as you seem to misunderstand upon whom the burden of proof rests. So to be clear, I'll explain once again how it works in the world of science and skepticism: If you're claiming that Jomanda "is working", it is your responsibility to provide supporting evidence to back up that claim.
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 10/28/2006 : 21:51:00 [Permalink]
|
Until Jomanda submits herself and her psychically-infused water to the James Randi Challenge, wins the Challenge, and collects the million dollars, I see no reason to consider her anything but another in a long line of loathsome quacks and medical frauds.
Jomanda has already spectacularly failed the Silvia Millecam Challenge, with the result being the horribly painful death of that poor lady.
The burden of proof (you do understand that concept, don't you, Eeken?) is upon Jomanda to prove her remarkably extraordinary healing claims. Unless and until she does so, I will continue to consider her a fraud, a con artist, a killer, and a dangerous vampiric parasite who lives upon the suffering of desperate people.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 10/29/2006 : 10:00:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by FE6666...
What is your conclusion ?
My conclusion is this: If you are claiming that Jomanda has the ability to heal the sick, and it sounds like you are, then it is your responsibility to provide evidence that it is true. So far you have provided none, and from what I've gathered by doing a bit of research on her, none yet exists.
So, Frank, if you're making a claim about Jomanda's abilities, go ahead and do what you can to prove it. If you're not making a claim, if you're just here to inform us (you refer to yourself as the "messenger"), consider your job done. We have been informed, thank you. You may now move along and spread your word at some other site.
Could it be any simpler than that?
|
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 10/29/2006 : 10:46:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Do you also have this same opinion about the church, where all over the world, services are held, in which sick people are 'cured' by means of 'handlaying' (as Jomanda) only with a difference that this happens e.g. 'out of name of Jesus'? Or do you make a difference , distinguition between Jomanda / alternative medicine and millions of church, mosque visiting people ?
If no, do you also tell e..g. priests off, that they should hand over 'the evidence' ?
If yes, on basis of what ?
Frank, there is as much reliable evidence of Jeebus curing anyone as there is of self-proclaimed psychics curing anyone. None. It's all bullshit without a shred of credible evidence. Priests, psychics, dowsers, none has been shown to be anything other than deluded, a con artist, or both.
quote:
(B) Is someone is sick. Goes to a doctor which sees e.g. a suffered small heartattack with evidence / foto's. Treatment is planned and a next appointment is set up. Then in the meantime the person goes to Jomanda-healing. Lateron, after the healing, the second visit to another doctor, shows (with evidence foto's) that there is no more sign of this heartattack, and no more (expensive) treatment is needed. What is your conclusion ?
.
Evidence of a heart attack doesn't disappear with medical or woo-woo treatment. The point of cardiac care is not to erase evidence of the heart attack, but to restore the organ to a functional state cabable of sustaining life. Anyone who goes to a "psychic" in the midst of a heart attack is too stupid to live anyway, and their passing will raise the IQ level of the gene pool. |
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
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 10/29/2006 : 11:19:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by FE6666
So why don't I see the Skeptics attacking the Christians and Muslims, in the same manner as they do alternative medicine ?
The reason you don't see it is that you're not looking in the right places. You are obviously highly ignorant of what skeptics do or don't do - you're just getting your "information" from people like Winston Wu and sites like Curezone, neither of which would know a skeptic if one bit them. And so you wind up asking ridiculous questions about whether skeptics are "afraid" of alternative medicine, as if most of us make money off "big pharma." What a pathetic argument that is: when you're lacking evidence, just insinuate a financial investment. You're certainly no skeptic. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Psychic Jomanda/Millecam: the true story
Topic Locked
