No grudge, I’m just after the money.
Given that his challenge specifically talks about drilling, and that this comes from your proposal, I’m not sure how this is meant to come from him?
This board hasn’t had a good meltdown in awhile. It needs one every once in awhile to keep the rabble happy. I was hoping you’d be able to oblige us Peter, but the topic is just too stupid to make it interesting. Couldn’t you have picked a better topic, like female circumcision or a government conspiracy or fluorinated water or something?
I mean it’s sorta boring when you attribute quotes to someone, someone points out you’re wrong, and then you say “Nuh uh!” Especially when it’s about underground fucking rivers…
Might want to calm down the vitriol then. If you think he’s just a rube to be fleeced, there’s not a lot to be gained by having mini-breakdowns of poorly spelled exclamations that he’s a lying liar.
Name one.
Peter, you won’t listen, but I’ll try anyway: this is tragic. Nothing but. I (and others) have told you so many times now that we are not saying that Randi is right and you are wrong. We are really not saying that. That you are incapable of seeing it after having had it pointed out to you so many times is sad, and scary.
Indeed. Unless you are saying that dowsing works, James Randi and you have nothing to argue about except the definition of what counts as a meaningful quantity of water. Your desire for there to be more to argue about, unfortunately, doesn’t negate that fact.
You will always lose the argument with James Randi, because he agrees with you.
How’s that workin for you?
Check it again you idiot: I did not ask you that, I pointed out to **Contrapuntal ** (who did reply BTW) that:
Never told me that, I only said “I have seen enough lies from you”, and I was not replying to you. Your retort to that was “Name one” my reply was in the OP in this thread.
:rolleyes: since I got no reply from you, it would be hard for me to then lie again and again no?
To refresh your sorry memory: You did not reply to my points, and I did not ask you a series of increasingly stupid questions.
Anyone can see here that you don’t even can keep up on who is saying what, it is no wonder why we can say with certainty that you also can not be trusted on your testimonials about Randi or against me.
I appreciate that this is the Pit but this thread is the greatest trainwreck I have ever witnessed on the SDMB.
I’m starting to think that Peter Morris is mentally ill and this thread isn’t good for him in the long run.
I’ve been thinking that for a while. I’m not a mental health professional, but even I can see that if he is indeed sincere in what he has written in this thread and others, then he does have mental problems. Threads like this cannot be healthy for him.
Tell you what, everyone. Let’s leave the personal insults aside.
Each of you tell me your main objection to my application. I’ll answer your objection, provided you state it clearly, and without insult.
To be frank Peter, that’s been done to death. You simply don’t accept that your application is inherently flawed insofar as it violates the letter and spirit of the challenge. Moreover, your application appears to be solely reliant on your interpretation of some comments Randi may or may not have made. Again, this foundation does not lend itself to a credible application.
Mmm, didn’t a Moderator on the other thread mentioned it was a no-no to analyze other posters?
It is ok to speculate about this in the Pit? Considering that there are even more hints from him that he is seeking profit from this (him pointing to a site that is set for his profit), then a mental issue should IMO be more than enough to get him a suspension at least.
I would not mind closing this thread too.
Ok, then I’ll ask my question for a 4th time, which is relevant to this.
How do you plan to link Mr. Randi’s throwaway comment (“find me a dry spot”) to his unrelated $1M Challenge, and why do you think the two are related?
The objection is that each of us agrees that the only argument you have against anything James Randi has ever said is in pointing out his hyperbole. But looking at what he has said with a hundred intelligent, disinterested eyes, all fifty people will come to the conclusion that tossing the hyperbole, James Randi will probably agree with you on every assertion you make except for what is a “reasonable source of water” and other such specifics.
Even were the two of you to hammer out those specifics, all you will have achieved will have been to agree to a test, of which you both will expect the same exact outcome as one another.
About the only part of anything you’ve said that isn’t particularly likely to find support on the part of your opponent (besides the assertion that he’s a lying liar) is that using a surveyor’s map is a particularly good way to disprove the assertion that you can dig to “drill depth” (unquantified) on 94% of all land and find “water” (also unquantified.) Particularly given that he’s basing his assertion, it seems, on actual digs by geologists around the world–i.e. the people who make those self-same survey maps.
Peter, may I call you Peter? From the other thread you said:
If you don’t know what Mr. Randi was denying in this instance, how can you possibly claim he was wrong to do so? For all we know the underground river concept the dowsers claimed were something akin to an underground Mississippi that does not occur in caves.
Actually it is very much related to your claim. You gave this logically proof:
If you can’t show where Mr. Randi said that he believes all phony scientific theories are paranormal then your axiom #1 is unproven, and therefore your logically conclusion is unproven.
Have pity on an engineer and ignore all the terrible grammar mistakes in the previous post.
From the JREF challenge:
"At JREF, we offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event. "
Posted on the SDMB:
What, besides your apparent inability to assess reality, indicates to you that Randi is not telling the truth here?
You have already demonsrated amazingly well that you have no idea of what the concept of sameness is.
Tell him what? That you have no idea what you’re talking about? If he’s aware of you, I’m fairly safe in guessing that he’s aware of that.
Monty, let me answer your points first.
Several things tell me that Randi is not telling the truth.
First, the inherrent unlikeliness of the story sets off alarm bells.
Second, I consulted geologists on the matter, and they tell me that Randi is talking rubbish. 94% has water within easy reach? No way, they say. They all tell me it’s much harder than that, and hitting a dry spot much more likely.
Third, I corresponded with Randi, trying to find out exactly what he means by “dry spot” and during the discussion he openly admitted making the whole thing up.
But, Monty, you don’t have to believe me. Go ahead, keep thinking that it’s a true story told by a clever person.
I am willing to take the same test he offered them.
So, since you believe him go email him and tell him to take me on, give me the same test he gave them. Since you’re convinced he’s telling the truth, I won’t try to prove you wrong. You being fooled by him is to my advantage.