Your question was delibrately abrasive and wasn’t asked with an open mind. Let’s look at it again, shall we?
This is like going into one of Esprix’s old “Ask the Gay Guy” threads and asking, “You brainwash young boys into believing they’re gay so your numbers won’t dwindle and you’ll always have someone to have anal sex with. How does that make you different from, say, a rapist?” I have never once in my life attempted to dupe someone with BS in an atttempt to take money from them.
If you think I’m full of shit, then pit me. Otherwise, if you don’t have a contribution to make to this thread, then kindly leave.
You are incorrect. Ashtar did not answer my question, and he himself admits this. See post #92, where he writes “You’re right, that doesn’t answer you’re question.”
Lord Ashtar , thanks for answering the question about cold reading. You can accurately describe a person’s manner of dress, but only if you’re in the same room with them.
My contribution to this thread is to ask you to prove your claims, and quit with the circumlocution. Is that going to pass before you put me in your ignore list?
I think you misread my post (or are whooshing me, I’m open to either possibility). I was reading someone who wasn’t in the room through someone who was. I guess you could say I used their relationship as a conduit.
Good. We agree: what you wrote before was incorrect. This is all I wanted to point out, in the interests of fighting ignorance.
Nothing to forgive. Again, we can now agree that what you wrote previously was incorrect. And that’s all that I wanted to establish, for the reason given.
This assertion is not even internally consistent, let alone accurate. How does ‘17 out of 22’ (even if this is an approximation) equate to ‘100% success’? You cannot have it both ways. Either the requirement was something in the region of 17 out of 22 ‘hits’ (roughly 77% success) or it was 100%.
This isn’t about what I do or do not trust. You wrote some things about the JREF Million Dollar Challenge that were inaccurate. My only intention has been to point out these inaccuracies.
Well, he’s not asking you to demonstrate omniscience.
Omniscience is “having total knowledge; knowing everything.” (All definitions are from Dictionary.com) He’s not asking you to demonstrate you know everything; he’s asking you to demonstrate you can know one thing, not knowable through your five senses – namely, what number he’s thinking of. And if I may be so presumptuous as to speak for Steve, here’s the obvious underlying thinking:
When asked what you mean by “psychic,” you link to the Dictionary.com definition, which is “A person apparently responsive to psychic forces.” I assume we can agree that this definition is so vague as to tell us exactly nothing about what you think “psychic” means and what you think you can do that is psychic. So then we look at your example of what you feel you can do that is psychic, which is to describe by looks and characteristics a person you have never met but who is known to another person, the second person being in your presence.
As pyschic phenomena go, that would be an example of either ESP (extrasensory perception), which is “Perception by means other than through the ordinary senses, as in telepathy, clairvoyance, or precognition” or Telepathy, which is “apparent communication from one mind to another without using sensory perceptions” – i.e., mind-reading. Meaning, you either “knew” something directly about the non-present third-party (ESP) or you “read” about him from the mind of the person with you.
In either case, asking you to pony up a number that another person is thinking of is a reasonable second exemplar, since that too would require you to either just “know” the number (ESP) or to “read” Steve Wright’s mind (telepathy).
So I’d stick with “I can’t do that” and not claim he’s asking you to demonstrate omniscience, since the former is pretty unassailable but the latter is wrong.
You know as well as I do that there is no tangible proof you can offer on the internet to to establish what are so far, your baseless claims. You can’t just go around saying to people “I’m a psychic!” and then not be able to defend your assertion that you can see stuff that the rest of us mere mortals can’t, nor brush off requests to legitimize your story as “deliberately abrasive.” I’m requesting that you put up or shut up, otherwise admit that you are just talking out your…(checks forum)…hat. Thank you.
‘Proving’ is a separate issue, and not one that I have ever mentioned or asked you about. My question only concerned evidence, not proof. These are not the same thing. My question (1) was very simple, and was written in plain English. You still haven’t answered it, unless I take your answer to be: ‘None’. In which case, I’m happy to agree with you that there is no evidence supporting the contention – implied by your thread title – that you are psychic.
First of all, this isn’t about what I, personally, would or would not find convincing. It’s about evidence. Second of all, it’s not really my place to stipulate the kind, nature or degree of evidence that you may or may not be in a position to produce. Your thread title invites us to consider that you are psychic. I have simply asked you on what basis we are to believe or conclude that this is, in fact, the case. I will be happy to consider any evidence you wish to present that substantiates the hypothesis that the person posting here as Lord Ashtar is psychic or has psychic faculties.
So you’re asking for something you know I can’t provide? How very disingenuous of you.
I will legitimize my claims to the best of my ability in the medium in which we are conversing. You claimed that I’m cheating people out of their money when I’ve never done such a thing. In short, I’m being honest and you aren’t. What does that say about you?
It’s okay, you’re allowed to say you think I’m talking out of my ass in MPSIMS.
When I made that first post, I thought this was going to be a joke thread. (Turns out, it is.) Thus, my comment about taking money. That part was not an accusation. I had this idea that it was going to be funny and witty, with you providing levity and all that. Instead, it transpires that you actually believe what you’re saying.
Just because you believe you’re a psychic doesn’t make you one, nor does it offer any credible evidence that you are one. So you’ve made a claim for which you know you’re unable to provide any credible evidence? How very disingenuous of you. During which parts of your posts saying you’re a psychic have you been the least bit honest? Know what that says about you?
What would I like you to do? For the third time, offer proof, or rescind your declaration of psychic-ness. You’re the guy who made the statement. How are you going to back it up?
In a media interview, you wouldn’t last a minute and a half.
You know, this is really too bad. Consider for a moment that you could’ve taken this as an opportunity to ask questions and get a better idea of my mindset. Instead, you chose to attack me and to force me into your idea of what a psychic is. That, my friend, is the very definition of ignorance.
You’re a skeptic. Good for you. I think skeptism is a positive character trait. But you’re acting like a jerk. Your behavior in this thread says a lot more about you than it does about me.
You don’t believe me. I get it. Everyone reading this thread gets it. Do you have anything else to add, or are you just going to keep repeating yourself?
Um. As I see others have commented, it’s not really a case of “omniscience”, is it? All you have to do is read my mind (feel free to use a magnifying glass, if you think it would help), or remote-view my flat, or something else that would fall into the nebulous category of “psychic”. As a matter of fact, I once took part in a “telepathy/ESP test” that was, essentially, the same as this - I had to guess a bunch of random numbers written down where I couldn’t see them. (The verdict, by the way, is that I am not psychic. But then, I didn’t think I was.)
So. Um. As others have also said, what can you do, then? I mean, if you’re going to claim astounding powers beyond the ken of mundane science, it’d be nice if we knew what they actually are … Looking at various posts, I see you claim to read people’s “chakras” (which fall into the category of “things I don’t believe in”, so let’s not bother), and to tell people about themselves that you couldn’t possibly have known … OK, then. Tell me something about myself. With a proviso; something concrete, please. No vague newspaper-horoscope generalities along the lines of “Sometimes you feel that other people don’t recognize your full potential”. Something definite. Can you do that?
Great backpedaling there, sport. You can’t answer any of my questions (or anyone else’s), you can’t refute any of my assertions that you are completely full of it, and you turn it around to look like it’s my fault. I’m picking on you and acting like a jerk. Somebody call a waaaaaahmbulance.
