Typical tactic: make fun of the worst and ignore the best. The article clearly says that members of the press went into the house and saw furniture move by itself, etc. But if you’re thinking that I genuinely believe that this particular case is valid, think again. I myself would like to talk to the people involved and see what physical evidence exists. But this is the kind of case where sober, seemingly trustworthy people said that something unexplained was going on. Yeah, and later in the case they felt that the girls were purposely hoaxing them. But earlier in the case they didn’t feel so.
To my mind the evidence adds up to “exists.” YMMV.
Wow, we get to do the Randi argument twice in one thread. I’m too too thrilled.
Please refer to my comments on the sociological side of evidence and proof. You might actually learn something. You seem to need to learn something.
Coincidentally, I just had to lay down a chunk of change on a new camera today because my previously dependable one suddenly started spazzing out on me. I don’t know why that happened, and I certainly can’t explain the workings of other people’s cameras in situations that I’m unfamiliar with. All I know about the mysterious device in question is that it looks like a fan blowing air.
I take it I am not to assume that this is an off-the-shelf item from Wal-Mart, but that it is in some way a special fan. I am not interested in playing guessing games here. You don’t want to describe your mysteries friends’ mysterious device or show us the mysterious photos it produces, fine. In that case you’ve received all the answer you’re going to get.
A fan is a large and fairly powerful electric motor. In the old days of sysadmining, people would often complain that their monitors were flickering. When people came to look at it? No flicker. The cause was that they put fans on top of their monitors, and took them off when help showed.
This may or may not be related, but it bears investigation as to the point.
It’s not a ‘tactic’. It scares me that people who think they are investigating an incredible event should be so amateurish. You described them as ‘scientific-minded’ - why do you think that?
You also said about this ‘ghost’:
“There are many big, documented cases out there that had members of the press as well as scientific-minded people convinced that ghosts or related phenomena are real. They saw and heard things themselves that could not be explained.The Enfield Poltergeist is just one among many.”
So now this is not a valid case?
It’s not well documented?
It’s not convincing?
Well if that is the best case you have, then indeed I don’t consider it evidence.
I already understand the scientific method, which provably works. Do you agree with it?
You claim you and your friends have a paranormal power, but refuse to be tested on it.
Even if we offer you a million dollars.
I think that attitude speaks for itself.
The only thing “done” with the Randi Prize Argument in this, and most other threads on this subject, is that it has been dismissed without just cause. Give us a legitimate reason why you don’t want a million dollars.
I call megacrap on this short quote. Dung kg/per character ratio high.
Arguing about it for pages does not = “without just cause.” Please try to use more care with your words. Guess what? This same canard gets brought up in every paranormal thread, gets argued at length in every thread, and at the end of the day we still disagree.
The skeptics here (and I suspect elsewhere) just keep trying to boink the “believers” over the head with this same point time and again, often several times in the same thread. And you just did it again yourself!
It’s a tactic unworthy of GD. Then again, it perhaps more accurately could be called a tactic that characterizes GD. And Czar, as mod here and prototypical user of this cheezola sophistry unit, are doing more than others to promote this style of debate here.
Is that what you want? Is that what you stand for?
Aeschines, could you please give us a legitimate reason why someone would turn down a million dollars just by proving their claim under reasonable conditions? The money is there for the taking, you get to help set the conditions, and if you don’t want the money, you can give it away to charity. Even the judging is done by someone agreeable to both you and the JREF Foundation.
You miss the point. This board is biased against paranormal phenomenon. Maybe you haven’t noticed?
There’s always alternatitive explanations. Doesn’t mean that just because there is an alternative that the alternative is the right explanation. Where is your proof that these are just sleep paralysis? never mind proof, how about evidence, or even suggestions?
Interesting. You are asking for physical evidence for non-physical phenomenon??
Who’s claiming “physical evidence” in the first place?
But, you know, in part, you are right. Lots of people experience things like “sleep paralisys,” lucid dreams, etc., and assume the experience is paranormal. Looks like we need more open discussion and more education. Education without bias.
The “rest?” You been living on Mars??? Oh, ‘most’ of the rest… statistics please?? Or risk dismissal of your generalizations.
In investigation of the paranormal, it is always important, and supremely so, o elimin ate any esidual physical causes of the phenomenon observed.
In this case, it would require some sort of explanation as to how a generated electrical field from a fan would affect the printed image on polaroid camera!
Because Randi does not really want to give up his ‘million,’ and will alter the terms of the agreement in order to make it impossible or unlikly to attain.
“10 out of 10” ??? Really??? Even basketball players in the physical univese rarely get those odds!
“The Amazing Randi” is not very amazing. He’s a garden-variety trickster.
