Before I go any further, I should ask exactly what is implied here by “infection/oppression/possession from the spirit world” in your worldview. If it’s anything at all like some of the Christians I’ve known, then I have hit it right on the money.
Think hard about the term “Occult legitimacy,” GOM, I know you can figure it out. Think about what it means when you posit a spirit world that is alternately mysterious and dangerous. The kind of worldview that shuns Ouija boards and psychics not because they are simple games and conmen/women but instead manifestations of mysterious powers. Powers that may or may not derive from the devil (you haven’t come right out and said as much, your religion says it for you). Think about it, because it’s the same kind of “occult legitimacy” that leads some rebellious teenagers into things like Wicca and others to dabble in the worship of a figure that only exists to scare Christians (one guess).
**
Perhaps lekatt’s psychic advisor should already have told him this, but I do not have any fear of ouija boards. But thanks for “revealing” this bit of “esoteric truth” to me anyway.
Ouija boards are harmless, the unreasoning fears of a monotheist can be harmless too. Scams unfortunately aren’t always harmless though. But as they say, “a fool and his money are soon parted.”
Wrong, sort of. We’ve presented several cites regarding cold reading. You simply refuse to accept their validity. That’s your choice. However, I will concede that only skeptics accept Cold Readings. True Believers are unwilling to do so, because it means they are mistaken.
Cite, please? I did a google on the Oracle at Delphi, and although I found some interesting things, I haven’t found anything about punishment. In fact, the Oracles pronouncements were generally vague and open to interpretation, which would make it very difficult to punish her.
Read this about where the Oracle’s inspiration may have come from.
It’s also unsubstantiated, often contradictory, and generally based on a very limited understanding of science, coupled with bad analogies. Here’s a good example, if not exactly germaine to the thread.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Plenty of proof has been offered, you just haven’t accepted it, because it isn’t in your favor.
I won’t hold my breath. It sounds like you have a strong bias in favor of Praagh and your posts suggest that the only proof you would be willing to accept would be actual footage of him looking over somebody’s FBI file and quoting it verbatim in his act.
Sorry. Newbie mistake. All the other boards I post on allow a quote as long as the link is provided. I would have left in more than you did, but thank you for correcting my post. I didn’t notice your 5% suggestion in the other forum. I will remember from now on.
I would love to see you give readings along with James, I can’t even imagine what that would be like.
I will tell you once again, the accusers have the burden to prove their accusations. In this country, you are constitutional innocent until proven guilty, and those accused have the judicial right to confront their accusers. If you think you can stand a distance off and hurl hate and fraud accusations at a group of people you know nothing about, nor will ever learn about, you are wrong and our constitution assures that. I see no different between skeptics voicing their hate of psychics than catholics voicing their hate of protestants in Ireland. Put up or shut up, my friend.
Um, lekatt, this is not a criminal trial. This is a simple issue of logic, and the burden of proof in an argument.
Psychics have to prove that they have such powers. Until such time as satisfactory proof exists, they are merely charlatans, and frauds.
The Constitution has nothing to do with this.
Read carefully what Czarcasm wrote. Process it. If I say that the sky is bright green, it’s up to me to prove it, because I made the assertion, and my assertion is contrary to the generally accepted view. The same with you.
blanx
That is my understanding of Joe’s claim. It’s been out there for years. I think CSICOP would be yelling and screaming about him being a fraud, as they do so well, if he has lied about this. They take great pride in exposing frauds so I take their silence on this point to mean they know when they are beat.
Of course, I could be wrong. I have not seen his LoM. I find it highly unlikely that he made it up however. Maybe I’m just too gullible in this case. Now that it’s become an issue, I would like to take a look at it, or at any public records documenting his claim.
So where exactly is any conspiracy? Do you think Joe made a claim that is untrue? I’m still puzzled by your original question…
Now there’s an interesting claim. I haven’t seen Praagh, but I would love to be in the audience if you and he were to ever engage in a challenge of capabilities.
Let’s see…
You, Praagh, and a room full of Dopers! hahaha You think he would show up?
Nah. He’s making too much money doing what he’s doing. Why risk it?
The conspiracy of the government to suppress the information about “psychics”. If Joe did get his medal for being a psychic, then that would be a public admission (in my eyes) of the government accepting that psychic phenomenon exists. To the best of my knowledge the government does not believe this, their is no public/private record of such beliefs. Maybe I’m assuming too much or going in a different direction, but this is why I asked about conspiracies.
Hey lekatt, what about my challenge? If we all, including you, have psychic abilities, then you should be able to get significantly better than guessing percentage of powerball numbers. (Aside: what is guessing percentage? 30%?) Quite frankly, I’d be surprised if you got 50% of the numbers correct.
This isn’t a court Leroy, and we’re not making accusations. You’ve still got it backwards. The “psychics” are making assertions. All we’re asking for is proof of what they claim to be able to do.
Get it? The psychics claim to have powers and to communicate with the dead. Claim is another word for assert, which can also mean accuse. In this case however, the word accuse is inappropriate. Assert is appropriate. Your buddy James asserts he can communicate with the dead, so he has to prove it. Obviously he has proven it to you, but guess what? In the world of research that’s not good enough. In fact, in the world of research his claims have already been torn apart. Ad nauseum. If you want me to put it into court terms, Praagh (and the others) have been unable to put forth an argument beyond reasonable doubt as to their own “guilt” in being able to communicate with the deceased. The defense, or skeptics, have however demonstrated their innocence, by showing how they might not have committed the “crime” they “accuse” themselves of. The burden of proof is on the claimants, in this case the psychics. The skeptics have just torn down the arguments, diminishing the proof.
By the way, “Put up or shut up?” We’ve put up. You haven’t.
That’s it, perfect, stop right there. A perfect example of where the proper burden of proof lies-on the one making the extraordinary claims. In a criminal proceeding, we don’t make the accused prove his own innocence. The burden of proof lies on the one making the claim as to the person’s guilt, the prosecutor. We require proof beyond a reasonable doubt as to a person’s guilt.
If I claim to be the son of God, that’s an extraordinary claim. It might also be a completely true claim; however, other people can’t be logically expected to accept it unless I provide proof, regardless of its truth or falsity. They aren’t “accusing” me of not being the son of God, and the burden isn’t on them to prove I’m not.
Psychic ability is an extraordinary claim. Most people either do not have this ability or do not detect it in themselves or others. You can’t be mad at them for asking for proof, rather than providing falsification.
As Podkayne pointed out in another thread about NASA, our government consists of a wide range of sometimes highly opinionated individuals. Our government does not “believe” anything. But people within the government do believe in a wide range of things.
I am not aware of any official government position about psychic phenomenon, but there are certainly individuals within our government who do believe in psychic abilities.
Now about any possible conspiracy: Our remote viewing program ran for roughly 17 years. Was there 100% accuracy? Probably not. I don’t think anyone has claimed 100% accuracy. Was there some value received from the information gathered? I think so. I think Joe’s LoM indicates that. Do I have any access to classified materials? No. So I can only draw my own conclusions from what is known. Much is apparently hidden about this.
: