Lekatt do you actually believe this? Or are you just trying to bluff us, hoping that this thread is so long that most people will assume that what you have just said is not the big fat lie that it is?
You are treating us like we are stupid. How long are you going to go on believing that your “big lie” technique isn’t going to work?
Err, is going to work, sorry.
No. What is double talk is emphatically denying something AND stating that you cannot possibly know that very thing.
If you know almost nothing about your father’s side of the family(which you stated), then you cannot state that no one in your family has died of cancer(which you did, in the same freaking post). It is quite possible that many of your ancestors have died of cancer.
Do you see what I’m getting at? One statement can be true. But both statements cannot. Pick one and go with it
I think he argued (at some point) something to the effect that “If I can’t remember them, they aren’t my family.” Meaning that since the only people he remembers are his parents and, what, a grand parent or something that’s the only family he has–as though his parents were immaculately conceived, and his ancestors do not count as “family”. Which, if this is true, means that he needs to acknowledge the fact that the Larry King psychic is a liar–as she asked her “readee” to go check back with her family on things that she didn’t remember.
The point is, Lekatt, regardless of who you remember, they’re still related to you. That woman caller on Larry King couldn’t possibly have actively remembered her Civil War ancestor–even if she did know of his existence–so your point about “why would they try to contact me if I don’t remember them” is moot. Rosemary communicated with ancestors the caller did not remember. Edwards does it all the time. “Please go home and check with your family, I feel this is true.” I’ve seen him do it. I’m sure most of us have heard that line used many times.
So what it comes down to, is you have a couple choices here. Either you:
See what I’m getting at, here? They’re mutually exclusive states. If you’re right, than Rosemary was lying. If Rosemary is telling the truth, than you’re wrong. Which is it?
Peace,
~mixie
Ack, “as though his parents were immaculately conceived, or that his ancestors…”
Peace,
~mixie
I could be wrong Leroy but I think Czarcasm’s #1 could be an issue of libel *, seeing as this site runs off of the chicago reader.
*I am probably wrong, because I don’t know the laws very well.
I think Czarcasm’s #1 issue was “The Amazing Czarcasm #1”. That definitely came before “Web of Czarcasm” and “Peter Parker, the Spectacular Czarcasm”. Honestly, between all the titles and the X-Men crossovers I don’t know how the guy gets any sleep.
Proof again that two people can look at the same thing and see it in completely different ways.
Have you actually read any of the posts? If by fishtailing you mean backpedaling you are 100% wrong. Nobody but you doubts cold readings.
Good guess. Of course, we have no way of knowing what actually happened. I don’t think you’re lying, but how do you know it wasn’t just a guess? How do you know the other person wasn’t lying to you? How do you know the other person wasn’t simply mistaken? Bottom line, you offer an anecdote as proof yet again, and in this case only your interpretation of an event involving other people. Not exactly a double bllind study. Perhaps you heard somebody talking earlier in the evening and something that was said stuck with you. Perhaps the crystal was in fact an arrowhead. Perhaps all this happened in a town with a large Indian burial ground nearby and similar crystals showed up frequently.
See the previous several hundred posts.
Love
Leroy **
[/QUOTE]
Nuts. Forgot to remove that last Love Leroy bit. Sorry. Can a mod fix it? Please?
Actually, my first appearance was in “Amazing Czarcastic Fantasy #15”. I didn’t mind Ditko’s artwork, but John Romita really had me down pat.
True.
So “psychics” exaggerate their hit rates a little bit? What’s wrong with that? 
That depends on what evidence you accept and what you reject. Our military program apparently did some things that shocked a few people. But it’s not a good career move to be associated with the occult. I haven’t had time to look into it, but I would bet that Joe McMoneagle was tested…
That’s the easy conclusion, but not necessarily the right one.
Tests of psychic ability might not have to claim repeatability for instance. This is because maybe some things happen not by cause and effect but by synchronicity: events popping up from the general matrix of the flow or the Tao. Examples of synchronicity besides coincidences are inventions made around the same time by people who didn’t know each other or their work (often scientific work is done in deliberate isolation from others in order to get credit, especially nowadays); theories thought up by various people at around the same time and they are unconnected; art movements and ideas coming along but invented independently: Schoenberg, Webern, and Hauer have all been given credit for the discovery or development of the 12-tone system in music, and there were several art movements that were similar to each other that came around the same time but without one causing the other.
When some form of augury (augury is not just fortune telling but is actually engaged in to get guidance from the universe or the gods)is done, such as using the I Ching, or any of the ones that people laugh at like astrology, palmistry, and
the like, there are at least six things that are HAPPENING ALL AROUND THE SAME TIME–in other words we can interpret the results if we think of their relatedness. If we take the I Ching, for instance, the book has to be oriented north, I think, and there is incense involved;sticks or coins are thrown and their pattern is looked up in the I Ching WHILE THE ATTITUDE OF THE PERSON SEEKING THE GUIDANCE is the most important item in the list of more or less synchronous activities; the person must identify the toss of the coins with the pictures and the comments in the book for that pattern and he or she must interpret it. The interpretation is not separate from the attitude and none of these things is separate from any of the others. The attitude has to be one of respect, not stupidity or an attempt to test the Tao or the gods or Heaven, but one doesn’t have to be a crazed fanatic either. The attitude has to be just right. Now science is the opposite of this kind of thing just mainly because it tries to leave out things going on around the same time rather than include them. For example it definitely tries to rule out the experimenter’s attitude.Now it is said in science that under the same conditions the same thing will happen. However, science also knows that it is impossible ever to exactlyl repeat the same conditions, but it doesn’t really matter as we can get close enough. This already somewhat leaky requirement for science is irrelevant in augury in the first place.
Moreover, as I said before, there is no arguing with experience. People can tell the difference between a dream and something completely different from dreaming. There is no reason to question this. And if they saythey have seen the beyond and talked to Uncle George, fine and even finer if they aren’t asking for any money to tell you this. It is only when the money thing gets into the picture that things go awry.
To deal with just many of the probelms in your post
Sure there is. Have you ever heard of hallucinations? Delusions? While some conditions result in hallucinations which a person knows to be unreal, others result in hallucinations which are accepted as reality.
There is no good reason to assume that an individual can always distinguish between a dream and waking experience. Second, there are many good reasons (the DSM V is filled with them) to assume that an individual may not be able to distinguish hallucination from reality.
Case closed!
You better start a thread on Carl Jung. Or take a look at this one that can only be seen in Boardreader’s cache.
I tried to read the rest of your post but my eyes kept glazing over.
Oh nothing, it’s just lying… And I wasn’t saying they exagerate their success rate; I was pointing out that no psychic has been able to perform their abilities to any reasonable degree when in a controlled environment.
As has already been pointed out, there is ample reason to doubt the “success” of that project, and no evidence has been presented from that project…
That’s not a true/false statement, GOM. It’s taking in the fact that no psychics have proven their abilities in a controlled environment (And instead, fail, often misearably), and that no evidence has come foreward supporting psychic ability to be true, and therefor taking the logical conclusion to not put stock into psychic abilities. It doesn’t mean that psychic abilities are true or false, merely that they’re unproven and rather suspect, currently.
Try this, for example; An aircraft manufacturing company builds a new aircraft, assuring everyone that it’s perfectly safe, giving demonstrations, etc. Say the FAA does tests on the aircraft, with all the information available on what tests are done, etc, and the aircraft fails. Every time. Each and every test flight results in some sort of failure. Not neccessarily disaster, but failure; Sure, sometimes the engines explode, send turbine blades through the passenger cabin and fuel tanks, ripping the wings off and detonating the fuel, but sometimes, it’s just the landing gear buckling on landing. The company insists it’s safe, and that the FAA test is unfair. Would you fly in that plane?
Yeah, but we know politicians exist. I’m a little confused at where you stand on the issue: Do you think psychics have power beyond that of normal people (ie. can see the dead, future, auras, etc)?
What’s your explanation? I’m curious, you probably clarified yourself earlier, but it’s early in the morning and my heads filled with pea soup…
[bolding mine]
so, since we cant account for attitude, I guess we’ll never be able to test the placebo effect :rolleyes:
Seriously, how can an experimenter’s attitude influence the effectiveness of the practitioner? One can test the accuracy of results of enthusiastic practioners just fine. Unless the Powers That Be intentionally try to obscure scientific evidence of the success of augury. And the aliens are in control of the Tri-Lateral commission :dubious:
How is this different than lucky guessing? I mean how can you tell it apart from lucky guessing?
Science has had several examples of the practitioner or experimenter attitude definitely affecting the outcome. They fake something and say it is scientifically proved. Their attitude is they wanted the outcome of the scientific experiment to go a certain way, so it is faked to go that way. Just as another scientist can come and expose the fake, so fake psychics are exposed. Or maybe not “just as,”
since a lot of the scientific research that proves some finding is peanuts and nobody has any incentive to disprove the results or even read them in the first place. All these people writing research papers in order to stay employed as professors are what I’m thinking of. And some of the results don’t even have to be consciously
or deliberately created so much as a little unconsciousness here and there of what the experimenter is doing can make the results seem to himself to be valid. I don’t have a cite on the latest scandal-- in the science-rational world-- of faking, but I think cold fusion might be and example. And I’ve seen articles in magazines with titles to the effect that some experiment has now been proven to have had faulty practices involved in its making…
I am wondering if all of the health and diet “reporting” on television and radio about what is good or bad for us is a matter merely of incompetent news reporting or if the experiments were shoddy or even self-serving in the first place. I heard a rumor that when you hear a “science report” about some food on the news it is always a the result of experiments PAID FOR BY THE INDUSTRY MAKING THE FOOD.
Thus the dairy industry can “prove” that dairy products are good for you and there are all kinds of diet people who pay for studies that" prove" that dairy isn’t good for you. Everything is so phony and ignorant that …well I don’t want to go on any further except to say that the astrologers and the psychics do less harm to society than the rational scientists. However, I realize we musn’t throw out the baby with the bathwater and just abandon science because it isn’t perfect!
Not that there is any danger of that anyway, because there is too much money invested in science (and in “science”). There is a lady with a white smock on and white hair and I think she really is a doctor and she is on tv for some proven product to do something or other, and in the old days besides the smock the doctors had that round light on their foreheads, or the actors playing them did. This type thing means that the advertisers think or know that the public has a lot of FAITH in science, even if it is just “science” they have faith in most of the time…