Hoooo, it gets even worse than that. First off, neverminding that’s it’s no longer 1998 by half a decade (And it’s past winter currently, anyway), his prediction is incredibly far-fetched.
His prediction starts with “When we go to war with Iraq – and we will…” Not exactly a big stretch to make that claim, it’s just about decided already, but hold on… Shortly after the attack starts in Iraq (“Shortly” being an incredibly vague period of time), North Korea will launch a classic-scenario attack on South Korea. Massive artillery bombardment and conventional forces, but no nukes. US/ROK forces reply in kind. Then, the DPRK starts to withdraw. US/ROK forces follow, and upon crossing the DMZ, North Korea detonates a nuclear weapon hidden in a tunnel, which wipes out a good number of the US/ROK forces, and stuns the world. Yeah, you read that right. No nuclear-armed SCUD, no No-dong or taep’o-dong MRBM, they’re going to make a nuclear land-mine, dramatically cutting down the weapons blast radius, and achieving nothing but the destruction of maybe a couple battalions. Instead of taking out a major industrial center or the like, they’re going to abandon the front line and cause minimal casualties. And he says that the only way this will not all come to pass is if the US withdraws all 37,000 troops from the Korean penninsula before attacking Iraq.
That’s a bit more damning than just saying “North Korea will be the next nation to use a nuclear weapon in anger.”
Almost as good is his call about the shuttle, which he said was triggered (Triggered, mind you, the event that set it all off) by a conduit cable getting severed, shutting down their computer (Singular). Which, considering what we know of the telemetry feed and the nature of the disaster… Is utterly impossible.
Also, I’m going to have to call “BS” on his out. He’s been attributed several times to saying that while individuals can be wrong in remote viewing, a group of 5-6 colaberating are 100% accurate. And he did say that this whole nuke prediction was done by his whole group. But then again, so was the call for 1998…
Man, I go away for a couple of days and look at what I miss.
Okay, for starters:
Based on your debate skills demonstrated in these threads, you failed your “training” and I would never want to be represented by you in a negotiation. Sticking your fingers in your ears and saying “la la la la laaaa, I can’t hear you,” doesnt’ get you very far.
At this point, I’d like to take a look back at what I like to call “The best of Lekatt.”
Your exact words lekatt, yet based on your own links, you lied here, because you weren’t even close to death, you were simply asleep.
Your exact words, lekatt, from page 1. Here you say you have talked to the dead, ie., had psychic experiences.
Again, your exact words, from page 1.
Your exact words,from page 2. It’s interesting that here you imply that cold readings do exist, inspite of all your claims that
Your exact words, from page 5.
One of my favorite non sequitors:
Your exact words, from page 5. Utterly meaningless in this debate.
Your exact words from page 6. Here, in the space of two sentences you say you have ability, and then say you don’t lay claim to ability. You contradicted yourself.
Your exact words from page 8. Sorry, argumentum ad populum doesn’t fly.
Your exact words from page 9, challenging a cold reading. I’m just curious, when were you young?
One of my favorites. Your exact words from page 12, in which you relate a psychic experience you claim to have had.
Your exact words from page 15. Nice. Tricky. You don’t actually say you didn’t claim to have psychic abilities, just that you don’t have any worthy of testing. Clever. Of course, it’s not really up to you to decide if any ability you claim to have is worth testing or not.
Of course, later on the same page you said this:
Again, your exact words from page 15. Relating your “personal experience” of doing those things, is the same as claiming the ability.
Your exact words, again from page 15. Here you blatantly deny what you said earlier. Oh, you didn’t use those exact words perhaps, since you deny the existence of “powers.” preferring to call them “abilities,” although the two terms are often used interchangably, and of course you fail to recognize that 19 correct baby gender guesses out of 20 is 95%
Your exact words from page 16. A statement of ability is a claim to possess ability.
Man, I go away for a couple of days and look at what I miss.
Okay, for starters:
Based on your debate skills demonstrated in these threads, you failed your “training” and I would never want to be represented by you in a negotiation. Sticking your fingers in your ears and saying “la la la la laaaa, I can’t hear you,” doesnt’ get you very far.
At this point, I’d like to take a look back at what I like to call “The best of Lekatt.”
Your exact words lekatt, yet based on your own links, you lied here, because you weren’t even close to death, you were simply asleep.
Your exact words, lekatt, from page 1. Here you say you have talked to the dead, ie., had psychic experiences.
Again, your exact words, from page 1.
Your exact words,from page 2. It’s interesting that here you imply that cold readings do exist, inspite of all your claims that
Your exact words, from page 5.
One of my favorite non sequitors:
Your exact words, from page 5. Utterly meaningless in this debate.
Your exact words from page 6. Here, in the space of two sentences you say you have ability, and then say you don’t lay claim to ability. You contradicted yourself.
Your exact words from page 8. Sorry, argumentum ad populum doesn’t fly.
Your exact words from page 9, challenging a cold reading. I’m just curious, when were you young?
One of my favorites. Your exact words from page 12, in which you relate a psychic experience you claim to have had.
Your exact words from page 15. Nice. Tricky. You don’t actually say you didn’t claim to have psychic abilities, just that you don’t have any worthy of testing. Clever. Of course, it’s not really up to you to decide if any ability you claim to have is worth testing or not.
Of course, later on the same page you said this:
Again, your exact words from page 15. Relating your “personal experience” of doing those things, is the same as claiming the ability.
Your exact words, again from page 15. Here you blatantly deny what you said earlier. Oh, you didn’t use those exact words perhaps, since you deny the existence of “powers.” preferring to call them “abilities,” although the two terms are often used interchangably, and of course you fail to recognize that 19 correct baby gender guesses out of 20 is 95%
Your exact words from page 16. A statement of ability is a claim to possess said ability.
So what do we have here? A bunch of posts that contradict one another, and sometimes are self-contradictory, coming from somebody who claims to be trained to debate, yet has no recourse but to constantly resort to logical fallacies, and semantic disputes.
Ah well, in his own mind he remains undefeated and has vindicated all his claims. Just not in anybody elses.
Thanks prin, but I will admit to a streak of stubbornness (as well as the OCD) which makes it tough to throw in the towel. Especially when dealing with a credophile (good word) like Lekatt.
I will concede that we have no chance of changing his mind, but, since a few new posters have dropped in, I’ve just wanted to make it clear how irrational his posts are.
Though frankly, I’m not near as annoyed about his absolute uncredibility as I am by his unflagging rudeness. Good grief!
Has anybody figured out what he’s actually hoping to achieve here? By now, anyone could tell that his personable manner and cunning debate style aren’t going to win any converts.
A tie is where both parties fight to the same position.
A stalemate is where one party can’t win, and the other can’t lose, for structural reasons. We can’t win and Lekatt can’t lose because he is not listening.
umm…
Enough about Lekatt already. He isn’t even “here”. Everyone who wants to, can see what he’s like. Nobody’s debating the quality of Lekatt’s debate. There is a pit thread about him already started.
I should have known I couldn’t get him to answer me directly, but at least he’s not able to bang his “definitions of cold reading are contradictory” drum anymore.
As far as what Lekatt is hoping to achieve, my guess is that, like somebody said a couple of pages back, he’s trying to reassure himself that his beliefs hold water. Luckily for him, no matter how leaky they are, all he see’s is the puddle at the bottom (to stretch a metaphor like taffy).
I’m not quoting here, but if I recall correctly, Lekatt’s idea was that a genuine psychic only works to help people, while a fraud is only concerned with money.
My definition is, a genuine psychic is self deluded and truly believes s/he is communicating with the dead, and a fraud knows it’s all an act.
I bought a clock last weekend that sets itself, or so it claimed.
When I got home I unpackaged it and put the batteries in place.
While I was reading the instructions the clock did set itself to the correct time and date. We know that the clock contained a receiver that listened for a radio signal which told it the correct time.
We are spiritual beings having a physical experience, inside we have a receiver to contact the spiritual world and learn about ourselves and the world we live in. If we want to activate it we must “put the batteries in”, make the moves to contact our inner spiritual being. Some will and some won’t. But it is there waiting for us when we are ready.
