A couple things. Since the Dope isn’t a court of law (or somesuch) it’s probably okay that Moderators participate in the very same threads they are Moderating. This raises and interesting point (to me) because I have always found the Mods use of the “[Mod hat on] … [/mod hat off]” thing to be kind of annoying, but after reading the OP here, I’m thinking that just such precise language should ALWAYS be used (or not used when one’s just participating in a thread) so that it is clear what a Mod’s intentions are.
Point two: according to Snakespirit, the issue of the existance of ghosts is “the proverbial two-edged sword” because neither side can prove their point; therefore both sides act as “true believers”. May I just hijack enough to point out that this is unscientific nonsense. Ghosts, like God are mere conjecture. there is no reason to believe they exist (and no evidence-- other then anecdotal) so it is really quite the burden of the believers (in ghosts, gods, tooth fairies and IPUs) to prove, or even advance their notions.
And finally, Aeschines. I am pretty much on the side of scientic rationalism in these sorts of debates. But I do think that sometimes you get short shrift around here. There are certainly some things that humans don’t and/or can’t understand, and there are ultra-skeptics here that will go so far as to say “if it hasn’t been proven, it can’t exist.” Still, you can’t expect rational folks to sit idly by and take people’s word for it that they saw a ghost or goblin. Most folks need some sort of proof beyond just a “well I saw it” or “well I believe it, and it’s real to me, therefore it’s real.”
I believe Czarcasm can take great comfort in this statement, considering the source. One of the most irrational, dimwitted posters on the boards thinks that Czarcasm’s powers of reason are slipping away. That’s got to be a good sign.
Well, thanks for the affirmation. I’d have to agree, at least when it comes to the paranormal threads. The thing is, I’m not a ditzy “believer,” however much the skeptics here would like to see me as one. I believe that psi has been proved in the lab. Skeptics disagree, that’s fine, but there’s still a ton of good or at least reasonably executed experiments that point in that direction. I believe that the Afterlife has been proved, based on NDEs and the evidence of mediums. Skeptics disagree, fine again, but there is again a good body of evidence. The concept of ghosts fits in with the afterlife, and again I think the proof is good. I do not believe in bigfoot, fairies, or that UFO phenomena are caused by aliens visiting us. For that matter, I don’t believe in a monotheistic God. Also, I know what it’s like to be an atheist. I was an atheist from age 12 to about age 14. Pretty heavy duty. But I investigated various phenomena on my own and came to believe that, yeah, the proof was there.
So I’m a little miffed when I try to make relatively sophisticated points in these threads and have to put up with a bunch of BS. The general disrespect of people who think anyone who doesn’t share their worldview is an idiot and can be dismissed out of hand. I certainly don’t think the skeptics are idiots. I don’t think Christians are idiots. I don’t even think the Creationists are idiots–just dogmatic. Where is the real debate? Where is the “Oh, that point is interesting, but I can’t quite agree.” The “debate” in the paranormal threads seems hardly the genteel, urbane conversation of genuine intellectuals. It is mean stuff. And I don’t really see where it comes from.
But all that has nothing to do with the OP. Fine, the mods mod their own threads and that’s the way it is. Fine. But I doubt I’ll participate in the paranormal threads anymore because the social dynamic there is unpleasant and the debate never seems to lead anywhere except to squabbling over the Randi Challenge.
Screw you, man. Snake is one of the more creative and interesting people on the boards. With a great sense of humor, and lots of life experience that is pertinent to a wide range of topics. I don’t even particularly agree with the man’s politics, which lean toward libertarian, but I love the guy. I’d trade tenth of him to a fucker like you any day.
SnakeSpirit, your phony concern really touches me, but just to clarify things, is it my physical health or my mental health that you are casting not so subtle aspersions on? Would you have me see a psychiatrist, or would you prefer I visit a medium?
Apologies, Aeschines, for one moment you reminded me of our departed friend so much I couldn’t resist. Actually, if you continued that particular debate I believe we’d genuinely get somewhere.
This subject has clearly got everyone’s back up. I don’t hold up Randi as some kind of paragon of virtue, with the humility and patience of a saint and the wisdom of a Babylonian king: indeed, I think charlatans like Uri Gellar and John Edward would tear such a person a new arsehole on television.
He is brusque, egocentric and rude. But I do admire him, and I think accusations of outright fraud on his part are way off.
Yeah, I’d say deal with it. If you can find evidence that I’ve censored someone because they have dared to disagree with me, please present the evidence, and I’ll correct my mistake and, if applicable, apologize.
Fair enough. I consider the issue dealt with. I still think a thought-out policy is advisable, but even if there is to be none I don’t consider it to be the end of the world.
If you want to believe nonsense, go to a board specifically for people who believe nonsense, not one for fighting ignorance. If you are unhappy with the way things are here, it’s your own damn fault for expecting people to be happy that you are undermining what the entire website was created for.
What’s unproductive about asking that people who wish to remain ignorant leave instead of arguing if they don’t like the way the site is run?
If I were running a site dedicated to talking about the history of Croatia and people wanted to come and talk about collecting cabbage patch dolls and then complained when it didn’t go well, of course I’m going to recommend that they find a cabbage patch dolls (or dolls in general or toys or whatever) site to go to.
There are plenty of boards out their for believers in supernatural powers to make unsupported claims and bash skeptics. Expecting to do that here is a complete waste and shows stubborn cluelessness.
Oh, and Kythereia, please join up. I would also like to see you stick around.
And Dan Norder, I partially agree with you. Aeschines, Snakespirit, you two seem to really be hitting your heads against the wall here. You ought to either (1) realize you aren’t going to convert anybody, and simply leave the subject alone, and/or (2) find a board where your beliefs are given more credence. Actually, the two options are not mutually exclusive. Or go ahead and stay and argue your beliefs, just understand I ain’t buying, not anymore than if a Jehovah’s Witness was trying to convert me. But hey, as long as you both are civil, it ain’t no skin off my back.
I respectfully disagree. The boards benefit from differences of opinion. I see the debate as analogous to the theism/atheism debate. I personally give a roughly similar credence to ghosts as I do to god, that is very little. I am happy to read views on both sides of both issues, however, provided those views put forward with eloquence and consideration.
