# Hastur, what do you have against James Randi? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 26, 2001, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402 "2001-04-26T14:19:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/101 "2001-04-28T18:46:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by FunkDaddy \* > \*\*Hastur - I’m not looking to make a personal attack (seriously, I’m not). I’m not overly interested in magic. I don’t believe in it, and as far as I’m concerned it’s like religion… I ignore it. 🙂 > > However, you mentioned that you didn’t have to prove magic existed, rather that it was for others to disprove its existence. > \*\* No. And I love the way people recast this… I am saying that as this started in a Pit thread with jab1, claiming there is no magick without cites or proof, that the onus was on him to provide proof. And I have restated this far too many times for people who seem to be able to read… ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/102 "2001-04-28T18:49:43Z")
Once again, it is an impossibility to prove a negative. The burden of proof is always on the person contending the exisitence of a theory. What is so hard to understand about that? Haj ---
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/103 "2001-04-28T18:51:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Manda JO \* > \*\*Now that Hastur is actually answering questions, can we get back to the OP? **What is wrong with James Randi?** > > I think this is an important question, becasue there are two major catagories of believers in the paranormal: on one hand, you get people who are overall rational, who accept that there are frauds and con-men out there, but do think there is this one paranormal activity that they cannot explain. I may think thise people are misguided on that one area, but they are people you can at least talk to. On the other hand, you have people who believe in **everything**. These people often serve as default support groups for each other’s delusions–“I promise to believe you if you promise to believe me.” Among these types, questioning of any type is horribly rude. You can’t talk to them. > > It seems to me that the first type of believer in the paranormal would be a fan of Randi–after all, he is providing a valuble service by cutting through the bullshit to better expose the real stuff, eventually. It is only the people that have adopted the “I’ll belive you if you believe me” method of validation who fear the questioner. > > So Hastur, are there _any_ paranormal claims you suspect? Do you think that _anyone_ out there is looking to make a buck by faking paranormal abilities? If you do, then why does the idea of a guy dedicated to exposing these frauds bother you? \*\* Yes, I do think there are frauds out there. But, Randi treats everyone like frauds(from what I have seen and read), and in discussing them on his website, comes off as harsh and smug(not unlike Czarcasm and his ilk). What about the concept of innocent until PROVEN guilty? ---
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/104 "2001-04-28T18:54:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by hajario \* > \*\*Once again, it is an impossibility to prove a negative. The burden of proof is always on the person contending the exisitence of a theory. What is so hard to understand about that? > > Haj \*\* Nice try. Really. But, the person who comes up with the first claim has the burden of proof. jab1 came up with the existence of a theory that there was no magick. He did not prove it. Thus, the onus is still on him. Why is it so hard for you to understand that? My logic professor understands it. I let him read the thread. ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/105 "2001-04-28T18:54:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Hastur \* > \*\* What about the concept of innocent until PROVEN guilty? \*\* It’s alive and well. We promise that the State will not put you in jail or levy any other sanction just because you are full of shit about being able to perform Magick. Hope that helps. ---
**Author:** ![berdollos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ed8c4c/32.png) [@berdollos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/berdollos)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/106 "2001-04-28T18:58:19Z")
can duplicate a “psychic” event doesn’t disprove that it occurred. There is a fundamental logical flaw in Randi’s disproofs. All he is proving is that the phenomenon observed could have been produced by trickery. This is true of most scientific data. The results COULD HAVE been faked. ---
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/107 "2001-04-28T18:58:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by manhattan \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Hastur \* > > \*\* What about the concept of innocent until PROVEN guilty? \*\* > > It’s alive and well. We promise that the State will not put you in jail or levy any other sanction just because you are full of shit about being able to perform Magick. > > Hope that helps. \*\* Next on Fox: **When Mods Attack II**. ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/108 "2001-04-28T19:02:56Z")
I was merely commenting that the principle of innocent until proven guilty is unique to jurisprudence, and has no bearing whatsoever on the world of science, religion or anything else. It’s as if you asked whatever happened to the principle of less is more. Please try to confine your spreading of ignorance to one topic at a time. ---
**Author:** ![pepperlandgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f17d59/32.png) [@pepperlandgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pepperlandgirl)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/109 "2001-04-28T19:09:08Z")
No, **jab1** did not make the original claim that magic(k) does not exist. **Freyr** made the original claim that magic _does_ exist in his GD thread. jab was responding to that claim, and countered with “No, it doesn’t.” (Admittedly worded a big more harshly than that). Then **Hastur** enters and counters the original counter with “Yes, in fact, it does exist.” Therefore, the burden of proof is on Hastur’s (and other pagans/wiccans’) shoulders. Then this whole mess started, and continued with Hastur’s retracted invitation. Because Hastur will not back up his invitation, or otherwise prove the existance of magic, he is losing the debate. I can prove that magic doesn’t exist, because it’s imaginary. How are you going to convince me otherwise? Why should _I_ (or anybody else for that matter) prove _your_ beliefs to myself? That doesn’t make any sense. That would be tantamount to asking **jab1** (The Atheist) to prove God’s existance to me (The Christian) ---
**Author:** ![Folkie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ecccb3/32.png) [@Folkie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Folkie)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/110 "2001-04-28T19:18:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by berdollos \* > \*\*can duplicate a “psychic” event doesn’t disprove that it occurred. > > There is a fundamental logical flaw in Randi’s disproofs. > > All he is proving is that the phenomenon observed could have been produced by trickery. > > This is true of most scientific data. The results COULD HAVE been faked. \*\* Berdollos, this is a common misconception. Randi doesn’t say that the fact that he might be able to do something without psychic powers proves that someone else did it that way. He DOES say that unless the “psychic” can do it in circumstances that eliminate the possibility of fraud then psychic powers have not been proven. In effect, it falls in the margin of error. That’s why he is willing to go to considerable trouble to set up an experiment that both he and the subject agree would be a fair test of their ability. That may also possibly explain why some well-known people refuse to be tested by him - even with a million bucks waiting. By the way, I saw Randi live once, in the 1980s. I was in New York at Bouchercon - the international mystery fans convention - and the Saturday night performer was supposed to be a magician who cut a lady in half. Unfortunately the lady in question was sick so the magician begged off (we offered to provide another woman but he said no). So at the last minute they found a substitute - James Randi. As you can imagine this was like being told there were no hamburgers left; so would filet mignon be okay? Randi explained his work, talked about Project Alpha, and did some tricks (most of which I still have no idea how he accomplished). During the question period one irritated woman stood up and said “how do we know that you aren’t doing these tricks with psychic powers?” “Well,” Randi said (approximately). “You have to decide which is more likely. That I could break the laws of physics. Or that I could fool you.” The lady sat down. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/111 "2001-04-28T19:59:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Hastur \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by hajario \* > > \*\*Once again, it is an impossibility to prove a negative. The burden of proof is always on the person contending the exisitence of a theory. What is so hard to understand about that? > > > > Haj \*\* > > Nice try. Really. > > But, the person who comes up with the first claim has the burden of proof. jab1 came up with the existence of a theory that there was no magick. He did not prove it. Thus, the onus is still on him. Why is it so hard for you to understand that? My logic professor understands it. I let him read the thread. \*\* It is a basic fact of life that lack of existence is impossible to prove. You can’t prove that I’m not a 100 foot tall purple ape who reverts to human form in the presence of nonbelievers. I will say it again, no one on Earth can prove that there is no magick, however, if magick were real it would have to be proveable. No one would be happier than me if magick were real. I would use it all of the time. You clearly have a great understanding of the craft and claim to use it. Please prove it to me. I honestly am interested. All of the other stuff aside. Will you please prove it to me? Haj ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/112 "2001-04-28T20:00:19Z")
> [@](#): > > What about the concept of innocent until PROVEN guilty? And I ask the same question back to you: you have accused the man of coming off as “harsh and smug,” of “treating everyone like frauds”, but you haven’t shown any evidence of that. Several people _have_ presented evidence that Randi is not these things–namely, that he is respectful towards _beliefs_ and only challenges actual _claims_ that can be tested emperically. He has given every indication of being more than willing to accept evidence that can be shown to be fraud-free, and of being more than willing to work with anyone to come up with a testing situation that satisfies everyone. He hasn’t set impossible conditions on his prize or refused to observe anyone’s evidence. He does seem to really hate people who take advantage of other people’s desperation in the face of tragedy, but I would think those sorts of people would infuriate people who consider themselves authentic more than they infuriate skeptics–thier actions are the reasons that paranormal claims must be defended with utterly unimpeachable evidence. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/113 "2001-04-28T20:03:24Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by berdollos \* > \*\*can duplicate a “psychic” event doesn’t disprove that it occurred. > > There is a fundamental logical flaw in Randi’s disproofs. > > All he is proving is that the phenomenon observed could have been produced by trickery. > > This is true of most scientific data. The results COULD HAVE been faked. \*\* Randi does not prove that the effect in question does not exist. He merely provides and alternative, rational explanation as to why it _seems_ like the effect in question exists. Haj ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/114 "2001-04-28T20:10:54Z")
Depressingly, this thread makes it clear why so many have so much trouble grasping evolutioniary theory, genetic heredity and any number of other scientific topics discussed on these boards. ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/115 "2001-04-28T21:04:30Z")
> [@](#): > > I did answer the questions. Oh, really? Let’s go through the list… The first question, the title of the thread: “Hastur, what do you have against James Randi?” You responded, “He’s a pompous jerk, I’m a martyr, blah blah blah.” Fine. There’s one answer. The next question was: “How is Randi spiritually dead?” (Granted, that specific sentence wasn’t asked, but it was alluded to so often as to make it’s implication noticable to anyone with a brain cell to spare) You responded… well, you DIDN’T. Third question: “if you actually could do something so powerful, wouldn’t you want to share it, if only to show others your power? If you actually found some insight into the nature of the universe, wouldn’t you want to pass it along so that other seekers might find a better path?” You responded: “It’s not my desire to become a shepherd for others. I have my own way to find as everyone else does. I also have no need to show off, and don’t want to do parlor tricks to build my ego as you seem to by ad hominem and baseless attacks on character.” Basic bullshit that means: “I can’t prove shit and I know it.” If you really had no desire to show off, **why did you make the claim that you could do magick, and ask people to come see?!?** Anyway… Fourth question (an insistance, really): “Show us where [Randi] said anything wrong, that is, proven wrong.” You responded… again, you DIDN’T. Fifth question (and, in my mind, the most important): “Don’t you have the simplest notions of decency and politeness? Have you no shame?” You responded… “No, I don’t, I’m the lowliest of the lowest shitscabs to ever ooze across the face of the planet” (well, you didn’t say as such, but your subsequent posts have carried that message). Sixth question: “Is that claim that you can perform magic still open?” and “Would you care to show it to anybody here at the SDMB?” You responded… “Du-u-u-urr…” and “Fuck you.” Hardly the words of an honest man. Seventh question (from me): “Who, exactly, was the idiot who claimed he could perform “magick”?”, carrying the implication that **You made the claim, so the burden of proof is on you.** You must give us something to disprove before we can disprove it. So far, all you’ve given is jackassery and assholicness. Anyway, you responded… well, again, you didn’t, and keep maintaining that you can say whatever damn fool thing (emphasis on “fool”) you want without having to back up your claims. Eighth question: “Are you being deliberately obtuse?” You responded with more obtuseness, thus making your answer “Yes.” Ninth question: " Why should I (or anybody else for that matter) prove your beliefs to myself?" You responded… well, okay, so you haven’t gotten back to this thread yet, so I can’t really expect you to have responded yet. However, it’s an important question, and stands as the crux of the argument that **YOU** need to prove **YOUR** claims. ---
**Author:** ![beagledave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6de8d8/32.png) [@beagledave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beagledave)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/116 "2001-04-28T21:36:20Z")
Hastur has chosen to evade the serious questions posted so far, which leads me to ask…why are people STILL asking them? The horse is dead. Whether you whip it with a crop or kick it with your spurs, the horse is till dead people. ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/117 "2001-04-28T21:43:21Z")
True words, Beagle, but I consider this one horse that needs to be beaten. Time and time again, every time Hastur is called on something, he rants and raves and avoids the question. I’m pretty convinced that he thrives on being a dipshit, and now he’s getting called on it. _Again_. ---
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/118 "2001-04-28T21:55:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE Bo Diddly \* > \*\*True words, Beagle, but I consider this one horse that needs to be beaten. Time and time again, every time Hastur is called on something, he rants and raves and avoids the question. > > I’m pretty convinced that he thrives on being a dipshit, and now he’s getting called on it. _Again_. \*\* Oy vey. Why don’t you get a life, Spoofe. Your vendetta is as tired as your website. ---
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/119 "2001-04-28T21:56:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by beagledave \* > \*\*Hastur has chosen to evade the serious questions posted so far, which leads me to ask…why are people STILL asking them? > > The horse is dead. Whether you whip it with a crop or kick it with your spurs, the horse is till dead people. \*\* No, they just don’t like my answers. ---
**Author:** ![jab1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee7513/32.png) [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2001, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402/120 "2001-04-28T23:41:47Z")
My current theory is that you cannot do real magick, **Hastur.** The only way to disprove this claim is for you to demonstrate that you CAN do magick. There is not one thing _ **I** _ can do to prove or disprove this. The only person who can prove or disprove that **Hastur** can do magick is **Hastur**. Is it clear now? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hastur-what-do-you-have-against-james-randi/63402.md?page=7)