quote:
*Witches spell magick with a "k" to distinguish what we do from what stage
magicians/illusionists do. Canadians spell colour with a "u". Deaf people capitalize the word
"Deaf". Deal with it.
Can I just say that really its only Americans that spell colour without a “u”.
As for magick, what the hell. If people want to believe it let them, its no more harmful than religion…
Did anyone else pick up on that sarcasm?
Because, of course, Slythe knows everything about what’s applicable in all situations to everyone’s spiritual lives, not to mention having a direct hotline to someone who settles claims about everything that may or may not exist in the universe.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by matt_mcl *
**
You mean Cecil?
This being the 20th (or 21st, depending on how you count) Century, AND this being a board devoted to fighting ignorance, unless you can point to some objective proof that magic(k) works, you should be prepared for some periods of light to moderate skepticism when you admit you practice.
Skepticism is a good thing, but don’t be too quick to close your mind to things just because “main-stream” science dismisses them. It wasn’t too many years ago that people such as yourself laughed at the idea of living things having an aura. Now that science has caught up, we can actually measure the aura of living things.
They laughed at Columbus when he said the world was round. They used to believe that the human body couldn’t take the pressure of traveling at the speed of sound. Oh, and what was the name of that prehistorical fish that was believed to be extinct, until they found one? Be skeptical, but keep an open mind. It’s hard to do, but it’s worth it.
To the OP, I believe magic can work. Weather it’s just the “belief” that makes it work, or if there’s really some power behind it, I’m not sure. I’ve studied many paranormal topics over the years. Magic, however, is one that I haven’t spent much time on. My suggestion is to do as much research as you can BEFORE you get involved in anything of the sort. I’ve have heard claims that certain types of magic can back-fire on you if not performed perfectly.
First of all, any time someone uses the dismissive phrase “mainstream science”, I know they are about to blow smoke. This post is no exception.
Auras? I want a cite. And please don’t say Kirlian photography.
People knew the world was round for a thousand years before Columbus sailed. His thesis (which was wrong) was that the world was small enough to sail around.
Give me a reason to have an open mind where magic is concerned. At least with the coelacanth, we had fossil evidence of its existence. Show me one spell, cantrip, chant, prayer, incantation, potion, powder, or ceremony that objective observers agree modifies the environment in a repeatable fashion. And don’t give me this bullshit about established scientists suppressing evidence of the paranormal because of our tiny skeptical minds. Scientists love new stuff. Show them an unexplained phenomenon and they’d be all over it.
Don’t be so sure. My roommate convinced his psychiatrist that he could at least do something interesting. (He rattled off what she had fed her son for breakfast and what the son had worn that day). She was fascinated, but told him that if she told anyone else she would lose her job.
I love majic(k)! Penn and Teller Rule!!!
Wow, you just proved my point. So quick to dismiss. So quick to attack anyone who might be just a little more opened minded than yourself.
Isn’t it “site”?
I’m not so sure. Look at how quickly you pointed out that I was “blowing smoke”. You did NO research of your own on the subject of magic. You had NO documentation to back you up, you relied on the opinions of others (mainstream science), and you made absolutely NO attempt whatsoever at even trying to understand the point of view of the person you were attacking. You simply went in with guns blazing in an attempt to discredit someone on a topic that you obviously have no interest in even looking into.
Looking at that, it’s very easy to see why scientists stray away from anything considered “paranormal”. You’ve already pointed out that you have a problem with Kirlian photography. Hey, here’s a guy just trying to document something new. The first thing scientists do, is call it bullshit and move on.
Don’t get me wrong here. Although I’m a believer, I’m also a true skeptic. I don’t know that there really IS enough evidence to prove the existance of ghosts.
Got to believe in something though, don’t we… :rolleyes:
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Stric-9 *
**
No, in this case, he is looking for a cite. The site he is standing on while requesting the cite is unknown.
[hijack]
Would it be terribly wrong of me to interrupt this thread to note that, in the 16th century, in England “magic” was almost always spelled with a “k” and “color” was never spelled with a “u”?
Also, couldn’t what Penn and Teller and David Blaine and the like do be more properly referred to as “conjuring”? Keith Thomas in Religion and the Decline of Magic notes that “conjuring” and “magic” were often fairly properly delineated in the Middle Ages.
[/hijack]
Well, I do watch Buffy the Vampire Slayer every week. Does that count?
Sheesh…
Per the OP:
No I do not believe in magic in the supernational sense of the word.
No, you should not be scared of black magic. It doesn’t do anything so nothing bad can come from it (at least nothing that a weak mind doesn’t imagine).
This is not the best place to be if you enjoy hiding and avoiding the truth. (Though this activity seems to be increasingly popular in MPSIMS and IMHO.)
For those who will now jump on my case: You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. Mine is that you are wrong.
I’m sorry, but if you want to stipulate that something that defies the known laws of science exists, it is up to you to provide the evidence. Until you do, the preponderance of evidence points heavily towards to non-existance of “magic”, no matter how you care to spell it.
BTW, I have an open mind. It is open just enough to let in evidence, without letting out my sense of reality.