[QUOTE=FinnAgain]
For anybody who is unaware, DocCathode deserves a medal. This is some of the funniest stuff ever written on the Dope.
[/QUOTE]
Wow. Truly the incarnation of Greatness.
“ScrewTape Poisoning.” That explains a lot. Perhaps all of it.
Well, this thread has run its course, the topic has become Lekatt instead of the OP. So no matter what I post the skeptics will do what they do best. But perhaps someone will come away with an interest in reading the material. If you wish to think you won, please do so. It matters not what you or I believe, only truth matters. So have your fun.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Well, this thread has run its course, the topic has become Lekatt instead of the OP.
[/QUOTE]
I wonder why…
[QUOTE=FinnAgain]
I wonder why…
[/QUOTE]
Oddly enough, he never saw it coming.
Well played!
You win the internet.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Well, this thread has run its course, the topic has become Lekatt instead of the OP. So no matter what I post the skeptics will do what they do best. But perhaps someone will come away with an interest in reading the material. If you wish to think you won, please do so. It matters not what you or I believe, only truth matters. So have your fun.
[/QUOTE]
Ignorance brought, ignorance fought, ignorance runs.
Buh bye.
Now, back to the topic at hand.
Would it be better if another Million Dollar Challenge was offered with someone else in charge, or should it be done with no monetary reward offered?
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Well, this thread has run its course, the topic has become Lekatt instead of the OP. So no matter what I post the skeptics will do what they do best. But perhaps someone will come away with an interest in reading the material. If you wish to think you won, please do so. It matters not what you or I believe, only truth matters. So have your fun.
[/QUOTE]
Speaking of skeptics:from here
[QUOTE=lekatt]
OK, DocCathode
Maybe I was a little hard on you. But I thought of a way for you to prove what you say.
I will give you five names: Pam Reynolds, Betty Law, Herman Brown, Amy Kattein and Tom Sawyer.
Just give me a reading of the consciousness of the above names and I will give you the verifiable details of whether of not they had NDEs. Fair enough.
You could do it with just my name, so you should be able to do it again with the names above. If you are correct, I will apologize for every thing I thought about you, and take a close second look at the work you are doing.
Leroy
[/QUOTE]
Why come you can issue these types of challenges but when we ask you to put up or shut up you call us skeptics? You were skeptical of Doc’s claims. Furthermore your Truthiness Detector was apparently not working to good that day…
ETA: Nevermind, Bayard did in fact just win the thread…
A prize with a dollar attachment is a must. That way, it gives wooians one less silly little dodge. They can still dissemble and pretend that the rules are rigged, or what have you… but if cash is on the line, lots of cash? That at least provides a counter for claims such as “What reason could I possibly have to subject myself to such a test?”
[QUOTE=Czarcasm]
Now, back to the topic at hand.
Would it be better if another Million Dollar Challenge was offered with someone else in charge, or should it be done with no monetary reward offered?
[/QUOTE]
I actually think a public and verifiable challenge like this is a good thing. It’s an actual wall you can put woo up against. It’s not foolproof, and lots of people who have been challenged have weaseled their way out one way or another, but it’s something. It’s bascially a formal way of announcing ‘We think you’re full of shit, and here’s a million dollars to back it up’. Without he money you’re just yelling back ‘is not’.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Well, this thread has run its course, the topic has become Lekatt instead of the OP. So no matter what I post the skeptics will do what they do best. But perhaps someone will come away with an interest in reading the material. If you wish to think you won, please do so. It matters not what you or I believe, only truth matters. So have your fun.
[/QUOTE]
Well I believe it is because you have refused to answer the questions put to you. Bayard asked another good question concerning the bible quotes you used and you have ignored it. I asked for a single prominent psychic you think is a fake and you have not responded.
My use of ‘space’ is just as intangible as what you described, yet I was somehow able to convey and address the issues for my client. I could have said what I heard one client tell a colleague–“space? What space–the one between your ears?” 
My position is that if you come into a thread and board fighting ignorance and you have a non traditional stance, you need to be prepared to explain yourself in terms that work with the medium you have at your disposal. Those would be your words and writings.
I remain open minded but as of your last posting you have not convinced me, nor do I think you have convinced anyone of your position.
Well, if it’s pretty much agreed that having the Prize is a Good Thing, then should it be open to all, or just the major players? Considering the massive amounts of time it takes to go through all the applications, sorting the nonsensical and incomprehensible from the coherent and the possible, then trying to set up when, where and how the test will take place, I would be in favor of just going after the big guns. Where it is less likely that they would consent to be tested, it would be damn good publicity for our side.
[QUOTE=Czarcasm]
Well, if it’s pretty much agreed that having the Prize is a Good Thing, then should it be open to all, or just the major players?
[/quote]
By major players, I assume you mean celebrities? I guess it’s a bit complicated… If you exclude ‘minor players’, you open yourself up to (justified) claims of bias and cherry picking. If psychics were real, then a real psychic could just as easily be famous as not. Limiting it to famous ones would only prove or disprove that they were psychics or not. If the prize should serve as a test for everybody, it should be open to everybody.
But at the same time, that would necessitate either time or expense for those who carry out the selection process. Asking for neutral observers to act as volunteers in the selection process might work… setting up an account whose interest payment would pay a modest salary for workers to field applications might work as well.
I think that limiting the prize to well known figures would, ultimately, be self defeating.
Here is a sampling of applications(and attempted applications) over the last year. I think it’s a pretty good argument for limiting the contest somewhat.
Don’t get me wrong, I certainly agree that the contest will draw a great many kooks, cranks, jokers and fakers. I just think that the drawbacks of excluding anybody are more extreme than the hassle of including everybody.
Imagine, with all the bullshit objections that are put forward now, what a prize that would exclude people would garner? “Of course I could pass that challenge and get the prize, but they only offer it to people who they know won’t win. I applied and was rejected from even setting up a demonstration, it’s a total fraud.”
Then again, it’s not my money that’d finance the project.
[QUOTE=Hakuna Matata]
Well I believe it is because you have refused to answer the questions put to you. Bayard asked another good question concerning the bible quotes you used and you have ignored it. I asked for a single prominent psychic you think is a fake and you have not responded.
My use of ‘space’ is just as intangible as what you described, yet I was somehow able to convey and address the issues for my client. I could have said what I heard one client tell a colleague–“space? What space–the one between your ears?”
My position is that if you come into a thread and board fighting ignorance and you have a non traditional stance, you need to be prepared to explain yourself in terms that work with the medium you have at your disposal. Those would be your words and writings.
I remain open minded but as of your last posting you have not convinced me, nor do I think you have convinced anyone of your position.
[/QUOTE]
The question was not answered because it’s answer is obvious. What if you asked me which singer or movie star was really a fake. Famous psychics get to be famous because they are talented, just as anyone else does. If there were a fake they would not be famous. I did meet a psychic named Bob in Texas. He gave me a reading as a courtesy, I knew he was not very talented after the first five minutes. Bob had a late night TV show for about 4 months and then a radio show for about 6 months. He was invited to the New York psychic parties and stayed for only two weeks. He was not invited back. Then there was a psychic named Laza who had a local TV show for a while before she moved to Alaska. She wrote a book on how to be a psychic called “Fake it till You Make it.” Yes, that’s true. She dropped off the radar long ago. Psychics are the same as any skill, those who have it become famous and those who don’t fade away.
There would not be any way I could explain how I know or the process behind it without the usual immature rantings and name calling that goes on in this thread. Some people really believe if they can out shout and intimidate their opponent they win. Reality is what truth is, we can not change that only observe it.
It is not my goal to change the beliefs of anyone, nor the beliefs of the world. That is beyond the scope of any individual unless they are a master teacher. It is the spiritual teachers that have changed the world for the good. The negatives, dictators, megamaniacs might make a small ripple quickly dispersed and quickly forgotten. The goal is truth, wherever, whenever and from whomever it comes.
Megamaniacs: when normal sized maniacs simply won’t do.
Look for them in your grocer’s household goods aisle.
[QUOTE=FinnAgain]
Megamaniacs: when normal sized maniacs simply won’t do.
Look for them in your grocer’s household goods aisle.
[/QUOTE]
Wouldn’t you find them in the MegaloMart?
I don’t believe the answer is obvious at all. Being famous is NOT the same as having ability. Are you saying that Paris Hilton is a great actress? Do you honestly believe that famous equals talent or ability?
I am an extremely good Architect. I am not famous. Famous Architects in my field become famous because of the right client, or being in the right place at the right time. There are a couple famous Architects who are excellent Architects–but it is not a club exclusive to their fame.
If I was a psychic I doubt I would want to be famous and make money from that skill. Frankly my inclination would be to prove that this talent exists and the Randi prize is one way I could see to prove the skeptics wrong.
LeKatt do you consider yourself a psychic? If so–have you considered applying for the Randi prize?
[QUOTE=Czarcasm]
Well, if it’s pretty much agreed that having the Prize is a Good Thing, then should it be open to all, or just the major players?
[/QUOTE]
Slow down, hoss. I’m not certain that the challenge is a Good Thing. I don’t think it’s necessarily harmful to the cause of reason, but I think we skeptics could make better use of limited resources.
Let’s split the woo-woos into three broad categories: the people like my uncle, who believes he can dowse for water but who is not trying to make any money off anyone and is fairly harmless; the people like our esteemed lekatt who actively spreads nonsense but, as far as I can tell, isn’t making any money off it; and the people like Sylvia Browne, who are deliberate frauds and who are certainly harmful, because they steal money, discourage people from seeking medical help, and interfere with police investigations.
The first group – Harmless Uncles – will always be with us and, being harmless, might not need to be a priority.
The second group – Carriers – are a more serious problem, because they win converts. However, as we have seen, they’re largely immune to reason. The good news, I believe, is that they draw considerable strength and encoruagement from the success of…
the third group – Evil Ones. The Evil Ones are not the root of the problem; the root is human stupidity. But, the Evil Ones throw so much gas on the fire of stupidity that they should be our primary focus. If we can knock off Jamesathan-Sylvia Van Brownward, we do the most immediate good because we prevent the fleecing of millions of their dupes, and we remove a lot of the fuel from the Carriers.
And that’s why I think the Challenge is the wrong approach. The Evil Ones, as someone noted upthread, stand to gain nothing by submitting to the Challenge. Randi hasn’t been able to net a big fish, and I think that’s only partly because of his personality – mostly it’s because the Evil Ones are smart enough not to make asses of themselves at Randi’s hands.
So I don’t think the Challenge is the best use of resources. We need to come up with a better way to expose the Evil Ones. How? Hell if I know. Finding some journalist with the monomania of Lou Dobbs and the brain of Ira Flatow to take on woo-woo as his cause would be a good step. That’s probably not so easy to do, though. So… I dunno.
I’m comforted by the presence of the Challenge, and I applaud Randi for having the balls to do it. I just don’t think it’s going to get us where we need to be.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
The question was not answered because it’s answer is obvious. What if you asked me which singer or movie star was really a fake. Famous psychics get to be famous because they are talented, just as anyone else does.
[/QUOTE]
I thought you were leaving. Anyway I’ve been poking around in the dusty old NIV, and I found this:
and
That book is just full of stuff like this. Damnedest thing.