I levitate corrected.
OK, I give up, I know psychics are real, and spiritual things are real. If anyone else wants to know these things they will have to study them for themselves.
You can’t quit us, baby. One mention that NDE is not real and you will be all over it like a duck on a junebug.
Sorry for going off-topic, but I have a question for you: What evidence would make you think that psychics are probably NOT real?
Nothing. He is a True Scotsman when it comes to debunking psychics.
I think if his spirit guide told him, he might believe it.
Have your fun, poor Lekatt, thinks there are pink unicorns. Ha Ha Ha
The last laugh is mine…ala Raymond Moody and Elisabeth Keubler-Ross. Yes, they both said that.
So did Larry Harmon and Chris Wedes.
And Larry Storch and Chris Farley.
And Larry Fine and Christopher Moltisanti.
lekatt, Don’t you think it’s just a tiny bit ironic that you demanded a cite when you seldom if ever respond to requests for them?
I go away with for a couple of pints and this just ends up in a believers against skeptics battle. I guess it was always going to.
But I really was more interested in what the lack of the million dollar challenge would do.
I think it leaves a gap that would allow someone to offer a challenge that doesn’t have the look-down-your-nose approach of Randi.
Clearly the two sides in this thread will not convince each other through rhetoric or dueling cites, but it did look like both sides (and sorry you’re a bit outnumbered lekatt) would buy into a proper controlled trial. That, if nothing else, shows some promise.
I don’t imagine for a second that we could make this happen, but it’s interesting that there’s some acceptance for a test that didn’t come with the Randi-associated baggage.
Yes, other tests will pop up, but it just doesn’t matter. The people that should be tested will only submit to a test that:
- Is run by people that are predisposed to believing anyway, and
- Is run loose enough to allow just about any result to count as a “hit”.
As annoying as Randi is, there’s no question that he’s smart and skilled. For example, here’s a great clip from the 70s in which he pwns a “psychic”:
I don’t get it. You specifically alluded to a case that you personally participated in and helped solve. When asked for a specific backup to this claim with specific details, which, if provided would have been looked at with a fair eye by at least some of us, you gave up and started claiming we said you believed in pink unicorns. Perhaps there were a couple somewhat snarky replies, yes, but the request for a specific cite that you presumably have information on (since you were involved) you completely ignored. Why?
Assume that at least a few people would be convinced (and thus it’d be worth it) if you provided solid, convincing, objective, verifiable evidence that psychic power can work successfully.
Perhaps.
The people you’re talking about couldn’t pass a fair test (i.e. they’re frauds.)
I’d love someone to put on a fair test and a real psychic to pass it with flying colours.
Equally I’d love someone to put on a fair test that is so obviously fair that psychics can’t help but look bad when they refuse to take it.
The problem with the JREF challenge is that, because of what it was, it was easy for the potential applicants to spin reasons to not take it.
I would love for somebody to do this. I believe there is much about the universe we do not understand. What lekatt and people like him fail to understand is that so far none of them have provided that kind of evidence. Its all a bunch of wishy washy pseudo philosophical babble mixed in with vague unverifiable anecdotes of ridiculous claims.
Thirded that I would be thrilled to see sturdy, compelling evidence for ESP, the supernatural, a meaningful afterlife, etc. I’m not a skeptic because it’s fun. I’m a skeptic because it’s right.
However, it occurs to me that there has been nothing stopping a psychic from inviting scientists to fairly test him, all the while thumbing his nose at Randi and refusing his money. I see no reason the removal of Randi from the equation
should increase the odds of that happening. After all, as easy as it was to spin reasons not to answer Randi’s challenge, it’s even easier to not answer no challenge.
I know what you mean. I feel the same way about Penn Jillette - I mean, he’s probably right, but he’s such a pushy, abrasive ass, that he could easily be wrong about a few things and still win the day through sheer brute force.
Whoa, really?
I’d always hoped that Penn might be the one to take over the JREF when Randi retires. I’ve seen/heard/read a fair bit of both of them and I’ve always got the feeling that a believer would get a far better hearing off Penn than Randi. Of course Randi’s had to put up with this shit far longer, but Penn has always struck me as willing to engage with everyone regardless of what side they were on.
Horses for courses I guess, which is why I was looking for someone who wouldn’t be as polarising.