KGS,
You have indicated that you’re not very good at being psychic yet. It shows. People who are good at it don’t waste time arguing about it with us skeptical sorts on message boards.
kisses,
–Ensign Tom
PS. It’s all in your head.
That’s right. The good ones get really boring TV shows instead.
Well apparently I’m on your ignore list 
, but note that I asked some civil questions about your claims which you:
a) ignored, then
b) claimed not to understand, then
c) claimed I didn’t want to know the answers, then
d) ignored me
Note that I posted the thread giving my year-long test on this very board of a psychic. All polite and scientific throughout. Finally he decided he didn’t have psychic abilties.
This incredible achievement (unique as far as I know) apparently doesn’t qualify as ‘being interested in the subject’. According to you. :rolleyes:
Aura readings aside, my posts were a deliberate use of Socratic irony, using innocent-seeming questions to draw out the contradictions and irrationality of KGS’s beliefs. Had I simply heaped scorn on him, as other posters have, it would just feed his paranoia, which he’s using as reinforcement (i.e. I have knowledge; others are seeking to ridicule my knowledge; therefore they fear my knowledge; therefore my knowledge has merit). Heck, even pointing out that his beliefs have no rational merit is pointless, because he cheerfully points out that psi is beyond reason.
Unfortunately, people with views similar to KGS are not the downtrodden minority he claims. Fortunately, though, it’s not necessary that 100% of a society believe in science for that society to benefit from science. We can afford to humour KGS and those like him. I wish he wouldn’t misuse scientific jargon, though, just out of respect.
Why are you backpedaling all of a sudden? Is the peer pressure starting to get to you?
And why should anyone care, what I think? I’m entitled to my own belief system, aren’t I? Or is that something I signed away, when I paid for registration on this board? I sure didn’t see it in the fine print, not even when I read between the lines.
Good idea, I think we call that science.
Backpedalling from what? Oh oh wait, I know. You don’t care to show us. Or you would but you don’t have time. Or some other nonsense.
There you go again. Implying that your beliefs are being restricted. That straw man you have been building over the past few days is turning into a Goliath.
Maybe you should have read the aura between the lines.
Ridiculous attempt at counter-attack. My views on “psi” are well-documented on this board. I’ve even been pitted for them, twice. I was subjecting Aeschines and others to the same Socratic routine long before this thread, because I find it entertaining and less of a waste of time than just calling them names. Frankly, I’m a little dismayed at my fellow skeptics for feeding your delusions of martyrdom when they can just as easily get you to talk about your beliefs and reveal how empty and irrational they are.
Are you under the impression your right to your own belief system is being denied? What’s really happening is that your belief system is being challenged and ridiculed, as it richly deserves, for being an irrational hodgepodge of complete nonsense that tries to sneer at the vastly superior scientific method approach, and by “vastly superior” I mean effective and useful. A sage can mumble vaguely about future visions, which the devout can later mangle to roughly correspond to real-life events but a meteorologist, working from a long tradition of study of empirical evidence can say pretty accurately what the weather will be like next week. Science 1, Psi 0.
I didn’t intend for my words to sound like a personal attack. Sorry about that, Bryan.
So you agree, that is what’s been going on since the previous thread. Thank you for finally pointing it out. Not that anyone else will listen, but thank you just the same.
Quite the opposite. If you go back and read our dialogue together, you will see that, in fact, we agree on many issues. We just use different words to describe them, like the unconsious recognition of patterns. True, we vastly disagree on many others, such as the “vastly superior scientific method approach”. That is a statement of opinion, and to pass it off as absolute fact is, well, shameful.
Not anymore (obviously)
I must have missed the thread. Can you link to it again, please?
WHOA!! Are you full of yourself, or what! :eek:
I’ll let that statement stand as written. Maybe your peers won’t recognize your megalomania, but lurkers might. Watch, my children, and learn.
Not accepted, because your claimed intent is not believed. Accusing someone of backpedalling and yielding to peer pressure is the same as accusing them of being spineless and lacking integrity. If you had another meaning in mind, please rephrase.
You’re welcome, but it’s irrelevant. Their attacks on you in no way validate your views; rather, they’re just a side-show.
I’ve given you the example of a vague prophecy versus a reliable weather forecast. What counter-examples can you give of of “psi” equalling or outperforming science? Of all the accomplishments of science and technology of the last 5000 years, what examples of psi exists that outperform any of them? Until you can, my pride is untouched.
Give us another example of someone getting a “psychic” to admit he doesn’t have psychic powers, and I’m sure he’ll retract.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. To call such a thing “an incredible, unique achievement” is quite an extraordinary claim, and I am not the one who made it.
It is glee’s responsibility to back up that claim, not mine.
His claim stands. The evidence is the linked thread. He claimed it was unique as far as he knew. Nothing extraordinary about that. Which leaves us with his description of it as “incredible.” Priceguy handled that one.
Your attempts at diversion are becoming boringly predictable, as is your inability to stand by your own words. See below.
.
Now, who’s claiming to be psychic here? 
Wait a minute. Are you honestly suggesting, that if someone recognizes he made a mistake, he should NOT apologize, but stick to what he mistakenly said before?? That makes no sense, dude. (Unless you’re employed by the Bush Administration. Which, I’m not.)
emphasis mine
Oh, man! This is such exquisite bullshit!
Is that what you were doing? Well, I believe your intent was a personal attack, and a weak one at that. It would have been braver for you to just say nothing than try to claim otherwise.
And the issue of science’s accomplishments versus psi’s accomplishments is still on the table. I maintain that science has accomplished a great deal while psi has accomplished nothing, therefore the scientific approach is objectively far better. It would be shameful to pretend otherwise.
…
Did you just admit that you’re delusional?
Frankly, I don’t remember if my true intent was meant as an attack or not. Perhaps, I used the wrong words. In any case, I did not mean to attack your integrity, and I don’t think I did. Obviously, you disagree. So let’s just leave it alone, shall we?
What other method, besides scientific method, has been used to prove/disprove psi? (Beyond subjective experience, of course!)
Now hold on just a minute, I’m not quite sure about the etymology of “meteorologist” but “weather man” is Latin for “fucking liar.”