KGS you silly boy, get your ass in here

The BBQ Pit
221

[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
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.
[/QUOTE]
PSI, in it’s current form, is mainly only useful on a personal level, so you won’t find such examples in the mainstream media…and certainly not in scientific journals, since scientists are naturally disdainful towards PSI.

So no, I can’t give any examples. I’ve cited many personal examples, all of which have been refuted or rebuffed. I could cite more, but since I don’t expect anyone to believe those either, I’ll keep them close to the vest. (Although I’m very tempted to cite one, very recent…but I have to confer with my peers first, before I reveal it. Let’s just say, many lives were saved that day. Perhaps.)

However – and I want to make this clear – I agree with you, science and technology have accomplished tremendous feats over the last 5,000 years, and if I were forced to choose science over PSI, then yes, I would choose science.

222

[QUOTE=KGS]
So no, I can’t give any examples. I’ve cited many personal examples, all of which have been refuted or rebuffed. I could cite more, but since I don’t expect anyone to believe those either, I’ll keep them close to the vest. (Although I’m very tempted to cite one, very recent…but I have to confer with my peers first, before I reveal it. Let’s just say, many lives were saved that day. Perhaps.)

[/QUOTE]

You’ve cited examples in which psi was useful? I missed those. Could you point them out again?

I’ve seen you cite examples in which what you believed was psi was all freakalicious and nifty, but I don’t recall any examples that you cited in which psi actually filled a belly, cured a disease, saved a child, or solved a problem.

Show us an example of that, and we’ll have something to talk about (namely, whether psi is the best explanation for the occurrence).

Daniel

223

[Quote=glee]
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.

[/quote]

[QUOTE=KGS]

I must have missed the thread. Can you link to it again, please?

[/quote]

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=226916&highlight=remote+viewing

[QUOTE=KGS]

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.
[/QUOTE]

How strange your thinking is.
I announce that I have spent a year successfully conducting a psychic test on the Internet. :eek:
I post the proof. :cool:

Since it is difficult to get people even to discuss their psychic claims (like you for example), it certainly is incredible to persuade someone who genuinely beleives he is psychic that he’s not.
Given how difficult it is to get psychics to be tested, it is amazing that I achieved this over an Internet message board, to the full satisfaction of the psychic believer.
**I have never seen anyone do this anywhere else ** (which is why I said I believed it was unique).
To disprove this, all you have to do is post proof of another successful Internet test.

Since you clearly don’t know what megalomania is, let me assure you that my doing what I claimed is not it. :smiley:

224

[QUOTE=KGS]
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.
[/QUOTE]

Oh dear.
It is true that if I make a claim like ‘I can levitate at will’, then the responsibility lies with me to prove it. How would you disprove it?
Rather like you saying ‘Psychic powers are very elusive, and rarely reliable.’

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=369710&page=4&pp=50

(post 153 in that thread)

Of course you have never given us any evidence to back up your claims.

Meanwhile, when I claim that I am the only person to have successfully conducted a psychic test over the Internet, you are now welcome to disprove it.
Very easy. Find another successful test.
Or would you rather I sent you a hard copy of the Internet, showing nobody else has ever done what I did?

Please think about this. The two types of claim above differ in how easy it is to disprove them, altering whose responsibility it is ti provide a cite.

225

[QUOTE=KGS]
However – and I want to make this clear – I agree with you, science and technology have accomplished tremendous feats over the last 5,000 years, and if I were forced to choose science over PSI, then yes, I would choose science.
[/QUOTE]

Fortunately, you aren’t being forced to choose. Science is so useful a tool that you can parasitically live off its excess by-products, including eating food produced using the science of agriculture, staying warm through the wonders of electricity and/or petrochemistry and even broadcast your nonsensical views through the wonders of electronics and telecommunications. I just hope you learn some respect and make a conscious decision not to post crap equating a belief in science to “boring atoms and photons bouncing around space”. Knowing how those “atoms and photons” work, and how to make them work for us is what makes your comfortable life possible. Keeping your ingratitude in check would be, at the very least, polite. You’re pathetic. I’m done.

226

[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
Fortunately, you aren’t being forced to choose.
[/quote]
It almost seems like I am, isn’t it? Not by physical force, naturally…but there’s certainly a lot of pressure coming down from all sides. (Lucky I can handle it, huh? After all, I’ve been here before…)

Is that what pissed you off? Look, I was being partly sarcastic. Science is wonderful, it’s useful and extremely fascinating. But when you think about it, the whole thing boils down to matter and energy, randomly bouncing around. I think life deserves to have more than that, don’t you? Voltaire said, “If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.” How many human beings believe in some form of higher power? Basically, ALL of them.

:rolleyes:
“Those who want respect, give respect” – Tony Soprano

227

[QUOTE=KGS]
Look, people. This isn’t a debate anymore. This is a fucking interrogation.

(snip)
But you do have to offer up something of yourself, some kind of insight that proves to me you are actually interested in debating the question.
[/QUOTE]
It certainly was not my intent to interrogate you.

I offered my sincere take on the situation, which is that even though I have had what I perceive to be the same feelings you’ve had, my best effort at being honest with myself leads me to believe that those feelings do not reflect or influence reality.

As much as I’d like them to, I have no reason to believe they actually do, no matter how strong the feelings are. Simple reasoning tells me that coincidence accounts for the correlations I’ve seen or heard about.

228

[QUOTE=glee]
How strange your thinking is.
I announce that I have spent a year successfully conducting a psychic test on the Internet. :eek:
I post the proof. :cool:
[/quote]
Yep. Full of yourself, full to the brim.
I don’t care what you’ve done, or how significant you think it is. As long as you’ve got that smug grin on your face, there’s no way anyone can honestly trust you. (And if you think people trust you, they are lying because they are afraid of you.)

BTW, I remember that thread, back when it started. Didn’t know it had an ending. Sounds like when he says, “I am posting here to concede,” it doesn’t necessarily mean he’s given up on his beliefs. But, that’s neither here nor there. You gave him a test, and he failed. Frankly, I don’t see what’s so dramatic about it.

You haven’t met a lot of psychics, then. Wait, scratch that. You haven’t met a lot of PEOPLE. You need to get off the Internet, and get out more. See a movie, shoot some hoops. Your small world is closing in on you.

[QUOTE=glee]

Rather like you saying ‘Psychic powers are very elusive, and rarely reliable.’
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=369710&page=4&pp=50
(post 153 in that thread)

Of course you have never given us any evidence to back up your claims.
[/QUOTE]

:eek: :eek: :eek: OH DEAR GOD NOT THAT SHIT AGAIN!!! :eek: :eek: :eek:

Listen, Glen. WHY do I need to give evidence? I’m already conceding a lot, by amending my 2003 position that I was possibly psychic, and stating in 2006 that I’m not (or at least, I’m untrained) and that psychic power is NOT reliable, and NOT easy to grasp. That’s quite a change, don’t you think? In fact…go back to the first page, and look for the thread link that Priceguy posted. You know the one I mean. THERE is your proof. I made a prediction, and it was wrong. Ergo, psychic power is NOT 100% reliable. Quid Pro Quo. Case Closed.

Any more broken records you want to play???

229

Good grief KGS are you a glutton for punishment or what?

I’m pretty open minded when it comes to psychism to the extent that I’m willing to entertain the notion so long as it isn’t directly contradicted by the evidence. IOW I’m not even skeptical.

But your performance in this thread and the one that perfornmed it has been atrocious. Ignorant, badly written, data free, poorly explained and insulting. And unsurprisingly you are getting your ass handed to you.

If your performance is typical of ‘psychics’ the the typical psychic is a self-deluded, passive-aggressive nutjob.

230

[QUOTE=RJKUgly]
It certainly was not my intent to interrogate you.

I offered my sincere take on the situation, which is that even though I have had what I perceive to be the same feelings you’ve had, my best effort at being honest with myself leads me to believe that those feelings do not reflect or influence reality.
[/quote]
Yes, you were one of the “nice” ones. (I should have included your nick with the others I listed, sorry about that.) Indeed, you’ll notice that it was in my reply to you, that I revealed one of the most intimate details of my life. (I’m still a little freaked that I revealed that much – not that it’s a problem, I’ve more or less recovered from that situation and I have no problem talking about it.)

See guys, how easy that is? Those who want respect, give respect.

Fair enough. As I’ve said before, you are entitled to your own interpretation of reality. All I ask, of anyone, is that they respect my own world view. Disagreement is fine; so is open debate, in the right forum. Throwing rocks & poking sticks in my cage…not so much.

231

[QUOTE=Blake]
Good grief KGS are you a glutton for punishment or what?
[/quote]
It has been said by others.

I dunno, I think it all worked out pretty well, especially towards the end.

232

[QUOTE=KGS]
I dunno, I think it all worked out pretty well, especially towards the end.
[/QUOTE]

Add ’ sadly deluded’ to that list of traits.

When the whole world is agaisnt you, you are doing something wrong.

233

[QUOTE=KGS]
Were you one of the students laughing in a circle, or the small nerdy kid getting pushed around in the middle?
[/QUOTE]

Both.

234

[QUOTE=KGS]
:eek: :eek: :eek: OH DEAR GOD NOT THAT SHIT AGAIN!!! :eek: :eek: :eek:

Listen, Glen. WHY do I need to give evidence? I’m already conceding a lot, by amending my 2003 position that I was possibly psychic, and stating in 2006 that I’m not (or at least, I’m untrained) and that psychic power is NOT reliable, and NOT easy to grasp. That’s quite a change, don’t you think? In fact…go back to the first page, and look for the thread link that Priceguy posted. You know the one I mean. THERE is your proof. I made a prediction, and it was wrong. Ergo, psychic power is NOT 100% reliable. Quid Pro Quo. Case Closed.

Any more broken records you want to play???
[/QUOTE]
This broken record is going to keep getting played if only because you posted it. Why? Because with that statement you made any scientific proof impossible. You’ve made it so psychic powers cannot be refuted by any means. Couldn’t make a prediction? Well that’s just because the durn thing is on the blink. Bit like an old television it is.

And your insistance that people be open minded is ridiculous since you can’t even manage it yourself. You’ll accept no proof that you are not psychic.

By the way, your “concession” (bolded by me) is contradictory.

235

[QUOTE=KGS]
I’m already conceding a lot, by amending my 2003 position that I was possibly psychic, and stating in 2006 that I’m not (or at least, I’m untrained) and that psychic power is NOT reliable, and NOT easy to grasp. That’s quite a change, don’t you think?
[/QUOTE]

Actually, your stated 2003 position was more along the lines of “I am a psychic, and it’s impossible to convince me otherwise” which you have graciously amended to a mere “Psychic powers exist, and it’s impossible to convince me otherwise”. No, it’s not that big a change.

236

[QUOTE=KGS]
Didn’t know it had an ending. Sounds like when he says, “I am posting here to concede,” it doesn’t necessarily mean he’s given up on his beliefs.
[/QUOTE]
Exquisite. You are one loony dude, dude. In a world where conceding is not giving up I suppose anything is semantically possible. Or, in your case, manically possible. Ta.

237

I think someone can concede a point without conceding a whole belief system. ??

238

[QUOTE=Spider Woman]
I think someone can concede a point without conceding a whole belief system. ??
[/QUOTE]
The point he was conceding was that he was unable to perform remote viewing. Whether or not that amounts to a belief system is not for me to say. KGS is the one who added the equivocal “beliefs.” It is typical of him to use such straw man tactics. If you will wade through his posts you will see that he was asked to provide another example of a psychic admitting defeat in such a test. Rather than admit that he could not do so, he chose to dissimilate about the meaning of the word “concede,” as well as to pretend that the test was about belief, rather than performance.

See upthread where he pretends there is a significant meaningful difference between “refuse” and “decline” as it relates to this thread. He is dishonest. He is effectively a liar.

239

:eek:

[QUOTE=KGS]
Yep. Full of yourself, full to the brim.
I don’t care what you’ve done, or how significant you think it is.

[/quote]

Gosh. You are such a great debater. :rolleyes:
I announce I’ve done something and post the proof.
You spout insults.

[QUOTE=KGS]

As long as you’ve got that smug grin on your face, there’s no way anyone can honestly trust you.

[/quote]

Gee. I wonder if you could back this curious statement up.
No?
Of course this is your style throughout - make claims, refuse to back them up, insult and dodge.

[QUOTE=KGS]

(And if you think people trust you, they are lying because they are afraid of you.)

[/quote]

See above. :slight_smile:

[QUOTE=KGS]

BTW, I remember that thread, back when it started. Didn’t know it had an ending. Sounds like when he says, “I am posting here to concede,” it doesn’t necessarily mean he’s given up on his beliefs. But, that’s neither here nor there. You gave him a test, and he failed. Frankly, I don’t see what’s so dramatic about it.

[/quote]

As usual, you miss the point.
Firstly you claimed in that thread:

[QUOTE=KGS]

It’s really not fair to ask astral projectors to identify words or 6-digit numbers, because reading is impossible on the astral plane. You can see the writing, of course, but you can’t remember what the figures represent or even how many there are.

[/quote]

Do you believe this?
If so, can you back it up?
Or do you just make random claims in every thread? :rolleyes:

Second, cityboy (he changed his name to umop ap!sdn ) started by saying he can ‘astrally project, and thereby remote view something he could not see directly’.
He also said ‘Finding glee’s desk shouldn’t be too difficult - it is actually easier to project to a person than to a place. I know this person as “glee” and can will myself to go to “glee’s desk”.’

By the end of the thread he said ‘At this point I would concede that based on these two events, there probably is no AP or else it isn’t what I’ve been experiencing, and the article SDStaff Doug wrote a ways back might be correct in its reverse-somnambulism explanation.’

That was a gracious admission that his beliefs had changed and that I had run a satisfactory test.
Of course you can’t see what’s dramatic about it. But intelligent people can. :stuck_out_tongue:
And, as far as I know, that test + result were unique.

[QUOTE=KGS]

Listen, Glen. WHY do I need to give evidence?

[/quote]

Because you made a claim. And quite a dramatic one.

You can only know that ‘psychic powers are very elusive and rarely reliable’ if you’ve done **extensive testing ** to distinguish between that statement and pure chance.
I’d like some details of your testing.
Or you could withdraw the claim. :smiley:

[QUOTE=KGS]

I’m already conceding a lot, by amending my 2003 position that I was possibly psychic, and stating in 2006 that I’m not (or at least, I’m untrained) and that psychic power is NOT reliable, and NOT easy to grasp. That’s quite a change, don’t you think? In fact…go back to the first page, and look for the thread link that Priceguy posted. You know the one I mean. THERE is your proof. I made a prediction, and it was wrong. Ergo, psychic power is NOT 100% reliable. Quid Pro Quo. Case Closed.

[/quote]

There’s a massive difference between something not being 100% reliable and it being ‘very elusive and rarely reliable’.

[QUOTE=KGS]

Any more broken records you want to play???
[/QUOTE]

Here we are on a board dedicated to fighting ignorance.
You make a claim.
I challenge you to back it up.
You refuse, dodge the issue and insult me.
I’m happy to repeat my scientific request.

Oh, and what happened to your demand that I prove there have been no other successful psychic tests like mine?
You haven’t actually worked out how silly your actions were, have you?

240

Good Lord, glee! I wait two days for you to show up, and this is the best you can come up with?

[QUOTE=glee]
Gosh. You are such a great debater. :rolleyes:
[/quote]

Stop pretending this is a debate. It’s a dogpile, plain and simple. Particularly with comments like this:
[QUOTE=Darkhold]
I’m really stunned that someone of such breathtaking stupidity has gone under my radar this long.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Princhester]
I’m done with poking this particular monkey through the bars of his cage.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Airman Doors, USAF]
What prejudice?..You can’t be prejudiced against something that doesn’t exist.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=FinnAgain]
We don’t have to suspend judgement just because someone claims something.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Contrapuntal]
…how utterly without merit your claims are, and how utterly devoid of character, class, and integrity you are.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
What’s really happening is that your belief system is being challenged and ridiculed, as it richly deserves…
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
You misspelled psychotic.
[/QUOTE]
And that’s just the first page. So…I’m the one who’s supposed to be polite, calm, rational, and backing up each word I type with scholarly, peer-reviewed citations?? Nice debate, yeah. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=glee]

Gee. I wonder if you could back this curious statement up. No?
[/quote]
Are you seriously trying to tell me, that whenever you think of this perceived triumph over Cityboy, you DON’T get a slight grin on your face, accompanied by a quick, brisk stroke to your self-esteem? Because, if that’s what you’re saying, you are lying. By your overuse of the :cool: smiley, by your choice of words like “incredible” and “unique”, by the mere fact that you keep citing this event over and over (as if anyone gives a rat’s ass)…it is patently obvious that you are INCREDIBLY proud of this small event, and not only that, one can infer that you don’t have many events in your life to be proud of. So you cling to this perceived triumph, and yes, you are overtly smug about it. And I don’t need to use cold reading to detect that. Anyone with basic knowledge of psychology, and knows how words get put together, can see that plain as day.

Did Cityboy know your true, full name? If not, no wonder he couldn’t find your desk.

Aaaaand…hate to burst your ego bubble, but…

I’ve underlined the parts you missed. His use of “probably” and “might” prove conclusively that his opinion had NOT changed, he was just no longer 100% sure that Remote Viewing actually worked. Indeed, he may have been lying just to get you off his back (though it’s impossible to determine now…the rhythm’s gone cold.) Sorry to disappoint you. But hey, that’s life.

NOW who’s slinging insults… :rolleyes: