Peter Morris and Randi

I’m not interested in debating Morris: he’s mentally ill and it would be a good thing in my view if others stopped baiting him and if he was banned (Handy style) from posting about Randi.

However, this postconcerns me.

Whenever dowsing (or similar) comes up, someone says a reason they don’t believe there is any substance to it is because if there were, someone would have won Randi’s prize. Whatever you think of Randi’s prize, it’s existence and what it implies is at the very least a fair point to bring up. Then of course Morris arrives and launches into his bizarro Randi bashing crusade which usually results in the thread getting locked.

It would be grossly wrong if it became impossible to mention something as pertinent as Randi’s challenge in the linked thread (or indeed in effect on the board) because it causes one of our local loonies to start a screaming match so loud it drowns out sensible debate. As you will see from the linked post, Morris delights in the idea that simply by being a jerk every time Randi’s challenge is mentioned he can effectively censor Randi’s challenge out of the debate.

The guy needs to be shut down on this issue.

Indeed. The hatred PM has for the man is blinding, especially blinding himself : definitions get changed (in his mind only), he can read other people’s minds, he resorts to the lame ‘you know I’m right’ defense, he claims experts support him when evidence shows otherwise. Its creepy, and it this point the link Princhester posts to is almost that classic kind of stalker who insists he is the one being stalked ( I think it is called False Victimization Syndrome).

Seriously. There needs to be a block. Mentioning Randi’s challenge almost assures a threadshitting by PM and he shouldn’t be allowed to do it or play wounded fawn when he gets called on it.

Maybe Randi beat him up when he was a kid or something.

Well he obviously believes in dowsing, so he’s just a moron woo-fan who hates that someone calls his fantasies as what they are.

It seems to me this question would be worth a discussion in ATMB, because it looks like Morris has found a way to censor mentions of Randi.

Yet he claims to not be a believer, but more of a “I’m just asking questions” type. I think the motivation isn’t to defend dowsing as much as just rabble-rousing in the name of “scientific experiment” definition. Or he has a personal beef with Randi for some illogical reason.

Second verse, same as the first.
/Now I’ve got Violent Femmes in my head.

And I’ve gotHerman’s Hermits in my head. A generational difference, eh? :slight_smile:

From what I can divine (heh heh) from that thread is not so much that Peter Morris believes in dowsing but that he can’t stand James Randi, and anything he says about anything should be held up for ridicule.
I’m sticking with the wedgied by Randi as a child theory.

Peter loudly proclaims that he does not believe in dowsing, but there is something off the deep end with regards to his reaction to Randi and dowsing. He barely touches much else Randi does but instead harps on comments Randi has made about ground water (comments that are not wrong, BTW) and goes to great lengths to claim that such comments are lies.

I think one of the more telling moments was his efforts to take the Randi challenge but was stymied because Randi could see he was not negotiating in good faith. The particular hang-up was Peter’s definition of ‘dry’ was utterly at odds with Randi’s comments about dowsing.

*Oh, Randi
Well I came for the cash for the taking
But you sent me away, oh Randi
Well you dissed me and stopped me from faking
And I hate you today, oh Randi! *

I got it. Summer camp. Mid 50’s. A rambunctious Randi puts the naive Morris’ hand in a bowl of water while he was sleeping, making him wet the bed, implanting a sever hatred of James Randi anytime the subject of liquid is brought up.

That is what has been bugging me. From some early comments in the recent thread it seems others feel that way as well. Its getting the to point where you just can’t mention a legitimate issue without Peter popping in with his debunked nonsense.

Right now I think the path might go that way without such a thread. The GD moderators are losing patience.

Can I cite the Mythbusters episode where they debunked that trick? :smiley:


With his MIND!!!

FWIW, I think Randi is a quasi-fraud, in the sense that he runs misleading tests and misrepresents the results. The point at issue here is that for some reason many people are unable to distinguish between the following:

[li]does Randi owe the contestants the prize money?[/li][li]do the test results prove that the tested phenomena don’t exist?[/li][/ul]The first of these is wholly dependent on the details of whatever Randi and the participant agreed to. The second is completely independent of the details of their agreement.

Randi controls all the cards because he’s the one offering the money. So he makes tests that are hard to pass even if the phenomenon has some validity. The participant invariably fails the tests, and Randi doesn’t give him the prize. This is valid. Then Randi holds the failure up to the world as a proof that the phenomenon doesn’t exist. This is not valid.

Two words. Bull. Shit.

Go sit in the corner with Peter.

Cite where James Randi has said that, because a person hasn’t passed a test, that the claimed paranormal phenomena doesn’t exist?
Cite where James Randi has created a test for a participant that wasn’t done with the cooperation of said contestant, and wasn’t agreed to by said contestant?

Before asking me to go running around trying to find cites, do you really disagree with this? What do you think the purpose of his prize is?

I doubt if he has ever done this.

You appear to have misunderstood my post.