peter morris is a fraud. In this thread, he calls James Randi a fraud over and over again.
The gist of his complaint appears to be this:
But then the heat comes on, little peter is asked for cites, he gives links to various sites claiming they support his conclusion. They don’t. This is pointed out to him, and eventually we get down to this:
The only catch is, this last sentence is pure, unadultered weaselly pass-the-buck hide-behind-lies-and-hope-dopers-all-have-the-memory-of-gnats bullshit.
Because not only did Rittersport and Musicat never say that Randi had ever said any such thing (something dear pete later admitted as regards Musicat) but also, earlier, when I suggested that peter morris actually read up on Randi, rather than believing lies about him spread by psychics and dowsers and their fellow travellers, lovable peter said this:
peter morris, not only are you slandering Randi without cause, but when you are caught out you are such a wimp, such a weasel, that you seek to blame your mistake on other posters.
There’s also the detail that he cannot describe what makes Randi’s tests “sooooo unfair”, except to complain that a test for water in pipes is not a test for underground rivers.
Of course, you have to ignroe the fact that the dowser agreed to be tested in such a manner.
Obviously, Randi’s own subliminal psychic power is to make dowsers agreed to things they cannot do! Quick, Randi should apply for his own prize!
That is a good point, though, Mr. Miskatonic: it’s not like the dowsers didn’t agree to the tests.
I can’t wait for the retest of the girl who can see colors through a blindfold: since it’ll be her second time, I wonder what tricks she’s got up her sleeves this time.
There in his post, a sight to drive even the most stalwart of men to the gibbering depths of madness! I am no coward. I had fought long and bloody battles in our war. I have been faced with Things which there are not words to describe. But still, nothing compared to this eldritch abomination. Emerging from the emptiness beyond the rolling spheres, from the mad and chaotic abyssess at the edge of the cosmos, came the unspeakable Smai Li!
No, the gist is the many misrepresentations Randi has made on many different subjects, not just dowsing.
Examples, please?
I guess you are referring to Randi’s claim that “underground rivers are fictional” You somehow think that my cites showing that there ARE underground rivers does not discredit Randi. Doubtless you think that Randi didn’t actually mean what he said, so he was telling the truth after all.
As a matter of fact, I “admitted” no such thing. I pointed out that his words seemed to mean EXACTLY that, and invited him to submit some plausible alternative interpretation.
You keep on quoting me as saying the exact opposite of what I really said.
A) You don’t know the difference between slander and libel.
B) I have cause. I have repeatedly listed several lies he told in just one article.
C) Its not slander, or even libel unless its untrue. What I said is 100% true.
Randi’s report on his Australian testing, in which you said that he said that his pipe testing disproved dowsing for underground rivers, but which you later admitted did not say any such thing.
Well what you actually said was this:
Which is pretty much admitting you were wrong.
Actually, it’s not that I don’t understand the distinction, it’s just that the jurisdiction in which I practice, the distinction has been abolished. The reason it has been abolished is that it was always a silly and irrelevant distinction. The exact same thing could be said about your attempt to distract us from the main point of this thread by attempting to sidetrack about legal terminology.
The major point remains that you said that you knew about Randi from your personal experience. Then when it was shown that what you knew about Randi was purest bullshit, you attempted to suggest that you had been misled about Randi by other posters.
You are a weasel, and the more you deny it and squirm and wriggle, the more apparent is your weasel-ness.
Aha! I was right! Randi never claimed there was no such thing as an underground river! I win my bet! For the sum of money, I claim A MILLION DOLLARS! And for the person who has to pay me, I pick PETER MORRIS! Pay up, petey boy. And let this be a lesson to you on why it’s important to get both participents to agree to terms in writing before under taking any sort of challenge.
peter morris, hailing from England as you do, you wouldn’t happen to be the same Peter Morris who authored the study titled: Cam Peak: a psychic perspective would you?
Which I have cited repeatedly. All you do is claim they ‘don’t matter’
Just to summarize briefly :
Randi’s claim about ideomotor action disproving dowsing. It’s a lie because dowsers themselves state they atre moving the stick.
Randi’s word games, where he claims that getting a subliminal impression from the local geography doesn’t count as dowsing, rather than admit this as a scientific explaination of how it works.
Randi’s claim that underground rivers are ‘fictional’. They are real.
his ‘test’ for ability to find an underground river is to see whether they can find a four inch pipe instead. As several Skeptics have admitted, there is a big difference.
his constant self-promotion, grandstanding and boasting. His tests are about making money for James Randi, not about any scientific endeavour.
his claim that he will adapt the test to suit the testee, but in fact the subject must meet the demands of Randi.
his claim that water can be found everywhere, but in fact in many places it amounts to a tiny trickle, less than would be considered a succesful dowse.
I feel like I’m playing a game of “what have the Romans ever done for us” here. How many lies do I have to expose in order to prove him a liar?
Far from it. I was pointing out that what I quoted was the most natural interpretation of his words. I stand behind it 100%
here’s a quote from Randi: <<Besides, the “underground river” notion that dowsers maintain is sheer fiction, not supported at all by geological research.>>
Because I have seen so many similar errors in James Randi’s work I have no faith in anything he says, or in the validity of any test he sets.
