[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Great Debates is a Forum for debates. The “Great” in the title is a bit ironic: in its original incarnation before the Cafe Society and IMHO Forums were created, an example given for a topic was “Kirk vs. Picard.” However, there should be an actual debate (or some religious witnessing) somewhere in the OP.
[/QUOTE]
Thank you for clarifying that. In which case my thread qualifies as it is.
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
The dowsing thread seeks a method to test an actual series of claims that have been repeated ad infinitum et ad nauseam by proponents of claims for the paranormal.
[/QUOTE]
Well my thread seeks a method (a fool-proof method at that, I have clearly stated) to test an actual claim, while not a series admittedly because of its unusual nature (I mean how many people claim that they can make you urinate uncontrollably just by using their mental power? beats Uri Geller, and his spoon bending gang hollow, dont you think? heh heh - O pardon me - (excuse my rather putrid humour, but I understand how you feel about that - no need to comment - keeps me amused though), none-the-less an actual claim as you have subsequently verified.
The ad infinitum, ad nauseam surely must be an exaggeration? Infinity is a very large number. Did you know that there were 3 grades of infinity though, each larger than the other? A little known mathematical fact I thought I’d share with you. Oh I get it. It was a joke! Ha Ha … that was really good! pardon me I’m a little slow in the intake (though faster on the uptake). I like your sense of humour - once I get it.
Anyway my original statement stands. My thread is debatable and in fact, a debate had actually started, when shortly afterwards you so abruptly closed it.
namelss had actually suggested a fairly reasonable test, to test the claim. Though I thought it suffered from some flaws. It would work fine if n were an infinite number (getting back to infinity), but might very well be skewed, if there were a limited number of people willing to be tested, as seems more probable.
For example, some of the people may be suffering from urinary incontinence, due to disease or a medical disorder. When subjected to the steely psychic eye of Ms Hunter, they may very well urinate uncontrollably, which they may also do if suggested by someone else, not so psychic. There are many other things I can think of - but then thats a whole debate.
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Based on the basic incoherence of the OP, (which you, yourself admit had no point to debate), I decided to close the thread rather than letting it attract a lot of untoward comments throughout the day, before another GD Moderator could review it, that would require Moderator intervention. It seemed the most merciful tack to take. I am willing to reverse that decision if the thread is going to have an understandable position that can be debated. (It does not have to be profound, but it needs to be understandable and debatable.)
[/QUOTE]
Now when I said I kind of agreed with you, I was being humble(false modesty?/sarcasm?). Dont hold me down to it. It was also because I thought that the actual point to debate had to be “great”, but that, you have clarified perfectly, is not so.
I have clearly shown above, that, it is debatable, and you have graciously said it doesnt have to be profound. Designing a fool-proof Test for Psychic Urination seems pretty coherent to me. I look forward thus to you re-opening the thread. Sincerely - richnz
