[QUOTE=X-ray vision]
yet also say Randi wouldn’t pay up because you have evidence that he once welshed on a bet (a claim you made with no reliable evidence).
[/QUOTE]
Here you say I made a claim with no reliable evidence. That is what you say. The evidence is on Randi’s website. Regardless of your conclusion from the evidence, do you believe the evidence on Randi’s website to be reliable or not ?
[QUOTE=Iknewit]
You said I had no reliable evidence. That is what you said. The evidence is on Randi’s website. Therefore, you are saying that evidence posted on Randi’s website is not reliable.
[/QUOTE]
WOW! Do you ever give up with the dishonest arguments? You have provided ZERO evidence form Randi’s website that Randi welshed on his bet.
I in no way inferred that Randi is unreliable. I have, however, clearly proven that you are many times.
[QUOTE=Iknewit]
He says if one of 24 facts was proved wrong, he would pay. Immediately he concedes, himself, that in one of the 24 facts , he was wrong.
[/quote]
I’ll reiterate x-ray’s question you ignored:
Answer this, please. What is fact #18?
.
[QUOTE=Iknewit]
Regardless of your conclusion from the evidence, do you believe the evidence on Randi’s website to be reliable or not ?
[/QUOTE]
Yes. But even if its not, so what? Lets assume, for the sake of shits and grins, that Randi is totally full of shit, is only after money, or whatever. This doesn’t mean the bullshit claims of psychic’s and other folks of that ilk are right by default. There is no (read zero) reproducable evidence by ANYONE that such things are real.
So, going back to your original OP…do you have any non-anecdotal evidence that your claims of wart talkers is real? No? Then you are simply witnessing. Fine…thats part of what this forum is for. Why its taken this many pages to simply say that I have no idea. You can claim that there are invisible pink unicorns in your garage all you like as far as I’m concerned. Until you have some kind of hard evidence about them however you are just spouting the same old bullshit. Obviously you are convinced…just like folks who are religiously oriented are convinced. Again, no skin off my nose. But there is no debate without evidence…which you don’t have. Proving or disproving that Randi is a fraud does nothing to further YOUR claim…it just attempts to muddy the waters.
I’m not seeing why anyone would want to beat their heads against your brick wall for this many pages, but I’ll leave them too it. Carry on.
-XT
[QUOTE=x-ray vision]
WOW! Do you ever give up with the dishonest arguments? You have provided ZERO evidence form Randi’s website that Randi welshed on his bet.
I in no way inferred that Randi is unreliable. I have, however, clearly proven that you are many times.
[/QUOTE]
WOW ! Do you ever give up or admit you were wrong ? There was no inference of anyhting except that I had made a claim with “no reliable evidence”.
I gave you the evidence. Is it reliable or not ? The interperting of the evidence has no bearing the reliabilty of the evidence. You said I made a claim without reliable evidence. I show you the evidence, you dispute the claim but now somehow refuse to back up your claim that the evidence was unreliable.
You are being dishonest. That’s ok. Scientific studies have shown that most people lie although most people will not admit it.
[QUOTE=Iknewit]
You said I had no reliable evidence. That is what you said. The evidence is on Randi’s website. Therefore, you are saying that evidence posted on Randi’s website is not reliable. Regardless of whether you agree or not with the evidence, the evidence comes from Randi’s website. Do you consider Randi’s website to be reliable or not ? It’s a simple question.
[/QUOTE]
Actually from here it looks like you have sacrificed reading comprehension on the pyre of preconcieved conclusions. The conclusions you are imagining into the text from Randi’s website are not actually supported by a non-tortured reading of the text in question.
In short: Randi’s website is (most likely) reliable. The conclusions you claim can be deduced from it are not reliable.
Personally, I haven’t figured out what you think you’re defending. Why do you so desperately need to pretend that Randi and/or his challenge is dishonest or decietful?
[QUOTE=Iknewit]
WOW ! Do you ever give up or admit you were wrong ?
[/quote]
You have the gall to ask ME that question? I don’t see where I have been wrong once in this thread, yet it seems you are aware of when you have been wrong by your silence on certain subjects (such as your claims about point #22) yet I have seen no admissions of error from you.
[QUOTE=Iknewit]
I gave you the evidence. Is it reliable or not ?
[/quote]
Repeating myself is really getting tiring. You have provided zero evidence that Randi welshed on the bet in question. I went over all of your claims without skipping any.
[QUOTE=Iknewit]
The interperting of the evidence has no bearing the reliabilty of the evidence. You said I made a claim without reliable evidence. I show you the evidence, you dispute the claim but now somehow refuse to back up your claim that the evidence was unreliable.
[/quote]
Are you really trying to twist it as to say that what I meant was that Randi’s website is unreliable? I’m really hoping this being done purposely on your part and not an inability to follow the conversation.
I said that you have provided no reliable evidence that Randi welshed. That is not an admission that Randi’s website is unreliable because nowhere on his site does the evidence that he welshed exist, not there is no reliable evidence of anything else on his site. Get it? Sheesh!
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Yes. But even if its not, so what? Lets assume, for the sake of shits and grins, that Randi is totally full of shit, is only after money, or whatever. This doesn’t mean the bullshit claims of psychic’s and other folks of that ilk are right by default. There is no (read zero) reproducable evidence by ANYONE that such things are real.
So, going back to your original OP…do you have any non-anecdotal evidence that your claims of wart talkers is real? No? Then you are simply witnessing. Fine…thats part of what this forum is for. Why its taken this many pages to simply say that I have no idea. You can claim that there are invisible pink unicorns in your garage all you like as far as I’m concerned. Until you have some kind of hard evidence about them however you are just spouting the same old bullshit. Obviously you are convinced…just like folks who are religiously oriented are convinced. Again, no skin off my nose. But there is no debate without evidence…which you don’t have. Proving or disproving that Randi is a fraud does nothing to further YOUR claim…it just attempts to muddy the waters.
I’m not seeing why anyone would want to beat their heads against your brick wall for this many pages, but I’ll leave them too it. Carry on.
-XT
[/QUOTE]
I totally agree that there is ZERO evidence of any of these events being real. Therefore, there is ZERO evidence that the Challenge prize is genuine. There is ZERO demonstrable chance of it being given. It is not a prize.
I make no claim of what the wart thing was. I don’t know. I was just asking. I can only “witness” what I witnessed. I have no proveable explanation. I would suspect some sort of placebo effect, for lack of a solid, understood term. "Placebo effect"is just as unexplained as “wart charmer”. They are both just terms for unexpainable effects.
[QUOTE=Iknewit]
“I will give $1,000 to any named charity, should Targ and/or Puthoff be able to substantiate any of the 24 ‘facts’ they allege concerning statements made about their Geller research fiasco in my book, The Magic of Uri Geller. There is one exception, where I admit I am in error; Deutsch, the P.R. man at S.R.I, did not quit. I had been informed otherwise by a person at S.R.I”
[/QUOTE]
I’m really not sure what point you are attempting to make, here.
[Quote=Iknewit]
He says if one of 24 facts was proved wrong, he would pay. Immediately he concedes, himself, that in one of the 24 facts , he was wrong.
[/quote]
You’re kidding, right? You are making a claim that a condition on a bet is evidence of dishonesty?
In a single statement, Randi laid out the terms of a wager that included as part of the wager an exception. That is hardly a rare sort of thing to do.
If Randi’s statement had stopped at “. . . my book, The Magic of Uri Geller.” and then he had reneged when someone brought up the issue of Mr. Deutsch at a later time, you would have a point. Setting a condition at the beginning of a wager, however, does not cause the bettor to renege if that condition is the only one that would have satisfied the bet.
Regardless. this thread has long since degeneratred into little more than (not very well veiled) name calling and is going to suffer a sudden and ignominious end if there is not some healhy content supplied to it in a very short time.
[QUOTE=x-ray vision]
You have the gall to ask ME that question? I don’t see where I have been wrong once in this thread, yet it seems you are aware of when you have been wrong by your silence on certain subjects (such as your claims about point #22) yet I have seen no admissions of error from you.
[/QUOTE]
I admit that I very well may contradict or lie. Most people do lie although most will not admit to it.
[QUOTE=x-ray vision]
Repeating myself is really getting tiring. You have provided zero evidence that Randi welshed on the bet in question. I went over all of your claims without skipping any.
[/QUOTE]
I am not tired at all of repeating myself. Your summary from the evidence has no bearing on the reliablity of the evidence. You said I had no reliable evidence. I give you the evidence and the source. You use the same evidence to make your claim. Is the evidence reliable or not ? If you do believe the evidence to be unreliable, as you stated, I find it very disingenuous of you to make an agrgument using evidence that you have said was unreliable.
It’s ok. Scientific studies show that most people do lie although most do not admit it.
[QUOTE=x-ray vision]
I said that you have provided no reliable evidence that Randi welshed.
[/QUOTE]
That’s a lie. It’s ok. Most of us lie. Here, again, is what you said. You are completely free to lie about it again.
[QUOTE=x-ray vision]
yet also say Randi wouldn’t pay up because you have evidence that he once welshed on a bet (a claim you made with no reliable evidence).
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Iknewit]
I totally agree that there is ZERO evidence of any of these events being real. Therefore, there is ZERO evidence that the Challenge prize is genuine. There is ZERO demonstrable chance of it being given. It is not a prize.
[/QUOTE]
Well, so what? Personally I think that since psychic claims are all bullshit that the prize is bullshit too…since its obvious that no one could possibly win it. Here’s a hint…thats why he’s willing to offer 1 million dollars, ehe? I think that the whole Randy discussion is just a way to muddy the waters as I said earlier. What possible difference does it make?
[QUOTE=Iknewit]
I make no claim of what the wart thing was. I don’t know. I was just asking. I can only “witness” what I witnessed. I have no proveable explanation. I would suspect some sort of placebo effect, for lack of a solid, understood term. "Placebo effect"is just as unexplained as “wart charmer”. They are both just terms for unexpainable effects.
[/QUOTE]
Fine by me. Its simply an artifact of human physiology…sort of like if you have a cold and you take some over the counter cold medicine. You will get better in 7 days, instead of the week it would normally take you. The only ‘unexplainable effect’ here is simply (again) an artifact of your lack of knowledge about the subject (as shown by your comment about the placebo effect). There really is no big mystery here…and this thread shouldn’t have gone this many pages to show that.
-XT
[QUOTE=Iknewit]
I
I am not tired at all of repeating myself.
[/QUOTE]
I can see that. Why don’t you repeat a few more times that lying is an aspect of human nature as some sort of way to justify getting caught bullshitting in this thread? Have fun.
Mr. Moderator, if you would be so kind, please do close the thread at anytime you see fit.
[QUOTE=x-ray vision]
I can see that. Why don’t you repeat a few more times that lying is an aspect of human nature as some sort of way to justify getting caught bullshitting in this thread? Have fun.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t justify, I admit. I lie. That’s got to be like the fourth or fifth admission of that. Science has shown that you too, most likely lie, although we have yet to see anyhting except evidence that you do. No admission yet.
No matter how often you say “2 + 2 = 5”, and no matter how true it is that “2 + 2” is indeed the text under discussion, you are not going to get anybody to admit that 5 is the unavoidable result.
I’m still curious as to why you are so dedicated to the cause of claiming that the Challenge is dishonest and/or deceitful.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Well, so what? Personally I think that since psychic claims are all bullshit that the prize is bullshit too…since its obvious that no one could possibly win it. Here’s a hint…thats why he’s willing to offer 1 million dollars, ehe? I think that the whole Randy discussion is just a way to muddy the waters as I said earlier. What possible difference does it make?
-XT
[/QUOTE]
Well what are we disagreeing on ? The entire argument here is that the prize is not bullshit. That’s my argument exactly. Exactly as you just said. There is no possible winner, therefore there is no possible prize. It is bogus
There’s nothing dishonest about offering a prize that cannot be won, if you state that it cannot be won. I mean, where’s the lie?
[QUOTE=begbert2]
No matter how often you say “2 + 2 = 5”, and no matter how true it is that “2 + 2” is indeed the text under discussion, you are not going to get anybody to admit that 5 is the unavoidable result.
I’m still curious as to why you are so dedicated to the cause of claiming that the Challenge is dishonest and/or deceitful.
[/QUOTE]
Because I agree with this:
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Well, so what? Personally I think that since psychic claims are all bullshit that the prize is bullshit too…since its obvious that no one could possibly win it.
[/QUOTE]
The rest of this has meandered into silliness. There is no prize. It is bogus.
Ick.
[ /Moderating ]