|
|
|
Orpheus
Skeptic Friend
92 Posts |
 Posted - 03/11/2003 : 00:20:51 [Permalink]
|
| Yeah, I also don't see the connection between ETs and SETI. Sagan once said that he would love to believe that ETs visited earth every second tuesday, but that there has never been hard evidence for this. Given the distances involved, radio astronomy seems the best bet to find other civilizations. |
Find your own damned answers! |
 |
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2003 : 10:49:04 [Permalink]
|
My main problem with James Randi is this:
The man is just plain insulting to anyone who doesn't agree with him.
It's my opinion that his debunking style does more harm than good. Because of him and people like him, skeptics have a reputation as rude and nasty people.
I remember trying to talk some sense into a believer. I wasn't being insulting or attacking him, but he didn't realize it. I think that part of the reason is that, in his mind, all skeptics are insulting jerks who ridicule people, like little James Randis. So whatever we say must be some sort of attack or insult.
Believers have never liked skeptics, because we have that annoying habit of destroying their fantasies. But because of James Randi and people like him always insulting people, believers assume that all skeptics are jerks, and hate us even more.
So skepticism goes into the believers' hate pile.
Also, when debunking claims, Randi often uses or at least makes some mention of science or scientific principles.
So, being related to skepticism, science goes into the hate pile as well.
You'll never convince anyone of anything by making them hate you. It's like Osama bin Laden killing Americans to convert Americans to Islam. It just doesn't work.
James Randi's style has made more people hate skeptics than ever before. I really think he's damaged our reputation beyond all hope of repair. Randi has gotten "into a habit of thought in which you enjoy making fun of all those other people who don't see things as clearly as you do", a habit which Carl Sagan warned us about in his "Burden of Skepticism".
Which brings me to Carl Sagan. I liked his style: he was a careful, thoughtful dispenser of gentle explanation, rather than a grumpy old heckler like James Randi.
I just think it's strange that he spent millions looking for evidence of an uncertainty (extraterrestrial intelligence) in radio signals from space, but didn't look into the possibility that the same uncertainty may be encountered by people here on Earth. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2003 : 13:57:07 [Permalink]
|
I encounter plenty of "believers" of all sorts who:
A) have never heard of James Randi, and
B) find it insulting that I question their beliefs at all, no matter how politely I try to do it.
For the vast majority of people I've met, if you tell them that something they firmly believe is not true, they take it personally, and things get nasty right then and there. Just say something like, "those Q-Ray bracelets don't have any evidence to support their claims," and a "believer" in them will happily tell you that you don't know what the hell you're talking about. If you have the gall to disagree, the "believer" will eventually call you a closed-minded idiot, or something similar.
I've gotten into lots of discussions like that, with normal everyday folk (I'm excluding discussions with salespeople here). Without exception, I've never been the one to start tossing insults.
If Randi acts as you say (and I see little evidence of that), it's probably simply because his patience has run out. Mine's getting close, too.
And as for Sagan, if I remember Cosmos correctly, he was close to certain that SETI would eventually turn up something. And if I'm not mistaken, a single full-sky survey has yet to be completed.
|
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2003 : 15:03:42 [Permalink]
|
"those Q-Ray bracelets don't have any evidence to support their claims,"
Q-ray bracelets don't have evidence? Aieee! You bastard! How dare you?! I'm alive today because... and so forth.
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2003 : 15:37:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Infamous
James Randi's style has made more people hate skeptics than ever before.
What is "ever before"? Randi's been doing his thing for 35 years.
quote:
I really think he's damaged our reputation beyond all hope of repair.
This is 1) silly; 2) seriously Americo-centric. Much of the industrialized world embraces science, technology and skepticism. Randi is highly regarded in many scientifically enlightened countries.
Randi has had great public effect on those niches of pseudoscience which he has pursued - when's the last time anyone mentioned Uri Geller in this country? Psychic surgery?
quote:
Which brings me to Carl Sagan. I liked his style: he was a careful, thoughtful dispenser of gentle explanation, rather than a grumpy old heckler like James Randi.
Sagan was a scientist and an educator. Randi is a magician and a debunker. They are (were) attacking pseudoscience from different ends, but each is (was) effective in his own way.
|
I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
-Agent Smith |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2003 : 19:23:28 [Permalink]
|
| I like the SETI program. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Orpheus
Skeptic Friend
92 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2003 : 00:54:16 [Permalink]
|
I have not seen Randi, so I can't comment on him in particular. I have to say however, that rabid, ad hominem skeptical attacks on non-skeptical beliefs are probably not such a great idea. Infamous has a good point.
In fact, in this forum, theists are often labeled "jesus freaks" and so on by non-theists. I'm pretty sure that this is unproductive, since you are likely to antagonize the other person, which closes them to rational debate. Also, your "debunking" is in fact, not debunking at all, but simply name-calling. If we do that, we become zealots. Skeptical zealots, but zealots nontheless.
I do sympathize with DaveW though. My patience is getting pretty thin too. I think it is useful to distinguish two sorts of non-skeptics. One non-skeptic, the "undecided", is interested to know what alternative beliefs or non-beliefs are out there, and is still open to learn new things. The other, "true-believer", has already made up their mind, and simply goes through the motions of arguing a point. They know the outcome of any such argument is a foregone conclusion- their belief will be verified.
I try to identify the former group for my "debunking conversations". The latter, well, maybe they're Star Wars fans or something.
Kill: SETI rocks! To get in on the action check out seti@home. |
Find your own damned answers! |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2003 : 12:18:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Infamous
My main problem with James Randi is this:
The man is just plain insulting to anyone who doesn't agree with him.
It's my opinion that his debunking style does more harm than good. Because of him and people like him, skeptics have a reputation as rude and nasty people.
I remember trying to talk some sense into a believer. I wasn't being insulting or attacking him, but he didn't realize it. I think that part of the reason is that, in his mind, all skeptics are insulting jerks who ridicule people, like little James Randis. So whatever we say must be some sort of attack or insult.
Believers have never liked skeptics, because we have that annoying habit of destroying their fantasies. But because of James Randi and people like him always insulting people, believers assume that all skeptics are jerks, and hate us even more.
So skepticism goes into the believers' hate pile.
Also, when debunking claims, Randi often uses or at least makes some mention of science or scientific principles.
So, being related to skepticism, science goes into the hate pile as well.
You'll never convince anyone of anything by making them hate you. It's like Osama bin Laden killing Americans to convert Americans to Islam. It just doesn't work.
James Randi's style has made more people hate skeptics than ever before. I really think he's damaged our reputation beyond all hope of repair. Randi has gotten "into a habit of thought in which you enjoy making fun of all those other people who don't see things as clearly as you do", a habit which Carl Sagan warned us about in his "Burden of Skepticism".
Which brings me to Carl Sagan. I liked his style: he was a careful, thoughtful dispenser of gentle explanation, rather than a grumpy old heckler like James Randi.
I just think it's strange that he spent millions looking for evidence of an uncertainty (extraterrestrial intelligence) in radio signals from space, but didn't look into the possibility that the same uncertainty may be encountered by people here on Earth.
I have seen James Randi on several shows. He isn't insulting, although the targets of his debunking seem to think so. He insists that his opponents actually prove their claims and explains to the marks.... I mean audience how the trick is done. This infuriates the opponent (directly impacts his ability to continue the fraud) and the opponent claims that he is insulting. (Diversion tactic. Form over substance logical fallacy.)
He directly challenges the claimant to empirically prove their claims and explain the mechanism of fraud. In cases where the claims of insulting manner is most prevalent, I have seen the claimants complain that Randi and his people have perpetuated a fraud upon them. (Mostly done by faith healers) His expose' on psychic surgery on the Tonight show was very well done with comic over-exaggeration in order to expose the trick fully.
James Randi's detractors typically use the arguement that he is insulting. I have rarely heard the same arguement from someone who has seen him debunking someone else personally. He does not name-call but continually hammers away at the substance of the claim with science. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
| Edited by - Valiant Dancer on 03/12/2003 12:20:46 |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2003 : 12:47:49 [Permalink]
|
| If Randi can be said to be insulting at all, it is only to the people whom he knows are deliberately misleading and stealing from people with trickery. I have no sympathy... |
| Edited by - Tokyodreamer on 03/12/2003 12:48:33 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2003 : 12:51:58 [Permalink]
|
| I've seen Randi in person and on TV and I don't recall him ever being insulting. I thought he bent over backwards to be polite to Sylvia Browne. How many of us would have been so polite? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2003 : 14:22:52 [Permalink]
|
Wasn't Randi on that Larry King show a while back where Van Praagh/Edwards/Browne were mercilessly bashing skeptics (especially CSICOP); van Praagh called them "evil" or something. Rabbi Boteach and Paul Kurtz were on there also and, aside from Boteach's sometimes manic mini-rants, the skeptics were by far the more civil. Sylvia Browne agreed to Randi's test on camera and has yet to even respond to his queries.
What, exactly, are skeptics supposed to do in the face of such incredibly rude and disingenuous behavior?
|
I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
-Agent Smith |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2003 : 22:12:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
SETI rocks! To get in on the action check out seti@home.
Been my screen saver for years. We used to have a button on this site that linked to SETI. Hmmmm. Wonder where it went to? |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2003 : 22:13:25 [Permalink]
|
| My only beef with Randi is his site does not link to ours.... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
