|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 07/22/2007 : 07:45:25 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Kil
Either way, I didn't do it on purpose, and I wish I had. |
Wait: I thought that you think that Freud gets too much criticism as it is.
|
Yes, I do. But claiming to channel Freud for the purpose of doing therapy would almost certainly be fraud, (and bullshit.) |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2007 : 19:24:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
H.H. wrote:| ... you stive for it like the acne-ridden geeky teenager who wakes up sticky and clamps his eyes shut in a vain effort to get back into the arms of his sister's best friend. I'd tell you that you should open your eyes, wipe yourself off, and try to hide the sheets like your shame, but I know all too well that at this point in time, the memory-scent of her hair is far too powerful for you to act against. And, you're powerful when you're with her, unlike in the real world. |
Damn you to Hell, H.H.! |
I almost forgot: I have to take the rap for this one, Half. It wasn't H., it was me. H. just quoted my whole post, is all. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2007 : 20:42:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gary 7
What is the scientific basis for skepticism? Science can prove nothing of interest. The profoundest thing scientists say is that the Universe is made up of empty space mostly with small particle of matter flitting in and out. Morons!!!!!!! Stay clear of those idiots! |
Riiiight. I can see it's going to be a worthwhile expenditure of effort to discuss things with Gary 7.
Originally posted by Gary 7
Reincarnation cannot be proved. |
I wouldn't go so far as cannot, but I'd certainly say that it hasn't been proved, so far.
Originally posted by Gary 7
The fakery of psychics like Sylvia Browne and James Van Praagh has been proved, but is it fakery or just extreme incompetence and irresponsibility. |
Why not all three?
Originally posted by Gary 7
Find a meditation master and walk beyond the artificial Matrix we assume that is all that there is.
The evidence is in front of you!!!
|
Dave's already handled this, but what makes you think that your meditation induced state is any more real than the one preceding it?
Edited to fix spelling, thanks GeeMack. Medication would be almost as good a substitute though! |
John's just this guy, you know. |
| Edited by - JohnOAS on 07/22/2007 21:45:28 |
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2007 : 21:14:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JohnOAS...
Dave's already handled this, but what makes you think that your mediation induced state is any more real than the one preceding it? |
Uh, John, it looks like you left a "t" out of the word "mediation". Or maybe it was supposed to be a "c". 
|
|
|
|
Gary 7
New Member
28 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2007 : 13:42:21 [Permalink]
|
So do u skeptics believe in the possibility of reincarnation? Scientists, when not busy telling us the Universe doesn't really exist (Morons!), also tell us that energy can never be destroyed, but simply changes form.
Don't forget your pendulums, guys!
They are like glasses for myopic and withered third eyes (Eastern philosophy). I guess you skeptics are too macho for such things?
Who brainwashed you?
Past Life Reading for Dummies
Sir William Herschel
http://brianstalinsnotebook8.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2007 : 13:58:29 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gary 7
So do u skeptics believe in the possibility of reincarnation? |
Why would anyone believe in a possibility? Lots of things are possible. Someone once calculated that the odds of a mouse surviving on the Sun for a week are 1 chance in 1050. Just because something is possible in principle doesn't mean we should believe in it.| Scientists, when not busy telling us the Universe doesn't really exist (Morons!)... |
What scientists are feeding you that garbage?| ...also tell us that energy can never be destroyed, but simply changes form. |
Yup, that's right. And since "mind" is just neurons firing, once a person dies, the mind dies, too.| Don't forget your pendulums, guys! |
How do they differ from guesswork?| They are like glasses for myopic and withered third eyes (Eastern philosophy). |
Except you're still trapped in your metaphysical nightmare, Gary? Do you really have the gall to lecture us on possibilities when you can't acknowledge the most important facts?| I guess you skeptics are too macho for such things? |
Where's the evidence, Gary?See? There's another question that's more properly asked of you, Gary? You claim stuff is true, but you can't explain why. Doesn't that just reek of brainwashing?Past Life Reading for Dummies
Sir William Herschel |
Ah, the man who discovered Uranus. I get it! That's funny. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Gary 7
New Member
28 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2007 : 22:28:52 [Permalink]
|
| You claim stuff is true, but you can't explain why. Doesn't that just reek of brainwashing? |
No, it's not imposing a point of view, but simply inviting others to look at a new one. You are free to laugh at it and reject it.
I know information can be channeled. That is a fact.
Whether the information is true is another matter and must be based and assessed based on one's own experience. You can't really poo poo it until you've tried and tested it,unless you have been brainwashed to think the whole story is absurd. This is an invitation to try out new experiences. Just need a pendulum and an open mind.
http://brianstalinsnotebookindex.blogspot.com/
Yes, I can explain all this stuff, but if you haven't experienced the basics, how can you expect to understand the fun stuff? |
| Edited by - Gary 7 on 07/26/2007 22:30:48 |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2007 : 23:25:26 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gary 7
I know information can be channeled. That is a fact. Whether the information is true is another matter and must be based and assessed based on one's own experience. |
Then how can you distinguish "channeling" from "making shit up?"
| You can't really poo poo it until you've tried and tested it,unless you have been brainwashed to think the whole story is absurd. |
Why would we try it when you admit outright that it doesn't produce valid results?
| This is an invitation to try out new experiences. Just need a pendulum and an open mind. |
An invitation to what? Get answers with an error-ratio no better than chance? What would be the point of that?
| Yes, I can explain all this stuff, but if you haven't experienced the basics, how can you expect to understand the fun stuff? |
Ah, but if you skip over the "basics" without ever proving them valid, then the more complicated stuff is just complicatedly wrong.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Gary 7
New Member
28 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 00:20:58 [Permalink]
|
We are trying to find the reincarnation of Sir Frederick William Herschel,well at least I am, ha ha! -the skeptics are still back at base camp making snide comments.
The really difficult thing about this is that the candidate has to look like all of these pictures to a certain extent to pass muster.
How can this feat be achieved?- I believe this is possible only by channeling THE TRUTH.
You simply cannot make this stuff up as you go along without getting caught out.
Are you ready for the solution?
brianstalin
http://brianstalinsnotebook13.blogspot.com/ |
| Edited by - Gary 7 on 07/27/2007 00:25:00 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 00:28:42 [Permalink]
|
Gary 7 said:| You simply cannot make this stuff up as you go along without getting caught out. |
Then, since you won't even begin to give basic definitions, much less evidence to support your claims, consider yourself caught out.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Gary 7
New Member
28 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 03:21:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Gary 7 said:| You simply cannot make this stuff up as you go along without getting caught out. |
Then, since you won't even begin to give basic definitions, much less evidence to support your claims, consider yourself caught out.
|
Information is channeled. The information is real.
Reproduction of data is possible by independent dowsers.
Yes,you can dowse information!
The rest you have to sort out for yourself.
We tend to forget when we try to fool others that there is objective and verifiable truth. I never said this truth could be proven. Scientists cannot prove a lot either if they say stupid things about everything made up of empty space mostly with particles flitting in and out of our so-called reality. Under such conditions skeptics are redundant.
If scientists cannot begin to define things,what's your point?
Prove what I am saying is false then.
|
|
|
|
Gary 7
New Member
28 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 03:28:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gary 7
The fakery of psychics like Sylvia Browne and James Van Praagh has been proved, but is it fakery or just extreme incompetence and irresponsibility. |
Why not all three?
Good point. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 05:15:23 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gary 7
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Gary 7 said:| You simply cannot make this stuff up as you go along without getting caught out. |
Then, since you won't even begin to give basic definitions, much less evidence to support your claims, consider yourself caught out.
|
Information is channeled. The information is real.
Reproduction of data is possible by independent dowsers.
Yes,you can dowse information!
The rest you have to sort out for yourself.
We tend to forget when we try to fool others that there is objective and verifiable truth. I never said this truth could be proven. Scientists cannot prove a lot either if they say stupid things about everything made up of empty space mostly with particles flitting in and out of our so-called reality. Under such conditions skeptics are redundant.
If scientists cannot begin to define things,what's your point?
Prove what I am saying is false then.
|
No, you still don't get the skeptical, scientific approach. I didn't make the extraordinary claim, so I don't need to "prove" anything. The burden of proof will be upon you, once you've defined what your terms mean.
For instance:
Define "scientist." You seem to be referring to some kind of witch doctor or priest. You don't show an understanding of how science works. Your description of the scientific understanding of the universe shows dreadful ignorance of scientific cosmology.
Define "channeling," then prove it exists.
Define "dowsing," then prove it does something meaningful and objective.
If, as seems to be the case, you don't care for this "evidence" and "proof" thing, then you are just wasting your time, and ours, on a skeptic site.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 07:47:53 [Permalink]
|
No dowser has ever passed a scientifically constructed preliminary test of their claimed abilities. Further testing was deemed unnecessary.
How would one test for “information dowsing”?
Please produce anything that supports you assertion that ”Scientists cannot prove a lot either if they say stupid things about everything made up of empty space mostly with particles flitting in and out of our so-called reality.” Please provide evidence that any scientist has made the assertion you attribute to scientists in general.
Please explain how a passing physical resemblance to someone long dead is evidence for reincarnation. Lots of people look a lot like other people living or dead, so how is a mere physical resemblance indicative of anything supernatural? Since many people also have a resemblance to their parents, and their parents gave birth to them, were the parents also reincarnations of the same person? How many reincarnations can a person have living at one time? (And how many pictures of the parents of the people you say are reincarnated have you seen either in paintings or pictures?)
As for proving what you are saying is false, that is not our job. It's up to you to support your assertions and not up to us to prove that they are baloney. If our doubt is not enough for you to get off your duff and present us with some intriguing evidence, there is no reason for us to not remain doubtful.
If you really want to spread your knowledge beyond the "true believer" crowd, skeptics are exactly the group of people you must convince. Call scientist morons if you like. Call skeptics redundant. But it's the scientists and skeptics that hold the key to a wider acceptance of your claims. Get through us and the validity of your claims will be taken seriously.
Anecdotal evidence will not suffice. Anyone can make a claim. We are an imaginative, and all too often a credulous animal, easily deluded or mistaken. I could probably name hundreds of claims making the rounds that even you, Gary 7, would likely doubt.
What makes your claim different from those?
Edited.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 09:16:12 [Permalink]
|
Thank you, Gary 7, for providing an easy-to-reference itemized list of claims.Originally posted by Gary 7
Information is channeled. The information is real. |
I don't think anybody's disputing the fact that information exists. When somebody talks/writes/communicates in any way, there is "real" information. It's the mechanism that we are curious about.
Please provide more information on the mechanism of information channeling. I doubt your first sentence. | Reproduction of data is possible by independent dowsers. |
Reproduction of data is possible by any person. One merely has to repeat something (s)he witnessed or experienced. Please provide more information on "independent dowsers." I don't understand what you mean by either word in this context. | Yes,you can dowse information! |
Without any background, this sentence makes no sense. Please provide more information on the mechanism of dowsing. | The rest you have to sort out for yourself. |
I cannot sort any of this out for myself, since I have no idea what your talking about. | We tend to forget when we try to fool others that there is objective and verifiable truth. |
This is a matter of philosophy, and one of contention. Nobody here "forget[s] ... that there is objective and verifiable truth," because (likely) very few here ever thought it was true. | I never said this truth could be proven. |
Well, at least we've got that going for us. If you can't prove it, how do you know it's valid?| Scientists cannot prove a lot either if they say stupid things about everything made up of empty space mostly with particles flitting in and out of our so-called reality. |
I think this is a strawman, but I'm not sure. Would you mind clarifying?| Under such conditions skeptics are redundant. |
I long for the day when skepticism is redundant. Perhaps I misunderstand you here.| If scientists cannot begin to define things,what's your point? |
Who made that claim?| Prove what I am saying is false then. |
This has been adequately addressed by HalfMooner and Kil.
Edited for formatting |
| Edited by - Boron10 on 07/27/2007 09:21:37 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Shirley Maclaine & Kevin Ryerson
