|
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
 Posted - 02/21/2008 : 09:52:01
|
You have got to be kidding me
This is what some idiot says. I like the fact that he "LOL" at the claims that there's no known evidence for the supernatural, yet he's the one doing the mocking here.
No known evidence for the supernatural? LOL! Not only are their countless books, articles and TV programs reporting on supernatural experiences, but there's abundant peer reviewed scientific studies clearing indicating the existence of a supernatural dimension.
A great book which review the past 150 years of scientific work on the supernatural can be found at http://www.amazon.co.uk/There-Afterlife-Comprehensive-Overview-Evidence/dp/1903816904
A well reviewed scientific paper was
A Double-Blind Procedure for Assessing the Relevance of a Medium's Statements to a Recipient. Robertson and Roy, JSPR Vol 65.3 No 864 July 2001 pg 161 - 174 |
Yeah, let's just stick with the peer reviewed stuff, ok? Lord knows that those "countless books, articles and TV programs reporting on supernatural experiences" haven't exactly been through the peer review process.
I'm lazy, so I'll just look at the journal reference. What in hell does "JSPR" stand for? Apparently it stands for "Journal of the Society for Psychical Research". Yeah. That looks promising. Anyway, here's what that guy's talking about.
Yeah. I'm going back to bed now. Peer-reviewed my ***.
Maybe the Randi boards may find this interesting.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
Edited by - the_ignored on 02/21/2008 10:08:42
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2008 : 14:58:15 [Permalink]
|
The Ignored.....
Maybe Randi will find it interesting. I sent this to JR this morning:James Randi.....
We are entering a new frontier in the development of woo-woo studies! Peer-reviewed, yet! A member of SFN (Skeptic Friends Network) found this on the Athieism Sucks website.* "Abundant peer reviewed scientific studies clearing indicating the existence of a supernatural dimension."
*http://atheismsucks.blogspot.com/2008/01/sound-of-kelly-oconnors-voice-and.html#c3578874162221604086
They go on to state:
"No known evidence for the supernatural? LOL! Not only are their countless books, articles and TV programs reporting on supernatural experiences, but there's abundant peer reviewed scientific studies clearing indicating the existence of a supernatural dimension.
A well reviewed scientific paper was
A Double-Blind Procedure for Assessing the Relevance of a Medium's Statements to a Recipient. Robertson and Roy, JSPR (Journal of the Society for Psychical Research) Vol 65.3 No 864 July 2001 pg 161 – 174
A DOUBLE-BLIND PROCEDURE FOR ASSESSING THE RELEVANCE OF A MEDIUM'S STATEMENTS TO A RECIPIENT
by ARCHIE E. ROY and T. J. ROBERTSON
In a previous study, it was shown that a significantly higher percentage of a set of statements given by a medium to a recipient was accepted by the recipient compared with the percentage of the same set accepted by non-recipients. A number of non-paranormal factors were identified that might diminish the large gap between the acceptibility levels of recipients and non-recipients. In the present paper a hard protocol is described that may be used to assess the effect of each factor separately. The protocol's single, double and triple blind nature in testing each factor is discussed.
Much of the science can be reviewed on line
http://www.sspr.org.uk/Search.html
http://www.psy.herts.ac.uk/wiseman/papers/MediumBJP.pdf |
The first url goes to the Scottish Society for Psychical Research and notes extensive "scientific" investigation of the redoubtable Eusapio Palladino (whose career I am sure you are very familiar with), back in the early 1900's. As you, of course, know; Palladino was thoroughly exposed: a magicians wife, a conjuror herself!
The second is a real hoot, for after extensive explanation of the testing of mediums, it concludes thus:
"In short, the present study found no evidence to support the notion that the professional mediums involved in the research were, under controlled conditions, able to demonstrate paranormal or mediumistic ability."
So it appears these Psychical Apologists are citing two references that deny the very premise that they have allegedly scientifically proved! In addition to their other intellectual failings, they seem to be bi-polar! Peer review becomes Jeer review!
Medium regards,
William Buck
Coeur D'Alene, Idaho |
Check out SWIFT next friday! |
 |
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2008 : 17:46:15 [Permalink]
|
| Looks like they posted my comment there. Mind if I post what you, and maybe what the SWIFT article may say in other fora? |
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
| Edited by - the_ignored on 02/21/2008 17:57:03 |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 02/21/2008 : 18:32:44 [Permalink]
|
the ignored.....
By all means, be my guest. Randi will publish if he has a medium slow Friday. Depends on what else he gets this week. Averages about forty to fifty a week! He told me once "The wilder and woolier, the better, but don't make it up!" |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 02/22/2008 : 04:26:52 [Permalink]
|
<shrug> Same tired, old, wishful dreaming. Why is it that theists are so much better than atheists at making shit up? As to the of the Society for Psychical Research link, well, I rather enjoyed this part:
THE RISE AND FALL OF THE INDIAN ROPE TRICK
by PETER LAMONT and RICHARD WISEMAN
In the classic version of the Indian rope trick the performer first causes a rope to rise into the air. His boy assistant then clambers up the rope and promptly disappears. Next, the performer climbs the rope after the boy and also vanishes. Moments later, dismembered parts of the boy's body fall to the ground. The performer now descends the rope and puts these parts into a basket. Finally, the boy jumps from the basket, fully restored to life. This legendary rope trick has generated over a hundred years of debate among scientists, psychical researchers, journalists, magicians and the public. This paper is an attempt to present a comprehensive solution to the legend. The paper describes how the legend of the trick became known in the West via a hoax article carried by an American newspaper in 1890. The paper then notes how the legend gained momentum when witnesses claimed to have actually seen the trick, and occasionally produced photographic and cine-film evidence to support their claims. The paper presents a detailed critique of this evidence and concludes that it is less than convincing. The photographic and cine-film evidence is either inauthentic or hoaxed, and the eyewitness accounts were unreliable. The paper then outlines how those who believed in the reality of the trick attempted to account for the illusion, and notes how writers variously argued that the trick was a genuine paranormal event, the result of mass hallucination or a magic trick. A final section of the paper considers why the legend of the trick has achieved worldwide popularity.
Rather a good, if brief, history & description, I think. Here's a little more on it from eleswhere:
The trick would be performed in imminent darkness, with nearby hills or trees. The magician would rely on a thin strong black cord slung between two high points. The rope that he would throw up would have a heavy black ball on the end which would hook over this cord, and which would be strong enough to support the weight of the slim youth. Once the boy had reached the top he would hook the vertical rope onto the horizontal black cord, which could then take the weight of the magician.
And the boy's dismembered body parts? They were bits of a shaved monkey that were previously dressed in clothes similar to the boy's, with a bit of red sauce splattered around.
As conjuring tricks go, it's a classic.
Here's a little more & a link posted by adamB. I took the liberty of hot-linking it:
While not directly reporting on the supernatural, another recent study devastating to the atheist view was the one that found the more higher education one has the more likely one is to believe in the supernatural
"...more higher education" It must be true.  From the link:
Believe it or not, higher education is linked to a greater tendency to believe in ghosts and other paranormal phenomena, according to a new study.
Contrary to researchers' expectations, a poll of 439 college students found seniors and grad students were more likely than freshmen to believe in haunted houses, psychics, telepathy, channeling and a host of other questionable ideas.
The results are detailed in the January-February issue of the Skeptical Inquirer magazine.
'Not Sure'
The survey was modeled after a nationwide Gallup Poll in 2001 that found younger Americans far more likely to believe in the paranormal than older respondents.
The new study was done by Bryan Farha at Oklahoma City University and Gary Steward Jr. of the University of Central Oklahoma.
In general college students checked the "Believe" box less than the general population surveyed by Gallup. But the lack of "Don't Believe" responses among college students was lower for six of the 13 categories: psychic or spiritual healing, haunted houses, demonic possession, ghosts, clairvoyance and witches. That means a higher percentage of college students put themselves in the "Not Sure" column on these topics. [Table of results]
This is devestating to atheists how, exactly? The whole thing is worth a read.
I don't think suckers are born every minute, but are instead created. Every nanosecond. 
Got any evidence beyond blather, adamB? Fine. Produce it and stop being such an ass!
|
"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! 
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Peer reviewed studies confirming the supernatural?
