the existence of god is a scientific fact

[ImmortalFlame]

Eight good reasons why unbiased minds should conclude that the Randi Prize of a million dollars was probably just a publicity stunt and not a genuine offer.

(1) James Randi made his living as a stage magician. He liked deceiving people and he was good at it. “If a trick is well done, it doesn’t look like a trick. It looks real” -- James Randi

Completely irrelevant. Randi is a magician who is open about the fact that being magician is an act of illusion and that he professes no genuine, mysic powers. The fact that he is good at devising illusions in no way indicates that he is dishonest in his efforts to test supernatural claims.

(2) If the Prize was a legitimate offer, neutral parties would have employed to set the pass-fail standards. Instead, Randi kept full control which allowed him to create unfair tests that applicants couldn't pass.

This is a lie. The conditions and standards of the tests were all mutually agreed upon by both Randi and those he was testing. If you wish to assert the tests were unfair, please give specific details of one of the tests and the ways in which it was unfair.

(3) By asking the applicants to sign unfair agreements before testing, Randi would have everything to gain and nothing to lose. If they were foolish enough to sign the agreement, they would fail the test. If they didn't sign, he could accuse famous psychics of avoiding the challenge for fear of being exposed as frauds. While we have no sympathy for famous frauds, the point is that either way, whether his challenge was accepted or not, Randi gained publicity without risking money to pay for it.

Again, this is just plain silly. The applicants AGREED to the conditions, and if your only response is "well, they were foolish to do so" then you have no real argument. The tests were mutually agreed upon by BOTH parties, so any insistence that Randi somehow made the agreements "unfair" are baseless. If they were truly unfair, the applicants would not have agreed to them.

(4) Telepathy is the most common paranormal phenomenon. It requires a sender and receiver. I read somewhere that Randi would not accept "pairs" as applicants. If true, that means he didn't want to test for telepathy. If you look at a list of people tested, it confirms this speculation as probably true.

Challenge Applications - International Skeptics Forum

Are you suggesting that there is no possible way to test for telepathy without two already familiar individuals?

(5) Not even hard-core skeptics took Randi's Prize seriously. According to CSICOP Fellow Dr Ray Hyman: Scientists don’t settle issues with a single test, so even if someone does win a big cash prize in a demonstration, this isn’t going to convince anyone. Proof in science happens through replication, not through single experiments.

Non-argument. The test was more for the purpose of public display and challenge than genuine science. Essentially, Randi actually set a bar that was LOWER than that standard scientific model, in order to display that no paranormal claims come close to even reaching THAT bar, let alone qualifying as valid science. That was always the intent and the point, so to point out that the tests don't meet scientific standards is more damning of the applicants and paranormal claims in general than of Randi's challenge.

(6) Victor Zammit a lawyer who writes often about controversial issues wrote: "I received a number of emails from mediums, psychics and researchers who say that when they applied for the alleged $1m challenge, JR does not reply to them. Why they ask? The answer is simple: when he investigates the applicants and finds they do have the skills to pass the test, he will NOT reply to the applicant ever again."
James Randi Challenge EXPOSED!

Anecdotal evidence and baseless speculation. If these people did have the skills to pass the tests set by Randi, they needn't apply to him to display their abilities. They would do it elsewhere.

(7) The million dollars isn't offered in cash. The JREF stated that the million dollars was in the form of negotiable bonds within a "James Randi Educational Foundation Prize Account." There's no way to know what they're worth. Stocks and bonds can be worthless.

Non-argument. The money offered was still evidenced, as per the bank statements on the JREF website, and the money is irrelevant as to whether or not anyone actually succeeded at the challenge itself. The money was merely an incentive for more hesitant paranormal claimants to try. If their abilities were genuine, they shouldn't need prize money to come forward and demonstrate what they can do.

(8) James Randi discovered a career far more profitable than being a stage magician. He was in demand for guest appearances on TV as a debunker of psychics. He then expanded his career by writing books and articles. His career depended on publicity that would keep his name before the public.

The fact that Randi was good at his job does not in any way indicate that his tests were fraudulent.

Bottom Line: The Randi Million Dollar Prize was most likely a hoax but a brilliant publicity stunt.

You've not provided even a single shred of evidence that that's the case. Please find ONE example of a test that was performed, and how it was biased against the claimant. Just one.

 

[joe1776]

Completely irrelevant. Randi is a magician who is open about the fact that being magician is an act of illusion and that he professes no genuine, mysic powers. The fact that he is good at devising illusions in no way indicates that he is dishonest in his efforts to test supernatural claims.


This is a lie. The conditions and standards of the tests were all mutually agreed upon by both Randi and those he was testing. If you wish to assert the tests were unfair, please give specific details of one of the tests and the ways in which it was unfair.


Again, this is just plain silly. The applicants AGREED to the conditions, and if your only response is "well, they were foolish to do so" then you have no real argument. The tests were mutually agreed upon by BOTH parties, so any insistence that Randi somehow made the agreements "unfair" are baseless. If they were truly unfair, the applicants would not have agreed to them.


Are you suggesting that there is no possible way to test for telepathy without two already familiar individuals?


Non-argument. The test was more for the purpose of public display and challenge than genuine science. Essentially, Randi actually set a bar that was LOWER than that standard scientific model, in order to display that no paranormal claims come close to even reaching THAT bar, let alone qualifying as valid science. That was always the intent and the point, so to point out that the tests don't meet scientific standards is more damning of the applicants and paranormal claims in general than of Randi's challenge.


Anecdotal evidence and baseless speculation. If these people did have the skills to pass the tests set by Randi, they needn't apply to him to display their abilities. They would do it elsewhere.


Non-argument. The money offered was still evidenced, as per the bank statements on the JREF website, and the money is irrelevant as to whether or not anyone actually succeeded at the challenge itself. The money was merely an incentive for more hesitant paranormal claimants to try. If their abilities were genuine, they shouldn't need prize money to come forward and demonstrate what they can do.


The fact that Randi was good at his job does not in any way indicate that his tests were fraudulent.


You've not provided even a single shred of evidence that that's the case. Please find ONE example of a test that was performed, and how it was biased against the claimant. Just one.

I'll concede that I lack the kind of argument that could change your mind.

 

[Nakosis]

oh yeah.....the horror of it

you can't get out of your body
you did not put you into it

if you can't get out now.....how then after your last breath?

I lean to spirit
this form is here to learn all I can before I die

then.....like the shell it is...
my body will fail and break down

I believe we are formed in this life to become unique

then....as noted in the book of Job

the sons of God gather ….to present themselves

So fear of the grave/God is driving your narrative?

Hopefully you will be able to please your God so they will find you worthy assuming you picked the right God to place your faith in.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I'll concede that I lack the kind of argument that could change your mind.

No, you lack an argument. The best you have is baseless speculation which is contradicted by what the actual facts show us. It is a fact that the people who were tested both helped to formulate and agreed to the conditions of the test. It is not a fact that the tests were biased - you have yet to present any facts to support that.

Nonetheless, I will gladly concede that there is one accusation you have made that I believe is actually true: that I am not viewing these facts with an unbiased mind, and I personally don't believe James Randi is either. In fact, I'm willing to bet that most people here who are skeptical of paranormal claims are biased too.

Biased in favour of the paranormal claims being true.*

Allow me to clarify. I would LOVE for psychic powers to exist. I would LOVE to know that it's possible for humans to move objects, read minds, heal the sick, levitate, predict the future, communicate with the dead and all that stuff. And I'm willing to bet my bottom teeth that James Randi, a man who has spent longer than an average lifetime performing illusions under the guise of a magician and has devoted himself to astounding and amazing people, would also ABSOLUTELY LOVE for there to be some truth in paranormal claims.

I gladly admit that it would make life more interesting and more fantastical. I was raised on a steady diet of fantasy literature and superhero comics, so nothing could be further from the truth if you wish to imply I am somehow biased against fantastical powers and abilities being real. I yearn for someone to come forward who can definitively show "Psychic powers are real" or "Ghosts exist" or anything of that ilk. I'd LOVE for these things to be true, because anything that nudges this world any closer to my favourite fantasy novels or comic books would be pure heaven for me.

But, they never can. And I am constantly disappointed every time someone steps to the plate and either fails, demonstrates themselves to be liar, or doesn't even have the courage to come forward in the first place. I am on their side. I would gladly cheer them up to the stand. But if they can't actually deliver, I'm not going to pretend they can.

So, that's why I trust James Randi, and that's why I don't trust you when you claimed to have personal, psychic powers. Because, if you can't step up to the plate and demonstrate that you can nudge the world a little in the direction of my childhood ideal, you're only lying to others and yourself.

You don't have psychic powers. Nobody does.

Until you demonstrate otherwise.

Spoiler

* WHOAH! Plot-twist! I just M. Nighted you, bro!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Eight good reasons why unbiased minds should conclude that the Randi Prize of a million dollars was probably just a publicity stunt and not a genuine offer.

(1) James Randi made his living as a stage magician. He liked deceiving people and he was good at it. “If a trick is well done, it doesn’t look like a trick. It looks real” -- James Randi

(2) If the Prize was a legitimate offer, neutral parties would have been involved to set the pass-fail standards. Instead, Randi kept full control which allowed him to create unfair tests that applicants couldn't pass.

In the words of Chris Carter, author of Parapsychology and the Skeptics: If Randi were genuinely interested in testing unusual claims, then he would also not insist upon odds of at least one million to one against chance for the results. Anyone familiar with scientific studies will be aware that experimental results against chance of say, 800,000 to one would be considered extraordinary; but results this high would be, according to Randi, a “failure.”

(3) By asking the applicants to sign unfair agreements before testing, Randi would have everything to gain and nothing to lose. If they were foolish enough to sign the agreement, they would fail the test. If they didn't sign, he could accuse famous psychics of avoiding the challenge for fear of being exposed as frauds. While we have no sympathy for famous frauds, the point is that either way, whether his challenge was accepted or not, Randi gained publicity without risking money to pay for it.

(4) Telepathy is the most common paranormal phenomenon. It requires a sender and receiver. I read somewhere that Randi would not accept "pairs" as applicants. If true, that means he didn't want to test for telepathy. If you look at a list of people tested, it confirms this speculation as probably true.

Challenge Applications - International Skeptics Forum

(5) Not even hard-core skeptics took Randi's Prize seriously. According to CSICOP Fellow Dr Ray Hyman: Scientists don’t settle issues with a single test, so even if someone does win a big cash prize in a demonstration, this isn’t going to convince anyone. Proof in science happens through replication, not through single experiments.

(6) Victor Zammit a lawyer who writes often about controversial issues wrote: "I received a number of emails from mediums, psychics and researchers who say that when they applied for the alleged $1m challenge, JR does not reply to them. Why they ask? The answer is simple: when he investigates the applicants and finds they do have the skills to pass the test, he will NOT reply to the applicant ever again."
James Randi Challenge EXPOSED!

(7) The million dollars isn't offered in cash. The JREF stated that the million dollars was in the form of negotiable bonds within a "James Randi Educational Foundation Prize Account." There's no way to know what they're worth. Stocks and bonds can be worthless.

(8) James Randi discovered a career far more profitable than being a stage magician. He was in demand for guest appearances on TV as a debunker of psychics. He then expanded his career by writing books and articles. His career depended on publicity that would keep his name before the public.

Bottom Line: The Randi Million Dollar Prize was most likely both a hoax and a brilliant publicity stunt.

No matter how many times you repeat this nonsense it will still be nonsense. Number one is a "so what"? In fact the reason that Randi did this is because as a stage magician he knew what to look for when people purposefully tired to fool others. You forgot that one of the big accomplishments of his career was to debunk Yuri Geller. Number two relates to number one. "Neutral parties" do not have the training that he and his have to spot fakes. Face it, all that you have are unfounded complaints. You have not been able to support any of your claims so all you can do is to make a personal attack against a man that refuted claimants bold enough to be tested.

 

[KT Shamim]

A question that is always at the top of my mind is what can be expected to be gained "spiritually" which can't be gained otherwise?

Is it for the sake of a afterlife in which you will be rewarded for your belief?

For me, whatever the truth happens to be, doesn't care about what I believe. If there is an afterlife there is, if not, then not. What I believe won't change that. Lots of different stories about different afterlives to believe in. Any I decide to believe in could be wrong. So without knowledge I can rely on, seems a bit reckless to invest belief in any of them.

Other than a belief in some form of afterlife, how does spirituality benefit you?

I've already said the most important reason is that we should have a sense of gratitude to The Creator and Greatest Benefactor. But that is a lofty standard of worship ...

Another huge reason is that The Living God provides the support mechanism necessary to keep a moral compass! Most humans suffer loads of pressures and require a support mechanism to keep making the right moral choice under every circumstance. I'm not saying whether the principles you believe in are right or wrong. That is another reason why God is necessary. However, I'm saying that for us to stick to whatever principles we believe in and to practice our beliefs in what constitutes good we need a support mechanism ... someone to wipe away our tears ... to give us solace and comfort in our darkest times.

A sleeping God Who neither speaks nor acts, as most religions and most so-called religious, would have you believe is useless. Most religious scholars present exxagerated stories of how God helped His Prophets but do not present a God Who still acts or speaks. Even most Muslim scholars (especially most Muslim scholars) hold the same view.

But Islam does not present that view. And in the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community to which I belong God's existence is visible through Divine interference in our everyday lives so that extraordinary coincidences become too many to ignore for any honest observer. This motivates action towards justice, kindness, and kinship towards humanity.

Several more reasons ...

@joe1776

 

[joe1776]

No matter how many times you repeat this nonsense it will still be nonsense. Number one is a "so what"? In fact the reason that Randi did this is because as a stage magician he knew what to look for when people purposefully tired to fool others. You forgot that one of the big accomplishments of his career was to debunk Yuri Geller. Number two relates to number one. "Neutral parties" do not have the training that he and his have to spot fakes. Face it, all that you have are unfounded complaints. You have not been able to support any of your claims so all you can do is to make a personal attack against a man that refuted claimants bold enough to be tested.

I was remiss in not defining "neutral parties" for you. I was thinking of people like Ray Hyman and Susan Blackmore. They are both skeptics of the paranormal with long experience in criticizing paranormal science --- far more experience than James Randi who has no scientific expertise at all.

Even though Hyman and Blackmore are skeptics, I would trust thaat they wouldn't risk their reputations by going too far beyond fair. If the people who allowed themselves to be tested had IQs over 65, they had to be desperate to trust the pass-fail decision to James Randi.

The fact that the pass-fail decision wasn't in the hands of neutral parties on its own should have been a red flag for anyone wondering whether the offer was legit.

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑​

How do you justify your comment about Godly motivated virtuous lives in light of the three examples I posted?

As I said they are your thoughts. They are not of Christ, they are of this world.

This is what to look for, this is what it is to be inspired by Christ and not by self and greed.

Gregory the Great

Regards Tony

In other words, you cannot support your assertion. In other words, you just posted some feel-good stuff that has no bearing on reality. You do a lot of that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I was remiss in not defining "neutral parties" for you. I was thinking of people like Ray Hyman and Susan Blackmore. They are both skeptics of the paranormal with long experience in criticizing paranormal science --- far more experience than James Randi who has no scientific expertise at all.

Even though Hyman and Blackmore are skeptics, I would trust thaat they wouldn't risk their reputations by going too far beyond fair. If the people who allowed themselves to be tested had IQs over 65, they had to be desperate to trust the pass-fail decision to James Randi.

The fact that the pass-fail decision wasn't in the hands of neutral parties on its own should have been a red flag for anyone wondering whether the offer was legit.

The problem is that no matter who the "independents" are they would have to be paid At times like that people like you would object and claim that they are not independent. And you forgot why Randi was so successful. Scientists had been fooled in the past by people that were dishonest. I can link info on that for you. Randi was an illusionist, a highly trained one, and he could spot fakes rather easily. That is why such people are key to this sort of "research". By the way, about Ray Hyman:

"Hyman, along with James Randi, Martin Gardnerand Paul Kurtz, is one of the founders of the modern skeptical movement. "

Ray Hyman - Wikipedia

 

[ecco]

I don't understand why you don't think I'm not talking about analogies. Can you explain?

You asserted my analogies were false analogies but have failed to show why.




You: PSI Researchers cannot get funding.
Creationists. ID Scientists cannot get funding.

You: PSI Researchers cannot get published in scientific journals.
Creationists. ID Scientists cannot get published in scientific journals.

You: A year ago, about 100 scientists signed a petition to expose this bias but it won't change anything.
Creationists. 1000 scientists have signed a document stating Evolution if false.

 

[joe1776]

You asserted my analogies were false analogies but have failed to show why.

You: PSI Researchers cannot get funding.
Creationists. ID Scientists cannot get funding.

You: PSI Researchers cannot get published in scientific journals.
Creationists. ID Scientists cannot get published in scientific journals.

You: A year ago, about 100 scientists signed a petition to expose this bias but it won't change anything.
Creationists. 1000 scientists have signed a document stating Evolution if false.

I showed you why. I linked you to the site with more than 100 links to research. ID scientist don't have that. I'm pretty sure you rejected it.

 

[joe1776]

The problem is that no matter who the "independents" are they would have to be paid At times like that people like you would object and claim that they are not independent. And you forgot why Randi was so successful. Scientists had been fooled in the past by people that were dishonest. I can link info on that for you. Randi was an illusionist, a highly trained one, and he could spot fakes rather easily. That is why such people are key to this sort of "research". By the way, about Ray Hyman:

"Hyman, along with James Randi, Martin Gardnerand Paul Kurtz, is one of the founders of the modern skeptical movement. "

Ray Hyman - Wikipedia

I have a rule in business that has served me well for a long time. I won't sign a contract with someone that I wouldn't be willing to trust on a handshake.

I know the reputations of Ray Hyman and James Randi well but not as well as I know that of Donald Trump. I would be willing to do a business deal with Ray Hyman even though he and I disagree on the paranormal. I'd be unwilling to do business with James Randi or Donald Trump no matter how lucrative the deal might seem to be.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have a rule in business that has served me well for a long time. I won't sign a contract with someone that I wouldn't be willing to trust on a handshake.

I know the reputations of Ray Hyman and James Randi well but not as well as I know that of Donald Trump. I would be willing to do a business deal with Ray Hyman even though he and I disagree on the paranormal. I'd be unwilling to do business with James Randi or Donald Trump no matter how lucrative the deal might seem to be.

Where has Randi ever shown himself to be dishonest? He is clear that when he does illusions that that is exactly what he is doing. He took his lessons from Houdini who also exposed fakes. They both know how to separate fantasy from reality. They do not give out their personal secrets, but they do not claim that they are real either.

 

[ecco]

Did you bother reading any of the ~150 articles in your link? Any? When you do, then you can post comments, in your own words and post excerpts from an article that supports your comments.

No. Your suggestion isn't necessary since the link was posted only to refute the no evidence claim made by you and others.

So now you have given us another similarity between you and Creationists. They, like you, post walls of links with absolutely no understanding of anything contained in the linked articles.


(My emphases)
Here is an example...

The methodologic limitations of several studies make it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about the efficacy of distant healing. However, given that approximately 57% of trials showed a positive treatment effect, the evidence thus far merits further study.
​

So, there is one example of evidence from the first "study" in your wall of evidence:

• Cannot draw definitive conclusions
• Needs further study

Here is from another study:

Abstract & Parapsychology is the scientific investigation of apparently paranormal mental phenomena (such as telepathy, i.e., ‘‘mind reading’’), also known as psi. Despite widespread public belief in such phenomena and over 75 years of experimentation, there is no compelling evidence that psi exists.
...
Moreover, the study included biologically or emotionally related participants (e.g., twins) and emotional stimuli in an effort to maximize experimental conditions that are purportedly conducive to psi. In spite of these characteristics of the study, psi stimuli and non-psi stimuli evoked indistinguishable neuronal responses—although differences in stimulus arousal values of the same stimuli had the expected effects on patterns of brain activation. These findings are the strongest evidence yet obtained against the existence of paranormal mental phenomena.

​

And, finally, one more coffin nail...

Remember this one?

The precognitive abilities reported by Bem (2011) emerged across a range of tasks. As one example, in Experiment 1, Bem (2011) asked participants to select whether a picture would appear on the left side of the screen or the right side of the screen. Participants’ selections were accurate more often than chance would predict when the picture in question was an erotic one (but not a neutral, positive, or negative one), suggesting that people have precognitive abilities to detect where erotic stimuli will appear.​

Here's what researchers found...

Across 7 experiments (N 3,289), we replicate the procedure of Experiments 8 and 9 from Bem (2011), which had originally demonstrated retroactive facilitation of recall. We failed to replicate that finding. We further conduct a meta-analysis of all replication attempts of these experiments and find that the average effect size (d 0.04) is no different from 0. We discuss some reasons for differences between the results in this article and those presented in Bem (2011).​

That pretty much sums up what we have been saying - there is no evidence supporting ESP Woo.

Of course, if you had bothered to actually take the time and make the effort you would have known that before you posted your link. You made the same mistake that Creationists and other woosters make; you misread the title of a link and, without bothering to check, assumed it supported your views.

I think we are done here.

 

[joe1776]

Where has Randi ever shown himself to be dishonest? He is clear that when he does illusions that that is exactly what he is doing. He took his lessons from Houdini who also exposed fakes. They both know how to separate fantasy from reality. They do not give out their personal secrets, but they do not claim that they are real either.

Obviously I'm not talking about his stage act. I'm talking about his character that I've read about in several online articles. And no... I'm not going to find them again and link them for you. I'm offering my opinion on James Randi and Ray Hyman based on reading several articles about them over the years.

 

[ecco]

Invoking God and representing Him as a Manifestation are entirely different things. All the Manifestations of God such as Christ, Muhammad, Buddha have had a remarkable influence on the arts and sciences as well as architecture. Orphanages, schools, universities, charities were founded in their name. Red Cross, red crescent and so on. Surely you are aware that entire nations adopted a religion of one of these Great Beings. SE Asia is predominantly Buddhist, the west Christian, the Middle East follows the Prophet Muhammad.

Very few follow, or have even heard of, The Bab.

The impact the Manifestations of God have had on the world, civilisation and in hearts and minds to this day is undeniable and unparalleled in the annals of human history.[/QUOTE]

So, in the 1800s a disaffected Muslim came up with the idea that all religions were about just one god. Based on that he founded a(nother) new religion. He, or his successor, decided which "Manifestations of God" to include and which to omit. I have to admit, that was a pretty good idea. Who knows what the next Bahai prophet will do. Perhaps he will include Joseph Smith, L. Ron Hubbard and Sun Myong Moon.

 

[joe1776]

So now you have given us another similarity between you and Creationists. They, like you, post walls of links with absolutely no understanding of anything contained in the linked articles.

I guess if wasn't for your beloved false analogies, you wouldn't have much to say.

May I suggest more cherry-picking of the evidence as you did in this post. It's not much of an argument but the arguments by false analogies get stale.

 

[ecco]

“Within twenty-five years after the death of Mohammed, under Ali, the fourth khalif, the patronage of learning had become a settled principle of the Mohammedan system. Under the khalifs of Bagdad this principle was thoroughly carried out. The cultivators of mathematics, astronomy, medicine, and general literature abounded...

Wow! In just 25 years! I guess that proves that Mohammed was indeed inspired by God. I guess that proves that an earthly appearance by a "Manifestation of God" quickly brings about significant positive changes.

That is unless one considers some other "Manifestations of God".

One thousand years after Christ, there were no significant positive changes. In fact things went downhill following the Christianization of the Roman Empire.

One hundred fifty years since The Bab and we have had two World Wars and a multitude of smaller deadly wars.

It seems the appearance of "Manifestations of God" do not always lead to significant positive changes. Actually, it looks like the events in the Middle East were an anomaly. In any case, there is certainly no reason to believe the appearance of your Messengers had any immediate positive effect.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Obviously I'm not talking about his stage act. I'm talking about his character that I've read about in several online articles. And no... I'm not going to find them again and link them for you. I'm offering my opinion on James Randi and Ray Hyman based on reading several articles about them over the years.

So all you have are "articles" that you won't even post. That is not very convincing. I could find articles praising the man and not post them. Would that convince you that you were wrong? The only attacks that I have seen against him are from woo woo sites. That does not mean that there are not any reliable sources that attack him, but if there were it would be nice to see them.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

you just posted some feel-good stuff that has no bearing on reality.

If you were to say what I offered has no bearing on your reality, I would agree that is true.

Watch: Your Brain Hallucinates Your Conscious Reality

I can say in my reality, I answered your questions and I know others would agree.

Regards Tony