Goodnight James Randi

[blü 2]

Oh, I see. Enjoy your world of your own insistence but with the quotes I presented I have to believe you are in science denial on this subject when you speak with such false bravado.

The solution is easy ─ all you need is just one example of the paranormal credibly authenticated to the objective standards of science.

At present you don't have even one.

Until then, my adapted version of what Martin Gardner said is undeniably true ─ evidence of the paranormal is overwhelming evidence of error or fraud.

If you doubt it, keep a sharp eye on the court cases reported in the news and see how many supernatural defenses succeed ─ if you can find any examples, that is.

 

[George-ananda]

Yes. And I posted the list (in another thread) of those asking for demonstrations - where money was offered - and where none has been taken. Why?

After decades of observation I believe the Randi types have created the concept that all psychic phenomena is fake. That creates a legion that will be obstinate to death. It’s what they have come to ‘want’ to believe. Reality’s complexities always gets the final say.over people’s attachment to narrow fundamentalism.

 

[George-ananda]

After decades of observation I believe the Randi types have created the concept that all psychic phenomena is fake. That creates a legion that will be obstinate to death. It’s what they have come to ‘want’ to believe. Reality’s complexities always gets the final say.over people’s attachment to narrow fundamentalism.

The solution is easy ─ all you need is just one example of the paranormal credibly authenticated to the objective standards of science.

At present you don't have even one.

Until then, my adapted version of what Martin Gardner said is undeniably true ─ evidence of the paranormal is overwhelming evidence of error or fraud.

If you doubt it, keep a sharp eye on the court cases reported in the news and see how many supernatural defenses succeed ─ if you can find any examples, that is.

And I say the experimental, investigative and anecdotal evidence for the paranormal is overwhelming to the point of being beyond reasonable doubt. And I know there are dead set Randi followers who will never accept this.

We each must decide who is playing fairest with the facts. As for me I believe you can find frauds and you can find genuine phenomena.

 

[Mock Turtle]

After decades of observation I believe the Randi types have created the concept that all psychic phenomena is fake. That creates a legion that will be obstinate to death. It’s what they have come to ‘want’ to believe. Reality’s complexities always gets the final say.over people’s attachment to narrow fundamentalism.

Well you can't dispute the fact that there have been, and are, a lot of fakes about, so one can understand why so many need rigorous proof as to any powers claimed.

 

[George-ananda]

Well you can't dispute the fact that there have been, and are, a lot of fakes about, so one can understand why so many need rigorous proof as to any powers claimed.

I actually think the frequency of intentional frauds has been vastly overrated.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Oh, I see. Enjoy your world of your own insistence but with the quotes I presented I have to believe you are in science denial on this subject when you speak with such false bravado.

We have. The spoons are real. The keys are real. The means to bend them aren't.
You can't bull**** a bull****ter, and this is especially true of a magician. Those like James Randi who have an understanding in how such illusions work saw straight through Geller's act and figured out how to do his tricks.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I actually think the frequency of intentional frauds has been vastly overrated.

They're all frauds. Randi confirmed this. America confirmed this. The USSR confirmed this. Men who stare at goats don't kill goats. We learned that some time ago, and it's the reason universities and super powers alike abandoned researching those claims. They just aren't real.

 

[blü 2]

And I say the experimental, investigative and anecdotal evidence for the paranormal is overwhelming to the point of being beyond reasonable doubt. And I know there are dead set Randi followers who will never accept this.

We each must decide who is playing fairest with the facts. As for me I believe you can find frauds and you can find genuine phenomena.

I rely on an objective standard of truth. For a statement to true, it needs to be an accurate statement about objective reality.

And in objective reality there are presently zero credibly authenticated examples of the paranormal or the supernatural.

Otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[MonkeyFire]

If your passive right you can use equanimity to feel good and and defend yourself...

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

James Randi was probably a bigger loss than Sean Connery overall, even though people are more likely to care more about the Sean Connery death.

 

[George-ananda]

I rely on an objective standard of truth. For a statement to true, it needs to be an accurate statement about objective reality.

We agree.

And in objective reality there are presently zero credibly authenticated examples of the paranormal or the supernatural.

We disagree in reality as I have quoted a few of the grains of sand.

Otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion.

We'll always have this discussion as long as there are Randi followers that will never accept anything contrary to their party platform. Using terms like 'credibly' authenticated can give them an out to continue until their last breath. Again, I stand back and judge who is paying fairest with the facts and who is only interested in defending a party platform.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I actually think the frequency of intentional frauds has been vastly overrated.

Well I think there would be more coming forward to claim any money if they had such powers, but of course I don't know if such has happened - numbers doing so and being rejected. And not just Randi - given the list.

 

[blü 2]

We agree.
We disagree in reality as I have quoted a few of the grains of sand. We'll always have this discussion as long as there are Randi followers that will never accept anything contrary to their party platform. Using terms like 'credibly' authenticated can give them an out to continue until their last breath. Again, I stand back and judge who is paying fairest with the facts and who is only interested in defending a party platform.

If it clarifies matters, delete 'credibly authenticated' and substitute 'authenticated to scientific standards'. The point about scientific standards is that they maximize objectivity to a substantially greater extent than any other method does, though I accept it's not possible to remove human subjectivity entirely.

What is an example of the paranormal or supernatural that we can agree is authenticated to this standard?
[

 

[George-ananda]

Well I think there would be more coming forward to claim any money if they had such powers, but of course I don't know if such has happened - numbers doing so and being rejected. And not just Randi - given the list.

The Randi prize was just a publicity stunt. Randi knew there was no way he could lose a challenge in which he is the final arbiter. It was a publicity game. As he said 'he always has an out''; he's a magician and a showman and this challenge was his show.

 

[George-ananda]

If it clarifies matters, delete 'credibly authenticated' and substitute 'authenticated to scientific standards'. The point about scientific standards is that they maximize objectivity to a substantially greater extent than any other method does, though I accept it's not possible to remove human subjectivity entirely.

What is an example of the paranormal or supernatural that we can agree is authenticated to this standard?
[

A controlled experiment of metal bending would be one such example for me. I quoted scientists that have done such in this thread. And the hard-core skeptic will always have the 'out' of saying 'cheating must have occurred' and make the game go on forever if they so choose.

We each look at all the facts and judge for ourselves. And in Geller's case microscopic evaluation of the bending shows it occurred in a way that is different from every known method. I'll follow the best analysis of the evidence myself. Others can lock their feet in cement and without the ability to move they will only see the same world.

 

[Mock Turtle]

The Randi prize was just a publicity stunt. Randi knew there was no way he could lose a challenge in which he is the final arbiter. It was a publicity game. As he said 'he always has an out''; he's a magician and a showman and this challenge was his show.

And the rest ... ?

 

[George-ananda]

And the rest ... ?

I don't understand your post there??? Rest of what?

 

[blü 2]

A controlled experiment of metal bending would be one such example for me. I quoted scientists that have done such in this thread. And the hard-core skeptic will always have the 'out' of saying 'cheating must have occurred' and make the game go on forever if they so choose.

We each look at all the facts and judge for ourselves. And in Geller's case microscopic evaluation of the bending shows it occurred in a way that is different from every known method. I'll follow the best analysis of the evidence myself. Others can lock their feet in cement and without the ability to move they will only see the same world.

Why doesn't Geller remind you of the spiritualists at the end of the 19th and start of the 20th centuries? They fooled a lot of people, and maybe a small number of them were self-deceived, but very largely they were just the ancestors of Doris Stokes and friends.

Why didn't the hundreds of millions of dollars the US and Russian military establishments spent on extra-sensory perception in the 1950s and 60s produce a single usable result?

No one has ever returned from an out-of-body or near-death experience with new remote information about reality; claims to the contrary have all failed close inspection. You'll recall the notices placed on top of cupboards facing upwards in a UK hospital for many years in order to catch the eye of out-of-body travelers with zero success.

Why isn't the cultivation of paranormal powers taught in schools and as part of higher degrees? If it works, how can people still be ambushed at night, not know the moment when their parents or their friends or their children die remotely and unexpectedly? Why do people travel in cars, on planes, boats, trains, that crash?

Why is the large and well-advertised "psychics" industry such transparent nonsense? Why doesn't faith healing stand the close-up look? Why don't wishing wells work? Why aren't prayers answered? Why don't horoscopes or tarot or rolling the dice foretell the future with any greater success than chance?

Why haven't you picked the lotto numbers again and again and are now a billionaire whose investments are foolproof?

Why did NO ONE ever win James Randi's prize?

Why on earth would you want to bend a spoon? What about bending a girder? Or a granite column?

Knowledge of the remote and the future, whether for danger or for opportunity, is of such tremendous survival value that throughout nature evolution would select for it ruthlessly, those with paranormal powers eating and defeating and using their rivals every step of the way.

So we simply don't live in a paranormal world. If we did, the paranormal would provide us with countless useful and live-saving functions that would be integral parts of how we live every day and how our societies work. Instead, nothing.

 

[George-ananda]

Why doesn't Geller remind you of the spiritualists at the end of the 19th and start of the 20th centuries? They fooled a lot of people, and maybe a small number of them were self-deceived, but very largely they were just the ancestors of Doris Stokes and friends.

I would say there were real and fraudulent mediums back then too.

Why didn't the hundreds of millions of dollars the US and Russian military establishments spent on extra-sensory perception in the 1950s and 60s produce a single usable result?

Most likely they continued classified programs. But anyway the point is real abilities were detected by some psychically gifted people

No one has ever returned from an out-of-body or near-death experience with new remote information about reality; claims to the contrary have all failed close inspection. You'll recall the notices placed on top of cupboards facing upwards in a UK hospital for many years in order to catch the eye of out-of-body travelers with zero success.

There are many case of Veridical Near Death Experiences.

Why isn't the cultivation of paranormal powers taught in schools and as part of higher degrees? If it works, how can people still be ambushed at night, not know the moment when their parents or their friends or their children die remotely and unexpectedly? Why do people travel in cars, on planes, boats, trains, that crash?

Belief in the existence of psychic abilities is very different from saying people can then become all-knowing and all-powerful.

Knowledge of the remote and the future, whether for danger or for opportunity, is of such tremendous survival value that throughout nature evolution would select for it ruthlessly, those with paranormal powers eating and defeating and using their rivals every step of the way.

There is probably a trade-off between logical-analytical thinking and psychic perceiving in brain wiring. Analytical thinking has its survival advantages too.

Why is the large and well-advertised "psychics" industry such transparent nonsense? Why doesn't faith healing stand the close-up look? Why don't wishing wells work? Why aren't prayers answered? Why don't horoscopes or tarot or rolling the dice foretell the future with any greater success than chance?

Why haven't you picked the lotto numbers again and again and are now a billionaire whose investments are foolproof?

Why did NO ONE every win James Randi's prize?

Why on earth would you want to bend a spoon? What about bending a girder? Or a granite column?

We simply don't live in a paranormal world. If we did, the paranormal would provide us with countless useful and live-saving functions that would be integral parts of how we live every day and how our societies work.

These are kind of repeats of the questions I gave my thoughts on above.

 

[blü 2]

I would say there were real and fraudulent mediums back then too.

There's no evidence of it. The evidence for fraud, on the other hand, is abundant and much commented at the time.

Most likely they continued classified programs. But anyway the point is real abilities were detected by some psychically gifted people

This was never demonstrated. Nothing came of all those bucks except to establish a negative.

There are many case of Veridical Near Death Experiences.

Your link is not to a scientific page. I say again, there is not one authenticated example of a person undergoing an NDE and as a result returning with new remote information about reality. The same is true for OOBEs.

Belief in the existence of psychic abilities is very different from saying people can then become all-knowing and all-powerful.

Why? If psychic powers are real then what real factor curbs them in this way?

There is probably a trade-off between logical-analytical thinking and psychic perceiving in brain wiring. Analytical thinking has its survival advantages too.

We think our symbiosis with dogs began as a sensory tradeoff, they being very good at detecting threats at night or around corners and we being very efficient in hunting. No sign of a psychic tradeoff anywhere.

These are kind of repeats of the questions I gave my thoughts on above.

It's there, but it has the unfortunately quality of turning invisible just before you look at it.

Yes, that MUST be the explanation.