How do psychic mediums know stuff about you

[JayUtah]

There you go, putting me down again...

"Oh, poor, poor me!" Get over yourself.

Well I am working on another thread about whether science is discovering mysticism through quantum physics. I am currently reading.
'the Tao of physics' by Fritjof Capra as background info.

I didn't ask for your biography. I asked if you came here knowing that you'd be persecuted for your beliefs, and seeking exactly that. Just answer my question and quit whining.

 

[Scorpion]

"Oh, poor, poor me!" Get over yourself.



I didn't ask for your biography. I asked if you came here knowing that you'd be persecuted for your beliefs, and seeking exactly that. Just answer my question and quit whining.

You seem to be putting me down again. Well you might as well go and piss on a duck for all the effect it has on me.

 

[JayUtah]

I am working on another thread about whether science is discovering mysticism through quantum physics.

A subject that's already been done to death. Jabba was the last person to hurl that particular bit of woo.

Indulge me. Start your thread when you're ready. But stipulate ahead of time that if you tell any of your standard anecdotes in the thread, you agree to have the moderators suspend you for a period they see fit to impose. That is, agree ahead of time that all your self-centered anecdotes are explicitly off-topic and constitute a willful derailment of the thread if raised. Will you stipulate?

 

[Scorpion]

My spirit guide is telling me something. He says your theory will be pathetically lacking in any merit whatsoever. Does that mean anything to you?

I just saw your post on the next thread telling me there are no spirits and no mediums and no psychics. So you are obviously talking bull.

 

[Scorpion]

A subject that's already been done to death. Jabba was the last person to hurl that particular bit of woo.

Indulge me. Start your thread when you're ready. But stipulate ahead of time that if you tell any of your standard anecdotes in the thread, you agree to have the moderators suspend you for a period they see fit to impose. That is, agree ahead of time that all your self-centered anecdotes are explicitly off-topic and constitute a willful derailment of the thread if raised. Will you stipulate?

No, I will do as I always have. In any case the administrator took one of my threads off topic himself yesterday.

 

[abaddon]

There you go, putting me down again while recently accusing me of insulting
you all. Well I am working on another thread about whether science is discovering mysticism through quantum physics. I am currently reading.
'the Tao of physics' by Fritjof Capra as background info.

That is a manifestation of your illness. Get it into your head. Pointing out that you are flat wrong is in no way persecuting you. It is simply pointing out that you are wrong.

Or are you claiming that it is impossible that you are wrong? Because that would be quite an extraordinary claim.

 

[JayUtah]

You seem to be putting me down again.

Or maybe that's what you frantically want everyone to think.

Well you might as well go and piss on a duck for all the effect it has on me.

It seems to be having the effect of you desperately trying to play the victim. You opened the door in this thread to the question of your motive for participating. You say you try to "attack the bastions of atheism." You say you veil that thinly, which admits to at least some degree of intentional deception. I'm just trying to discover how deep the deception goes.

It's a simple question. Are you here to bait the criticism your anecdotes invariably engender, which you then style as persecution to make you feel better? Are you here to paint atheists as unfair persecutors of personal beliefs?

 

[JayUtah]

No, I will do as I always have. In any case the administrator took one of my threads off topic himself yesterday.

So can we expect the thread to be just more "thinly veiled' narcissism?

I asked whether you could participate in a thread without your typical self-focus. You cited a draft thread that ostensibly has another purpose, supposedly as an example of a thread in which you wouldn't simply focus on yourself again. I asked if you would be willing to put your money where your mouth is on that point. You said no. So it seems you aren't willing to participate non-narcissistically. Is that a fair analysis of your position?

 

[Scorpion]

Or maybe that's what you frantically want everyone to think.



It seems to be having the effect of you desperately trying to play the victim. You opened the door in this thread to the question of your motive for participating. You say you try to "attack the bastions of atheism." You say you veil that thinly, which admits to at least some degree of intentional deception. I'm just trying to discover how deep the deception goes.

It's a simple question. Are you here to bait the criticism your anecdotes invariably engender, which you then style as persecution to make you feel better? Are you here to paint atheists as unfair persecutors of personal beliefs?

I am not really victim material, as I have already been to hell and back and survived. I cannot deny, I think of atheists as blockheads. But I accept fair criticism and strive to learn from it.

 

[Scorpion]

So can we expect the thread to be just more "thinly veiled' narcissism?

I asked whether you could participate in a thread without your typical self-focus. You cited a draft thread that ostensibly has another purpose, supposedly as an example of a thread in which you wouldn't simply focus on yourself again. I asked if you would be willing to put your money where your mouth is on that point. You said no. So it seems you aren't willing to participate non-narcissistically. Is that a fair analysis of your position?

'You' are currently making this thread about me.

 

[JayUtah]

I am not really victim material, as I have already been to hell and back and survived.

And can't stop talking about it, even when no one asked.

I cannot deny, I think of atheists as blockheads.

With whom you choose to converse on almost a daily basis. What part does endless repetition of your claims and personal anecdotes play in that particular drama?

But I accept fair criticism and strive to learn from it.

Give an example of fair criticism the atheists here have given you, and what you learned from it.

 

[Scorpion]

With whom you choose to converse on almost a daily basis. What part does endless repetition of your claims and personal anecdotes play in that particular drama?
Give an example of fair criticism the atheists here have given you, and what you learned from it.

The only thing I have is my own experience and that is anecdotal..

Among lots of other things I have taken on board, I was told Descartes did not coin the term 'Ghost in the machine' it was a critic of his.

 

[JayUtah]

'You' are currently making this thread about me.

No. You responded to AmyW's question by assuring her that the "atheists" in this thread would never change their minds because they are too closed-minded, which of course is not the reason they themselves give. You opened the door to questions about why you hate atheists so much, yet choose to spend so much time and effort talking to them. I'm responding to your direct and ongoing attack -- completely unwarranted -- against "atheists" in this thread. You're going to egregious lengths to pretend you're being persecuted, simply because an "atheist" is holding you to account for your brazen accusations.

In addition, AmyW asked you to reconcile your attack on "atheists" with the evidence that skeptics cite for their disbelief. You responded, as usual, with your customary stories.

 

[JayUtah]

The only thing I have is my own experience and that is anecdotal..

But somehow atheists are "blockheads" for not taking it at face value the way you do, and are too closed-minded to accept any eventual evidence.

Since you admit that all you have is anecdotal evidence, it would be prudent for you to apologize for accusing skeptics of being irrational "blockheads."

 

[Scorpion]

But somehow atheists are "blockheads" for not taking it at face value the way you do, and are too closed-minded to accept any eventual evidence.

Since you admit that all you have is anecdotal evidence, it would be prudent for you to apologize for accusing skeptics of being irrational "blockheads."

I did not say atheists were irrational.

 

[JayUtah]

I did not say atheists were irrational.

Picking nits instead of answering the hard questions. See why so many people have questions about your motives?

You accuse us of rejecting evidence of "genuine" mediums because it would "shatter our world." Please elaborate on how that is not an accusation of a conclusion drawn outside of reason.

 

[Scorpion]

Picking nits instead of answering the hard questions. See why so many people have questions about your motives?

You accuse us of rejecting evidence of "genuine" mediums because it would "shatter our world." Please elaborate on how that is not an accusation of a conclusion drawn outside of reason.

I think an atheist has a view of the world stuck in the most mundane view and interpretation of scientific findings. Atheists keep calling the world and their experience of it as 'reality' I do not think they have any idea what 'reality' is. The theme of my next thread.
I do think some atheists may be scared of facing the possibility of psychic people with knowledge they know nothing about. Because they would not know the rules. They would be lost in the unknown. Their world view would be shattered.

 

[JayUtah]

That is a manifestation of your illness.

It may or may not be. Parsimoniously, in this case, we don't need to invoke clinical paranoia because people will feign indignation for ordinary rhetorical effect. Any opposition to their point of view, or any bluntness on the part of the critic, is interpreted as some form of persecution. The proponent suddenly develops an onion-thin skin. Scorpion can't answer any of my questions, or bring to bear any verifiable facts to support his claims -- or for that matter, treat AmyW's question with anything but narcissism -- so he has to resort to vilifying his critics and then claiming himself to be the undeserving victim of our villainy.

It's not like it's any great secret anymore that his goal is to hurl mud at skeptics at any cost, but it would be nice if he owned it. For some reason, deception (or self-deception, if you prefer) is acceptable as long as the goal is to thwart atheism.

Or are you claiming that it is impossible that you are wrong? Because that would be quite an extraordinary claim.

Extraordinary, but not to unexpected. Look at the "thought police" thread to see an example of how far someone will go to save face.

 

[Scorpion]

Bertrand Russell, arguably one of the best minds of the 20th century, was an agnostic not an atheist. Because he knew there was not enough information to know if there is a God or not.

 

[Craig4]

Thanks guys, how do these mediums convince themselves they are not lying. Do they really believe themselves that they can speak to a dead person?

The same way the rest of us get through the gut wrenching hell of talking to someone who is bereaved and tell ourselves we're not lying. Think about it, when you tell someone, "everything happens for a reason" or "it's all in God's plan" do you really believe it? If someone dies and you say they are in a better place or now they are at rest, how do you know? Why do you think that? Mediums just take what most of us do to a different level.