• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Hello from a non-skeptic

wareagle said:
The fact that I didn't express an ability YET
Click to expand...
Factually incorrect. You have claimed an ability to predict lottery numbers, though imperfectly.

No matter, though. We'll go with this new statement, that you have no abilities beyond which we skeptics would expect you to have.

Then you have nothing to teach us.


wareagle said:
pretty much undermines your statement.
Click to expand...
Nope.


wareagle said:
The practice has nothing do with faith.
Click to expand...
But learning it does, according to you. Regardless, you can't do it.


wareagle said:
Don't worry about your co dependency
Click to expand...
Don't worry; I'm not worried.


wareagle said:
most of the US expresses it that's why we are in the political -economical fix that we are in.
Click to expand...
Try another forum and thread for that discussion.
 
wareagle said:
Cognitive dissonance. Hearing what people didn't say or rearranging what was said in order that you may hear what wasn't said.
Click to expand...
Are you saying I misunderstood you? That's entirely possible, I find your posts quite difficult to parse. Perhaps you could clarify?
 
wareagle said:
Cognitive dissonance. Hearing what people didn't say or rearranging what was said in order that you may hear what wasn't said.
Click to expand...


No. That is not what cognitive dissonance means and amazingly is yet one more term that you don't understand and are using incorrectly. I'm beginning to think that you are a troll.
 
AdMan said:
No. That is not what cognitive dissonance means and amazingly is yet one more term that you don't understand and are using incorrectly. I'm beginning to think that you are a troll.
Click to expand...

I was going to comment on that, but it's possible he's saying that cognitive dissonance LED to what was described in the second sentence. He just left out a few words.
 
I understand. Stephen Hawking lost all credibility when he switched verb tenses. All that great work down the drain due to grammatical error.
 
aggle-rithm said:
I was going to comment on that, but it's possible he's saying that cognitive dissonance LED to what was described in the second sentence. He just left out a few words.
Click to expand...


Possible, but given the rest of his posts I would lean toward the conclusion that he just doesn't understand many of the terms he is using.
 
aggle-rithm said:
Correctly guess randomly generated numbers with consistency?
Click to expand...


Strictly speaking, he didn't say he could do this. He said he could guess random numbers and the chance of him being correct would be consistent.

For the record, I can do that, too.
 
"I knew Stephen Hawking. Stephen Hawking was a friend of mine. You, Sir, are no Stephen Hawking."

Now that's out of the way, there is a huge difference between grammatical error and consistently incorrect usage of your key terms.
 
wareagle said:
I see. Because much of the population is unwilling to learn how to do well...nearly anything...that thing becomes a special power?
Click to expand...

No, I'd call it a 'special power' if it appears to run counter to what we would expect to be possible, given what we already know.

In this case, we know in advance the probability of correctly picking x numbers of a lottery draw by chance. For someone to consistently exceed that probability would be unexpected - because it would contradict our existing model of how the world behaves - i.e. that random events are (individually) unpredictable.

Lotteries are supposed to draw randomly, so if someone could consistently predict lottery numbers a rate better than expected by chance, it would be very interesting.
 
Cognitive dissonance: an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously

In order to foster a commonality of experience, which among you will agree upon this definition of cognitive dissonance in order to create a synergistic framework of communication?
 
But what if the accuracy attributed by sitters to the person doing it for money, the person doing it for free and the person doing it as a part of a demonstration of cold reading is the same?

Because I missed something further up thread does this have something to do with the validity of a reading being in direct alignment with its cost?
 
Then I'd have to ask people as I did about a zillion posts ago to suspend beliefs expectations for a while. Expecatation is based on belief (prejudice_ I'm only asking to interact with an actual skeptic on the matter.

I think but I'm not sure is that it is based on the premise which is found in quantum physics, metaphysics, and a few other arenas of thought where everything happening NOW. I think. Don't quote me.

dlorde said:
No, I'd call it a 'special power' if it appears to run counter to what we would expect to be possible, given what we already know.

In this case, we know in advance the probability of correctly picking x numbers of a lottery draw by chance. For someone to consistently exceed that probability would be unexpected - because it would contradict our existing model of how the world behaves - i.e. that random events are (individually) unpredictable.

Lotteries are supposed to draw randomly, so if someone could consistently predict lottery numbers a rate better than expected by chance, it would be very interesting.
Click to expand...
 
wareagle said:
But what if the accuracy attributed by sitters to the person doing it for money, the person doing it for free and the person doing it as a part of a demonstration of cold reading is the same?

Because I missed something further up thread does this have something to do with the validity of a reading being in direct alignment with its cost?
Click to expand...


I was responding to Charles Boden's comment that he is skeptical of mediums who do it for the money and that no 'true' medium would apply for the million dollar challenge.

Regardless, the question still remains:

But what if the accuracy attributed by sitters to the person doing it for money, the person doing it for free claiming psychic powers and the person doing it as a part of a demonstration of cold reading is the same?
 
Last edited:
Robert Oz said:
I was responding to Charles Boden's comment that he is skeptical of mediums who do it for the money and that no 'true' medium would apply for the million dollar challenge.
Click to expand...

You have to admit that Charles' conclusion that no "true medium" would apply for the challenge seems to be faultless, it's just his premises that still need a little work :D
 
wareagle said:
Then I'd have to ask people as I did about a zillion posts ago to suspend beliefs expectations for a while. Expecatation is based on belief (prejudice_ I'm only asking to interact with an actual skeptic on the matter.

I think but I'm not sure is that it is based on the premise which is found in quantum physics, metaphysics, and a few other arenas of thought where everything happening NOW. I think. Don't quote me.
Click to expand...


I think before people start quoting you they might first want to understand what you meant to say. So I don't think there's much to worry about.
 
wareagle said:
I think but I'm not sure is that it is based on the premise which is found in quantum physics, metaphysics, and a few other arenas of thought where everything happening NOW. I think. Don't quote me.
Click to expand...
And you are incorrect. I'm sure. Unless you are making no claim now, though even then the fact of having no ability is not related to quantum physics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom