Hello from a non-skeptic

[godless dave]

Thank you both and thank you for the links. But Pixel, just to clarify this one point:

When the medium approached me during the session, and please excuse me for saying "incorporated with an entity" who presents himself by the name of Lock-Street, the words he used, and I am quite certain of them, were:

"A member of that Royal Family that you have connections to is going to die this week. Pay attention to whom it might be..."

Prior to this event, seven years before to be more precise, the following had happened:

The very first time I sat for a consultation with the medium I have made so many references to, this is what was said:



Given this association, and the fact that indeed almost 20 years later I was able to verify that indeed I am genealogically descended from King James IV, makes it very difficult for me to believe that this can be explained by any "cold reading" technique, and certainly that "a member of that Royal Family you have connections to" could not be referring to any other but the one in question.

Why not? Why would you have any more connection with Diana than with any of the other members of the royal family who are descended from James IV?

 

[catsmate]

I posted this in another thread, but its stil TOTALLY relevant.

I firmly believe that Princess Diana was killed in the Titanic disaster while attempting to recover an illegal shipment of Plutonium that was being sent from Ireland to Mexico, via the fledgling reactor in Chicago and would have been sent from there as processed weapons grade material to Mexico and assembled into a working nuclear device.
Eamon De Valera was clearly of Mexican origin, (via Spain), and was the linchpin in this scheme, (to gain nucular weapons for the IRA), having heard a lecture given by Leo Szilard at belvedere college, which prompted his institution of the Trinity College archaeological exploratory digs in the Mourne mountains, the american 'Trinity bomb project was named after this as it used plutonium from this dig), which were purportedly seeking remnants of the fianna, but which were in fact to investigate and recover a noted rock formation which was known as 'the bright destroying one', in old Irish after the sword of finn, an Irish Hero. They found that the rock was radioactive and many of them died in its mining.

The ore was to be shipped to be processed when MI5 found out about it. We know that on another Timeline the U.K. was devastated by atomics in the early part of the 20th century, and an answer had to be found.
In keeping with its Royal Charter the Hapsburg Timegate trust needed a scion of the royal family to activate the time gate, and finding that Diana was in France, and by virtue of marriage was royal and possessed one of the gate gates activating crystals in her engagement ring from Charles, (which she was unable to remove, due to a 'Flem-Ath' seal), spirited her away, killing her companions and leaving a hastily grown clone, that would soon expire.

Using the French gate at Liny-Devant-Dun in northern France she led a team commando to destroy the shipment and lost her life heroically.

The film of the disaster which commemorates this event is known for the song, 'My Heart will go on', which is a cryptic reference to Diana who was the queen of all our 'Hearts'..

This is all predicted by nosferatu Nostradamus.

That reminds me of a GURPS Black Ops campaign we has a few years ago.....

 

[Elizabeth I]

And don't forget about his father frequently singing "Charlie is My Darling" to him. I wonder how many other ways his dad influenced him? It's not surprising that an imaginative child growing up in those circumstances would believe he had a past life from that time.

And how strange that a parent would sing "Charlie Is My Darling" to a presumably beloved child named...um...Charles!

 

[Charles Boden]

Guys, I rode the wave with you all in as much as I could, but I have to say I am astounded by the way things are conducted over here.

I came with one specific question in mind, concerning the quantum-wave effect, and did so because I was truly looking for an answer. For a member to have dug out the story I wrote and posted its link here, by which I was instantly exposed to far more than I wished to share, and then the use of a quote of something I would never have said in this forum to people I had never met before, was to say the least the lowest of blows beneath the belt. But still I rode it out with all of you...

For twelve years, as I said, I took part in what I consider a serious spiritualist center here in Brazil. Perhaps some here may have heard of the work of a Brazilian medium called Chico Xavier, who worked relentlessly throughout all his life in providing evidence of the truth of the mediumnic capacity and the intercommunication with spiritual entities, and who wrote dozens of books that were sold by the hundreds of thousands, the proceeds of which he donated all to charity, because, according to what he felt, he could not benefit from what had not been his own work. Likewise it was not my book that brought me here. And the use of it, as it was done, was most unfair...

There are plenty of serious people involed in the study and understanding of mediumnity and how such a phenomenon might work. To get back to "objectivity", this is indeed what I have also been after - an answer as to how could this work and how could this be possible. You all seem to wish to state that this is different. That there is no such thing and that anyone who believes in the such is either deluded, failing of memory, the victim of some scam or some kind of syndrome almost as if it were some disease that might even infect your children. Forgive me if I cannot agree, for I have, indeed, personally seen and experienced, in far more than just what I have shared here, enough events to at least place that shadow of a doubt in my mind as to its possibility.

It is much more than that in fact, I assure you, but one of the most elementary laws of spirituality is that nothing can be divulged spiritually that has not yet been divulged naturally. This applies also to any criminal case in which "nothing new was mentioned", and naturally to your "million-dollar-test".

In attempting to debate the issue over here, however, I have come across nothing but being mocked, offended, disrespected and invaded in a manner that I consider that what is permitted here in this forum is certainly not what one might expect from an well conducted open-forum under moderation.

It is certainly not within my interest, grasp, responsibility, desire or even my time to provide, or attempt to provide, any kind of "proof" that I cannot. I have not raised this banner here nor do I wish to ever do so. I did say this here from the start...

I have offered you all the link to Carol Bowman's forum. If you wish to discuss anything further at all on this matter, you know where you can find me. Again I will ask you to respect the beliefs of others in terms of that which you can still not prove.

I wish you all the best in your quests and in your searches, but would request that you kindly be less rude to newcomers in the future. It is not the argumentation in itself that drives them away, I'm quite sure, but the manner in which it is conducted...

My regards to all of you,

Charles

 

[Apology]

Your book is for sale to the general public, Charles. It's hardly an invasion of your privacy for someone to link to a book that you've posted in a public place, available to all and sundry with a few dollars to burn. It's not like someone stole the password to your Facebook account and posted pictures of your kids here.

Maybe one of the reasons why people have mocked you so much is that you're prone to dramatic overstatement of the facts. That might be the reason why you've fallen for the whole psychic mindgame as well.

 

[kerikiwi]

It is much more than that in fact, I assure you, but one of the most elementary laws of spirituality is that nothing can be divulged spiritually that has not yet been divulged naturally.

Do you consider it rude of me to ask that you provide some evidence that it is a spiritual law that nothing can be divulged spiritually that has not yet been divulged naturally? Who wrote the law?
And what in the name of FSM does it even mean?

 

[Loss Leader]

I came with one specific question in mind, concerning the quantum-wave effect, and did so because I was truly looking for an answer.

You were given an answer almost immediately by several posters who then repeated themselves many times:

You need a primer on String Theory and quantum physics. Pick up a copy of "Elegant Universe", that's a good starting point.

If you are referring to the quantum level then you are voicing a question that physicists are looking at but which does not serve as an explanation for phenomena on the macro level, particularly not for phenomena which have not even been demonstrated to actually exist. What you have done is take a characteristic of quantum physics and--without understanding what it says--posit that it explains what has not been shown to exist.

Observation involves probing something and sending back information to an observer. You must be careful here because there are two separate phenomena: 1) being probed and 2) observing the results. It is important to note that the observer need not be a person. The observer is irrelevant. The only relevant thing is the probe - usually a photon. That hits the object and bounces away. It is this act that collapses the waveform - not the actual observation of it by any person, animal or machine.
So, your concept that consciousness somehow radiates some sort of energy that collapses waveforms is misguided. The waveform has been collapsed and the decision has been made before the observer even gets the information. This is not a possible method by which clairvoyance or fortune telling could be accomplished.

DDid you try to enter , say, duality wave particle in wiki as a research start ? Do you also understand that anyway, this would have nothing to do with human consciousness (no experimental link) or even dead and mediumship (no experimental link, not even experimental evidence of existence) ? In the context of evidence, until you prove that human consciousness has any effect on particle or wave, speaking of the duality of wave particle is a NON SEQUITUR.

Yes, that's the classic "two-slit experiment," but nothing about it is dependent on human consciousness, or any other consciousness for that matter.

This is a fairly good video that explains the double slit experiment, from a new Bishadi thread.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6429804#post6429804
A few more:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-sccvRatlQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9xM2_MrC2k

"Observation" does not mean "observation by a person." It means any probing with any tool, including a photon or a single electron. Nothing can be found in space without something bouncing off it (or emitting something itself). It is the bouncing that collapses the dual state, not the noticing. Thus, observation by a camera yields the same results as observation in person. Can you explain how "consciousness" can affect the quantum state yet, at the sam time, be indistinguishable from the effect of an inanimate object like a camera or a photographic plate?

You never really evinced any understanding of the answers. You never had any further questions about them. You mentioned once that if the answers were true you would incorporate them into the next edition of your book, if you wrote one.

To my memory, you moved quickly on to describing anecdotes that you felt showed some sort of psychic behavior.

For a member to have dug out the story I wrote and posted its link here, by which I was instantly exposed to far more than I wished to share,

That's not entirely true. Some of your earliest posts were direct quotes from your book. They weren't just the same stories retold, they were cut and pasted. It's silly to say that we exposed you any more than it is to say we exposed Melville if you're first post had said, "Call me Ishmael."

To get back to "objectivity", this is indeed what I have also been after - an answer as to how could this work and how could this be possible.

You were answered in detail. First, the mechanism you invoked was explained not to work in the way you thought. Second, it was pointed out frequently that you had provided insufficient evidence that there were any phenomena to explain. If we cannot say for certain that a psychic event has taken place, it is foolish to try to explain it. We might as well debate how Warp Drive could possibly envelop space at a speed faster than light in order to then move the Enterprise that fast. The Enterprise DOES NOT EXIST.

as if it were some disease that might even infect your children.

Magical thinking is rampant in children. My 3 year old cried for half an hour until I found Woody's hat because Woody (who is a doll) doesn't like it when he loses his hat.

Forgive me if I cannot agree, for I have, indeed, personally seen and experienced, in far more than just what I have shared here, enough events to at least place that shadow of a doubt in my mind as to its possibility.

I think we'll all agree that you believe yourself.

It is much more than that in fact, I assure you, but one of the most elementary laws of spirituality is that nothing can be divulged spiritually that has not yet been divulged naturally. This applies also to any criminal case in which "nothing new was mentioned", and naturally to your "million-dollar-test".

Seriously?

Seriously?

You are seriously stating that spiritualism absolutely CANNOT, by its very nature, ever impart new information? So it can never pass any sort of test as to its own existence? It can never differentiate itself from knowledge that could be gained by mundane means?

Assuming that's true, what good is it? We can't use it to answer questions about ourselves. We can't use it to predict anything. It might as well not even exist?

But ... then ... what about that dead royal in a week thing? That was a prediction. That gave you new information you didn't know. You could have spent the entire week trying to get Princess Di or the Queen Mum on the phone. You just chose not to. So, how does that prediction fit with what you just said about spiritualism not adding any information to the natural world?

Again I will ask you to respect the beliefs of others in terms of that which you can still not prove.

If nothing else, you've provided proof that you have absolutely no understanding of the concept of "proof."

 

[AdMan]

In attempting to debate the issue over here, however, I have come across nothing but being mocked, offended, disrespected and invaded in a manner that I consider that what is permitted here in this forum is certainly not what one might expect from an well conducted open-forum under moderation.

What is "mocking" may be subjective, but in my view, little, if anything went beyond the line in this thread.

I am sure you read the membership agreement, correct?

The Forum is a discussion forum and we want it to be a friendly and lively (if challenging) forum for a mature audience and therefore will endeavour to ensure that civility will be the norm, but this does not mean that Members will be insulated from all insults and certainly not from challenges; the nature of the Forum inevitably involves strong emotions and opinions which can result in heated exchanges. Having your views challenged is not considered unfriendly nor uncivil.

[Emphasis added.]

Based on this, are you really surprised with the responses after some of the claims you made in this thread?

 

[Olowkow]

Guys, I rode the wave with you all in as much as I could, but I have to say I am astounded by the way things are conducted over here.

Thanks, that's why most of us enjoy JREF so much. It's an astounding forum, and quite possibly the finest of its kind on the planet. Good luck.

 

[Akhenaten]

Hmm . . .

I've had a close look, but I'm unable to detect any evidence of shaking.

 

[Wolrab]

For the love of spaghetti, I googled his own posted words. Next time don't freakin' recycle.

 

[tsig]

Hmm . . .

[qimg]http://www.yvonneclaireadams.com/HostedStuff/CleverPedestal.jpg[/qimg]​

I've had a close look, but I'm unable to detect any evidence of shaking.

All knowing pillars of knowledge don't rock!!

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

My apologies, for I have not read the full thread. In fact, I only read the very few first and very few last posts.

POST 1

Firstly, I must say that I too was skeptical of anything paranormal for a number of years until I had my own personal evidences that "there are more mysteries between heaven and earth than supposes our vain philosophy", which I am quite willing to share here just as long as the term "skeptical" might not be used as synonimous of biased, pre-judgemental or pre-conceptual, but as analytical and scientifically based in order to analyse not only a contrary point of view but a rational analysis of phenomenae beyond any current scientific knowledge, which naturally cannot be used as a premise for immediately discarding it.

POST 6

Welcome to JREF. The only "former skeptics" that have trouble on JREF are those who come here with an agenda for convincing the uninformed of their particular paranormal fetish.

POST 764

For twelve years, as I said, I took part in what I consider a serious spiritualist center here in Brazil. Perhaps some here may have heard of the work of a Brazilian medium called Chico Xavier…Likewise it was not my book that brought me here.

Forgive me that I skipped the middle 20 pages, but I expect I have read the same 20 pages in entirely other words many times before, and that Olowkow was prophetic in this regard.

 

[tsig]

Guys, I rode the wave with you all in as much as I could, but I have to say I am astounded by the way things are conducted over here.

I came with one specific question in mind, concerning the quantum-wave effect, and did so because I was truly looking for an answer. For a member to have dug out the story I wrote and posted its link here, by which I was instantly exposed to far more than I wished to share, and then the use of a quote of something I would never have said in this forum to people I had never met before, was to say the least the lowest of blows beneath the belt. But still I rode it out with all of you...

For twelve years, as I said, I took part in what I consider a serious spiritualist center here in Brazil. Perhaps some here may have heard of the work of a Brazilian medium called Chico Xavier, who worked relentlessly throughout all his life in providing evidence of the truth of the mediumnic capacity and the intercommunication with spiritual entities, and who wrote dozens of books that were sold by the hundreds of thousands, the proceeds of which he donated all to charity, because, according to what he felt, he could not benefit from what had not been his own work. Likewise it was not my book that brought me here. And the use of it, as it was done, was most unfair...

There are plenty of serious people involed in the study and understanding of mediumnity and how such a phenomenon might work. To get back to "objectivity", this is indeed what I have also been after - an answer as to how could this work and how could this be possible. You all seem to wish to state that this is different. That there is no such thing and that anyone who believes in the such is either deluded, failing of memory, the victim of some scam or some kind of syndrome almost as if it were some disease that might even infect your children. Forgive me if I cannot agree, for I have, indeed, personally seen and experienced, in far more than just what I have shared here, enough events to at least place that shadow of a doubt in my mind as to its possibility.

It is much more than that in fact, I assure you, but one of the most elementary laws of spirituality is that nothing can be divulged spiritually that has not yet been divulged naturally. This applies also to any criminal case in which "nothing new was mentioned", and naturally to your "million-dollar-test".

In attempting to debate the issue over here, however, I have come across nothing but being mocked, offended, disrespected and invaded in a manner that I consider that what is permitted here in this forum is certainly not what one might expect from an well conducted open-forum under moderation.

It is certainly not within my interest, grasp, responsibility, desire or even my time to provide, or attempt to provide, any kind of "proof" that I cannot. I have not raised this banner here nor do I wish to ever do so. I did say this here from the start...

I have offered you all the link to Carol Bowman's forum. If you wish to discuss anything further at all on this matter, you know where you can find me. Again I will ask you to respect the beliefs of others in terms of that which you can still not prove.

I wish you all the best in your quests and in your searches, but would request that you kindly be less rude to newcomers in the future. It is not the argumentation in itself that drives them away, I'm quite sure, but the manner in which it is conducted...

My regards to all of you,

Charles

About that princess Di thing.

 

[Olowkow]

Forgive me that I skipped the middle 20 pages, but I expect I have read the same 20 pages in entirely other words many times before, and that Olowkow was prophetic in this regard.

Thanks for noticing. Nah, you didn't miss much in the middle 20 pages. I read them, and my life is no better for it, except for the fact that they contain a real toolkit of techniques for figuring one's way out of woo beliefs. I am grateful to all the excellent writers who devoted so much time to this. I don't have nearly the skill nor the patience to do it.

ETA: by the way, I have been reading up on Chico Xavier. He was apparently a very highly regarded even beloved medium in Brazil, and died at 92. It is claimed that he lived as a poor man, wrote 400 books which were essentially dictated to him by spirits, solved countless crimes, and gave all the proceeds to charities. IIRC even nominated for a Nobel. If I can find some time, I would like to learn more about him.

 

[Dunstan]

Let's review that first post of yours, Charles.

Firstly, I must say that I too was skeptical of anything paranormal for a number of years

Liar. You began as a child thinking you were the reincarnation of a prince, then claim to have experienced paranormal phenomenon with a Ouija board, then spent 12 years at a "spiritualist center" at which you supposedly "studied" these phenomenon. (It must have been quite a rigorous study given how badly you crumble into a ball when anyone asks a mildly skeptical question.)

When challenged on this, you made some vague remarks about having just "put aside" for a time the very same paranormal phenomenon that you now insist are utterly convincing.

You lied, Charles. You were never a skeptic, you were always a believer in paranormal phenomenon. It would have been fine if you'd just admitted it from the outset, but you insisted on playing this silly "I used to be a skeptic, too" card.

until I had my own personal evidences that "there are more mysteries between heaven and earth than supposes our vain philosophy", which I am quite willing to share here

Note the bolded language, it's going to contradict another lie of yours coming up.

In the case of Jacqueline Pool, a medium claimed to have been contacted by the deceased passing on to her information of her killer which proved to be astoundingly accurate and correct. She informed the police authorities of such an encounter and the information that was passed to her, allegedly by the deceased, including the information of who the assassin was. Such information was eventually proven to be correct thanks to DNA testing, which was not available at the time of the murder (1983).

I personally have also encountered apparently mediumnic occurrences which would go well beyond the possibility of a scam of any kind - to mention just two: my 2nd wife's pregnancy of my daughter when my wife was just two weeks pregnant and neither she nor I even suspected that this could be possible, and the death of Lady Diana just seven days prior to the actual event.

My first question is the following: we now know as a fact that the human consciousness, or our intent in observing the reality around us, collapses quantum waves into particles. But if "consciousness" is merely the result of electro-chemical discharges of the human brain, as is understood by modern science, how does this interaction take place? Could "consciousness" not perhaps be that which vibrates the super-strings and causes such a collapse?

Note what you did there: you asserted three different paranormal phenomenon. And yet later you're going to whine that you were asked about them. If they weren't relevant to your question, why did you bring them up?

And now let's look at your version of events when you decided to run off with your tail between your legs:

Guys, I rode the wave with you all in as much as I could, but I have to say I am astounded by the way things are conducted over here.

Yeah, I'll just bet you are.

I came with one specific question in mind, concerning the quantum-wave effect, and did so because I was truly looking for an answer.

Sure. And if I went to the politics forum and posted that "we all know that Barack Obama is a Kenyan and his presidency a communist plot. What I want to know is, are the Chinese communists involved, or was it just the Russians?" shockingly, the mean people there wouldn't just answer my question, but would actually challenge my premises. Oh, the horrors!

For a member to have dug out the story I wrote and posted its link here, by which I was instantly exposed to far more than I wished to share, and then the use of a quote of something I would never have said in this forum to people I had never met before, was to say the least the lowest of blows beneath the belt. But still I rode it out with all of you...

How is it a low blow to quote your own published words?

You all seem to wish to state that this is different. That there is no such thing and that anyone who believes in the such is either deluded, failing of memory, the victim of some scam or some kind of syndrome almost as if it were some disease that might even infect your children.

Charles, you have been told time and time again that these phenomenon are due to normal human imperfections, not some mental defect. The fact that you keep mischaracterizing everyone else's position over and over again means you're lying again.

Forgive me if I cannot agree, for I have, indeed, personally seen and experienced, in far more than just what I have shared here, enough events to at least place that shadow of a doubt in my mind as to its possibility.

Ah yes, more than you have shared here. I'm sure you do have many other stories to tell, but you're afraid to subject them to scrutiny. Tell me Charles, were these stories before, during, or after the mysterious stretch of time in which you claim you were a skeptic?

It is much more than that in fact, I assure you, but one of the most elementary laws of spirituality is that nothing can be divulged spiritually that has not yet been divulged naturally. This applies also to any criminal case in which "nothing new was mentioned", and naturally to your "million-dollar-test".

That must make it awfully challenging to do that scientific studying of "mediumship" you claim to have spent 12 years on.

In attempting to debate the issue over here, however, I have come across nothing but being mocked, offended, disrespected and invaded in a manner that I consider that what is permitted here in this forum is certainly not what one might expect from an well conducted open-forum under moderation.

Charles, you told lie after lie, willfully misstated what others were telling you despite being called on it multiple times. You're still lying about your original intentions in coming here. And now you're whining about someone using your own phrases from your posts to identify your published book? Boo freaking hoo.

It is certainly not within my interest, grasp, responsibility, desire or even my time to provide, or attempt to provide, any kind of "proof" that I cannot. I have not raised this banner here nor do I wish to ever do so. I did say this here from the start...

Sure, you just wanted to assert the existence of paranormal phenomenon as truth, and then ask us to provide some quantum physical "explanation" for them. And what happened to what you said in that first post about how you were willing to share your "personal evidences"?

I have offered you all the link to Carol Bowman's forum. If you wish to discuss anything further at all on this matter, you know where you can find me. Again I will ask you to respect the beliefs of others in terms of that which you can still not prove.

I wish you all the best in your quests and in your searches, but would request that you kindly be less rude to newcomers in the future. It is not the argumentation in itself that drives them away, I'm quite sure, but the manner in which it is conducted...

My regards to all of you,

Charles

People here were unfailingly nice to you, Charles, despite you revealing yourself as a liar repeatedly. Don't lecture us on how to behave.

 

[Pixel42]

In attempting to debate the issue over here, however, I have come across nothing but being mocked, offended, disrespected and invaded in a manner that I consider that what is permitted here in this forum is certainly not what one might expect from an well conducted open-forum under moderation.

As one of several posters here who has engaged with you seriously and respectfully I must tell you that I find this statement extremely offensive, as well as being a downright lie. By making it you have lost what little respect I gained for you in the course of this discussion.

I have offered you all the link to Carol Bowman's forum. If you wish to discuss anything further at all on this matter, you know where you can find me.

It is not my habit to seek out people who disagree with me in order to explain to them the error of their ways, I only engage with people who come to forums like this one to do just that.

I'm sure you'll be much happier talking to people whose minds are so closed they haven't even bothered to find out whether there is any evidence which contradicts what they believe, or any plausible explanations of their perceptions other than the one in which they have chosen to emotionally invest.

 

[H'ethetheth]

Well, that was predictable.

 

[Garrette]

As one of several posters here who has engaged with you seriously and respectfully I must tell you that I find this statement extremely offensive, as well as being a downright lie. By making it you have lost what little respect I gained for you in the course of this discussion.

Agreed. I stood up for you, Charles, more than once claiming you were sincere in your beliefs and ultimately willing to listen to reason.

I see I was mistaken. I was not rude to you, Charles, and I did not mock you. Neither did Pixel42 or several others.

Have fun having your ego stroked at the Carol Bowman forum, sitting comfortably in the knowledge that you need not actually learn anything there.

 

[jond]

You were given an answer almost immediately by several posters who then repeated themselves many times:











You never really evinced any understanding of the answers. You never had any further questions about them. You mentioned once that if the answers were true you would incorporate them into the next edition of your book, if you wrote one.

To my memory, you moved quickly on to describing anecdotes that you felt showed some sort of psychic behavior.





That's not entirely true. Some of your earliest posts were direct quotes from your book. They weren't just the same stories retold, they were cut and pasted. It's silly to say that we exposed you any more than it is to say we exposed Melville if you're first post had said, "Call me Ishmael."





You were answered in detail. First, the mechanism you invoked was explained not to work in the way you thought. Second, it was pointed out frequently that you had provided insufficient evidence that there were any phenomena to explain. If we cannot say for certain that a psychic event has taken place, it is foolish to try to explain it. We might as well debate how Warp Drive could possibly envelop space at a speed faster than light in order to then move the Enterprise that fast. The Enterprise DOES NOT EXIST.





Magical thinking is rampant in children. My 3 year old cried for half an hour until I found Woody's hat because Woody (who is a doll) doesn't like it when he loses his hat.





I think we'll all agree that you believe yourself.





Seriously?

Seriously?

You are seriously stating that spiritualism absolutely CANNOT, by its very nature, ever impart new information? So it can never pass any sort of test as to its own existence? It can never differentiate itself from knowledge that could be gained by mundane means?

Assuming that's true, what good is it? We can't use it to answer questions about ourselves. We can't use it to predict anything. It might as well not even exist?

But ... then ... what about that dead royal in a week thing? That was a prediction. That gave you new information you didn't know. You could have spent the entire week trying to get Princess Di or the Queen Mum on the phone. You just chose not to. So, how does that prediction fit with what you just said about spiritualism not adding any information to the natural world?





If nothing else, you've provided proof that you have absolutely no understanding of the concept of "proof."

Charles: Read this. Then read it again.