I have applied for the challenge

It will either be another example of Peter Morris's usual total lack of understanding of what "context" means or just one of his many lies.
 
Miss Anthrope said:
When did you apply?
Click to expand...

Full details of my application on my website : www.proverandiwrong.net

MWare said:
Your paranormal claim is that you can find a dry spot? Maybe I'm misunderstanding.
Click to expand...

That is the challenge that Randi issued. I've accepted the challenge that he set.

Note that I don't say it's paranormal. I state instead that Randi is ill-informed, and doesnm't know how to run a test. But he issued the challenge, he set the terms, and paranormal or not, I'm entitled to take him up on it.
 
I call for an independent psychiatric expert to determine whether Peter Morris is is delusional.

IXP
 
Darat said:
It will either be another example of Peter Morris's usual total lack of understanding of what "context" means or just one of his many lies.
Click to expand...

If you think that, then you won't worry about independent arbitration, will you.
 
IXP said:
I call for an independent psychiatric expert to determine whether Peter Morris is is delusional.
Click to expand...

I'm perfectly certain that independent review by any intelligent person would come out in my favour.

You would only oppose arbitration if you know I'm right.

If you think arbitration would come out in Randi's favour, then you'd support it.
 
Last edited:
I thought the 'dry spot' comment was a flippant one. Also known as 'a joke'. Try one, they're delicious.
 
When did he say that the challenge to find a dry spot is part of the million-dollar challenge?

Is it now the case that EVERY time Randi challenges someone on any point, it's part of the MDC? If he challenged you to prove a point in, say, a political argument, would that be subject to the challenge? How about an arm-wrestling match?

I fail to see how the "dry spot" challenge, since it does not require demonstrating a paranormal ability, should be subject to the MDC.
 
Peter Morris said:
If you think that, then you won't worry about independent arbitration, will you.
Click to expand...

Peter Morris said:
I'm perfectly certain that independent review by any intelligent person would come out in my favour.

You would only oppose this if you agree with me.
Click to expand...


Those posts are examples of a fallacious argument which is commonly known as "a false dichotomy" i.e assuming there are only two alternatives when in fact there are more.
 
Arbitration won't clarify for you what have not understood so far: You have taken, nay, ripped Randi's statement out of context.

It has been explained to you many times. You obviously lack the capability to comprehend said explanation, Peter Morris.
 
Peter Morris said:
I'm perfectly certain that independent review by any intelligent person would come out in my favour.

You would only oppose arbitration if you know I'm right.

If you think arbitration would come out in Randi's favour, then you'd support it.
Click to expand...
Okay I support it. I do not think a resonable person would think your application meets the requirements. The challenge is to demonstrate a paranormal event. Since your application states that it is not paranormal, you lose.

Do remember though, that even if it were accepted, you would have to agree on a protocol in which you distiguish dry spots without any normal clues at above chance.


IXP
 
Last edited:
GzuzKryzt said:
Arbitration won't clarify for you what have not understood so far: You have taken, nay, ripped Randi's statement out of context.
Click to expand...

On the contrary. Arbitration will clarify what YOU have not understood so far. I've given the challenge Randi issued IN CONTEXT. You keep claiming otherwise, but have nothing to show for your claims.

I am confident that independent arbitration will agree that this is a legitimate claim under Randi's rules.

It has been explained to you many times. You obviously lack the capability to comprehend said explanation, Peter Morris.
Click to expand...

Saying it many times does not make it true.
 
Peter Morris said:
On the contrary. Arbitration will clarify what YOU have not understood so far. I've given the challenge Randi issued IN CONTEXT. You keep claiming otherwise, but have nothing to show for your claims.

I am confident that independent arbitration will agree that this is a legitimate claim under Randi's rules.
Click to expand...

I wish you will get the arbitration you desire. I do not support it because it seems obvious to me that your application has been rejected for valid reasons and any more energy wasted on your alleged claim is just that: wasted.

Hence, I disagree with you: Arbitration will determine your application rightfully rejected. The defeated party should pay for all expenses involved.

Peter Morris said:
Saying it many times does not make it true.
Click to expand...

And untrue neither.
[/Kindergarden]
 
If you are having trouble finding a dry spot, Peter, Huggies or Depends (don't know your age) may help!
 
Peter Morris said:
Great, that's one.

Please email Randi and tell him that you support arbitration.
Click to expand...

No thanks, I will support it tacitly. Really though, I would like to see it happen. I would like to see how you argue your way out of it when proven wrong.

IXP
 
IXP said:
No thanks, I will support it tacitly. Really though, I would like to see it happen.
Click to expand...

If you support it, then email Randi and tell him.

I would like to see how you argue your way out of it when proven wrong.
Click to expand...

If I'm proven wrong then I'll admit it.

I'm confident that any independent and intelligent arbitrator will agree that my claim is a valid one under Randi's rules.
 
GzuzKryzt said:
I wish you will get the arbitration you desire. I do not support it because it seems obvious to me that your application has been rejected for valid reasons and any more energy wasted on your alleged claim is just that: wasted.
Click to expand...

What you think is irrelevant. Randi's rules allow for arbitration. If you oppose it, then you are going against Randi's rules.

Nothing new about that. You've ALWAYS ignored Randi's rules.

Hence, I disagree with you: Arbitration will determine your application rightfully rejected. The defeated party should pay for all expenses involved.



And untrue neither.
[/Kindergarden]
Click to expand...
 
Peter Morris said:
If you support it, then email Randi and tell him.



If I'm proven wrong then I'll admit it.

I'm confident that any independent and intelligent arbitrator will agree that my claim is a valid one under Randi's rules.
Click to expand...

Since IXP went offline, I submit to you, Mr. Morris, he said "tacitly". Tacitly.
 
Peter Morris said:
What you think is irrelevant. Randi's rules allow for arbitration. If you oppose it, then you are going against Randi's rules.

Nothing new about that. You've ALWAYS ignored Randi's rules.
Click to expand...

Your statement does not make any sense, Mr. Morris. Again.

I wish you the best of success in getting an arbitration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom