Looking for Skeptics

Status
Not open for further replies.
trustbutverify said:
Would be delicious... but won't ever happen.
Click to expand...

I personally wouldn't like flaccon to get stung by contract law but if I was her I'd be very very careful around making offers to the public at large unless I was very willing to part with the money and was explicit as to what "debunked" and/or "re-created" actually are.
 
flaccon said:
No one is going to take my word for any of it, I expect it, who would? I wouldn't.

I was in a quiet place in a private room, alone. The recording on playback was the usual overlapping of words (hardly heard) The sentences on there now were added a few weeks ago.
Click to expand...

Can you prove that with an MD5 hash?
 
SezMe said:
I don't mind being ignored here (well, ok, a little :)) but I thought my post 3783 was important. Nobody (except a PM) apparently gave much of a damn to the issue of whether the continuation of this thread is doing more harm than good. So maybe I'm off base. Am I?
Click to expand...

AFAIC, you are 100% correct. This entire monster thread is an exercise in futility. The OP has a religious belief in her fantasy, and has already explicitly stated it is impossible for her to be wrong on this. No evidence will affect the authenticity of her claims in the slightest.
 
trustbutverify said:
AFAIC, you are 100% correct. This entire monster thread is an exercise in futility. The OP has a religious belief in her fantasy, and has already explicitly stated it is impossible for her to be wrong on this. No evidence will affect the authenticity of her claims in the slightest.
Click to expand...

Pretty much - we've explained what we found. Still it's been interesting in thoroughly debunking cobblers and proving pareidolia - and why you should use professional equipment and software appropriate for the job.
 
Alderbank said:
I don't see where this is leading, Jack. Are you saying that a recording of people talking, or indeed any recording, could be evidence of the existence of spirits?

I can accept the recording as evidence that flaccon has a budgie. That is not extraordinary. However on the principle of ECREE I myself would not accept any distorted recording of speech as evidence of spirits. How could that work?

Also, flaccon says that flaccon1 and flaccon2 are the clearest and best evidence of the existence of spirits. These are very recent recordings and I hear nothing paranormal. What then did the best evidence for spirits before these recent recordings sound like?

Finally, I note that flaccon says that the budgie was not present during the recording and the budgie's voice has been added by the spirits. This is an extraordinary claim and I would expect more evidence for it than a single recording.
Click to expand...

Pardon? and when did I say this one Alderbank? Budgie voice added by spirits?
 
tuxcat said:
I personally wouldn't like flaccon to get stung by contract law but if I was her I'd be very very careful around making offers to the public at large unless I was very willing to part with the money and was explicit as to what "debunked" and/or "re-created" actually are.
Click to expand...

I believe that if one makes a ridiculous challenge to "skeptics", believing they are safe from financial loss because they will end up judging the final results in their favor no matter what, they fully deserve to get the heck stung out of them. But that's just me.

But as long as such folks keep using completely undefined terms, such as "debunked" and "re-created", I suppose they'll keep getting away with it. But not after I get appointed dictator.
 
Last edited:
tuxcat said:
Pretty much - we've explained what we found. Still it's been interesting in thoroughly debunking cobblers and proving pareidolia - and why you should use professional equipment and software appropriate for the job.
Click to expand...

Not quite, I heard Mr Roberts computer change as well as his 2 silent recordings. I heard jsfishers recording was a constant drone throughout, with no interferences, but his original now has significant differences. This is fact, whether its believed or not.
 
flaccon said:
Not quite, I heard Mr Roberts computer change as well as his 2 silent recordings. I heard jsfishers recording was a constant drone throughout, with no interferences, but his original now has significant differences. This is fact, whether its believed or not.
Click to expand...


What are these significant differences, flaccon?
 
flaccon said:
Not quite, I heard Mr Roberts computer change as well as his 2 silent recordings. I heard jsfishers recording was a constant drone throughout, with no interferences, but his original now has significant differences. This is fact, whether its believed or not.
Click to expand...


Why are the changes not detectable in any objective way?
Why is all the evidence of spirits after the fact?
Why is there no way to objectively demonstrate the spirits ability?
Why is no one else able to hear what you hear without you telling them?
Why is it the spirits known and believe only what you know and believe?
 
Jack by the hedge said:
What do you actually say in that recording, please? And is the budgie yours?
Click to expand...

flaccon said:
There isn't a budgie present, its probably/possibly/likely noise from the spirit world, or not.
Click to expand...

Alderbank said:
I note that flaccon says that the budgie was not present during the recording and the budgie's voice has been added by the spirits.
Click to expand...

flaccon said:
Pardon? and when did I say this one Alderbank? Budgie voice added by spirits?
Click to expand...

Seems clear enough to me :)
 
tuxcat said:
Can you prove that with an MD5 hash?
Click to expand...

Considering I only learned what an MD5 hash was five minutes ago no, but I don't need to prove anything really, do I. Lets face it, I'm not here for prizes, and there seems to be a box for everything these days, there are just too many text book theories. I write the truth as it is.

It'll come good at some point. Truth takes its throne eventually (whatever the outcome)
 
Before page 100 rounds the bend, I'd like to say that it is quite evident, as it was at page 2, that flaccon's laptop is not Edison's machine.

(cheap shot)
 
Last edited:
flaccon said:
Not quite, I heard Mr Roberts computer change as well as his 2 silent recordings. I heard jsfishers recording was a constant drone throughout, with no interferences, but his original now has significant differences. This is fact, whether its believed or not.
Click to expand...

jsfisher said:
Why are the changes not detectable in any objective way?
Why is all the evidence of spirits after the fact?
Why is there no way to objectively demonstrate the spirits ability?
Why is no one else able to hear what you hear without you telling them?
Why is it the spirits known and believe only what you know and believe?
Click to expand...


Has anyone seen the movie 'Groundhog Day'?
 
calebprime said:
I bow and yield to the larger process. Others should lead that.

I can offer experience, good gear, a quiet room, and trained ears. (No budgies on this bus, imnsho!)
Click to expand...

I have suggested how to rule out paredolia. Lets not concentrate on their voices, this immediately rules out paredolia.

Trained ears are great.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom