Merged New telepathy test: which number did I write ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, righto, Michel, whatever you say. You're always right, and we've just been stringing you along for 3 years.






Is the above A: to be taken literally, or B: to be taken as sarcasm?
 
Michel H said:
... suffer from epilepsy (or worse) from the pills two months later. ...
Click to expand...

Epilepsy or seizures? What did the neurologist have to say?
Michel H said:
I began hearing "voices in my head" in 1994 and, since then, I have talked about this phenomenon with physicians several times (either psychiatrists or general practitioners, also a neurologist). ...
Click to expand...
HIlite by Daylightstar
 
Donn said:
I believe it's literally sarcastic.
Click to expand...

So you're admitting to not actually knowing? You state you believe it, so you haven't actually detected sarcasm?
If it had been there, surely, you would have detected it and stated such .... as a skeptic you love to do stuff like that?

Since you didn't actually detect sarcasm, what MikeG said must be true?

Also, the second line in MikeG's post is way below his principal statement, so low that it appears to avoid association with the principal statement as if the second line really is a lie, which it then is, which makes the principal statement true?

:duck:
 
Daylightstar said:
.........the second line in MikeG's post is way below his principal statement, so low that it appears to avoid association with the principal statement as if the second line really is a lie, which it then is, which makes the principal statement true?....
Click to expand...

How can a question be a lie?

The large gap was to give Michel pause to think, so that he can then make a choice between my options A or B.
 
Michel H said:
It seems to me he was trying to poison me (in his erratic style), this is just more of the same on this forum. It doesn't take that much courage to swallow pills, or to tell others that they are psychotic and that they should swallow pills (especially if it is a lie). Of course, those who give this "advice" are not the ones who are going to suffer from epilepsy (or worse) from the pills two months later. Doing a serious, honest and original research requires perhaps more work and courage, it seems to me.

Now I write (for example): "My first episode was way back in 1988". Perhaps, according to this gentleman, if I follow the medication path, after 12 years of trials and errors, I shall write (like him): "My first episode was way back 1988". I can see this improvement. Thank you, thank you, "JREF", I am so grateful... I wonder what the next exciting step would be. "Sssssank yu" perhaps?
Click to expand...

I think it's safe to say Michel is beyond any traditional help it serves no purpose for anyone to continue in the conversation.
 
Nay_Sayer said:
I think it's safe to say Michel is beyond any traditional help it serves no purpose for anyone to continue in the conversation.
Click to expand...

I've tried stopping people, but it seems an impossible task here. At least the unproductive sarcasm and mockery has died down.
 
MikeG said:
Yeah, righto, Michel, whatever you say. You're always right, and we've just been stringing you along for 3 years.






Is the above A: to be taken literally, or B: to be taken as sarcasm?
Click to expand...
I suspect it will be..

MikeG said:
Yeah, righto, Michel, whatever you say. You're always right, and we've just been stringing you along for 3 years.
Click to expand...
Thank you for confirming it.
 
Last edited:
MikeG said:
I've tried stopping people, but it seems an impossible task here. At least the unproductive sarcasm and mockery has died down.
Click to expand...

I hope you're right, but I have a feeling your earlier post isn't going to help...
 
MikeG said:
How can a question be a lie?

The large gap was to give Michel pause to think, so that he can then make a choice between my options A or B.
Click to expand...

Clearly, your question was aimed at obtaining a "sarcasm" answer where clearly no sarcasm was detected by you?
Just one of those skeptics' tactics?

:duck: ?
 
MikeG said:
Yes there is, if special means wrong and deluded.
Click to expand...
Yes of course, but that's not what "special" generally means. I am worried that conservative people impose more and more their will in my threads, by "urging other people to not participate in this bad test (sic)", with some support from the moderating team. The end result of that kind of "urging" might well be that I am no longer getting enough answers to do my research, and to do my statistical analyses.
 
Michel H said:
The end result of that kind of "urging" might well be that I am no longer getting enough answers to do my research, and to do my statistical analyses.
Click to expand...

Since you're already ignoring null results, your statistical analyses are meaningless anyway. If you were testing, say, a new instant messaging service by sending out a message and asking who'd received it correctly and who incorrectly, and you ignored every response that said they hadn't got the message at all, do you think your results would be credible?

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
Since you're already ignoring null results, your statistical analyses are meaningless anyway. If you were testing, say, a new instant messaging service by sending out a message and asking who'd received it correctly and who incorrectly, and you ignored every response that said they hadn't got the message at all, do you think your results would be credible?

Dave
Click to expand...
The case of a new instant messaging service is different. One reason is that people seem to be generally much more honest on these simple technical things. A second reason is that, when you a telepathy test (with a number to guess), you can scientifically figure out whether some telepathy took place by doing a standard statistical analysis on the numerical answers alone. And a third reason is that, on this large "skeptical" forum, hostility towards my claims is pretty enormous, with people supporting each other, so that a "I don't know" answer is not very interesting (it might be just related to the place where I am).
 
Michel H said:
There is nothing wrong about being "special" in this thread, about saying something different from the majority.
Click to expand...

Is there something special in this thread? It seems mostly: pathological irrational belief meets skepticism.
There are many threads here containing the exact same thing.
 
Michel H said:
Yes of course, but that's not what "special" generally means. ...
Click to expand...
It does in this case.


Michel H said:
... ... this bad test (sic)", ...
Click to expand...
It's not a test, it's a number guessing game. It's also a mechanism to support evasion of appropriate attention.


Michel H said:
... The end result of that kind of "urging" might well be that I am no longer getting enough answers to do my research, and to do my statistical analyses.
Click to expand...
Your 'research' and 'statistical analyses' are only your mechanism to not face your real problems, in addition to defining your condition (voices telling you to kill yourself) as a 'telepathy problem'.

You have no telepathy, you are not special. You have personal problems for which you run away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom