Peter Vs Randi

[tamiO]

Nope. no thoughts causing arthritis here.

Are you saying that stress does not affect your immune system or state of mind?

 

[tamiO]

Way off base, Tami, way off base.

Were Peter Morris making honest inquiries, I would understand. But, he's using a boatload of dishonesty to make these attacks.

I doubt Randi 'hates' Peter Morris. By comparison, Peter's hatred of Randi is palpable. Look at the linked threads listed above and go to some of the SDMB threads as well.

I am making a point. Neither one of them like each other, but we must not use motive in our reasoning.

 

[tamiO]

I was going to cooment on some of the dialouge but gosh this is getting to be be a repetition of the same old stuff, we have two unsubstantiated claims that randi hates Ptere and that Petere hates Randi, we also have the usual name calling occuring, we have the usual retratcion of statements and continuing to assert that the retracted opinions were correct, if retracted.

Look here is the deal people, randi is two things, he is a debunker and he writes an editorial, if he makes a factual error in the ditorial then it is likely that he does so because he is writing an editorial. But by a nad large his stements are correct.

1. His comments on clustering were in reference to the magic properties of Penta water.

His comments on dowsing and underground rivers are in reference to the dowser's reference to 'underground rivers'.

So freaking what?

The conversation would be easier to read if people could refrain from the ad homs and stick to the argumentation, and leave the vendettas at the door.

And what of Randi's ad homs?

Or is he somehow above us all in a 'do as I say, not as I do' way.

 

[Dancing David]

Are you saying that stress does not affect your immune system or state of mind?

Of course not dear fellow poster, but that was not the claim that Mr. Morris made nor is that the quibble that he has with Randi. Of course strees is an agravating factor, that is totaly clear from the reading of the sources, but that is not what MR. Morris said he said 'tought or state of mind can cause arthritis', which is very different from saying that 'thoughts or state of mind are a contributing factor in arthritis' and since in many of his posts he is taking randi to task fr the unpedantic use of language I am pointing out that he is in eror in his use of language.

As a nother example; stress related illnesses such as schizophrenia effect a large number of people, the symptoms of schizophrenia are worsened by stress, but the underlying illness is not caused by stress. There is a difference in language. A series of psychotic events may be triggered by a stressful event but they merely trigger the underlying mechanism, they do not cause the symtoms themselves. So while stress argravates schizophrenia it is not the cause of schizophrenia.

 

[tamiO]

Of course not dear fellow poster,

Sorry, I am not out to prove anyone right or wrong by being pedantic.

I am just interested in learning the truth about things.

 

[Peter Morris]

Of course not dear fellow poster, but that was not the claim that Mr. Morris made nor is that the quibble that he has with Randi. Of course strees is an agravating factor, that is totaly clear from the reading of the sources, but that is not what MR. Morris said he said 'tought or state of mind can cause arthritis', which is very different from saying that 'thoughts or state of mind are a contributing factor in arthritis' and since in many of his posts he is taking randi to task fr the unpedantic use of language I am pointing out that he is in eror in his use of language.

David, perhaps you could read what I actually wrote

So, it is reasonable to state that "You create diseases like arthritis with your thoughts." To be strictly accurate, we should say that “according to current theory, state of mind is a major factor in the onset of certain types of arthritis”

you see, dear fellow poster, I did state that thoughts are a "contributing factor" rather than the sole cause.

Incidently, what attacks on Randi for unpedantic use of language are you talking about? Give examples?

Or are you just parroting Princhester's accusation.

 

[BillHoyt]

Try again, Peter. Actually read that short page, sir. There are at least three different sentences there that demonstrate the actually meaning of the phrase "share the same chromosome." Can you find them? Do they mean anything to you?

 

[Peter Morris]

Bill, I'm not going to play word games with you. It is an utter waste of time discussing what he meant by a particular word.

 

[thaiboxerken]

It's pretty sad that a person would spend so much time and effort to discredit and defame a person that is only searching after the truth. James Randi hates Peter Morris, that is what the thread is also about.

Not at all, James Randi only responds to Petey's lies and fabrications. Randi probably doesn't know Pete any more than from what Pete has posted on the board.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I am making a point. Neither one of them like each other, but we must not use motive in our reasoning.

Maybe you shouldn't tell outright lies when you make a point.

I'm not using Pete's hate as a motive in my reasoning, but instead.. I'm illustrating that Pete's arguments lack reasoning because of Pete's hatred. This hate is what leads Pete to have little credibility in his posts.

 

[BillHoyt]

Bill, I'm not going to play word games with you. It is an utter waste of time discussing what he meant by a particular word.

Let me get this straight. You're at the basketball game when you suddenly get a bug up your butt. You don a ref's cap, jump onto the floor and signal a technical foul. And now I discuss wish to discuss with you the definition of said foul and you declare it a waste of time?

I'm sorry to confuse you with the facts, here, Peter, but you most assuredly started this as a discussion of what Randi or his correspondent meant by "share the same chromosome." I maintained that there was no technical foul here, wannabe-ref, that the phrase was used correctly. I illustrated this by pointing you to a page with no less than three passages there that point to this meaning.

So, Peter are you now withdrawing this complaint about Randi, or are you prepared to discuss it? Or are you ripping your wannabe-ref cap off your head, and scurrying back to the stands?

 

[tamiO]

I'm not using Pete's hate as a motive in my reasoning, but instead.. I'm illustrating that Pete's arguments lack reasoning because of Pete's hatred. This hate is what leads Pete to have little credibility in his posts.

Would you like me to switch that one around for you too?

Neither one of them like each other.

Randi is often sloppy with his research and comes off as an ass. Just as the other extreme of the subject does.

 

[Peter Morris]

Maybe you shouldn't tell outright lies when you make a point.

I'm not using Pete's hate as a motive in my reasoning, but instead.. I'm illustrating that Pete's arguments lack reasoning because of Pete's hatred. This hate is what leads Pete to have little credibility in his posts.

Folks, I've tried to talk reasonably to you people. I've tried to ignore trolls like this one, and only responded to reasonable people.

I've said my piece, offered evidence in support of it, you can accept it, or make excuses for Randi as you wish.

I'm done here.

I'll keep posting more of Randi's errors, I'm sure you'll keep ignoring or denying them.

 

[Peter Morris]

Let me get this straight. You're at the basketball game when you suddenly get a bug up your butt. You don a ref's cap, jump onto the floor and signal a technical foul. And now I discuss wish to discuss with you the definition of said foul and you declare it a waste of time?

I'm sorry to confuse you with the facts, here, Peter, but you most assuredly started this as a discussion of what Randi or his correspondent meant by "share the same chromosome." I maintained that there was no technical foul here, wannabe-ref, that the phrase was used correctly. I illustrated this by pointing you to a page with no less than three passages there that point to this meaning.

So, Peter are you now withdrawing this complaint about Randi, or are you prepared to discuss it? Or are you ripping your wannabe-ref cap off your head, and scurrying back to the stands?

okay, just one last post then I'm gone.


I don't follow sport, and I'm not American, so I have no idea what the basketball metaphor is all about.

I take exception to the claim that I "started this as a discussion of what Randi or his correspondent meant by "share the same chromosome."

I have never argued about what the word means. In fact I directly refused to join in.

My point about Randi is that he is factually and scientifically wrong.

Randi offered an argument based on the supposition that chromosomes pass unchanged from generation to generation. This is wrong.

I am not accusing Randi of using the wrong word here, I am accusing him of basic ignorance.

Arguing about the meaning of the word "same" is entirely Bill's doing, and I want no part of it.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

My point about Randi is that he is factually and scientifically wrong.

...snip....

I am not accusing Randi of using the wrong word here, I am accusing him of basic ignorance.

...snip...

What is your point? That Randi makes mistakes, sometimes he corrects them sometimes he doesn't and sometimes he doesn't accept he's made a mistake? Is that your whole point?

If so.. then so what...?

 

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

In a perfect world the word bollocks would always come up at the notion of something even remotely supernatural! Although in that perfect world the notion wouldn’t exist in the first place!


It’s a fallacious mistake to treat believers with any respect! If we act decently around them the next thing you know we’ll be treating fools who believe in the tooth fairy as normal! If you think about it there is more evidence for the tooth fairy than there is for PSI! It’s all bullsh*t!

 

[tamiO]

In a perfect world the word bollocks would always come up at the notion of something even remotely supernatural! Although in that perfect world the notion wouldn’t exist in the first place!


It’s a fallacious mistake to treat believers with any respect! If we act decently around them the next thing you know we’ll be treating fools who believe in the tooth fairy as normal! If you think about it there is more evidence for the tooth fairy than there is for PSI! It’s all bullsh*t!

!Xx+-Rational-+xX!, I love you!

 

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

!Xx+-Rational-+xX!, I love you!

That is very rational of you!



Why some many websites debunking the supernatural and conspiracy theories when common sense and simple reasoning already do the job!? A: Believer’s brains can’t comprehend reality!


Materialism is no philosophical view or paradigm! Materialism is just the way things are, it’s truth, it’s science, it’s reality, it’s the conclusion of every valid experiment ever conducted, it’s skepticism, it’s what great material intellects support, it’s the most positive possible reality, it’s what retards reject while clouded by delusion, it provides the best possible outcome after bodily death, and it’s the cure for irrationality! Materialism is all and everything!

 

[Dancing David]

David, perhaps you could read what I actually wrote

you see, dear fellow poster, I did state that thoughts are a "contributing factor" rather than the sole cause.

Incidently, what attacks on Randi for unpedantic use of language are you talking about? Give examples?

Or are you just parroting Princhester's accusation.

Funny thing Mr. Morris, I parrot no one, you also sated this

Maybe James Randi should get someone to check his writings for accuracy. Randi makes two errors here. Firstly, he challenges the notion that thoughts create arthritis. He is wrong on this. Thoughts – or at least state of mind – CAN cause arthritis.

And that is very different from the later statement you made, GOSH but that is the same sort of quibble you have with Randi's use of language throughout your OP. So in my sense you try to pick with Randi for his inaccurate use of language and then go and use changing meanings and inaccurate language yourself.

Mr. Pot I would like you to meet Mr. Kettle, Mr. Kettle I would like you to meet Mr. Pot. But you seems to be old chums already!

 

[Dancing David]

Sorry, I am not out to prove anyone right or wrong by being pedantic.

I am just interested in learning the truth about things.

I thought that I had called Mr. Morris on his use of pedantic criteria for language, in no way did I mean to suggest that you are anything less than tolerant and understanding. If I have caused harm, I offer apology.