walthrup48
Unregistered
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2001
- Messages
- 1,087
I'm trying to compose a response to this page: http://skeptics.victorzammit.com/reward.html
I'd be grateful if someone would check my argument is sound and my analogy is good. Logic/grammar corrections appreciated, improvements welcome.
Ta.
Zammit: Considering the [JREF $1,000,000] offer has allegedly been made since 1987 it is most suspicious that the offerer boasts that nobody has passed the initial test. Evidence from many parts of the world shows that the evidence for the afterlife is abundant, proven, definitive and conclusive.
Me: Whilst I am in do doubt of Mr Zammit’s sincerity that definite proof of the afterlife exists, the fact is that evidence for life after death is very controversial and the idea far from accepted. Whether the afterlife exists or not though, is hardly relevant. Mr Zammit has implied that the JREF challenge is flawed or skewed as no one has won the prize despite the existence of the afterlife. He has assumed, incorrectly, that people who have been tested for claims involving contact with the afterlife have used the correct methods for communication.
Let me explain with an analogy. For the sake of argument, I will assume that the afterlife exists.
We all know that the means of flight exists. Millions of people travel on planes each year. A person comes along who claims he can fly. This is entirely possible, we know people are able to fly using the correct means. However, he claims he can fly by flapping his arms. Thus, although flight is possible, it does not follow that everyone who claims to be able to fly can do so. So it is with contact with the afterlife. Even if it does exist, it is not necessarily true that people who claim to be able to contact the dead can do so. It is perfectly plausible that the claimants tested by the JREF for the ability to contact those who have passed over have failed simply by using the incorrect means of communication. Mr Zammit’s argument does not hold due to his faulty assumption.
I'd be grateful if someone would check my argument is sound and my analogy is good. Logic/grammar corrections appreciated, improvements welcome.
Ta.
Zammit: Considering the [JREF $1,000,000] offer has allegedly been made since 1987 it is most suspicious that the offerer boasts that nobody has passed the initial test. Evidence from many parts of the world shows that the evidence for the afterlife is abundant, proven, definitive and conclusive.
Me: Whilst I am in do doubt of Mr Zammit’s sincerity that definite proof of the afterlife exists, the fact is that evidence for life after death is very controversial and the idea far from accepted. Whether the afterlife exists or not though, is hardly relevant. Mr Zammit has implied that the JREF challenge is flawed or skewed as no one has won the prize despite the existence of the afterlife. He has assumed, incorrectly, that people who have been tested for claims involving contact with the afterlife have used the correct methods for communication.
Let me explain with an analogy. For the sake of argument, I will assume that the afterlife exists.
We all know that the means of flight exists. Millions of people travel on planes each year. A person comes along who claims he can fly. This is entirely possible, we know people are able to fly using the correct means. However, he claims he can fly by flapping his arms. Thus, although flight is possible, it does not follow that everyone who claims to be able to fly can do so. So it is with contact with the afterlife. Even if it does exist, it is not necessarily true that people who claim to be able to contact the dead can do so. It is perfectly plausible that the claimants tested by the JREF for the ability to contact those who have passed over have failed simply by using the incorrect means of communication. Mr Zammit’s argument does not hold due to his faulty assumption.
