• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Questions for Lucianarchy

What happened, CF, did you get tired of harassing Clancie? :D

Well, I must admit that it will probably be easier to bully the less-threatening and less bright Lucianarchy. Clancie was the steel hand behind the velvet glove. It's about time you surrendered.

So now you have new victim. Bottoms up!:rr:
 
Cynical said:
What happened, CF, did you get tired of harassing Clancie? :D

Well, I must admit that it will probably be easier to bully the less-threatening and less bright Lucianarchy. Clancie was the steel hand behind the velvet glove. It's about time you surrendered.

So now you have new victim. Bottoms up!:rr:
Click to expand...

:dl:
 
Cynical said:
What happened, CF, did you get tired of harassing Clancie? :D
Click to expand...

LOL. It's easy to "harrass" several creduloids at the same time. There is no substance inside of the velvet glove.
 
I don't give a rat's rear about your obsession with skepticism, CF. Promote it 'till the cows come home. But what's it getting you, besides anger and impatience - and probably ulcers?

The people who believe in psychics are ALWAYS going to believe. There are more cases of skeptics-turned-believers than vice-versa, because there are miracle cases that have no logical explanation. Skeptics CANNOT prove skepticism. They can only assert that there is no "proof" in the paranormal.

So WHY are you so passionate about this? Don't you have any other interests that you can put your energies into? I mean, ANYTHING?? You're like a cat chasing his tail.
 
Cynical said:
The people who believe in psychics are ALWAYS going to believe.
Click to expand...

This is clearly wrong. Are you suggesting that all believers are indefinitely closed-minded? If so, you are not only way off the mark (many have changed their minds), but also asserting that all believers are idiots. Way to go.

There are more cases of skeptics-turned-believers than vice-versa, because there are miracle cases that have no logical explanation. Skeptics CANNOT prove skepticism.
Click to expand...

I'm going to call you on this one--I am fairly sure that you have no clue which event has happened more.

Besides, it doesn't matter: your statement has the assumption that there are atleast *some* believers turned skeptics ("vice-versa", which is odd, because that very admission completely contradicts the statement in the beginning of your post!), which means that promoting skepticism and critical thinking is not a waste of time.

Skeptics cannot "prove skepticism?" Do you actually have any idea what skepticism is, and why your statement is nonsensical?
 
Cynical said:
The people who believe in psychics are ALWAYS going to believe. There are more cases of skeptics-turned-believers than vice-versa, because there are miracle cases that have no logical explanation. Skeptics CANNOT prove skepticism. They can only assert that there is no "proof" in the paranormal.

So WHY are you so passionate about this? Don't you have any other interests that you can put your energies into? I mean, ANYTHING?? You're like a cat chasing his tail.
Click to expand...

You are very wrong here.
I used to believe in psychics, yet I retained enough open mindedness to learn what was wrong what what was presented to me.

You do not seem to understand the meaning of skepticism. It is not something to be proven or disproven, any more than, say, happiness, or despair. It is (for me, at least), the ability to retain a questioning mind, regardless of circumstances.
 
So WHY are you so passionate about this? Don't you have any other interests that you can put your energies into? I mean, ANYTHING?? You're like a cat chasing his tail.
Click to expand...

I consider psychic surgeons to be one of the most disgusting form of con artist because they take money from people who can least afford it while convincing seriously ill people from seeking or continuing medical treatment. Edgar Cayce performing psychic diagnosis is another example of reprehensible activity. Sylvia Brown also has performed psychic diagnosing in front of credulous television hosts (Montel Williams, Larry King). I have strong beliefs in making sure the public understands that there is no valid basis for any of these particular psychic beliefs.

After-death communicators also fall into the category of preying on people who are in a vulnerable state. Wanting these people to be held accountable for their unscrupulous behavor is, in my opinion, an appropriate place "to put one's energies."

I also think it is appropriate and useful to educate reporters into the tricks that professional psychics use in taking money from people.
 
You last three posters made some excellent points. I bumped this post up for CF's sake. Because I think he'll find SOMETHING to dispute in your posts. CF thrives on argument, not harmony.

But in any case, he needs to see what you've written, so that he can see that good points can be made without arrogance.
 
This could be added to the Natalia Lulova section.

Can see it here:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870441822#post1870441822

In particular (a couple of posts up from that one here http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870441786#post1870441786):
OTOH, isn't it right that Randi tested a little girl, who, after she passed his prepared controls, went on to have most of her face plastered with duct tape, broke down in tears, only to be then humiliated again by having the whole debacle publicised internationaly in 'Time' magazine?
(don't worry, I'm not going to 'go off on one' about this. ;) )
Click to expand...

As I asked in that other thread, please show where she 'broke down in tears'. Also the photographs do not show her crying, at all.
 
Marian said:
This could be added to the Natalia Lulova section.

Can see it here:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870441822#post1870441822

In particular (a couple of posts up from that one here http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870441786#post1870441786):

As I asked in that other thread, please show where she 'broke down in tears'. Also the photographs do not show her crying, at all.
Click to expand...

Oh nos! Randi made a little girl cry! What a mean man! Therefore psychics are real!

*Sigh*

(Directed at your quote, not your post, Marian. :) )
 
Marian said:
As I asked in that other thread, please show where she 'broke down in tears'. Also the photographs do not show her crying, at all.
Click to expand...

I think she got a lesson for life without the tears. I can only imagine the frustration that little girl must have felt when she was blindfolded for real, and only were able to throw wild guesses just to see the $1.000.000 disappear in the horizon, that she had hoped to win for her and her parents.
She of course knew it was a scam, and the adults around her didn't seem to be all that innocent either - according to their reactions to Randi's improvements of the blindfold.

The prize of being a fraud, is the embarrassment and loss of credibility that follows when the scam is exposed. It's still sad though, when children is getting dragged into such an episode because they follow the lead of the adults that surround them. The shame is not to be on this little girl, but on the ones who encouraged her to be a fraud.

/thomas
 
Larsen has made a distinct claim about my IP address.

He made the claim that they are "similar".

Saying it is "not resolved" is just about the most stupid thing I have seen from him to date. He either has the evidence, or he hasn't.

A claim which he uses to suggest I am responsible for writing something particulalrly unpleasant about Randi.

Such a claim without evidence is completely dispicable.

Until Larsen removes the dispicable claim and apologises, he remains in contempt and dishonest.
 
Lucianarchy said:
Larsen has made a distinct claim about my IP address.

He made the claim that they are "similar".

Saying it is "not resolved" is just about the most stupid thing I have seen from him to date. He either has the evidence, or he hasn't.

A claim which he uses to suggest I am responsible for writing something particulalrly unpleasant about Randi.
Click to expand...

No, I do not. I make it clear that the matter is unresolved.

Lucianarchy said:
Until Larsen removes the dispicable claim and apologises, he remains in contempt and dishonest.
Click to expand...

The subject stays until it is resolved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom