Person A bends spoons and claims it is an invisible, undetectable force from an invisible, undetectable being with invisible, incomprehensible powers existing in an unknown, undetectable place that only invisible, undetectable bits of people can visit is fine for them to say.
However, person B easily and obviously shows that the same thing is achieved by bending the spoon with your hands when no one is looking.
To me, when this happens I feel that it is required of person A to show that they are definitely not doing what person B is doing.
The woos seem unable to understand that the collection of undetectables is less plausible than the obvious, easily replicated, easily understood demonstration/explanation in the real world.
BTW, before someone 'spoons' me to death, I use it as an example for all paranormal/super-natural claims.
The woos seem able (maybe?) to exercise great critical thinking when buying a used car, but unable to apply the same thinking to their cherished beliefs.
Interesting Ian is a perfect example of a person firmly enamoured of person A and discounting of person B.
I'm not picking on you Ian, I'm entertained by your posts, but you are well known here and our best example of the privative of skepticism.
So let's cut the cr@p should we?
