What standards can one expect as an applicant?

[MRC_Hans]

That is it exactly.

Not only is our understanding limited, it is variable, and subjective, and...., and..., and..., : Human mentality is everything.

Ahh, not quite. To be sure, individual observation is all you say, but, using scientific methods, humanity has managed to get a quite acurate understanding of the world. Still lots to learn, of course.

It is definitely not explained by such trivialising as is exemplified by claims based on stage illusion and cold reading deception, which is virtually the foundation stone of the modern skeptical movement from the mid twentieth century.

How whould you know what is the founding stone of the modern skeptical movement? It is certainly not some standard explanation. The founding stone is science and scientific research methods.

Hans

 

[maatorc]

1...Ahh, not quite. To be sure, individual observation is all you say, but, using scientific methods, humanity has managed to get a quite acurate understanding of the world. Still lots to learn, of course.
2...How whould you know what is the founding stone of the modern skeptical movement? It is certainly not some standard explanation. The founding stone is science and scientific research methods.Hans

1...As you know, we are not talking about scientific methods, which are not in question.

2...The same way anyone with an interest can find out. Read what Randi and Shermer have written. The basis of modern skepticism is certainly not science.

 

[Thabiguy]

1...As you know, we are not talking about scientific methods, which are not in question.

2...The same way anyone with an interest can find out. Read what Randi and Shermer have written. The basis of modern skepticism is certainly not science.

maatorc,

The Journal of Parapsychology defines paranormal as "any phenomenon that in one or more respects exceeds the limits of what is deemed physically possible according to current scientific assumptions". Not only it does not follow from this definition that the paranormal cannot exist, but this definition does not come from skeptics, but quite on the contrary, from the other party.

It is not Randi who says, "I deem some stuff that rarely happens in nature paranormal and I challenge you to prove it". That's a gross misrepresentation of the situation. It's the people out there who claim that they can predict future by the use of astrology, tarot cards, or contact with spirits. It's people out there who claim that they can use extra-sensory perception to gain access to obscured information, that they can use simple tools to locate hidden items such as water or metals, that they can heal serious diseases of other people by touching them. It's them who claim they have these powers and it's them, their peers and believers, who call these alleged powers paranormal. It's them who claim they are rare but ubiquitous. It's them who are so confident in these powers that they will charge money to provide that kind of service.

What Randi says is, "if all of this is true, if you claim that your claimed powers do work, if you are willing to sell them to others based on that claim, then come and show me with a trivial demonstration of your choice that they do work; I'll give you a million dollars for that". And their reply? Silence. The obvious conclusion? They are all full of [rule 8].

This has nothing to do with scientific research. And everything to do with challenging false claims that frauds out there make.

 

[robinson]

Don't forget the people who claim to have powers from "God" or the "Holy Spirit", who not only fleece gullible people out of money, but give them false hope and claim to cure their diseases. Those asswipes are really scum.

Sadly, they are also capable of making so much money off of religion that they would never take the MDC, nor do they need the money.

What does this have to do with the topic again? I forgot.

 

[maatorc]

1... maatorc, The Journal of Parapsychology defines paranormal as "any phenomenon that in one or more respects exceeds the limits of what is deemed physically possible according to current scientific assumptions". Not only it does not follow from this definition that the paranormal cannot exist, but this definition does not come from skeptics, but quite on the contrary, from the other party.
2... It is not Randi who says, "I deem some stuff that rarely happens in nature paranormal and I challenge you to prove it". That's a gross misrepresentation of the situation. It's the people out there who claim that they can predict future by the use of astrology, tarot cards, or contact with spirits. It's people out there who claim that they can use extra-sensory perception to gain access to obscured information, that they can use simple tools to locate hidden items such as water or metals, that they can heal serious diseases of other people by touching them. It's them who claim they have these powers and it's them, their peers and believers, who call these alleged powers paranormal. It's them who claim they are rare but ubiquitous. It's them who are so confident in these powers that they will charge money to provide that kind of service.
3... What Randi says is, "if all of this is true, if you claim that your claimed powers do work, if you are willing to sell them to others based on that claim, then come and show me with a trivial demonstration of your choice that they do work; I'll give you a million dollars for that". And their reply? Silence. The obvious conclusion? They are all full of [rule 8].
4... This has nothing to do with scientific research. And everything to do with challenging false claims that frauds out there make.

1... Michael Shermer wrote: "There is in fact, no such thing as the supernatural and the paranormal. There is only the natural, the normal, and the mysteries we have yet to explain. I agree with this view.

2... It is true that very many fringe claims of psychical reality are spurious and uncontrollable, but the real issue is not these spurious claims but is the actual principle of psychical reality which Shermer and Randi deny is possible.

3... It is true generally that the people who make public claims about psychical reality and charge money for their advice will also tend to discredit the principle under consideration by their trivializing of this principle, but this does not even begin to disprove it.

4... I agree the MDC has no connection with scientific research.