$1,000,000 reward if you can show evidence of any paranormal or occult power

[Clancy]

James Randi, a.k.a. The Amazing Randi, magician and author of numerous works skeptical of paranormal, supernatural, and pseudoscientific claims has for about ten years offered "a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power."

His rules were little more than what any reasonable scientist would require. If you are a mental spoon bender, you couldn't use your own spoons. If you claimed to see auras, you'd have to do so under controlled conditions. If you claimed to be able to do remote viewing, you wouldn't be given credit for coming close in some vague way. If you were going to demonstrate dowsing powers, you would have to be prepared to be tested under controlled conditions. If you were going to do psychic surgery or experience the stigmata, you would have to do so with cameras watching your every move.

To claim your reward go here
https://skepdic.com/randi.html

[ThePhiant]

this reminds me of those basketball players in the court yards that make every hoop from the free throw line.
how come they ain't picked up by the NBA?
does something happen when you change the conditions?

James Randi, a.k.a. The Amazing Randi, magician and author of numerous works skeptical of paranormal, supernatural, and pseudoscientific claims has for about ten years offered "a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power."

His rules were little more than what any reasonable scientist would require. If you are a mental spoon bender, you couldn't use your own spoons. If you claimed to see auras, you'd have to do so under controlled conditions. If you claimed to be able to do remote viewing, you wouldn't be given credit for coming close in some vague way. If you were going to demonstrate dowsing powers, you would have to be prepared to be tested under controlled conditions. If you were going to do psychic surgery or experience the stigmata, you would have to do so with cameras watching your every move.

To claim your reward go here
https://skepdic.com/randi.html

[decterlove]

There's an easy way to do this but it can't be done under sterile laboratory conditions that Randi would probably insist on, plus being the Arch-Bishop of the Dark Scientific Materialist Reductionist Powers that he is, would probably contest the payment even if Jesus Christ came back, and walked across his swimming pool while using the pool skimmer.

I can think of two simple experiments right off hand that would offer extremely convincing evidence for a court of law at least, one involving astrology, and one involving the use of say a dozen or two readings by different psychics on a specific topic. Psychics can't work in test tubes though but I don't see why it couldn't take place somewhere outdoors in a natural environment with impartial observers perhaps videotaping the event. Could try it first on a very small scale and see if my hunch is correct.

That's a lot of buckaroos....I've heard the offer before....might be easier than getting on Jeopardy or eating bugs on Survivor lol. I wouldn't mind splitting that little chunk a with a lot of co-conspirators of the Divine Light, lol one more time!

Anybody seriously interesting in discussing this matter in depth please contact me. Bring a slightly open and a slightly skeptical mind...that would be ideal. Please don't bother responding if you really believe the Universe is just one giant Carburetor.

[ThePhiant]

my first astrological reading was with someone who got himself involved in astrology because he was appalled at the idea that someone could think knowing something about him without knowing him.
he was going to prove what an idiot the other person must be.
then he was so shocked when he had his first reading done, that the person knew more about him than he was comfortable with.
now he refuses to meet or talk to the person before he does a reading, because he doesn't want any outside impressions to influence him.

There's an easy way to do this but it can't be done under sterile laboratory conditions that Randi would probably insist on, plus being the Arch-Bishop of the Dark Scientific Materialist Reductionist Powers that he is, would probably contest the payment even if Jesus Christ came back, and walked across his swimming pool while using the pool skimmer.

I can think of two simple experiments right off hand that would offer extremely convincing evidence for a court of law at least, one involving astrology, and one involving the use of say a dozen or two readings by different psychics on a specific topic. Psychics can't work in test tubes though but I don't see why it couldn't take place somewhere outdoors in a natural environment with impartial observers perhaps videotaping the event. Could try it first on a very small scale and see if my hunch is correct.

That's a lot of buckaroos....I've heard the offer before....might be easier than getting on Jeopardy or eating bugs on Survivor lol. I wouldn't mind splitting that little chunk a with a lot of co-conspirators of the Divine Light, lol one more time!

Anybody seriously interesting in discussing this matter in depth please contact me. Bring a slightly open and a slightly skeptical mind...that would be ideal. Please don't bother responding if you really believe the Universe is just one giant Carburetor.

[watermarko]

whoaaaaaa, loookeeee there~~~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Darn, you missed it!!!!:panther:

There's an easy way to do this but it can't be done under sterile laboratory conditions that Randi would probably insist on, plus being the Arch-Bishop of the Dark Scientific Materialist Reductionist Powers that he is, would probably contest the payment even if Jesus Christ came back, and walked across his swimming pool while using the pool skimmer.

I can think of two simple experiments right off hand that would offer extremely convincing evidence for a court of law at least, one involving astrology, and one involving the use of say a dozen or two readings by different psychics on a specific topic. Psychics can't work in test tubes though but I don't see why it couldn't take place somewhere outdoors in a natural environment with impartial observers perhaps videotaping the event. Could try it first on a very small scale and see if my hunch is correct.

That's a lot of buckaroos....I've heard the offer before....might be easier than getting on Jeopardy or eating bugs on Survivor lol. I wouldn't mind splitting that little chunk a with a lot of co-conspirators of the Divine Light, lol one more time!

Anybody seriously interesting in discussing this matter in depth please contact me. Bring a slightly open and a slightly skeptical mind...that would be ideal. Please don't bother responding if you really believe the Universe is just one giant Carburetor.

[lynn]

James Randi, a.k.a. The Amazing Randi, magician and author of numerous works skeptical of paranormal, supernatural, and pseudoscientific claims has for about ten years offered "a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power."

In my experience...The thing about 'paranormal' experiences...is they happen very spontaneously, in a very unpredictable manner, so I would never expect to be able to 'prove' them...And in regards to 'clairvoyance'...this intuition can at times 'come through' in a very symbolic manner not understandable to the 'logical mind'...so, naturally could never be 'proved' as a predictor of an outcome...

In short, I would never expect someone like Randi to understand, or find 'proof' of a 'paranormal' experience if he hasn't had one...

[Dixon]

Lynn, if, as you claim, "paranormal" experiences are too unpredictable/uncontrollable to be tested, they're also too unpredictable/uncontrollable to be sold! In other words, if "psychics" or astrologers can't control what they're doing, how could they possibly make appointments with their customers and deliver their "services" (and get paid)?

It's true that some paranormal claims don't usually claim to be controllable. Apparitions and UFO sightings come to mind. But any offer of, for instance, divination (astrology, psychic readings, crystal balls, tea leaf readings, palmistry, etc.) or healing (therapeutic touch, homeopathy, spiritual healing, various machines, etc.) implies that the technique is fairly controllable or they wouldn't be able to do business. When was the last time you heard of an astrologer saying to a customer "Sorry, I can't accept your money; the stars aren't working today"? LOL!

Bottom line: Any technique or product that claims some result and can be sold is, to some degree, controllable or at least predictable enough to be delivered upon demand, and IS therefore testable! Anyone who sells a service or product which they claim actually works, while at the same time claiming it's not testable, is a con artist (even if they've conned themselves enough to believe their own claims).

Dixon

In my experience...The thing about 'paranormal' experiences...is they happen very spontaneously, in a very unpredictable manner, so I would never expect to be able to 'prove' them...And in regards to 'clairvoyance'...this intuition can at times 'come through' in a very symbolic manner not understandable to the 'logical mind'...so, naturally could never be 'proved' as a predictor of an outcome...
In short, I would never expect someone like Randi to understand, or find 'proof' of a 'paranormal' experience if he hasn't had one...

[decterlove]

It's a good argument, Dixon, but let me submit to you Left Brain types on the Forum the following, first by inserting this brief paragraph about how Human minds are wired, although most brain researchers today would insist it's not quite a cut and dry;

Left Brain		Right Brain
Logical Sequential Rational Analytical Objective Looks at parts		Random Intuitive Holistic Synthesizing Subjective Looks at wholes

Most individuals have a distinct preference for one of these styles of thinking. Some, however, are more whole-brained and equally adept at both modes. In general, schools tend to favor left-brain modes of thinking, while downplaying the right-brain ones. Left-brain scholastic subjects focus on logical thinking, analysis, and accuracy. Right-brained subjects, on the other hand, focus on aesthetics, feeling, and creativity.

Suppose you sat down in a cold, sterile room with several scientists sitting in folding chairs with pens and notepads on their laps....

A great artist like Picasso or Mozart...

And instructed: PAINT PABLO, PAINT! COMPOSE MOZART, COMPOSE!

Now I'm not suggesting that any particular psychic today is a genius and will provide lasting works for the benefit of the entire human race...etc, etc...just allow me a little poetic leeway here to make my case more readable...

So we'll put the Great Randi in the room to and he can have a camcorder, or a notepad, or whatever he likes too. Who in their Right Brain (or Left Brain!), would believe that either great Creative Mind, could go, "Sure Randi, watch closely now, I'm going to put a splash of red over here on the top corner and then wash this whole section in a lite grey, splash a little specks of green over here...Are you watching closely, Randi? This will only take about 45 minutes and revealed will be my next Guernica. Presto! Now Mozart, it's your turn...Please demonstrate to Randi and the seated audience your unique Talents too! How about Symphony in E-flat, No. 1?

Now Art and Music are indeed different from Psychic abilities I will grant you but the point is that none of them are perfectly controllable unless you're talking about some idiot painting an ocean scene on Channel 36 early Saturday Morning. (I grew up with John Gnagy....anybody remember John Gnagy?)

And I suspect that it would be perfectly legitimate for some psychics to tell a client on some particular day that they are not at their best but it's sorta like a barber telling one of their clients, "Hey, Sam...I'm notta cutting too good today...pleasa come backa tomorrow....I give you a reala cuta then....aka Seinfeld, Enzo Manganaro. It's just not practical in any sort of business to serve your clients only when you are feeling masterful.

The point here is that some aspects of reality are NOT PERFECTLY CONTROLLABLE AND REPRODUCIBLE IN A SYSTEMATIC FASHION and must be nurtured, and invited, and waited upon, to be manifested on to the Physical Plane. And if Art and Music can be demonstrated to be formed in that way....then how could it be expected that any genuine INTERFACE BETWEEN THIS PHYSICAL WORLD AND A MUCH MORE SUBTLE, STRANGE, IN SOME WAYS REVERSE, AND TRANSCENDENT REALITY to be subject to our little Human egotistical panderings?

What the Left Brain types just don't understand....and I think it's just as difficult for them to do so as it is for some of us Right Brain types to follow electrical circuitry diagrams or fix cars...(indeed one almost has be able to entirely block out the physical material concerns of "Just Stuff" or block out the subjective, intuitive impulses of "Just Feelings" to operate well at either side of the opposite spectrum). is that the Language of the Psychic is an entirely different one from anything they can imagine and indeed Even to the Psychic themselves...it is a foreign language....one necessarily oblique as indeed we are contacting a DIFFERENT REALITY when we are contacting Spirit in any form.

So what can we determine or at least describe upfront about this strange LANGUAGE?

One, it is a language of pictures primarily. Yes, there are various psychic phenomena like clairaudience, seeing ghosts or spectrals, or even what seem to be real live people who aren't there, but when one sits down for a psychic reading, what the psychic will be interpreting are PICTURES. The physical brain, which is wired in specifics ways for language, for analytical thinking, for dealing with the hard realities of Matter....is no longer in play when we pass over into the Spiritual World. IT IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT REALITY AND YOU WILL NO LONGER HAVE THE DELIGHTFUL PRIVILEGE OF OPERATING WITH A PHYSICAL BRAIN IN A TIME/SPACE REALITY. Your soul will then be your only instrument and FEELING WILL BE THEN ELEVATED OVER THINKING and Pictures will be the Language of the Soul.

But like all opposites....MATERIAL WORLD AND SPIRITUAL WORLD......it is also complementary....it is connected to the physical plane.....ie....there is an overlapping.....it is complementary as well as antagonistic....and it is radically reverse/different. Spirit or Souls that have passed on are capable of "sharing" pictures with a Mind on Earth that is capable of pushing away this World temporarily, and finding that Inner Space where these "pictures" can be "read" or observed. It is the Skill Level of the individual Psychic reading this pictures that determines how these "pictures" might be translated in the Real World.

IT IS NOT A VERBAL, RATIONAL, LINEAR CONVERSATION THAT TAKES PLACE. (exception: CHANNELING....but usually that happens without the channelers conscious awareness of the "conversation/instruction" that is taking place...that's a whole other ball of wax, though, not for this thread.)

If you are able to observe your dreams carefully.....if you can remember them, many people apparently don't.....you may get a glimpse of this type of reversal, and may observe the following:

• In the Dreamworld there is little experience of Space and Time. In other words, in your dreams, everything is experienced sort of "up close"....there may be spatial elements but there is seldom, at least in my dreams, a horizon...a sky.....a great distance viewed.....etc. (SPACE) And likewise, we are blessed in our Dreams never to find ourselves staring at a wall wondering what to do next, or fretting about tomorrow. (TIME)
• When we are Dreaming, we feel our emotions much more directly. There is less of a barrier/a wall/a glass ceiling to our emotions....and we may find ourselves quite comfortably in the presence of someone we feel much discord or alienation with in the physical world, or likewise more afraid or more violent than we could ever imagine ourselves to be in our PHYSICAL REALITY.
• We experience our True Essence/Soul more easily....as our Dreaming Personality floats through various Desires and Attractions/Repulsions, as it tries to process out some of the left over, undigested experiences from our Waking Life.
• If we are lucky enough or persistent enough to experience Lucid Dreaming.........we find ourselves TRULY AWAKE IN ANOTHER WORLD. We can say to ourselves in our Dream...yes, I am Dreaming...and the world I see in front of me...appears in EVERY RESPECT...although Different.....TO BE JUST AS REAL, JUST AS DETAILED, MUCH MORE WONDERFUL AND SPECTACULAR, AS THE WORLD OF MY WAKING EXISTENCE.
• Any language content in a dream is USUALLY garbled and nonsensical when connected to waking life. (Not always...sometimes a person is given a perfectly clear "audible" massage in their dreams that does clearly have application in their current life. I often wake up with fantastic Dylan lyrics or Paul Simon (unwritten or published by either mind you), Songs in my head....sometimes i attempt to write them down but I am not musically inclined so they stay Astral...)

If you watch John Edwards, aka Crossing Over, what is he constantly telling the audience? "Your Grandfather is showing me a picture of an Orange. What does that mean to you? Oh, he grew up in Orange County, etc, etc...

Now, again, I don't mean to imply that just because JE sees a picture of an Orange in his mind, that automatically translates to Orange County, and many of you will object saying that's exactly the problem....the pyschic is offering something so general that it opens to all sorts of easily available translations and produces a "fake experience" for the person being read. But anyone who watches a skilled psychic in person, WITH A TRULY OPEN MIND, will probably see phenomenon that simply can not be explained by coincidence alone.

Except for the fact, that all you truly Left Brain types out there....and I do Truly value your Brainwaves when I need my car fixed or my computer fixed or even this damn Economy fixed.....may simply not be able to open your minds up sufficiently....BECAUSE IT'S TOO THREATENING TO YOUR WORLDVIEW.

Let's face it. Reality is strange, VERY STRANGE, no matter what you believe to be true, and we all in some ways necessarily cling to some basic patterning paradigm that is familiar and that works for us. What irks me the most is the fact that in order for the Modern Mind to completely deny the existence of a world beyond the Five Senses we are currently limited by, The Modern Personality MUST ASSUME THAT EVERY CULTURE THAT CAME BEFORE WESTERN SCIENTIFIC RATIONALISM AS WELL AS EVERY CULTURE THAT STILL SURVIVES BESIDE IT OR IN SPITE OF IT.......EVERYONE IN THAT CULTURE, EVERY GREAT MIND IN THAT CULTURE, EVERY SHAMAN OR PRIEST IN THAT CULTURE.....MUST BE IGNORANT, CRAZY OR COMPLETELY DELUDED!

They must be that is if they BELIEVE IN, RESPOND DO, SEE AND LIVE ACCORDING TO A PERCEIVED VIA SHAMANISTIC RITUALS, etc.....A SPIRITUAL REALITY that contains Entities in all sorts of form, effects, and manifestations. Modern psychiatry would have to label them as crazy, stupid, schizophrenic or psychotic. We have no other plausible explanation.

The Modern Rational Mind we all enjoy, sort of, has taken Centuries to come into Full Blossom, rightfully and necessarily so. But it peaked somewhere in the middle of the Twentieth Century and now we will find more and more people being born with a greater and greater connection to the Spiritual World. Now people, especially younger people are drifting more and more into waters inhabited by Spiritual Forces at Work.

This development is REFLECTED EVERYWHERE YOU LOOK in our ART & MEDIA. Just watch a handful of cartoons on a Saturday morning and you will see how the world of spiritual beings is slowly penetrating the consciousness of "new beings" ie children. This can be for profound GOOD or profound EVIL but either way it is up to us to be open enough to OBSERVE IT and understand it contains a deeper meaning and reflects changing times.

JUST BECAUSE THE SPIRITUAL WORLD MAY BE JUST AS COMPLEX TO UNDERSTAND AS THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE IS, AND JUST BECAUSE THERE ARE A BUNCH OF RIGHT WING DODOHEADS INSISTING THAT IT TOO IS STILL FLAT, DOESN'T MEAN THAT INTELLIGENT HUMAN BEINGS CAN AFFORD TO CONTINUE TO DENY AND IGNORE IT'S IMPINGING PENETRATING REALITY AND NOT SUFFER CONSEQUENCES AND LIVE IN GREATER AND GREATER IGNORANCE.

Frankly....We as modern people, even with 500 years of Scientific Theorems behind us are simply not that smart! And if we were, pray tell me....why the fuck would Sarah Palin be running second in line for the most Powerful Political Office on the Planet. Pray tell, me please, Dixon...how could that be so?

Lynn, if, as you claim, "paranormal" experiences are too unpredictable/uncontrollable to be tested, they're also too unpredictable/uncontrollable to be sold! In other words, if "psychics" or astrologers can't control what they're doing, how could they possibly make appointments with their customers and deliver their "services" (and get paid)?Dixon

[MsTerry]

LOL
But doctor that did happen to the wunderkind Wolfgang!
And he couldn't perform either, so all his music is just a figment of our imagination

Suppose you sat down in a cold, sterile room with several scientists sitting in folding chairs with pens and notepads on their laps....

A great artist like Picasso or Mozart...

And instructed: PAINT PABLO, PAINT! COMPOSE MOZART, COMPOSE!

[decterlove]

Oh I said, I didn't know that....

but then there was only one I ever met.....

and he just smoked my eyelids.....

and punched my cigarette.....

How was the picnic, MsTerry....did you go as a balloon or anything?

Too windy for me.......!!!!! !!!!! !!!!!....!

LOL
But doctor that did happen to the wunderkind Wolfgang!
And he couldn't perform either, so all his music is just a figment of our imagination

[Dixon]

Yo, decterlove;

Let me start with a general assessment of your post. Then I'll look at a few of your specific claims.

Your post is typical of the responses I get when I suggest that people's claims, especially those used as ways of getting money from others, be subjected to reasonable tests. It's basically a litany of fallacious excuses for why your favorite claims are supposedly not testable, along with the strong implication that it's appropriate to believe them anyway.

I find that, especially when it comes to people's most cherished beliefs, there are basically two kinds of people: Believers, who construct belief systems that meet their needs and then rigidly defend them to the death, and Truth-Seekers, who are willing to go wherever the evidence leads regardless of whether the resulting conclusions meet their needs.

Truth-Seekers are always looking for ways to test their beliefs that will not just confirm them, but will show them if they're wrong so they can be corrected. In science, this takes the form of creating and testing falsifiable hypotheses. In less formal discourse, it takes the form of submitting oneself to reasonable standards of logic by which one's beliefs can be tested, and possibly refuted.

Decterlove, your attempts to wriggle and squirm until you've weaseled out of having to subject your pet beliefs to any kind of rigorous testing place you firmly in the Believer category (and firmly out of the Truth-Seeker category).

I know that's a provocative statement, and I want to be fair to you, so here's an invitation to show that I'm wrong about this and you're really a Truth-Seeker:

1. Please specify at least one belief that is important to you and which you think can't appropriately be scientifically, or at least rationally, tested.

2. Are you open to the possibility that you're mistaken; that this belief is actually false?

3. If you have ANY belief about which you can't affirm that possibility of being wrong, can you acknowledge being closed-minded?

4. If you can affirm the possibility of being wrong about your belief, would you want to know whether you're wrong, or would you prefer to keep the belief even if it's an illusion?

5. If you're correctable (i.e., willing to discover you're wrong), can you specify some kind of test that would be able to convince you to drop the belief? Note that it would have to be a test that corrects for common human sources of error that tend to distort our everyday, nonsystematic judgment.

Now I'll address a few of your more specific points:

It's a good argument, Dixon, but let me submit to you Left Brain types on the Forum the following, first by inserting this brief paragraph about how Human minds are wired, although most brain researchers today would insist it's not quite a cut and dry;

Left Brain		Right Brain
Logical Sequential Rational Analytical Objective Looks at parts		Random Intuitive Holistic Synthesizing Subjective Looks at wholes

Most individuals have a distinct preference for one of these styles of thinking. Some, however, are more whole-brained and equally adept at both modes. In general, schools tend to favor left-brain modes of thinking, while downplaying the right-brain ones. Left-brain scholastic subjects focus on logical thinking, analysis, and accuracy. Right-brained subjects, on the other hand, focus on aesthetics, feeling, and creativity.

Decterlove, you would apparently like to assume that I'm unbalanced in the direction of being a "Left Brain type" simply because I use logic appropriately in realms where it's necessary to do so, rather than believing woowoo silliness on the basis of some twisted misuse of "intuition" or the inappropriate application of subjective feelings to the understanding of objective facts. This constitutes a gross misunderstanding of where I'm coming from as well as an implicit ad hominem attack.

While the left/right brain duality has some truth to it, and people do tend to prefer one or the other, we all have both aspects available to us, and a well-rounded person moves freely from analysis to synthesis, objective to subjective, etc. as appropriate to the situation.

Your defensive attempt to invalidate me by reducing me to a "Left Brain type", as if I'm some kind of thinking machine, would be laughable to those who know me far better than you do. For one thing, my entire philosophy and morality is based upon a recognition that we're all One (Holistic, Synthesizing, Looking at Wholes)! As a fairly well-integrated person, I move freely from Left to Right-brain and back, depending on the situation.

When dancing, making love, or doing art, I'm less analytical, more intuitive and subjective. Being overly analytical in those situations would be inappropriate, right? Likewise, when assessing the truth of claims about objective reality, such as whether psychic powers are real, or whether some treatment cures some medical condition, I'm very analytical, trying to screen out subjective factors that could only distort the findings. Being well-rounded is about being very subjective for some tasks, and very objective for others.

Those who are Believers rather than Truth-Seekers, when assessing claims about objective facts, love to muddy the waters by inappropriately involving their subjective feelings, or by conveniently mistaking their wishful thinking for "intuition", so they can believe whatever bullshit meets their needs regardless of the evidence. But tainting the assessment process thusly is no more valid that it would be to lecture your lover about calculus while in a love embrace. If you really want to know the truth about psychic powers, healing modalities, or whatever, you will use mostly "Left-brain" functions because they're the functions suited to such assessment. Trying to assess claims about objective truths subjectively makes as much sense as trying to hear with your mouth and eat with your ear.

You seem to be violating the yin/yang principle by setting up polaristic pairs such as Analytical/Synthesizing and Objective/Subjective as if they are in conflict with one another, so that we have to choose a side. In some cases, such as Rational/Holistic, the pairs aren't even opposites! Dig it, decterlove: it's not about being Left- or Right-brained; it's about being a fully functioning person who uses ALL of those gifts AS APPROPRIATE. And that, my friend, is holistic.

(Decterlove then muddies the waters with a rather lengthy and entirely irrelevant example about scientists putting artists and composers in the lab and commanding them to paint or compose.)

Decterlove, since we were discussing the assessment of objective claims such as the efficacy of psychic powers or healing techniques, your example using subjective aesthetic tasks such as painting and composing is just irrelevant obfuscation. It almost looks like you wanna confuse the issue rather than looking at it clearly! This impression is partly due to the fact that you've thus far failed to make a case for one single specific healing or divining practice that gives objective results (such as healing some condition) but isn't testable.

Again, I wanna be fair to you, so here's an opportunity to show that you really wanna look at the issue clearly by getting more specific: Please specify at least one or two woowoo beliefs that involve claims about objective outcomes, which you think aren't testable. Any claim about a technique being effective for healing will do, but they should be claims that are controllable or predictable enough that people make a living selling them (astrology, psychic powers, homeopathy, "energy healing", various machines, whatever). For each example you give that meets those criteria, I'll tell you how it can reasonably be tested.

...The point here is that some aspects of reality are NOT PERFECTLY CONTROLLABLE AND REPRODUCIBLE IN A SYSTEMATIC FASHION and must be nurtured, and invited, and waited upon, to be manifested on to the Physical Plane.

Decterlove, here you commit the fallacy known as "attacking a straw man" (or, in gender-neutral terms, "attacking a straw figure"). You apparently cannot find anything wrong with my real position (that anyone who can consistently deliver a service upon demand has enough control over that service that it's testable), so you distort my position into something being "PERFECTLY CONTROLLABLE", which I neither said nor implied. Nothing is perfectly controllable, but anything controllable enough to sell to customers every day IS controllable enough to be available for testing. So far you have been unwilling to address that fact honestly, decterlove.

...And if Art and Music can be demonstrated to be formed in that way....

Again, to the extent that that's true of Art and Music, it's irrelevant to this discussion. But in fact, it's not even true of Art and Music to any great degree, because nearly all artists and musicians can do their thing on demand. That's how they make a living! Have you ever gone to a concert only to hear an announcement that the band wouldn't be playing because the muse didn't show up? Even creative acts like composing or painting can often be done, and done beautifully, on command.

...then how could it be expected that any genuine INTERFACE BETWEEN THIS PHYSICAL WORLD AND A MUCH MORE SUBTLE, STRANGE, IN SOME WAYS REVERSE, AND TRANSCENDENT REALITY to be subject to our little Human egotistical panderings?

If you'd like to offer proof of this non-physical reality, I'm all ears. I'm open to the possibility that it's real. Are you open to the possibility that it's not?

Re: "egotistical panderings", I've rarely seen anything more egotistical than the phony certainty of paranormalists who feel that their unsystematic judgment is superior to dozens or hundreds of well-crafted scientific studies. Talk about arrogant!

In contrast, the rational/scientific position is based on the humble recognition that we're all more fallible than we'd like to think and that therefore the search for truth requires procedures designed to correct for our universal human fallacies--procedures which people like you desperately try to exempt their pet beliefs from.

What the Left Brain types just don't understand...is that the Language of the Psychic is an entirely different one from anything they can imagine and indeed Even to the Psychic themselves...it is a foreign language....one necessarily oblique...

Woooeeee--the smoke's getting thick in here! By way of increasing clarity, let me translate that quote: "This psychic stuff is solid and specific enough to be useful for decision-making and real enough to charge money for, but too subtle to be tested. Those benighted Left-Brain types don't understand that, because they're not as sensitive and enlightened as those of us who aren't hobbled by anything so gross as reason or evidence". LOL!!!

...as indeed we are contacting a DIFFERENT REALITY...

I'm not hostile to that idea, decterlove, and if it's true I'd like to know it. Can you give some evidence of this "different reality"?

BTW, you may be interested to know that I used to believe in psychic powers myself. I stopped believing in them (as well as ghosts, UFOs, Bigfoot, etc.) as a result of becoming more open-minded and listening to BOTH SIDES of the argument, rather than just the fun and exciting true-believer stuff. To my surprise, the skeptics won me over because they had reasonable arguments and I was open-minded enough to change (unlike most paranormalists).

...when we are contacting Spirit in any form.

If you think Spirit is something separate from you that needs to be "contacted", you've lost sight of the essential Oneness, decterlove. So much for your Right-Brained Holism, Synthesizing and Looking at Wholes, LOL!

(Decterlove then goes into a lengthy discussion of "psychic" experience, in which he invokes a number of dubious constructs without evidence, apparently trying to make a case for saying that they're real enough to get paid for, but in a way that leaves them magically and conveniently untestable. LOL!!!)

(He then bores us again with a similarly lengthy discussion of dreams, composed of dubious claims mixed with truths which are irrelevant to the current discussion).

...If you watch John Edwards, aka Crossing Over, what is he constantly telling the audience? "Your Grandfather is showing me a picture of an Orange. What does that mean to you? Oh, he grew up in Orange County, etc, etc...

John Edwards is one of those ghouls who preys upon the bereaved by using the well-understood techniques of "cold reading" to convince the gullible that he has magical powers. Anyone can learn to do the same stuff, but most of us are too honest to do so. Googling "cold readings" will yield more info on the subject. (I've already spent too much time on this response to go into an explication of it here, but I will remark that no one ever went broke telling people what they want to hear, such as that they don't really die, LOL!)

...But anyone who watches a skilled psychic in person, WITH A TRULY OPEN MIND, will probably see phenomenon that simply can not be explained by coincidence alone....

Decterlove, my psychic powers are telling me that you have never even exposed yourself in any deep way to the explanations that skeptics adduce to explain "psychic" phenomena. Your talk about having a "TRULY OPEN MIND" is sheer hypocrisy until you do so, right?

...Except for the fact, that all you truly Left Brain types out there....and I do Truly value your Brainwaves when I need my car fixed or my computer fixed or even this damn Economy fixed...

Sorry, decterlove, but I'm lousy with cars and computers, and fiscal stuff is incomprehensible to me. So much for your stereotypes, LOL!

...may simply not be able to open your minds up sufficiently....BECAUSE IT'S TOO THREATENING TO YOUR WORLDVIEW.

You have the cart before the horse here, when you try to explain the cause of presumed closed-mindedness before it's even been established that we who disagree with you are closed-minded!

I'm open to the possibility that I'm closed-minded (are you open to the possibility that you are?). If you think I am, please provide evidence so that I can see it. You do understand that my disagreeing with you isn't such evidence, right?

Ironically, if you assume that those who disagree with you are closed-minded in the absence of any evidence that they are, that's a closed-minded defense mechanism in itself! ("Whoever disagrees with me must be closed-minded, or else they'd see that I'm absolutely, certainly right!").

And please note that this whole discussion started with Clancy and me suggesting that some claims be tested. Notice that such a suggestion implies open-mindedness. If we knew for sure the claims were untrue, testing would be a waste of time and resources, wouldn't it? Testing makes no sense if you're closed-minded. Closed-minded people fear reasonable tests because the tests may prove them wrong. Conversely, those calling for fair tests must be open-minded. Since you're desperately trying to exempt your claims from testing while I desire tests THAT COULD PROVE ME WRONG, the evidence so far is that I'm open-minded and you're closed-minded.

...What irks me the most is the fact that in order for the Modern Mind to completely deny the existence of a world beyond the Five Senses we are currently limited by...

That's the "Straw Figure" fallacy again. This is not quite what science is saying. It is saying that the burden of proof is appropriately on the claimant, and that claims about the objective universe which lack proof are highly unlikely to be true.

...The Modern Personality MUST ASSUME THAT EVERY CULTURE THAT CAME BEFORE WESTERN SCIENTIFIC RATIONALISM AS WELL AS EVERY CULTURE THAT STILL SURVIVES BESIDE IT OR IN SPITE OF IT.......EVERYONE IN THAT CULTURE, EVERY GREAT MIND IN THAT CULTURE, EVERY SHAMAN OR PRIEST IN THAT CULTURE.....MUST BE IGNORANT, CRAZY OR COMPLETELY DELUDED!

This is an even worse Straw Figure fallacy; science does NOT say this stuff. It simply says that humans everywhere are fallible, and it rejects beliefs that are not supported by good evidence or are clearly based on fallacies. Decterlove, your SHOUTED ranting above is about as honest and reasonable as a spittle-flecked fundamentalist preacher.

...They must be that is if they BELIEVE IN, RESPOND DO, SEE AND LIVE ACCORDING TO A PERCEIVED VIA SHAMANISTIC RITUALS, etc.....A SPIRITUAL REALITY that contains Entities in all sorts of form, effects, and manifestations. Modern psychiatry would have to label them as crazy, stupid, schizophrenic or psychotic. We have no other plausible explanation.

And again, the Straw Figure fallacy. You're setting up rationality as an easy target by grossly distorting what it really says, decterlove. Science does not say you're stupid or psychotic for believing in your favorite superstitions, just mistaken. And, science is always willing to look at any evidence you can adduce for your claims. But you apparently won't be satisfied until reasonable people accept your claims on the basis of crappy, fallacious evidence. And of course, if they did that, they wouldn't be reasonable people!

...now we will find more and more people being born with a greater and greater connection to the Spiritual World. Now people, especially younger people are drifting more and more into waters inhabited by Spiritual Forces at Work.
This development is REFLECTED EVERYWHERE YOU LOOK in our ART & MEDIA. Just watch a handful of cartoons on a Saturday morning and you will see how the world of spiritual beings is slowly penetrating the consciousness of "new beings" ie children...

Whenever any society is in extreme turmoil, many people seek refuge in superstition. Thus, both religious fundamentalism and New Agey paranormalism increase dramatically in uncertain times. This is scary because it means we're less likely to approach our problem-solving rationally.

JUST BECAUSE THE SPIRITUAL WORLD MAY BE JUST AS COMPLEX TO UNDERSTAND AS THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE IS, AND JUST BECAUSE THERE ARE A BUNCH OF RIGHT WING DODOHEADS INSISTING THAT IT TOO IS STILL FLAT, DOESN'T MEAN THAT INTELLIGENT HUMAN BEINGS CAN AFFORD TO CONTINUE TO DENY AND IGNORE IT'S IMPINGING PENETRATING REALITY AND NOT SUFFER CONSEQUENCES AND LIVE IN GREATER AND GREATER IGNORANCE.

You're screaming again, Mr. Intelligent Human Being, LOL! Don't forget to wipe the spittle off the podium.

...We as modern people, even with 500 years of Scientific Theorems behind us are simply not that smart!

Those who actually make an honest effort to understand rationality are smarter than most. You can't fault science or rationality for people's unwillingness to use them properly, especially when you're one of those people.

...And if we were, pray tell me....why the fuck would Sarah Palin be running second in line for the most Powerful Political Office on the Planet. Pray tell, me please, Dixon...how could that be so?

Precisely because people aren't thinking rationally. They're following their feelings and their superstitious beliefs. A open-minded thinker would not support Palin any more than he/she would stay stuck in wacky New Age beliefs.
Blessings on ya!

Dixon

[Sylph]

Well said, Dixon!

I too, think Edwards is a wretched, evil ghoul who preys on the bereaved.
The shows are carefully edited to show his 'hits' which are the result of not particularly clever cold reading.

John Edwards is one of those ghouls who preys upon the bereaved by using the well-understood techniques of "cold reading" to convince the gullible that he has magical powers. Anyone can learn to do the same stuff, but most of us are too honest to do so. Googling "cold readings" will yield more info on the subject. (I've already spent too much time on this response to go into an explication of it here, but I will remark that no one ever went broke telling people what they want to hear, such as that they don't really die...

We as a society are becoming more superstitious, not more spiritual...alas!

[MsTerry]

How about this, Dixon
You supply a DOB, time and place of someone you know real well and we'll find an astrologer to do a reading and you can be the judge of it matches.
Of course it would be fun if it was someone everybody knows so we all can do the fact checking. But don'ttell anybody who it is beforehand.
Are you in?

1. Please specify at least one belief that is important to you and which you think can't appropriately be scientifically, or at least rationally, tested.

2. Are you open to the possibility that you're mistaken; that this belief is actually false?

3. If you have ANY belief about which you can't affirm that possibility of being wrong, can you acknowledge being closed-minded?

4. If you can affirm the possibility of being wrong about your belief, would you want to know whether you're wrong, or would you prefer to keep the belief even if it's an illusion?

5. If you're correctable (i.e., willing to discover you're wrong), can you specify some kind of test that would be able to convince you to drop the belief? Note that it would have to be a test that corrects for common human sources of error that tend to distort our everyday, nonsystematic judgment.


Dixon

[cdegenhardt]

Just a brief comment of "proofs." I'm not much for what I call the "occult," but proving its validity or lack there of may be a bit more difficult than supposed by strict science. It's like any faith - or any emotion. There might be evidence pointing toit, but not actual proofs of it. Asking someone to "prove" psychic ability is a bit like asking them to "prove" love. There is evidence of love (as there is any emotion) in our behavior. There are even brain waves that show up in MRIs when we feel intense emotion and that disappear in folks who have neurological damage and cannot feel emotion. Some of those same kinds of tests are done on "psychics" with similar brain wave anomolies. When they aren't in hteir "zone," (for lack of better word - pardon my ignorance) these waves disappear. Sugar use goes up in the brain in both study groups as well. Evidence that points to its presense, but not proof.

Yo, decterlove;

Let me start with a general assessment of your post. Then I'll look at a few of your specific claims.

Your post is typical of the responses I get when I suggest that people's claims, especially those used as ways of getting money from others, be subjected to reasonable tests. It's basically a litany of fallacious excuses for why your favorite claims are supposedly not testable, along with the strong implication that it's appropriate to believe them anyway.

I find that, especially when it comes to people's most cherished beliefs, there are basically two kinds of people: Believers, who construct belief systems that meet their needs and then rigidly defend them to the death, and Truth-Seekers, who are willing to go wherever the evidence leads regardless of whether the resulting conclusions meet their needs.

Truth-Seekers are always looking for ways to test their beliefs that will not just confirm them, but will show them if they're wrong so they can be corrected. In science, this takes the form of creating and testing falsifiable hypotheses. In less formal discourse, it takes the form of submitting oneself to reasonable standards of logic by which one's beliefs can be tested, and possibly refuted.

Decterlove, your attempts to wriggle and squirm until you've weaseled out of having to subject your pet beliefs to any kind of rigorous testing place you firmly in the Believer category (and firmly out of the Truth-Seeker category).

I know that's a provocative statement, and I want to be fair to you, so here's an invitation to show that I'm wrong about this and you're really a Truth-Seeker:

1. Please specify at least one belief that is important to you and which you think can't appropriately be scientifically, or at least rationally, tested.

2. Are you open to the possibility that you're mistaken; that this belief is actually false?

3. If you have ANY belief about which you can't affirm that possibility of being wrong, can you acknowledge being closed-minded?

4. If you can affirm the possibility of being wrong about your belief, would you want to know whether you're wrong, or would you prefer to keep the belief even if it's an illusion?

5. If you're correctable (i.e., willing to discover you're wrong), can you specify some kind of test that would be able to convince you to drop the belief? Note that it would have to be a test that corrects for common human sources of error that tend to distort our everyday, nonsystematic judgment.

Now I'll address a few of your more specific points:



Decterlove, you would apparently like to assume that I'm unbalanced in the direction of being a "Left Brain type" simply because I use logic appropriately in realms where it's necessary to do so, rather than believing woowoo silliness on the basis of some twisted misuse of "intuition" or the inappropriate application of subjective feelings to the understanding of objective facts. This constitutes a gross misunderstanding of where I'm coming from as well as an implicit ad hominem attack.

While the left/right brain duality has some truth to it, and people do tend to prefer one or the other, we all have both aspects available to us, and a well-rounded person moves freely from analysis to synthesis, objective to subjective, etc. as appropriate to the situation.

Your defensive attempt to invalidate me by reducing me to a "Left Brain type", as if I'm some kind of thinking machine, would be laughable to those who know me far better than you do. For one thing, my entire philosophy and morality is based upon a recognition that we're all One (Holistic, Synthesizing, Looking at Wholes)! As a fairly well-integrated person, I move freely from Left to Right-brain and back, depending on the situation.

When dancing, making love, or doing art, I'm less analytical, more intuitive and subjective. Being overly analytical in those situations would be inappropriate, right? Likewise, when assessing the truth of claims about objective reality, such as whether psychic powers are real, or whether some treatment cures some medical condition, I'm very analytical, trying to screen out subjective factors that could only distort the findings. Being well-rounded is about being very subjective for some tasks, and very objective for others.

Those who are Believers rather than Truth-Seekers, when assessing claims about objective facts, love to muddy the waters by inappropriately involving their subjective feelings, or by conveniently mistaking their wishful thinking for "intuition", so they can believe whatever bullshit meets their needs regardless of the evidence. But tainting the assessment process thusly is no more valid that it would be to lecture your lover about calculus while in a love embrace. If you really want to know the truth about psychic powers, healing modalities, or whatever, you will use mostly "Left-brain" functions because they're the functions suited to such assessment. Trying to assess claims about objective truths subjectively makes as much sense as trying to hear with your mouth and eat with your ear.

You seem to be violating the yin/yang principle by setting up polaristic pairs such as Analytical/Synthesizing and Objective/Subjective as if they are in conflict with one another, so that we have to choose a side. In some cases, such as Rational/Holistic, the pairs aren't even opposites! Dig it, decterlove: it's not about being Left- or Right-brained; it's about being a fully functioning person who uses ALL of those gifts AS APPROPRIATE. And that, my friend, is holistic.

(Decterlove then muddies the waters with a rather lengthy and entirely irrelevant example about scientists putting artists and composers in the lab and commanding them to paint or compose.)

Decterlove, since we were discussing the assessment of objective claims such as the efficacy of psychic powers or healing techniques, your example using subjective aesthetic tasks such as painting and composing is just irrelevant obfuscation. It almost looks like you wanna confuse the issue rather than looking at it clearly! This impression is partly due to the fact that you've thus far failed to make a case for one single specific healing or divining practice that gives objective results (such as healing some condition) but isn't testable.

Again, I wanna be fair to you, so here's an opportunity to show that you really wanna look at the issue clearly by getting more specific: Please specify at least one or two woowoo beliefs that involve claims about objective outcomes, which you think aren't testable. Any claim about a technique being effective for healing will do, but they should be claims that are controllable or predictable enough that people make a living selling them (astrology, psychic powers, homeopathy, "energy healing", various machines, whatever). For each example you give that meets those criteria, I'll tell you how it can reasonably be tested.



Decterlove, here you commit the fallacy known as "attacking a straw man" (or, in gender-neutral terms, "attacking a straw figure"). You apparently cannot find anything wrong with my real position (that anyone who can consistently deliver a service upon demand has enough control over that service that it's testable), so you distort my position into something being "PERFECTLY CONTROLLABLE", which I neither said nor implied. Nothing is perfectly controllable, but anything controllable enough to sell to customers every day IS controllable enough to be available for testing. So far you have been unwilling to address that fact honestly, decterlove.



Again, to the extent that that's true of Art and Music, it's irrelevant to this discussion. But in fact, it's not even true of Art and Music to any great degree, because nearly all artists and musicians can do their thing on demand. That's how they make a living! Have you ever gone to a concert only to hear an announcement that the band wouldn't be playing because the muse didn't show up? Even creative acts like composing or painting can often be done, and done beautifully, on command.



If you'd like to offer proof of this non-physical reality, I'm all ears. I'm open to the possibility that it's real. Are you open to the possibility that it's not?

Re: "egotistical panderings", I've rarely seen anything more egotistical than the phony certainty of paranormalists who feel that their unsystematic judgment is superior to dozens or hundreds of well-crafted scientific studies. Talk about arrogant!

In contrast, the rational/scientific position is based on the humble recognition that we're all more fallible than we'd like to think and that therefore the search for truth requires procedures designed to correct for our universal human fallacies--procedures which people like you desperately try to exempt their pet beliefs from.



Woooeeee--the smoke's getting thick in here! By way of increasing clarity, let me translate that quote: "This psychic stuff is solid and specific enough to be useful for decision-making and real enough to charge money for, but too subtle to be tested. Those benighted Left-Brain types don't understand that, because they're not as sensitive and enlightened as those of us who aren't hobbled by anything so gross as reason or evidence". LOL!!!



I'm not hostile to that idea, decterlove, and if it's true I'd like to know it. Can you give some evidence of this "different reality"?

BTW, you may be interested to know that I used to believe in psychic powers myself. I stopped believing in them (as well as ghosts, UFOs, Bigfoot, etc.) as a result of becoming more open-minded and listening to BOTH SIDES of the argument, rather than just the fun and exciting true-believer stuff. To my surprise, the skeptics won me over because they had reasonable arguments and I was open-minded enough to change (unlike most paranormalists).



If you think Spirit is something separate from you that needs to be "contacted", you've lost sight of the essential Oneness, decterlove. So much for your Right-Brained Holism, Synthesizing and Looking at Wholes, LOL!

(Decterlove then goes into a lengthy discussion of "psychic" experience, in which he invokes a number of dubious constructs without evidence, apparently trying to make a case for saying that they're real enough to get paid for, but in a way that leaves them magically and conveniently untestable. LOL!!!)

(He then bores us again with a similarly lengthy discussion of dreams, composed of dubious claims mixed with truths which are irrelevant to the current discussion).

John Edwards is one of those ghouls who preys upon the bereaved by using the well-understood techniques of "cold reading" to convince the gullible that he has magical powers. Anyone can learn to do the same stuff, but most of us are too honest to do so. Googling "cold readings" will yield more info on the subject. (I've already spent too much time on this response to go into an explication of it here, but I will remark that no one ever went broke telling people what they want to hear, such as that they don't really die, LOL!)



Decterlove, my psychic powers are telling me that you have never even exposed yourself in any deep way to the explanations that skeptics adduce to explain "psychic" phenomena. Your talk about having a "TRULY OPEN MIND" is sheer hypocrisy until you do so, right?



Sorry, decterlove, but I'm lousy with cars and computers, and fiscal stuff is incomprehensible to me. So much for your stereotypes, LOL!



You have the cart before the horse here, when you try to explain the cause of presumed closed-mindedness before it's even been established that we who disagree with you are closed-minded!

I'm open to the possibility that I'm closed-minded (are you open to the possibility that you are?). If you think I am, please provide evidence so that I can see it. You do understand that my disagreeing with you isn't such evidence, right?

Ironically, if you assume that those who disagree with you are closed-minded in the absence of any evidence that they are, that's a closed-minded defense mechanism in itself! ("Whoever disagrees with me must be closed-minded, or else they'd see that I'm absolutely, certainly right!").

And please note that this whole discussion started with Clancy and me suggesting that some claims be tested. Notice that such a suggestion implies open-mindedness. If we knew for sure the claims were untrue, testing would be a waste of time and resources, wouldn't it? Testing makes no sense if you're closed-minded. Closed-minded people fear reasonable tests because the tests may prove them wrong. Conversely, those calling for fair tests must be open-minded. Since you're desperately trying to exempt your claims from testing while I desire tests THAT COULD PROVE ME WRONG, the evidence so far is that I'm open-minded and you're closed-minded.



That's the "Straw Figure" fallacy again. This is not quite what science is saying. It is saying that the burden of proof is appropriately on the claimant, and that claims about the objective universe which lack proof are highly unlikely to be true.



This is an even worse Straw Figure fallacy; science does NOT say this stuff. It simply says that humans everywhere are fallible, and it rejects beliefs that are not supported by good evidence or are clearly based on fallacies. Decterlove, your SHOUTED ranting above is about as honest and reasonable as a spittle-flecked fundamentalist preacher.



And again, the Straw Figure fallacy. You're setting up rationality as an easy target by grossly distorting what it really says, decterlove. Science does not say you're stupid or psychotic for believing in your favorite superstitions, just mistaken. And, science is always willing to look at any evidence you can adduce for your claims. But you apparently won't be satisfied until reasonable people accept your claims on the basis of crappy, fallacious evidence. And of course, if they did that, they wouldn't be reasonable people!



Whenever any society is in extreme turmoil, many people seek refuge in superstition. Thus, both religious fundamentalism and New Agey paranormalism increase dramatically in uncertain times. This is scary because it means we're less likely to approach our problem-solving rationally.



You're screaming again, Mr. Intelligent Human Being, LOL! Don't forget to wipe the spittle off the podium.



Those who actually make an honest effort to understand rationality are smarter than most. You can't fault science or rationality for people's unwillingness to use them properly, especially when you're one of those people.



Precisely because people aren't thinking rationally. They're following their feelings and their superstitious beliefs. A open-minded thinker would not support Palin any more than he/she would stay stuck in wacky New Age beliefs.
Blessings on ya!

Dixon

[decterlove]

hhh

Oh, geez....the Canyons of Our Cultural Divide......first I debate vitamins with Braggi and Sylph..............now I debate spirituality with Dixon and Sylph.

Look..........response to both posts.........you have a right to believe in anything you think/feel is true and live your life accordingly.........period.

We can argue a thousand points to death and if we were all old and in our eighties and sitting around in some park by the beach in Southern California.......it might be fun to do!

The very best minds on the planet are in disagreement on these paradigmic abysses...........I've posted links to Edward O Wilson's works and his intellectual adversaries before.......and I won't bother to do it again as only about 3 people are going to read this post anyway.

Believe what ever makes it worth your while to get up in the morning..........we will not know answer to any of these questions for real for maybe another 50 or 100 years.........and humans may STILL be debating the same very issues then........as they were in some circles 500 or a 1000 years ago.

it's like the Democrats and the Republicans........one can only scratch one's head and ask; why did they say that?

Indeed, Dixon...............if we were sitting on a beach, retired and sick of playing chess..............it would be really interesting to go thru it all point by point......but frankly, I don't have 50 hours to devote to the topic.

But points however............never quite add up to the whole.....it/life is a mystery and to condense the whole thing into one neat Cliff note it comes down to this...........

People who like, are persauded and feel good about the Western Scientific Paradigm that increasing has dominated the "reality" of individual and cultural thinking of the past few hundred years are eager to put the last few nails into the coffin of what they view as a half a million years of human delusion, ignorance, mysticism and fantasy. I understand that tendency/desire to reach Certainty...........we all crave it!

My argument, and others like me, is simply that there are way too many pieces that don't fit in that puzzle and aren't without value. They to me, like others, are Real Pieces! Science loves to just throw these pieces away, and deny they ever existed. Or do an Ad Hominem attack (as Sylph does to Edwards) on anyone who is defending/promoting or demonstrating these pieces. Call em Quacks, Creepos, or Terrorists and be done with it. Those pieces, I believe, have significant value and may be the VERY pieces that ultimately help us solve the now seemingly impossible problems of our times. (Do I really have to list them???? Science can certainly solve Environmental problems and any problem of a technical or mechanical nature.........it's social problems, spiritual problems and even some biological problems like optimal human health that at least in it's current application, fails to solve miserably...)

Now it is possible that Humans are just lagging so far behind scientific revelations that we will indeed tragically self-destruct out of sheer ignorance and in the stew of our own mysticisms. In that case, my questioning and undermining the Scientific Paradigm represents a real threat that should be battled on every front and I assume that is what motivates you Dixon to some extent as it has a few others on this forum in the past. (I'm thinking Willie LumpLump.....what a handle....is that from a Dicken's novel or something........good luck to you Willie, wherever you are...)

It's possible!

I simply don't believe that is really the nature of what we are going thru. Period. It's part of it.........we have to use the tools of Science in every way we can........to those issues where it is solely applicable........but it's not enough. That's the belief I come to when adding up all the little bits and gobs of data that my Mind/Brain has collected in 56 years and has access to. Could I be wrong? Am I biased and more partial to some solutions than others? Well, duh.

What I believe is that Science is at some point going to be faced with some indisputable evidence that it it just simply can't brush aside or stuff into some corner somewhere and it is going to have to expand and shift and alter it's methods of investigating phenomenon in some dramatic way. Whatever that looks like, it is not going to negate or invalidate any hard scientific discoveries or principles that have been demonstrated to be true so far.....but it is going to change our world upside in some dramatic way and hopefully offer some real insights into the subjects that Science so far just can not explain and refuses to even consider as valid to investigate.

Now I apologize, Dixon, if I seem to be just dismissing the very sound, thoughtful and solid arguments you brought up..........just as you easily dismissed anything I described that did not fit neatly into your paradigm. But frankly Minds Way better than ours have and still are debating these very same issues and the verdict is simply not in yet...and it's as much as an issue of time constraint than an unwillingness/aversion to explore some very interesting territories you suggested.

Below.........this to me Sylph.......and I know you are an intelligent. thoughtful, and well meaning person....is as bizarre a character assassination as the ones stemming from Republicans about Obama being a Terrorist. Just Plain incomprehensible!

I too, think Edwards is a wretched, evil ghoul who preys on the bereaved.
The shows are carefully edited to show his 'hits' which are the result of not particularly clever cold reading.

ps..........what I would like to see done in response to the original question of the thread would be to have an individual go to see perhaps 10 or 20 psychics........not the one's running the 800 numbers for Cs sake, and get a reading regarding the dynamics of their family of original. For example...is my father's "energy" abusive, supportive, loving or alienated. What is my relationship to my sister, my brother, my mother, etc.....was I close to my grandmother, etc.

Then, take those 20 readings and see if indeed there is a fairly accurate pattern and accuracy to the persons real family dynamics. Or do a hundred readings like this or a thousand with different people...all recorded on tape but none done in a cold, hard, skeptical "scientific" environment. Have the participants fill out a form describing their familial relationships first if you like.....even videotape the sessions if you like.....but don't try to do it in a goddamn test tube!

Now, I've gone to psychics who have hit dead on my extremely easy to define relationships with father, mother, brother and sister. Maybe my sister was a little vague but the first three were practically what I would have written down if I had to fill out a form.

Another study that could be done would be to create a form of personality traits that conforms closely to the way Astrology describes different signs of the zodiac. Make it a thousand questions long....so there can clearly be no mistaking whether or not a person is an aggressive personality, has a lot of patience, is meek in most situations, is extremely materialistic or sexual, dark, naive, good at math, relationships, art, design, etc. etc. ad infinatum.

Do that with a 1000 people and process the results. But these examples I propose would NOT BE CONSIDERED SCIENTIFIC ENOUGH FOR MOST MINDS LOCKED SOLIDLY INTO SKEPTICISM AND THEY WOULD FIND MEANS OF DISMISSING THEM! PLUS NO FUNDING WOULD BE AVAILABLE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT FIT INTO DOMINANT PARADIGM OF OUR TIMES.

Or you'd get the same thing that happens with vitamins. One study comes out saying Vit E is an excellent preventative agent for heart disease and 5 years later another study is done contradicting the first, indicating that it makes heart disease worse. And the Mass Media, of course, reports both stories incorrectly and adds its' toxic current bias the mix.

And we call this Science. And we call it unbiased. And we call it useful. A study was just released recently with a large number of participants that indicated the people with the highest salt intake consistently outlived the people who consumed the least salt! It's Woody Allen's Utopian Vision...........Chocolate and Lard ARE NOW GOOD FOR YOU AGAIN. The marvels of Science based Reality.

So......it comes down to..........believe what you want to believe and put your money down on any horse you think has the best chance of paying the dividends. You only get one shot, at least as the personality you came around in this time.

That's it for me....it really would be cool if we were sitting on a beach somewhere.........with ten years to kill....we could fill up the time pretty nicely.

[decterlove]

I did this with a $10. computer printout Astrological reading for my father when I was in high school. (as well as for myself, brother, mom and sister.) He denied it had any validity and correllation to his personality traits and we all laughed because it was dead on!

This sort of example however has been done millions of times in households across America and elsewhere and does leave a great deal of subjectivity into the mix. I think it has to be performed in a fairly organized fashion with large numbers of people to really be persausive but still just like other issues, the results will remain highly contentious.

How about this, Dixon
You supply a DOB, time and place of someone you know real well and we'll find an astrologer to do a reading and you can be the judge of it matches.
Of course it would be fun if it was someone everybody knows so we all can do the fact checking. But don'ttell anybody who it is beforehand.
Are you in?

[Sylph]

I'm sorry Dector, John Edwards is a fraud, plain and simple. Calling him a fraud is like calling Obama a terrorist?? You can do better than that! It's disgusting of him to make millions taking money from vulnerable people by lying to them. Really, do a minimum of research on this guy...he's not the real deal.
If he has the 'power', why can't he win Randi's million? Oh, I know, the contest is rigged and the laboratory environment would squelch the spirits....

This article explains the machinations of his show:
https://www.re-quest.net/entertainment/movies-and-tv/tv/john-edward/

Demystifying John Edward of Crossing Over

"I was on the John Edward show. He even had a multiple guess "hit" on me that was featured on the show. However, it was edited so that my answer to another question was edited in after one of his questions. In other words, his question and my answer were deliberately mismatched. Only a fraction of what went on in the studio was actually seen in the final 30 minute show. He was wrong about a lot and was very aggressive when somebody failed to acknowledge something he said."

https://www.time.com/time/columnist/jaroff/article/0,9565,199773,00.html
Debunking Seeing Without Sight
Most of the challengers to date have been minor players in the world of the paranormal: a nurse who practices therapeutic touch, assorted dowsers, medical quacks and psychic readers. All have failed. But despite Randi's specific challenge to several of the big guns, none has risked being exposed. Among those who have refused are Israeli psychic Uri Geller, French chemist and mystical homeopathy buff Jacques Benveniste, "Crossing Over" host John Edward and University of Arizona scientist Gary Schwartz, who claims to have validated Edward's claims that he hears from the dead. Noted psychic Sylvia Browne, who months ago brashly promised on the Larry King show that she would indeed take the Million Dollar Challenge, has since avoided Randi's calls and has yet to be heard from.

[Sylph]

Dectorlove, you are I are not necessarily on opposite sides of a 'great cultural divide'. I am open to alternative remedies, vitamins and supplements, if they work. The science of nutrition is evolving and constantly changing and we are getting valuable information from huge studies on real people that show us which supplements are useful and which are perhaps, harmful. I take vitamin D, now, after careful consideration. I believe it's best to get most of what you need out of food because supplements are too reductionist and may have an unanticipated effect. I have a brilliant friend who takes a high-priced resveratrol supplement. He's hoping they'll help him live longer. I'm waiting for the studies on this one.

At the risk of offending some, I think there are answers to the mysteries of the paranormal or astrology, both have failed to be proved legitimate and further, to show me or teach me anything of great value for living my life.

A skeptic is not to be written off as a dry, humorless, 'left-brainer'. We can be creative, passionate, feeling and thinking, Republican, Democrat, apolitical, conventional or unconventional, artists, musicians, dreamers and intuitive thinkers. We just want extraordinary claims backed up by extraordinary evidence.

I would love to see the 'indisputable evidence' that will 'change our world in a dramatic way'!
I'm ready...if it happens, I'm sure it will be on the Wacco board within hours.

[Sylph]

I may seem to be picking on John Edwards, and I am!
More about cold reading. Why do the dead seem to only be able to communicate as if they are playing charades...I am getting a 'J'...I see a picture of a heart, etc?
https://thinkingisreal.blogspot.com/...cold%20reading

[decterlove]

Well, that's sweet Sylph, and I agree. We just strongly disagree on this particular issue, and probably mildly disagree on others, and strongly agree on some.

I understand the natural arousal of skepticism in the past decade or two...life has gotten very, very strange in many circles and it's only natural that there should be a vector of people saying "Whoa, whoa...that's enough...We want to see proof for everything from this point on!" It is a "conservative" reaction though in some ways, and there's nothing wrong with a healthy conservative approach to some arenas.

I just simply don't live my life from that point of view. I take my experiences roughly at face value and draw the best conclusions I am capable of drawing from them. I have explored conceptual frameworks in the past that account for the excesses of the strict scientific mindset as well as the excesses of the woo woo, let's try anything mindset, that are rampant as well in our culture especially at the edges. The frameworks I have stumbled on allowed me to make sense of both worlds in a semi-integrated way.

I had the experience of being "born again", twice as a matter of fact, and then sitting in a big congregation listening to some dumb ass preacher talk about dinosaur bones being placed by the Devil to tempt Christians. Needless, to say, I ran for the door! I've had a broad range of experiences that fall into the spiritual "spectrum" and worked my mental and holy ass off in my twenties and thirties trying to make sense of them in a way that did not require one to go holy brain dead in the process. I was raised as an atheist and a New York intellectual with books around like Bertrand Russell's "Why I am not a Christian" so while I did not have any particular bias against religion, I also had the need for it to satisfy a certain "complexity", let's say, in order to have any compelliing interest or value to me. I am happy with my reality framework now and like anyone else who believes in anything, very much like you and Dixon, find it necessary sometimes to stand up and fight for its' validation.

I believe that areas which can't be explored or investigated from strict scientific means yet, ARE OPEN to legitimate exploration via the means of metaphor, intuition, meditation, maybe even sacred divination plants although I don't use them myself anymore, or simply making one's best guess on the matter. They don't have to be closed off with yellow tape like a "does not fit into my reality so I can not allow myself, and I can not allow you, to allow it, to exist" framework. This is the point on which you and I, and I and Dixon, I and others, and others and others, strongly disagree.

Life is complicated though and sometimes we just have to pick a way to go and just go that way for as long as it feels right to be sailing along in that boat. Let's face it, even Einstein sort of peaked in his twenties and thirties and petered out a bit in his attempt to form further, more elaborate "complete" theories later in his life.

Our five senses alone filter out a zillion impressions and perceptions a day out of the simple basic need to act on the most important stimuli around us. Perhaps our intellects must do the same. Seems like everyone on Wacco filters out the second "e" in decterlove, by the way, and replaces it with an "o".....it's amusing. Since it's not my "god-given" name....well, I can't get too upset about it, can i?

Dectorlove, you are I are not necessarily on opposite sides of a 'great cultural divide'. At the risk of offending some, I think there are answers to the mysteries of the paranormal or astrology, both have failed to be proved legitimate and further, to show me or teach me anything of great value for living my life.

[decterlove]

p.s. Sylph...this is precisely what I tried to explain in my extended post last week....yes! It's pictures!

Why do the dead seem to only be able to communicate as if they are playing charades...I am getting a 'J'...I see a picture of a heart, etc?