This skeptic blogger girl has the wrong idea about this site

[ciscop]

hahahahaha
i am a skeptic linzee
im just pulling your leg cause i am having fun with this
hahaha sorry
wont happen again

[LinzeeBinzee]

[ciscop]

hahaha oh! whats the harm
you already made it to winston´s paper
and you also call this place a big pile of kookiness (something like that) so everybody said something and now the controversy is over ( )
fair is fair... right?

for the record
i hope when he adds me to his paper, has to be something with me using abusing logic and facts, like
not believing magicians are psychics, such as uri geller... like.. if he goes to magic conventions, hangs around with magicians, there´s methods in magic to do what he does, it has been seen on tv and youtube cheating, has made the cover of magic magazines, when there are control setting he has failed (johnny carson show) and no longer calls himself a psychic but a mystifier and distanced himself from the term psychic.. is.. because he is a MAGICIAN and is all tricks!

[LinzeeBinzee]

[Scepcop]

[Scepcop]

[ProfWag]

[ciscop]

[ProfWag]

[ciscop]

[Purple Scissor]

[LinzeeBinzee]

[ciscop]

linzee is gonna get mad at me!!
it was only a joke !!! let it gooo
i have always wonder where slang came from..
imagine if in 20 years.. it gets popular and out of the paranormal/skeptic realm
¨are you linzebinzing me?
stop it!

it is a joke
let it go guys
please let it go
there´s things like chevalry and being courteous to a lady

[Student of Sophia]

I think Lindsay might be displaying characteristics that are described in a paper I referenced earlier, . The author sort of goes undercover and investigates a skeptic organization.

"Recently, I have voluntarily and publicly “blown my cover” with them, and advised them that this paper was coming. I felt it only fair to give them some warning, but did not disclose this paper’s central premise."

And here is something that I think sheds a little light on Lindsay.

"Very often, their family or community has (almost forcibly) imposed this [faith-based] philosophy on them from a very early age; but then as they matured, they threw off this philosophy with a vengeance, vowing at a soul level never to be so victimized again. Less often, it appears that they have instead voluntarily and enthusiastically embraced, for example, a New Age cult, or have become say, a born-again Christian. Then after a few years, they become convinced of the folly of that infatuation with the same basic result. They throw off this philosophy with a vengeance, vowing at a soul level never to be so victimized again."

You once considered self a person of faith, correct Lindsay? You feel you were duped...that you were "completely credulous"?

"A person who has been duped frequently in everyday life might learn by bitter experience to be cautious and wary. The reaction of those who have joined PhACT is however more dysfunctional. They have been wounded at a deeper level, to the extent that what was purported to be a valid philosophy of life, and in which they were heavily involved, turns out to be empty and useless, even damaging, in their eyes. Thus, they gravitate to what appears to them to be the ultimate non-faith-based philosophy, Science. Unfortunately, while they loudly proclaim their righteousness, based on their professed adherence to “hard science”, they do so with the one thing no true scientist can afford to possess, a closed mind. Instead of becoming scientifically minded, they become adherents of scientism, the belief system in which science and only science has all the answers to everything.

This regrettable condition acts to preclude their unbiased consideration of phenomena on the cutting edge of science, which is not how a true scientist should behave. In fact, many “Skeptics” will not even read significantly into the literature on the subjects about which they are most skeptical. I have direct experience with this specific behavior on the part of a number of PhACT members. Initially, I attributed that behavior to just plain laziness, but lately I’ve begun to suspect that those individuals may actually have a phobia about reading material that is contrary to their own views. It seems entirely possible that they fear “contamination” from that exposure will eventually lead to (Gasp!) acceptance of the opposition’s position. Such scientifically inclined, but psychologically scarred people tend to join Skeptics’ organizations much as one might join any other support group, say, Alcoholics Anonymous. There they find comfort, consolation, and support amongst their own kind."

And you were 'de-converted' by the the movie Religulous, and now you'll be durned if you're gonna get duped again! You've made up your mind, and placed your bets. You're betting on scientism and you're not interested in evidence to the contrary because all that would mean to you is that you were duped again.

Did you stop for one second to consider a middle ground, or did you just shift from one extreme to the other during that movie?

[Purple Scissor]

Yes, I already said that to her, on her blog. But I did not know about the paper. Think about it Lindsay: Why are you so sure of yourself? You are not even interested in the evidence. A true skeptic would let themselves be agnostic. Only religious people are sure of themselves without having really studied the data. Do you think I am sure about something? You are wrong.

I believe in unbelief
And further, I believe it.
If you think that contradicts
It's cause you can't achieve it.

Okay, Lindsay, I guess I really cannot post this because it is too mean to you (that is, if you think it is mean then it would be mean). But just in case you change your mind, here is the draft (wiki formatted)

The '''Linzeebinzee syndrome''' is the condition wherein a skeptic, having stated that [[|no evidence exists]] then requests evidence. When evidence is provided, the skeptic then makes it clear that they are not actually interested in the subject to begin with.

The syndrome is named after Linzeebinzee of the XXXXXXX blog. Linzeebinzee, having manifested the syndrome, and having been called on it by Vinstonas Wu, was also the first and only skeptic to recover from the disease, stating: