View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

My correspondence with DragonCon re: participating next year

Discuss General Topics.

Re: My correspondence with DragonCon re: participating next year

Postby ProfWag » 25 Sep 2009, 00:51

ciscop wrote:
ProfWag wrote:
Scepcop wrote:BTW, a presentation might be in powerpoint, but a debate is usually just sitting at the table and talking, at least that's what I saw on youtube of the debates.

Okay, so just to be sure I'm straight on this--you've never actually participated in a real debate, but you firmly believe that you can out-debate one of the foremost authorities on skepticism in the world?


Profwag im not sure if you didnt know but.. EVERYBODY KNOWS DEBATING ON THE INTERNET IS THE SAME AS DEBATING WITH AN EXPERT IN FRONT OF A LIVE AUDIENCE
:lol:
i think it will be a lot of fun if every time he gets to talk he tries to plug his manifesto like he does here

Oh yes, I forgot how much alike those types of debating are. Not that he's even proficient at internet debates. To me, it appears he posts something then runs away. Not quite professional debate material.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54






Re: My correspondence with DragonCon re: participating next year

Postby Scepcop » 27 Sep 2009, 01:00

BTW, another thing.

It's silly of you skeptics to think that just cause Michael Shermer is on TV and radio a lot, that he must be smarter and more skillful than other skeptics. Just cause someone is on TV or interviewed by the media a lot does not make him smarter or more intellectual/intelligent. I've had far deeper/intellectual discussions in youth hostels and pubs than what I see on Nightline, This Week with David Brinkley, Lou Dobbs, Larry King, etc. You have to remember that the media is dumbed down and biased. They want you to be a simpleton freak who only lives to work, consume and mind his own business. The media preaches that all you need is a job and your life is fulfilled and happy (yet look at all the grumpy irritable overweight people in this country who live in fear and paranoia! obviously the media's propaganda is a lie and myth)

Look at Larry King for example. He sometimes asks the stupidest questions. Any average person can think up the questions that he asks. He is not smart or intellectual and he's admitted that he is very computer illiterate and doesn't know what "www" stands for. He's not on TV cause he's bright or smarter than everyone. He's on TV cause he's got the connections, personable charm and cause he gets ratings. That's it.

The smartest people do not get the best ratings. Dean Radin is far smarter than Michael Shermer, for example, but he's not on TV as much.

That being said, I want you all to know that I am 100 percent sure that I can outshine Michael Shermer in a debate, despite your glorification of him. And I mean that.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: My correspondence with DragonCon re: participating next year

Postby Scepcop » 27 Sep 2009, 01:10

ProfWag wrote:Oh yes, I forgot how much alike those types of debating are. Not that he's even proficient at internet debates. To me, it appears he posts something then runs away. Not quite professional debate material.


That's your opinion ProfWag, but obviously cause you don't agree with my points. Duh. Those who agree with me say this site is the best one against psuedoskepticism. So many disagree with you about my debating skills.

Haven't you seen these?

“Winston Wu has now written an essay that brilliantly and decisively rebuts the general skeptical arguments against the paranormal. This is among the best essays ever written on this subject, and deserves extensive study. The essay carefully moves through the entire skeptical lexicon of arguments, rebutting each in turn.

As it reveals the fallacy in each argument, it builds a crucial case against the whole skeptical approach to reality, suggesting that it is, essentially, a form of superstition that has the effect of filtering out data if it cannot be explained by accepted scientific theory.”

“Mr. Wu identifies a difference between healthy skepticism and the cynicism of blanket rejection of evidence.”

- Whitley Strieber, Author and Radio Host of UnknownCountry.com

“Your article "debunking pseudoskeptical arguments on paranormal debunkers" is a must read to any person who seeks to understand the nature of pseudoskepticism.”

“Your treatise "debunking pseudoskeptical arguments of paranormal debunkers" is the best refutation of pseudoskeptics' arguments, tactics and fallacies to reject the evidence for paranormal phenomena. I've recommended your article to every person that I know.”

“I'm Jürgen and I write you from Germany. Let me tell that your article about debunkers/pseudoskeptics of PSI is the best handbook to debate with them. I used to debate pseudoskeptics as a pastime, using the arguments and tactics of your article.”


Also these raving endorsements?
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/endorsements.php

I do not run away. It's just that you guys can't win point by point, so you resort to denial and ad hominem attacks, and so for me to repeat the same thing becomes a waste of time. Since you are denialists and fanatics, not skeptics, eventually the debate with you becomes a lowering of the margins of diminishing returns.

In a public debate however, when Shermer goes into denial, the audience will see that and that will make him look bad, like a fanatic rather than an objective thinker or true skeptic. When he can't win, he will have no choice but to deny reality or use ad hominem attacks. At that point, I will have won. It's as simple as that.

I've seen Shermer debate on TV and heard him on the radio too. He has no new tricks up his sleeve. He uses the same arguments that I've debunked years ago. So it's not like he can pull any surprises. So what can go wrong?

On Larry King Live, for instance, he used a version of the "Invisible Pink Unicorn/Santa Claus Gambit", a card which I can easily debunk with multiple points.

All I have to do is put him on the defensive and bring up points he can't counter, then it becomes obvious that he is in denial and that I have the upper hand.

Trust me. I can beat the chess computer up to level 5 and the scrabble computer up to the upper intermediate level (which most players cannot do), so I am very very good and sharp at tactics.

As to public debating, all I have to do is say what I would say on the internet. As long as I'm not interrupted, that's all I need to do. I just need to be prepared with notes, that's all.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: My correspondence with DragonCon re: participating next year

Postby Scepcop » 27 Sep 2009, 01:19

You guys are forgetting something else.

In the summaries of pseudoskeptical fallacies on the home page (the ones linked in the left sidebar), NONE of them have been countered or debunked by the pseudoskeptics. So, even if I just stick to summarizing those fallacies that I summarized, with explanations and examples, in THEORY I could still win. Nothing could go wrong, in theory, since they have no counter to them.

All I need is a few winning points to break even, or get ahead.

Lack of experience in public debates doesn't really matter here. My talent and knowledge makes up for it.

My strategy is foolproof, unless he can come up with any unprecendented surprises (is that what you guys are counting on?).

Besides, Shermer has only been in a few himself. He does mostly interviews.

And he has definitely NEVER debated someone who knows how to debunk pseudoskeptics, point by point. One time he debated James Fetzer about 9/11. The two were about even, even though I thought Fetzer's points made more sense. Fetzer is a great author and speaker, but he doesn't know debate strategy or attack/defense tactics. I do.

You see, as in the Christian Fundamentalism debate, I have spent many years studying all the arguments for and against. I know how they stack up against each other side by side. Therefore, all I have to do is take the arguments that I know the other side can't counter or will run away from, and focus on them. That will win the debate solidly. That's how I win debates with Christian Fundamentalists, and how I can win against PseudoSkeptics as well.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: My correspondence with DragonCon re: participating next year

Postby Scepcop » 27 Sep 2009, 02:28

Sorry skeptics, but your attempt at inducing fear in me that Michael Shermer is this tough "Mike Tyson" debater that I stand no chance against, has failed. I have the KNOWLEDGE and strategy to win against him, and KNOWLEDGE IS POWER, power that overcomes your attempts to induce fear in me and ridicule me. So sorry, you guys fail again.

Bottom line: I have knowledge and truth on my side. You guys don't. So you resort to psychological/emotional tactics.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: My correspondence with DragonCon re: participating next year

Postby ProfWag » 27 Sep 2009, 08:27

Uhhhhh yea. Okay.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: My correspondence with DragonCon re: participating next year

Postby ciscop » 28 Sep 2009, 04:42

Scepcop wrote:Sorry skeptics, but your attempt at inducing fear in me that Michael Shermer is this tough "Mike Tyson" debater that I stand no chance against, has failed. I have the KNOWLEDGE and strategy to win against him, and KNOWLEDGE IS POWER, power that overcomes your attempts to induce fear in me and ridicule me. So sorry, you guys fail again.

Bottom line: I have knowledge and truth on my side. You guys don't. So you resort to psychological/emotional tactics.


i dont want you to have fear of him
i actually wanna see you debating him

i do think that guy has his knives really sharp from debating all year long,
So much i wanna see you debating him that i already gave you advice on not debating the dragoncon guy and
not mentioning homeopathy and narrowing down to your strong topics so you see
i do wanna see you getting in the ring with that guy
and i already applauded your courage if you do it, i think thats really cool

here a link from michael shermer, his talk on TED (awesome videos)

his comedy timing sucks.. but his talk is really cool.. i love the part that he talks about white noise i think is great.
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: My correspondence with DragonCon re: participating next year

Postby NinjaPuppy » 28 Sep 2009, 05:05

Thank you for posting that Ciscop. It is a very good video and I enjoyed it very much.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: My correspondence with DragonCon re: participating next year

Postby NinjaPuppy » 28 Sep 2009, 19:33

SCEPCOP - Have you developed a game plan yet for your debate? I'm curious as to if you are limited to one topic or the paranormal in general. I know that you have posted your correspondence from them but I'll be darned if I can recall if any of the parameters are stated in that correspondence.

Has anyone on this forum ever seen a Dragoncon/Randi debate live?
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: My correspondence with DragonCon re: participating next year

Postby ProfWag » 28 Sep 2009, 22:37

Scepcop wrote:Sorry skeptics, but your attempt at inducing fear in me that Michael Shermer is this tough "Mike Tyson" debater that I stand no chance against, has failed. I have the KNOWLEDGE and strategy to win against him, and KNOWLEDGE IS POWER, power that overcomes your attempts to induce fear in me and ridicule me. So sorry, you guys fail again.

Bottom line: I have knowledge and truth on my side. You guys don't. So you resort to psychological/emotional tactics.

Speaking for myself only, it's not fear I'm trying to induce. Just hoping you're aware of what you might be getting yourself in to. it could get quite ugly if you're not prepared. You may even want to practice a bit with a live person. Just sayin'.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Previous

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests