This site needs to be renamed

[leo100]

NinjaPuppy

Yes i would say their are extremes. I would say James Randi is a pseudoskeptic because he seems so certain that all paranormal phenomenon don't exist.

[NinjaPuppy]

[brett]

purple scissor opined : Brett.... We should make a rule on this forum: no allcaps. It looks like woo

er excuse me ?? - i use CAPS to emphasise things - and bold to denote really important things how in hell does that make my writing sound like woo ?? - don't forget i AM a woo according to most of the skeptical people on this site - so no biggie there

what is important is the CONTENT of a post ,not how it is written - I could be pedantic and comment on a lot of peoples spelling , but i am not so arrogant as to do so - so long as i can understand what they write - does it really matter ??

if you don't like the way I write - don't read my posts - simples eh ??

as we say here " I am like sooooooooooooo not bothered ""

[Purple Scissor]

[brett]

[Purple Scissor]

[Scepcop]

[ProfWag]

From what I've seen in this forum, anyone who doesn't believe in the paranormal or things unproven is a pseudo-skeptic. At least according to the forum's creator.
And why do I need to criticize Shermer, Randi, et. al? Do you criticize Gage, Radin, etc.?

[quantumparanormal]

I agree with the name change. I consider myself a skeptic, although I do believe in some forms of paranormal phenomena. Being skeptical but capable of reviewing the data no matter where it leads (whether for or against a paranormal or non-paranormal conclusion) is the sign of a good skeptic. "Debunking skeptics" implies you are out to discredit any and all skepticism, something I don't agree with. Skepticism keeps us from jumping to irrational conclusions, ones not based on empirical research.

[Purple Scissor]

[quantumparanormal]

[Purple Scissor]

[quantumparanormal]

[quantumparanormal]

[Scepcop]