Post suggestions, ideas and feedback for SCEPCOP and this website. Propose and coordinate projects, plans, articles, site improvements, etc. Requests for new boards can be made here too.
SCEPCOP - Is there anything that can be done about those talking ads at the bottom of the forum pages? They are making me crazy and one of the non-talking ads keeps hijacking my screen and kicking me off the forum.
how about a forum for EVP/ITC ?? - I'm sure there are others interested in that aspect of afterlife research - what say the rest of you ??
LIFE - just filling the bits between birth, death and taxes
EVP is a form of ITC. ITC is 'Instrumental Transcommunication', which is essentially any form of electronic "communication from discarnate humans," and that includes EVP and communication via other electronic devices, such as TVs, etc.
ITC, in any form, is very, very subjective, as often the "communication" is very difficult to interpret objectively. Besides it being highly subjective in nature, the issue of whether or not discarnate humans are actually "communicating" via such mediums is largely impossible to substantiate, as the identification of the communicators and replication are largely unattainable.
Would it be appropriate to start a topic under:
Survival Science / Afterlife Research / Ghosts and Spirits
Discussions about Afterlife Research, Near Death Experiences, Out of Body Experiences, Spirit Communication, Mediums, Consciousness Research, etc.
Since 'Spirit Communication' would fit this sort of topic?
ah but like all things paranormal , there is "something " there and the work of finding out WHAT that something is continues , for any one interested may i recommend the following sites ( for general interest /background info - of course )
yes i agree that many examples of EVP/ITC are subjective - but for those willing to plough through - there are some very good examples also
and it is a interest that those of us who are unfortunate enough to have become disabled and thus unable to pursue active investigation of "claimed " paranormal locations anymore ** ( note i say claimed ,as out of all of the ones i have visited ,literally 3 or 4 ( see my posts in the personal experiences section ) have had any thing of interest - the rest being either not active IMO , "motive " jobs , or just plain BS - SEE EVEN US "BELEIVERS CAN AND MUST BE SCEPTICAL ) can indulge in in the comfort of our own homes ( vis you don't have to go to a location to get EVP )
and we must remember about ALL research , the words of one Albert einstein when he said " if we knew what we are doing - it would not be called research , would it ?? " - so if that's good enough for an indisputably great scientist ( oh yea there are some who I do respect ) - then its good enough for a humble "amateur researcher " such as myself
** i have issues with many groups and organisations connected with the paranormal and investigation there of , in that they are and in some cases have patently demonstrated themselves to be ,what i consider "institutionally disabalist " - in fact i mentioned this on a forum recently and was told quote : we don't want that sort of comment here - its too negative " ( er too near the truth one wonders ?? ) - but that's another issue - for another time and place
any ways like all things - go do your own research - draw your own conclusions and come back and discuss if so inclined
LIFE - just filling the bits between birth, death and taxes
I was inspired by reading on JREF about their Flying Pigasus and Stundie awards and I thought it would be a great to create our own to award to the most outrageous and scandalous attempts to use what I call Ocaam's Hammer - the simplest solution is not usually the best, it is always the best…no matter what." What I mean by that is this, a vid of Joe Nickell attempting to debunk human levitation on a History Channel special
Go to 1:10 and watch Shameless Joe Nickell employ what I call an "Implausible Plausible -
1. Trying to make something fit where it doesn’t fit. Every explanation MUST be a plausible and mundane one, even when it doesn’t fit.
2. It is better to be mundane and wrong than to be complex and right.
(See Ocamm’s Beard – the simplest solution isn’t always the right one)
3. Trying to fit a size 9 foot into a size 6 shoe.
I think it would be fun and it would give them their just comeuppance, hoist them by their own petards, as it were. I think we should think of some names like: The Bundy Award (as in Al Bundy), The Cyclops Award (get it, one eye = tunnel vision).
Debunkers think all UFO photos are fake,
especially the real ones.
I seem to recall seeing this somewhere, but can't find it now. I'd like to suggest a semi-permanent ban (say a month to 3 months) for people with 3 temporary bans, then after the 4th ban, it should be for life.
I have often thought about creating an Official Stundie Awards based on pseudo skeptical thinking. Where as the JREF Stundie nominations are usually based on out of context statements or semantics, mine would be based on the tactics that fake debunkers use. My adaptation of an essay written by Marcello Truzzi about pseudoskeptics and what patterns of behaviour I have noticed from these so called debunkers.
Pseudoskeptics will always use one of the following.
# The tendency to deny, rather than doubt a claim.
# Double standards in the application of criticism of a claim.
# The making of judgements without full inquiry.
# Tendency to discredit a claim, rather than investigate it.
# Pejorative labelling of proponents rather than dealing with the claim.
# Presenting insufficient evidence or proof of their claim.
# Assuming criticism of a claim requires no burden of proof.
# Making unsubstantiated counter-claims.
# Counter-claims based on plausibility rather than empirical evidence.
# Suggesting that unconvincing evidence is grounds for dismissing it.
# Creating strawman arguments in lieu of any admission of a claim or other arguments.
# Debate semantics and spelling arguments as a way of ignoring evidence, or admission of a claim.
# Use of ridicule or ad hominem attacks in lieu of arguments or point.
There maybe others that I have missed and including your Occams Hammer! But it's a start. hehe!!
For every tactic they use in a debate, they would get stundie points and these would be totalled to determine the most stundielicious psuedoskepticism quote or post.
The problem is, just from my debates with so called debunkers regarding the events surrounding 9/11 and with what I witness on the JREF CT forum, you would need super computers to work out those calculations alone.
Maybe whoever nominates a quote or post could calculate their own and others can verify it.
That way it is vetted by all and would give us a truly stundielicous post.
There is no such things as magic, just magicians and fools.
I think there is a wrong link to a site on the committee page
Bart Van Sichem De Combe
Dutch Translator for books of renowned telepathy scientist Dr. Rupert Sheldrake
Seminar organizer for Dr. Sheldrake
Masters in Communicaton and Translation Sciences
Ruby Rose Line Holistic Health Store
The link on Ruby Rose Holistic Health Store goes to this site, which is a Dutch site for domain registration: http://www.rubyroseline.com/index-en.html
I think it should go to another site, maybe this one (Dutch text): http://spirituelestartpagina-be.publiho ... lezing.pdf
SCEPCOP is going to have to address this one as I am totally in the dark.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests