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

Skeptics, Galileo and Newton were NOT one of you, so stop it

Discuss Science, Alternative Science and Suppressed Research.

Re: Skeptics, Galileo and Newton were NOT one of you, so sto

Postby NinjaPuppy » 01 Aug 2011, 02:17

Arouet wrote:
Craig Browning wrote:For that matter I can't see how anyone religious could be accepted by the skeptic's community given their dependence on faith


Wrong again Craig. Google Pamela Gay.

OK, now I'm confused. WTF has religious faith got to do with being a skeptic? Is this so called, "skeptic's community" you speak of, a state of mind? Because if it's not, then it's pretty much a just a group of like minded people with similar beliefs. Different groups have different similar beliefs. This sounds like stereotyping which I would think isn't a form of skepticism at all.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Skeptics, Galileo and Newton were NOT one of you, so sto

Postby ProfWag » 01 Aug 2011, 20:47

NinjaPuppy wrote:
Arouet wrote:
Craig Browning wrote:For that matter I can't see how anyone religious could be accepted by the skeptic's community given their dependence on faith


Wrong again Craig. Google Pamela Gay.

OK, now I'm confused. WTF has religious faith got to do with being a skeptic? Is this so called, "skeptic's community" you speak of, a state of mind? Because if it's not, then it's pretty much a just a group of like minded people with similar beliefs. Different groups have different similar beliefs. This sounds like stereotyping which I would think isn't a form of skepticism at all.

I think it's called stereotyping, Ninja. Something that happens a lot around here...
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3846
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Skeptics, Galileo and Newton were NOT one of you, so sto

Postby Craig Browning » 02 Aug 2011, 00:10

Stereotyping, eh?

An who isn't guilty of rolling their eyes the instant they hear someone claim to be a Psychic or to have encountered Ghosts, etc.? Hell, I'm someone that has a belief in such things and still roll my eyes in that 99% of those making such claims are 1,000 miles off base when it comes to anything that comes close to being "legit" -- that is to say, they've not walked through the qualifiers that negate plausible real world explanations around said encounters or perspectives. Even such check-lists are unfortunately fickle however, in that some seek to vivisect quarks when it comes to avoiding the possibility that such things may in fact, prove real.

Religious Faith has been given a safe-guard by the skeptics community which I find to be strange as all get out, given how often that same element attacks the viability of Prayer, as an example, when it comes to healing or guarding those in danger, etc. The skeptic's community have ripped the various tales of the bible asunder, painting them as being nothing but nomadic tales that echo far older but similar ideas that were simply personalized based on orator traditions. They have deliberately painted every single "miracle" in the Bible (primarily) as being a non-miracle including the most important miracle of them all, the one that defines what being a Christian is -- undeniable belief in the Resurrection not to mention the Day of Judgment. . . . depending on the particular type of Christian one may be these two main factors could include purest belief in the Gifts of the Holy Spirit which mirror most of the common Psychic abilities skeptics seek to discredit most. There is likewise the issue of the Rapture, the Anti-Christ's reign, and of course the actual age of the earth and everything being created as it is right now, at the snap of God's finger over a 6 day period of time.

Where's the skeptic that denies these things and can still call themselves a "Christian"? You can't be both! One perspective instantly negates the requirements of the other, it's that simple.

Yes, the majority of skeptics and pioneers into Parapsychology and its related departments were very much people of faith and more so, persons that sought confirmation of faith. The less they found in way of confirmation and the more carnal explanation that seemed to be extant, the more they found themselves loosing faith; especially as they found similar modes of corruption and duplicity within church history and its theology.

I am very much a man of faith but I can no sooner claim to be a "Christian' as such is defined in today's view, than I can be seen a "Satanist". As I've said numerous times, I am 93% skeptic and 7% believer -- I cannot close the doors on the power of faith, the reality of the miraculous, and the fact that I've been blessed in life as a witness to and of so many miracles -- a witness to phenomena & manifestations that will not allow me to let go of that last little bit of belief I've known for so long. Just maybe there are people of faith that are quite similar to me in this way, but I find it quite difficult to believe that they are devout Christians, Muslim or whatever other sect because of how so much of skepticism attacks and explains away said ideas. . . the majority of skeptics being quite militantly opposed to Christianity in particular due to personal psychological/emotional bitterness. . . but I'll not stroll down that aisle presently.

We cannot have it both ways folks. . . that is, if you aren't willing to consider what I've been saying all along; a mid-point between belief and the analytical isn't just plausible, it must exist. It's the very same "gospel" if you would, that's been taught for at least 3,000 years of human history and yet, we still haven't grasped the most elementary key to said wisdom -- to treat others as we would wish to be treated. . . go figure :lol:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Skeptics, Galileo and Newton were NOT one of you, so sto

Postby ProfWag » 02 Aug 2011, 01:45

Craig Browning wrote:Where's the skeptic that denies these things and can still call themselves a "Christian"? You can't be both! One perspective instantly negates the requirements of the other, it's that simple.

When I was a follower of faith, I was quite skeptical of bigfoot, mind-reading, and UFOs. In fact, I didn't believe any of it and, at the time, had little more to go on than common sense. Now, a few years later, my lack of belief in the paranormal is only cemented with the research I've discovered. I was quite a Christian in the day, but the belief in the paranormal, CTs, and any of the other pseudo-science things out there and believing that a god/christ exists are two completely different things. Just because Randi professes to be a staunch atheist doesn't mean all skeptics kiss his ass either and I really do wish you would stop putting many of us skeptics and Randi in the same category. Just because one votes Republican doesn't mean they can't wish guns were outlawed.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3846
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Skeptics, Galileo and Newton were NOT one of you, so sto

Postby Arouet » 02 Aug 2011, 03:57

So Craig I'm guessing you didn't google Pamela Gay.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Skeptics, Galileo and Newton were NOT one of you, so sto

Postby Craig Browning » 03 Aug 2011, 01:40

Arouet wrote:So Craig I'm guessing you didn't google Pamela Gay.


On my to-do list. . .

ProfWag. . . I can see what you're saying and agree with it but we are looking at selective skepticism and for that matter, a huge amount of common sense when it comes to some of the things you've mentioned. I personally leave the door cracked on some of these things, especially UFO issues and certain aspects of the Psychic world, Ghosties, etc. But I've quite critical of these things and anyone that wants to claim an encounter. As I said earlier, very few people go down a very simple check-list that can disqualify 90% or more of this type of thing. I guess you could say that I encourage Faith so long as it does not blind or deafen you and that you address all facets of belief with a strong dose of skepticism -- strong dose, not outrageous extremes which seems to be the course plotted by so many in the skeptic's movement these days. . . as I said before about lab rats and the ridiculous level of exposure they are given to prove that this or that causes cancer. . . well of course it does. The same is true, in my experience, when it comes to the whole psychic testing thing; not to mention the fact that there have been tests done by seriously respected individuals that sustain aspects of the psychic issue. It's unfortunately that such revelations end up costing them their reputation simply because they aren't playing by the established agenda rules.

On the level you've described ProfWag I can see where you could be a skeptic + a person of faith. My view and what I've been arguing, stems from the extreme ends of Skepticism and how such individuals would be singled-out as not being "true" skeptics. I've heard about this sort of thing from reliable sources as well as how they slowly nudge such folks deeper down the path towards atheism; so much so that it becomes a kind of re-birthing celebration akin to an AA sobriety date. . . But there is the other side of this issue based on the thing I've brought out. . . how can a Christian, as an example, believe in prophecy (which envelopes most of the biblical tradition) or the power of prayer when they negate these same abilities/skills in people that aren't of the Christian faith (and in some instances, those that identify as being Christian) Such would be a double-standard and at minimum, goes back to the primitive bias that only this particular deity is capable of producing genuine Miracles and all other such things are done by "Satan" or his equivalent in whatever pantheon we're dealing with.

There's just too many conflicts when it comes to such things, at least when it comes to how my mind perceives it all.
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Skeptics, Galileo and Newton were NOT one of you, so sto

Postby NinjaPuppy » 03 Aug 2011, 02:31

Scepcop wrote:Skeptics,
Galileo was not one of you, so quit that ridiculous claim to try to make yourselves look better. He was not an Atheist. And he challenged the establishment. You guys do NOT. And he believes in both science and God at the same time. You guys don't. So quit trying to make him out to be one of you. He would never have approved of the Randis and Shermers.
Same with Newton. He believed in God. None of these guys were Atheists.
So quit the scam.

I would like to revisit the original post here and put in my $.02.
I think that compairing anything from the 1500-1600s to today isn't going to be possible without noting the changes of the world/life/science in every aspect. Let's start with the word "skeptic". Did the word, defined as we know it today, even exist in the Italian and/or Latin language or whatever language used at that time? Looking for the answer is too deep for me and personally not interesting enough for me to even want to go beyond asking this question.

Second, religion back then was not as it is today either. Religion has morphed. Science has evolved. Definitions are updated according to world change. The comparison isn't an option on something like this forum. I'm afraid that Scepcop has missed the mark with his final comment here, "He (Galileo) would never have approved of the Randis and Shermers." It is a good example of a man of science who had religious faith but that's about it. The centuries inbetween make finding out the answer is what makes finding that answer pretty much impossible.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Skeptics, Galileo and Newton were NOT one of you, so sto

Postby ProfWag » 03 Aug 2011, 17:48

Craig Browning wrote:On the level you've described ProfWag I can see where you could be a skeptic + a person of faith. My view and what I've been arguing, stems from the extreme ends of Skepticism and how such individuals would be singled-out as not being "true" skeptics. .

Yea, there are extreme ends to most everything. Extreme skepticism, belief, religion, superstition, and so on. I, myself, have based my conclusions and beliefs on personal experiences and would think that most people do the same which could very easily mean a person believes in one thing and not another.
And Ninja, good points on your post! Hope you're doing better today!
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3846
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Skeptics, Galileo and Newton were NOT one of you, so sto

Postby NinjaPuppy » 03 Aug 2011, 22:06

ProfWag wrote:
Craig Browning wrote:On the level you've described ProfWag I can see where you could be a skeptic + a person of faith. My view and what I've been arguing, stems from the extreme ends of Skepticism and how such individuals would be singled-out as not being "true" skeptics. .

Yea, there are extreme ends to most everything. Extreme skepticism, belief, religion, superstition, and so on. I, myself, have based my conclusions and beliefs on personal experiences and would think that most people do the same which could very easily mean a person believes in one thing and not another.

Nicely put. I agree that we are all a product of our personal experiences, level of education and upbringing. It all comes down to different strokes for different folks, when it comes to beliefs and personal experiences. One persons everyday life can be another persons Jerry Springer marathon.
ProfWag wrote:And Ninja, good points on your post! Hope you're doing better today!

Thank you. I do believe that the worst is over.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Skeptics, Galileo and Newton were NOT one of you, so sto

Postby Arouet » 03 Aug 2011, 22:42

NinjaPuppy wrote:Thank you. I do believe that the worst is over.


good to hear!
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Previous

Return to Science / Alternative Science / Suppressed Research

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron