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

Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Discussions about the James Randi Educational Foundation and its Million Dollar Challenge.

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby Kevin Kane » 05 Feb 2010, 04:14

ProfWag wrote:
Kevin Kane wrote:Harry Houdini wasn't a good scientist. Any guy who chains himself in a box to entertain others is probably a little off in the head.

Then so are all of the people who paid to see him do it.


People pay to see jackasses. Harry was an early winner of the Darwin Awards.


ProfWag wrote:Once again, I must clarify, skepticism is NOT a "belief system." It's a method of searching for the truth.


Science is a method of searching for truth. Skepticism is doubt-based reasoning. Please don't confuse skepticism with science.
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18






Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ProfWag » 05 Feb 2010, 05:19

Kevin Kane wrote:
ProfWag wrote:
Kevin Kane wrote:Harry Houdini wasn't a good scientist. Any guy who chains himself in a box to entertain others is probably a little off in the head.

Then so are all of the people who paid to see him do it.


People pay to see jackasses. Harry was an early winner of the Darwin Awards.


ProfWag wrote:Once again, I must clarify, skepticism is NOT a "belief system." It's a method of searching for the truth.


Science is a method of searching for truth. Skepticism is doubt-based reasoning. Please don't confuse skepticism with science.

Is your statement "skepticism is doubt-based reasoning" based on emotions or facts? If factual, please provide a reference as I'm not finding one.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby Kevin Kane » 05 Feb 2010, 05:54

Look up the definition of skepticism. If we described skepticism as a medical pathology, it would be: chronic mental doubt. Obsessive and compulsive doubting. Depressing, isn't it?

Science already provides a method of checking and double checking subjects. So why are skeptics needed?
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby NinjaPuppy » 05 Feb 2010, 07:14

Yes, the Wikipedia definition is very interesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skepticism
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby NinjaPuppy » 05 Feb 2010, 07:21

Since this topic has gotten very interesting, I decided to do a bit of reading and found this:

CRITICAL THINKING: To develop one's critical thinking traits, one should learn the art of suspending judgment (for example, when reading a novel, watching a movie, engaging in dialogical or dialectical reasoning). Ways of doing this include adopting a perceptive rather than judgmental orientation; that is, avoiding moving from perception to judgment as one applies critical thinking to an issue.

One should become aware of one's own fallibility by:

accepting that everyone has subconscious biases, and accordingly questioning any reflexive judgments;
adopting an ego-sensitive and, indeed, intellectually humble stance;
recalling previous beliefs that one once held strongly but now rejects;
tendency towards group think; the amount your belief system is formed by what those around you say instead of what you have personally witnessed;
realizing one still has numerous blind spots, despite the foregoing.
An integration of insights from the critical thinking literature and cognitive psychology literature is the "Method of Argument and Heuristic Analysis." This technique illustrates the influences of heuristics and biases on human decision making along with the influences of thinking critically about reasons and claims.

Examining your own personal views on a subject can be difficult. Especially if you believe that you are right.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby highflyertoo » 05 Feb 2010, 10:12

Michael Savage wrote a book called ''LIberalism is a mental disorder''....... I think Skepticism is a mental disorder.... Why?,because the skeptics are constantly searching for doubt

Ciscop is the classic example... skeptics say they will only believe the paranormal exists when written in a Science Journal.... So if ciscop was to witness and or experience a paranormal event(s) HE ciscop would dimiss the self witnessed experience as visual gobbledygook......

Come on skeptics,how about thinking for yourselves instead of requiring your parental supervision of the psuedo-scientists to keep you functional (non functional).
Randi was no researcher of the paranormal even though he tried half heartedly.... Shows over.
highflyertoo
 
Posts: 400
Joined: 26 Jul 2009, 09:57

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby Kevin Kane » 05 Feb 2010, 10:48

So "critical thinking" is the equivilant of sticking a misbehaving puppy's nose in the poop it made .. only to realize that the puppy will grow up to eat it's own poop.

PS: not a reference to "Ninja Puppy"
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ciscop » 05 Feb 2010, 15:04

Kevin Kane wrote:Harry Houdini wasn't a good scientist. Any guy who chains himself in a box to entertain others is probably a little off in the head.


hahaha thats funny
i believe that anybody that thinks Uri geller is for Real
is a little off in the head
i dont blame them.. must people are lay audience
i just cant take when lay audience become appologists for scammers
thats just plain dumbness
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: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby Kevin Kane » 05 Feb 2010, 17:52

Who is Uri Geller "scamming"? He's an entertainer. Eat your dinner and sit back and enjoy the show. He's not selling used cars. He's not selling drugs. He's not doing anything illegal.

If you don't want to believe Uri has psychic powers, that's your right. Personally I wouldn't make a religion out of disbelieving people.
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ProfWag » 05 Feb 2010, 20:20

Kevin Kane wrote:Who is Uri Geller "scamming"? He's an entertainer. Eat your dinner and sit back and enjoy the show. He's not selling used cars. He's not selling drugs. He's not doing anything illegal.

If you don't want to believe Uri has psychic powers, that's your right. Personally I wouldn't make a religion out of disbelieving people.

If you were the president of an oil company and Uri said he could detect underground oil fields, and you paid him money to find the oil fields, only to find out later he really couldn't do it, would you consider that illegal? I would.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ProfWag » 05 Feb 2010, 20:26

Ninja, I fopund the first sentence in your critical thinking definition quite initeresting which essentially says to develop critical thinking means one must suspend judgement. As a skeptic and a self-proclaimed critical thinker, I agree wholeheartedly with that, but it may come across a bit deceiving. When developing an opinion of something, then suspending judgement until all of the facts are in is vital. When it comes to psychic abilities, for example, I suspended judgement for quite some time until I became convinced myself that it probably doesn't exist. That doesn't mean that eventually someone could prove it's reality which is why we say "probably" a lot, but out of all of the evidence presented to date, I've judged and made my determination as of now. If someone shows us skeptics something we haven't seen before, then we'll re-look at the evidence.
Another point I'd like to make, we skeptics probably want psychic abilities to exist as much as, if not more than, non-skeptics. We just need to see valid, repeatable experiments.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby NinjaPuppy » 05 Feb 2010, 21:31

ProfWag wrote:Another point I'd like to make, we skeptics probably want psychic abilities to exist as much as, if not more than, non-skeptics. We just need to see valid, repeatable experiments.

Of course skeptics probably want psychic ability to exist more than non-skeptics because we non-skeptics already know it exists. :D
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ProfWag » 05 Feb 2010, 21:43

NinjaPuppy wrote:
ProfWag wrote:Another point I'd like to make, we skeptics probably want psychic abilities to exist as much as, if not more than, non-skeptics. We just need to see valid, repeatable experiments.

Of course skeptics probably want psychic ability to exist more than non-skeptics because we non-skeptics already know it exists. :D

Oh, is that it... ;-)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ciscop » 06 Feb 2010, 00:32

Kevin Kane wrote:Who is Uri Geller "scamming"? He's an entertainer. Eat your dinner and sit back and enjoy the show. He's not selling used cars. He's not selling drugs. He's not doing anything illegal.

If you don't want to believe Uri has psychic powers, that's your right. Personally I wouldn't make a religion out of disbelieving people.


see?? dont get mad when i call you ignorant
since most of the time
you dont even know what you are talking about
so let me enlighten you
Uri was contacted by an oil company to use his "psychic" powers and dowse for oil
he didnt find anything, yet he charged millions
Uri himself admits to that

thats why he will never admit he is a magician
if he does, he will end up admiting he is a fraud and lawsuits will follow
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: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby highflyertoo » 06 Feb 2010, 00:35

NinjaPuppy wrote:
ProfWag wrote:Another point I'd like to make, we skeptics probably want psychic abilities to exist as much as, if not more than, non-skeptics. We just need to see valid, repeatable experiments.

Of course skeptics probably want psychic ability to exist more than non-skeptics because we non-skeptics already know it exists. :D


See how ProfWag says that your experience is not valid. ProfWag calls every paranormal claim a fraud. Yep,ProfWag keeps needling the believers with the word ''valid''.......

ProfWag believes he is right in his wording.....
Last edited by highflyertoo on 06 Feb 2010, 00:39, edited 1 time in total.
Randi was no researcher of the paranormal even though he tried half heartedly.... Shows over.
highflyertoo
 
Posts: 400
Joined: 26 Jul 2009, 09:57

PreviousNext

Return to JREF / Randi Challenge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron