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 NinjaPuppy » 29 Jan 2010, 01:50

Let's examine exactly what was written, shall we?
ProfWag, let me ask you; how does it feel to be on the side of someone such as ciscop? A snot-nosed, foul-mouth with an 8-bit mental capacity? How does it feel to have him speaking for you, for your causes, for skepticism? How does it feel to be on the side of pharmaceutical representitives, helping to poison and addict children, defrauding the public with false-alarms, exaggerated symptoms and hyped up claims of efficacy? And doing immense damage to health and society while skeptics worry about woo-woo. You've already see what "skeptical thinking" has done to ciscop. A "rationalist" who can't think straight? Is that how ProfWag will turn out? How does it feel, man?

Kevin Kane seems to be calling all skeptics, "snot-nosed, foul-mouth with an 8-bit mental capacity". I get this from the previous sentence ending, "on the side of someone such as ciscop". Of course I may be wrong here but that's how I take it.

I have already given Kevin Kane the opportunity to tell us why he is really here but he either skipped my post or ignored it. I guess he doesn't want to say.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44






Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ProfWag » 29 Jan 2010, 02:51

NinjaPuppy wrote:Let's examine exactly what was written, shall we?
ProfWag, let me ask you; how does it feel to be on the side of someone such as ciscop? A snot-nosed, foul-mouth with an 8-bit mental capacity? How does it feel to have him speaking for you, for your causes, for skepticism? How does it feel to be on the side of pharmaceutical representitives, helping to poison and addict children, defrauding the public with false-alarms, exaggerated symptoms and hyped up claims of efficacy? And doing immense damage to health and society while skeptics worry about woo-woo. You've already see what "skeptical thinking" has done to ciscop. A "rationalist" who can't think straight? Is that how ProfWag will turn out? How does it feel, man?

Kevin Kane seems to be calling all skeptics, "snot-nosed, foul-mouth with an 8-bit mental capacity". I get this from the previous sentence ending, "on the side of someone such as ciscop". Of course I may be wrong here but that's how I take it.

I have already given Kevin Kane the opportunity to tell us why he is really here but he either skipped my post or ignored it. I guess he doesn't want to say.

Perhaps I took it too personally. I was born and bred a yankee and still am at heart, but since I live in the south, when people down here talk crap about "northerners, well, they are referring to me regardless of where I currently live or what I do for their society down here. If one wants to attack my point of view because of errors or my lack of knowledge about something, then fine, attack away. But I don't think it's right that people attack me JUST because I'm classified as a "skeptic," regardless of why or how I became that way or because I have feelings for other people. I'll try to just keep my mouth shut best I can.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby Kevin Kane » 29 Jan 2010, 05:01

Did James Randi catch Sylvia Browne's financial corruption? Sylvia choose to break the law, and was caught by the law. Her bad advise in the kidnapping case did not affect the parent's pursuit of the victim. I personally wouldn't take her advise, but others are free to. Who's responsibility is that? Should we censor everything Sylvia says? No. Should we let Randi be the thought police? No.

But you're certainly welcome to blow things out of proportion because celebrity cases deserve special attention. TV is sending special messages to people to give their life purpose and meaning. I understand.

And if ciscop doesn't like being insulted, he probably should refrain from insulting others. I expressly asked that board rules be enforced, but was ignored.
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ProfWag » 29 Jan 2010, 05:32

Kevin Kane wrote:Did James Randi catch Sylvia Browne's financial corruption? Sylvia choose to break the law, and was caught by the law. Her bad advise in the kidnapping case did not affect the parent's pursuit of the victim. I personally wouldn't take her advise, but others are free to. Who's responsibility is that? Should we censor everything Sylvia says? No. Should we let Randi be the thought police? No.

But you're certainly welcome to blow things out of proportion because celebrity cases deserve special attention. TV is sending special messages to people to give their life purpose and meaning. I understand.

And if ciscop doesn't like being insulted, he probably should refrain from insulting others. I expressly asked that board rules be enforced, but was ignored.

May I ask what I blew out of proportion? You asked what made skeptics and I responded with my story. Sylvia's was just the start. There are many more besides Sylvia.
Should we just let people say and do whatever they want regardless of how many people get hurt? I say no, but even though I have 24 years in the military, I'm a pacifist. You may disagree with me and not give a crap about people. That's fine for you but not fine for me.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby Kevin Kane » 29 Jan 2010, 06:06

I've stated why I am here at least twice, but to be short .. I'm here to debunk skeptics.

It's actually the name of the forum.

If skeptics (as a group) don't like what I am saying, they can go to JREF or other skeptic fanboy sites to cry. I'm just one person, these are my opinions, experiences and observations.


Should we just let people say and do whatever they want regardless of how many people get hurt?


If it's legal, people can say and do whatever they choose. I'm all for freedom of thought and action. If Sylvia Browne is bugging you, you can express it to someone who gives a crap. If James Randi annoys me, I can do the same. We don't need any James Randi's to tell us what to think or do.
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ProfWag » 29 Jan 2010, 06:14

Kevin Kane wrote:I've stated why I am here at least twice, but to be short .. I'm here to debunk skeptics.

It's actually the name of the forum.

If skeptics (as a group) don't like what I am saying, they can go to JREF or other skeptic fanboy sites to cry. I'm just one person, these are my opinions, experiences and observations.

Just to be clear, I haven't asked you why you are here. I really don't care. So fine, you're here to debunk skeptics. I'm here to learn from both skeptics and those who are not so skeptical. Why would you care why I am here? You shouldn't.
I actually enjoy reading your posts when they contain correct information. If there is invalid information, I think readers should know the whole story so as to formulate their own opinion with more valid facts.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ciscop » 29 Jan 2010, 07:06

Kevin Kane wrote:
ProfWag, let me ask you; how does it feel to be on the side of someone such as ciscop? A snot-nosed, foul-mouth with an 8-bit mental capacity? How does it feel to have him speaking for you, for your causes, for skepticism? How does it feel to be on the side of pharmaceutical representitives, helping to poison and addict children, defrauding the public with false-alarms, exaggerated symptoms and hyped up claims of efficacy? And doing immense damage to health and society while skeptics worry about woo-woo. You've already see what "skeptical thinking" has done to ciscop. A "rationalist" who can't think straight? Is that how ProfWag will turn out? How does it feel, man?

Because I don't want to know. I don't care and I'd hate to be a skeptic. I'd hate to be a ProfWag.


Worrying about woo? Wtf .. How childish is that?

Let's call "Woo" what it really is ... FREE THOUGHT.

Woo is Free Thought.


You are right, you are free of thought
any thought... my pet rock has more thoughts than you

by the way
Wag is a skeptic
I am not a skeptic, i am a Cynic
i make fun of dumb people, i love to do that
everything is a joke when you are funny :lol:
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 » 29 Jan 2010, 10:54

.
Listen, ciscop, I know you have come here to defend skeptics, but this place is called "Debunking Skeptics".

An entirely different meaning.

Image

That is not logical.
You say you are debunking skeptics, yet skeptics are the debunkers.
You are not the Randi?
Must analyze.
Error! Error!
Faulty! Faulty!
Must sterilize.
Ster .. i .. lize
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ciscop » 29 Jan 2010, 15:37

Kevin Kane wrote:.
Listen, ciscop, I know you have come here to defend skeptics, but this place is called "Debunking Skeptics".

An entirely different meaning.

Image

That is not logical.
You say you are debunking skeptics, yet skeptics are the debunkers.
You are not the Randi?
Must analyze.
Error! Error!
Faulty! Faulty!
Must sterilize.
Ster .. i .. lize



damn... another joke that fell flat
things like this makes me realize that somebody has to be smart to be funny
and you arent
not even close...
but thanks for trying
let the professionals (i get paid for being funny) do the jokes
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 » 29 Jan 2010, 22:01

ciscop isn't a Star Trek fan?


Heretic!
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby highflyertoo » 30 Jan 2010, 00:32

I will not be assimulated
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 ciscop » 30 Jan 2010, 01:51

Kevin Kane wrote:ciscop isn't a Star Trek fan?


Heretic!


startrek is so boring
thats for american nerds

but sign me in for seinfeld :-p
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 NinjaPuppy » 30 Jan 2010, 05:44

highflyertoo wrote:I will not be assimulated

Is that a Star Trek reference?
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby NinjaPuppy » 30 Jan 2010, 05:47

Ciscop - I couldn't stand Seinfeld when it first came on TV. I realize now that it has it's place in pop culture.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ciscop » 30 Jan 2010, 09:31

NinjaPuppy wrote:Ciscop - I couldn't stand Seinfeld when it first came on TV. I realize now that it has it's place in pop culture.


yeah!
sure it does
cant get enought of George Constanza
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

PreviousNext

Return to JREF / Randi Challenge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest