TheSkepticCanuck
Scholar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 87 If Randi lied or not is completely irrelevant. Either Sheldrake can do what he claims to be able to do, and prove it, or he can't. If he can, then whether Randi lied or not will have no meaning, as Randi will be one voice of dissension among a myriad of scientists who have studied the evidence and were able to verify it as accurate. This would make Randi's statements against it irrelevant. If he can't, then it also makes no difference whether Randi lied or not, as he will have failed to convince anyone else either. Either way, who cares.
__________________
The plural of anecdote is NOT evidence!
Please help to Stop Sylvia Browne
Please check out The Reality Check, Canada's premier podcast dedicated to science and skepticism.
''If Randi lied or not is completely irrelevant''........... How about we make up our own rules as it pleases our status , Oh that's exactly what Randi does.Statistics: Posted by highflyertoo — 04 Aug 2009, 16:48
]]>