Chars. and Behaviors of PseudoSkeptics - a critical review

[Arouet]

Ok, let's do another one.

3) Carries a fixed set of unchanging beliefs which all data must conform to

I'm guessing this is a code for materialism so I'll wait til I get to that one a bit below.

4) Are not interested in truth, evidence or facts, only in defending the views of establishment

For this one I'll use Penn and Teller:

Here are some topics they've taken on:

1-05: second hand smokeL Critiques concerns on second-hand smoke and attempts to ban it,
1-07: bottled water: challenging claims on the quality of bottled water
2-04: the war on drugs: Questions the constitutionality of the "War on Drugs"
2-05: recycling: Criticizes certain aspects of recycling, including the increased cost of particular forms of recycling and the detrimental effect that certain forms of recycling have on the environment, and debunks numerous myths regarding landfills. Notes that people are generally more than happy to recycle and that it is the system that is flawed.
2-09: death inc): Offers criticisms of many claims made by businesses which offer funeral services, and investigates the validity of cryonics as a method of preserving a human body.
3-02: family values: Argues that the "traditional" husband-and-wife family is a relatively recent creation. Supports gay marriage and polyamory, and also attacks the idea that homosexuals can be "cured".
3-06: College: Opposition to political correctness, speech codes, and diversity requirements, especially on college campuses.
3-09: Gun control: Against gun control laws.
3-11: Endangered Species: Criticism of the U.S. Endangered Species Act and highlights its unintended consequences.
3-13: The best (Criticism of people who engage in the pursuit of needless luxury.)
4-02: Prostitution: Pro-legalization of prostitution. Criticizes various viewpoints on the dangers of the profession, and points to the dangers of it not being legalized.
4-03: the Death Penalty: Argues against capital punishment, from pragmatic and moral viewpoints.
4-05: Ground Zero: About the dragging of feet and design mistakes by the LMDC in rebuilding at the World Trade Center site, the lack of family and public approved memorials to the 9/11 attacks, the impact on local business, and how the whole process has been co-oped by people out to make money.
7-07: Taxes: Penn & Teller attack the tax system of the United States as complex and unfair. The guys visit the halls of Congress in search of a legislator willing to discuss America's tax system.

Full disclosure: I haven't watched most of those episodes (got the descriptions from wiki.) But those topics are all P+T arguing against government or "establishment" policies.


5) Cannot think in terms of possibilities, but views their own fixed viewpoints as constant:

Ok, I've already shown examples against this in other threads. In the Randi video thread I pointed out Randi in the video saying that he accepted that psi might be possible. I've posted Michael Shermer saying similar things about Bigfoot. Both men have explicitly stated that they are open to the possibility of these things, but need reliable evidence to believe it.

6) Are willing to lie and deceive to preserve establishment views, which are their true master:

Well, I don't know what he's getting at here. I know Randi lied about project Alpha, but that was the point. I don't know what examples Scepcop is alluding to here. If they lied, they shouldn't have. I do know that I've seen Randi post corrections to past mistakes. I think in general people are too quick to resort to the "lying" accusation, on both sides. Most of the time, when someone makes a statement that turns out not to be true, when dealing with these types of topics, its a mistake, rather than deliberate deception. There may be examples of pure dishonesty, but I don't know of them off hand. I'd be happy to discuss them if provided with examples.


Ok, that's good for tonight.

[Craig Browning]

[Arouet]

[really?]

[Craig Browning]

You're making some big assumptions about blinders, nor do I see the world as black and white. You are making assumptions based on stereotypes which, I have been arguing on this site, are largely unfounded. There is a characature of the "evil skeptic" presented on this site (and by many proponents) which is as unjustified as most stereotypes

But what about the negative assumptions skeptics make towards believers or supporters of the paranormal?

We can't have it both ways, which is what most humans want... you can't put me in this niche but I can put you in this one over here...

Honestly, "public opinion" as to what niche folks go into is always based on the antics of the minority -- the negative type-cast. I have many friends, several of note, that are part of the Skeptic's Community and I can honestly say that I have a healthier and far closer rapport with them than I do most of those involved with the shut-eye world of the paranormal or New Age life (I just don't do airheads and stupid really well no matter the source).

Now when it comes to "Evil Skeptics" you guys need to thank churchianity and it's various cousins, they are the source by which your obvious alliance with Satan comes from... at least in part. The small fragment that does not come from this arena comes from within your own world via the various assholes out there that, like their christian counterparts, try cramming their own gospel down everyone's throat with no exception. So, as the say, get your own house in order before casting stones... granted, this is what all groups need to do but it's so much easier to deal with the splinter in the eye of others vs. the beam in our own, isn't it?

Now when it comes to some of the responses you make in my previous post... I agree with 95% of it... if you can "challenge" a person to "think" and mull over "possibilities" then there is a chance of actually helping them. But you must be able to "speak their language" as it were, and I think we are both in agreement as to what that means. When I talk about working WITH people based on their customs and beliefs I'm not saying to cosign or even help perpetuate a delusional circumstance, only pointing out that sometimes you do need to prescribe the proper placebo in order to get affirmative results. The more you inner-act with such individuals and generate trust (by way of honoring their beliefs) the more they will open up to you and how you see things, which is the "chink in their armor" so to speak, that allows "me" to challenge them at the critical thought level.

Yes, it's a slower boat but it is likewise a method of approach that allows the transformation to happen based on the person's own course of decision making rather than feelings of persecution, which is how most people feel after an encounter with the Shermer & Randi type personalities. For that matter, you can see how the modified and "softened' approach being used by Banachek and even Derren Brown in the UK, seems to come with far less resistance or public challenge; most folks like these guys where you can't say that for Randi, Joe Nichols, etc. (hell, there are skeptics out there that avoid these clowns).

I always encourage HEALTHY Skepticism be it through my shows or when I'm doing classes in Psychic Development; this includes the idea of "clarity", challenging our perceptions so to speak. In simple terms I manifest something the average person would perceive as "miraculous" and then challenge my students to find answers.

NO, I'm not "exposing" magic secrets per ce but I am encouraging the eager believer to look beyond the manifestations they may encounter, so as to see what the real cause might be around an effect... and life is filled with such scenarios. But in order to honestly help these people to THINK, I must speak their language and appeal to their fantasy in order to avoid resistance. One of my tools for doing this is revealing how many of the explanations offered by the skeptics are 100% correct and then I show them why, using "logic" in the process of evolution so to speak, and thus showing how ALL magic has its very simple, carnal truths. In using this approach I'm able to reveal why real Psychics exist to the skeptical while likewise helping the believer better understand what that idea (being Psychic) actually means... removing the boogieman factor.

In other words, we're speaking the same language just approaching things in a very different way.

[Arouet]

[Craig Browning]

I don't know what "house" I'm in. I'm not a member of any of these organizations (unless you count signing up for internet forums and some email lists). Even if I was, I wouldn't be in a leadership role (no time!). But on these forums I will call out BS where I see it, from either side. I don't just agree with skeptics because they're skeptics. And I don't just disagree with proponents because they are proponents. I'll take each issue as it comes. And when I see inappropriate stereotypes from either side, I'll often speak up (not every time, I mean, it happens so often on these forums that I'd quickly become shrill if I did it every time!).

Kudos!

As I believe I’ve mentioned somewhere around here, I’ll play Devil’s Advocate in either camp even when I agree with the tenets of what the other person is arguing. I do this in order to learn but likewise, it’s a way by which I can encourage them to widen their view on things and take the concept of “critical thought” a bit further down the line so they are capable of seeing the more complete portrait of the forests rather than the few trees blocking the view.

Since my early teens I have striven to learn as much as I can from both, the esoteric side of things as well as the more analytical side. To my mind this is the only way to be truly fair in my judgment but more so, when I actually PARTICIPATE vs. viewing things scholastically, I’m able to cultivate a bit of actual “wisdom” when it comes to the issue as a whole. Unfortunately, both sides tend to change the rules and definitions here and there, so as to use linguistic/sematic manipulations ala the classic two-bit lawyer; antics that perpetuate the tension rather than bringing about acceptable resolution… that middle ground area I keep referring to that really does exist.

I'm honestly not very clear on where you stand - ie: whether you believe in the paranormal or not, or rather just have a reverence for the feelings of wonder and magic that can be induced in some people using various techniques.

All of the Above!

I do have a genuine belief that comes from two factors;
a.) Personal Experiences
b.) “Critical” Theory


Personal Experience is the one most people can understand and most skeptics love to take a dump on, belittle and make claims that the person with the testimony is simply misremembering things. It is the least “provable” aspect of faith and at the same time, one of the most concrete arguments of perspective you will get form a believer.

Critical Theory is what I’ve been trying to reveal in this and other threads and it is admittedly, a difficult thing for most folks to wrap their head around, especially those that aver logic oriented by nature. The theory itself came about in the early 1980s as I started seeing parallels between the theatrical art of Mentalism and Hermetic philosophy. As I dug deeper I found similar parallels within the Rosicrucian, Shamanic and Kabalistic tradition as well as the auspices of the Roma (Gypsy) culture. In simple terms these shared formula include (but aren’t limited to) the following;

1.) Memory/Recall Development – mnemonics – this would include training courses in general Awareness that is quite similar to what Law Enforcement as well as what Mental Health professions must go through and then some.

2.) Subliminal Communication – this includes everything from understanding body morph factors ( body shape, facial reading methods, movement/body language, etc.) to more deliberate “application” techniques akin to NLP/Suggestion, Conversational Hypnosis and even “codes” that can be used to convey information to other “members of the collective” in a covert manner. For an example, the multiple meanings behind Hebrew characters and similar associations found in other cultures outside the Romanized world; the Druids as well as Native Americans likewise had some unique forms of “sign language” that could be employed based on how they held their hands & fingers against a staff.

3.) Higher Mental Function Development – which rings a very sad note in human history actually, in that the “advancement” of the public school system (particularly in the U.S.) resulted in a slow phasing out process of certain exercises tied to this “mystic” tradition. In simple terms this category centers on training the brain to focus and process on demand. The most rudimentary exercise would be simple mathematic computation which likewise tied into music, which is a very mathematical art form. The Druids of modern time requires all members of the order to be able to play at least two different kinds of instruments such as a Violin and Reed or similar contrast… they likewise require their neophytes to be able to speak no fewer than three languages fluently, which goes hand in hand with mystic training and development… as well as intellectual development from within the scholastic and monastic environs i.e. challenging the brain to learn complete new and contrasting disciplines on a 3-5 year rotation. Not only does this exercise aid one in the Mental Function area, it adds to your general versatility and as has been recently discovered, adds to one’s longevity and quality of life… then again, most all wizards and wise ones (women) were known for being “ancient” in years, weren’t they?

4.) Environmental Awareness – is quite established on the ancient scale but is something echoed as recently as the mid-20th century by the legendary Edgar Cayce., but it can be found as part of Yogic and Buddhist Meditation as well as TM… the act of sensitizing one’s self to the finest of “vibrations” surrounding you. Though this sounds New Agey and silly, stepping back a few paces and thinking about bio-physics (ideomotor influences) as well as the previously noted awareness training allows you to bring this idea into a more “mundane” or “critical” perspective… the more aware we become when it comes to our surroundings the more “sensitive” we are to the subliminal or subconscious influences that our conscious mind is typically not aware of… it ignore it. But when you have been trained to be aware/sensitive or even born with a nature penchant towards such things, you suddenly find yourself with the ability to “READ” things. That would include the more metaphoric sense of perspective when it comes to positioning of things from a given horizon & center-line; colors, the type of thing you are looking at, direction of movement if applicable, etc., etc. {BTW I have a book series of which Book One has already been released (though not presently available) and Book Two is planned to be out next spring… entitled “Easy Reading” the two tomes cover much of what I’m describing here}


I believe this short list of examples helps reveal the criss-cross between the two disciplines and why I lean on these factors as “proof” that Psychics and Magick are very much real but not so much in the exoteric manner most of humanity makes them out to be… and that includes the assumptions/ implications made by the skeptic’s community who likewise sustain the more fantasiful idea behind such things in order to have their debate.

When I teach or work with folks that are being terrorized due to personal beliefs and cultural influences, I can only reach them by understanding their perspective and worth with that in order to not just empower them when it comes to their issue, but as I said previously, I want to gain their trust so that I can empower them even more by giving to them “the deeper mysteries” as they are known in the shut-eye world… shining light on the greater truth so they can digest it and most importantly, make it their own sense of discovery. We can say the words and show them all the studies on the planet but until the believer is ready to accept the data, it will never stick. However, when I hold their hand, speak their language and have other elders from around the globe sustaining the lessons I share, I am able to show them directly what it means to claim personal power over spiritual and mystical situations; I can teach them how to see the illusion and not fear it, doing so in a way that allows every bit of the goal to be their discovery… their choice… their idea. This is when the lessons take hold and I end up with individuals set within a faith-based community who are able to take the very same course of action and open the eyes of others.
NO, it doesn’t work each time but it does work to some degree with every person the approach is used on for reasons that should be obvious by this point.

Being “Psychic” only means that you are more aware – expanded awareness and the ability to “see” and process the subtle data in ways most other human being do not or cannot due to lack of discipline. But as I’ve pointed out in many an interview and to students; just because you can read the Tarot Cards or you understand Palmistry based on what you learned form a book/class DOES NOT mean you are a “Psychic”… those things are just tools that help you cultivate your skills and move you in the direction that may allow you to gains such perspective, nothing more!

Of course I really piss them off when I explain why it’s all “Cold Reading” but that’s another story altogether…

[Arouet]

[really?]

These quotes should be posted on that other forum also.

[Craig Browning]

To me invoking the words of St. James is akin to calling being a Nazi or Fascist...

Randi is NOT a Scientist but rather a magician that not only fell into the "I can't get to the top" mode but who likewise had some very nasty situations surrounding him, such as trying to kill off his primary competition (Steve Baker/Mr. Escape)... such things, on top of all his other "alleged" crimes and questionable associations, basically tell the average person that he's not to be trusted... amazingly, the intellects of society seem willing to ignore all the man's shortcomings because he not only cosigns their idea of things, he's become the Billy Graham of the Atheist world.

Understand, Randi can be quite personable and charming, I've had some very pleasant conversations and email exchanges with the man even though we don't agree on an array of points. His resources have been an aid to some of my studies about predator psychics in certain parts of the country and I have no problem sharing my discoveries with the JREF. I know this sounds rather contradictory but I feel it must be stated so as to sustain the fact that I really don't believe in absolutes.

Where we have the above quotes and article we will find changed words and views further on in his life and work, views that fluctuate based on the social-political and even scholastic environs of the time. The problem is, Randi seems to take a dump on any and all things that don't fit his particular group of niches, even denying scientific proofs, theories and facts... one tale having him getting a bit physical with a noted Nobel Prize winning physicist promoting some sort of connection between Quantum Science and the Paranormal... as the story goes, Randi's temper (and he has one) got a bit out of control and he punched this poor man... but as I said, I don't know the whole tale though I have seen posted, Randi's denial or "retelling" of said events, which of course, paint him in a more positive light.

Where is the explanation behind Randi's habit of picking and choosing which science he'll support or use vs. what is ignored or down-right rejected? I'm not talking about some of the "pseudo-sciences" out there like NLP or even Parapsychology for that matter, but what's his aversion to Quantum Physics and the many avenues Quantum theory give us to explore? Why can't he accept the scientific logic that alien life probably does exist and though it would require technology well advanced to our to do it, they may have found ways to traverse the galaxy... accord to this feature -- we are moving in that direction. It may be a few centuries away, but we already have the foundation technology for doing this. Considering that, it is most likely humans will be exploring and colonizing other regions of the galaxy not only in the manner noted in this article but in time, via real time travel.

This IS science as is an abundance of material that sustains the views I've already shared that "explain" psychic & magickle operation and thus, proves that such claims are genuine and just because we have these explanations does not negate the claim; a person that possesses the skill and discipline to work with such energy is still a psychic... just because you know how a Levitation works on stage doesn't mean it's not a Levitation...

Skeptics/cynics don't want to accept this reality, that is where I begin having problems with them; the universe is not explained in Black & White.

[Arouet]

[Craig Browning]

PUT ON THE BREAKS!

You're good... you sucked me into the classic merri-go-round game skeptics love to play; the goal being to get the "believer" frustrated so they blow up and the skeptic can run of gloating... NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!

"Poisoning the Well" is not ok when it comes to your "leadership" and yet it is exactly what you guys do when any information or source that goes contrary to your desired points of view is offered. You constantly demean any "legit" resource that might challenge you and your views; this merri-go-round argument is one method used for creating this image. Especially when you know that "believers" or those that defend a persons right to believe, are not as anal-retentive as the typical skeptic who keeps a list of resources, studies, quotes, etc. on hand at all times... it's part of your training it would seem... I'd love to find that JREF Boot-Camp...

I just can't wrap my head around how anyone could support anyone that has as much ugly "elements" surrounding them as Randi does... even CSICOPS distanced themselves from him at one point. The sex scandals... the number of young men he's put through college when sex scandal was threatened... questionable art deals... the list is interesting and long but a solid spin was given by St. James and so all his "intelligent" patrons keep throwing their tithes in his direction blindly... sustaining the Church of Randi and more directly, their flawless leader... last I checked, thinking a leader to be spic-and-span and seeing their word as the gospel are two of the first key warnings of a potentially dangerous cult scenario.

No... I go no further in this game... not due to lack of reference, just lack of desire to play this game and WASTE time digging up all the links or citations, etc.

[really?]

[Arouet]

Yeah, wtf Craig? I'm trying to take a critical look at Scepcop's article, which deals with some very specific topics, and you keep on derailing (including making some very serious allegations which may very well be libelous). Such allegations should not be so callously brought up and I hope its not just homophobia.

In any event, can we stick to intellectual arguments here and leave the lurid stuff aside? Scepcop has accused certain well-known skeptics of certain things, and I'm trying to see if the facts match up to the allegations. So far in this analysis, they don't. I've been able to find examples contradicting every one so far. If you have any evidence supporting Scepcop's allegations I'd like to see it.

This site has been set up to attack certain skeptics (here called pseudo-skeptics). Don't you think it's fair to really see if the criticisms are warranted?

[Craig Browning]