Objectivity test for Skeptics here - Should it be required?

[Scepcop]

[Franc28]

[General Zod]

[Scepcop]

[Scepcop]

Franc,
You're getting off topic. You were the one that said that you could prove that God doesn't exist. Then you said you could do so by debunking some extreme Christian claims. All you've shown is that you can debunk Christian fundamentalism or classic Christian theology. Your arguments do not debunk God "in general". Nor have you demonstrated your claim that the existence of God can be disproven. Just because you can debunk a specific concept of God does not disprove God in general. Nor the existence of higher deities or entities that exist in God-like states.

I was just speculating on the possibilities of God. Probably God would have a spirit body that is capable of interacting sometimes in this world. Whether he is all powerful or not is another question, and one that I'm not trying to prove.

Just for the record, I'm a Pantheist. Many mystics, including New Age speakers and authors, are sort of Pantheists in that they believe that God is like a universal consciousness that we are a part of. And in fact, we are sort of part of the dream of God.

Videos like this help explain this idea, in case you've never heard of it.

[Scepcop]

[ProfWag]

I hope you don't mind me interjecting on this last post. First, the "what if" that started your statement is just that, "what if." What if a spacecraft flew in on Super Bowl Sunday and teleported an entire football team right in front of everyone's eyes. Something like that would be hard to be skeptical of. However, in the case of psychics, the "what if" is much less cut and dry. I have been to many psychics. Not one of them has impressed me one bit. In fact, none of them have ever given me any "secret" information about myself or anyone else. Hence, based on my experiences, I'm quite skeptical of psychics. However, "what if" someone showed up at my door and proceeded to tell me every item in my refrigerator. I would be quite impressed indeed, but would continue to be skeptical until this person was properly tested for such an ability on many levels. How do I know the psychic didn't sneek into my house the night before?
As for the objectivity test question, my opinion is that it should not be required. What is the other person's side of the story? Shouldn't they both get equal treatment? Telling a lie is usually a bad thing and the story sounds like the person did tell a lie. But, of course, perhaps the person just didn't want to give away something personal. It seems to be implied that only skeptics tell lies. Don't non-skeptics tell lies also? Credibility is a two-way street.
Wag

[Scepcop]

[ProfWag]

[ProfWag]

I have received a reply from the office of George Anderson on his research. First, his reply is now quoted:

"Dear Layne:

Thank you for your interest in George Anderson.

George has had a number of tests over the past 30 years--some privately funded (by outside groups), some funded by the university through which the studies were made, and some by medical doctors. We never thought to keep a record of each test, but I can tell you the ones I do remember. We don't list them on our site because George was a third party participant and the findings are not our property. Many also were written about in the books about George (or books that made reference to George)--"We Don't Die," "We Are Not Forgotten," "Our Children Forever," "Lessons From The Light," "Afterlife Encounters," and "The Afterlife Experiments." I can give you a short list of some of the testing that I remember--I hope it will help:

Columbia Presbyterian Hospital, New York (facilitator not known)
Cornell Medical Center, New York (facilitator not known)
Theatre of the Mind (Psychomanteum Chamber), Alabama Dr. Raymond Moody
Dr. Elisabeth Kubler-Ross Center, Texas Dr. Elisabeth Kubler-Ross
University of Las Vegas, UNLV, Las Vegas Dr. Raymond Moody, Robert Bigelow
University of Virginia Dept. of Personality Studies, Virginia Dr. Ian Stevenson, Dr. Bruce Grayson
University of Arizona, Human Energy Lab, Arizona Dr. Gary Schwartz


I hope the information helps.

Regards, Andrew Barone"

I will be looking at some of this information over the coming days and will give my point of view from a critical thinker's perspective. I hope for an honest debate...
First, before researching any of the above studies, I'd like to start the debate with his line "We never thought to keep a record of each test." Huh? Someone has the ability to communicate with dead people and they don't think about keeping a record of his scientific testing? Of course, if the testing did not show any significance towards his communication, then I guess the test should be forgotten, but also more on that later...
More to follow
Wag

[Azrael]

[ProfWag]

[brett]

interesting thread :

2 questions - when have pseudo skeptics ever been objective ?? - and WHY oh WHY ?? do we get the does god exist /not exist argument dragged into so many threads ?? - what pray has he /she/ it got to do with anything ??

i have a simple "objectivity ' when dealing with the paranormal - look at the evidence - look again at the evidence - look VERY closely for any "motive" - then consider all the possibilities - AND the impossibilities - come to a conclusion - and if there is nothing there SAY SO !! - if there IS something there - continue probing - and last but not least don't let the opinions of supposed "experts**" - ever get in the way of research !

( ** X=an unknown quantity , and a "spurt " is a drip under pressure )

ho hum

[NinjaPuppy]

[ciscop]