Why Randi, Shermer and the CSICOPers are not Real Skeptics

[NinjaPuppy]

[Kubla Khan]

[Kevin Kane]

NinjaPuppy's first comment to me was to warn me to obey the rules of the forum, which I had just read and agreed to, and which I had not broken. How oddly over cautious and inappropriate, I thought. Is this some sort of Be Nice To Skeptics forum? Is that why it's overrun by spoiled skeptic brats who can break the rules, insult and harass at whim, while I'm warned to obey the rules, or punished for defending myself? Is that why all the most anti/non skeptics left and never returned, grumbling on their way out? A higher burden, a higher level of scrutiny is placed on them by this forum. What about deleted posts? Whose posts are most often deleted and whose aren't? The forum is overrun by skeptic spam posts, topics inappropriate to the forum, yet antiskeptic posts are censored or deleted ... because? Because it might offend some skeptic somewhere? And when skeptics complain, the moderators listen. But when non-skeptics complain, they are totally ignored or laughed off.

Listen, if you don't want me here at this forum .. or people like me who have similar interests and concerns against skeptics ... just come straight out and say it. But it must seem odd to the casual observer just why the forum is nothing but skeptic posting the usual skeptic crap everywhere. Same as any other skeptic board, forum or blog. No different. Why is that?

[Kevin Kane]

I figured out that this board is not for people who have rejected skepticism and seek to discuss it. It's for skeptic rejects. Guys who could argue their way out of a paper bag and who the average pseudo-skeptic wouldn't be caught dead talking to.

Welcome to the board, Unitards.

[NinjaPuppy]

[NinjaPuppy]

BTW, can you define 'Unitard' please. I am unaquainted with that terminology. I am also still waiting for you to answer my question in another topic where you use the term, 'watermelon inspector'.

[NinjaPuppy]

[Kubla Khan]

[Kevin Kane]

Unitard is a type of ballet costume ... skeptics often wear them when jogging or wanting to appear scientific looking.

Watermelon inspectors are low paid.

And why would I - or anyone interested in the topics at this board - want to read about magic tricks? Do posts and threads about magic tricks belong at this forum? Magic tricks are imitations of the paranormal, just as skeptics are imitations of rational thinkers.

unitard:

[NinjaPuppy]

[Kevin Kane]

If anyone considers magic tricks as a legitimate topic for this forum, then please make a forum specifically for that purpose. For pseudo-psychic or pseudo-paranormal techniques. If it will reduce the amount of what I consider spam posted to relevant (ie paranormal) topics, I'm all for it. Should pseudo-paranormal topics be mixed with paranormal topics? Maybe at a skeptic board they should be, which I was lead to believe that this forum isn't.

[NinjaPuppy]

[NinjaPuppy]

BTW Kevin, I have asked you this three times but you seem to avoid answering.... Have you read SCEPCOPS Treatise? http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Contents.htm

[Kevin Kane]

I read it twice. This is the second time I answered your question if I read it.

Pseudo-paranormal would be anything that pretended to be paranormal, to fool or trick a person into thinking that they are witnessing the paranormal. This would go for fraudulent psychics, ghost hunters, spiritualists (who trick people for money) as it would for skeptic magicians (who also trick people for money). Imitative trickery or illusions of the paranormal.

[Kubla Khan]