IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Coronavirus , partskeptic

Reply
Old 6th November 2020, 07:42 PM   #2361
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 28,223
This brings up an interesting dilemma. Ordinarily I'd consider Tarot reading to be of zero value, and simply ignore it. But if one finds it quicker and easier to do so and write about it voluminously than to read the thread one is posting in, perhaps we are in the territory of negative value, and in that case perhaps we should pay heed. When our fearless reader says "go this way," should not a wise person turn and run the other?
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2020, 11:10 PM   #2362
PartSkeptic
Illuminator
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,977
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post

So tell us now how the Tarot told you which question to ask.......or did you simply ask two questions and got two different answers?

I noticed that I often ask questions where the answer is likely to be a "yes" meaning the aces will be up and not reversed. I was getting a lot of "yes" answers (that all happened to be correct ) but I realized this is really pushing the odds.

So now I decide on a question and also it's negative. "Will happen" versus "Will not happen". I then just pick a random card from the deck. If up then I choose the positive, if reversed, I choose the negative form of the question. The procedure amounts to one question just two steps.

The deck is very well shuffled with regard to up and down. But against the odds I again got aces up.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2020, 11:30 PM   #2363
PartSkeptic
Illuminator
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,977
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
Guy fails to get much wanted visa, then gets cancer and extensive medical complications. Doesn't hold God responsible for any of it, even though (if he exists) he obviously is.

Following all this bad luck guy gets a single piece of good luck, and this he does decide is God's work.

It's almost as if he first decided what he would like to believe and then twisted and interpreted everything that happened to him to fit that belief, no matter how obviously ridiculous his "reasoning".

You are following a typical line of fallacious logic which can be answered with "reductio ad absurdum".

The question itself is valid. Why does God not not prevent bad things happening instead of giving fixes afterward?

If we follow this to its logically conclusion then there would never be any bad things happening. No illness, no death, no accidents. People could not offend others. Warfare would not happen. Overpopulation would not happen. This is absurd because we would all be puppets and zombies living naked in the Garden of Eden. God would also have to protect one species from eating another.

The true reality is that the Ultimate Intelligence has set up the Universe with a God and a Devil in it and lets the laws of physics take it's course, using evolution to produce an amazing world with interesting people. God intervenes now and then. There is no formula. My uncle's cancer was going to happen as a result of his aging. He was cured when God answered prayers (using the US medical system). His family were spared from going bankrupt with medical costs, using the US government. In this way, God strengthened and rewarded the faith my uncle's family have.

My uncle and his late wife were active Christians. They believed in helping others. When they used some of their holiday timeshare for a vacation, they would choose a deserving couple from an old age home and invite them on the holiday. It cost very little extra to spread a lot of joy.

Bottom line. Think of yourself giving charity. Do you give every beggar or charity money or your time? You make choices and your assistance is limited to when and whom you think is deserving.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2020, 11:56 PM   #2364
PartSkeptic
Illuminator
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,977
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post

In what you call "dumb" matter, we can observe the kind of behavior that gives rise to increasingly complex arrangements. We don't have to invent magical beings or forces to make it happen. Having observed that it forms a chaotic system that increases in complexity with local influx of energy, it simply requires multitudes of combinations to arise over a long time, and the overwhelmingly vast majority of those combinations to be discarded via natural selection. As you do with every attempt you've made to claim supernatural powers, you ignore the discards and focus only on the accidental successes, and pretend that constitutes some kind of miracle.

Why is a God or a spirit world "magical". If we and the Universe are an illusion then anything is possible. The miracle of life is magical. Mystical events happen subtly and rarely. Not many observe them. The physical instrument that observes them is the brain of a life-form. You appear to think we now "know it all". Presumptuous of you - like Newton's time.

Explain how that matter and energy came into existence with all the properties that have allowed and even driven the evolution to a complexity so amazing intelligent being emerged? An emergent property (intelligence) MUST have the intrinsic capacity to be able to form complex molecules such as proteins that are capable of working together in cooperation.

For a cell to divide you need proteins that first straighten the DNA, then others to spit the DNA, then a set of two others that add the complementary pair, and then both sets must again coil fold themselves up. Just change one tiny characteristic and it will not happen.

You need to once more, extend your logic backward to get to the creation of these dumb particles. Seems that they are not "dumb". But how did they get the innate intelligence? I say the same with the Tarot cards. They are displaying (for some of us) an intelligence that cannot be explained.

The only answer posters have to my anecdotes is that they are anecdotes and they do not have to accept them as the truth. Have you considered the possibility that I am being honest and truthful? You refuse to do so, because it would invalidate your belief (yes, belief ) that there is no God or supernatural.

It is educational to me to see the extent to which intelligent people will go to rationalize away any challenge to their long-held beliefs. Both atheists and those with any sort of belief. We are all emotional humans. I have said I was probably somewhat autistic when younger. When comparing myself to some who have explained their Asperger's symptoms and how they dealt with them, I have come to the conclusion that I have a mild form of Asperger's. I do not see it as disadvantage.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 12:06 AM   #2365
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,029
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
The question itself is valid. Why does God not not prevent bad things happening instead of giving fixes afterward?
Because random unconnected events are random and there is no God!

Do I win the "Bloody obvious prize"?
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 12:08 AM   #2366
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,029
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
If we and the Universe are an illusion then anything is possible.
An illusion to whom? If we don't exist to whom is this illusion happening to?

You never really thought this argument through, did you?
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 12:11 AM   #2367
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,029
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
The only answer posters have to my anecdotes is that they are anecdotes and they do not have to accept them as the truth.
We already know you aren't telling the truth. Tell us again when you studied at Joburg City Power? We will then quote your earlier posts.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 12:11 AM   #2368
PartSkeptic
Illuminator
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,977
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Except that PartSkeptic originally said his interpretations came from a specific book. Others reading the same book find that it says something different than what PartSkeptic represents. I agree that having one's own Tarot-reading style is stock in trade. And other Tarot experts long ago pointed out that PartSkeptics' interpretations are...unique. But this is a much simpler matter of apparently lying about what the text of a book says.



It does seem rather hypocritical. Possibly then for the same reason that abortion clinics get their share of God-fearing Christians who argue that God is okay with their abortion. But no one else gets one.

Do you not agree that there are many who copy something and then claim to have improved it? Yet all they are doing is making changes that would appeal to some people. They then market it as new and improved despite having lost a lot. Their decks have less detail and therefore less to prompt an inspiration. The books are not well thought out and give less variance needed for inspiration. They are simpler.

It is like selling a simple camera where all one can do is point and shoot. Great marketing but professionals want much more.

That said, one CAN interpret ANYTHING to get information from the spirit world. Tea-leaves, clouds, TV shows, comments from strangers and so on. The posters here all assume the cards are a computerized answering machine. They ignore the fact that much of the interpretation is done by the person doing the reading. I chose a deck and a book. I was guided to do that.

Where did Jesus say that abortion is wrong? Thou shalt not kill needs interpretation. When does life begin? Can one kill an animal? Can one kill some human cells by amputating a limb? Some clerics have ulterior motives for choosing their interpretation. The Catholic Church wanted to "grow" its following so anything that might reduce births was wrong.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 12:16 AM   #2369
PartSkeptic
Illuminator
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,977
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Because random unconnected events are random and there is no God!

Do I win the "Bloody obvious prize"?
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
An illusion to whom? If we don't exist to whom is this illusion happening to?

You never really thought this argument through, did you?
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
We already know you aren't telling the truth. Tell us again when you studied at Joburg City Power? We will then quote your earlier posts.

???

You have proof there is no God?

The illusion is a dream in the mind of the Infinite Intelligence which is the only thing that exists.

You prove my point by calling me a liar.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 12:17 AM   #2370
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,029
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
Do you not agree that there are many who copy something and then claim to have improved it?
Not really. The original fantasy film "The Wizard of Oz" (1939) was still better than all the later reinterpretations.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 12:18 AM   #2371
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 13,163
The bottom line is that all the objections PartSkeptic is trying to rationalise away are a consequence of the assumption that the supernatural/God exist. Refrain from making that assumption and no such difficulties arise, no rationalisations are required. The world makes perfect sense. Questions remain, but assuming the existence of the supernatural/God does not answer them; at most it just replaces them with even harder questions. The only advantage of the assumption is that it makes the world seem like a more comforting place, and that seems to be sufficient for the likes of PartSkeptic to continue to make it no matter how many problems and inconsistences it creates.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett

Last edited by Pixel42; 7th November 2020 at 01:35 AM.
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 12:19 AM   #2372
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,029
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
??? You have proof there is no God?
Yep. It's simple. As you can't supply one iota of evidence for your hypothesis there is a god, I can simply dismiss your claim as pure fantasy.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 12:21 AM   #2373
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,029
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
You prove my point by calling me a liar.
You mean you forgot what you wrote in your previous little story about when you worked at Joburg City Power?

Thanks for proving my point.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 04:56 AM   #2374
Cosmic Yak
Illuminator
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 4,012
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
I noticed that I often ask questions where the answer is likely to be a "yes" meaning the aces will be up and not reversed. I was getting a lot of "yes" answers (that all happened to be correct ) but I realized this is really pushing the odds.

So now I decide on a question and also it's negative. "Will happen" versus "Will not happen". I then just pick a random card from the deck. If up then I choose the positive, if reversed, I choose the negative form of the question. The procedure amounts to one question just two steps.

The deck is very well shuffled with regard to up and down. But against the odds I again got aces up.
To summarise where we're at so far:
You claim to have read the Tarot cards and made an accurate prediction.

The cards that came up are not described as having the meanings you give them, in the book you say you are using.

The method you are using, of simply picking three cards, is not one recommended by the book you say you are using.

The idea that 'up' means yes, and 'down' means no, is not supported by the meanings described in the book you say you're using.

In fact, it's hard to say you're doing a Tarot reading at all. If all you're looking for is a 50/50, yes or no answer, then you might as well just toss coins. If you are going to ignore the accepted methods of reading the Tarot, and ignore the accepted meanings of the cards, why are you bothering to use Tarot cards at all?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 04:57 AM   #2375
Cosmic Yak
Illuminator
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 4,012
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
???

You have proof there is no God?

The illusion is a dream in the mind of the Infinite Intelligence which is the only thing that exists.
Any time you feel ready to prove this assertion, you carry on. I won't hold my breath.
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 05:02 AM   #2376
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 21,470
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
You have proof there is no God?
Nope. There is simply no evidence that any of the thousands of claimed gods over the entirety of human history have ever been real. Your version of "god" is merely another "god" to add to the pile of unevidenced and failed "gods".

Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
The illusion is a dream in the mind of the Infinite Intelligence which is the only thing that exists.
That would be a deepity. Superficially appears profound, but carries no meaning. Deepak would be proud.

Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
You prove my point by calling me a liar.
Nope. You prove yourself wrong with every post you make about gods and tarot and 5G.

You appeal to the argumentum ad populum of billions of believers in the Judeo-Christian god (even that is wrong) while ignoring the fact that a HUGE proportion of them would consider what you do to be satanic.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 05:06 AM   #2377
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 21,470
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
Any time you feel ready to prove this assertion, you carry on. I won't hold my breath.
Oh sure. Don't hold your breath. An "Infinite Intelligence"? Do you think there is any chance of any evidence for that claim?

Of course not.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 08:28 AM   #2378
JesseCuster
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,238
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
I do not need Tarot cards to tell me you chose the cards you wanted.
Nope, I shuffled my pack of Tarot cards and picked the first 3 off the top of the deck.
JesseCuster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 08:44 AM   #2379
sackett
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 6,432
Which the in exists only intelligent thing is dream mind illusion the infinite a that.

And you can't prove otherwise.
__________________
If you would learn a man's character, give him authority.

If you would ruin a man's character, let him seize power.
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 09:09 AM   #2380
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Embedded and embattled, reporting from Mississippi
Posts: 4,735
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Oh sure. Don't hold your breath. An "Infinite Intelligence"? Do you think there is any chance of any evidence for that claim?

Of course not.
It's not just that there's no chance of any evidence for that claim, it's that there's no need for any- what would be a bug for any actual skeptic is a feature for an only partial one. "Infinite" anything pretty much covers everything, so you don't have to stoop to messy details to support it- every effect is subsumed in the seamless whole. To repeat myself from another thread- the devil is in the details because god leaves no room for them, he fills up all the spaces necessary for simple belief.
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King

Last edited by turingtest; 7th November 2020 at 09:11 AM.
turingtest is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 09:27 AM   #2381
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 19,214
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
Why is a God or a spirit world "magical".
Because none of it is observable or testable, and we know where those tales come from. They didn't come from observation and analysis. They came from people making stuff up. That you want to continue to make stuff up and believe it is what makes it "magical."

Quote:
You appear to think we now "know it all". Presumptuous of you - like Newton's time.
I made no such claim. But neither am I going to discard what we do know simply because you don't understand it and can't fit it into your desired beliefs.

Quote:
Explain how that matter and energy came into existence with all the properties that have allowed and even driven the evolution...
You're the one claiming to be a genius physicist. You tell us. I'll give you a hint. An emergent property is not one that existed ab initio.

Quote:
Just change one tiny characteristic and it will not happen.
Just as it did not happen the vast number of times that were discarded. As I said before, you're pointing to the tiny fraction of all emergent systems that have not failed and trying to cry "miracle!"

Quote:
You need to once more, extend your logic backward to get to the creation of these dumb particles. Seems that they are not "dumb". But how did they get the innate intelligence?
It's not innate; it emerged. It's not intelligence; it's chatic and complex.

Quote:
I say the same with the Tarot cards. They are displaying (for some of us) an intelligence that cannot be explained.
No, you're just making stuff up and trying to pass it off as some sort of magic that you're good at. That's not at all the same as observing the operation of the universe.

Quote:
The only answer posters have to my anecdotes is that they are anecdotes and they do not have to accept them as the truth.
You pose your anecdotes expecting them to stand as evidence that you have extraordinary abilities that others must acknowledge. I won't acknowledge that you have extraordinary abilities without testable evidence of it. All you're doing now is whining that all you're willing to produce isn't convincing. That's how the world works.

Quote:
Have you considered the possibility that I am being honest and truthful?
I have considered the possibility. Then I look at the evidence, and conclude that you are not being honest or truthful.

Quote:
You refuse to do so, because it would invalidate your belief (yes, belief ) that there is no God or supernatural.
No, I refuse to do so because the evidence compels me to dismiss the hypothesis. Despite your claims to be the chosen vessel of your god, the only evidence you can provide are more self-aggrandizing claims, many of them preposterous on their face. Despite your claims to be a genius on various topics, you cannot demonstrate even minimal competence when probed.

It's not because believing you're a universal genius and favored of your god would rock my world, but because it stands in contrast to the evidence. Get over yourself.

Quote:
It is educational to me to see the extent to which intelligent people will go to rationalize away any challenge to their long-held beliefs.
No, it's not atheists being stubborn. It's skeptics being skeptics and expecting evidence for a claim. It's not a challenge unless you have that testable evidence. Otherwise it's just a cool story, bro, and no "rationalization" is required to dismiss it rationally.

Last edited by JayUtah; 7th November 2020 at 10:10 AM.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 09:42 AM   #2382
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 19,214
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
Do you not agree that there are many who copy something and then claim to have improved it?
You claim to be using a specific book that recommends specific practices and advocates specific interpretations. Yet what you're doing has no resemblance to your source. The problem is that you're misrepresenting your source, not that you've refined the technique.

Quote:
The books are not well thought out and give less variance needed for inspiration. They are simpler.
Irrelevant. When you say "The book says X," and we go to the book and it specifically says Y, you're simply lying. And if instead you tell us you're following the book, but then you later tell us you're applying your own method, then you're changing your story.

Quote:
The posters here all assume the cards are a computerized answering machine.
No one has made that claim. However, those others familiar with Tarot have noted that the cards have traditional meanings that you seem to have discarded, and traditional methods of dealing the cards that you have abandoned.

Those are important because they provide the structure of the purported prophecy that is outside the control of the reader. The prophecy is expected to be manifest in the cards in a way that can't be molded later to fit a situation as it arises. Yes, there's interpretational wiggle room. But your method is all wiggle room, which proves nothing except your ability to wiggle.

Quote:
They ignore the fact that much of the interpretation is done by the person doing the reading.
But if you simply throw away the rules of the cards, you can say anything you want after the facts unfold, and retrospectively apply any interpretation you want to the cards that were dealt. And then this somehow proves the efficacy of Tarot as divination and you as a prophet. It's only credible if you follow the traditional rules. You're trying to backfill your incorrect understanding of the U.S. election on the cards you drew, and that requires you to part with tradition. It's Cinderella's sisters cutting off bits of their feet so they fit the glass slipper.

You're just making stuff up and pretending you prophesied it. You're really not very good at faking being a prophet.

Last edited by JayUtah; 7th November 2020 at 10:12 AM.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 10:50 AM   #2383
MarkCorrigan
Winter is Coming
 
MarkCorrigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,087
I find it amazing that you seem to think Trump is intelligent and in good shape personally. Whatever the issues with your making up your own interpretation of the cards might be THAT is a big one as far as I'm concerned. You not only retrofitted your cards to fit, you retrofitted Trump.
__________________
Naturalism adjusts it's principles to fit with the observed data.
It's a god of the facts world view. -joobz

When I give food to the poor they call me a saint, when I ask why the poor have no food they call me a communist - Hélder Câmara
MarkCorrigan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 10:54 AM   #2384
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 19,214
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
Thou shalt not kill needs interpretation.
Agreed, and we have many tools to help us interpret the imperative in context. We have contemporary texts to give us the moral climate in which such direction arose. We have contemporary writings using the same words, to help us discern the nuances of possible meaning. On this particular text, we even have mounds of subsequent commentary and debate to help guide our thinking. And that's if we want to be originalist. We can also be textualist and say that we'll just consider the word in its modern moral and linguistic context. The whole field of hermeneutics exists to provide system and structure for decisions on what writings can mean.

Naturally we'll never exactly what the original author meant. Nor will we likely agree today what it should mean in a moral context. But just because there's wiggle room doesn't mean we get to redefine "kill" as "top with a light chicken gravy" in order to justify a murder.

The cards have traditional meanings. Interpretation occurs when those meanings are considered alongside evident facts and internal thoughts and sensations. But it's not interpretation when you decide after the fact that the King of Cups should mean something that no other reader follows. This is why every other Tarot expert you've spoken to on this forum disagrees with you.

All your delusions require everyone else to agree to abandon the traditional -- and sometimes the required or by-definition -- meanings of words, statistical laws, empirical conventions, and so forth in your favor. Then you get all butthurt when they won't, and accuse them of being stubborn or entrenched.

Quote:
Some clerics have ulterior motives for choosing their interpretation.
As do some self-proclaimed prophet-geniuses.

Quote:
The Catholic Church wanted to "grow" its following so anything that might reduce births was wrong.
And some would-be prophets might want to maintain the illusion that they are favored of their gods and possessed of exceptional abilities, and will jump through all kinds of hoops to interpret -- even invent -- facts toward that end. And they'll browbeat and cajole others into accepting those interpretations in order to grow their following. And how does the listener recognize ulterior interpretations? By their failure to coincide with the consensus of a larger body of interpreters.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 11:07 AM   #2385
EvilBiker
Spectral Challenger
 
EvilBiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Berlin
Posts: 1,405
Hey PartSkeptic, while we‘re discussing your dabbling in the Dark Arts, can we circle back to that other Dark Art* we were trying to get info on from you, as a supposed expert in the field:

Is your aura still able to detect that devilish WiFi? Inquiring minds want to know.

(* Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic - Arthur C. Clarke)

Do feel free to expound on the subject, or take a flying **** at a rolling doughnut.
__________________
Flat Earth Theory:
The unfortunate result of ordering pizza to satisfy munchies after smoking way too much weed to bring you down from that hectic acid trip.
EvilBiker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 12:54 PM   #2386
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 21,470
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Those are important because they provide the structure of the purported prophecy that is outside the control of the reader. The prophecy is expected to be manifest in the cards in a way that can't be molded later to fit a situation as it arises. Yes, there's interpretational wiggle room. But your method is all wiggle room, which proves nothing except your ability to wiggle.
In a three card reading on a yes/no question, the cards are suppose to be read as supporting influences, opposing influences and eventual outcome. Not that I believe a word of that from experience.

PS has made up his own interpretation. Out of nowhere.

My own view is that, for the believers, It merely gives an outlet for what they already believe. If it is a yes/no question, one card should suffice, but it doesn't. That is plain cold reading. For someone else or for oneself? That matters not a whit. Self-deception is a thing.

At this point I retain two tarot decks. One because I cannot find it and the second because I find it aesthetically pleasing.

Any use I have had of them have been pure cold reading. I have been clear with any "victims" that it is utter bollox from the outset. I have not, unlike PS, ever pretended it was real. It was always cold, warm or hot reading.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 02:51 PM   #2387
sackett
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 6,432
You can have fun with a Tarotter by looking at him in incredulous amazement and exclaiming, "You believe in THAT Tarot???!! The one they sell in the stores? Oh God, lay me down!"

Then go on to refer menacingly but patronizingly to the Dark Arcana, the Psitticalian Series, the Iteration Fatality, and, of course, to THEM. "Please tell me you have mastered the pre-Chaldean Annihilation. THEY will be pleased if you have not." Then offer to draw a diagram.


And so on, as long as you feel like it. I guarantee they'll buy any line you want. Because here's the real arcane truth: it feels good to be gullible.
__________________
If you would learn a man's character, give him authority.

If you would ruin a man's character, let him seize power.
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 04:53 PM   #2388
junkshop
Student
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: blighted lorry park
Posts: 38
While it is true the PartSkeptic does not adhere to the traditional interpretations and methodology of the tarot, i can't help but feel that the more important point is that the idea that the future can be divined through fancy bits of pasteboard is a ridiculous idea in and of itself.
The argument that he may be doing it 'wrong' is entirely irrelevant, when the very concept is based on entirely unevidenced ******** to start with.

Last edited by junkshop; 7th November 2020 at 04:56 PM. Reason: Sorry, automatic English spelling of 'sceptic'
junkshop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 06:20 PM   #2389
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,029
Originally Posted by PartSkeptic View Post
The deck is very well shuffled with regard to up and down. But against the odds I again got aces up.
Tell me the shuffle method you use to get upside down cards? Is it a variant of the riffle shuffle?
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2020, 08:37 PM   #2390
sackett
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 6,432
Originally Posted by junkshop View Post
While it is true the PartSkeptic does not adhere to the traditional interpretations and methodology of the tarot, i can't help but feel that the more important point is that the idea that the future can be divined through fancy bits of pasteboard is a ridiculous idea in and of itself.
The argument that he may be doing it 'wrong' is entirely irrelevant, when the very concept is based on entirely unevidenced ******** to start with.
Welcome on board, junkshop.

Tarot isn't a method of divination, it's a craft devoted to harvesting money from suckers. An easy one, too.
__________________
If you would learn a man's character, give him authority.

If you would ruin a man's character, let him seize power.
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2020, 04:54 AM   #2391
Cosmic Yak
Illuminator
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 4,012
Originally Posted by junkshop View Post
While it is true the PartSkeptic does not adhere to the traditional interpretations and methodology of the tarot, i can't help but feel that the more important point is that the idea that the future can be divined through fancy bits of pasteboard is a ridiculous idea in and of itself.
The argument that he may be doing it 'wrong' is entirely irrelevant, when the very concept is based on entirely unevidenced ******** to start with.
As I said upthread, my point was that, even by his own standards, PartSkeptic's claims of prophesy are a miserable failure.
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2020, 01:51 PM   #2392
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 19,214
Originally Posted by junkshop View Post
While it is true the PartSkeptic does not adhere to the traditional interpretations and methodology of the tarot, i can't help but feel that the more important point is that the idea that the future can be divined through fancy bits of pasteboard is a ridiculous idea in and of itself.
The argument that he may be doing it 'wrong' is entirely irrelevant, when the very concept is based on entirely unevidenced ******** to start with.
Of course. In the broadest sense, the most important point a skeptic can make with respect to Tarot is that, just like any other claims to apparatus-assisted divination, there is no evidence that either the apparatus or the interpretation of the indications involves the supernatural in any way. Or that its practitioners achieve a prediction rate significantly greater than chance. So when claims of prophecy arise around Tarot, that's the most straightforward framework we can apply.

And you can certainly say that everything past that is moot. But it's often instructive to note all the ways in which an argument is wrong, not just those that are immediately dispositive. This helps us know all the things that we have to get right in order for an argument to convince a skeptical audience.

We don't have to believe in Tarot to treat it as any other subject of scholarship. You can morally oppose playing poker, yet still be able to describe to someone the rues of the game. So when PartSkeptic tells us the Knight of Cups refers to intelligence, I -- a non-believer in Tarot -- can still consult the body of information on the subject and point out that this is not the common definition of the Cups suit. Intelligence is more appropriately indicated by the Swords suit.

Why does that matter? Because, as PartSkeptic tells us, a Tarot reading has two components: the card, and the reflection of that card's meaning on the subject individual's circumstances, thoughts, or feelings. The latter can, of course, vary greatly. But the former cannot. And it's important that it cannot, because the subject is supposed to believe that the apparatus has somehow been affected supernaturally to produce that card for that question. Then it's the reader's job to connect that prescient draw with the subject's circumstances. The skilled reader makes that process seem as straightforward as possible, so that the overall effect is a combination of supernatural effect upon the cards and possibly supernatural insight on the part of the reader -- because it can't all have been so uncannily applicable on its own.

The rebuttal that says, "You're changing the meaning of the cards to fit your predetermined conclusion," appeals to both believers and non-believers of Tarot. Anyone can still dismiss the claim by noting that the it's internally inconsistent.

But it gets worse.

PartSkeptic's new claim is that he has created his own Tarot method. He has his own methods of shuffling, drawing, and placing. And more importantly, he has given new meanings to the cards. But we have no evidence that he did this before doing the reading that required this new meaning for the Knight of Cups. So it has no value as evidence to prove a prophetic ability. It's just postdiction, a well-worn technique among fake prophets.

It doesn't take a lot of critical thinking skill to see this kind of cheating. A believer in Tarot might be convinced by that rebuttal, noting that they stick to the traditional definitions of the cards precisely in order to avoid being accused of shifting the goalposts.

It's a new claim, because he previously told us he was getting the meanings of cards from a particular tutorial book. And he claimed that his definition is what the book said for the Knight of Cups. But of course anyone can go look at the book and see for themselves that it doesn't. PartSkeptic tries to tell us his copy of the book is somehow different than everyone else's. But the meaning given in the book is the traditional interpretation: what we'd expect from a popular author on the subject. "Mine is somehow different," is then absurd on its face.

Now this sort of rebuttal should appeal to everyone. You don't have to believe in Tarot or know anything about it. Or you can be a Tarot master. This is a matter of claiming an easily-obtained book on a subject says a certain thing that it observably doesn't. The most probable explanation is an intentional misrepresentation of the source.

And you don't have to believe in Tarot or know anything about it to see that PartSkeptic has changed his story. Is this is own method? Or did it come from the book? This little bit of dishonesty tips the balance on those other points where we would be asked to give the claimant the benefit of the doubt. "No, really, I decided the Knight of Cups would represent intelligence long before I needed it to mean that." One doesn't get that benefit after there's evidence of arguing in bad faith.

In the end, you never know which of several possible rebuttals someone will find convincing. But you can see what has to happen to make an argument convincing. You have to keep the story straight -- which is easier if it's the truth. You have to assume your critics will look up your sources. If there is common knowledge associated with your argument, respect it. And above all, be prepared to give evidence for any affirmative claim you make, or else be prepared not to rely on it to have a convincing effect.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2020, 02:33 PM   #2393
Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
 
Foster Zygote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 17,968
Read the first page, and the last page. I can only assume that the OP's screen name refers to parts per million.
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone.
Foster Zygote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2020, 01:55 PM   #2394
p0lka
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: near trees, houses and a lake.
Posts: 2,266
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
This brings up an interesting dilemma. Ordinarily I'd consider Tarot reading to be of zero value, and simply ignore it. But if one finds it quicker and easier to do so and write about it voluminously than to read the thread one is posting in, perhaps we are in the territory of negative value, and in that case perhaps we should pay heed. When our fearless reader says "go this way," should not a wise person turn and run the other?
It might be useless, but it's not of zero value as it actively 'suggests' what people should do, then they do it. If it didn't exist then people would be doing different things. It causes people to do things they wouldn't ordinarily do.
EDIT:
negative value, yeah cheers.

Last edited by p0lka; 11th November 2020 at 02:00 PM.
p0lka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2020, 09:47 AM   #2395
MarkCorrigan
Winter is Coming
 
MarkCorrigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 9,087
Having gone back through and read this thread I am honestly astounded.

PartSkpetic is projecting so hard a business could use him to display visual aids during their meetings.
__________________
Naturalism adjusts it's principles to fit with the observed data.
It's a god of the facts world view. -joobz

When I give food to the poor they call me a saint, when I ask why the poor have no food they call me a communist - Hélder Câmara
MarkCorrigan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2020, 10:58 AM   #2396
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 21,470
Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan View Post
Having gone back through and read this thread I am honestly astounded.

PartSkpetic is projecting so hard a business could use him to display visual aids during their meetings.
You should have been here since the start. I has been an odd journey that has only gotten more bizarre as it rambled along.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2020, 10:13 AM   #2397
PartSkeptic
Illuminator
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,977
For those of you who recall the medical problems I claimed happened to me when living next to the tower, you may remember that we moved away from our house and so did the neighbors on the other side. They also had problems. People asked what about the people who rented their property to the tower company. My answer was "Wait."

There was a Whatsapp from the wife asking if anyone knew the whereabouts of her husband. The next post tells how he was found dazed and confused at a shopping center. He had suffered a severe epileptic seizure.

Part of the discussion was about emfs causing epileptic seizures. Once more, one has some "anecdotal" evidence. Just coincidence, huh? When I see the decrease in people mental abilities in general, I also am of the opinion that it is emf radiation. Science fiction predicting once more? (March of the Morons).


Covid is doing maximum damage to economies by its behavior. People getting fatigued. Second waves occurring. Seven million mink culled because of a variant. Recall my prediction with the Tarot. Just when we think we have beaten Covid, a second hit will occur. The next one will probably be faster to kill and more deadly. It will be able to spread far and wide and quicker because people will not be expecting it.


Sorry for not responding for the moment. Too much on the go. I am finding that everyday events are problematic. Things are breaking and failing. Companies are slow to respond. Other companies are scamming others. Society is showing cracks in the fast paced "me first" culture. It will not fix itself and will accelerate in pace.


I went through a very bad period physically where I was lying in bed because of the headaches and nausea. I discovered that it was the bat fungus. I need to take one a day without skipping, and take it with a lot of Coke. That is not good. It seems to be developing resistance to the anti-fungals. If so, that is me gone. Oh well, we all die sometime.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2020, 10:18 AM   #2398
PartSkeptic
Illuminator
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,977
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Of course. In the broadest sense, the most important point a skeptic can make with respect to Tarot is that, just like any other claims to apparatus-assisted divination, there is no evidence that either the apparatus or the interpretation of the indications involves the supernatural in any way. Or that its practitioners achieve a prediction rate significantly greater than chance. So when claims of prophecy arise around Tarot, that's the most straightforward framework we can apply.

And you can certainly say that everything past that is moot. But it's often instructive to note all the ways in which an argument is wrong, not just those that are immediately dispositive. This helps us know all the things that we have to get right in order for an argument to convince a skeptical audience.

We don't have to believe in Tarot to treat it as any other subject of scholarship. You can morally oppose playing poker, yet still be able to describe to someone the rues of the game. So when PartSkeptic tells us the Knight of Cups refers to intelligence, I -- a non-believer in Tarot -- can still consult the body of information on the subject and point out that this is not the common definition of the Cups suit. Intelligence is more appropriately indicated by the Swords suit.

Why does that matter? Because, as PartSkeptic tells us, a Tarot reading has two components: the card, and the reflection of that card's meaning on the subject individual's circumstances, thoughts, or feelings. The latter can, of course, vary greatly. But the former cannot. And it's important that it cannot, because the subject is supposed to believe that the apparatus has somehow been affected supernaturally to produce that card for that question. Then it's the reader's job to connect that prescient draw with the subject's circumstances. The skilled reader makes that process seem as straightforward as possible, so that the overall effect is a combination of supernatural effect upon the cards and possibly supernatural insight on the part of the reader -- because it can't all have been so uncannily applicable on its own.

The rebuttal that says, "You're changing the meaning of the cards to fit your predetermined conclusion," appeals to both believers and non-believers of Tarot. Anyone can still dismiss the claim by noting that the it's internally inconsistent.

But it gets worse.

PartSkeptic's new claim is that he has created his own Tarot method. He has his own methods of shuffling, drawing, and placing. And more importantly, he has given new meanings to the cards. But we have no evidence that he did this before doing the reading that required this new meaning for the Knight of Cups. So it has no value as evidence to prove a prophetic ability. It's just postdiction, a well-worn technique among fake prophets.

It doesn't take a lot of critical thinking skill to see this kind of cheating. A believer in Tarot might be convinced by that rebuttal, noting that they stick to the traditional definitions of the cards precisely in order to avoid being accused of shifting the goalposts.

It's a new claim, because he previously told us he was getting the meanings of cards from a particular tutorial book. And he claimed that his definition is what the book said for the Knight of Cups. But of course anyone can go look at the book and see for themselves that it doesn't. PartSkeptic tries to tell us his copy of the book is somehow different than everyone else's. But the meaning given in the book is the traditional interpretation: what we'd expect from a popular author on the subject. "Mine is somehow different," is then absurd on its face.

Now this sort of rebuttal should appeal to everyone. You don't have to believe in Tarot or know anything about it. Or you can be a Tarot master. This is a matter of claiming an easily-obtained book on a subject says a certain thing that it observably doesn't. The most probable explanation is an intentional misrepresentation of the source.

And you don't have to believe in Tarot or know anything about it to see that PartSkeptic has changed his story. Is this is own method? Or did it come from the book? This little bit of dishonesty tips the balance on those other points where we would be asked to give the claimant the benefit of the doubt. "No, really, I decided the Knight of Cups would represent intelligence long before I needed it to mean that." One doesn't get that benefit after there's evidence of arguing in bad faith.

In the end, you never know which of several possible rebuttals someone will find convincing. But you can see what has to happen to make an argument convincing. You have to keep the story straight -- which is easier if it's the truth. You have to assume your critics will look up your sources. If there is common knowledge associated with your argument, respect it. And above all, be prepared to give evidence for any affirmative claim you make, or else be prepared not to rely on it to have a convincing effect.

Long winded. I sum it up by saying you are twisting and rephrasing to suit your agenda. Talk about missing the point. You missed almost every one. You may convince yourself, but I see clearly through you.

Bottom line. I was correct in my prediction.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2020, 10:48 AM   #2399
PartSkeptic
Illuminator
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,977
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Oh sure. Don't hold your breath. An "Infinite Intelligence"? Do you think there is any chance of any evidence for that claim?

Of course not.
Let us deal with "evidence." I make a statement of "fact".

You say prove it.

1. I say I had pawpaw for breakfast.
2. I say I broke my toe a week or so ago
3. I say I fell off a house foundation and did not get injured but should have.
4. I say it seemed God told me of a coming pandemic in 2009
5. I say I "knew" a biker would die just ahead.
6. I say that I experienced the Infinite Intelligence.

One "proof" would be that I do not lie. When Chris Packham said on Hardtalk that he hated lying and would not do so, and that it was part of the Aspergers he had, I realized that I too hate lying and hate injustice.

So you can pretty much eliminate any suspicion of lying.

Next is faulty memory. I wrote about items 3 - 5 before my memory began to be less accurate. Very unlikely.

Next is a hallucination. These occurred while I was in good health and in quiet circumstances. What on earth would trigger such a strange brain malfunction. Especially when I am not prone to "mistakes". (Prize for those with good memories)

You choose not to believe me. Does that falsify my claims?

Are there contradictions in my account?

Can you prove that any or all are impossible?

Does 6. explain things that science cannot? It does. Surely one should accept the better explanation until disproved or a "better" one comes along?

"Exceptional claims require exceptional evidence". Why? How did this mantra come about? Where is the proof that this must be so?

Why is the scientific method applicable to everything including philosophy? Prove that it must be.
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**

Last edited by PartSkeptic; 27th November 2020 at 10:49 AM.
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2020, 11:07 AM   #2400
PartSkeptic
Illuminator
 
PartSkeptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,977
So are we getting dumber?


https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...336?via%3Dihub

A reversal of the Flynn effect for spatial perception in German-speaking countries: Evidence from a cross-temporal IRT-based meta-analysis (1977–2014)
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.**
PartSkeptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:07 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.