ISF Logo   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.
Reply
Old Yesterday, 07:49 AM   #201
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by shankara View Post
I don't need external evidence of my own existence.
I didn't ask about your own existence. You were discussing the properties of a "soul" being carried around in the vessel of our bodies. The "soul" is a concept for which we have no evidence. If you would like to more precisely define what you mean by "soul" and provide evidence that it exists, only then can you discuss its properties.

Originally Posted by shankara View Post
Ok so there is actually this whole thing in Buddhism called the "doctrine of Anatman" which is to say that the Being isn't exactly an individual in the sense of an "I".
That is a non-sequitur. Anatman does not posit the existence of a soul. Nor does it provide evidence for one. It's just a way to phrase the illusion of self. I'm puzzled as to why you would bring this up when I asked about the soul; my understanding is that anatman literally means the opposite of soul. Maybe I'm wrong - it wouldn't be the first time.

Originally Posted by shankara View Post
But I think the people who deny the existence of a soul is like people who say that Love is just brain chemicals. Modern cynicism.
And another non-sequitur here. You are welcome to think whatever you like above love, but again it's up to you to provide evidence for your claims. If you say that love happens somewhere outside of the brain, then you are free to provide evidence for this.

As I mentioned, the Religion and Philosophy sub-forum would be the best place for that discussion.

Last edited by carlitos; Yesterday at 07:55 AM.
carlitos 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 Yesterday, 08:09 AM   #202
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by Samael Aun Weor
Public auditors must technically reconcile the interests of employers and workers in this concrete case of the participation of workers in the profits of companies.

Public auditors will have to decide what percentage should be distributed as taxable income and, in the case of the companies making a yearly loss, in what way that will affect the distribution of profits on the capital.

The public auditors will have to solve technically this difficult problem of profits on capital.

Sure, there will some public auditors that will work impartially to re-distribute wealth, determine taxes, etc. This reminded me of a Milton Friedman segment from an old US talk show. "Where in the world are you going to find these angels who are going to organize society for us?"





YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE









**off-topic aside - Wow, look at how that show has aged. Donahue asked Friedman a question, and gave him literally minutes to answer, almost without interruption.
carlitos 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 Yesterday, 08:29 AM   #203
shankara
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 91
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
I didn't ask about your own existence. You were discussing the properties of a "soul" being carried around in the vessel of our bodies. The "soul" is a concept for which we have no evidence. If you would like to more precisely define what you mean by "soul" and provide evidence that it exists, only then can you discuss its properties.
Consciousness cannot be a product of matter. It's just not possible, they are two totally different categories of phenomena.

Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
That is a non-sequitur. Anatman does not posit the existence of a soul. Nor does it provide evidence for one. It's just a way to phrase the illusion of self. I'm puzzled as to why you would bring this up when I asked about the soul; my understanding is that anatman literally means the opposite of soul. Maybe I'm wrong - it wouldn't be the first time.
Yeah that's what I was saying, Anatman is in a sense the absence of soul and in it's own way makes a lot of sense. I say 'in a sense' because Buddhism isn't denying soul so much as self.

Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
And another non-sequitur here. You are welcome to think whatever you like above love, but again it's up to you to provide evidence for your claims. If you say that love happens somewhere outside of the brain, then you are free to provide evidence for this.
Provide evidence to prove that your own biological-materialist paradigm can describe the category of phenomena "love". There's no need to provide evidence for something which can be directly experienced. This is the question of being "bigger than God", that people can experience something and then rationalise to themselves that it isn't that which it clearly is. It's a way of distorting one's real experiences to fit with the logical construct of the paradigm you hold.

And no, I don't have the time or wisdom to fully articulate an alternative paradigm, though I can critique the biological materialist one in a few ways. Firstly, it's totally reductionist.

Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
As I mentioned, the Religion and Philosophy sub-forum would be the best place for that discussion.
Probably yeah, I think we should stick to this whole question of collective sharing in profits.
shankara 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 Yesterday, 09:43 AM   #204
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by shankara View Post
Consciousness cannot be a product of matter. It's just not possible, they are two totally different categories of phenomena.
Matter plus energy.


Originally Posted by shankara View Post
There's no need to provide evidence for something which can be directly experienced.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
--Richard Feynman

carlitos 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 Yesterday, 11:02 AM   #205
shankara
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 91
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Matter plus energy.
Still doesn't explain it... When does the combination of matter and energy go from being unconscious to being conscious? When it becomes a stone? An amoeba? A fish, animal etc?

Anyway this is getting into realms of theory of consciousness which is way off topic.

Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
--Richard Feynman

That's a knife that cuts both ways.
shankara 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 Yesterday, 11:30 AM   #206
shankara
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 91
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Sure, there will some public auditors that will work impartially to re-distribute wealth, determine taxes, etc. This reminded me of a Milton Friedman segment from an old US talk show. "Where in the world are you going to find these angels who are going to organize society for us?"

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


**off-topic aside - Wow, look at how that show has aged. Donahue asked Friedman a question, and gave him literally minutes to answer, almost without interruption.
I don't think these people would have to be angels, they would just be officials who decide (presumably based at least partly on some kind of formula) how the profits of a company would be shared among the workers. There would certainly need to be checks and balances to avoid corruption, as there are in some things today.

Beyond this Samael makes pretty clear that those who we choose to rule over us should be virtuous people, he says that usually we shouldn't be concerned about how people live but in the case of politicians they do need to be virtuous, given the power they hold. I suppose if those at the very top aren't corrupt, those below would be less corruptible, more accountable.

Friedman eh... Of the same Chicago School who drew up the economic blueprint for Pinochet as the tanks were rolling through the streets of Santiago... But his view on drugs was pretty enlightened imo.
shankara 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 Today, 02:02 AM   #207
Cosmic Yak
Master Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 2,509
Originally Posted by shankara View Post


So the capital will not belong to the state as in the Marxist-Leninist model (which also does not permit any kind of free enterprise) but some kind of organ of the state will work to ensure the correct distribution of profits.
So capital won't belong to the state, but the state will control it. Is there any real distinction?
"Some organ of the state" is exactly the kind of vague concept I was talking about. Some questions:
Who will choose these people, and how?
To whom will they be accountable?
Will there be any form of consultation process, or will the profits earned by businesses be subject to the arbitrary whims of remote and unaccountable bureaucrats? Why shouldn't businesses themselves have some say in how they use their profits- reinvestment, R & D, expansion, cash reserves, bonuses, share dividends etc?
How would this work with multinational companies?

Originally Posted by shankara View Post
So in this case we are talking about Distributive Justice. It's all very well to say "oh everyone is getting richer under capitalism",
Which no-one has said, but carry on....

Originally Posted by shankara View Post

this may be true in certain respects but where is the Distributive Justice? Why does one person have the right to more than another? In many cases this is just a question of luck, or even of being unscrupulous in the case of bankers etc.
Why should one person not have the right to have more than another? Why should success be punished and condemned?
Again, you assume that creating and maintaining a successful business is about luck or lack of scruples without any supporting evidence. Prejudice is not evidence. Can you support your assertion?

Originally Posted by shankara View Post
Undeniably the system is unfair, and we can only get out of worrying about this by RATIONALISATION (which unfortunately is the normal attitude of people after they're done with the idealism of youth).
Unfair how? The examples you have cited, from the Big Book of Sammy Stuff, do not apply to the West, nor to many other countries. A lack of worker protection is a failure of government, not a failure of economics.


Originally Posted by shankara View Post
What Samael is suggesting then is a NEW MODEL consisting neither of Private Capital or State Capital. Incidentally, despite being a socialist, he is more against the latter than the former because Communism takes away so many human rights. Of course it would require very major reforms, an entirely new economic system. He gives some ideas about how this work, for example of a system of "spending-saving", taxing consumption rather than wages. The question of the logical possibility of this must be left to economists, maybe it could work somehow (not that they would likely hear of or test the idea, it being buried among "conspiracy theories").
In other words, Sammy Says, so it must be true, despite your admitting you have no idea how it would work in practice.
You still have not addressed the idea of collective capital, which was my question, and the one you promised to answer.
How exactly is it supposed to work?
__________________
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 Today, 07:33 AM   #208
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
...

In other words, Sammy Says, so it must be true, despite your admitting you have no idea how it would work in practice.
You still have not addressed the idea of collective capital, which was my question, and the one you promised to answer.
How exactly is it supposed to work?
All socialists models have failed namely because of corrupt people at the top of the heap. This model would fail also from the same corrupt people.
bknight 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 Today, 08:51 AM   #209
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 13,139
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
All socialists models have failed namely because of corrupt people at the top of the heap. This model would fail also from the same corrupt people.
Related to my earlier comment (several pages back, too lazy to look):

Any system that starts on the assumption that you have to have people of a certain type, or with a certain attitude or attribute, but doe snot include any way to assure that, is not a valid real-world model.

Almost any model will work is you start with the assumption that everyone believes in it and will follow it 100%.

For a workable system, you have to start with the assumption that, say 50% of the people believe in it, 40% are ambivalent, and 10% are actively looking for ways to subvert it for personal gain. Only if it's still workable under those conditions does it have any chance of functioning in the real world.
Hellbound 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 Today, 09:21 AM   #210
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
All socialists models have failed namely because of corrupt people at the top of the heap. This model would fail also from the same corrupt people.
But this time we will have virtuous people at the top.
carlitos 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 Today, 09:25 AM   #211
shankara
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 91
Ok look I'm not saying I, alone, am necessarily capable of completely explaining how to implement Samael's ideas. They are, I believe, simply intended to give a sort of basic political orientation. I don't know to what extent it's possible to develop them into a complete and coherent system and, again, such a project isn't one for a single individual (and no-one seems to find his ideas interesting enough to bother 'coz, y'know, "that guy's a crank").

All I can say then is "I imagine it would be like this..." but maybe somebody else, or a group of people, could shed more light on the actual practical possibilities.

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
So capital won't belong to the state, but the state will control it. Is there any real distinction?
"Some organ of the state" is exactly the kind of vague concept I was talking about. Some questions:
Who will choose these people, and how?
To whom will they be accountable?
Will there be any form of consultation process, or will the profits earned by businesses be subject to the arbitrary whims of remote and unaccountable bureaucrats? Why shouldn't businesses themselves have some say in how they use their profits- reinvestment, R & D, expansion, cash reserves, bonuses, share dividends etc?
How would this work with multinational companies?
The state will have some degree of control perhaps, but the workers themselves would have a lot of power and anyway, if the state doesn't profit from it what reason for corruption?

Well I mentioned how Samael says that people should be aware of how their leaders are living, whether they live ethical lives. I imagine there would be some kind of democratic process.

I would imagine that they might account to each other as a collective and that there would be some kind of process to raise greivances.

I think that the businesses probably would have quite a degree of say in what they want to do with their profits. As they would be property of all the workers, all the workers could vote.

As for international companies, I would imagine that some kind of system could be worked out on the international level, and anyway, perhaps what we now call nations might not exist in the same sense. At least, like Bolivar dreamed, there would be a confederation of Latin American states.


Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
Which no-one has said, but carry on....
People were definitely saying something pretty much to that effect.


Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
Why should one person not have the right to have more than another? Why should success be punished and condemned?
Again, you assume that creating and maintaining a successful business is about luck or lack of scruples without any supporting evidence. Prejudice is not evidence. Can you support your assertion?
Yeah sure, there are entrepreneurs who aren't unscrupulous. On the other, to work in some sectors of banking you have to be a little lacking in conscience...

Should a person have the right to more than another? Yeah, if they work for it, and not in astronomical proportions... I mean, if they work 10,000,000 times harder then...


Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
Unfair how? The examples you have cited, from the Big Book of Sammy Stuff, do not apply to the West, nor to many other countries. A lack of worker protection is a failure of government, not a failure of economics.
You really think that the Neo-Liberal "just act in your own self-interest" is a fair system. I mean, for one example, why should people be allowed to inherit vast wealth? Have they earned it by their ancestry? Well, maybe from some perspective of Karma...

Originally Posted by Samael Aun Weor
Money is like manure: it is not good unless it is spread.

DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE can save America from falling into the Feline Claws of Communism.
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
In other words, Sammy Says, so it must be true, despite your admitting you have no idea how it would work in practice.
You still have not addressed the idea of collective capital, which was my question, and the one you promised to answer.
How exactly is it supposed to work?
Well, I would imagine that the workers in a company would have quite a degree of control (by popular vote) over how capital is used, perhaps the state would just ensure that enough is re-invested that the enterprise stays afloat and continues being profitable.

But as I said, to flesh out a system from the sketch that is Samael's social works, will take a lot more time and energy than I currently have to invest.

Last edited by shankara; Today at 09:26 AM.
shankara 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 Today, 09:26 AM   #212
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,285
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Related to my earlier comment (several pages back, too lazy to look):

Any system that starts on the assumption that you have to have people of a certain type, or with a certain attitude or attribute, but doe snot include any way to assure that, is not a valid real-world model.

Almost any model will work is you start with the assumption that everyone believes in it and will follow it 100%.

For a workable system, you have to start with the assumption that, say 50% of the people believe in it, 40% are ambivalent, and 10% are actively looking for ways to subvert it for personal gain. Only if it's still workable under those conditions does it have any chance of functioning in the real world.
What does the nasal mucus of a female deer have to do with anything?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 Today, 09:28 AM   #213
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Related to my earlier comment (several pages back, too lazy to look):

Any system that starts on the assumption that you have to have people of a certain type, or with a certain attitude or attribute, but doe snot include any way to assure that, is not a valid real-world model.

Almost any model will work is you start with the assumption that everyone believes in it and will follow it 100%.

For a workable system, you have to start with the assumption that, say 50% of the people believe in it, 40% are ambivalent, and 10% are actively looking for ways to subvert it for personal gain. Only if it's still workable under those conditions does it have any chance of functioning in the real world.
What I was referring was that all those socialist models have in reality failed whether you start with any assumptions. It is human nature that doomed these systems of having one/group in charge and they will exploit those below for their own benefit.


In principle I agree with you, but the end result will be failure
bknight 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 Today, 09:30 AM   #214
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
But this time we will have virtuous people at the top.
Right that is how they all attempt to begin but quickly fail for the betterment of the top with the betterment being taken from the bottom.
bknight 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 Today, 09:50 AM   #215
shankara
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 91
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
What I was referring was that all those socialist models have in reality failed whether you start with any assumptions. It is human nature that doomed these systems of having one/group in charge and they will exploit those below for their own benefit.


In principle I agree with you, but the end result will be failure
Samael is very clear that there must be no dictatorship of the proletariat. He also speaks about the absence of propaganda in a true democracy. There would need to be something in the organization of the system which prevents petty dictators from arising, for example he says that no leader would ever serve as long as ten years.

Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Related to my earlier comment (several pages back, too lazy to look):

Any system that starts on the assumption that you have to have people of a certain type, or with a certain attitude or attribute, but doe snot include any way to assure that, is not a valid real-world model.

Almost any model will work is you start with the assumption that everyone believes in it and will follow it 100%.

For a workable system, you have to start with the assumption that, say 50% of the people believe in it, 40% are ambivalent, and 10% are actively looking for ways to subvert it for personal gain. Only if it's still workable under those conditions does it have any chance of functioning in the real world.
Yeah that's an interesting one. There could some kind of vanguard but how would we then avoid the trap of the dictatorship of the proletariat? Maybe that thing Samael says about the political and spiritual leaders being the same.

Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
But this time we will have virtuous people at the top.
Possibly if there was a great deal of transparency in the political process there could be some possibility like this. Of course there would need to be some agreement on what constitutes virtue, which would probably be impossible in Europe. But in a less cynical society this could be achieved, again with the unity of the political and spiritual principles in the leader.

A "syncretist TheoCracy (DivinOcracy)"???
shankara 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 Today, 10:14 AM   #216
Nay_Sayer
I say nay!
 
Nay_Sayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 3,592
Originally Posted by shankara View Post
There are religious people who believe that you go to hell eternally for not having the correct concept about what God is (a Trinity? a Unity? Has a Son?), who don't grasp that in fact there are simply many ways of explaining the same thing... Yet you label me as delusional based on my (perhaps admittedly poor) attempts to explain a couple of books you haven't even read and so surely don't understand...
I go with, Imaginary, made up, nonsense, non-existent
__________________
I am 100% confident all psychics and mediums are frauds.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"01010100 00110100 01110110 01101101 00110111 01100111 01010010 00110110 00001101 00001010"

Said the robot gleefully as he went on his rampage.
Nay_Sayer 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 Today, 10:28 AM   #217
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,772
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
Right that is how they all attempt to begin but quickly fail for the betterment of the top with the betterment being taken from the bottom.
Not so much (but that happens too) in the betterment of the top but in particular - a very human trait - to give 'help' to their children, nieces and nephews. After the first visionaries lead the charge they cannot help helping their offspring do better than the average.
Hans 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 Today, 12:42 PM   #218
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by shankara View Post
Samael is very clear that there must be no dictatorship of the proletariat. He also speaks about the absence of propaganda in a true democracy. There would need to be something in the organization of the system which prevents petty dictators from arising, for example he says that no leader would ever serve as long as ten years.

What a utopian non-existent dream. In other words what he envisions won't happen if fact can't happen. Look at all the evidence that history is full of.
bknight 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 Today, 01:12 PM   #219
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 13,139
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
What does the nasal mucus of a female deer have to do with anything?
Damn it! I've let slip the secrets of the mystical order of the bucksnort!

Originally Posted by bknight View Post
What I was referring was that all those socialist models have in reality failed whether you start with any assumptions. It is human nature that doomed these systems of having one/group in charge and they will exploit those below for their own benefit.


In principle I agree with you, but the end result will be failure
That was what I was saying, too. The models don't work because they all have those assumptions that everyone buys into it/is virtuous enough/whatever. They don't account for human nature.

I think we're agreeing in more than principal, I'm just not as clear as I'd like to be
Hellbound 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 Today, 01:51 PM   #220
bknight
Graduate Poster
 
bknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Damn it! I've let slip the secrets of the mystical order of the bucksnort!



That was what I was saying, too. The models don't work because they all have those assumptions that everyone buys into it/is virtuous enough/whatever. They don't account for human nature.

I think we're agreeing in more than principal, I'm just not as clear as I'd like to be
NP We are on the same side of the court.
bknight 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 04:30 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.