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

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


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 auras , hallucinations

Reply
Old 6th December 2017, 03:30 AM   #201
P.J. Denyer
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,847
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
What I am curious about is, why haven't any of the investigations yielded strong evidence?
I spent all day yesterday searching for evidence of wild elephants in England's Chiltern Hills. I didn't find any. Why do you think my investigation didn't yield strong evidence of elephants?
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer 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 December 2017, 03:53 AM   #202
P.J. Denyer
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,847
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Four months ago we observed a neutron star collision based on gravitational waves. We had only confirmed the existence of gravitational waves 2 years earlier. It is risible we still have to entertain questions on paranormal activity that has never been confirmed in a lab.
What I find risible is the idea that these things are undetectable by science but perfectly clear to a conman wrapped in a bedsheet. There's something obnoxious about the attitude that "I know more than people who've spent their lives studying because my fuzzy feelings are obviously right", I feel the same way, although perhaps even more strongly, about alternative medicine practitioners, who needs to study the real reasons for illness and disease when you can claim to see and manipulate 'auras' or wave a crystal around.

I think it was on 'Enemies of Reason' where an 'alternate therapy practitioner' was interviewed, she bought a 'crystal healing' machine but the instructions were in a language she didn't understand. Did she have them translated? Of course not, she operates it 'according to her feelings'! Now don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that if she had been following the instructions the machine would have been effective and she would have been doing anything other than conning dupes, some of whom might be paying real money for a non existent treatment for actual medical conditions. But this attitude that flows down from the whole "personal feelings trump scientific evidence" meant that not only did she feel no requirement to actually be medically trained before offering a claimed medical service, she didn't even think she needed to read the bloody instructions.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer 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 December 2017, 05:43 AM   #203
kali1137
Critical Thinker
 
kali1137's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Purgatory, PA
Posts: 404
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
I've realized that I can not readily provide a logical (or otherwise) argument to support the objectivity of phenomena allegedly perceived through supernatural means. An experiment may be possible, but due to how elaborate the experiment would have to be I am not willing to carry it out. You are probably not interested in debating whether a given experiment could work in principle and neither am I.
What on earth is so "elaborate" about locating a person through a wall by their aura if such a thing exists?? It is so tiresome to have person after person come on here with beliefs they can't back up. You get upset that we don't just take a person's word for it. Plenty of common sense is laid out and what I consider to be some pretty standard tests. Nothing elaborate if the beliefs are real. Yet you are the just another person who backs out when a legit test is brought to the table. This behavior is the main reason I remain a skeptic.
kali1137 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 December 2017, 06:39 AM   #204
P.J. Denyer
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,847
Originally Posted by kali1137 View Post
What on earth is so "elaborate" about locating a person through a wall by their aura if such a thing exists?? It is so tiresome to have person after person come on here with beliefs they can't back up. You get upset that we don't just take a person's word for it. Plenty of common sense is laid out and what I consider to be some pretty standard tests. Nothing elaborate if the beliefs are real. Yet you are the just another person who backs out when a legit test is brought to the table. This behavior is the main reason I remain a skeptic.
Earlier in the thread I mentioned Emily Rosa, the nine year old girl who disproved the claim of Therapeutic Touch practitioners that they could feel the energy field around their dupes patients. Apparently forth graders can figure out ways to perform these 'elaborate' tests successfully. It's a shame the believers aren't similarly sophisticated.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer 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 December 2017, 09:06 AM   #205
Nay_Sayer
I say nay!
 
Nay_Sayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 3,366
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
You guys seem convinced that there's nothing paranormal about the world, did you read or watch or listen to something that convinced you or is it just your own thinking that has led you to that? If you did read or watch something, could you tell me what it was? What exactly (experiences and experiences of books, articles, videos, etc. included) has made you a skeptic?
My own thinking and interaction with the world.

Look I know it's fun to imagine that our world just beyond our cities is a fanciful land of wonder and mystery. To some degree, it is but if you simply whitewash everything you don't understand with "Paranormal" you miss out greatly on the even more wonderful feeling of discovery, That moment when you get to learn the proverbial secret to the magic trick.

My question to you is why would I want to deny myself inquiry? Why, for example, instead of investigating a strange noise, instead, choose to think it must be a ghost and go on my merry way?
__________________
I am 100% confident all psychics and mediums are frauds.
----------------------------------------------
Proud woo denier
----------------------------------------------
“That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.” -Christopher Hitchens-

Last edited by Nay_Sayer; 6th December 2017 at 09:07 AM.
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 6th December 2017, 10:05 AM   #206
Gilbert Syndrome
Philosopher
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Aigburth, Liverpool, UK
Posts: 5,382
Originally Posted by xterra View Post
Wonder234, have you read the Wikipedia article on Russell's Teapot? What is your reaction to it?
He's ignored it, like he ignored the link re: transcendental meditation, and everything else he's been offered.

He's not here for anyone to sway his views, he just wants to see how his thoughts look when they're typed down on screen.
__________________
Generic proclamation of positivity:

Scouse saying - Go 'ed, is right, nice one, boss, well in, sound, belter, made up.

Usage: 'Go 'ed, lad, get us an ale in, nice one.'
Gilbert Syndrome 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 December 2017, 10:26 AM   #207
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 20,801
Originally Posted by Gilbert Syndrome View Post
He's ignored it, like he ignored the link re: transcendental meditation, and everything else he's been offered.

He's not here for anyone to sway his views, he just wants to see how his thoughts look when they're typed down on screen.
I soon came to think this was a she not a he. I've no idea why. I'm getting the feeling that s/he has buggered off, probably muttering and tutting about us and "evidence".
__________________
The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place. The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG 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 December 2017, 12:57 PM   #208
xterra
So far, so good...
 
xterra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: On the outskirts of Nowhere; the middle was too crowded
Posts: 2,677
Gilbert Syndrome, I repeat this for the sake of Wonder234

Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
What I am curious about is, why haven't any of the investigations yielded strong evidence?

And what I am curious about is, why you won't read the link I gave you and won't respond to me.

I think, based on the pattern you [GS, not Wonder234] noted, that there is little chance that I will get a response, but it is worth asking the question ... multiple times.
__________________
Over we go....
xterra 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 December 2017, 01:33 PM   #209
P.J. Denyer
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,847
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
I soon came to think this was a she not a he. I've no idea why. I'm getting the feeling that s/he has buggered off, probably muttering and tutting about us and "evidence".
95% certain it's a he. The same question is posted on Quora, which has a 'real name' policy.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer 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 December 2017, 04:52 AM   #210
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,129
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
You guys seem convinced that there's nothing paranormal about the world, did you read or watch or listen to something that convinced you or is it just your own thinking that has led you to that? If you did read or watch something, could you tell me what it was? What exactly (experiences and experiences of books, articles, videos, etc. included) has made you a skeptic?
I was interested in all such things when I was a young, but the more I learned about the world, the more I realized that all paranormal events had simple explanations not involving anything paranormal.

I would love telepathy, life after death and so on to be real, but as long as every evidence for it can be explained without resorting to the paranormal, I just cannot believe it.

Almost daily I see statements about the paranormal that are obvious fantasies, not based on anything else than imagination, but I also see that these statements are accepted as facts by the believers. That alone would be enough to make me a skeptic.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh 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 December 2017, 05:21 AM   #211
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,340
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
You guys seem convinced that there's nothing paranormal about the world, did you read or watch or listen to something that convinced you or is it just your own thinking that has led you to that? If you did read or watch something, could you tell me what it was? What exactly (experiences and experiences of books, articles, videos, etc. included) has made you a skeptic?
That's an interesting question, and of course one absolutely central to the mission of this forum. I'd like to take it apart and look at it a bit at a time.

Firstly, what does "paranormal" even mean? If something is real, it can be perceived and experienced; if it can't be perceived and experienced, it isn't real. If it can be perceived it can be measured, so if it can't be measured it isn't real. "Paranormal" seems to be a self-contradictory word, in that it seems to mean "things that are real but can't be measured." To my mind, that's a null set. Taking this thread as a case in point, if seeing auras is a real thing and not an optical illusion or an error in perception, then it must be possible to see the aura even when the person generating it is occluded, so measurement is possible. If it can be measured, is it "paranormal" any more; and if it turns out you can only see the aura when you can see the person, doesn't that indicate that the aura isn't in fact real?

Secondly, assuming "paranormal" means "things that are real but can't be measured," why would the default position be belief? Why does there have to have been a cause that resulted in someone not believing in things they've never seen, and apparently nobody else has either? Taking this thread as a case in point, the OP asserts that something exists which the poster has never actually experienced. That's even weaker than an unsupported anecdote. If you say to me, "Auras exist, though I've never seen one myself," why should I believe them?

In my case, I think, what "made" me a skeptic is not having had a lifetime of people telling me lies and insisting that I believe them. I've never had to develop the mental processes that are required not to be a skeptic; I can simply ask, "If this is true, can you show me evidence for it?" If the answer is "No," then I have no reason to believe it's true.

So let's put aside the meaningless and misleading word "paranormal;" it's not helpful. Do I believe things exist that I've never personally perceived? Yes, provided the evidence is sufficiently convincing. No, if it isn't. It's really quite a simple and obvious position to take; I'm at a loss to see what's complicated about it, or why it's sufficiently unnatural that someone has to be "made" a skeptic.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers 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 December 2017, 05:30 PM   #212
P.J. Denyer
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,847
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
I was interested in all such things when I was a young, but the more I learned about the world, the more I realized that all paranormal events had simple explanations not involving anything paranormal.

I would love telepathy, life after death and so on to be real, but as long as every evidence for it can be explained without resorting to the paranormal, I just cannot believe it.

Almost daily I see statements about the paranormal that are obvious fantasies, not based on anything else than imagination, but I also see that these statements are accepted as facts by the believers. That alone would be enough to make me a skeptic.
It would be really nice to have someone come on the forum who claimed to have an ability and genuinely want to prove it. Preferably someone honest enough to do the test and accept the result (I know they're rare but there are quite a few of the out there) rather than this current run of people who proportedly believe and then run away (tossing excuses behind them) as soon as a test is suggested. To me it seems dishonest and I know that my impatience shows through.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer 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 December 2017, 07:56 PM   #213
Wonder234
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 175
Originally Posted by xterra View Post
Wonder234, have you read the Wikipedia article on Russell's Teapot? What is your reaction to it?
I understand that the burden of proof is an obligation by the person putting forth a claim in an argument to provide an argument for that claim, and I get that because you are putting forth the claim that you ought to be the one to explain it, but I don't get why.
Wonder234 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 December 2017, 08:11 PM   #214
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 11,910
Originally Posted by xterra View Post
Gilbert Syndrome, I repeat this for the sake of Wonder234




And what I am curious about is, why you won't read the link I gave you and won't respond to me.

I think, based on the pattern you [GS, not Wonder234] noted, that there is little chance that I will get a response, but it is worth asking the question ... multiple times.
Because there is so little evidence in the first place, goddamit. When will you pathologically credulous freaks finally figure that out????
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave

Last edited by John Jones; 7th December 2017 at 08:16 PM.
John Jones 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 December 2017, 08:26 PM   #215
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,599
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
Why is that important?
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 December 2017, 09:11 PM   #216
xterra
So far, so good...
 
xterra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: On the outskirts of Nowhere; the middle was too crowded
Posts: 2,677
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
I understand that the burden of proof is an obligation by the person putting forth a claim in an argument to provide an argument for that claim, and I get that because you are putting forth the claim that you ought to be the one to explain it, but I don't get why.

Suppose I say that there is a 10-million dollar treasure buried 30 feet deep in middle of the field at the end of Maple Road, and I want you to go dig it up.

Don't you think that you would want some assurance that it is really there before you go get a shovel and start digging? So you ask me how I know it's there.

I say, "Because I have this wonderful map that I bought for $3.00 from someone on the Internet!"

And you say, "Come on, xterra, you can't possibly believe someone would sell you a map to a 10-million dollar treasure for $3.00!"

And I say, "But, Wonder234, prove to me that it's not there."

Are you gonna grab the shovel, roll up your sleeves and start digging?

Or are you gonna say, "Sorry, pal, you're gonna have to dig it up yourself, or provide me with proof that it's really there"?
__________________
Over we go....
xterra 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 December 2017, 10:24 PM   #217
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,526
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
It would be really nice to have someone come on the forum who claimed to have an ability and genuinely want to prove it.
Actually it's really depressing.
theprestige 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 December 2017, 10:47 PM   #218
barehl
Master Poster
 
barehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,628
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
I do a practice that is intended to "open" my third eye. The practice is chanting the sound OM for 10 minutes a day, twice a day. I do the practice for a couple of weeks, and eventually something happens, you can call it my third eye opening just for the sake of argument. All of a sudden I see what looks like auras, see what looks like ghosts, and feel what seems to be other people's emotions. What would you, if you are a materialist, say about this as a materialist? And for the sake of the thread we'll just say a materialist is someone who believes that there are no supernatural entities.
I'm familiar with self-hypnosis so this doesn't seem at all unusual to me. I don't see any connection to the supernatural.
barehl 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 December 2017, 10:54 PM   #219
barehl
Master Poster
 
barehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,628
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
It would be really nice to have someone come on the forum who claimed to have an ability and genuinely want to prove it. Preferably someone honest enough to do the test and accept the result (I know they're rare but there are quite a few of the out there) rather than this current run of people who proportedly believe and then run away (tossing excuses behind them) as soon as a test is suggested. To me it seems dishonest and I know that my impatience shows through.
I guess it depends on what you like. I get that same reaction from people on this forum who swear up and down that they are true, dyed-in-the-wool skeptics. They can indeed split hairs and be skeptical to the nth degree with anything they don't like, but turn the conversation to something they do like and you get special pleading with a megaphone. I'm sorry but I've seen this all too often.
barehl 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 December 2017, 11:56 PM   #220
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,925
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
I understand that the burden of proof is an obligation by the person putting forth a claim in an argument to provide an argument for that claim, and I get that because you are putting forth the claim that you ought to be the one to explain it, but I don't get why.
To me this parses as "I understand it but I don't understand it". What exactly is it you don't get?

Are you familiar with Hitchens' Razor: "Anything which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"?. Do you understand that?
__________________
"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
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 8th December 2017, 12:03 AM   #221
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,925
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
It would be really nice to have someone come on the forum who claimed to have an ability and genuinely want to prove it. Preferably someone honest enough to do the test and accept the result (I know they're rare but there are quite a few of the out there)
I've found them to be as rare as hens teeth. In my years here I've followed, even assisted, in several tests and however sincere the claimant appears to be to find the truth as soon as the truth turns out not to be what they expected excuses of increasing ridiculousness start to be trotted out.
__________________
"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
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 8th December 2017, 02:02 AM   #222
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,286
I have seen two posts here take a shot at the reason for the burden of proof, but these feel like they are making assumptions that a person asking that question may not hold.

It would probably work best to go to writing that had to rigourously argue for the concept logically and start there.
BobTheCoward 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 December 2017, 02:21 AM   #223
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,340
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
I understand that the burden of proof is an obligation by the person putting forth a claim in an argument to provide an argument for that claim, and I get that because you are putting forth the claim that you ought to be the one to explain it, but I don't get why.
Two questions:

(1) If the person putting forth the claim doesn't have an obligation to provide evidence for it, why should anyone else have the same obligation?

(2) Why should anyone act on the basis of a claim someone else has made but declined to provide evidence for?

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers 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 December 2017, 04:01 AM   #224
P.J. Denyer
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,847
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
I've found them to be as rare as hens teeth. In my years here I've followed, even assisted, in several tests and however sincere the claimant appears to be to find the truth as soon as the truth turns out not to be what they expected excuses of increasing ridiculousness start to be trotted out.
There are quite a few of us here who used to believe in such things but assessed the evidence/honestly evaluated their own results so it is presumably more common than it appears, I suppose it might be that a large percentage of those who are genuinely open to honestly evaluating their 'powers' can do initial assessments and reach a negative conclusion while still lurking. Edzard Ernst would be probably the most public face of testing and rejecting one's prior beliefs.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer 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 December 2017, 04:10 AM   #225
P.J. Denyer
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,847
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
I understand that the burden of proof is an obligation by the person putting forth a claim in an argument to provide an argument for that claim, and I get that because you are putting forth the claim that you ought to be the one to explain it, but I don't get why.
No, not "explain" it, "provide evidence" for it. If you prove that a "paranormal" phenomena exists then people will attempt to find a rational for it, even if it means changing our view of the world. No one is asking for a philosophical argument or a theoretical framework for these powers you are claiming exist, they are asking for evidence. Demonstrate that they work, explanations come later if you can demonstrate that they do.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

Last edited by P.J. Denyer; 8th December 2017 at 04:43 AM.
P.J. Denyer 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 December 2017, 05:00 AM   #226
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,129
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
It would be really nice to have someone come on the forum who claimed to have an ability and genuinely want to prove it. Preferably someone honest enough to do the test and accept the result (I know they're rare but there are quite a few of the out there) rather than this current run of people who proportedly believe and then run away (tossing excuses behind them) as soon as a test is suggested. To me it seems dishonest and I know that my impatience shows through.
I am not sure it is dishonest, or that the believers themselves think of it as dishonesty. One of the things I have come to accept, but not understand, is that people's beliefs can be consciously selected. It is possible for a person to decide to believe in something, even something unlikely to be real, and this belief is to this person as solid as my own beliefs in most things.

But in the back of their heads, these persons are aware that it is best not to test this belief against reality in order to avoid cognitive dissonance, and this is what you and I perceive as dishonesty, but these persons do not register the dishonesty. They can even try to defend their beliefs with new invented claims such as "God does not like to be tested; He wants our pure unwavering belief" or "Skeptics send out a negative force that causes tests to go wrong".
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh 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 December 2017, 05:06 AM   #227
P.J. Denyer
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,847
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
I am not sure it is dishonest, or that the believers themselves think of it as dishonesty. One of the things I have come to accept, but not understand, is that people's beliefs can be consciously selected. It is possible for a person to decide to believe in something, even something unlikely to be real, and this belief is to this person as solid as my own beliefs in most things.

But in the back of their heads, these persons are aware that it is best not to test this belief against reality in order to avoid cognitive dissonance, and this is what you and I perceive as dishonesty, but these persons do not register the dishonesty. They can even try to defend their beliefs with new invented claims such as "God does not like to be tested; He wants our pure unwavering belief" or "Skeptics send out a negative force that causes tests to go wrong".
It depends on the claimant, with Michel H it's a symptom of his illness but at the other end I suspect KotA (as an example) of deliberate trolling. With a sliding scale in between.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer 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 December 2017, 05:15 AM   #228
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,129
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
I've found them to be as rare as hens teeth. In my years here I've followed, even assisted, in several tests and however sincere the claimant appears to be to find the truth as soon as the truth turns out not to be what they expected excuses of increasing ridiculousness start to be trotted out.
I remember the dowser you helped test. He was the most sincere claimant I have ever followed, and he was willing to put his money where his mouth was. And yet, his beliefs trumped reality after all.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh 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 December 2017, 06:31 AM   #229
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,925
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
I remember the dowser you helped test. He was the most sincere claimant I have ever followed, and he was willing to put his money where his mouth was. And yet, his beliefs trumped reality after all.
DowserDon, yes, a good example. He seemed fairly rational and was convinced there was a non-paranormal explanation as to why dowsing worked (he had some kind of theory, the details of which he never shared). But he was so emotionally invested in it all he never considered the possibility that he might be mistaken, and when it turned out he was he still wouldn't accept it.

I remember chatting with Professor French during the test, who had been corresponding with him all the time we'd been talking to him here and giving him all the same information about the ideomotor effect that we were. Yet when we did the test DowserDon started off by listing all his anecdotes about dowsing "working", every single one of which was explainable by the ideomotor effect, as if there was no possible explanation for them but that dowsing really worked.

Here's his thread, which still makes fascinating, if depressing, reading:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=226770
__________________
"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
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 8th December 2017, 09:23 AM   #230
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 11,239
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
I understand that the burden of proof is an obligation by the person putting forth a claim in an argument to provide an argument for that claim, and I get that because you are putting forth the claim that you ought to be the one to explain it, but I don't get why.
If I may chime in ...

You do not have to explain to anyone how this paranormal power of yours does actually work.

Instead, you have to show to everyone that this paranormal power of yours does actually work.

And since you have repeatedly claimed to everyone that this paranormal power of yours does actually work, then it should not be difficult for you to show everyone that this paranormal power of yours does actually work.

I hope that is clear.
__________________
On 16 MAY 2017 Paul Bethke discussed some of the sexual prohibitions of his god regarding man-to-man sex acts and woman-to-woman sex acts: "So not only lesbian acts but also anal sex.."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0#post11840580

A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow 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 December 2017, 09:59 AM   #231
P.J. Denyer
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,847
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
If I may chime in ...

You do not have to explain to anyone how this paranormal power of yours does actually work.

Instead, you have to show to everyone that this paranormal power of yours does actually work.

And since you have repeatedly claimed to everyone that this paranormal power of yours does actually work, then it should not be difficult for you to show everyone that this paranormal power of yours does actually work.

I hope that is clear.
I made the same point in #225. A lot of claimants seem to confuse 'provide evidence for' with 'argue for/make an unfalsafiable claim about'.

Except that he doesn't seem to be claiming it works for him yet. He seems to be claiming it works for the person(s) who are charging him to learn how to do it..
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer 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 December 2017, 10:15 AM   #232
xterra
So far, so good...
 
xterra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: On the outskirts of Nowhere; the middle was too crowded
Posts: 2,677
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
Except that he doesn't seem to be claiming it works for him yet. He seems to be claiming it works for the person(s) who are charging him to learn how to do it..

Almost correct. Wonder 234 says that the people who are charging him tell him that it works. I don't know that he has seen actual, objective, non-anecdotal evidence.

I hope that he comes back to comment on my example in post #216.
__________________
Over we go....
xterra 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 December 2017, 11:43 AM   #233
JesseCuster
Muse
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 725
Having read through this and the reincarnation thread, it seems that Wonder234 wants to actively put aside anything in the way of evidence while discussing the paranormal. It all should be discussed in pure hypotheticals. He seems to think that some sort of back and forth discussion between believers and skeptics can achieve something without any mention of what does or doesn't actually happen in the real world with regard to these phenomena.

Which as has been pointed out by several people is rather a pointless exercise. May as well be discussing the pros and cons of flying by flapping your arms, without any bothering to demonstrate that such a thing isn't pure fantasy.
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 8th December 2017, 03:24 PM   #234
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,272
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
Here's his thread, which still makes fascinating, if depressing, reading:
"I can sense these things through asphalt, but not plywood!" is kinda amazing.
SOdhner 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 December 2017, 05:33 PM   #235
barehl
Master Poster
 
barehl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,628
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
A lot of claimants seem to confuse 'provide evidence for' with 'argue for/make an unfalsafiable claim about'.
I get this in my threads, the difference being that it's the "skeptics" who can't seem to understand the difference.
barehl 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 December 2017, 05:36 PM   #236
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,950
Originally Posted by barehl View Post
I get this in my threads, the difference being that it's the "skeptics" who can't seem to understand the difference.
Ohhh! SNAP! You sure showed them!
The Norseman 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 December 2017, 06:27 PM   #237
P.J. Denyer
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,847
Originally Posted by xterra View Post
Almost correct. Wonder 234 says that the people who are charging him tell him that it works. I don't know that he has seen actual, objective, non-anecdotal evidence.

I hope that he comes back to comment on my example in post #216.
I think we're both correct actually. My recollection on which I based the comment (no I couldn't even be bothered to go back over this short a thread) was that his wording was such that he basically said that they could do it, when questioned he admitted that the 'evidence' was that they claimed he'd be able to do it himself with their instruction. But it was introduced as a claim he doubted.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer 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 December 2017, 02:38 PM   #238
P.J. Denyer
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,847
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
I've found them to be as rare as hens teeth. In my years here I've followed, even assisted, in several tests and however sincere the claimant appears to be to find the truth as soon as the truth turns out not to be what they expected excuses of increasing ridiculousness start to be trotted out.
I remember that one, after all the effort you put in both online and irl, DowserDon's response was horribly disappointing, however on the opposite side here's an example from a thread that you also participated, in a second dowser entered the thread claiming to be able to prove his abilities and after reading the thread went off and tested himself...

Originally Posted by vman0909 View Post
I am shocked at our ability to convince ourselves of things that are not true. I was convinced that dowsing worked for finding utility lines. However, after doing a few tests, I am convinced that I was using visual clues and the rods were doing what my body told them to do. Just a slight tilt of the hands will cause the rods to cross.

I attempted to take out the human factor by drilling two holes in a 2X4 at the approximate width that I hold the rods in my hands, so that they could swing freely. This does not completely take out the human factor, but your actions to manipulate the rods are much more noticable.

Burried electical line--No indication
Burried water line--No indication
Burried telephone line--No indication
Swimming pool--No indication
Known Water Table (two water wells lined up with each other) --No indication

The only logical conclusion is that I knew enough about trenching utility lines to "feel" the burried path and made the rods indicate what I felt.

I never believed that anything supernatural was happening and I have been wrong many times in my life (why I don't have any tattoos), so I am not upset.

These tests won't prove anything to anybody, except me, but I was completely open minded when I started. Maybe somebody else can prove dowsing, but I can't.

Sadly the poster didn't stick around after his epiphany, I think anyone willing to test themselves, honestly appraise the results and admit they were wrong would have been a welcome addition.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer 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 10th December 2017, 11:23 AM   #239
xterra
So far, so good...
 
xterra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: On the outskirts of Nowhere; the middle was too crowded
Posts: 2,677
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I have seen two posts here take a shot at the reason for the burden of proof, but these feel like they are making assumptions that a person asking that question may not hold.

It would probably work best to go to writing that had to rigourously argue for the concept logically and start there.

I am having difficulty understanding what you mean. In particular, please comment on post #216, in which I tried to explain to Wonder234 the reason that the burden of proof is on the person making the claim, in that particular example, me.

Do you see me making assumptions that Wonder234 may not hold? If so, what are they?

Also, what does "rigourously argue for the concept logically" mean in this context?
__________________
Over we go....
xterra 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 10th December 2017, 12:47 PM   #240
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,712
Originally Posted by Wonder234 View Post
I understand that the burden of proof is an obligation by the person putting forth a claim.. but I don't get why.
If one were a sociopath, one would also struggle with this basic concept. Naturally, sociopaths enjoy the free lunch.

You see:
You have eaten your cake and you demand it on your plate.

You charge on the swings; and the roundabouts.

Your grass must be greener on both sides.

In short: you want free rein to leash.
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn 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 » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

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 08:54 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.