Earl, How do you verify Psychic Claims
Dan Pressnell
>who proclaim themselves psychics. Need it be suggested but it's my
>opinion that anyone who claims that they are the seventh descendent of a
>psychic, etc.; someone who got hit in the head by a meteor; or, someone
>who has a special gift from God, are those who I consider to be frauds
On Uri Geller's website, there's a story about him where he claims he got
hit on the head, or something like that.
You want replicatable experiments? Here's one. If the spoon is not too
heavy-duty, I can bend it with my hands 100% of the time.
Uri Geller can, too.
Dan
Steven Reiser
Hi,
I started this newsgroup in 1990 in an effort to create a forum in which
people could simply share their experiences and what they speculated or
believed about them without being hounded by skeptics to prove anything.
The purpose of this newsgroup is to share paranormal experiences.
If you want to debate proof then take it to sci.skeptic and other skeptic
newsgroups and LEAVE IT THERE - PLEASE.
I quit reading this newsgroup years ago because many skeptics have no
respect for a division of interests. My perception is they are no
different than Bible thumpers beating your door down to convince you to
join their religion. It can be very annoying to a group that would like to
discuss paranormal openly without some skeptic screaming prove it or
constantly deriding people for their belief in even the possibility of
paranormal experience.
For me, ESP, telepathy and other so-called paranormal abilities are a
fact. However, I believe it with or without proof because I have
personally experienced it and that is good enough for me. I am a
scientist and in my career things need proof. However, there comes a point
for many of us where experience is so powerful that we can't see a way to
prove it and often have NO DESIRE to prove it. Such is my situation, and
my believing it is not hurting anyone. I have no desire to prove the
existence of ESP to others, but rather to explore the situations in which
it is most likely and for some types of powers to see if they can be
controlled and to do it with and open mind to possibilities.
The best way to make alt.paranormal an effective group is to stop the
cross-posting.
As for me I have news filters that filter out any news with the string
"skeptic" in the newsgroup name.
If I wanted to debate proof I would go to sci.skeptic where that and
debunking are major concern.
The very saddest element of existence on this planet are people who insist
everyone must think like them and have the same exact perception of
reality as them and when proof to the scientist becomes as dogmatic as
faith to the religious then the proselytizing zealots become quite
annoying in their desire to convert.
I am an apatheist, and what is that? I couldn't care less whether there
is a God or not. Why? Because I have no experience that indicates it is
even worth discussing. I don't call myself an atheist because that is a
belief to and is as time wasting as if I went around protesting that I
don't believe in the tooth fairy.
People can believe whatever they want. Each of us is trying to find
something for themselves we call truth and I have found that the greatest
happiness comes from minding my own business about what I believe and to
not shove any of my beliefs at others. I don't go to Christian newsgroups
and blast them though I don't agree with them and I feel the same respect
should be given those who wish to explore paranormal.
Learning to love and accept our fellow man with their differences is a
much greater accomplishment than finding absolute truths about reality.
Steve
--
s...@srv.net (Steven Reiser)
Home Businesses: USANA and Save Now Enterprise
http://www.srv.net/~sir/reiser.html
Bruce Daniel Kettler
In <sir-270496...@199.104.80.6> s...@srv.net (Steven Reiser)
writes:
I bid you contact Earl Curley. I would ask you to read my latest
postings. I would ask that you contact the internet provider of Dan
Pressman. I would ask you to read my reply to "TWITCH" in 4 parts of
"IS PARANORMAL TURNING INTO ANTI-PARANORMAL"
I really appreciate you letting us know who you are and how you feel.
Now, let Dan Pressman's internet know who you are and how you feel.
The reason is that the matter is still not yet settled.
Bruce Daniel Kettler
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal,alt.paranet.skeptic,alt.paranet.psi
Subject: Re: *WHY I STARTED ALT.PARANORMAL 6 YRS. AGO*
References: <4lloet$b...@muir.math.niu.edu> <4lmq90$c...@nougat.asgo.net> <4lmtaq$5...@newshost.vvm.com> <sir-270496...@199.104.80.6>
>The best way to mappy that you see it that way. I feel your input is quite
valuable at this time. I hope you can make your voice known and felt.
I've been saying the same thing all along. We, who are into this
newsgroup just want to write with each other, and don't want to answer
your need for "proof." Go find it yourself, and leave us alone.
Carl J Lydick
In article <sir-270496...@199.104.80.6>, s...@srv.net (Steven Reiser) writes:
=Hi,
=
=I started this newsgroup in 1990 in an effort to create a forum in which
=people could simply share their experiences and what they speculated or
=believed about them without being hounded by skeptics to prove anything.
=
=The purpose of this newsgroup is to share paranormal experiences.
=
=If you want to debate proof then take it to sci.skeptic and other skeptic
=newsgroups and LEAVE IT THERE - PLEASE.
If the folks like you who just want others to affirm your own superstitions
don't want any debate about proof, then you shouldn't crosspost your claims to
sci.skeptic.
=I quit reading this newsgroup years ago because many skeptics have no
=respect for a division of interests.
Please note that you're crossposting this bullshit to sci.skeptic. How is it
that you think you've got something to complain about?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CA...@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL
Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Bruce Daniel Kettler
In <4m0j3n$e...@gap.cco.caltech.edu> ca...@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J
SOL1::CARL
>
>Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid
for. My
>understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).
So
>unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me
or my
>organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can
try to
>hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with
it.
I can't answer for Steven. I can only say that if it were me, I'd be
figuring that people who spend most of their time reading SCI.SKEPTIC
take times aside to spend in alt.paranormal, and other similar
newsgroups. The best way *I'd* reach them would be to to to
SCI.SKEPTIC *before* they come to alt.paranormal. That's what I'd be
doing.
Steven can answer for himself, of course, if he want's to.
claire read
"apathiest" is a nice word. I like the idea of complete indifference to
the existence of god. The occult however is another matter. sometimes
things happen and there isn't a rational explanation, so we're forced to
believe in the irational. Intuition used to be the realm of women
because they supposedly had less scientific, lineal minds then men.
even now it's said the men are better at math than women. I wonder if
most of the debunkers nad skeptics are men, real retards when it comes
to using their own builtin psychic talent....the one we call intuition.
I found my lost car keys in the refrigerator by following a pendulum
around the house. My own talent is to see vignets or snapshots of
places where people have lived at sometime in their lives. It's
happened at least a half dozen times, but not under my control.
interesting?
claire
Charles Gregory
Carl J Lydick (ca...@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU) wrote:
: =I started this newsgroup in 1990 in an effort to create a forum in which
: =people could simply share their experiences and what they speculated or
: =believed about them without being hounded by skeptics to prove anything.
: If the folks like you who just want others to affirm your own superstitions
: don't want any debate about proof, then you shouldn't crosspost your claims to
: sci.skeptic.
I agree. I have an interest in "scientific" debate on these subjects, but
the tenuous nature of the experiences leaves few openings for rigorous
examination of the phenomena involved. So I strongly support leaving the
FEW (if any) scientific arguments about these matters in the "skeptics"
area, and the "open" speculation without scientific basis, in the
"paranormal" areas.
: =I quit reading this newsgroup years ago because many skeptics have no
: =respect for a division of interests.
: Please note that you're crossposting this bullshit to sci.skeptic. How is it
: that you think you've got something to complain about?
Please note that you're crossposting this bullshit to alt.paranormal. <grin>
The thing to "complain about" is that some TWIT keeps cross-posting their
messages from one group to the other, and once these messages get
started, no one removes the "wrong" group from the message header.
Therefore might I RECOMMEND for the various kinds of postings:
1) If a post makes pretensions of "proving" something while not really
doing anything worthwhile, please delete the reference to
"alt.paranormal" and let the "twit" debate his little heart out on
sci.skeptic until you get tired of it.
2) If the posting makes references to a phenomenon without any pretension
to try and substantiate it in a scientific manner, please delete the
reference to "sci.skeptic" and allow those who share the "unscientific"
interest to proceed in their own manner.
If in doubt about the character of the message, just consider the
character of your REPLY. Presume that a person posting to sci.skeptic
wants an argument and someone posting to alt.paranormal wants "support".
Grant each what they desire. Edit your "Newgroups" line in your headers
appropriately.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Charles Gregory
E-Mail: cha...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca
Home Page: [J]ump to "http://www.freenet.hamilton.on.ca/~ab801/Profile.html"
twi...@hub.ofthe.net
s...@srv.net (Steven Reiser) wrote:
How very sad. You have my sympathy, Steve. To seperate one's
professional life and private life and to require different standards.
I hope that you find happiness.
Twi...@hub.ofthe.net
Wenthold Paul G.
In article <4m16ko$9...@mentor.telis.org>,
claire read <yum...@telis.org> wrote:
>
>I found my lost car keys in the refrigerator by following a pendulum
>around the house. My own talent is to see vignets or snapshots of
>places where people have lived at sometime in their lives. It's
>happened at least a half dozen times, but not under my control.
>interesting?
If you really have an ability to do this, I urge you to
contact James Randi. There's a half a million bucks in
it for you (I won't even ask for commission!)
paul
--
!! Joe: "He will come back to you. Don't worry." !!
!! Meg: "But how do you know he'll come back?" !!
!! Sister: "BECAUSE HE'S A BASEBALL STAR, THAT'S HOW HE KNOWS!"!!
!! (from the Broadway hit "Damn Yankees" starring Jerry Lewis) !!
Mark O'Leary
In article <sir-270496...@199.104.80.6>,
Steven Reiser <s...@srv.net> wrote:
>I started this newsgroup in 1990 in an effort to create a forum in which
>people could simply share their experiences and what they speculated or
>believed about them without being hounded by skeptics to prove anything.
>The purpose of this newsgroup is to share paranormal experiences.
>If you want to debate proof then take it to sci.skeptic and other skeptic
>newsgroups and LEAVE IT THERE - PLEASE.
i.e. If you ever see someone post a known lie there, don't correct it in
context, just send your correction elsewhere, where it won't intrude on the
case being supported by that lie (and by analogy, if you ever see a rascist
or sexist post in alt.paranormal, leave it completely unchallenged, or take
your protests to alt.rascism (where the perpetrator will never see it),
right?).
If it's purely a 'reporting of the paranormal' newsgroup, then it should be
moderated and limited only to factual accounts. If it's a discussion group,
then surely both points of view *must* be represented, or it turns into a
"me too" festival of posts along the lines of "I'd just like to say that I
agree absolutely with what Able, Baker and Charlie said they agreed with
too". A wonderful mutual appreciation society, but also a complete waste of
time.
I can't see how you can complain that a newsgroup that was founded so
"people could simply share their experiences and what they speculated or
beleived about them" is being abused by someone who, for instance, might say
"I saw a light in the sky, but it turned out to be Venus, and I think that a
lot of such sightings might also be Venus". You don't want reports and
speculation, you seem to want reports and definitive explanation by true
beleivers *only*. If the word 'Venusians' was substitude for the word
'venus' in the above example, it seems you'd have no problem with it at all:
the kind of explanation meets your prejudice. As it stands however, you'd
feel strongly enough about it to post a 'take it to sci.skeptic' rant.
Of course, I've got no problem with this. I don't read alt.paranormal and I
don't crosspost to it unless the headers are already set there and I am not
sure where the poster I am answering posted from. Since I see this demand
for a skeptic-free forum where paranormal backpatting can go unchallenged as
an admission that the ideas being discussed are indefensible and would melt
in the face of skeptical/critical/intelligent examination, it doesnt trouble
me at all that such a group should exist. Others obviously think
differently, or you wouldn't be prompted to post your request for a
unilateral cease-fire. I'm only responding to the ludicrous nature of your
attempted justification for your 'members only' group.
>I quit reading this newsgroup years ago because many skeptics have no
>respect for a division of interests. My perception is they are no
>different than Bible thumpers beating your door down to convince you to
>join their religion.
The bible-thumpers would be justified *if* the atheists were spending their
tax money to research into atheism, or were killing people with quack 'just
don't beleive in god' cancer cures, or were deliberately misquoting and
misunderstanding the bible to make their atheist point, or were attempting
to rewrite the bible and claiming that their 'correct' version was being
suppressed by a cabal of senior theologians...
Thats the important difference. Finding 'real' paranormal phenomena could
change the world for the better, could save lives. Promoting demonstrably
'fake paranormal' stuff can have the opposite effect. Since you beleive this
stuff is real, what objection can you have to having it examined. Every
debunked claim makes the 'undebunkable' claims (should any turn up)
stronger, wouldn't you say?
>It can be very annoying to a group that would like to
>discuss paranormal openly without some skeptic screaming prove it or
>constantly deriding people for their belief in even the possibility of
>paranormal experience.
It seems you've met a very limited cross-section of skeptics... Or is this
just a gross generalisation?
>For me, ESP, telepathy and other so-called paranormal abilities are a
>fact. However, I believe it with or without proof because I have
>personally experienced it and that is good enough for me. I am a
>scientist and in my career things need proof. However, there comes a point
>for many of us where experience is so powerful that we can't see a way to
>prove it and often have NO DESIRE to prove it.
Yes, and its called 'wishful thinking'. It's the same sort of thing that
inspires (to pick an extreme example) date rape. I mean, you know she wants
it even if you can't prove it (i.e. ask her) and you don't even want to ask
her (amongst other reasons because you can't bear the possibility of a
'no'). You don't have to ask, because the experience of desire from your
side is just so *powerful*, right?
I'm sure you'll tell me where my analogy breaks down in comparison with your
own reasoning.
>Such is my situation, and
>my believing it is not hurting anyone.
Except those who see your unsupported (and therefore possibly incorrect)
beleif, decide to accept it on your authority (you are a scientisit right?)
and make decisions on that basis, such as discontinuing conventional cancer
therapy in favour of a 'faith healer'. The unquestioning acceptance of
maybereal/maybenotreal paranormal phenomena also encourages the
unquestioning acceptance of definitely-not-real definitely-murderous fake
therapies and the like. A forum such as you espouse would be the rich
breeding ground (or killing floor) for such conmen and women.
Thats my reason for being a skeptic that tries to show the evidence to
others rather than just keeping quiet and watching the rest of thee world go
to hell. I think your beleif that "it is not hurting anyone" is misguided
and naive.
>I have no desire to prove the
>existence of ESP to others, but rather to explore the situations in which
>it is most likely and for some types of powers to see if they can be
>controlled and to do it with and open mind to possibilities.
Yet you reject the assistance of skeptics who could ensure that you really
*do* find the "situations in which it is most likely" by excluding all the
situations in which it could be faked or interefered with!
Skeptically-designed experiments *are* open minded to possibilities as you
put it: they are still *looking* for the phenomenon, and the rigour just
makes it more likely that anything that is found really *is* what we're
looking for.
>The best way to make alt.paranormal an effective group is to stop the
>cross-posting.
'effective' in what sense? A support group for skeptically-damaged
beleivers? A place were incipient doubts can be soothed away by "me too"
fests? Do you want discussion of the phenomena or just agreement about them?
>As for me I have news filters that filter out any news with the string
>"skeptic" in the newsgroup name.
I imagine you lose as many natives of alt.paranormal as you do 'intruding'
skeptics. Crossposting isn't an exclusive, or indeed common, activity of
most sci.skeptic posters.
>If I wanted to debate proof I would go to sci.skeptic where that and
>debunking are major concern.
Agreed. That *is* the best place for it. But there is unquestionably a place
for posts on alt.paranormal that say "This phenomenon has been explained,
please see the thread/FAQ etc on sci.skeptic for more info", rather than
just letting claims that have been dealt with on sci.skeptic just be
restated as if there had been no discussion or consensus or out and out
proof. Equally there is a place for answering those who say "They claim on
sci.skeptic that this has been debunked but they havent" on alt.paranormal.
>The very saddest element of existence on this planet are people who insist
>everyone must think like them and have the same exact perception of
>reality as them and when proof to the scientist becomes as dogmatic as
>faith to the religious then the proselytizing zealots become quite
>annoying in their desire to convert.
Isn't your haven of unquestioned paranormal speculation a forum for
proselytyzing? Why el;se do you seek to ban the opposing point of view?
Aren't you saying you only want to hear from those who think like you?
My concern is that every new net user who wants to learn about the
paranormal will go to a group with that in its name, and if you get your way
they may not even realise that there *is* another side to the argument when
they get there. You could undertake to add a line to each post made there
saying "Please refer to sci.skeptic for an alternative viewpoint on this
stuff"... but would that really be better than an even debate?
>I am an apatheist, and what is that? I couldn't care less whether there
>is a God or not. Why? Because I have no experience that indicates it is
>even worth discussing. I don't call myself an atheist because that is a
>belief to and is as time wasting as if I went around protesting that I
>don't believe in the tooth fairy.
... and the relevance of this is? (But for interests sake, why don't you use
the term 'agnostic' which has the same meaning more or less?)
>People can believe whatever they want. Each of us is trying to find
>something for themselves we call truth and I have found that the greatest
>happiness comes from minding my own business about what I believe and to
>not shove any of my beliefs at others.
So now you are arguing for the removal of the group altogether?
[by arranging a forum in which only beleifs you support are posted,
excluding all other interpretations, you *are* shoving your beleifs at
others].
>I don't go to Christian newsgroups and blast them though I don't agree with
>them and I feel the same respect should be given those who wish to explore
>paranormal.
Religion doesnt deal with the physical world. Multiple descriptions of a
spiritual 'reality' do not neccessarily collide. Paranormal phenomena are
alledged to happen in the real physical world. This is a direct collision
with the current laws of physics, and taking the pragmatic view that there
is only one reality to describe, one of them must be wrong or incomplete.
Exploring this collision is essential - either physics will expand to
accomodate real phenomena, or the mundane physical basis of currently
unexplained events will be discovered. You can't say "I'll beleive what I
want and you beleive what you want" when it comes to how the world works
because there is only *one* answer. Either ESP is possible or it isnt.
Either ghosts appear or they don't.
>Learning to love and accept our fellow man with their differences is a
>much greater accomplishment than finding absolute truths about reality.
Seeing someone elses opinions as something worth examining strikes me as an
excellent way of respecting ones fellow man. You seem to be arguing for
either being left in ignorance yourself (if you're wrong) or leaving us
skeptics ignorant (if you're right). Your humanist position only holds up if
you respect *us* enough to try and convert us to your way of thinking. One
could describe your request as intellectual apartheit: no skeptics here,
they have to go through the door down the hall...
M.
--
-=-=-=-=-=- -.-. .- .-.. .-.. -- . -.-. --- --- ... .-.-.- -=-=-=-=-
Mark O'Leary, Voice: Extn. 6201
Network & Communications Group. Email: mol...@dmu.ac.uk
De Montfort University, UK.
Earl Curley
went...@jila02.Colorado.EDU (Wenthold Paul G.) wrote:
>In article <4m16ko$9...@mentor.telis.org>,
>claire read <yum...@telis.org> wrote:
>>
>>I found my lost car keys in the refrigerator by following a pendulum
>>around the house. My own talent is to see vignets or snapshots of
>>places where people have lived at sometime in their lives. It's
>>happened at least a half dozen times, but not under my control.
>>interesting?
>
>
>If you really have an ability to do this, I urge you to
>contact James Randi. There's a half a million bucks in
>it for you (I won't even ask for commission!)
>
>paul
Ah another Randi groupie. When are you fools going to realize that the
main reason no reputable psychic will take up Randi's challenge is
because he doesn't have a pot to go to the washroom in. Now, I admit,
there will the newbies who profess talents and will pretend they have
the world by the tail, but you supposed skeptics really need to get a
life. Living off the back of "The Amazing One" is simply a way to keep
yourself filled with the gullible ones who are snagged in your web. Get
a life. You'll enjoy it as much as we do.
Earl Gordon Curley
psy...@asgo.net
http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
Earl Curley
ca...@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) wrote:
>In article <sir-270496...@199.104.80.6>, s...@srv.net (Steven Reiser) writes:
>=3D
>=3DI started this newsgroup in 1990 in an effort to create a forum in which
>=3Dpeople could simply share their experiences and what they speculated or
>=3Dbelieved about them without being hounded by skeptics to prove anything.
>=3D
>=3DThe purpose of this newsgroup is to share paranormal experiences.
>=3D
>=3DIf you want to debate proof then take it to sci.skeptic and other skeptic
>=3Dnewsgroups and LEAVE IT THERE - PLEASE.
>
>If the folks like you who just want others to affirm your own superstitions
>don't want any debate about proof, then you shouldn't crosspost your claims to
>sci.skeptic.
>
>=3Drespect for a division of interests.
>
>Please note that you're crossposting this bullshit to sci.skeptic. How is it
>that you think you've got something to complain about?
>Carl J Lydick
Carl, you and I have had our differences of opinions over the years, but be honest here. The problem is that as you know the trolle=
rs are the ones who add sci.skeptic to the posts. Now I readily admit that I always include you guys because it's time that you got=
some of your own medicine back.
Earl Gordon Curley
psy...@asgo.net
http://www.asgo.net/~psychic
http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic
Franklin Jordan
Earl Curley wrote:
> [snip...]
>
> Ah another Randi groupie. When are you fools going to realize that the
> main reason no reputable psychic will take up Randi's challenge is
> because he doesn't have a pot to go to the washroom in. Now, I admit,
> there will the newbies who profess talents and will pretend they have
> the world by the tail, but you supposed skeptics really need to get a
> life. Living off the back of "The Amazing One" is simply a way to keep
> yourself filled with the gullible ones who are snagged in your web. Get
> a life. You'll enjoy it as much as we do.
>
> Earl Gordon Curley
I'm an admirer of James Randi and I do have an enjoyable life despite
what you may think of the "Amazing Randi".
The real resaon most 'reputable psyhcics' don't take up Randi's challenge
is they are afraid they will fail and lose an easy way of making a
living in most cases. After all a fool and his money are soon parted.
Despite what you think of James Randi, he would like to see a real case
of a psychic event. But all too often the 'acclaimed psychics' are
either charlatans or are self-deluded. That's why the challenge exists
to weed out the fakes from the actual psychics(if any).
Carl J Lydick
In article <4m1c4q$a...@main.freenet.hamilton.on.ca>, ab...@freenet.hamilton.on.ca (Charles Gregory) writes:
=Carl J Lydick (ca...@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU) wrote:
=: Please note that you're crossposting this bullshit to sci.skeptic. How is it
=: that you think you've got something to complain about?
=
=Please note that you're crossposting this bullshit to alt.paranormal. <grin>
Oh, I'm crossposting, certainly. However, I'm not the one ranting about how
his newsgroup is being destroyed by crossposting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Terrell
Earl Curley wrote:
...
> Ah another Randi groupie. When are you fools going to realize that the
> main reason no reputable psychic will take up Randi's challenge is
> because he doesn't have a pot to go to the washroom in. Now, I admit,
Ddin't Earl claim to have taken up Randi's challenge?
Finally he admits that he is not reputable.
...
> Earl Gordon Curley
> psy...@asgo.net
> http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
> http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
Chow,
Steve
Rob Glanville
claire read wrote:
> I found my lost car keys in the refrigerator by following a pendulum
> around the house.
> claire
You must not have been thinking to put your keys in the refridgerator.
If you wander aimlessly about your house and look everywhere, with or
without following a pendulum (how did the pendulum move around for you
to follow it?), you will eventually find what you are looking for. And
it will always be in the last place you look.
Carl J Lydick
In article <4m31pu$d...@forged.passport.ca>, Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> writes:
=ca...@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) wrote:
=>In article <sir-270496...@199.104.80.6>, s...@srv.net (Steven Reiser) writes:
=>=3DHi,
=>=3D
=>=3DI started this newsgroup in 1990 in an effort to create a forum in which
=>=3Dpeople could simply share their experiences and what they speculated or
=>=3Dbelieved about them without being hounded by skeptics to prove anything.
=>=3D
=>=3DThe purpose of this newsgroup is to share paranormal experiences.
=>=3D
=>=3DIf you want to debate proof then take it to sci.skeptic and other skeptic
=>=3Dnewsgroups and LEAVE IT THERE - PLEASE.
=>
=>If the folks like you who just want others to affirm your own superstitions
=>don't want any debate about proof, then you shouldn't crosspost your claims to
=>sci.skeptic.
=>
=>=3DI quit reading this newsgroup years ago because many skeptics have no
=>=3Drespect for a division of interests.
=>
=>Please note that you're crossposting this bullshit to sci.skeptic. How is it
=>that you think you've got something to complain about?
=
=
=Carl, you and I have had our differences of opinions over the years, but be honest here. The problem is that as you know the trolle=
=rs are the ones who add sci.skeptic to the posts.
No, Earl, the ones who add sci.skeptic to the posts seem usually to be
believers in the paranormal who see someone else's paranormal claims
contradicting their own.
Earl Curley
Another piece of false quoting from Steve. In fact, for you Steve I'll reiterate exactly what I said about Randi's challenge. I no=
r any reputable (yes myself) psychic would even consider Randi's challenge since he doesn't have the money to back up his challenge.=
Quite simple, even for someone with no brains like you.
ronh
In article <sir-270496...@199.104.80.6>,
s...@srv.net (Steven Reiser) wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I started this newsgroup in 1990 in an effort to create a forum in which
>people could simply share their experiences and what they speculated or
>believed about them without being hounded by skeptics to prove anything.
>
( snip)
>
>The best way to make alt.paranormal an effective group is to stop the
>cross-posting.
And the same goes for sci.skeptic? Why did you crosspost your opinion
here to sci.skeptic?
ronh
Steve Terrell
Months ago Earl was claiming to have once taken Randi up
on his challenge--so far as to lie about rightfully winning
only to have Randi stiff him. And even after that, he tried to
"bend the rules" on Randi's challenge that includes the
pledges. Now he is saying that no reputable psychic
would go for it. Well said.
Chow,
Steve
Crystal Odenkirk
claire read (yum...@telis.org) wrote:
: "apathiest" is a nice word. I like the idea of complete indifference to
: the existence of god.
yes, when I saw it I just had to chuckle. I think I'm going to have to
start writing that in on all those forms with 'religious preference' areas
:)
The occult however is another matter. sometimes
: things happen and there isn't a rational explanation, so we're forced to
: believe in the irational.
Occult merely means 'hidden.' The occult is very rational to me. Just
because I don't understand why things happen is no reason to call it
irrational.
Intuition used to be the realm of women
: because they supposedly had less scientific, lineal minds then men.
: even now it's said the men are better at math than women. I wonder if
: most of the debunkers nad skeptics are men, real retards when it comes
: to using their own builtin psychic talent....the one we call intuition.
Excuse me? Please do NOT use stereotypes in your arguements, on either
side. Statistics can be made to say just about anything, so don't even
bother quoting anything to prove your fallacious generalization about men
and women. I happen to know several male pagans/'psychics' (they'd kill me
if they knew I'd used that term to describe them), and several men who are
terrible at math, and several men with wonderful intuition. These
categories overlap. I also know several VERY scientific, linear-minded
women, several who are wonderful in math, and several who have absolutely no
intuition at all. DO NOT EVER use stereotypes in arguments, because they
can be disproven so easily.
Besides which, when you do here you're likely to get angry responses from
me. That's the warning to everyone. I hate stereotypes and sweeping
generalizations which take NOTHING into account except the biased views of
the speaker.
: I found my lost car keys in the refrigerator by following a pendulum
: around the house. My own talent is to see vignets or snapshots of
: places where people have lived at sometime in their lives. It's
: happened at least a half dozen times, but not under my control.
: interesting?
: claire
However, should you be willing to drop your stereotypes, I would love to
continue talking about what you have written here.
crys
quickly pulling away from both 'sides' and refuting everyone
blase menichelli
DaveHatunen
In article <4m672f$a...@forged.passport.ca>,
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
[...]
>Another piece of false quoting from Steve. In fact, for you Steve
I'll reiterate exactly what I said about Randi's challenge. I no= >r
any reputable (yes myself) psychic would even consider Randi's
challenge since he doesn't have the money to back up his challenge.= >
Quite simple, even for someone with no brains like you.
Surely some psychic as litigious as you or Geller wouldn't pass up the
chance to haul Randi's ass into court to collect the money, would you?
Damn, just think of the publicity for the psychic -- worth more than
even the original $10,000 prize in the long run.
--
********** DAVE HATUNEN (hat...@netcom.com) **********
* Daly City California *
* Between San Francisco and South San Francisco *
*******************************************************
Earl Curley
Steve, if anyone is liar here, we know that it's you. I did relate a
situation which happened in 1978 whereby Ray Hyman (who's a shill of
Randi's) did in fact lose on national radio and in fact did state to the
radio show host he couldn't explain how I was able to "read" him and his
family so well> It's public record and public knowledge. As to the new
challenge, I see you're still beating a dead horse, and as far as I'm
concerned the Randi challenge is a sham. Your post is a perfect
confirmation of the Skeptical Fallacies post of mine a few days ago.
Here we have an idiot troller who has nothing better to do with his life
then try to disrupt a legimate discussion. Go back to your sand-box and
play with the other so-called skeptics.
Earl Gordon Curley
psy...@asgo.net
http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
Crystal Odenkirk
Mark O'Leary (mol...@dmu.ac.uk) wrote:
: It seems you've met a very limited cross-section of skeptics... Or is this
: just a gross generalisation?
The problem is that we have people here claiming to be skeptics who are
insulting us (not that I'm saying it hasn't degenerated to include both
'sides,' mind you), which leads several people to make sweeping (and wrong)
generalizations about all of them.
: Yes, and its called 'wishful thinking'. It's the same sort of thing that
: inspires (to pick an extreme example) date rape. I mean, you know she wants
: it even if you can't prove it (i.e. ask her) and you don't even want to ask
: her (amongst other reasons because you can't bear the possibility of a
: 'no'). You don't have to ask, because the experience of desire from your
: side is just so *powerful*, right?
: I'm sure you'll tell me where my analogy breaks down in comparison with your
: own reasoning.
What?!
I do believe your analogy is a better one for the way several people
claiming to be skeptics have treated those of us who post on this board for
discussion!
I HAVE NEVER FORCED MY VIEWS ON SOMEONE ELSE! It's not date rape if you
never touch your date.
I have a return analogy. Do you believe in science? Do you have any desire
to go out and prove it to those of us who don't?
: Except those who see your unsupported (and therefore possibly incorrect)
: beleif, decide to accept it on your authority (you are a scientisit right?)
: and make decisions on that basis, such as discontinuing conventional cancer
: therapy in favour of a 'faith healer'. The unquestioning acceptance of
: maybereal/maybenotreal paranormal phenomena also encourages the
: unquestioning acceptance of definitely-not-real definitely-murderous fake
: therapies and the like. A forum such as you espouse would be the rich
: breeding ground (or killing floor) for such conmen and women.
Except that there are several people like me who specifically state that
until further evidence is shown, 'faith healers' and such should not be a
sole or even first attempt at cure. I do believe that those of us who
actually believe in things we can't explain have more reason to hate and
remove charlatans than you who has just made the sweeping general
implication that we are all gullible fools who will believe anything whether
we experience it or not.
: Thats my reason for being a skeptic that tries to show the evidence to
: others rather than just keeping quiet and watching the rest of thee world go
: to hell. I think your beleif that "it is not hurting anyone" is misguided
: and naive.
It isn't hurting anyone if you make sure that others understand that it is
not a cure-all and you don't try to force your beliefs on others.
: 'effective' in what sense? A support group for skeptically-damaged
: beleivers? A place were incipient doubts can be soothed away by "me too"
: fests? Do you want discussion of the phenomena or just agreement about them?
Again, please refrain from assuming that just because my personal
experiences have in some cases been stranger than yours that I am a gullible
idiot!
: >The very saddest element of existence on this planet are people who insist
: >everyone must think like them and have the same exact perception of
: >reality as them and when proof to the scientist becomes as dogmatic as
: >faith to the religious then the proselytizing zealots become quite
: >annoying in their desire to convert.
: Isn't your haven of unquestioned paranormal speculation a forum for
: proselytyzing? Why el;se do you seek to ban the opposing point of view?
: Aren't you saying you only want to hear from those who think like you?
No, we only want to hear from people who don't insult us.
Subtle difference maybe, but I am a creature of subtlety.
: Religion doesnt deal with the physical world. Multiple descriptions of a
: spiritual 'reality' do not neccessarily collide. Paranormal phenomena are
: alledged to happen in the real physical world.
Not all of them. Some do not interact with the physical world at all.
This is a direct collision
: with the current laws of physics, and taking the pragmatic view that there
: is only one reality to describe, one of them must be wrong or incomplete.
: Exploring this collision is essential - either physics will expand to
: accomodate real phenomena, or the mundane physical basis of currently
: unexplained events will be discovered. You can't say "I'll beleive what I
: want and you beleive what you want" when it comes to how the world works
: because there is only *one* answer. Either ESP is possible or it isnt.
: Either ghosts appear or they don't.
Ah, you assume there is only one reality. And you are right...for you. To
me there are as many realities as there are sentiences.
crys
Earl Curley
hat...@netcom.com (DaveHatunen) wrote:
>Surely some psychic as litigious as you or Geller wouldn't pass up the
>chance to haul Randi's ass into court to collect the money, would you?
>Damn, just think of the publicity for the psychic -- worth more than
>even the original $10,000 prize in the long run.
>
>DAVE HATUNEN
Publicity? Heck Randi can't even get his name in print any longer and
you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank you
just same and it doesn't cost me a dime.
Earl Gordon Curley
psy...@asgo.net
http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
DaveHatunen
In article <4m9osv$d...@forged.passport.ca>,
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>hat...@netcom.com (DaveHatunen) wrote:
>
>>Surely some psychic as litigious as you or Geller wouldn't pass up the
>>chance to haul Randi's ass into court to collect the money, would you?
>>Damn, just think of the publicity for the psychic -- worth more than
>>even the original $10,000 prize in the long run.
>Publicity? Heck Randi can't even get his name in print any longer and
>you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank you
>just same and it doesn't cost me a dime.
The comment wasn't directed jsut at you, Earl. Certainly, Geller hasn't
quailed at sueing Randi in the past. And surely there are some psychics
besides you that could take on Randi.
I didn't realize that money was the only consideration in what you do,
though. Given the amount of time you spend criticizing Randi, the
definite impression is that you do not consider him to be a has-been. I
mean, if someone as important as you spends that much time on him,
surely someone somewhere would like to really cut him down.
I would think that someone who -- like you -- is financially secure
from their psychic abilities might want to take on the Rande challenge
even for free.
You seem obsessed by the size and assuredness of the prize, rather than
the principle involved.
Gratuitous Pseudonym
In article <4m955d$6...@forged.passport.ca>,
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>Steve, if anyone is liar here, we know that it's you.
Now, didn't you threaten to sue someone for calling you a liar in this
newsgroup, Earl? Do you think that you are vulnerable to the same threat?
>I did relate a situation which happened in 1978 whereby Ray Hyman (who's a
>shill of Randi's) did in fact lose on national radio and in fact did state to
>the radio show host he couldn't explain how I was able to "read" him and his
>family so well> It's public record and public knowledge.
Hyman is a professor at the University of Oregon, not a "shill of Randi's".
He may agree with Randi's views and cooperate with him in regards to some
projects, but to call him a "shill" is a gross distortion. Is everyone who
agrees with you a shill of yours, Earl?
I would be very interested in hearing a direct quote from Hyman rather than a
paraphrase of it from you.
>and as far as I'm concerned the Randi challenge is a sham.
And as far as far as Randi is concerned, it is you who is a sham. Only by
meeting his challenge will you change that.
>Here we have an idiot troller who has nothing better to do with his life
>then try to disrupt a legimate discussion.
Indeed we do. His name is:
>Earl Gordon Curley
>psy...@asgo.net
>http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
Lizz Braver
In article <4m9osv$d...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
>
>>Publicity? Heck Randi can't even get his name in print any longer and
>you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank you
>just same and it doesn't cost me a dime.
>
How many of your articles have made it into Scientific American lately?
RANDI,James. "Investigating Miracles Italian-Style". Scientific American,
February, 1996, pp.136.
Lizz "Perhaps into 'Crazy Canadian'..." Braver
Earl Curley
hat...@netcom.com (DaveHatunen) wrote:
>In article <4m9osv$d...@forged.passport.ca>,
>Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>>hat...@netcom.com (DaveHatunen) wrote:
>>
>>>Surely some psychic as litigious as you or Geller wouldn't pass up the
>>>chance to haul Randi's ass into court to collect the money, would you?
>>>Damn, just think of the publicity for the psychic -- worth more than
>>>even the original $10,000 prize in the long run.
>
>>you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank you
>>just same and it doesn't cost me a dime.
>
>quailed at sueing Randi in the past. And surely there are some psychics
>besides you that could take on Randi.
>
>I didn't realize that money was the only consideration in what you do,
>though. Given the amount of time you spend criticizing Randi, the
>definite impression is that you do not consider him to be a has-been. I
>mean, if someone as important as you spends that much time on him,
>surely someone somewhere would like to really cut him down.
>
>I would think that someone who -- like you -- is financially secure
>from their psychic abilities might want to take on the Rande challenge
>even for free.
>
>You seem obsessed by the size and assuredness of the prize, rather than
>the principle involved.
>
Dave, if anyone is obsessed it's a few of you so-called skeptics who keep harping on the topic of the false challenge. Responding t=
o your challenges and others is simply a reply so I'm afraid your comments are a little rump backwards, wouldn't you say. And yes, =
frankly if Randi or whomever had a certified check in the $500,000 amount I've said it before and I'll say it again, I do not work f=
or nothing.
Earl Gordon Curley
psy...@asgo.net
http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
Mark O'Leary
In article <4m955d$6...@forged.passport.ca>,
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
[snip]
> an idiot troller who has nothing better to do with his life then try to
> disrupt a legimate discussion.
[snip]
>Earl Gordon Curley
I quite agree: you are.
Earl Curley
disc...@fastlane.net (blase menichelli) wrote:
>In article <4m672f$a...@forged.passport.ca>, Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> says:
>>
>>Steve Terrell <st...@hfab1.sc.ti.com> wrote:
>>>Earl Curley wrote:
>>>...
>>>> Ah another Randi groupie. When are you fools going to realize that the
>>>> main reason no reputable psychic will take up Randi's challenge is
>>>> because he doesn't have a pot to go to the washroom in. Now, I admit,
>>>
>>>Ddin't Earl claim to have taken up Randi's challenge?
>>>Finally he admits that he is not reputable.
>>>
>>>...
>>>> psy...@asgo.net
>>>> http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
>>>> http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
>>>
>>>
>>> Steve
>>
>>Another piece of false quoting from Steve. In fact, for you Steve I'll reiterate exactly what I said about Randi's challenge. I =
no=3D
>>r any reputable (yes myself) psychic would even consider Randi's challenge since he doesn't have the money to back up his challeng=
e.=3D
>> Quite simple, even for someone with no brains like you.
>>
>>psy...@asgo.net
>>http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
>>http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
>>
>>
From what I remember you crapped your drawers when I told you exactly what you have in your bank account after remote viewing your p=
lace of residence. Remember or is your memory lapsing? I can post the original posts if you want to look even stupider than you do=
now. You then came back crying that I forgot to see your supposed gold coins (which I might add were not there) to cover your butt=
Get a life Blaise, you're starting to look more rediculous each and every day.
George Black
In article <4mdeg1$l...@ionews.ionet.net>,
di...@ohww.firmware.com (Lizz Braver) wrote:
>In article <4m9osv$d...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
>>
>>>Publicity? Heck Randi can't even get his name in print any longer and
>>you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank you
>>just same and it doesn't cost me a dime.
>>
>
>How many of your articles have made it into Scientific American lately?
>
>RANDI,James. "Investigating Miracles Italian-Style". Scientific American,
>February, 1996, pp.136.
And, further. James Randi is also a contributor to OMNI and has been since its
inception. His articles are interesting, lucid and very revealing as to the
parlour tricks employed by these 'psychic' ---------
George Black Hamilton New Zealand
gbl...@midland.co.nz
3:774/605.112
If you think you have a problem
twi...@hub.ofthe.net
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
#hat...@netcom.com (DaveHatunen) wrote:
#>Surely some psychic as litigious as you or Geller wouldn't pass up
the
#>chance to haul Randi's ass into court to collect the money, would
you?
#>Damn, just think of the publicity for the psychic -- worth more than
#>even the original $10,000 prize in the long run.
#>
#>DAVE HATUNEN
#Publicity? Heck Randi can't even get his name in print any longer
and
#you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank
you
#just same and it doesn't cost me a dime.
Golly, I wonder who that was who I saw on PBS just a few months ago?
When were you on PBS or any major network? Minor network? In the
classifieds? The garden section? Oh, I know, the lonely hearts
section!
Earl Curley
di...@ohww.firmware.com (Lizz Braver) wrote:
>In article <4m9osv$d...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
>>
>>
>
>How many of your articles have made it into Scientific American lately?
>
>RANDI,James. "Investigating Miracles Italian-Style". Scientific American,
>February, 1996, pp.136.
>
>
It's that time of the month again.
Lizz Braver
In article <4mg02r$4...@newshost.vvm.com>, dpre...@ns.vvm.com says...
>
>I thought the folks in alt.paranormal could benefit by seeing one of
>their heros in action. Notice, Bruce Daniel Kettler, the scientific
>method of the one you would collude with to silence somebody who would
>disagree with.
>
>Dan
>
>
>
>Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>>di...@ohww.firmware.com (Lizz Braver) wrote:
>>>In article <4m9osv$d...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
>>>>
>>>>>Publicity? Heck Randi can't even get his name in print any longer
and
>>>>you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank you
>>>>just same and it doesn't cost me a dime.
>>>>
>>>Just curious, Earl...
>>>
>>>How many of your articles have made it into Scientific American lately?
>>>
>>>RANDI,James. "Investigating Miracles Italian-Style". Scientific
American,
>>>February, 1996, pp.136.
>>>
>>>
>>>Lizz "Perhaps into 'Crazy Canadian'..." Braver
>>
>>
>>It's that time of the month again.
>>
Oh, Dan, Earl and I have had this argument before. Let's just say he's no
better at predicting my bodily functions than he is at anything else.
Lizz "Period! I mean, full stop!" Braver
Dan Pressnell
I thought the folks in alt.paranormal could benefit by seeing one of
their heros in action. Notice, Bruce Daniel Kettler, the scientific
method of the one you would collude with to silence somebody who would
disagree with.
Dan
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>di...@ohww.firmware.com (Lizz Braver) wrote:
>>In article <4m9osv$d...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
>>>
>>>>Publicity? Heck Randi can't even get his name in print any longer and
>>>you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank you
>>>just same and it doesn't cost me a dime.
>>>
>>Just curious, Earl...
>>
>>How many of your articles have made it into Scientific American lately?
>>
>>RANDI,James. "Investigating Miracles Italian-Style". Scientific American,
>>February, 1996, pp.136.
>>
>>
>>Lizz "Perhaps into 'Crazy Canadian'..." Braver
>
>
>It's that time of the month again.
>
Dan Pressnell
di...@ohww.firmware.com (Lizz Braver) wrote:
>
>Oh, Dan, Earl and I have had this argument before. Let's just say he's no
>better at predicting my bodily functions than he is at anything else.
>
>Lizz "Period! I mean, full stop!" Braver
>
Thanks for the info, Lizz. I didn't know that Earl had a habit of
referring to the menstrual cycle of female posters. I guess nothing the
scum does should surprise me now, though.
I wonder whether his psychic clients (if he has any, that is) knows what
a disgusting excuse for humanity he is.
Dan
Earl Curley
d...@teleport.com (Gratuitous Pseudonym) wrote:
>In article <4m955d$6...@forged.passport.ca>,
> Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>
>
>Now, didn't you threaten to sue someone for calling you a liar in this
>newsgroup, Earl? Do you think that you are vulnerable to the same threat?
No I didn't. I did issue two law suits to two individuals and their service providers, which I might add were settled out of court,=
for calling me a "fraud" without just cause. Would you like to try your hand at it?
>>I did relate a situation which happened in 1978 whereby Ray Hyman (who's a
>>shill of Randi's) did in fact lose on national radio and in fact did state to
>>the radio show host he couldn't explain how I was able to "read" him and his
>>family so well> It's public record and public knowledge.
>
>Hyman is a professor at the University of Oregon, not a "shill of Randi's".
>He may agree with Randi's views and cooperate with him in regards to some
>projects, but to call him a "shill" is a gross distortion. Is everyone who
>agrees with you a shill of yours, Earl?
No, again not at all. Ray Hyman, as far as I'm concerned knows nothing about anomalies and is strictly going by 1940's reflections =
on the subject. It's about time he started researching the new material since he's becoming a little behind the times. But, that d=
oesn't mean he didn't lose the challenge that Randi chickened out on in 1979. Yes, I do have the audio tape of that radio program a=
nd hundreds of witnesses.
>I would be very interested in hearing a direct quote from Hyman rather than a
>paraphrase of it from you.
You'll hear the same old BS. I noticed, however, Hyman never commented on that program but Randi BS's his response when it was brou=
ght up months ago in this conference. I believe he was trying to get all those gullible fools to donate their money to him so he co=
uld survive at that time, if I'm not mistaken.
>>and as far as I'm concerned the Randi challenge is a sham.
>
>And as far as far as Randi is concerned, it is you who is a sham. Only by
>meeting his challenge will you change that.
Bull dung. Randi can't come up with the cash he's purported to have pledged. It's as simple as that. ABC contacted me and when I=
requested a guarrantee from them they refused to produce a program because they couldn't guarrantee Randi had the money.
Earl Gordon curley
Earl Curley
gbl...@midland.co.nz (George Black) wrote:
>In article <4mdeg1$l...@ionews.ionet.net>,
> di...@ohww.firmware.com (Lizz Braver) wrote:
>>In article <4m9osv$d...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
>>>
>>>>Publicity? Heck Randi can't even get his name in print any longer and
>>>you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank you
>>>just same and it doesn't cost me a dime.
>>>
>>Just curious, Earl...
>>
>>How many of your articles have made it into Scientific American lately?
>>
>>RANDI,James. "Investigating Miracles Italian-Style". Scientific American,
>>February, 1996, pp.136.
>
>inception. His articles are interesting, lucid and very revealing as to the
>parlour tricks employed by these 'psychic' ---------
>
>
>
>George Black
Whow! I'm impressed. Not.
Earl Gordon Curley
psy...@asgo.net
http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
http://www.webdeswign.ca/~psychic/
Earl Curley
di...@ohww.firmware.com (Lizz Braver) wrote:
>In article <4mg02r$4...@newshost.vvm.com>, dpre...@ns.vvm.com says...
>>
>>I thought the folks in alt.paranormal could benefit by seeing one of
>>their heros in action. Notice, Bruce Daniel Kettler, the scientific
>>method of the one you would collude with to silence somebody who would
>>disagree with.
>>
>>Dan
>>
>>
>>
>>Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>>>>In article <4m9osv$d...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
>>>>>
>>>>>>Publicity? Heck Randi can't even get his name in print any longer
>and
>>>>>you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank you
>>>>>just same and it doesn't cost me a dime.
>>>>>
>>>>Just curious, Earl...
>>>>
>>>>How many of your articles have made it into Scientific American lately?
>>>>
>>>>RANDI,James. "Investigating Miracles Italian-Style". Scientific
>American,
>>>>February, 1996, pp.136.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>It's that time of the month again.
>>>
>
>
>better at predicting my bodily functions than he is at anything else.
>
>Lizz "Period! I mean, full stop!" Braver
Bodily functions? Heck, I'm talking about Mars retrograting. Get you mind out of the gutter Liz. Oh, for your information, that's astrology.
Earl Curley
Dan Pressnell <dpre...@ns.vvm.com> wrote:
>di...@ohww.firmware.com (Lizz Braver) wrote:
>>
>>Oh, Dan, Earl and I have had this argument before. Let's just say he's no
>>better at predicting my bodily functions than he is at anything else.
>>
>>Lizz "Period! I mean, full stop!" Braver
>>
>
>referring to the menstrual cycle of female posters. I guess nothing the
>scum does should surprise me now, though.
>
>I wonder whether his psychic clients (if he has any, that is) knows what
>a disgusting excuse for humanity he is.
>
>Dan
Dan, you are a crude and lude individual who's mind is so disrespectful that you have to resort to vulgar terminolgies. I was talki=
ng about Mars retrograting and here you have to open your dirty mouth and change my statements to vulgar terms. How dare you. It's=
time to send this post, again to your service provider.
Earl Curley
mol...@dmu.ac.uk (Mark O'Leary) wrote:
>In article <4m955d$6...@forged.passport.ca>,
>Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>
>> an idiot troller who has nothing better to do with his life then try to
>> disrupt a legimate discussion.
>[snip]
>
>>Earl Gordon Curley
>
>I quite agree: you are.
>
This is so enjoyable watching all the pansies come out of the woodwork. God, you guys must have missed me.
Earl Gordon Curley
psy...@asgo.net
http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
Earl Curley
twi...@hub.ofthe.net wrote:
>Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>
>#hat...@netcom.com (DaveHatunen) wrote:
>
>#>Surely some psychic as litigious as you or Geller wouldn't pass up
>the
>#>chance to haul Randi's ass into court to collect the money, would
>you?
>#>Damn, just think of the publicity for the psychic -- worth more than
>#>even the original $10,000 prize in the long run.
>#>
>#>DAVE HATUNEN
>
>and
>#you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank
>you
>
>Golly, I wonder who that was who I saw on PBS just a few months ago?
>
>When were you on PBS or any major network? Minor network? In the
>classifieds? The garden section? Oh, I know, the lonely hearts
>section!
>
>
>
>Twi...@hub.ofthe.net
Twitchy, baby, you better do your homework. I've had more air time and
print than Randi. Do yourself a favor, search before you put your foot
in your mouth.
Lizz Braver
In article <4mh1k5$n...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
>>Dan, you are a crude and lude individual who's mind is so disrespectful
>ng about Mars retrograting and here you have to open your dirty mouth and
change my statements to vulgar terms. How dare you. It's=
> time to send this post, again to your service provider.
>
>
>
>
Lizz Braver
In article <4miq7g$g...@ionews.ionet.net>, di...@ohww.firmware.com says...
>
>In article <4mh1k5$n...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
>>>Dan, you are a crude and lude individual who's mind is so disrespectful
> ^^^^ that you have to resort to vulgar
>terminolgies. I was talki=
>>ng about Mars retrograting and here you have to open your dirty mouth
and
>change my statements to vulgar terms. How dare you. It's=
>> time to send this post, again to your service provider.
>>
one is almost as good as "skrewed."
Earl, report me to my service provider, too. He needs a good laugh; poor
thing's been working much too hard lately.
Lizz "Earl should be roundly bude" Braver
Dan Pressnell
Earl, how dare you call me lude! I ought to sic my lawyers on you!
>who's mind is so disrespectful that you have to resort to vulgar terminolgies. I was talki=
>ng about Mars retrograting
Yeah, right, liar! Just because you are stupid doesn't mean that
everybody else is equally stupid and willing to accept this swill.
>and here you have to open your dirty mouth and change my statements to vulgar terms. How dare you. It's=
> time to send this post, again to your service provider.
Sure..... The world-famous media personality strikes again with
stupidity, threats, hypocricy... you name it, and if it's stupid, Earl
will do it.
Dan
Gratuitous Pseudonym
In article <4mh16c$n...@forged.passport.ca>,
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>d...@teleport.com (Gratuitous Pseudonym) wrote:
>>Now, didn't you threaten to sue someone for calling you a liar in this
>>newsgroup, Earl? Do you think that you are vulnerable to the same threat?
>
>No I didn't. I did issue two law suits to two individuals and their service
>providers, which I might add were settled out of court, for calling me a
>"fraud" without just cause. Would you like to try your hand at it?
Well, it depends. How much money did you have to pay in punitive damages for
bringing a frivolous lawsuit? Geller ended up getting nicked for $120,000.
Nah, I figure the courts have enough to do given the sorry state of our
criminal justice system. Suing people over slights to one's ego seems like a
waste of everyone's time. I'd just as soon confine the ranting and raving to
Usenet.
>Ray Hyman, as far as I'm concerned knows nothing about anomalies and is
>strictly going by 1940's reflections on the subject. It's about time he
>started researching the new material since he's becoming a little behind the
>times.
That's nothing about anomalies, as far as *you* are concerned. However, I
imagine it is a different matter as far as anyone else is concerned.
>I noticed, however, Hyman never commented on that program but Randi BS's his
>response when it was brought up months ago in this conference. I believe he
>was trying to get all those gullible fools to donate their money to him so he
>could survive at that time, if I'm not mistaken.
However, you are quite often mistaken.
>>And as far as far as Randi is concerned, it is you who is a sham. Only by
>>meeting his challenge will you change that.
>
>Bull dung. Randi can't come up with the cash he's purported to have pledged.
>It's as simple as that. ABC contacted me and when I requested a guarrantee
>from them they refused to produce a program because they couldn't guarrantee
>Randi had the money.
An interesting story. I wonder what the ABC people would say. Who did you
speak to?
Gratuitous Pseudonym
In article <4mh1aa$n...@forged.passport.ca>,
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>gbl...@midland.co.nz (George Black) wrote:
>>In article <4mdeg1$l...@ionews.ionet.net>,
>>>In article <4m9osv$d...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
>>>>
>>>
>>>February, 1996, pp.136.
>>
>>its inception.
>
Completely wrong, yes. Impressed, no.
What major magazines have published *your* work recently, Earl? Impress us.
Ted Rosen
dket...@ix.netcom.com(Bruce Daniel Kettler) wrote:
>In <sir-270496...@199.104.80.6> s...@srv.net (Steven Reiser)
>babbles:
>>I quit reading this newsgroup years ago because many skeptics have no
>>respect for a division of interests. My perception is they are no
>>different than Bible thumpers beating your door down to convince you
>>to join their religion.
>>For me, ESP, telepathy and other so-called paranormal abilities are a
>>fact. However, I believe it with or without proof because I have
>>personally experienced it and that is good enough for me.
Is it me, or does anyone else detect any bald-faced hypocrisy in these
two statements? Although I snipped and pasted, these two statements
were practically leading one into the next. This kind of intellectual
laziness and fanatic adherence to New Age buffonery brings me to my
next point:
>>The very saddest element of existence on this planet are people who
>insist
>>everyone must think like them and have the same exact perception of
>>reality as them and when proof to the scientist becomes as dogmatic as
>>faith to the religious then the proselytizing zealots become quite
>>annoying in their desire to convert.
Anyone see a pattern here?
>I bid you contact Earl Curley. I would ask you to read my latest
>postings. I would ask that you contact the internet provider of Dan
>Pressman. I would ask you to read my reply to "TWITCH" in 4 parts of
>"IS PARANORMAL TURNING INTO ANTI-PARANORMAL"
>I really appreciate you letting us know who you are and how you feel.
>Now, let Dan Pressman's internet know who you are and how you feel.
>The reason is that the matter is still not yet settled.
Gosh, Brucie, you woudn't be trying to demonstrate a lack of "respect
for a division of interests", would you?
Bruce, you're a fucking hypocrite (all apologies to Andrea Chen).
You don't like posts critical of ESP claims? Don't read them! Killfile
'em! But as soon as clowns like you, Reiser and Curley begin
*harrassing* your critics with cowardly calls to various ISP's, you
demonstrate a *lack* of respect for dissenting opinions and, even
worse, a yellow streak across your fucking forehead.
Can't take the heat? Get out of the kitchen, you sissy.
If some of the more infantile debunkers upset you, ignore them. If
some of the more thoughtful skeptics challenge you then take it like a
man . . . . respond with both barrels. Unless you can't.
Bruce, you're a weenie. And a cowardly weenie at that.
You make me sick.
- TR
Michael A. Dwyer
In article <4mh1k5$n...@forged.passport.ca>,
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
: Dan Pressnell <dpre...@ns.vvm.com> wrote:
: >di...@ohww.firmware.com (Lizz Braver) wrote:
: >>
: >>Oh, Dan, Earl and I have had this argument before. Let's just say he's no
: >>better at predicting my bodily functions than he is at anything else.
: >>
: >>Lizz "Period! I mean, full stop!" Braver
: >>
: >
: >Thanks for the info, Lizz. I didn't know that Earl had a habit of
: >referring to the menstrual cycle of female posters. I guess nothing the
: >scum does should surprise me now, though.
: >
: >I wonder whether his psychic clients (if he has any, that is) knows what
: >a disgusting excuse for humanity he is.
: >
: >Dan
: Dan, you are a crude and lude individual who's mind is so disrespectful that you have to resort to vulgar terminolgies. I was talki=
: ng about Mars retrograting and here you have to open your dirty mouth and change my statements to vulgar terms. How dare you. It's=
: time to send this post, again to your service provider.
: Earl Gordon Curley
Mr. Curley, how did you get so smart? I admire the way you savage the
skeptics and make them eat their words. The razor sharp logic and concise
language of each of your posts is something I admire. You are very much on
the ball.
Is there a correlation between your superior intelligence and the psychic
abilities you exhibit? If there is I fear I may fall short in my ambitions
to be like you. Oh well, one can aspire to greatness, but not everyone can
achieve it.
Thanks Earl (can I call you Earl?) for making this world a saner place.
Michael Dwyer
Michael A. Dwyer
In article <4mh16c$n...@forged.passport.ca>,
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
: d...@teleport.com (Gratuitous Pseudonym) wrote:
: >In article <4m955d$6...@forged.passport.ca>,
: > Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
: >
: >>Steve, if anyone is liar here, we know that it's you.
: >
: >Now, didn't you threaten to sue someone for calling you a liar in this
:
: for calling me a "fraud" without just cause. Would you like to try your hand at it?
Just to clarify - settled out of court... You mean dropped the suit?
Michael Dwyer
Earl Curley
Ah, we have another ten year old who got a computer for Christmas. Now all his parents have to do is teach him how to use it properly.
Earl Gordon Curley
psy...@asgfo.net
http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
twi...@hub.ofthe.net
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
#di...@ohww.firmware.com (Lizz Braver) wrote:
#>In article <4m9osv$d...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
#>>
#>>>Publicity? Heck Randi can't even get his name in print any
longer and
#>>you're claiming there would be publicity. I have enough now thank
you
#>>just same and it doesn't cost me a dime.
#>>
#>Just curious, Earl...
#>
#>How many of your articles have made it into Scientific American
lately?
#>
#>RANDI,James. "Investigating Miracles Italian-Style". Scientific
American,
#>February, 1996, pp.136.
#>
#>
#>Lizz "Perhaps into 'Crazy Canadian'..." Braver
#It's that time of the month again.
#Earl Gordon Curley
I didn't know you suffered from PMS, Earl! That explains a lot. But
I've never before heard of it going full time. Unless it means, in
your case, Poor Mental State.
Earl Curley
Quite the contrary. I do hope you and service provider are not next.
Earl Gordon Curley
psy...@asgo.net
http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
Earl Curley
Ah, the joys of watching little children make asses of themselves.
Earl Curley
>Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>: Dan Pressnell <dpre...@ns.vvm.com> wrote:
>: >di...@ohww.firmware.com (Lizz Braver) wrote:
>: >>
>: >>Oh, Dan, Earl and I have had this argument before. Let's just say he's no
>: >>better at predicting my bodily functions than he is at anything else.
>: >>
>: >>Lizz "Period! I mean, full stop!" Braver
>: >>
>: >
>: >Thanks for the info, Lizz. I didn't know that Earl had a habit of
>: >referring to the menstrual cycle of female posters. I guess nothing the
>: >scum does should surprise me now, though.
>: >
>: >I wonder whether his psychic clients (if he has any, that is) knows what
>: >a disgusting excuse for humanity he is.
>: >
>: >Dan
>:
>: Dan, you are a crude and lude individual who's mind is so disrespectful that you have to resort to vulgar terminolgies. I was talki=
>: ng about Mars retrograting and here you have to open your dirty mouth and change my statements to vulgar terms. How dare you. It's=
>: time to send this post, again to your service provider.
>:
>: psy...@asgo.net
>: http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
>: http://www.webdeswign.ca/~psychic/
>
>Mr. Curley, how did you get so smart? I admire the way you savage the
>skeptics and make them eat their words. The razor sharp logic and concise
>language of each of your posts is something I admire. You are very much on
>the ball.
>
>Is there a correlation between your superior intelligence and the psychic
>abilities you exhibit? If there is I fear I may fall short in my ambitions
>to be like you. Oh well, one can aspire to greatness, but not everyone can
>achieve it.
>
>Thanks Earl (can I call you Earl?) for making this world a saner place.
>
>Michael Dwyer
You have my blessings and permission to address me as an individual and friend. :-)
Dan Pressnell
ad...@shore.net (Michael A. Dwyer) wrote:
>Mr. Curley, how did you get so smart? I admire the way you savage the
>skeptics and make them eat their words. The razor sharp logic and concise
>language of each of your posts is something I admire. You are very much on
>the ball.
>
>Is there a correlation between your superior intelligence and the psychic
>abilities you exhibit?
I think there is a definite correlation. They are equal in extent.
Dan
Martin Blackwell
-> From what I remember you crapped your drawers when I told you exactly
-> have in your bank account after remote viewing your p=
-> lace of residence. Remember or is your memory lapsing? I can post t
-> l posts if you want to look even stupider than you do=
-> now. You then came back crying that I forgot to see your supposed
-> gold coins (which I might add were not there) to cover your butt=
-> Get a life Blaise, you're starting to look more rediculous each and
-> every day .
->
-> Earl Gordon Curley
-> psy...@asgo.net
-> http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
-> http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
You really did this???? Please do it for me. I'll leave my checkbook on
the nightstand.
Michael A. Dwyer
In article <4mli9o$8...@forged.passport.ca>,
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
: ad...@shore.net (Michael A. Dwyer) wrote:
: >Thanks Earl (can I call you Earl?) for making this world a saner place.
: >
: >Michael Dwyer
:
: You have my blessings and permission to address me as an individual and friend. :-)
Oh, thank you, thank you. So great is your intellect, yet so humble is
your demeanor. But Earl, in response to a simple question in another post,
you threatened to sue me and my service provider. Say it ain't so!
Michael Dwyer
Steve Terrell
Earl Curley wrote:
>
> Dan Pressnell <dpre...@ns.vvm.com> wrote:...
> >Thanks for the info, Lizz. I didn't know that Earl had a habit of
> >referring to the menstrual cycle of female posters. I guess nothing the
> >scum does should surprise me now, though.
> >
> >I wonder whether his psychic clients (if he has any, that is) knows what
> >a disgusting excuse for humanity he is.
> >
> >Dan
>
You'll have to forgive Earl. He has the *abridged* medical dictionary.
Chow,
Steve
Steve Terrell
Earl Curley wrote:
> ...
> Twitchy, baby, you better do your homework. I've had more air time and
> print than Randi. Do yourself a favor, search before you put your foot
> in your mouth.
Earl's right. I can't be the ONLY one printing out his
posts for training my puppy.
Chow,
Steve
Steve Terrell
Earl Curley wrote:
...
> Bodily functions? Heck, I'm talking about Mars retrograting. Get you mind out of the gutter Liz. Oh, for your information, that's astrology.
Don't patronize us, Earl. We may not as smart as you,
but we already DO know that the gutter is astrology.
Chow,
Steve
Steve Terrell
Earl Curley wrote:
...
> From what I remember you crapped your drawers when I told you exactly what you have in your bank account after remote viewing your place of residence. Remembe
[lies about gold coins not being there]
When I remote view into the desk drawer, I DO see gold coins, but fail
to see the Blaise-droppings that Earls insists is there. I think
that Blaise will back me up on this: Even I can remote view better than Earl!
Chow,
Steve
Steve Terrell
Earl Curley wrote:
...
> No I didn't. I did issue two law suits to two individuals and their service providers, which I might add were settled out of court, for calling me a "fraud" w
Choose your own bash:
1. So, how much did Earl have to pay them?
or
2. Notice he didn't *add* that they settled out of court. He *might* add.
...
> No, again not at all. Ray Hyman, as far as I'm concerned knows nothing about anomalies and is strictly going by 1940's reflections on the subject. It's about
[lies about taking the challenge...]
And remember, folks, Earl's own words suggest no "reputable" psychic would take up the Randi Challenge.
Chow,
Steve
Steve Terrell
Earl Curley wrote:
...
> Here we have an idiot troller who has nothing better to do with his life
> then try to disrupt a legimate discussion. Go back to your sand-box and...
Gramitcally speaking, "Here" refers to Curley's own post.
Chow,
Steve
Earl Curley
Not likely, fool. You showed your true colors. A troller in women's clothing. How appropriate.
Earl Curley
First of all you need to know how to construct a sentence. Read what you wrote above to get a clue. Remember "be" is a word to.
Earl Curley
At least you're reading them and learning something.
Ian Philips
In article <4morvi$b...@forged.passport.ca>,
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> writes:
|>
|> First of all you need to know how to construct a sentence.
|> Read what you wrote above to get a clue. Remember "be" is a word to.
|>
|> Earl Gordon Curley
|>
At first I resisted following up on this post of Earl's, but
the temptation was too great. Look at Earl's last sentence.
"Be" is a word to what? Or did Earl mean "be" is a word too?
^^^
To quote Earl "read what you <Earl> wrote above to get a clue".
Those in glass houses ....
Too bad Earl hasn't figured out that if he would just proof
read his posts *once* before he sent them, they would make a
lot more sense.
Lizz Braver
In article <4mos15$b...@forged.passport.ca>, psy...@asgo.net says...
>>
>>Earl's right. I can't be the ONLY one printing out his
>>posts for training my puppy.
>>
>>Chow,
>> Steve
>
>At least you're reading them and learning something.
>
>Earl Gordon Curley
Earl, it's his puppy that's learning something.
Lizz "What is it, Lassie? What is it, girl? Is there trouble at the farm?"
Braver
blase menichelli
In article <4mf9c0$s...@nougat.asgo.net>, Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> says:
>
>disc...@fastlane.net (blase menichelli) wrote:
>>In article <4m672f$a...@forged.passport.ca>, Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> says:
>>>
>>>Steve Terrell <st...@hfab1.sc.ti.com> wrote:
>>>>Earl Curley wrote:
>>>>...
>>>>> main reason no reputable psychic will take up Randi's challenge is
>>>>> because he doesn't have a pot to go to the washroom in. Now, I admit,
>>>>
>>>>Ddin't Earl claim to have taken up Randi's challenge?
>>>>Finally he admits that he is not reputable.
>>>>
>>>>...
>>>>> Earl Gordon Curley
>>>>> psy...@asgo.net
>>>>> http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
>>>>> http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>
>>>Another piece of false quoting from Steve. In fact, for you Steve I'll reiterate exactly what I said about Randi's challenge. I =
>no=3D
>>>r any reputable (yes myself) psychic would even consider Randi's challenge since he doesn't have the money to back up his challeng=
>e.=3D
>>> Quite simple, even for someone with no brains like you.
>>>
>>>Earl Gordon Curley
>>>psy...@asgo.net
>>>http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
>>>http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
>>>
>>>
>
>From what I remember you crapped your drawers when I told you exactly what you have in your bank account after remote viewing your p=
>lace of residence. Remember or is your memory lapsing? I can post the original posts if you want to look even stupider than you do=
> now. You then came back crying that I forgot to see your supposed gold coins (which I might add were not there) to cover your butt=
> Get a life Blaise, you're starting to look more rediculous each and every day.
>
>Earl Gordon Curley
>psy...@asgo.net
>http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
>http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
>
accounts,your "psychic guess" was close to a few of them but was NOT EXACTLY RIGHT ! I've
already covered this old story many times already ! For those who don't know I'll repeat it in
a short form. I ran "PSYCHIC" CONTESTS last year for months offering $5,000 to the
winner.When EARL GORDON CURLEY couldn't win, he tried to discredit me by coming up
with this preposterous story that he astral projected into my house, looked into all of my
drawers & found a bank statement. The funny thing is, if he looked on my kitchen table, he
would have won an easy $5,000 ! That's because I was running a contest where I placed
5 playing cards on my kitchen table, whereby to win $5,000 all you'd have to do is report the
correct 5 cards to me ! For some reason EARL GORDON CURLEY NEVER won a contest !
As far as posting old posts, I have no problem with it as long as I can post any that I want to
without you threatening my service provider !
You know EARL, the INFAMOUS ROB KNIGHT POST ! This is the one in which after
having deluded yourself into believing that you got my bank statement right, you took
ROB KNIGHT up on his $5,000 bet & not only were you way off on his bank account, but
there were 2 other things that you claimed you saw but were COMPLETELY WRONG !
In other words you were WRONG in 3 out of 3 "PSYCHIC" GUESSES ! By the way, have
you paid him the $5,000 yet ?
Also those gold coins were in my drawer & you could have won $5,000 if you told me the
5 playing cards that I had on my kitchen table at the same time !
>
Also EARL, when are you going to learn how to spell words & names ?
Don't you think it's time you purchased a dictionary !!!!!!
Have a nice day !
BLASE " I TELL IT LIKE IT IS " MENICHELLI
Steve Terrell
Earl Curley wrote:
...
> Publicity? Heck Randi can't even get his name in print any longer and
Strange, Earl here talks more about Randi than Randi talks about
him. Earls has just about doubled the number of times Randi's
name pops up. Why would Earl waste the time trying to beat
down a reputation with nothing but talk unless it was the only way
to make his repuitation held in hight esteem?
Of course, Randi beats on Uri's reputation, but the differnece
is the beating goes in both directions, and Randi is prepared
to backs up his claims with more than just hot air.
Chow,
Steve
Dan Pressnell
Twisted Metal <Not...@direct.ca> wrote:
>
>Is it just me, Or does Curley's reply make no sense?
>And why does it extend off my screen?
>Someone Clue me in, here.. please?
>
>TM
You must be new here. To answer your first question, Earl never makes
sense. Nobody knows the answer to your second question.
Dan
twi...@hub.ofthe.net
Steve Terrell <st...@hfab1.sc.ti.com> wrote:
#Earl Curley wrote:
#> ...
#> Twitchy, baby, you better do your homework. I've had more air time
and
#> print than Randi. Do yourself a favor, search before you put your
foot
#> in your mouth.
#Earl's right. I can't be the ONLY one printing out his
#posts for training my puppy.
#Chow,
# Steve
Out of curiousity, has anyone here ever seen or heard about Earl,
except on these newsgroups?
Enjoy.
Twi...@hub.ofthe.net
SSF Ltd Paul Whittaker
In article <4mrfh3$a...@aphex.direct.ca>, Twisted Metal
<Not...@direct.ca> writes
>>Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> went zooming off the right hand side of
the screen :
>
>
>And why does it (a reply from Earl) extend off my screen?
>Someone Clue me in, here.. please?
>
>TM
As usual Earl was not sticking to any one point/question, and as usual
went off on a tangent to everyone else.
If it's any consolation, when Earl does disappear off the screen, it's
usually for the best ...
Paul
Matt Kriebel
twi...@hub.ofthe.net wrote:
Well, there's a thread on sci.skeptic that Earl x-posted for no reason
that has to do with the anti-terrorism law being passed. That one has a
very odd mix of groups it goes to.
And most people in the other groups think Earl's a fake windbag too. :)
Matt Kriebel * This .sig is no longer small or easily digestible!
got...@netaxs.com * No, I'm not a goth. I just have an architecture fetish.
***************************************************************************
Not so much a shotgun approach, more like a double-loaded grapeshot approach.
Bruce Daniel Kettler
You seem quite upset! I feel sorry for you. I will point out that
your writing is filled with the distortion that the minds of people
like you generate. Without going into detail of exactly in what
ways it is distorted, I will point out that my writing consists of
much more than the above quoted. The reasons for mine, and others
displeasure about Pressnell have been clearly shown in ALT.PARANORMAL,
and in some cases other newsgroups. Your writing creats a distorted
and limited view.
I leave it to the reader to wonder what kind of a person would write
in such a hateful manner, as the above shows quite clearly.
>
>
>
Pat Parrinello
In article <4mrigu$r...@newshost.vvm.com>, dpre...@ns.vvm.com (Dan
Pressnell) wrote:
> It doesn't matter, really. Supersmart Earl the psychic probably
> thinks you are "lude" too!
Here ya go, this shuud help! :)
Memo: to all sighkick writers on alt.paranet.skeptic
Subject: New rules for improving readability for the convenience of the
general public.
Remember; You are what you write!
1. Avoid alliteration. Always.
2. Never use a long word when a diminutive one will do.
4. Employ the vernacular.
5. Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
6. Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary.
7. Remember to never split an infinitive.
8. Contractions aren't necessary.
9. Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
10. One should never generalize.
11. Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "I hate
quotations. Tell me what you know."
12. Comparisons are as bad as cliches.
13. Don't be redundant; don't use more words than necessary; it's
highly superfluous.
14. Be more or less specific.
15. Understatement is always best.
16. One-word sentences? Eliminate.
17. Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
18. The passive voice is to be avoided.
19. Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
20. Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
21. Who needs rhetorical questions?
22. Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.
23. Don't never use a double negation.
24. capitalize every sentence and remember always end it with point
25. Do not put statements in the negative form.
26. Verbs have to agree with their subjects.
27. Proofread carefully to see if you words out.
28. If you reread your work, you can find on rereading a great deal
of repetition can be avoided by rereading and editing.
29. A writer must not shift your point of view.
30. And don't start a sentence with a conjunction.
(Remember, too, a preposition is a terrible word
to end a sentence with.)
31. Don't overuse exclamation marks!!
32. Place pronouns as close as possible, especially in long sentences,
as of 10 or more words, to their antecedents.
33. Writing carefully, dangling participles must be avoided.
34. If any word is improper at the end of a sentence, a linking verb is.
35. Take the bull by the hand and avoid mixing metaphors.
36. Avoid trendy locutions that sound flaky.
37. Everyone should be careful to use a singular pronoun
with singular nouns in their writing.
38. Always pick on the correct idiom.
39. The adverb always follows the verb.
40. Last but not least, avoid cliches like the plague;
They're old hat; seek viable alternatives.
Jack Zupan
: >...
: >> Bodily functions? Heck, I'm talking about Mars retrograting. Get you mind out of the gutter Liz. Oh, for your information, that's astrology.
: >
: >Don't patronize us, Earl. We may not as smart as you,
: >but we already DO know that the gutter is astrology.
: >
: >Chow,
: > Steve
: First of all you need to know how to construct a sentence. Read what you wrote above to get a clue. Remember "be" is a word to.
Thank you for providing me with the biggest laugh of my day. I love this
place. :)
- Jack
~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~'~
o/~ "Music is God's voice" )Jack Zupan
)j...@apk.net
- Brian Wilson - ) Keet (^,^)
Ted Rosen
dket...@ix.netcom.com(Bruce Daniel Kettler) wrote:
>In <4mjbp9$a...@barad-dur.nas.com> ham...@nas.com (Ted Rosen) writes:
>>
>>dket...@ix.netcom.com(Bruce Daniel Kettler) wrote:
>>
<major snip>
Damn right I'm hornery on this one! First, you fail to attempt any
defense of the hypocrisy outlined in my above post (can you say "no
contest"?) and then you fail to address the atrocious behaviour of
you, Curley, Reiser and others when it comes to cowardly whines to the
ISP's of those who disagree with you on Usenet. Rather than defend
this behaviour, you accuse *me* of "distortion". Did Pressman write to
your home? Harrass you at work? Call up your wife and scream in the
phone? No. Did I? No.
He merely disagreed with your (and Curley's) point of view in a rather
humorous, often cynical, manner.
In return, you weenies want to contact his ISP to *have him silenced*!
Why? Does it really hurt you to be challenged on Usenet? Are you so
unable to respond in this cyber-forum that you must lash out in the
real world?
I don't get very mean when an argument ensues on Usenet. It's when
creepy little turds like you and Curley go around screwing with people
in the *real* world that I get pissed-off.
I reiterate: you demonstrate yourself to be a coward and a sissy by
making calls to the ISP's of your Usenet detractors. You show an utter
lack of respect for dissenting opinion and a fascist streak a mile
wide. How do you square this with your "sensitive New-Age" personna?
I may rant on Usenet but I *never* attack anyone in the "real" world.
I respect others' privacy and right to dissent.
So tell me, who's the mean and hateful one here, Bruce?
- TR
Bruce Daniel Kettler
>
>>You seem quite upset! I feel sorry for you. I will point out that
>>your writing is filled with the distortion that the minds of people
>>like you generate. Without going into detail of exactly in what
>>ways it is distorted, I will point out that my writing consists of
>>much more than the above quoted. The reasons for mine, and others
>>displeasure about Pressnell have been clearly shown in
ALT.PARANORMAL,
>>and in some cases other newsgroups. Your writing creats a distorted
>>and limited view.
>
>>I leave it to the reader to wonder what kind of a person would write
>>in such a hateful manner, as the above shows quite clearly.
(dkettler)
>
> Damn right I'm hornery on this one! First, you fail to attempt
any
>defense of the hypocrisy outlined in my above post (can you say "no
>contest"?)
IT'S NOT "NO CONTEST" but more like "why the hell do you think I *have*
to bring myself to the level you are on?
and then you fail to address the atrocious behaviour of
>you, Curley, Reiser and others when i
I addressed it in a "WE THE UNDERSIGNED" two in fact, to TWITCHY. (BDK)
Want some addressing, read my latest MUSINGS ON SKEPTICS... in
alt.paranormal.psi just placed today. (BDK)
Though it's been, in some ways fun, it's also been quite ridiculous
writing to you people. You really are a bunch of low-lifes. I don't
mean "skeptics," I mean people who write like you do. It looks like
I'm about fed up.(BDK)
If someone reads your ranting and raving about me, and they believe it,
who cares? To read that kind of junk, and take your word for it,
they'd have to be of the type that I could care less, what they
believe.(BDK)
comes to cowardly whines to the
>ISP's of those who disagree with you on Usenet. Rather than defend
>this behaviour, you accuse *me* of "distortion". Did Pressman write to
>your home? Harrass you at work? Call up your wife and scream in the
>phone? No. Did I? No.
> He merely disagreed with your (and Curley's) point of view in a
rather
>humorous, often cynical, manner.
> In return, you weenies want to contact his ISP to *have him
silenced*!
>Why? Does it really hurt you to be challenged on Usenet? Are you so
>unable to respond in this cyber-forum that you must lash out in the
>real world?
> I don't get very mean when an argument ensues on Usenet. It's
when
>creepy little turds like you and Curley go around screwing with people
>in the *real* world that I get pissed-off.
> I reiterate: you demonstrate yourself to be a coward and a sissy
by
>making calls to the ISP's of your Usenet detractors.
You show an utter
>lack of respect for dissenting opinion and a fascist streak a mile
>wide. How do you square this with your
Look you are so far off base, it's ridiculous. I never wanted
Pressnell silenced. The complaints had nothing to do with freedom of
speech, dissenting opionons to be banned, or anything that the
DISTORTED MIND OF YOURS
happens to think it knows.
"sensitive New-Age" personna?
> I may rant on Usenet but I *never* attack anyone in the "real"
world.
>I respect others' privacy and right to dissent.
> So tell me, who's the mean and hateful one here, Bruce?
>
> - TR
>
BOY, ARE YOU JUST DRIPPING WITH HATE!!!!!!! Check yourself out, man!
(BDK)
>
>
>
>
>
Hugh Young
In <pparri-1005...@pparri.sat.net> ppa...@sat.net (Pat
Parrinello) wrote:
>26. Verbs have to agree with their subjects.
I think you mean, "A verb have to agree with its subject" or "Verbs
has to agree with their subjects."
--
Hugh Young *************************
Pukerua Bay * An overnight editor *
Nuclear-free Aotearoa / NEW ZEALAND * Your text clarified *
* in the Antipodes *
The opinions expressed above * while you sleep: *
are damned good ones! * e-mail me for details *
*************************
Terry Romine
In article <4mf8qq$p...@midland.co.nz>, gbl...@midland.co.nz (George Black)
wrote:
>
> And, further. James Randi is also a contributor to OMNI and has been
since its
> inception. His articles are interesting, lucid and very revealing as to the
> parlour tricks employed by these 'psychic' ---------
Wouldn't be more acurate to say he was demonstration the parlor tricks _he_
used to _simulate_ the psychic's displays? I don't believe he ever stopped
a psychic during a demonstration and pulled off the fake finger...
************************************************************
** ... something is happening and you don't know what it is;
** Do you, Mr. Jones?
Pat Parrinello
In article <1016sfc6...@young.wn.planet.gen.nz>,
hu...@young.wn.planet.gen.nz wrote:
> In <pparri-1005...@pparri.sat.net> ppa...@sat.net (Pat
> Parrinello) wrote:
>
>
> >26. Verbs have to agree with their subjects.
> I think you mean, "A verb have to agree with its subject" or "Verbs
> has to agree with their subjects."
No, not at all. You see, Verbs (a noun) are the leaders of Verbia.
They are a true democracy
and the people are the Subverbs and they live in the suburbs.
You must remember, cats, like commas, are alike. Commas have pause at the
end of their clause whereas cats have claws at the end of their paws.
And that basically is why 'computer intelligence' is an oxymoron.
It does not explain UFO's but it's gets us pointed in the right direction.
~Pat~
George Black
In article <romine.t-130...@a17-221-40-181.apple.com>,
romi...@quickmail.apple.com (Terry Romine) wrote:
>In article <4mf8qq$p...@midland.co.nz>, gbl...@midland.co.nz (George Black)
>wrote:
>>
>> And, further. James Randi is also a contributor to OMNI and has been
>since its
>> inception. His articles are interesting, lucid and very revealing as to the
>> parlour tricks employed by these 'psychic' ---------
>
>Wouldn't be more acurate to say he was demonstration the parlor tricks _he_
>used to _simulate_ the psychic's displays? I don't believe he ever stopped
>a psychic during a demonstration and pulled off the fake finger...
James Randi has 'demonstrated' all the parlour magic tricks as a stage
magician.
It is because of this he is able to detect the same misdirection in other
stage magicians who pose as psychics .
Pulled off the fake finger????? Sorry, is this related to his contributions to
OMNI??? or something else ????
George Black Hamilton New Zealand
gbl...@midland.co.nz
3:774/605.112
If you think you have a problem
Earl Curley
Ted Rosen wrote:
> >I leave it to the reader to wonder what kind of a person would write
> >in such a hateful manner, as the above shows quite clearly.
>
> defense of the hypocrisy outlined in my above post (can you say "no
> you, Curley, Reiser and others when it comes to cowardly whines to the
> ISP's of those who disagree with you on Usenet. Rather than defend
> this behaviour, you accuse *me* of "distortion". Did Pressman write to
> your home? Harrass you at work? Call up your wife and scream in the
> phone? No. Did I? No.
> He merely disagreed with your (and Curley's) point of view in a rather
> humorous, often cynical, manner.
> In return, you weenies want to contact his ISP to *have him silenced*!
> Why? Does it really hurt you to be challenged on Usenet? Are you so
> unable to respond in this cyber-forum that you must lash out in the
> real world?
> I don't get very mean when an argument ensues on Usenet. It's when
> creepy little turds like you and Curley go around screwing with people
> in the *real* world that I get pissed-off.
> I reiterate: you demonstrate yourself to be a coward and a sissy by
> making calls to the ISP's of your Usenet detractors. You show an utter
> lack of respect for dissenting opinion and a fascist streak a mile
> I may rant on Usenet but I *never* attack anyone in the "real" world.
> I respect others' privacy and right to dissent.
> So tell me, who's the mean and hateful one here, Bruce?
>
> - TR
>
>
Talk about a hypercritical individual. What gives you the right to mouth off on the Usenet
when you say you don't on the street. My contention is more than likely you know that if
you did you'd probably get a punch in mouth. Neither you or Pressman debate the
issues. All we ever see from the likes of you are innuendoes, snide remarks, libelous
statements and sticking your nose in posts where it doesn't belong simply to try and
irritate the posters who are seriously trying to debate and learn the issues.
Don't come crying that we have contacted ISP's. It's about time everyone who's fed up
with those of you who feel you can hide behind your computer and do anything your little
desires are put a stop to. I for one will continue to contact the providers and lobby Usenet
to have your type limited to discussing issues and not disturbing the others who use the
Usenet conferences properly.
Dan Pressnell
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>Don't come crying that we have contacted ISP's. It's about time everyone who's fed up
>with those of you who feel you can hide behind your computer and do anything your little
>desires are put a stop to. I for one will continue to contact the providers and lobby Usenet
>to have your type limited to discussing issues and not disturbing the others who use the
>Usenet conferences properly.
Look who's talking about not disturbing others... The master
psychic/hypocrite, who refers to a female poster's menstrual cycle, and
tells another to "stop being a penis."
This is the guy who wants to lobby get his own style of attack adopted as
some kind of usenet law.
Dan
Dan Pressnell
dket...@ix.netcom.com(Bruce Daniel Kettler) wrote:
>I will contribute to Earl's endeavor. I have not initiated a
>contact with an ISP yet. However, I will contribute, to write
>to ISP'S, to lobby USENET, as part of a combined team effort. The
>next step, as I perceive it, is to contact each other, with multiple
>e-mail addressing to each other, with some plan for those who are FED
>UP WITH THE UTTER NONSENSE GOING ON HERE, to get together and PUT AN
>END TO THE GARBAGE STINKING UP OUR NEWSGROUPS!
I'll leave all those extra newsgroups in the header.
Bruce, I want to tell you something. I've never been one too keen on
extreme comparisons. For example, I've never been prone to call somebody
communist, fascist, or nazi. It does nothing for me.
But my girlfriend has read your and Earl's garbage. She is a German
citizen, and left Germany after she had lived there for more than 20
years. She tells me that in the German educational system, it is
stressed what the Nazis did. There's a lot of education that German
children get on that subject, and there's a lot of guilt that is being
carried by the German people. To them, the subject of Nazism is a very
serious one, and they don't joke about it. The feeling is so deeply
rooted that when my girlfriend and I watch a documentary or movie on
Nazis, she very often gets very emotional and sad, and starts to cry,
feeling that she has some of that guilt passed down to her just because
she is a German.
So neither she nor I make light of the subject of Nazis, and neither of
us compare anybody to Nazis without damn good reason. But after she had
read some of your and Earl's posts, and witnessed the efforts to get me
banned from usenet, she said something that indicated to me how strongly
she felt. She said that the efforts were just like the efforts in
Hitler's Nazi Germany--and she said that without any prior comment from
me. I gave her a surprised look when she said that, and she said, "It
is. It's just like Nazis, their tactics."
I thought you would enjoy that little story, for what it's worth.
Now, on the matter of all this cross-posting.....
Something has just come to my attention. I once made a post with the
subject of "How to bend a spoon psychically."
On May 7, Eric Roman posted under that thread. Also on May 7, you
answered him. But you did more than that. You added something to the
header. You added the newsgroup psi.general. Now there are followups to
that in the newsgroup psi.general.
If you want to verify this, go to DejaNews on the www, and search for
this:
how to bend a spoon measurable
That will show who added the group psi.general to the thread.
Other threads have had the same thing happen.
If you want to see the other garbage that is ending up in psi.general,
use DejaNews and search for:
psi.general
The newsgroup psi.general is a newsgroup for an internet service provider
called PSInet. It has nothing to do with the paranormal. The folks in
that newsgroup deal with computers, etc., not psychic or paranormal
stuff.
Do you think you could give those folks a break so they don't have to
wade through all that stuff about psychics and skeptics that you've been
posting into their newsgroup? (I also urge everybody to check their
followups to make sure that we don't perpetuate a thread in psi.general
that Bruce started.)
Dan
Bruce Daniel Kettler
TED ROSEN wrote:
- TR
Bruce Daniel Kettler (dket...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
I leave it to the reader to wonder what kind of a person
would write in such a hateful manner, as the above shows
quite clearly.
Earl Curley (psy...@asgo.net) wrote:
Talk about a hypocritical individual. What gives you the right to
mouth off on the Usenet when you say you don't on the street.
My contention is more than likely you know that if you did you'd
probably get a punch in the mouth. Neither you or Pressman debate
the issues. All we ever see from the likes of you are innuendoes,
snide remarks, libelous statements and sticking your nose in posts
where it doesn't belong simply to try and irritate the posters who
are seriously trying to debate and learn the issues.
Don't come crying that we have contacted ISP's. It's about time
everyone who's fed up with those of you who feel you can hide
behind your computer and do anything your little desires are put
a stop to. I for one will continue to contact the providers and
lobby Usenet to have your type limited to discussing issues and
not disturbing the others who use the Usenet conferences properly.
Earl Gordon Curley
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bruce Daniel Kettler (dket...@ix.netcom.com) writes:
Regarding Earl's,
...innuendos, snide remarks, libelous statements and
sticking your nose into posts where it doesn't
belong simply to try and irritate the posters
who are seriously trying to debate and learn
the issues.
And if one want's a detailed description of the type that Earl
writes about in the above, they can go to alt.psychology and
download my 2 part posting. It's a later revision, so reading
earlier versions will not show quite as much.
I call them "fanatics" and in my posting I show just exactly
how and why they ARE.
I wrote in a recent posting on alt.psychology that the statistics
show an overwhelming majority of people of the so-called "skeptic"
persuasion do what is shown in my description, that indeed my
writing is not "over-generalization." I was challenged,
recently by d...@teleport.com about how many. The evidence
is on USENET. Anyone willing to go into archives can examine
them, and see who, and how many write a certain way.
Earl writes:
I, for one, will continue to contact the providers
and lobby Usenet to have your type limited to
discussing issues and not disturbing the others
who use the Usenet conferences properly.
I will contribute to Earl's endeavor. I have not initiated a
Earl Curley
Jack Zupan wrote:
>
> Earl Curley (psy...@asgo.net) wrote:
> : Steve Terrell <st...@hfab1.sc.ti.com> wrote:
> : >Earl Curley wrote:
> : >...
> : >> Bodily functions? Heck, I'm talking about Mars retrograting. Get you mind out of the gutter Liz. Oh, for your information, that's astrology.
> : >
> : >Don't patronize us, Earl. We may not as smart as you,
> : >but we already DO know that the gutter is astrology.
> : >
> : >Chow,
> : > Steve
>
> : First of all you need to know how to construct a sentence. Read what you wrote above to get a clue. Remember "be" is a word to.
>
> Thank you for providing me with the biggest laugh of my day. I love this
> place. :)
>
> - Jack
Jack, the problem with Steve is he gets so frustrated trying to make a jack-ass of himself
that he doesn't realize it he does it every time he posts unintentially. I guess he reads his
Sun Signs in newspapers first and then figures out in his mind whether it's a good day to
vent those frustrations on others or not. I guess his above quote was one of those bad
retrogate days. :-)
Bruce Daniel Kettler
RESPONSE TO DPRESSNELL COMPARING MYSELF AND EARL TO NAZIS
>Your girlfriend, did not examine the entire context of this argument.
>No, this isn't about dissenting views being banned. This is not
>at all what the Nazis did. This has to do with decency, in
expression.
If anyone wants to know the whole story, let them go to archives on
>USENET. I don't have to quote line and verse the garbage that has
>littered these newsgroups from the likes of you -- long before I ever
>cross-posted, and long before I ever supposedly drew people from other
>newsgroups. Ask the founder, (s...@srv.net) how long this has been
>going on, the deluge of garbage littering ALT.PARANORMAL.
>++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
><SNIP>rovider
>>called PSInet. It has nothing to do with the paranormal. The folks
>in
>>that newsgroup deal with computers, etc., not psychic or paranormal
>>stuff. (dpressnell)
>
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>OK I made a mistake. Thank's for pointing it out.
>(dket...@ix.netcom.com)
>
>
>
In <4nc0jc$f...@newshost.vvm.com> Dan Pressnell <dpre...@ns.vvm.com>
writes:
>
>dket...@ix.netcom.com(Bruce Daniel Kettler) wrote:
>>I will contribute to Earl's endeavor. I have not initiated a
>>contact with an ISP yet. However, I will contribute, to write
>>to ISP'S, to lobby USENET, as part of a combined team effort. The
>>next step, as I perceive it, is to contact each other, with multiple
>>e-mail addressing to each other, with some plan for those who are FED
>>UP WITH THE UTTER NONSENSE GOING ON HERE, to get together and PUT AN
>>END TO THE GARBAGE STINKING UP OUR NEWSGROUPS!
>
Bruce Daniel Kettler
multiple
>>e-mail addressing to each other, with some plan for those who are FED
>>UP WITH THE UTTER NONSENSE GOING ON HERE, to get together and PUT AN
>>END TO THE GARBAGE STINKING UP OUR NEWSGROUPS!
>
>But my girlfriend has read your and Earl's garbage. She is a German
>citizen, and left Germany after she had lived there for more than 20
>years. She tells me that in the German educational system, it is
>stressed what the Nazis did.<<<SNIP>>>an.
>
>So neither she nor I make light of the subject of Nazis, and neither
of
>us compare anybody to Nazis without damn good reason. But after she
had
>read some of your and Earl's posts, and witnessed the efforts to get
me
>banned from usenet, she said something that indicated to me how
strongly
>she felt. She said that the efforts were just like the efforts in
>Hitler's Nazi Germany--and she said that without any prior comment
from
>me. I gave her a surprised look when she said that, and she said, "It
>is. It's just like Nazis, their tactics."
Your girlfriend, did not examine the entire context of this argument.
No, this isn't about dissenting views being banned. This is not
at all what the Nazis did. This has to do with decency, in expresFrom: dket...@ix.netcom.com(Bruce Daniel Kettler)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal,alt.paranet.skeptic,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.astrology,alt.life.afterlife,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp
Subject: Re: *WHY I STARTED ALT.PARANORMAL 6 YRS. AGO*
References: <4lloet$b...@muir.math.niu.edu> <4lmq90$c...@nougat.asgo.net> <4lmtaq$5...@newshost.vvm.com> <sir-270496...@199.104.80.6> <4luggk$7...@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com> <4mjbp9$a...@barad-dur.nas.com> <4mv4bu$7...@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com> <4n5d61$g...@barad-dur.nas.com> <319905...@asgo.net> <4nbr0k$d...@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> <4nc0jc$f...@newshost.vvm.com>
In <4nc0jc$f...@newshost.vvm.com> Dan Pressnell <dpre...@ns.vvm.com>
writes:
>
<<<SNIP>>>tep, as I perceive it, is to contact each other, with
multiple
>>e-mail addressing to each other, with some plan for those who are FED
>>UP WITH THE UTTER NONSENSE GOING ON HERE, to get together and PUT AN
>>END TO THE GARBAGE STINKING UP OUR NEWSGROUPS!
>
>But my girlfriend has read your and Earl's garbage. She is a German
>citizen, and left Germany after she had lived there for more than 20
>years. She tells me that in the German educational system, it is
>stressed what the Nazis did.<<<SNIP>>>an.
>
>So neither she nor I make light of the subject of Nazis, and neither
of
>us compare anybody to Nazis without damn good reason. But after she
had
>read some of your and Earl's posts, and witnessed the efforts to get
me
>banned from usenet, she said something that indicated to me how
strongly
>she felt. She said that the efforts were just like the efforts in
>Hitler's Nazi Germany--and she said that without any prior comment
from
>me. I gave her a surprised look when she said that, and she said, "It
>is. It's just like Nazis, their tactics."
Your girlfriend, did not examine the entire context of this argument.
No, this isn't about dissenting views being banned. This is not
at all what the Nazis did. This has to do with decency, in expres wants to know the whole story, let them go to archives on
Bruce Daniel Kettler
REPLYING TO:
From: Dan Pressnell <dpre...@ns.vvm.com>
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal,alt.paranet.skeptic,
alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.astrology,
alt.life.afterlife,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp
Subject: Re: *WHY I STARTED ALT.PARANORMAL 6 YRS. AGO*
Date: 15 May 1996 07:20:12 GMT from <dpre...@ns.vvm.com>
This makes excellent material for my newest revision of the text
that examines the psychology of "skeptics." (dkettler)
Comparing the statements and intentions of Earl Curley and Bruce
Daniel Kettler with Nazis will make a real grabber in the SUBJECT,
something like: "Skeptics compare those into paranormal to Nazis --
what's their psyche like?" let's say, in alt.psychology
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I will contribute to Earl's endeavor. I have not initiated a
contact with an ISP yet. However, I will contribute, to write
to ISP'S, to lobby USENET, as part of a combined team effort.
..to get together and PUT AN END TO THE GARBAGE STINKING UP
OUR NEWSGROUPS! <dket...@ix.netcom.com>
This is about people who are abusive, not the fact that they
have dissenting views. It's about (quoting my quote of Earl
Curley):
...innuendos, snide remarks, libelous statements and
sticking your nose into posts where it doesn't
belong simply to try and irritate the posters
who are seriously trying to debate and learn
the issues.
But my girlfriend has read your and Earl's garbage. She is a German
citizen, and left Germany after she had lived there for more than 20
years <SNIP> and neither of us compare anybody to Nazis without damn
good reason <SNIP> witnessed the efforts to get me banned from usenet
<SNIP> she said something that indicated to me how strongly
she felt. She said that the efforts were just like the efforts in
Hitler's Nazi Germany (dpressnell)
Your girlfriend did not examine the entire context of this argument.
No, this isn't about dissenting views being banned. This is not
at all what the Nazis did. This has to do with decency.
If a person goes to a public gathering, one of like-minded people,
and shouts during a speech or sermon, that all those in the group
are crazy, and that they need to debate him or her, they may be
warned, but if they continue, and then resist the police, they
will be dragged off.
The fact of the above illustrates my point, and does not mean
this is a police state. It doesn't make the police-person, or
those in charge of him or her, a Nazi.
If anyone wants to know the whole story, let them go to archives
on USENET. I don't have to quote line and verse the garbage that
has littered these newsgroups from the likes of you -- long before
I ever cross-posted, and long before I ever, supposedly, drew people
from other newsgroups. Ask the founder, (s...@srv.net) how long
this has been going on -- the deluge of garbage littering
ALT.PARANORMAL.
This is about the fact that people have placed postings
on alt.paranormal, and sent me e-mail that shows people are
discouraged from reading or contributing to discussions because
of the deluge of postings from those with dissenting views. It's
much like having to listen to a person shouting dissenting views
while in church trying to hear the sermon. Even the founder of
alt.paranormal (s...@srv.net) was dissuaded from reading or
contributing to the newsgroup he had founded.
An occasional comment or debate is one thing, but crowding one
or more newsgroups with consistent cross-posting is an altogether
different thing. I cross-post occasionally, and when responding
to those who have cross-posted. In my "THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SKEPTICISM"
in alt.psychology I show the difference between dissenting views and
their expression, and that of fanatics.
One of the points I make in my writing (the latter revision that
is in alt.psychology) is that people of your persuasion write,
often enough, for some kind of stimulation, amongst other reasons
such as their desire to prove certain points.
My response to you, in large part, provides that stimulation for
you. I'm getting tired of it, though. At some point, shortly,
I will let you go on discontinue responding to your distortions.
However, if as many as 1000 newsgroups read your ranting and
raving about what you think Earl Gordon Curley is and what
you think Bruce Daniel Kettler is, I'm not obligated to answer
it each and every time.
Actually, whatever a person with limited information blindly
believes your writing, without asking questions or knowing of what
is being referred to, that would be because of their narrow
mindedness. I don't have to concern myself with the views of
such people -- constantly.
I, for one, will continue to contact the providers
and lobby Usenet to have your type limited to
discussing issues and not disturbing the others
who use the Usenet conferences properly.
The above is what I'm responding to, a statement of Earl Curley.
It's not trying to ban dissenting views. What a total distortion.
You quote what is convenient to you, Dan. That's quite deceptive.
Also, Earl is responding to a person who wrote extremely abusive
and libelous remarks to me, with 4 letter words in public postings.
He's not writing in response to opposing views. The Nazis banned
and burned books. The Nazis threw people in prison and executed
them, not because they were disorderly, but because they had
dissenting views that they made public. You compare the writing
and actions of Earl and myself to *THAT*. Dan, I've read some
of the *LOWEST,* and the *MOST DISTORTED* writing from people of
your "persuasion" but this really does *EXCEED, BY FAR, ANY
EXPECTATION I'VE EVER HAD.*
In a way, you make my day. You prove, all the more, just what you
people are like.
My depiction, clearly written, that so many of you people are
fanatics, in my THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SKEPTICISM, has you frothing
at the mouth. Your response is to compare me to Nazis.
How sad.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As for psi.general, the issue of what the purpose of that
newsgroup is about, that you wrote about, thank's for
pointing that out to me. I'd been mistaken.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Having trouble posting, lately, hope this one makes it.
Technical difficulites. I may have to use my newsreader
and individually post it to the various newsgroups automatically
from my software, but individually.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
byw...@tiac.net
Reading from alt.atrology something-or-other, whatever you two
guys are saying, there's not much love in it.
Bruce Daniel Kettler
From: dket...@ix.netcom.com (Bruce Daniel Kettler)
Subject: Re: *WHY I STARTED ALT.PARANORMAL 6 YRS. AGO*
Date: May 16, 1996
REPLYING TO:
(slightly revised from the original posting)
Dan Pressnell <dpre...@ns.vvm.com>
Dan Pressnell's -- Date: 15 May 1996 07:20:12 GMT
Dan Pressnell's -- Date: 16 May 1996 05:18:39 GMT
----------------------------------------------------------------
This makes excellent material for my newest revision of the text
that examines the psychology of "skeptics." Comparing the
statements and intentions of Earl Gordon Curley and Bruce
Daniel Kettler with Nazis will make a good material for those
studying psychology, to examine.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I will contribute to Earl's endeavor. I have not initiated a
contact with an ISP yet. However, I will contribute, to write
to ISP'S, to lobby USENET, as part of a combined team effort.
.to get together and PUT AN END TO THE GARBAGE STINKING UP
OUR NEWSGROUPS! <dket...@ix.netcom.com>
This is about people who are abusive, not about the fact that
they have dissenting views. It's about (quoting my quote of
Earl Curley):
...innuendos, snide remarks, libelous statements and
sticking your nose into posts where it doesn't
belong simply to try and irritate the posters
who are seriously trying to debate and learn
the issues.
But my girlfriend has read your's and Earl's garbage. She is a
German citizen, and left Germany after she had lived there for more
than 20 years <SNIP> and neither of us compare anybody to Nazis
without damn good reason <SNIP> witnessed the efforts to get me
banned from usenet <SNIP> she said something that indicated to me
how strongly she felt. She said that the efforts were just like
the efforts in Hitler's Nazi Germany (dpressne)
Dan, I read a recent posting, responding to this, in which you
wrote that it was your hypothetical girlfriend's writing. No,
Dan, this is your writing, and I quote your above, "...neither of
us compare anybody to Nazis without damn good reason." Stop
trying to pass this on. You take responsibility for your writing.
Whoever, supposedly, *said* it is unimportant, since you are
obviously stating this as your view. (dkettler)
Your hypothetical girlfriend, who you've tried to hide behind, did
not examine the entire context of this argument. No, this isn't
about dissenting views being banned. This, which is being attempted
here, is not at all what the Nazis did. This has to do with decency.
(dkettler)
If a person goes to a public gathering, one of like-minded people,
and shouts during a speech or sermon, that all those in the group
are crazy, and that they need to debate him or her, they may be
warned, but if they continue, and then resist the police, they
will be dragged off. (dkettle)
How does one "shout" with his keyboard? (dpressne)
My analogy goes on, in other parts of this posting, and comes off
quite clearly in Steve Reiser's (s...@srv.com - founder of
alt.paranormal) liking "skeptics" to "bible-thumpers" about to beat
his door down to convert him. "Shouting" is the type of postings
of opposing views, (Earl Curley's description elsewhere in this
posting) the huge number of them, and the fact that people find it
hard to find postings that are on the subject of the newsgroup because
of so many dissenting views. If one has to *look*, that's likened
to *listening* for a voice in the *midst* of the *shouting* of others.
(dkettler)
The fact of the above (resisting the police) illustrates my point,
and does not mean this is a police state. It doesn't make the
police-person, or those in charge of him or her, a Nazi.
(dkettler)
If anyone wants to know the whole story, let them go to archives
on USENET. I don't have to quote chapter and verse the garbage
that has littered these newsgroups from the likes of you -- long
before I ever cross-posted, and long before I ever, supposedly,
drew people from other newsgroups. Ask the founder,
(s...@srv.net) how long this has been going on -- the deluge of
garbage littering ALT.PARANORMAL. (dkettler)
This is about the fact that people have placed postings
on alt.paranormal, and sent me e-mail that shows people are
discouraged from reading or contributing to discussions because
of the deluge of postings from those with dissenting views. It's
much like having to listen to a person shouting dissenting views
while in class trying to hear the professor tell of a certain
philosophy. Even the founder of alt.paranormal (s...@srv.net)
was dissuaded from reading or contributing to the newsgroup he
had founded. (dkettler)
An occasional comment or debate is one thing, but crowding one
or more newsgroups with consistent cross-posting is an altogether
different thing. I cross-post occasionally, and when responding
to those who have cross-posted. In my "THE PSYCHOLOGY OF
SKEPTICISM" in alt.psychology I show the difference between
dissenting views and their expression, and that of fanatics.
(dkettler)
One of the points I make in my writing (the latter revision that
is in alt.psychology) is that people of your persuasion write,
often enough, for some kind of stimulation, among other reasons,
such as their desire to prove certain points. (dkettler)
My response to you, Dan, in large part, provides that stimulation
for you. I'm getting tired of it, though. At some point, shortly,
I will let you go on, and discontinue responding to your distortions.
(dkettler)
However, if as many as 1000 newsgroups read your ranting and
raving about what you think Earl Gordon Curley is and what
you think Bruce Daniel Kettler is, I'm not obligated to answer
it each and every time. (dkettler)
Actually, whenever a person with limited information blindly
believes your writing, without asking questions or knowing of
what is being referred to, that would be because of their
narrow-mindedness. I don't have to concern myself with the
views of such people all the time. (dkettler)
I, for one, will continue to contact the providers
and lobby Usenet to have your type limited to
discussing issues and not disturbing the others
who use the Usenet conferences properly.
The above is what I'm responding to, a statement of Earl Curley.
It's not trying to ban dissenting views. What a total distortion.
You quote what is convenient to you, Dan. That's quite deceptive.
Also, Earl is responding to a person who wrote extremely abusive
and libelous remarks to me, with 4 letter words in public postings.
He's not writing in response to opposing views. The Nazis banned
and burned books. The Nazis threw people in prison and executed
them, not because they were disorderly, but because they had
dissenting views that were made public. You compare the writing
and actions of Earl and myself to *THAT*? Dan, I've read some
of the *LOWEST,* and the *MOST DISTORTED* writing from people of
your "persuasion," but this really does *EXCEED, BY FAR, ANY
I'VE EVER SEEN.* (dkettler)
Look who's distorting. I never said you and Earl are trying to put
people in prison and have them killed. (dpressne)
Obviously, I'm not saying that. (dkettler)
The above exagerration creates a distortion. I believe the Nazis
banning books would be closer to what you are saying is similar.
(ie: censoring) (dkettler)
You and he don't want to hear what others have to say when it might
disagree with your "religion." What's more, it's equally clear that
you don't want ANYBODY ELSE to hear it, either. (dpressne)
There's more distortion above, and the truth is shown elsewhere in
this posting and in other of my writing. (dkettler)
Not that it deprives the censor of something, but that it purposely
deprives EVERYBODY ELSE of the opportunity to hear. (dpressne)
Above, as another example, is more distorition. (dkettler)
Obviously, to anyone reading this and examining the postings of Earl,
myself, Steve Reiser and others, there's no desire to "censor."
As I understand it, a moderator is supposed to be sure the discussions
are on topic and prevent "flame wars." I've been told I should
volunteer to moderate alt.paranormal. My contention, repeatedly,
is that I don't believe it should need that. If I were so interested
in "censoring" as you put it, I'd be in some hurry to become a
moderator, or at least to advocate someone else doing it. (dkettler)
You prove, all the more in both your original posting and the reply
to mine, what I've written of what you people consistently do. You
distort, take writing out of context, and character-assassinate.
It's all quite common among people like you. (dkettler)
My descriptions, which clearly show that so many of you people
are fanatics, in my THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SKEPTICISM, (alt.psychology)
(titled differently in certain newsgroups) has you a bit
upset. Your response is to compare my actions to that of Nazis.
How sad.
Dan Pressnell
byw...@tiac.net wrote:
>Reading from alt.atrology something-or-other, whatever you two
>guys are saying, there's not much love in it.
>
>
A guess is that you are talking about Bruce Kettler and somebody (maybe
me).
It's kind of hard to have a discussion when one person suddenly starts
accusing the other of a mental illness for daring to doubt or be
skeptical.
Dan
Ted Rosen
Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
>Ted Rosen wrote:
>> I may rant on Usenet but I *never* attack anyone in the "real" world.
>> I respect others' privacy and right to dissent.
>
>Talk about a hypercritical individual. What gives you the right to mouth off on the Usenet
>when you say you don't on the street. My contention is more than likely you know that if
>you did you'd probably get a punch in mouth. Neither you or Pressman debate the
>issues. All we ever see from the likes of you are innuendoes, snide remarks, libelous
>statements and sticking your nose in posts where it doesn't belong simply to try and
>irritate the posters who are seriously trying to debate and learn the issues.
>Don't come crying that we have contacted ISP's. It's about time everyone who's fed up
>with those of you who feel you can hide behind your computer and do anything your little
>desires are put a stop to. I for one will continue to contact the providers and lobby Usenet
>to have your type limited to discussing issues and not disturbing the others who use the
>Usenet conferences properly.
Please note, young Earl: I didn't say I don't "mouth off" in the
street; I said I don't attack people in the street. This means I don't
do backhanded surreptitious guerrilla activities to subvert the
freedoms of people with whom I disagree. I don't contact others'
superiors to get them in trouble; I deal with others face-to-face,
unlike two cowardly little sissies I could mention. People who know me
consider me affable, fair and congenial.
If you reread sentence #5 in your post above, you'll see the hallmark
of hypocrisy. Look in any of the threads you litter and you'll see
*nothing but* innuendos and snide remarks. So fuck you.
Let's get to the point here: you and Brucie are wrong to contact the
ISP's of detractors. Are you so damn weak you can't respond to
detractors or assholes in a forum designed to express said opinions?
Are you so easily bruised that you must go running off to a
detractor's ISP to "get him/her in trouble"?
I abide by a lot both here and in other NG's. But I will not abide by
this nonsense. If you two babies can't stand the heat, get out of the
damn kitchen, OK? If harsh responses to your ludicrous claims and
pointed flames hurt your fragile little egos, go home to your damn
mommies. You weenies.
- TR
Mark O'Leary
In article <319905...@asgo.net>, Earl Curley <psy...@asgo.net> wrote:
[snip]
>continue to contact the providers and lobby Usenet to have your type
>limited to discussing issues and not disturbing the others who use the
>Usenet conferences properly.
>
>Earl Gordon Curley
Good idea, Earl.
Who's your (latest) ISP, again? Just wondering...
M.
--
-=-=-=-=-=- -.-. .- .-.. .-.. -- . -.-. --- --- ... .-.-.- -=-=-=-=-
Mark O'Leary, Voice: Extn. 6201
Network & Communications Group. Email: mol...@dmu.ac.uk
De Montfort University, UK.