Winston/Benneth's Ghost Hunt in Virginia City, NV
WinstonMcKay
I have so much to share with you regarding our ghost hunt, that I don't know
where to begin! As many of you know, I'm here in Virginia City, NV with John
Benneth, the nemesis of James Randi and claimant on the challenge. Yesterday,
at our Mark Twain Show, we had the pleasure of being visited by two paranormal
investigators, one of them is Robert Chamberlain from Northwest Paranormal
Investigations (ghostquest.com). They have been investigating ghosts for 8
years now. Anyway, tonight at 8:30pm me, John Benneth, two friends of ours,
and the two ghost investigators went to the Piper's Opera House to take some
pictures. The ghost hunters had these digital cameras where they could take
pictures on a disk and immediately show what they just took on a little screen.
We did that for a while and even tried talking to the ghosts too. We were all
so amazed because almost every picture taken came out with little orbs in them,
some big and in some pictures there were as many as 4. When John walked up on
stage to do his Mark Twain voice, 4 orbs appeared around him that showed up in
the picture, though not to the naked eye. The investigators were very excited
and said this was the most activity they'd ever seen.
They constantly showed me the pictures they got on the screen of their digital
camera, and almost every one had orbs. The orbs ranged from looking like dried
raindrops on your car windshield, to little points of lights like stars. Some
even moved and looked like streaks of rainbow colored light. They took about 4
packs of film tonight, so they have a treasure chest of ghost pictures of this
place. They said they'll scan them soon, so as soon as they do, I'll send them
all to you as either a file or a link to their website.
Keep in mind though, I don't think that they're hoaxing all this to us, because
a trusted friend of me and John's, also took a few pictures with a regular
camera a few weeks ago, and she thought the camera was defective cause there
were so many orbs on her pictures! But now that she knew they were probably
ghosts, she took them out again, and on one picture, the orb was so big that
you could kind of make out a face in it too! Freaky.
I took a few pictures tonight with my disposable camera, but they haven't
developed yet so I don't know if I got any orbs on my camera. But there should
be some though, cause everyone else's pictures came out with them! I'll keep
you all updated. Wow this'll be a great publicity thing if I can get word out
to the local newspapers!
Ok now get this. After we left Piper's Opera House, we went to Mackay's
Mansion, which was a home and museum too. When we went to the attic, Richard
said that the ghosts up there told him that they were angry that their "things"
were being taken from them up there. When we got back down to the first floor,
he told the lady who lived there that, and she acted surprised and said that
the owner of the mansion had been auctioning off items from the attic
lately!!!!!!!!!!!! Wow.
Anyway, that's all for now. It was a very exciting night. I've never been
ghost busting before. I'll keep you all updated on what happens next. I think
tomorrow night we are going to visit more haunted places. We have so many
ghost photos so far.
By the way, one more thing, if you want a quick sample of what the orbs in the
pictures look like, go to this site. The orb photos here are very similar to
what we got:
http://www.dream-link.org/family/crescent/
So skeptics, what do you think? Any comments?
Winston
Fabi...@hotmail.com
wrote:
So Winston "Legwanker" WooWoo decided to come back, but only after
changing his login!!
>Dear all,
>I have so much to share with you regarding our ghost hunt, that I don't know
>where to begin! As many of you know, I'm here in Virginia City, NV with John
>Benneth,
Is that the same John Benneth who rang away from the JREF challenge in
November last year? The same John Benneth who forged AP reports? Who
claimed that birds exploded into flames in Australia? The same John
Benneth who refused to follow the JREF rules for the challenge?
> the nemesis
you misspelt coward
>I of James Randi and claimant on the challenge.
Before he can be a claimant on the challenge, he actually has to take
it not run away from it.!
> Yesterday,
>at our Mark Twain Show, we had the pleasure of being visited by two paranormal
>investigators, one of them is Robert Chamberlain from Northwest Paranormal
>Investigations (ghostquest.com). They have been investigating ghosts for 8
>years now. Anyway, tonight at 8:30pm me, John Benneth, two friends of ours,
>and the two ghost investigators went to the Piper's Opera House to take some
>pictures. The ghost hunters had these digital cameras
snip Obviously they are not very experienced in digital cameras,
having no idea of the artefacts they produce from dust! <snigger>
>
>They constantly showed me the pictures they got on the screen of their digital
>camera,
snip.
> They took about 4 packs of film tonight,
HOLD ON, HOLD ON you said they had DIGITAL cameras! THEY do not use
FILM, so you are LYING AGAIN!
> so they have a treasure chest of ghost pictures of this
>place. They said they'll scan them soon,
So they are normal cameras, not digital. Why did you claim they were
digital then? Liar
> so as soon as they do, I'll send them
>all to you as either a file or a link to their website.
>
>
snip
> Wow this'll be a great publicity thing if I can get word out
>to the local newspapers!
So they too can think you are a kook! Good move!
>
>
snip a rant
>So skeptics, what do you think? Any comments?
I suggest you stop wanking on your ex girlfriends leg and leave her
alone. Also ask Benneth about his "ChickenHawk" movies!
Also read up a bit about camera's and dust.
>
>Winston
Adam Levenstein
photographic skills are constantly mistaken as proof of the afterlife.
I wait with baited breath for the large, pink, fuzzy orb that
mysteriously shows up on the side(s) of the photos.
--
------------------------------------------------
Adam Levenstein ICQ: 17125158
aleve...@mindspring.com
"And now, for something completely different."
Paul
WinstonMcKay wrote:
> By the way, one more thing, if you want a quick sample of what the orbs in the
> pictures look like, go to this site. The orb photos here are very similar to
> what we got:
>
> http://www.dream-link.org/family/crescent/
>
> So skeptics, what do you think? Any comments?
They look like lens artifacts to me. Lens flares and such-like.
Paul
Paul
Adam Levenstein wrote:
>
> If there is one thing that constantly mystefies me, it's how poor
> photographic skills are constantly mistaken as proof of the afterlife.
>
> I wait with baited breath for the large, pink, fuzzy orb that
> mysteriously shows up on the side(s) of the photos.
Or the earth-shattering images which show people with 'the red eyes of
satan'.
Paul
the answer guy
"WinstonMcKay" <winsto...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010706081211...@ng-ck1.aol.com...
Why would John Benneth, prophet extraordinaire, wizard of bi-location,
splitter of suns, bain of non-flaming birds, confessor to the Pope, spirit
guide to the Native American Nations, and master of the sympathy bus crash,
need a cheap digital camera to see ghosts?
George Black
Yup. One born every minute
Wally Anglesea™
wrote:
>Dear all,
>I have so much to share with you regarding our ghost hunt, that I don't know
>where to begin! As many of you know, I'm here in Virginia City, NV with John
>Benneth, the nemesis of James Randi and claimant on the challenge.
Really?
Winnie!! Ask the old fraud how he's going.
Ask him about the time he claimed Galahs were falling out of the skies
on fire in Sydney. Ask him about the time he claimed there were people
running from the beaches of Sydney with "flash sunburns".
Ask him about the times he forged AP press releases to make it look
like he was anything more than a scam artist and a fraud.
Lastly, ask him when he is going to either accept the JREF challenge,
or admit he's a fraud, a scam artist, and a kook.
Thanks winnie.
--
Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~wanglese/pebble.htm
"You can't fool me, it's turtles all the way down."
Wally Anglesea™
>On 06 Jul 2001 12:12:11 GMT, winsto...@aol.com (WinstonMcKay)
>wrote:
>So Winston "Legwanker" WooWoo decided to come back, but only after
>changing his login!!
>
>>Dear all,
>>I have so much to share with you regarding our ghost hunt, that I don't know
>>where to begin! As many of you know, I'm here in Virginia City, NV with John
>>Benneth,
>Is that the same John Benneth who rang away from the JREF challenge in
>November last year? The same John Benneth who forged AP reports? Who
>claimed that birds exploded into flames in Australia? The same John
>Benneth who refused to follow the JREF rules for the challenge?
Why yes, I believe it is the very same fraud and scam artist.
Wally Anglesea™
wrote:
LOL, That explains the behaviour of my dog.
I fixed it with Photoshop though....
Wally Anglesea™
wrote:
Ya know what's really funneeeeee?
the quote on the second picture:
"Here is some help, this picture was snapped about 2-5 seconds after
the one above. The camera was still adjusting the light in the
picture above and it looks darker than the one here. But you will
notice the ghost orbs that are clearly visible in the picture above
are not visible in this picture. Also note I was standing in the same
exact place. No lights in the room have changed. If you look real
close though you might actually find one in this picture."
Anyone who thinks that there is little difference between the 2
pictures, apart from it being 2 to 5 seconds later, (ok, the people
have moved off) has to be blind. The exposures's different.
What we have here, is an idiot who doesn't know how to take good
photographs.
Gennem
[snip]
> We did that for a while and even tried talking to the ghosts too. We were all
> so amazed because almost every picture taken came out with little orbs in them,
> some big and in some pictures there were as many as 4. When John walked up on
> stage to do his Mark Twain voice, 4 orbs appeared around him that showed up in
> the picture, though not to the naked eye.
You just debunked yourself. Its the camera and/or incompetent
photographers.
[snip]
Pyrrho Skeptikos
causes. Some probable causes are listed below -- there are probably
other possibilities, none of them paranormal.
Dust on the lens.
Dirt in the camera.
Internal reflections in the lens structure, also known as "lens
flare".
Deliberate multiple exposures.
Objects very close to lens, i.e. fingers.
Poor quality digital cameras.
Poor quality optics.
Deliberate digital editing of photographs.
Flash reflections from shiny objects in the room.
Contamination during processing of conventional film.
Contamination during printing of conventional prints.
Scanner anomalies.
Dust on the scanner glass.
Bad or outdated film.
There is *nothing* paranormal about so-called "orbs", or their bastard
cousin, "rods". I've been a photographer for many years and I do
understand the technology. People who believe these "orbs" are
paranormal are deluding themselves.
No doubt there will be arguments to the effect that I can't possibly
know this for certain, that certain "orbs" are "unexplainable", that I
am making absolute statements, etc. Don't waste your time. In this
area I *do* know what I'm talking about.
There are some things in the "paranormal" field which are total
nonsense, and "orbs" (or "rods") is one of them.
There *is* something amazing about ghosts -- apparently even the
crappiest cameras in the universe, using generic film, in the hands of
snapshot-shooters, can be used to photograph them.
Denis Loubet
"Wally AngleseaT" <wang...@spbigpondam.net.au> wrote in message
news:n5fckt4irkmojd5mg...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 06 Jul 2001 13:07:49 GMT, Fabi...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >On 06 Jul 2001 12:12:11 GMT, winsto...@aol.com (WinstonMcKay)
> >wrote:
> >So Winston "Legwanker" WooWoo decided to come back, but only after
> >changing his login!!
> >
> >>Dear all,
> >>I have so much to share with you regarding our ghost hunt, that I don't
know
> >>where to begin! As many of you know, I'm here in Virginia City, NV with
John
> >>Benneth,
> >Is that the same John Benneth who rang away from the JREF challenge in
> >November last year? The same John Benneth who forged AP reports? Who
> >claimed that birds exploded into flames in Australia? The same John
> >Benneth who refused to follow the JREF rules for the challenge?
>
> Why yes, I believe it is the very same fraud and scam artist.
Surely artist is bestowing too much credit. How about the Dull-Eyed Janitor
of Scam.
Denis Loubet
dlo...@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
WinstonMcKay
Mansion last night, the lady who lived there said that her black labrador dog
(who is so cute I might add) often goes upstairs and plays with the child
spirits! He reacts to them just like they're there! Skeptics, explain this
one to me. If ghosts are all in the mind (as cycnics say) then how come dogs
react to them????????? Explain that one!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WinstonMcKay
night! We were down at a former mortuary. And when they took pictures of me,
there were dozens of orbs in clusters around me!!!!!!!!!! There was even one
on John's head, like a halo!
We have this all on film! Also, I told the paranormal investigators about the
dust/water explanation for orbs. They said that they heard all those
explanations before and that they can easily tell the difference between a
dust/water orb, and a ghost orb. They've been doing it for eight years.
Winston
WinstonMcKay
>Is that the same John Benneth who rang away from the JREF challenge in
>November last year? The same John Benneth who forged AP reports?
Nope. That Benneth doesn't exist. Benneth followed the rules of the challenge
and even sent in the application twice. Randi never signed it. Those are the
facts. Face it!!!!!!!! We have all the documented proof for this! You should
have listened to Benneth explain it all last week on the Mike Goodspeed show.
>
>snip Obviously they are not very experienced in digital cameras,
>having no idea of the artefacts they produce from dust! <snigger>
I already brought that up to them. They said they know the difference between
dust/water orbs, and ghost orbs.
>
>HOLD ON, HOLD ON you said they had DIGITAL cameras! THEY do not use
>FILM, so you are LYING AGAIN!
Nope I'm not lying. I don't know anything about digital cameras, so I'm just
using old fashioned terminology. I don't know how the thing works! Stop
trying to change the subject stupid!
>
>So they are normal cameras, not digital. Why did you claim they were
>digital then? Liar
They are digital ones. They used them up all night. By the way, tonight,
after putting a fully charged battery in, the camera's power suddenly drained
while we were taking pictures orbs! Unexplained!
By the way, the orb theory is possible because when I was 5 years old, I was a
bright orb float into the bedroom and make sounds. It never happened again,
but it was very vivid.
WinstonMcKay
>Why would John Benneth, prophet extraordinaire, wizard of bi-location,
>splitter of suns, bain of non-flaming birds, confessor to the Pope, spirit
>guide to the Native American Nations, and master of the sympathy bus crash,
>need a cheap digital camera to see ghosts?
>
He doesn't have a digital camera, and he doesn't see ghosts. Silly! The two
paranormal investigators did! John and I didn't see much with the naked eye.
Tonight we were joined by two cameramen from a local TV station in Portland.
Winston
Marcus S. Turner
> >
> >Is that the same John Benneth who rang away from the JREF challenge in
> >November last year? The same John Benneth who forged AP reports?
>
> Nope. That Benneth doesn't exist.
Then who was the John Benneth who forged the AP reports? Who was posted the
infamous Flaming Birds of Oz prediction?
And just to clear, Is this Winston Wu posting?
Fabi...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Poor Winston "Legwanker" Woo, he appears to really have lost all
reason. He claims to be a "skeptic", but instead of investigating the
reasons for dust etc claims it is a ghost! Instead of assuming the dog
is chasing rats or mice, it is playing with a ghost! His
"investigators" claim to be able to tell the difference between a
"dust/water orb and a ghost orb, but do not explain how they do it!
And he believes them. He also believes the proven liar and forger John
"Chickenhawk" Benneth but refuses to take the JREF challenge himself!
Coward.
Pyrrho Skeptikos
You now expect us to accept a third-hand report of a dog's behavior as
evidence of the paranormal. This is astoundingly absurd. I, for one,
am not about to accept the testimony of a dog as evidence of ghosts.
There is nothing to explain. It was a dog. The owner has a vested
interest in promulgating the ghost story. Case closed.
Pyrrho Skeptikos
> Also, you guys should have been there with us on our second ghost hunting
> night! We were down at a former mortuary. And when they took pictures of me,
> there were dozens of orbs in clusters around me!!!!!!!!!! There was even one
> on John's head, like a halo!
How convenient. Looks like a couple of marks got taken pretty good.
> We have this all on film! Also, I told the paranormal investigators about the
> dust/water explanation for orbs. They said that they heard all those
> explanations before and that they can easily tell the difference between a
> dust/water orb, and a ghost orb. They've been doing it for eight years.
>
> Winston
Since they've been doing this for eight years their technique should
be honed very well. By the way, Winston, dust/water is not the only
explanation. We also have here the classic "only we can interpret the
results" argument, in this case, the investigators claim to be able to
tell difference when nobody else can.
All these "orbs" are replicable by normal means. They are not
paranormal in any sense of the word, and they never have been.
Pyrrho Skeptikos
It is most definitely Winston Wu. The same thread is being discussed
via an email list and this particular shaggy dog story was submitted
by WWu777 himself.
Ragnar
1. Anecdotal third-hand evidence is worse than crap.
2. Its a DOG, Winston! Mine chases his tail for no known reason. He
circles 3 or 4 times before lying down. Acribing human behavior to animals
is not only stupid but self-deluding.
Ragnar
Marcus S. Turner
"Pyrrho Skeptikos" <pyrrh...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:c0303878.01070...@posting.google.com...
I wonder if Winston has gotten the story about John Benneth channeling Randi
one night? The posts where John claimed that Randi was covering up a
pedophile ring that was involved in the death of a young aspiring magician?
This is the same John Benneth, isn't it Winston?? The guy that started with
the homeopathy "claim"??
I use to think that Winston was just a little naive, like most of the
WooWoos...
Now it appears he has decided to make this a career path and has joined
the truly vile.
Happy Dog
> >
> >Is that the same John Benneth who rang away from the JREF challenge in
> >November last year? The same John Benneth who forged AP reports?
>
> Nope. That Benneth doesn't exist. Benneth followed the rules of the
challenge
> and even sent in the application twice. Randi never signed it. Those are
the
> facts. Face it!!!!!!!! We have all the documented proof for this! You
should
> have listened to Benneth explain it all last week on the Mike Goodspeed
show.
Bullshit. I was involved in every aspect of that negotiation. Benneth had
two strongly pro homeopathy supporters who abandoned him when it became
clear that he would never produce a protocol. HE NEVER DID. You have NO
evidence to the contrary. Benneth is a liar and a raving nutcase. Ample
proof is available. You've been sucked in.
erf
Happy Dog
> > "WinstonMcKay" <winsto...@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:20010707044640...@ng-fj1.aol.com...
> > > >
> > > >Is that the same John Benneth who rang away from the JREF challenge
in
> > > >November last year? The same John Benneth who forged AP reports?
> > >
> > > Nope. That Benneth doesn't exist.
> >
> > Then who was the John Benneth who forged the AP reports? Who was posted
the
> > infamous Flaming Birds of Oz prediction?
> >
> > And just to clear, Is this Winston Wu posting?
>
> It is most definitely Winston Wu. The same thread is being discussed
> via an email list and this particular shaggy dog story was submitted
> by WWu777 himself.
What email list? I'd enjoy participating. I have a complete archive of the
entire event. Interested?
BTW, you never answered:
> > Then who was the John Benneth who forged the AP reports? Who was posted
the
> > infamous Flaming Birds of Oz prediction?
arf
Matt Kriebel
winsto...@aol.com (WinstonMcKay) wrote:
> >Is that the same John Benneth who rang away from the JREF challenge in
> >November last year? The same John Benneth who forged AP reports?
>
> Nope. That Benneth doesn't exist. Benneth followed the rules of the
> challenge
> and even sent in the application twice.
He could sign all he wants, but if he kept changing the test conditions
then he was not honest about it.
>Randi never signed it. Those
> are the
> facts. Face it!!!!!!!!
That Randi didn't sign it is irrelevant.
> We have all the documented proof for this!
And we have the testimony of several homeopaths who grew disgusted with
Benneth's constant weasling.
> You
> should
> have listened to Benneth explain it all last week on the Mike Goodspeed
> show.
I prefer the third party explanations m'self. There's a distinct lack of
Benneth delusions in the matter.
Now, care to answer some of Benneth's other anctics during this
escapade? Such as the forged AP articles, his 'channelling'.
--
Matt Kriebel * Oooops!
mkr...@cruzio.com *
*********************************************************************
Now 90% closer to 80% of the world's kooks!
Matt Kriebel
<happ...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
ANd Syd's (one of those homeopaths) summary can be seen here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Syd+Baumel&start=30&hl=en&safe=off&rnum
=39&ic=1&selm=5362.53T650T8944198sgb%40escape.ca
Sorry aboutt he long link. Here' the important part:
"Last summer, Randi offered a range of possible times at Mount St. Mary's
College in Maryland(?), but Benneth turned him down because he didn't
feel prepared and the terms of the test were still far from settled.
Later, when those terms seemed to have been settled (admittedly with
others publicly [on Usenet and a cc list] negotiating on Benneth's behalf
because Randi complained that Benneth was spamming him with too many
digressive rants and diatribes, but with Benneth's presumed behind-the-
scenes participation in the negotiation through Alain Jean-Mairet and to
a lesser extent me - and certainly with his witnessing of it), Benneth
refused to re-submit a written protocol, at Alain and Randi's request,
that would reflect those terms. Instead he called for an opportunity to
less formally and expensively demonstrate his yeast test to Randi's
volunteer expert, the NIST biochemist Mike Epstein (whose name had been
kept secret from Benneth out of fear that premature revelation would lead
to "spamming" or harassing of Epstein, derailing the negotiations). When
Randi agreed that such a demonstratrion - done double-blind - would
constitute winning the preliminary round of testing, Benneth failed to
respond to the offer (whether by accepting it, criticizing it, asking for
the name of the biochemist, etc.) and instead ignor5ed it and
instead escalated his war of words against Randi and eventually Epstein
(when he discovered his identity), Mount St. Mary's, and even (in
attenuated form) myself and Alain. We all, it seems, are conspiring with
Randi. That being the case, I'm just wondering when I can expect my
first pay cheque from Mr. Moneybags."
Of course, Winsont will ignore this detail, as it might dislodge his
nose from Benneth's ass.
George Black
The dogs as nutty as its owner
George Black
Faking photos ???
George Black
> >
> >Is that the same John Benneth who rang away from the JREF challenge in
> >November last year? The same John Benneth who forged AP reports?
>
> Nope. That Benneth doesn't exist. Benneth followed the rules of the
challenge
> and even sent in the application twice. Randi never signed it. Those are
the
> facts. Face it!!!!!!!! We have all the documented proof for this! You
should
> have listened to Benneth explain it all last week on the Mike Goodspeed
show.
There are many of us still on the net who watched throughout the benneth
duck and dodge days.
Whoever runs the old deja has all those messages on record.
mike
news:20010707043923...@ng-fj1.aol.com:
I'd like to know exactly what this dog is doing. Is it fetching some "ghost
ball" or "ghost stick" that the child sprits are throwing? Also, how does
this woman know exactly what the dog is doing when it goes upstairs? Does
she have video survailence of the second floor? If not, and the woman (or
some other living person), is up there observing the dog, how does she know
it's not simply reacting to her? And how does she know the dog is reacting
to "child sprits" anyway? Maybe the adult ghosts are having fun with the
dog. How in the world would this woman know who is playing with the dog?!!
Winston, explain that one to me!!!!!
mike
Night Child
> By the way, tonight,
> after putting a fully charged battery in, the camera's power suddenly drained
> while we were taking pictures orbs! Unexplained!
>
Once again, something with an unknown cause becomes extraordinary only
in your imagination. Why do you put an exclamation point after such an
occurance? Hundreds of unexplained things happen daily in everyone's life. They
don't surprise me because I know I'm not omniscient, and that if I were to seek
out explanations, most such things would turn out to be very mundane indeed.
Since you know next to nothing of the power systems of digital cameras, you
don't know the mundane explanations. So? Your lack of knowledge makes it
interesting?
> By the way, the orb theory is possible because when I was 5 years old, I was a
> bright orb float into the bedroom and make sounds. It never happened again,
> but it was very vivid.
You made some editing errors there but I know what you meant to say.
I have you beat, though. I experience hypnogogic hallucinations (which is very
likely what that was) frequently...about 3 times a week either while falling
asleep or while waking up. Just this morning I saw a "ghost" at the foot of my
bed. I'm not making that up to impress you. I'm so used to it I don't even write it
with an exclamation point.
Night Child
Night Child
> Poor Winston "Legwanker" Woo, he appears to really have lost all
> reason. He claims to be a "skeptic", but instead of investigating the
> reasons for dust etc claims it is a ghost! Instead of assuming the dog
> is chasing rats or mice, it is playing with a ghost! His
> "investigators" claim to be able to tell the difference between a
> "dust/water orb and a ghost orb, but do not explain how they do it!
> And he believes them. He also believes the proven liar and forger John
> "Chickenhawk" Benneth but refuses to take the JREF challenge himself!
> Coward.
It's kinda sad, really. Aside from being naive, I've had the impression the
Winston has mental problems (there was that schizophrenia article someone
posted a while back) that *could* be resolved if only he could focus on
that instead of spasticly jumping from one paranormal bandwagon to another.
He is a prime candidate to eventually become a cult member. Now, thanks
to his persistence and that article he wrote, Benneth and the like are sucking
him into the lamest areas in the paranormal world. I mean, some "new agey"
type folks are just fine with me they aren't hurting anyone and so what if they
believe in silly stuff. But now Winston is shacking up with the lowest of the low.
The frauds, the psychopaths who will lie, cheat, and steal to get what they
want. Infantile cranks who would rather make up stories about child molestation
than attempt allow a fair assessment of their skills. These people will even
turn on each other. Look at what happened to Art Bell. It wasn't a skeptic who
turned his life upside down. It was a crank that Art refused to put on his show.
Night Child
Fabi...@hotmail.com
wrote:
In that case ANYBODY who keeps ferrets is absolutely plagued by
invisible ghosts! They constantly play with invisible spirits!
Adam Levenstein
My rabbits every once in a while, for no apparent reason, will race
around my apartment at Bunny Warp Speed, which if you're familiar with
rabbits means that to the naked eye you simply see a fuzzy blur. Then
they stop, again for no apparent reason.
When I had a dog growing up (also a labrador), he would get up from his
nap, walk to the other side of the house, stand there for about ten
minutes, turn around, walk back, and go back to sleep.
Now, either ALL my pets, past and present, have some sort of ability to
see ghosts that I don't have, or they're just weird.
Personally, I'm betting on weird.
Hey, how about this? Why don't you give us all your available evidence
that the pooch is "playing with the child spirits," and not just acting
like a dog? Incidentally, how do you know they're child spirits?
Winston, I know you think anecdotal evidence is 100% reliable and all
that, but come on. Third party anecdotal stories of a dog's behavior?
You gotta be kidding.
--
------------------------------------------------
Adam Levenstein ICQ: 17125158
aleve...@mindspring.com
"And now, for something completely different."
WinstonMcKay
>evidence of the paranormal. This is astoundingly absurd. I, for one,
>am not about to accept the testimony of a dog as evidence of ghosts.
First of all, it's not third hand, but first hand! Duh! Second, it wasn't the
dog's testimony but his actions. So many logical fallacies right there!
>
>There is nothing to explain. It was a dog. The owner has a vested
>interest in promulgating the ghost story. Case closed.
>
Um, cases are not closed that easily! You are clearly acting more like a cynic
than a true skeptic.
Winston
WinstonMcKay
It's not third hand, you just want to think that to dismiss it.
>2. Its a DOG, Winston! Mine chases his tail for no known reason. He
>circles 3 or 4 times before lying down. Acribing human behavior to animals
>is not only stupid but self-deluding.
>
>Ragnar
>
Yeah but dogs don't tend to play with ghosts! Sorry, but your stupid
explanation doesn't cut it.
Winston
WinstonMcKay
>ball" or "ghost stick" that the child sprits are throwing? Also, how does
>this woman know exactly what the dog is doing when it goes upstairs? Does
>she have video survailence of the second floor? If not, and the woman (or
>some other living person), is up there observing the dog, how does she know
>it's not simply reacting to her? And how does she know the dog is reacting
>to "child sprits" anyway? Maybe the adult ghosts are having fun with the
>dog. How in the world would this woman know who is playing with the dog?!!
>Winston, explain that one to me!!!!!
>
>mike
I don't have the answers to those questions, but we can assume that dog owners
know when their dog is playing with something or someone. When you've raised a
dog, you know those things. Common sense.
WinstonMcKay
people there.
Plus, her room used to be there anyway. You can see it as part of the museum.
Winston
WinstonMcKay
>that, but come on. Third party anecdotal stories of a dog's behavior?
>You gotta be kidding.
Dude you never read my article have you? I specifically said that anecdotal
evidence is not perfect. I NEVER said it was 100 percent reliable. Why don't
other skeptics point that out to you?
Winston
WinstonMcKay
the digital camera! When they scan it, I'll show it to you all!
WinstonMcKay
No, nothing was faked. A friend of ours also took some a few weeks ago, and
got the same big orbs, and she didn't even know what they were. She thought
her camera was broken!
WinstonMcKay
>Then who was the John Benneth who forged the AP reports? Who was posted the
>infamous Flaming Birds of Oz prediction?
What AP reports? Do you even know his side of the story about that? Or do you
believe every lie from Randi?
>
> And just to clear, Is this Winston Wu posting?
>
Yes it is. Why?
WinstonMcKay
>one night? The posts where John claimed that Randi was covering up a
>pedophile ring that was involved in the death of a young aspiring magician?
I never heard of John channeling Randi before. But I can tell you this though.
I've stayed here with John for three weeks now, and although he is erratic and
spaced out sometimes, he has a good heart, and is honest and sincere. That I
can tell you.
>
>This is the same John Benneth, isn't it Winston?? The guy that started with
>the homeopathy "claim"??
Yes, and he beat the Randi Challenge too. There is documented proof of this.
Randi made a deal with him, and Randi broke it when he found out that Benneth's
protocol (which I've posted here MANY times already!) actually works!. That
much is clear.
> Now it appears he has decided to make this a career path and has joined
>the truly vile.
None of the paranormal investigators that we've worked with were vile in any
way. They are all nice people with good hearts. You may not agree with them,
but they are NOT vile. That much I can tell you.
Winston
WinstonMcKay
>entire event. Interested?
If you want to join my paranormal/skeptic list, email me at WWu...@aol.com
WinstonMcKay
>Bullshit. I was involved in every aspect of that negotiation. Benneth had
>two strongly pro homeopathy supporters who abandoned him when it became
>clear that he would never produce a protocol. HE NEVER DID. You have NO
>evidence to the contrary. Benneth is a liar and a raving nutcase. Ample
>proof is available. You've been sucked in.
>erf
>
Bull! Wanna make a bet? Both Dr. Gary Schwartz and Brian Josephson supported
him and said that his protocol is worth taking a look at! What do you mean he
never produced a protocol? The protocol is on his website! And I've posted it
many times too! Are you so cynical that you ignore thing so
easily?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
lol my logic and reason sure drive you guys crazy doesn't it? hehehe
WinstonMcKay
WinstonMcKay
Randi offered some dates at St. Mary's College, and then went off to China or
Las Vegas, proving that he wasn't even serious about it.
WinstonMcKay
>Now, care to answer some of Benneth's other anctics during this
>escapade? Such as the forged AP articles, his 'channelling'.
>
>--
>Matt Kriebel
All you have to do is email Benneth himself, and he'll tell you the honest
plain answer, unlike Randi who just hangs up on you and swears at you, etc.
Randi won't discuss anything with anyone who disagrees with him, but Benneth
WILL!
Winston
Fabi...@hotmail.com
wrote:
So you are Winston "Legwanker" Wu?
Here is a forged AP report by John "Proven Liar" Benneth
Fabi...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Poor Winston, people post uestions he refuses to answer so he just
ignores them.
I predict that very shortly Winston will run away from Usenet (again)
then return in the future, when he hopes people will have forgotten he
ran away. How are the "spells" going to bring your ex girlfriend back?
Have you been wanking on her leg again?
mike
news:20010707224152...@ng-ck1.aol.com:
>>I'd like to know exactly what this dog is doing. Is it fetching some
>>"ghost ball" or "ghost stick" that the child sprits are throwing? Also,
>>how does this woman know exactly what the dog is doing when it goes
>>upstairs? Does she have video survailence of the second floor? If not,
>>and the woman (or some other living person), is up there observing the
>>dog, how does she know it's not simply reacting to her? And how does
>>she know the dog is reacting to "child sprits" anyway? Maybe the adult
>>ghosts are having fun with the dog. How in the world would this woman
>>know who is playing with the dog?!! Winston, explain that one to
>>me!!!!!
>>
>>mike
>
> I don't have the answers to those questions, but we can assume
And here we have it. Winston doesn't know the answer to something, so he
just assumes an answer that he likes.
that dog
> owners know when their dog is playing with something or someone.
No. We can assume the owner knows when their dog LOOKS like he's playing
with someone or something. But how do they know the dog is really playing
with ghosts, and that it's not simply running around like an idiot, as dogs
are known to do (ever spend time around a dog, Winston?)?
When
> you've raised a dog, you know those things. Common sense.
I've seen dogs bolt up for no apparent reason, take off furiously down the
hall, and then run right smack into the wall. Should I assume the dog is
chasing a ghost, or just being, well, a dog?
mike
Happy Dog
> >Bullshit. I was involved in every aspect of that negotiation. Benneth
had
> >two strongly pro homeopathy supporters who abandoned him when it became
> >clear that he would never produce a protocol. HE NEVER DID. You have NO
> >evidence to the contrary. Benneth is a liar and a raving nutcase. Ample
> >proof is available. You've been sucked in.
>
supported
> him and said that his protocol is worth taking a look at! What do you
mean he
> never produced a protocol? The protocol is on his website! And I've
posted it
> many times too! Are you so cynical that you ignore thing so
> easily?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
I'll bet you any amount you like that Benneth NEVER followed up on his
agreement to work with Alain Mariet and submit a protocol to Randi. In your
feeble mind you think that "producing" a protocol means saying that you have
or posting one on a website. Benneth may have "produced" a hundred
protocols but he didn't submit one for his final claim. Randi was ready to
proceed. There's ample evidence of that. But your new best friend ran
away. So, how much? Or will you weasel out by saying that you never meant
to say that Benneth submitted a protocol for his last claim?
erf
George Black
Hey, I don't know where you butter bread in your universe but here we have
this strange custom of not believing 'a friend' quote.
And there are many ways to 'take' photos of blobs.
All of which include deliberate acts
George Black
George Black
> You still haven't explained why there was a CLUSTER of orbs around me!
It's on
> the digital camera! When they scan it, I'll show it to you all!
That's why people use Photoshop. I usually give the lens a wipe
George Black
> >
> >Then who was the John Benneth who forged the AP reports? Who was posted
the
> >infamous Flaming Birds of Oz prediction?
>
> What AP reports? Do you even know his side of the story about that? Or
do you
> believe every lie from Randi?
>
and cause much amusement amid we Antipodeans
Fabi...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>Furthermore, they know it's a child's spirit because she's been seen by many
>people there.
>
>Plus, her room used to be there anyway. You can see it as part of the museum.
>
Ah, so this is a "museum" that you pay to see. With some supernatural
theme. So of course they are going to say the dog plays with spirits.
So rubes like you will believe them, and tell their friends etc. ore
revenue for them!
Matt Kriebel
winsto...@aol.com (WinstonMcKay) wrote:
I will not be contacting any person who claims his opponents are
pedophiles. That is an extremely vile act and Benneth had the chance to
defend his actions when he posted them to USENET. He chose not to do so.
--
Matt Kriebel * Oooops!
mkr...@cruzio.com *
*********************************************************************
Now 90% closer to 80% of the world's kooks!
Matt Kriebel
winsto...@aol.com (WinstonMcKay) wrote:
> By the way, prove to me that Benneth is a liar. Show me the evidence
Let's start with his faked news report after his prediciton failed:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&th=a58e7284f7295b7,41&ic=1
Then there was his efforts to tie Randi to a boy who died on Long Island:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&ic=1&th=ef05ae21fd331bd1,7
&seekm=38B0F6AE.3D0968FB%40cyberhighway.net#p
A pure and evil lie. Of course you'll love every minute of it.
Matt Kriebel
winsto...@aol.com (WinstonMcKay) wrote:
> That's not so Matt.
Yes it is.
> Randi never offered any test dates.
Yes he did.
> From what I
> remember,
> Randi offered some dates at St. Mary's College, and then went off to
> China or
> Las Vegas, proving that he wasn't even serious about it
Ahem:
"Last summer, Randi offered a range of possible times at Mount St. Mary's
College in Maryland(?), but Benneth turned him down because he didn't
feel
prepared and the terms of the test were still far from settled. Later,
when those terms seemed to have been settled (admittedly with
others publicly [on Usenet and a cc list] negotiating on Benneth's behalf
because Randi complained that Benneth was spamming him with too many
digressive rants and diatribes, but with Benneth's presumed behind-the-
scenes participation in the negotiation through Alain Jean-Mairet and to
a
lesser extent me - and certainly with his witnessing of it), Benneth
refused to re-submit a written protocol, at Alain and Randi's request,
that would reflect those terms. Instead he called for an opportunity to
less formally and expensively demonstrate his yeast test to Randi's
volunteer expert, the NIST biochemist Mike Epstein (whose name had been
kept secret from Benneth out of fear that premature revelation would lead
to "spamming" or harassing of Epstein, derailing the negotiations). When
Randi agreed that such a demonstratrion - done double-blind - would
constitute winning the preliminary round of testing, Benneth failed to
respond to the offer (whether by accepting it, criticizing it, asking for
the name of the biochemist, etc.) and instead ignor5ed it and
instead escalated his war of words against Randi and eventually Epstein
(when he discovered his identity), Mount St. Mary's, and even (in
attenuated form) myself and Alain. We all, it seems, are conspiring with
Randi. That being the case, I'm just wondering when I can expect my
first
pay cheque from Mr. Moneybags."
-Syd Baumel
Yes, late int he game, after Randi sugged some dates, he did go on a
planned trip to Las Vegas. But by this time Benneth was well past the
point of serious negotiations himself.
Now why should Randi be nailed to his chair when Benneth could not give
a simple reply to the date?
Sorry Winston, I've seen the correspondence. I've gotten the info from
neutral parties.
You're not even getting half the story.
Matt Kriebel
winsto...@aol.com (WinstonMcKay) wrote:
> >
> >Then who was the John Benneth who forged the AP reports? Who was posted
> >the
> >infamous Flaming Birds of Oz prediction?
>
> What AP reports? Do you even know his side of the story about that? Or
> do you
> believe every lie from Randi?
And just where did anyone say this info was from Randi?
Hmmm?
Benneth posted fake AP reports to USENET. No Randi's were involved.
Fabi...@hotmail.com
<mkriebNOS...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>In article <20010707225921...@ng-ck1.aol.com>,
>winsto...@aol.com (WinstonMcKay) wrote:
>
>> By the way, prove to me that Benneth is a liar. Show me the evidence
>
>Let's start with his faked news report after his prediciton failed:
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&th=a58e7284f7295b7,41&ic=1
>
>Then there was his efforts to tie Randi to a boy who died on Long Island:
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&ic=1&th=ef05ae21fd331bd1,7
>&seekm=38B0F6AE.3D0968FB%40cyberhighway.net#p
>
>A pure and evil lie. Of course you'll love every minute of it.
I will predict that Winston will now dissapear from Usenet, as his
"special friend" Benneth has been shown to be a liar and forger., and
a nasty piece of work.
Fabi...@hotmail.com
<mkriebNOS...@cruzio.com> wrote:
Matt, I bet you get no reply from poor Winston on this.
Ragnar
> >1. Anecdotal third-hand evidence is worse than crap.
>
> It's not third hand, you just want to think that to dismiss it.
Lets look at the record, shall we? You said:
>By the way everyone, I forgot to mention in my letter that at the Mackay
>Mansion last night, the lady who lived there said that her black labrador
>dog
>(who is so cute I might add) often goes upstairs and plays with the child
>spirits! He reacts to them just like they're there! Skeptics, explain
this
>one to me. If ghosts are all in the mind (as cycnics say) then how come
>dogs
>react to them????????? Explain that one!!!!!!!!!!!!!>
You're correct - that must be the first time you've ever heard that. It
isn't third-hand anecdotal crap. Its second-hand anecdotal crap.
It could only be first-hand IF the dog was reporting it to you.
It is second-hand because the owner of the dog reported it. She was not
able to experience playing with the spirits, and cannot be a reliable
witness in any event.
Come to think of it, it IS third-hand anecdotal crap, since you then
repeated it to the rest of us.
Apology retracted. You are incorrect after all. I'm sure you're used to
the feeling.
Thank you for playing.
Matt Kriebel
Fabi...@hotmail.com wrote:
Or else Winston will snip all the relevant stuff and comment on one line.
john Latala
> Winston, I know you think anecdotal evidence is 100% reliable and all
> that, but come on. Third party anecdotal stories of a dog's behavior?
> You gotta be kidding.
But when Winston asked him what he was doing why would the dog lie? We're
talking about a lab here after all. And we all know labs don't lie!
--
john R. Latala
jrla...@golden.net
Marcus S. Turner
> >
> >Then who was the John Benneth who forged the AP reports? Who was posted
the
> >infamous Flaming Birds of Oz prediction?
>
> What AP reports? Do you even know his side of the story about that? Or
do you
> believe every lie from Randi?
No Winston. I saw the posts when John made them. Or does John claim that
these post came from someone else?
Marcus S. Turner
> >I wonder if Winston has gotten the story about John Benneth channeling
Randi
> >one night? The posts where John claimed that Randi was covering up a
> >pedophile ring that was involved in the death of a young aspiring
magician?
>
> I never heard of John channeling Randi before. But I can tell you this
though.
> I've stayed here with John for three weeks now, and although he is
erratic and
> spaced out sometimes, he has a good heart, and is honest and sincere.
That I
> can tell you.
Check the archieves Winston.
> >This is the same John Benneth, isn't it Winston?? The guy that started
with
> >the homeopathy "claim"??
>
> Yes, and he beat the Randi Challenge too. There is documented proof of
this.
> Randi made a deal with him, and Randi broke it when he found out that
Benneth's
> protocol (which I've posted here MANY times already!) actually works!.
That
> much is clear.
>
> > Now it appears he has decided to make this a career path and has joined
> >the truly vile.
>
> None of the paranormal investigators that we've worked with were vile in
any
> way. They are all nice people with good hearts. You may not agree with
them,
> but they are NOT vile. That much I can tell you.
Check the achieves Winston.
Wally Anglesea™
wrote:
>>
>>Then who was the John Benneth who forged the AP reports? Who was posted the
>>infamous Flaming Birds of Oz prediction?
>
>What AP reports? Do you even know his side of the story about that? Or do you
>believe every lie from Randi?
It wasn't Randi. The whole thing was played out over usenet. It's
public knowledge. Go and search google.
>
>>
>> And just to clear, Is this Winston Wu posting?
>>
>
>Yes it is. Why?
because you have morphed again.
--
Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~wanglese/pebble.htm
"You can't fool me, it's turtles all the way down."
Night Child
> >1. Anecdotal third-hand evidence is worse than crap.
>
> It's not third hand, you just want to think that to dismiss it.
>
> >circles 3 or 4 times before lying down. Acribing human behavior to animals
> >is not only stupid but self-deluding.
> >
> >Ragnar
> >
>
> Yeah but dogs don't tend to play with ghosts! Sorry, but your stupid
> explanation doesn't cut it.
>
> Winston
Now YOU are chasing your tail! I thought you were recounting the story
of the dog playing as evidence that there were ghosts. You are told that
dogs tend to play all by themselves. Now you are taking it as a given
that it was playing with ghosts, and offering that as evidence that it was
playing with ghosts.
Translation: "There were ghosts present because it is unusual for a dog
to be playing with ghosts."
Brilliant!
DC
> >You now expect us to accept a third-hand report of a dog's behavior as
> >evidence of the paranormal. This is astoundingly absurd. I, for one,
> >am not about to accept the testimony of a dog as evidence of ghosts.
>
> First of all, it's not third hand, but first hand! Duh! Second, it wasn't the
> dog's testimony but his actions. So many logical fallacies right there!
ROTFLMAO
And you wonder why everyone thinks you're dim?
Look, Legwanker, "first hand" would mean that the *dog* was telling
the story.
You're telling a story that you were told by the dog's owner - that
makes it third hand.
> >There is nothing to explain. It was a dog. The owner has a vested
> >interest in promulgating the ghost story. Case closed.
> >
>
> Um, cases are not closed that easily!
Only if your brain is stuck in neutral.
You can chain your login as much as you want, so long as you produce
brain drool like this everyone will know you're Winston Wu the
Legwanker.
DC
KCdgw
>talking about a lab here after all. And we all know labs don't lie!
>
My cat informs me that all dogs are liars. There you have it-- first-hand proof
that Winstons claim is false.
Cheers,
KC
Those who know the truth are not equal to those who love it - Confucius.
Matt Kriebel
kc...@aol.com (KCdgw) wrote:
> >But when Winston asked him what he was doing why would the dog lie?
> >We're
> >talking about a lab here after all. And we all know labs don't lie!
> >
>
> My cat informs me that all dogs are liars. There you have it-- first-hand
> proof
> that Winstons claim is false.
The Goldfish would like to say a few words about the reliability of the
cat.
Marcus S. Turner
"Matt Kriebel" <mkriebNOS...@cruzio.com> wrote in message
news:mkriebNOSPAMDAMMIT-7...@cnews.newsguy.com...
> In article <20010708094907...@ng-fn1.aol.com>,
> kc...@aol.com (KCdgw) wrote:
>
> > >But when Winston asked him what he was doing why would the dog lie?
> > >We're
> > >talking about a lab here after all. And we all know labs don't lie!
> > >
> >
> > My cat informs me that all dogs are liars. There you have it--
first-hand
> > proof
> > that Winstons claim is false.
>
> The Goldfish would like to say a few words about the reliability of the
> cat.
There you go - Moving the goldpost again...
George Black
"john Latala" <jrla...@golden.net> wrote in message
news:Pine.BSI.4.05L.101070...@shell.golden.net...
George Black
"Marcus S. Turner" <msha...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:vK327.84657$HJ1.1...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
Seems to be a case of fishy behaviour
WinstonMcKay
>My cat informs me that all dogs are liars. There you have it-- first-hand
>proof
>that Winstons claim is false.
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>KC
Again, logical fallacy. What someone actually experiences is not the same as
something that KC knowingly makes up.
WinstonMcKay
John said that Randi suggested testing him at St. Mary's college once, but then
when John found out that there are several St. Mary's colleges in the USA, John
had to ask Randi which one he meant. At that point Randi, refused to tell John
which St. Mary's college he was referring to! What do you make of that?
WinstonMcKay
Pyrrho Skeptikos
> >You now expect us to accept a third-hand report of a dog's behavior as
> >evidence of the paranormal. This is astoundingly absurd. I, for one,
> >am not about to accept the testimony of a dog as evidence of ghosts.
>
> First of all, it's not third hand, but first hand! Duh! Second, it wasn't the
> dog's testimony but his actions. So many logical fallacies right there!
First hand: the dog. Second hand: the owner. Third hand: you.
> >
> >There is nothing to explain. It was a dog. The owner has a vested
> >interest in promulgating the ghost story. Case closed.
> >
>
> Um, cases are not closed that easily! You are clearly acting more like a cynic
> than a true skeptic.
>
> Winston
Yes, cases are closed that easily. There is nothing about this dog
story to consider.
Please clarify: what is a true skeptic?
Pyrrho Skeptikos
> >1. Anecdotal third-hand evidence is worse than crap.
>
> It's not third hand, you just want to think that to dismiss it.
>
> >2. Its a DOG, Winston! Mine chases his tail for no known reason. He
> >circles 3 or 4 times before lying down. Acribing human behavior to animals
> >is not only stupid but self-deluding.
> >
> >Ragnar
> >
>
> Yeah but dogs don't tend to play with ghosts! Sorry, but your stupid
> explanation doesn't cut it.
>
> Winston
Circular reasoning -- invalid. Your argument takes this form:
1. The owner says the dog plays with ghosts
2. The dog would not play with ghosts unless there were ghosts
3. Therefore there are ghosts
You presuppose that there are ghosts to be played with and use that as
evidence that the dog was playing with ghosts, and then use that as
evidence that there are ghosts.
Pyrrho Skeptikos
> >I'd like to know exactly what this dog is doing. Is it fetching some "ghost
> >ball" or "ghost stick" that the child sprits are throwing? Also, how does
> >this woman know exactly what the dog is doing when it goes upstairs? Does
> >she have video survailence of the second floor? If not, and the woman (or
> >some other living person), is up there observing the dog, how does she know
> >it's not simply reacting to her? And how does she know the dog is reacting
> >to "child sprits" anyway? Maybe the adult ghosts are having fun with the
> >dog. How in the world would this woman know who is playing with the dog?!!
> >Winston, explain that one to me!!!!!
> >
> >mike
>
> I don't have the answers to those questions, but we can assume that dog owners
> know when their dog is playing with something or someone. When you've raised a
> dog, you know those things. Common sense.
No, we cannot assume so. You don't have the answers; you really do not
know what the dog was doing, but you take the owner's statement as
gospel truth when the owner has a vested interest in promoting ghost
stories. Common sense tells us to think twice about such things.
Pyrrho Skeptikos
> Furthermore, they know it's a child's spirit because she's been seen by many
> people there.
>
> Plus, her room used to be there anyway. You can see it as part of the museum.
>
> Winston
Doesn't prove that the dog was even up there, let alone playing with
the dead child (wasn't that children before? now it's just one?)
Pyrrho Skeptikos
> You still haven't explained why there was a CLUSTER of orbs around me! It's on
> the digital camera! When they scan it, I'll show it to you all!
Flash reflection from dust particles in the air. All very mundane.
FYI, nobody needs to scan an image from a digital camera -- unless
printing it and re-scanning it adds more anomalies to claim as ghost
orbs.
Matt Kriebel
winsto...@aol.com (WinstonMcKay) wrote:
No real comments on the lies Benneth told I see. You're evading a usual.
I give you another day, at most, on this thread before you flee once
more.
Matt Kriebel
winsto...@aol.com (WinstonMcKay) wrote:
What proof do you have that KC made it up?
Matt Kriebel
I make it that Benneth is desperate for excuses for his copping out.
Matt Kriebel
winsto...@aol.com (WinstonMcKay) wrote:
> Where is the evidence that the AP reports were faked?
Getting rather desperate are you.
Let me turn the tables and make you do some work for a change you lazy
pigfucker: Can you find an AP report that tells of birds exploding in
mid-air in Australia?
Pyrrho Skeptikos
Your post confirms that Benneth admits that Randi offered to test him
at St. Mary's College. The claim that Randi refused to test Benneth
and refused to set dates is now invalidated.
You are beating a dead horse, Winston.
Pyrrho Skeptikos
> Where is the evidence that the AP reports were faked?
Right here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&ic=1&selm=an_593490726
Adam Levenstein
>
> Dude you never read my article have you? I specifically said that anecdotal
> evidence is not perfect. I NEVER said it was 100 percent reliable. Why don't
> other skeptics point that out to you?
Evasion noted.
Now let me make sure I'm crystal clear on this.
You give us a story about a woman's dog playing with ghosts. This is
third-hand information (1: Dog. 2: Owner. 3: You.). Third-hand
information about the behavior of a DOG. This kind of anecdotal
"evidence" would have to climb a ladder just to reach "unreliable."
You present this along with "explain that!" and you whine that you don't
think anecdotal evidence is perfect. Care to explain the discrepancy, or
can't you see it?
--
------------------------------------------------
Adam Levenstein ICQ: 17125158
aleve...@mindspring.com
"And now, for something completely different."
Marcus S. Turner
Have you asked John about his multiple posts where he claimed to have
channeled Randi?
"WinstonMcKay" <winsto...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010709084056...@ng-fg1.aol.com...
KCdgw
it--
>> >first-hand
>> >proof
>> >that Winstons claim is false.
>> >
>> >
>> >Cheers,
>> >
>> >KC
>>
>> Again, logical fallacy. What someone actually experiences is not the
>> same as
>> something that KC knowingly makes up
>
Why is it when I talk to my cat, its made up, but when a woman talks to her
dog, its true? How does the w,man know the dog is see9ing ghosts? She obviously
must be communicating with teh animal in order to determin ethis so surely. So,
Winston, how about it? How do you know the dog was seeing ghosts, other than
just taking some woamn's word for it?
Honestly, Winston, you lack even the most basic skills of a skeptic. And your
logic is execrable.
Fabi...@hotmail.com
I just asked my ferrets, and they say that both cats and dogs lie all
the time. Just like poor Winston "Legwanker" Wu/McKay
Night Child
Pop quiz. Three individuals stand before you and tell you an extraordinary tale (I'll
leave it up to your imagination). They all tell exactly the same story.
Problem: One of them is telling about something they actually experienced. Two of
them are knowingly making it up. But remember, it's the same story.
So, Winston, by your own belief in anecdotal evidence, surely you believe you can
determine which story is true. Once again, they're all telling the same story.
George Black
Was this before he nutted off? or after
Endre Nestor
>On Sat, 07 Jul 2001 14:38:17 GMT, "Ragnar" <rwo...@earthlink.net>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"WinstonMcKay" <winsto...@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:20010707043923...@ng-fj1.aol.com...
>>> By the way everyone, I forgot to mention in my letter that at the Mackay
>>> Mansion last night, the lady who lived there said that her black labrador
>>dog
>>> (who is so cute I might add) often goes upstairs and plays with the child
>>> spirits! He reacts to them just like they're there! Skeptics, explain
>>this
>>> one to me. If ghosts are all in the mind (as cycnics say) then how come
>>dogs
>>> react to them????????? Explain that one!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>
>>1. Anecdotal third-hand evidence is worse than crap.
>>
>>2. Its a DOG, Winston! Mine chases his tail for no known reason. He
>>circles 3 or 4 times before lying down. Acribing human behavior to animals
>>is not only stupid but self-deluding.
>>
>>Ragnar
>>
>In that case ANYBODY who keeps ferrets is absolutely plagued by
>invisible ghosts! They constantly play with invisible spirits!
My cat must see ghosts frequently, as he will run through the house
like hundreds of ghosts are chasing him. Oncee he even ran into the
bathroom and jumped in the bathtub, which to his dismay he discovered
was full of water, as I was preparing to take a bath. One of those
Kodak moments when you don't have a camera.
Endre Nestor
Popular opinion is the greatest lie in the world.
Thomas Carlyle