SKEPTIC SCHIZOPHRINIA (PSI-WALKER, INC.)
South Dakota KiD
****************************************************************
# P S I - W A L K E R, I N C. #
# Minneapolis, Minnesota USA #
# Del R. Mulroy - CEO / PRES. #
# E-Mail: Ney...@winternet.com #
****************************************************************
================================================================
APRIL 26, 1996
SUBJECT: SKEPTICLE SCHIZOPHRINIA
We here at PSI-WALKER, INC. have been welcomed on the Internet by
a torent of e-mail, and postings from others in this, and other
newsgroups on the information that we have supplied in reguards
to the subject of this newsgroup, and to say that we are happy
about this is an understatement.
As the CEO/PRESIDENT, I entered into this venture as a "skeptic"
despite that I hold the title myself as a Psychic/Medium for the
last 21 years. There was hope that as both a investigative team
as well as a search for all information available in the area of
psychic/paranormal that a opinion could be formed into the main
question, are psychic talents real, or are they just some sort
of mass illusion in the minds of millions of people.
Here on the Internet, we at PSI-WALKER, INC. have been able to
research on the Internet unlike any other place we have been, as
the information available is incredible compared to our own local
library for instance. We have had the oppertunity to talk to
people on the Internet through e-mail, and the IRC, that have
been a real help to us in our search and quest for the truth.
The opinion now formed from the last 4 months of investigating
is this. That "skeptics" who claim they grasp reality, and the
truth, are themselves in question in what they believe in. They
certainly have offered no evidense at all that psychic talents
DON'T exist, but, they are quick to attack anyone that claims
psychic talents by:
1. Attacking the persons overall charachter in a lame
attempt to make them smaller then the skeptics.
2. Posting rants claiming that psychics, if they existed,
would be filthy rich if they would solve some of the
biggest crimes in this nation, including the infamous
UNABOMBER case, and the murders of Nicole Brown, and
Mr. Ron Goldman.
3. Attack the person for not bothering to invest time in
going after the $10,000 - $580,000 (however much it is
this week) prize that Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI has
offered to ANYONE who can prove in a scientific study
under his rules that psychic or paranormal talents are
real. This is simply a 27 year old APRIL FOOL'S JOKE
and everyone has bought the hook, line and sinker.
4. Attack the persons spelling is a fave for these skeptics
in this newsgroup. We at PSI-WALKER, INC. have noticed
that the ONLY people in this newsgroup that bother to do
this are the skeptics. This is a lame attempt to defame
the person overall, and dodge the issue at hand.
5. LIE! PSI-WALKER, INC. has made it a top priority in just
correcting and holding the skeptics true to the words they
posted in the past. It is amazing how some simply forget
the things they posted a month or two ago. To make up
something and post it, is not only rude, but a slap to
our faces that we are supposed to choke the made up claims
as fact! Skeptics think that everyone who is not a skeptic
is also less intelligent then they are. HAH! Dream on!!
In our 4 month investigation into the skeptics claims that
psychic talents are false, we have concluded that this is
not the truth. We have looked at the hardest cases involving
psychic talents, and were left throwing our hands in the air
unable to explain how some feats were accomplished.
We will note that Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI has done a great
job in the last 25+ years in debunking/exposing/humiliating
psychics and others that were indeed frauds. This is not
to go by without a large thank you from us here at
PSI-WALKER, INC. Anyone that is a fraud, and taking people for
hard earned money, SHOULD BE EXPOSED! But we seem to find that
skeptics the world over, including those affiliated with
Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI, have one small flaw. They persist
in a "ONE-TRACK" closed mind. Skeptics claim that ghosts are
not real in any shape or form, despite WHO makes the claim.
Are we at PSI-WALKER, INC. then impressed by this statement?
Not at all. Skeptics have no footing that is any more solid
then quick sand.
When Mr. and Mrs. Abraham Lincoln held seances in the United
States White House on a regular basis as they reported seeing
ghosts in the hallways, when President's Jimmy Carter, and
Ronald Reagan both while in office made public statements that
they had seen something they thought to be a ghost, and both
reported the 1st Family's dogs barking at nothing, or running
down the hallway chasing something, current President Bill
Clinton has stated in public that he has felt "something"
eerie in the White House late at night, and he had hoped it
was not a ghost, I personally will believe the words of the
current, and former President's of the United States over the
words of some "skeptics" who are just loud in words, and no
evidense to back the claims they make.
Skeptics try to cause fear in others who make claims of
psychic talents by insisting they PROVE their talents to
Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI. What really evades us here at
PSI-WALKER, INC., is why these same skeptics are not out
investigating in the persuit of the truth? They expect the
psychics to deliver the proof to them. Sorry skepticle
like ones, this is not how it works.
If *I* was a hard core extremest skeptic, I would at least
make a honest effort in determining the truth, instead of
laying around and expecting the truth to find me, and until
that time, it don't exist in my mind, and everyone is entitled
to MY opinion. This view of most skeptics as they portray
themselves in this newsgroup, is not only comical in nature,
but almost an insult to all of us.
One Psychic/Detective has been working for law enforcement for
over 25+ years all over the United States, has been protrayed
on several national tv shows for her abilities, and she has a
track record that is staggering. She will only take a case
when it has been determined that there are no more leads, the
case is innactive for at least 6 months, and she insists that
she not be told a thing about the case. Despite all this, she
has found over 200 missing bodies over the years, and found
evidence that jailed many people for murder over the years.
Despite her track record, and her methods, skeptics claim she
is a fraud, a few books have been written in the past that
"question" her abilities, but they have not "debunked" her.
Even if she some how manages to "cheat", or make this all some
sort of huge magic trick, she is solving the murders in this
nation that police have given up on. If that alone is not
something to bring to light, then what is? What matters is
the body is found, given a proper burial, and the family is
allowed to say goodbye to this loved one, and the killer is
brought to justice.
PSI-WALKER, INC. has investigated the past track records of
four psychic/detectives, and in each case, we were left with
more questions on how they did it then when we entered into
the investigation.
I was in California last summer at the Burbank NBC Studios
being featured on a national TV show called -THE OTHER SIDE-
for my psychic talents, when I got to meet one of the best
psychics in this nation. She was a resident expert on this
show, and had appeared in at least 18 episodes.
It was a great honor to meet this most down to earth honest
and sincere lady. Mrs. Sylvia Browne and me talked for a
few minutes following the show. I have known of Mrs. Browne
since she was featured on a national show -THATS INCREDIBLE-
back in 1978 with her investigation into the haunted
"TOYS R' US" store.
As shown in the movie HIGHLANDER I - III and in the tv
show, immortals can "feel" the presence of another immortal.
For some psychic's, it is the same way. I can feel the presence
of other psychics within my area, and the aura they have is
much brighter then that of other people the same age. As a
rule of thumb, kids have auras that are much brighter then
adults, and psychic adults auras are as bright as those kids
half their age. As I left the stage on the TV show, I stopped
in my tracks. I knew that I was in the midst of a very
powerful, and incredibly psychic person, I had never in 21
years felt that magnitude of energy. I told one of the
people that was on the show with me, "we are not alone, there
is someone close that is putting out a psychic aura that is
very powerful".
As we entered into the back room behind the stage, sitting
on the couch was Mrs. Sylvia Browne. Her first words to me
were "You are a healer, you have a healing aura, and you work
with kids". I have never met Mrs. Browne before, and she
left me stunned on my feet.
Prior to this trip to California, I was donating time to a
local hospital near my home working with the teens in the
"Suicide/Depression Unit". As a psychic, I have a incredible
advantage and insight into helping these teens that the others
in the hospital don't have. I had worked with 9-17 year olds
that were considered "Long-Terms" (LT's) of more then a three
week stay. In all cases were I worked with the kids, I was
able to have them released in less then half that time. Due to
illness and hospital stays of my own for diabetes, and badly
infected legs from a rattle snake bite of four years ago, I
had to quit going to the hospital to help the kids. I will be
resuming helping them again this summer. But, for Mrs. Browne
to have gotten this from seeing me on sight, I was stunned.
Our discussion was interupted by the producer of the show
walking in with a L.A. COUNTY SHERRIFF pilot with a map,
saying that a young girl had been missing for several days
and they feared the worse from the exposure to the desert
sun. I was amazed to see Mrs. Browne point to the map and
ask if there was a place not listed on this map she called
by name. The pilot was familur with the area. She told
him that she was there, under a large rock staying out of
the sun, but was in danger from the exposure. She detailed
the area for the pilot, who then left. How is it that a
person like Mrs. Browne can possibly know things about a
person she has never met? Or someone not even close to her
proximity? I was not able to find out before I was flown
back to Minneapolis is the girl was found or not, but I
would bet money she was from knowing Mrs. Brownes past
record as a psychic.
It is without saying that we at PSI-WALKER, INC. are still
left holding our hands up in the air, as to why some of the
skeptics don't bother to investigate the past recorded track
records of a few of the most incredible psychics in this
nation, and ask "how, why, etc". It seems that the skeptics
can't be helped, as they refuse to help themselves. Anyone
that buys into the rants, and the threats that skeptics throw
around about CLAIM THE PRIZE, and THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS
PSYCHIC's needs to take another look at their footing, as it
is not solid.
Skeptics refuse to admidt that they don't know how some psychics
work in helping people with the talents. Sometimes, "I DON'T
KNOW" is a good answer, but it is a answer skeptics won't let
slip from their lips.
We do not understand the mentallity of the skeptics, and
there is nothing wrong being a skeptic, but it appears in
this forum, there is a large majority of "extremest skeptics"
here.
I am a skeptic. It wasn't unil just a few months ago I
believed that a psychic could work over the phone. It does
not sound possible afterall, that someone could talk to
someone over a phone thousand of miles away, and work with
the psychic talents. There is nothing but a voice to work
with. But, I found that on the Internet, I was able to work
with my psychic talents in E-Mail, and in the IRC, able to
feel and see images left as sort of a "finger print" on the
elerctronic carried by phone message from someone thousands,
and in a few cases more then 10,000 miles away. I am still a
skeptic into some of the things I do, wondering if what I am
doing is possible or not, and amaze myself sometimes. To be
a skeptic is ok, but to close ones mind shut to the outside
world and refusing to look at the overwhelming evidense into
psychic talents almost shines a light over the extemest skeptic's
head that being a "Skeptic Schizophrinic" is the ultimate
high, and nothing can bring them down from the CLOUD 9 they
are on.
When they do come off that high, maybe we can see eye to eye
on the issues at face value. As it is now, all we can see
is the bottoms of the sneakers on the extemest skeptics feet.
Sincerely,
PSI-WALKER, INC.
Del R. Mulroy
Psychic/Medium/Healer/Author
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
Internet: Ney...@winternet.com
* "... oh and sir? One more thing, when you pass the boss's
office, stick him the finger real good for me will ya? ;) "
twi...@hub.ofthe.net
ney...@winternet.com (South Dakota KiD) wrote:
#****************************************************************
## P S I - W A L K E R, I N C. #
## Minneapolis, Minnesota USA #
## Del R. Mulroy - CEO / PRES. #
## E-Mail: Ney...@winternet.com #
#****************************************************************
#================================================================
# APRIL 26, 1996
#SUBJECT: SKEPTICLE SCHIZOPHRINIA
<snip>
#As the CEO/PRESIDENT, I entered into this venture as a "skeptic"
#despite that I hold the title myself as a Psychic/Medium for the
#last 21 years. <snip>
A "skeptic" who titles himself as a Psychic/Medium is not a skeptic.
A skeptic questions things. You clearly accepted them and therefore
could not have been a skeptic for at least 21 years.
#The opinion now formed from the last 4 months of investigating
#is this. That "skeptics" who claim they grasp reality, and the
#truth, are themselves in question in what they believe in. They
#certainly have offered no evidense at all that psychic talents
#DON'T exist,
I question the quality of your research if you are unaware that it is
not possible to prove that these talents DON'T exist. That sentence
illustrates one of the main problems with this newsgroup. The
"researchers" don't know or understand research or science.
but, they are quick to attack anyone that claims
#psychic talents by:
#1. Attacking the persons overall charachter in a lame
# attempt to make them smaller then the skeptics.
Considering that for a simple, polite disagreement over one article, I
just received 7 abusive emails from Mr. Kettler who had been blaming
the skeptics for flaming, I think you are just attempting to figure
out how to get some money from these people now that the gov't has
discontinued your funding.
#2. Posting rants claiming that psychics, if they existed,
# would be filthy rich if they would solve some of the
# biggest crimes in this nation, including the infamous
# UNABOMBER case, and the murders of Nicole Brown, and
# Mr. Ron Goldman.
Some of them have been rants. But some of them have raised legitimate
questions. Your arguments display the over-generalization fallacy and
point out that this is not a legitimate article but an attempt to "win
over" believers. Suspicious.
#3. Attack the person for not bothering to invest time in
# going after the $10,000 - $580,000 (however much it is
# this week) prize that Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI has
# offered to ANYONE who can prove in a scientific study
# under his rules that psychic or paranormal talents are
# real. This is simply a 27 year old APRIL FOOL'S JOKE
# and everyone has bought the hook, line and sinker.
Please post the evidence for this extraordinary claim. And why are
you so afraid of a scienitific study of your claims?
#4. Attack the persons spelling is a fave for these skeptics
# in this newsgroup. We at PSI-WALKER, INC. have noticed
# that the ONLY people in this newsgroup that bother to do
# this are the skeptics. This is a lame attempt to defame
# the person overall, and dodge the issue at hand.
Another over-generalization fallacy. You do like that fallacy, don't
you.
#5. LIE! PSI-WALKER, INC. has made it a top priority in just
# correcting and holding the skeptics true to the words they
# posted in the past. It is amazing how some simply forget
# the things they posted a month or two ago. To make up
# something and post it, is not only rude, but a slap to
# our faces that we are supposed to choke the made up claims
# as fact! Skeptics think that everyone who is not a skeptic
# is also less intelligent then they are. HAH! Dream on!!
Over generalization fallacy, again. Ad hominem generalization, also.
Like most of this flame. Attack some mythical beasts in general.
#In our 4 month investigation into the skeptics claims that
#psychic talents are false, we have concluded that this is
#not the truth.
The true skeptic asks that your claims for the paranormal be backed
up. If you have shown that the claims of the "skeptics", that you've
made up, are false, that implys that you have evidence that these
phenom actually exist. Please post that evidence, or list the
appropriate references. So far, all you've done is to set up strawmen
and demolished them. That is another logical fallacy. To use three
logical fallacies in one article is evidence of no little ability in
false reasoning.
We have looked at the hardest cases involving
#psychic talents, and were left throwing our hands in the air
#unable to explain how some feats were accomplished.
The fact that you claim to be a Psychic/Medium may have a lot to do
with that. Also the fact that you demonstrated a lack of
understanding of research earlier may also have something to do with
it.
#We will note that Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI has done a great
#job in the last 25+ years in debunking/exposing/humiliating
#psychics and others that were indeed frauds. This is not
#to go by without a large thank you from us here at
#PSI-WALKER, INC. Anyone that is a fraud, and taking people for
#hard earned money, SHOULD BE EXPOSED!
I'm glad that you agree.
But we seem to find that
#skeptics the world over, including those affiliated with
#Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI, have one small flaw. They persist
#in a "ONE-TRACK" closed mind. Skeptics claim that ghosts are
#not real in any shape or form, despite WHO makes the claim.
Who makes the claim is unimportant. And the fact that you don't seem
to realize that makes your claims to "research" sound hollow.
#Are we at PSI-WALKER, INC. then impressed by this statement?
#Not at all. Skeptics have no footing that is any more solid
#then quick sand.
Wow! Are you good at logical fallacies. I am impressed at your
ability to twist words and use dubious logic to attempt to gain your
goals.
#When Mr. and Mrs. Abraham Lincoln held seances in the United
#States White House on a regular basis as they reported seeing
#ghosts in the hallways,
Then it is replicable and can be checked on a scientific basis. But
the only scientific tests have shown nothing. Belief is strong and
can influence people. Both skeptics and believers. If this is so
replicable, please post the evidence or properly reference it.
when President's Jimmy Carter, and
#Ronald Reagan both while in office made public statements that
#they had seen something they thought to be a ghost, and both
#reported the 1st Family's dogs barking at nothing,
That you think barking dogs are scientific evidence, points out how
poor your own evidence must be.
or running
#down the hallway chasing something, current President Bill
#Clinton has stated in public that he has felt "something"
#eerie in the White House late at night, and he had hoped it
#was not a ghost, I personally will believe the words of the
#current, and former President's of the United States over the
#words of some "skeptics" who are just loud in words, and no
#evidense to back the claims they make.
The fact that you believe people and don't bother to investigate,
clearly says that your are incapable of doing research.
#Skeptics try to cause fear in others who make claims of
#psychic talents by insisting they PROVE their talents to
#Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI.
No. They are asked to demonstrate their talents. There is a
difference. Earlier you said that exposing frauds was good. How can
you expose them except by asking them to demonstrate their talents?
What really evades us here at
#PSI-WALKER, INC., is why these same skeptics are not out
#investigating in the persuit of the truth? They expect the
#psychics to deliver the proof to them.
It's called burden of proof! The fact that you seem to be ignorant of
this, calls your entire article into question. That is it would, if
your consistent logical fallacies didn't already indicate that your
know nothing of research.
Sorry skepticle
#like ones, this is not how it works.
Yes, it is! The person making the extraordinary claim has the burden
of proof that the claim is valid. That is how Randi exposed all those
frauds that you congratulated him on earlier. Or are you having
second thoughts now on whether exposing frauds is good?
#If *I* was a hard core extremest skeptic, I would at least
#make a honest effort in determining the truth, instead of
#laying around and expecting the truth to find me,
Total nonesense!
and until
#that time, it don't exist in my mind, and everyone is entitled
#to MY opinion.
Additional nonesense.
This view of most skeptics as they portray
#themselves in this newsgroup, is not only comical in nature,
#but almost an insult to all of us.
I'm sorry that you feel this way. I feel your pain.
#One Psychic/Detective has been working for law enforcement for
#over 25+ years all over the United States, has been protrayed
#on several national tv shows for her abilities, and she has a
#track record that is staggering.
No evidence for this claim.
She will only take a case
#when it has been determined that there are no more leads, the
#case is innactive for at least 6 months, and she insists that
#she not be told a thing about the case. Despite all this, she
#has found over 200 missing bodies over the years, and found
#evidence that jailed many people for murder over the years.
Over-generalization fallacy. Make a sweeping claim without evidence.
Controlled tests showed that psychic detectives did no better than
college students chosen at random.
#Despite her track record, and her methods, skeptics claim she
#is a fraud, a few books have been written in the past that
#"question" her abilities, but they have not "debunked" her.
#Even if she some how manages to "cheat", or make this all some
#sort of huge magic trick, she is solving the murders in this
#nation that police have given up on.
So even though she doesn't actually have the ability, that is
unimportant! And we have no evidence that is of any quality that she
has helped these police. But even if what she didn't do involved
cheating, it proves that the paranormal exists! (Believers you should
really get a better spokesperson! This person is killing you!)
If that alone is not
#something to bring to light, then what is? What matters is
#the body is found, given a proper burial, and the family is
#allowed to say goodbye to this loved one, and the killer is
#brought to justice.
What matters is that there is no quality evidence that she does this.
Whether she cheats or not!
#PSI-WALKER, INC. has investigated the past track records of
#four psychic/detectives, and in each case, we were left with
#more questions on how they did it then when we entered into
#the investigation.
Because you have plainly shown that you have no knowledge of research
methodology. Rest of fallacious, ad hominem drivel deleted.
Bruce Daniel Kettler
TWITCH, you are responding to an article that I've not been able to
find in it's original form on ALT.PARANORMAL.
The reference you make, TWITCH, to "ad hominem" isn't really applicable
here. If a group of people who read the same publication, SKEPTICAL
INQUIRER, and quote from RANDI, exhibit the same characteristics and
habits repeatedly, we have an observable fact.
The so-called "skeptics" of your religious persuasion constantly
distort. It's a fact, observable often enough.
If a group, any group, communists, right-wingers, or whatever exhibit a
certain pattern, whether it be a tendency to lie, a tendency to carry
firearms, to be paranoid, or whatever, if it's statistically sound,
then we can expect
Earl Curley
twi...@hub.ofthe.net wrote:
>#As the CEO/PRESIDENT, I entered into this venture as a "skeptic"
>#despite that I hold the title myself as a Psychic/Medium for the
>#last 21 years. <snip>
>
>A "skeptic" who titles himself as a Psychic/Medium is not a skeptic.
>A skeptic questions things. You clearly accepted them and therefore
>could not have been a skeptic for at least 21 years.
>
Excuse me but where on earth did you that logic from. Just because we
have someone who does have reason to believe is certain aspects of
parapsychology and may not believe in all the fallacies associated with
a profession or belief and wishes to be skeptical of those beliefs
doesn't mean that you can come along and claim that he can't be
skeptical.
What you are implying here is that just because you have beliefs in
nothing and claim you're skeptical then everyone should walk your line
and they have no right to be a skeptic unless it's defined under your
terms. Are you of your mind. I personally am more skeptical about
certain areas of parapsychology than you'll ever be, but the difference
between you and I is that I have the professional credentials and
experience and knowledge to back up my skeptism.
We all are skeptical of one thing or another and you have no right to
dictate who shall be and shant be.
Earl Gordon Curley
psy...@asgo.net
http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
http://www.webdesign.ca/psychic/
Crystal Odenkirk
twi...@hub.ofthe.net wrote:
: A "skeptic" who titles himself as a Psychic/Medium is not a skeptic.
: A skeptic questions things. You clearly accepted them and therefore
: could not have been a skeptic for at least 21 years.
I'm afraid I have to agree here. You may be skeptical about some things,
but don't claim to be a skeptic if you already believe in the 'paranormal'.
I keep my mind open that I may be wrong since I can't duplicate any of my
experiences at will (there are some I wouldn't want to, for any amount of
money), but I gave up the title 'skeptic' years ago.
: #1. Attacking the persons overall charachter in a lame
: # attempt to make them smaller then the skeptics.
: Considering that for a simple, polite disagreement over one article, I
: just received 7 abusive emails from Mr. Kettler who had been blaming
: the skeptics for flaming, I think you are just attempting to figure
: out how to get some money from these people now that the gov't has
: discontinued your funding.
Indeed. This is a problem on both 'sides'.
: #3. Attack the person for not bothering to invest time in
: # going after the $10,000 - $580,000 (however much it is
: # this week) prize that Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI has
: # offered to ANYONE who can prove in a scientific study
: # under his rules that psychic or paranormal talents are
: # real. This is simply a 27 year old APRIL FOOL'S JOKE
: # and everyone has bought the hook, line and sinker.
: Please post the evidence for this extraordinary claim. And why are
: you so afraid of a scienitific study of your claims?
Well, as for the april fool's bit, I've never heard of it, but I have seen
several instances of people being attacked because they don't have the time
and/or money to initiate or hold the sort of scientific studies that would
be required to prove the existence of the paranormal. I am one of those
instances; as a college student I really don't have time or money for it,
but I was attacked and insulted anyway.
: #4. Attack the persons spelling is a fave for these skeptics
: # in this newsgroup. We at PSI-WALKER, INC. have noticed
: # that the ONLY people in this newsgroup that bother to do
: # this are the skeptics. This is a lame attempt to defame
: # the person overall, and dodge the issue at hand.
: Another over-generalization fallacy. You do like that fallacy, don't
: you.
No kidding. That's a major problem on both 'sides,' as well. The simple
answer to that is to not give anyone that sort of fuel. If you're
intelligent enough to stand up under a full debate, you are intelligent
enough to learn how to spell. Of course, there will always be typos to be
attacked, but then, no one is perfect.
You know, I absolutely _abhor_ generalizations.
: #In our 4 month investigation into the skeptics claims that
: #psychic talents are false, we have concluded that this is
: #not the truth.
You know, this is what amuses me the most. In four months, any single group
of people is going to be able to prove with any certainty anything that has
stumped thousands of people for hundreds of years?!
: The true skeptic asks that your claims for the paranormal be backed
: up. If you have shown that the claims of the "skeptics", that you've
: made up, are false, that implys that you have evidence that these
: phenom actually exist. Please post that evidence, or list the
: appropriate references. So far, all you've done is to set up strawmen
: and demolished them. That is another logical fallacy. To use three
: logical fallacies in one article is evidence of no little ability in
: false reasoning.
Yes, please see, however, my other post about the subtle distinction between
those who claim to be something, and those who are. I believe it was under
one of the "why I started this newsgroup" headings.
: We have looked at the hardest cases involving
: #psychic talents, and were left throwing our hands in the air
: #unable to explain how some feats were accomplished.
: The fact that you claim to be a Psychic/Medium may have a lot to do
: with that. Also the fact that you demonstrated a lack of
: understanding of research earlier may also have something to do with
: it.
Again, even as a believer I find I have to agree here.
: #We will note that Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI has done a great
: #job in the last 25+ years in debunking/exposing/humiliating
: #psychics and others that were indeed frauds. This is not
: #to go by without a large thank you from us here at
: #PSI-WALKER, INC. Anyone that is a fraud, and taking people for
: #hard earned money, SHOULD BE EXPOSED!
: I'm glad that you agree.
I certainly do!
: But we seem to find that
: #skeptics the world over, including those affiliated with
: #Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI, have one small flaw. They persist
: #in a "ONE-TRACK" closed mind. Skeptics claim that ghosts are
: #not real in any shape or form, despite WHO makes the claim.
: Who makes the claim is unimportant. And the fact that you don't seem
: to realize that makes your claims to "research" sound hollow.
Again, I find I must agree. It _shouldn't_ make any difference who makes
the claim. Who is this 'psi-walker', anyway?!
: Then it is replicable and can be checked on a scientific basis. But
: the only scientific tests have shown nothing. Belief is strong and
: can influence people. Both skeptics and believers. If this is so
: replicable, please post the evidence or properly reference it.
Well, belief is my whole starting point for allowing for things I don't know
about or understand. Belief is the central point of reality in my view, but
that's a long-winded philosophy I'll only go into in any length when asked.
: #Skeptics try to cause fear in others who make claims of
: #psychic talents by insisting they PROVE their talents to
: #Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI.
: No. They are asked to demonstrate their talents. There is a
: difference. Earlier you said that exposing frauds was good. How can
: you expose them except by asking them to demonstrate their talents?
Um, except that in this case it's so. I agree that things should be
demonstated to be believed, but I _REFUSE_ to help anyone who treats me the
way I was treated after offering to try.
: What really evades us here at
: #PSI-WALKER, INC., is why these same skeptics are not out
: #investigating in the persuit of the truth? They expect the
: #psychics to deliver the proof to them.
: It's called burden of proof! The fact that you seem to be ignorant of
: this, calls your entire article into question. That is it would, if
: your consistent logical fallacies didn't already indicate that your
: know nothing of research.
What happened to that nice little patch of middle ground? I think it should
be a two way street.
: Sorry skepticle
: #like ones, this is not how it works.
: Yes, it is! The person making the extraordinary claim has the burden
: of proof that the claim is valid. That is how Randi exposed all those
: frauds that you congratulated him on earlier. Or are you having
: second thoughts now on whether exposing frauds is good?
Again, I am forced to agree. The majority of the burden does fall to the
person making the claim. However, if someone wants something proved to
them, they should be just as willing to try to find out one way or the
other. While this may happen with people I have not dealt with, there have
been very few willing to meet me halfway about anything; and I don't even
claim anything spectacular or strange.
: #If *I* was a hard core extremest skeptic, I would at least
: #make a honest effort in determining the truth, instead of
: #laying around and expecting the truth to find me,
: Total nonesense!
Well, not _totally_...
: and until
: #that time, it don't exist in my mind, and everyone is entitled
: #to MY opinion.
: Additional nonesense.
In some cases.
In others, it's dead on.
: #One Psychic/Detective has been working for law enforcement for
: #over 25+ years all over the United States, has been protrayed
: #on several national tv shows for her abilities, and she has a
: #track record that is staggering.
: No evidence for this claim.
I remember hearing about her, but I don't remember any details. Yes, why
don't you post it for us? I really am interested in finding out more; I
think it's worth the inevitable flames to post at least your resources.
: Over-generalization fallacy. Make a sweeping claim without evidence.
: Controlled tests showed that psychic detectives did no better than
: college students chosen at random.
And, now to turn your reply back at you, what are _your_ sources for this
extraordinary claim?
crys
Crystal Odenkirk
Crystal Odenkirk (oden...@stu.beloit.edu) wrote:
: Yes, please see, however, my other post about the subtle distinction between
: those who claim to be something, and those who are. I believe it was under
: one of the "why I started this newsgroup" headings.
My apologies. It was under "is alt.paranormal becoming anti-paranormal?",
not "why I started this newsgroup"
crys
twi...@hub.ofthe.net
oden...@stu.beloit.edu (Crystal Odenkirk) wrote:
#twi...@hub.ofthe.net wrote:
#: A "skeptic" who titles himself as a Psychic/Medium is not a
skeptic.
#: A skeptic questions things. You clearly accepted them and
therefore
#: could not have been a skeptic for at least 21 years.
#I'm afraid I have to agree here. You may be skeptical about some
things,
#but don't claim to be a skeptic if you already believe in the
'paranormal'.
#I keep my mind open that I may be wrong since I can't duplicate any
of my
#experiences at will (there are some I wouldn't want to, for any
amount of
#money), but I gave up the title 'skeptic' years ago.
Perfectly legit. And you shouldn't be attacked for being a believer.
#: #1. Attacking the persons overall charachter in a lame
#: # attempt to make them smaller then the skeptics.
#: Considering that for a simple, polite disagreement over one
article, I
#: just received 7 abusive emails from Mr. Kettler who had been
blaming
#: the skeptics for flaming, I think you are just attempting to figure
#: out how to get some money from these people now that the gov't has
#: discontinued your funding.
#Indeed. This is a problem on both 'sides'.
Yes. Bruce's total was 13 of the nastiest emails that I have ever
received before stopping. There is no excuse for that on either side.
#: #3. Attack the person for not bothering to invest time in
#: # going after the $10,000 - $580,000 (however much it is
#: # this week) prize that Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI has
#: # offered to ANYONE who can prove in a scientific study
#: # under his rules that psychic or paranormal talents are
#: # real. This is simply a 27 year old APRIL FOOL'S JOKE
#: # and everyone has bought the hook, line and sinker.
#: Please post the evidence for this extraordinary claim. And why are
#: you so afraid of a scienitific study of your claims?
#Well, as for the april fool's bit, I've never heard of it, but I have
seen
#several instances of people being attacked because they don't have
the time
#and/or money to initiate or hold the sort of scientific studies that
would
#be required to prove the existence of the paranormal. I am one of
those
#instances; as a college student I really don't have time or money for
it,
#but I was attacked and insulted anyway.
That shouldn't happen. But Randi's challange does not impose rules on
the believer. Both Randi and the person being tested must agree on
the rules prior to the demo or it is no go. Every person who has
taken the challange has had the opportunity to get it all in writing
prior to the test. And only one has passed the test. But he admitted
it wasn't by paranormal means.
Randi's challange doesn't require money on the part of the believer
who wishes to be tested, so you might consider trying it. If you
fail, you'll be no worse off, and if you succeed, according to written
and agreed upon ground rules, you'll be substantially richer. And,
for those who insist that Randi doesn't have the money and can't get
it, just think of all the fun you'd have throwing it in the skeptics
faces. And pointing it out to the skeptics would be legit!
#: #4. Attack the persons spelling is a fave for these skeptics
#: # in this newsgroup. We at PSI-WALKER, INC. have noticed
#: # that the ONLY people in this newsgroup that bother to do
#: # this are the skeptics. This is a lame attempt to defame
#: # the person overall, and dodge the issue at hand.
#: Another over-generalization fallacy. You do like that fallacy,
don't
#: you.
#No kidding. That's a major problem on both 'sides,' as well. The
simple
#answer to that is to not give anyone that sort of fuel. If you're
#intelligent enough to stand up under a full debate, you are
intelligent
#enough to learn how to spell. Of course, there will always be typos
to be
#attacked, but then, no one is perfect.
I attempt to not attack anyone for misspelling or grammer. While I
write novels (ones that are published!) I am not a typist but made my
living as a physicist. I don't have the time to go over each word to
the extent that I would like and attempt to afford the same liberty to
each person who writes an article. Bruce attacked me recently for
typos! But he misused the word (sic)! If you are going to attack
someone for typos, which I don't approve of, you shouldn't make
mistakes in your article.
One of my bosses put out a memo about the number of typos in
correspondence. We found 7 typos in his short memo! Boy, did that
feel good!
#You know, I absolutely _abhor_ generalizations.
Unfortunately, we all do them to some extent. But some posters only
use them and never provide anything else. (That is an
over-generalization, provided gratis!)
#: #In our 4 month investigation into the skeptics claims that
#: #psychic talents are false, we have concluded that this is
#: #not the truth.
#You know, this is what amuses me the most. In four months, any
single group
#of people is going to be able to prove with any certainty anything
that has
#stumped thousands of people for hundreds of years?!
Wouldn't it be wonderful if they would post the research that enabled
them to arrive at this conclusion!
#: The true skeptic asks that your claims for the paranormal be backed
#: up. If you have shown that the claims of the "skeptics", that
you've
#: made up, are false, that implys that you have evidence that these
#: phenom actually exist. Please post that evidence, or list the
#: appropriate references. So far, all you've done is to set up
strawmen
#: and demolished them. That is another logical fallacy. To use
three
#: logical fallacies in one article is evidence of no little ability
in
#: false reasoning.
#Yes, please see, however, my other post about the subtle distinction
between
#those who claim to be something, and those who are.
It is subtle and may be real. But until we can demonstrate that the
paranormal exists, it may be too subtle. But that is one of the
reasons why I am here, to see if it is real.
I believe it was under
#one of the "why I started this newsgroup" headings.
#: We have looked at the hardest cases involving
#: #psychic talents, and were left throwing our hands in the air
#: #unable to explain how some feats were accomplished.
#: The fact that you claim to be a Psychic/Medium may have a lot to do
#: with that. Also the fact that you demonstrated a lack of
#: understanding of research earlier may also have something to do
with
#: it.
#Again, even as a believer I find I have to agree here.
Thank you.
#: #We will note that Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI has done a great
#: #job in the last 25+ years in debunking/exposing/humiliating
#: #psychics and others that were indeed frauds. This is not
#: #to go by without a large thank you from us here at
#: #PSI-WALKER, INC. Anyone that is a fraud, and taking people for
#: #hard earned money, SHOULD BE EXPOSED!
#: I'm glad that you agree.
#I certainly do!
#: But we seem to find that
#: #skeptics the world over, including those affiliated with
#: #Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI, have one small flaw. They persist
#: #in a "ONE-TRACK" closed mind. Skeptics claim that ghosts are
#: #not real in any shape or form, despite WHO makes the claim.
#: Who makes the claim is unimportant. And the fact that you don't
seem
#: to realize that makes your claims to "research" sound hollow.
#Again, I find I must agree. It _shouldn't_ make any difference who
makes
#the claim. Who is this 'psi-walker', anyway?!
I believe they are a small company that was started by the military
officer who ran the remote viewing experiments, that were so
embarressing to the army and the CIA. If someone has knowledge
countering this, please post a correction.
#: Then it is replicable and can be checked on a scientific basis.
But
#: the only scientific tests have shown nothing. Belief is strong and
#: can influence people. Both skeptics and believers. If this is so
#: replicable, please post the evidence or properly reference it.
#Well, belief is my whole starting point for allowing for things I
don't know
#about or understand. Belief is the central point of reality in my
view, but
#that's a long-winded philosophy I'll only go into in any length when
asked.
I have no objection to belief, but when it is claimed to positively
exist and have scientific evidence for it, then I want to see it.
Belief is not in and of itself subject to skepticism. Only when it is
claimed to definitely exist and to have an effect on material things,
can it be tested. And then it should be.
#: #Skeptics try to cause fear in others who make claims of
#: #psychic talents by insisting they PROVE their talents to
#: #Mr. James THE AMAZING RANDI.
#: No. They are asked to demonstrate their talents. There is a
#: difference. Earlier you said that exposing frauds was good. How
can
#: you expose them except by asking them to demonstrate their
talents?
#Um, except that in this case it's so. I agree that things should be
#demonstated to be believed, but I _REFUSE_ to help anyone who treats
me the
#way I was treated after offering to try.
Was I one of the posters who attacked you? I don't believe so.
#: What really evades us here at
#: #PSI-WALKER, INC., is why these same skeptics are not out
#: #investigating in the persuit of the truth? They expect the
#: #psychics to deliver the proof to them.
#: It's called burden of proof! The fact that you seem to be ignorant
of
#: this, calls your entire article into question. That is it would,
if
#: your consistent logical fallacies didn't already indicate that your
#: know nothing of research.
#What happened to that nice little patch of middle ground? I think it
should
#be a two way street.
But to make such statements and use so many logical fallacies as well
as show such a disdain for normal scientific testing, moves them to
beyond belief IMHO. Skeptics are not free from logical fallacies as
this is a human problem.
#: Sorry skepticle
#: #like ones, this is not how it works.
#: Yes, it is! The person making the extraordinary claim has the
burden
#: of proof that the claim is valid. That is how Randi exposed all
those
#: frauds that you congratulated him on earlier. Or are you having
#: second thoughts now on whether exposing frauds is good?
#Again, I am forced to agree. The majority of the burden does fall to
the
#person making the claim. However, if someone wants something proved
to
#them, they should be just as willing to try to find out one way or
the
#other. While this may happen with people I have not dealt with, there
have
#been very few willing to meet me halfway about anything; and I don't
even
#claim anything spectacular or strange.
I totally agree that skeptics should attempt to assist someone making
a claim to test it if possible. They also should read up on the
subject, as should believers. Out of curiousity, if you don't claim
anything strange or spectacular why do you believe it is paranormal
which by its very name means beyond normal?
#: #If *I* was a hard core extremest skeptic, I would at least
#: #make a honest effort in determining the truth, instead of
#: #laying around and expecting the truth to find me,
#: Total nonesense!
#Well, not _totally_...
I concede. It is only about 95% nonsense.
#: and until
#: #that time, it don't exist in my mind, and everyone is entitled
#: #to MY opinion.
#: Additional nonesense.
#In some cases.
Everyone is always entitled to our opinion. But that doesn't mean
that they want it or even that that opinion is worth anything. If
they don't want it, they are not required to read the articles. It
can be close-minded of them, but it is certainly their right!
#In others, it's dead on.
#: #One Psychic/Detective has been working for law enforcement for
#: #over 25+ years all over the United States, has been protrayed
#: #on several national tv shows for her abilities, and she has a
#: #track record that is staggering.
#: No evidence for this claim.
#I remember hearing about her, but I don't remember any details. Yes,
why
#don't you post it for us? I really am interested in finding out
more; I
#think it's worth the inevitable flames to post at least your
resources.
#: Over-generalization fallacy. Make a sweeping claim without
evidence.
#: Controlled tests showed that psychic detectives did no better than
#: college students chosen at random.
#And, now to turn your reply back at you, what are _your_ sources for
this
#extraordinary claim?
I suggest that you read the Skeptical Inquirer. The article was
either in the last or the next to the last issue. What was
fascinating was that while the psychic detectives didn't do any better
than the college students, they rationalized it so that they believed
after seeing the results that they had been correct all along! The
interpretations that enabled them to believe that they were correct
was worth reading the article for by itself. Hope that this helps.
#crys