Randi's Million Dollar Challenge

[schticknz]

Originally Posted by kova

Where did I compare life in the universe and psychics??? Even though it has never been proven either... Obviously you don't know what my signature means... I think there should be life, but I have seen no proof.

schtick puts hand up ... I know what your signature is ... it's the Drake Equation ... which is, as we know, just a very hypothetical estimation of how many civilisations there are in the universe ... and probably needs some serious overhauling (although I know Frank Drake has tweaked it somewhat over the years).

My mention of other life in the universe was just trying to put forward the point that its totally illogical to say that 'psychics do not exist' since we know almost absolutely nothing about the universe around us, and its arrogant of us humans to even state something like that in any way.

I'm not a believer of 'angels' and 'demons' (for instance) either but again to say they don't exist ... full stop ... is a bit silly as we as a species have been around for only a split second in geological terms and who's to say that both of these are not just alien life forms of some kind or the after effects of another dimension/universe bleeding into our own ??? [again all total speculation of course :P]

[kova]

If you put it in those terms...

I will go on the record and say... there are no human psychics... Now. I don't know what will happen in the future... or I would be psychic. lol. If you showed me 1 supernatural person, that I think I would change my stance.

I don't think the drake equation is that far fetched, because I can prove life exist, so I an only imagine that some where, way out there, is another planet that got lucky and struck a balance like ourselves.

This scene is so polluted with kooks that it is even tough for me to believe in ufos let alone aliens from other planets. Every story I hear seems to be full of unreliable and non-verifiable BS. BUt don't get me wrong... I love listening to the good, the bad and the nonsensical(tribute to DB). But 99% of these characters that appear on these types of radio shows just make me laugh... and scared because some of them actually believe what they are saying(MH).

Side Note: The 2 biggest train wrecks I have ever listened too speak based on how arrogant they are, is hands down... David Icke and Michael Tsarion

[The Pair of Cats]

Randii will be dead soon and so will his trillion dollar challenge with it. And guess what? Psychics will still be around and so will the people who try, in vain, to debunk them.

The debunkers are no better than the people they try to discredit. They are just out there headline grabbing or trying to sell a book on how THEY are the go to guys/gals when it comes to debunking or starting a website to showcase their prowess.

Give it it up! You're not getting anywhere. You don't need knob heads like Randi or Shermer et al., to tell you that Edwards, Van Praagh, Sylvia Browne are full of shit.
Anyone with any sense can see that they are. The ones that can't, too bad for them. Let them get sucked into the scams and serve them right too.
Randi and Co. aren't out there to save the planet, they are out there to make a buck!

[kova]

lol... I had my last post deleted... so ill PG13 this one for you... Sorry BD and GS.

I have no problem with people making money, but I would rather be on the debunking side though that the con-artist side.

and your right... normal people with ordinary abilities will always be around. No matter what.

[Rick Deckard]

I look at it like this - I don't know whether psychics are real or not.

If they were real and the 'spooks' knew this, then I would assume that psychics would become targets of the 'dark' world. Their 'powers' would be seen as an asset or a threat - they would either be 'recruited' or assassinated.

If all psychics are 'cold reading' their 'victims' then, so what? Are their victims getting some sort of comfort from what the psychics are telling them? Is that comfort any less valid than the comfort received from the church or a therapist?

Does it really matter?

This is where I really don't care for 'debunkers'. Yes, fake psychics who pray on vulnerable people are the scum of the earth - as are all the confidence tricksters and advertisers (same thing). If people are presented with the all the evidence and choose to ignore it, then who am I to try and save them from themselves?

You just can't help some people. Let them learn their own lessons.

BTW, has Randi ever challenged the church to prove the existence of God? If not, then I guess debunkers have double-standards too...

[Chuckleberryfinn]

Originally Posted by Rick Deckard

BTW, has Randi ever challenged the church to prove the existence of God? If not, then I guess debunkers have double-standards too...

Randi, an intelligent man, probably has at least a basic understanding of the concept of "faith," which, by definition, equates with belief rather than proof, making such a challenge totally meaningless. No one who really understands faith, as defined best by Soren Kierkegaard, would take such a challenge seriously.

[Rick Deckard]

Originally Posted by Chuckleberryfinn

Randi, an intelligent man, probably has at least a basic understanding of the concept of "faith," which, by definition, equates with belief rather than proof, making such a challenge totally meaningless. No one who really understands faith, as defined best by Soren Kierkegaard, would take such a challenge seriously.

Fair point - but people do seem to have some sort of 'faith' in the psychics, horoscopes and tarot cards etc, which is why I brought up the church.

I dunno, perhaps faith is the wrong term, but what other word should we use to explain some people's willingness to ignore the evidence (or more accurately, the lack of evidence) and continue to support and participate in these activities? Is 'self-delusion' the right term? What's the distinction between faith and self-delusion?

[Ankhes]

I care about the victims. The StopSylviaBrowne website drove it further home for me. At one time I said, "so what" if people were taken in but not anymore. If people feel that way that's okay. But I can't. Maybe I'm too much of a sap but I do care when desperate and grieving people are taken in. Some may be comforted (falsely or not I cannot say) but others are just plain exploited and hurt. And when a case is high profile the "mediums" and "psychics" descend. They are not always sought. Many do descend like vultures and I find that repulsive.

The MDC is one way one of these professed psychics could prove what they say they can do. And according the rules Randi himself need not even be present and all protocols are agreed upon by both sides prior to a test. But I no longer see why the money should be hanging around. I don't think anyone will ever win it after many tries and many years. It should go towards something more useful and it will in 2 years.

[Chuckleberryfinn]

Originally Posted by Rick Deckard

Is 'self-delusion' the right term? What's the distinction between faith and self-delusion?

Perhaps there isn't a distinction between the two.

Another definition of faith that I like is the desire not to know the truth.

In fairness to religious people, however, self-delusion falls into the denial category, as in psychology, whereas faith is defined by the inability to feel or see the hand of God yet choosing to believe in it anyway. A truly faithful person (I do not consider myself one) is aware that he or she may be wrong, whereas a deluded person will not see this possibility.

A friend of mine, a Christian, "knows" that Jesus is God's son and that I will go to hell for not agreeing. He is deluded. One cannot know such an issue with the certainty that he attests. In my view, he doesn't understand faith. He's just deluded.

I hope that helps. Also, forgive me for being mean. I get snotty sometimes.

[Ankhes]

Originally Posted by Chuckleberryfinn

In fairness to religious people, however, self-delusion falls into the denial category, as in psychology, whereas faith is defined by the inability to feel or see the hand of God yet choosing to believe in it anyway. A truly faithful person (I do not consider myself one) is aware that he or she may be wrong, whereas a deluded person will not see this possibility.

I just want to say that I think you put that very well.