Added: 2 years ago
From: JamesRandiFoundation
Views: 15,656
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (178)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I could listen to this man all day.

  • Love you Randi and Penn!

  • It's very innoying that randi is convinced there are no paranormal or psychic occurances, because, as a result, he assumes that people are either lying, mentally ill or are mistaking a perfectly normal occurance as something supernatural. To add fuel to his opinion, there ARE people who are fakers and others who are mistaken or having delusions.

    Some people do have an extra awareness. They have a hunch, or sense danger.

    It is NOT a psychic power, it is abstract and unavailable on demand.

  • heartybbq. You say randi is one of the most cheerful chaps you could meet, well, what a strange discription that is. He is a miserable looking person and could be put in any spooky film as an undertaker or forensic pathologist.

    He'd fail an audition as Father Christmas, despite his beard, he is so grim.

    He might get a part as Father Christmas's Dad though, by the way,

    If he were his father,, he'd probably want to expose his famous son as a fake .

  • @Z1Z12 It is amusing that you would say such a thing about Randi. Obviously you have not met the man in person. One person's story about Randi is considered anecdotal. Many stories from different people are considered a data set. The data is in, Randi is a great guy.

  • Listen to his opening words, he's totally convinced it is all fake like his own profession. He is the faker who PRETENDS to do magic. He never experienced the real thing, He just ran along side it, finding tricks and ways to try and look as if he is doing the impossible. He can never touch on the real thing, he has no esp.

    Any esp he has stands for EXCEPTIONALLY SUSPICIOUS PERSON.

  • I once built a simple radio, putting parts together, hoping it would work. It was rough, but sometimes I picked up a signal, sometimes I couldn't., which was very frustrating. However, the signal WAS being transmitted, it was invisible, but it WAS there, but my simple radio wasn't very sensitive.

    Psychic people pick up things. They are more 'tuned in' If you have no esp and you sense nothing, It means YOU personally have no reception, so you assume theres nothing there. Simple as that !

  • @Z1Z12 What do you base these statement on? You've no evidence that to support the what you are saying. I am not Randi, nor do I speak for him, however in my experience I've only ever heard Randi say that ESP doesn't exist, I've only ever hear him say that he believes that there is no evidence to support the claims he has heard of, or that he has caught people using methods other than the super natural.

  • heartybbq. It may sound as if I am trying to be superior but I'm not, It's just that If

    I know something which you are unaware of, or that you can never perceive, it automatically puts me ahead of you. Skeptics argue about things which they haven't experienced which is not really very wise is it ? It is just their opinion, while psychic people are subject to insults and ridicule for relating what they have experienced. Sadly, some ARE fakes while others ARE insane.

    It cannot resolve.

  • @Z1Z12 What is interesting is that you feel the need to ignore issues like people surmise things all the time without experience. You don't have to jump in front of a car to know that you will get hit. You know this because there are certain constants in the universe. What is interesting is that, for all of your assailing the character of Randi and other Skeptics you fail to recognize that the person with the most "tainted" mind is probably you.

  • What a miserable, narrow minded old man randi is, going through life disbelieving and distrusting people, Thinking everyone he doubts is either lying, mistaken or having delusions. What a horrible, pesimistic, cold, unfriendly, suspicious negative world he lives in, having been a real faker of magic himself, he assums others are fakers like he is.

    The answer is simple - He has no extra sensory perception. The blind see no rainbows. The deaf hear no music. randi cannot perceive the paranormal

  • @Z1Z12

    "going through life disbelieving and distrusting people"

    He doesn't believe quackery and doesn't trust fraudsters. What's so bad about that?

    "What a horrible, pesimistic, cold, unfriendly world"

    Which is why we must work hard to make this world as nice as possible for us. Not through delusion and false hope, but through ACTUAL, REAL things.

  • @Z1Z12

    "The blind see no rainbows. The deaf hear no music."

    With science, that now may be possible.

    "randi cannot perceive the paranormal"

    Nor can science it seems...It's almost as if...It's BULLSHIT!

    "the paranormal"

    If there is no scientific evidence, I don't have to accept your ridiculous claims, evidence first.

  • @Z1Z12 have you used your eyes? Randi is one of the most cheerful chaps that you could meet. If a belief in paranormal satisfies and fulfills you then power to you, certainly Randi has said that he finds satisfaction and fulfillment without a belief in the paranormal.

  • I have been checking out any and all of James Randi content videos and I must say that this is the FIRST time he actually cussed. Maybe it's because he is sitting next to the vulgar Penn himself or maybe its because he just couldn't maintain his decency but rather actually spoke his heart...but to actually take the Lord's name in vain? DarN: There went A LOT of my respect for the guy.

    That was LOW CLASS Randy, very low class.

  • I love James Randi!

  • So in the end, randi tells a little white lie and because of the nature of that lie its ok. So when a medium does the same thing is it ok too. Or does Randi really believe in God and heaven and an afterlife, and because he's painted himself as a non beleiver to further his status as a skeptic is lying about being a believer. I don't know, but if you hold him to the same standards as he holds others, then you have to think this is not good at all.

  • @PatDalton2010, James Randi didn't use his lie to extort thousands of dollars from the grieving and vulnerable, that was pretty much his point.

  • @PatDalton2010 the difference is that Randi had an obligation to his father. A medium has no obligation and instead offers white lies for money which is surely immoral. Suppose there was a charitable medium that aimed to give people piece of mind for free. Wouldn't such action be less moral than not interfering? You could argue that Randi should have told his grandfather the truth, however, it is absurd to say that what a medium does is ok.

  • He looks like the 7th father of the house or a tiny santa clause sitting next to his huge elf enforcer or strong-arm. Seriously, imagine being taken by the elf mafia and brought before this spectacle.

  • THERE IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN THE PARANORMAL AND MAGIC TRICKS BECAUSE THE PARANORMAL IS NOT TRICKERY. randi IS TOTALLY CONVINCED THAT THE PARANORMAL NON 'SENSE' BECAUSE HE CAN'T SENSE IT, NO ESP, (LIKE THE BLIND SEE NO RAINBOWS AND THE DEAF HEAR NO MUSIC), IT IS BEYOND HIS SENSITIVITY. A RADIO MAY NOT PICK UP A SIGNAL, BUT IT IS STILL BEING TRANSMITTED, IT'S INVISIBLE AND IT IS THERE. PSYCHIC PHENOMENA IS RANDOM AND UNAVAILABLE ON DEMAND. THE FAKERS SPOIL IT FOR THE GENUINE PSYCHICS.

  • @Z1Z12

    If it can't be reproduced and can't be shown to exist through external tests, how can it be distinguished from delusion or deception? The examples of physical phenomena you give can be independently verified, their causes known. Neither of those can be said about paranormal phenomena.

    If it exists, please demonstrate it. If you have a way of distinguishing "real" and "genuine" psychics, present it, though I imagine a comprehensive test of this sort would find very few real psychics.

  • THERE IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN MAGIC TRICKS AND THE PARANORMAL BECAUSE THE PARANORMAL IS NOT TRICKERY. A RADIO MAY LOSE RECEPTION, BUT THE SIGNAL IS BEING TRANSMITTED, IT IS INVISIBLE BUT IT IS THERE.

    randi IS NOT A RECEIVER, HAS NO ESP, TO HIM IT'S ALL NON 'SENSE' HE

    CAN'T SENSE IT, LIKE THE BLIND SEE NO RAINBOWS AND THE DEAF HEAR NO MUSIC. TO THEM, IT IS NON EXISTANT. IT IS AN ABSTRACT, RANDOM PHENOMENON AND CANNOT BE PRODUCED ON DEMAND.NOTICE HOW HE CALLS IT DECEPTION.TOTALLY NARROW MINDED.

  • Same with me Rhandi.. same with me.

  • I hope he lives at least as long as his grandpa.

    I love how there are 666 ratings.

  • ...oops...typo...

    "...which lends a person an understanding of the meaning..."

  • you know, there are a few branches which lends a person an understand of the meaning and of the generosity of hypocrisy that is never shared within the scope of one's family, friendships and community. Hypocrisy can be both beneficial, neutral and inappropriate. I do not wish to purport that intent is what is the driving force that bends these branches, yet it seems reasonable to note it as being this until more info comes forward.

  • RIP Penn Jillette

  • RIP?, he is still alive. What do you mean by RIP?

  • i mean he can rip a woman into halves

  • Well, now hold on there, Mr. Randi. Sure, all the various religions are fantastical tales crafted for the comfort of mankind... but to so surely assert there is no afterlife. Lets first define afterlife. cosciousness and memory after death. The more we learn, the more bizarre the universe appear to be. could there possibly be some room for a kind of collective cosmic self awareness between all those strings, bosons, fermions, quarks, leptons? Theres lots we DONT know...

  • Sounds stupid, consciousness exists in our minds, all evidence says so. Just because we don't know something doesn't mean we should go off on a binge fantasizing a way that we can live on after death. There is no evidence (that I've heard of) for "collective cosmic self awareness." Also, imagination is important for scientific advances, but I think an effort should be made to correlate your ideas with facts.

  • I cant believe you peole neged me 4 times! Youre just as raving-mad in your own certainty of what doesnt exist, as fundamentalists are of what exists. Simply because there is no science to back up a theory, does not prove the theory to be false. That you give no quarter to any kind of continuation beyond death, shows your own flaws of logic. We already have learned that truth is stranger than fiction, and how amazing the universe really is. Leave a little room for what if, for goodness sake

  • Your completely right, just because science doesn't back up a theory do not mean its false. I don't know if you know this (doubt it), but you can't prove a negative (That something doesn't exist/ isn't real). The one who makes the claims bares the burden of providing evidence. And the difference between science and fundamentalism is that sciences adjusts its views based on new evidence. Fundamentalists reject evidence that does not agree with their views.

  • Of course I know that (cant prove a negative). Believe it or not, Im trained in science. Physics, chemistry, statistics, scientific method. Ive got a handle on the process of scientific investigation. Its the "I wonder if..." that is so basic to scientific investigation. Simply because I do not know yet, does not mean I dismiss out of hand. This is the flaw of hardcore skeptics. Arrogance. Many great scientific discoveries were once thought laughable, by the scientific community.

  • Btw, just because your trained in science does not mean that your suddenly credible, there are many pseudo-scientists out there that have taken formal science classes and still promote homeopathy.

    Also, I never said anything was definitively "no." I just said that there is not supporting evidence, that I know of, therefore I do not find any of your "what ifs" valid.

  • If I told you that tomorrow, a giant slab of frozen meat would fall from the sky and knock you unconscious would you believe me? Probably not..... but... "what if?"

    Evidence = Credibility = Believability (good)

    Imagination = new ideas = new research (good)

    New research = new evidence [or lack of]

    and repeat

    New idea with no evidence /=/ (doesn't not equal) credibility or believability

    The universe is amazing, but we don't need to believe our fantasies, no matter how much we want to.

  • I meant to say *(Does not equal)*

    Also, I do not believe in consciousness after death or life after death simply because we have no evidence for it after thousands of years of speculation and failed attempts to prove it.

  • Did I suggest I believe in the "fantasy" of afterlife? My line of thought was, it could be.... Because it still hasnt been PROVEN False. As for slab of meat, if you told me it would happen tomorrow, I would say - well, how do you know that? Then Id follow your chain of logic, and make my decision (which is likely to be no). But if you told me you were going to tie me up and drop a big frozen turkey on me from your third floor balcony, then I might have to take you more seriously. lol

  • Heres another thought. I think skeptics have two speeds. Yes, No. I have three speeds. Yes, I Dunno, and No. Its in that Dont know category I put consciousness after death. Im comfortable with dont know, It doesnt make me uncomfortable. I have safely placed the existence of the Devil and hell, in the NO column. and The tooth fairy is under that no heading too.

  • There is a difference between saying I don't know if there is a consciousness after we die and saying "there could be consciousness after death."

    Could there be? Sure! Is it likely? Based on the current evidence, no.

    Could there be fairies that take us away to a magical lollipop field filled with unicorns after we die? Sure! Is it likely? Based on the current evidence, no.

    Its not about not knowing, its about drawing conclusions from what we already know and forming new hypotheses.

  • I thought you just said you knew you couldn't prove a negative... if you know that it could not be proven wrong that consciousness exists after death then why did you just say "it could be.... Because it still hasnt been PROVEN False?"

    It seems to me like your bullshitting this whole argument.

  • I'd have no problem lying in that kind of situation. What would anyone really gain from telling the truth?

  • That last part was pretty surprising. I don't know if I could lie to my grandpa like that. I'm not sure what I would do in that situation.

    I explained in detail to my cousin why I didn't think there was an afterlife a couple weeks or so before he died, but that's a bit different, because he didn't see it coming.

  • I KNOW James Randi ts the real Santa Claus ¡¡

    I DO REALY KNOW ...¡JUST SEE HIS BODY ¡¡

    He is amazing , wonderfull , great ¡ups no nat great i mean small.

    ¿DON´T YOU ?

  • Really? 'I'll lie when it benefits my tribe. It's my emotions at bay and i will cater to them. Everyone else whom I've represented will be addressed differently and disinGenuously but as for myself: I will lie."

    It must be that you do not appreciate respect.

    An unstoppable, therefore powerful position, is the hour of dying. To lie to an animal before it dies lays upon you the responsibility that is: A Lie.

    Making you less than.

  • 2:45

    He says library and bookstore like a fatman.

    I don't know I thought it was pretty cute.

  • fantastic

  • If i Had 3 wishes it would be:

    1. to have been there in person to see this

    2. Teller to marry me

    3. to make everyone stop arguing on youtube about religion, not grasping what is really being said and just enjoy the show!

  • I'm a fan of Randi, but I disagree with him on white lies. I'd rather tell someone the truth instead of giving them false hope.

    "For me, it is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan

  • He not talking about ordinary people in an ordinary situation here, he is talking about people who are old frightened and probably in a lot of pain and dying.

  • But it was his dying grandfather, there was no damage in telling him what he neded to hear. It's not like he said it out in the open.

  • I know there's no harm in telling a dying person they'll go to heaven. That's not the point I'm arguing against. What I mean is that it's intellectually dishonest. Insincerity is not in my nature.

  • While in principle I don't disagree with what you're saying, there are absolutely situations where telling somebody the harsh truth does nothing but hurt them emotionally.

    And even if we weren't simply thinking about the temporary happiness of, for example, a person at death's door, the well documented efficacy of the placebo effect show us the power of hope.

  • This only stands true if you value emotions higher than truth. I don't. Hurt me plenty, I wish to know.

  • Would you rather know the truth even if the lie that you might get better helps you to do that?

  • Lies only help the ones unwilling to or incapable of accepting the truth. Life might change my oppinion on this later on, but so far that's the way my experience is.

  • Marry me, James Randi.

  • lol did he say "paranormal crap" is a technical term?

  • I could not prove it was a lie or not a lie with my own grandmother when I said, "I hope to meet you there." I simply needed hope more than, no hope.

  • So, where did you obtain your data about longevity, health, & happiness associated with 'religious' people? From Billy Graham's Ministry? Your 'facts' are not accurate. You can wiki it to check if you want. Randi likely believes it is 'bad' to believe in god because he knows, as do most enlightened people, that there is no god or any other supernatural entities, and the belief in them shuts down the believers' minds to the natural universe and to the advancement of science.

  • Proof for any of this? Proof that religion was not used to strengthen the slave trade?

    The abolishionist movement was by no means a "faith based" movement. You are simply cherry picking whatever you want from history and assuming that it naturally flows from your religion.

  • The arguments in favor of slavery were purely economic. There was no reason for freeing the slaves other than a "belief" that all men are endowed by their creator certain inalienable rights. I also never said belief in a religion causes better health, I simply said there is a connection between better health and religious belief.

    The idea that human life has inherent value separate from what the "usefulness" of that individual is, is a Christian ideal.

  • No, we freed slaves because its sick to keep another human in bondage *despite* what the bible says. Remember in the court cases the bible was used as evidence in favour of slaves. Until Darwin showed that we are all the same species there was no real push to free mankind. As for a Christian ideal, many Christians both now and in the passed do not subscribe to that ideal. The Greeks penned the golden rule as did the Chinese many years before the Christians broke away from the Jewish laws.

  • The Greeks killed infants who were not deemed strong enough. Greek intellectuals (Plato, Aristotle) of the time did not object to the practice because they did not believe a human life had intrinsic value. I did not know Darwin was an abolitionist.

    During ancient Greek and Roman times the concept of "human rights" did not exist. Any rights you had were granted to you by the government you lived under. Human rights that are granted by a Creator not A government is a Christian idea.

  • They also invented the democracy we all now enjoy. I didn't say they were all good though. The same could be said of the churches stance over the years towards both women and children. Human rights are a government idea, which is why you read the constitution to find out your rights, not the bible. Not to mention the eastern religions earlier stance on human and animal life sacredness. The bible speaks of chosen races and the destruction (using extreme cruelty) of others.

  • Don't mistake Civil Rights with Human Rights. Civil Rights - granted by the government. Human Rights - all humans posses regardless of where they happen to live. The Bible, especially the Old Testament,does speak of chosen races, although I was specifically referring to Christian ideology, not Jewish. I think it was well known that Blacks and Whites were the same species since the beginning of recorded history.

  • "I think it was well known that Blacks and Whites were the same species since the beginning of recorded history."

    Simply untrue. European's almost unilaterally believed that African's and other people's were inferior species well into the 1800s, hardly the beginning of recorded history. Much "science" of the day was spent making up research to show that European's were smarter and stronger and, most importantly, separated from other hominids.

  • Your Abolition timeline is way off. Darwin did not discover that Blacks were the same species. His "Origin of Species" was published in 1858 and had no impact on the scientific community until many years later. The Abolitionist movement in America was going strong since the 1700s. The Emancipation Proclamation was passed in 1862 and had nothing to do with Darwin's theories. Some segregationists have (erroneously) cited Darwin's theories to suggest that Blacks were closely related to Apes.

  • Can you tell me in what year of the 1900's Christian America adopted the view that blacks were the same species?

  • Your example of eastern philosophy made my case. According to Christian philosophy a Human life has value in and of itself, whereas an animal's value is only based on what that animal can do IE(as a pet, as livestock, assisting humans, as game, etc.)

  • Not really. In Christian philosophy a human life only has value because a certain god gave us that value. Its a bit like free will. How can it be free if it has to be given by a diety? Eastern philosophy (some) gives animals an almost equal status to us and values them as our contemporaries.Christians believe themselves to be above the animal kingdom not part of it.I think the thought that we have dominion over the planet has lead to the USA being the most polluting western nation out there.

  • @Munro1Man Additionally, how can we have free will if God has a "plan?" And if we are not acting of our own free will, and rather are acting in accordance to God's plans, then aren't we all doing God's bidding? Why should there be punishment for bad behavior such as heaven and hell?

  • Duke, I asked for proof, and all you can do is ASSERT that your views are correct. What evidence do you actually have for human equality coming only from a creator? Selective views of history and a misrepresentation of Darwin's influence on the abolitionist movement simply display your confirmation bias.

    You seem to start with the presupposition that your bible (and god) just HAS to be the source of this. Again, empty assertions of opinion are not evidence.

  • Duke, are you suggesting that for nearly a century before we freed the slaves we had those words in the Declaration of Independence, but didn't pay attention until one day we thought "wait a minute... what about black people?"

    Come on. That is ridiculous. As the north industrialized, it became less useful to have slaves instead of consumers in an economy. We freed the slaves because the US was going to lose a lot of land and power and it's largest trading partner.

  • That's before we even go into the mark of Cain !

  • What is you talkin abouts?

  • The benefits of attending group gatherings for a common purpose have absolutely nothing to do with a god. You have extrapolated the results to be an effect of some insane belief in non-existent beings, but there's no cause and effect relationship there. Also, believing in things for which there is no evidence destroys the healthy skepticism vital to our continued scientific advancement, and is plainly childish. So the abolishionist movement was 'faith based?' I think you need to re-read.

  • It's probably because they don't live longer, happier, and healthier lives... That's a gross misrepresentation of the average religious populous.

  • I agree with Randi about that white lie, because I am an unconditionally caring person who would want comfort for the person before they die.

  • James Randi is like a God to me, or he would be if i wasn't an atheist. I so enjoy these videos and would like to thank those involved with their posting.

  • See Penn striking the Last Supper pose :D

  • Damn, there's a t-shirt I want!

    The Atheist last supper.

  • What "book test" trick is he talking about?

  • The subject picks a book. The magician tells them to open to a certain type of page, or in some cases, any page. The magician then asks them to read the 3rd word from the top, or something of the sort. The magician will then correctly guess the word they picked out.

    I can't tell you the secret, because it ruins it completely, but I have to say, there's a lot of deception, trickery, and lying. =P

  • I wouldn't lie to a dying person, but I wouldn't tell the whole truth. I'd simply say something like "I don't know, your guess is as good as mine."

  • Randi is my hero.

  • Will you marry me, James?

  • I have to disagree with Randi here. The church preys on old people who are aware of their own mortality and they waste their time and money with churches and getting religious.

  • The difference here is his grandpa was on his death bed, and it was his personal relative. Not someone else.

  • I see your point, but ultimately, mortality is why religion is able to exist. They prey on the fear of death and offer promises they never actually have to deliver on and inevitably want control and money. Telling someone on their deathbed that they might go to heaven, is ultimately a kindly act though. But if were not bed ridden, he would have ended up in church wasting his money and what little time he had left.

  • He was nearing his final days. The man isn't going to rush to the nearest church, and donate a bunch of money. Although, I'm sure he already believed in this and donated a bunch throughout his life.

    Randi's fine line is between comforting white lies, deception, trickery... and downright lying and scamming.

    Believing in ghosts and psychics? Monsters? Sure, it's fun stuff. But to commit fraud and offer "exorcisms" and scan people's houses for ghosts for a fee, that's quite different.

  • I have tremendous respect for Randi, JREF, and their inportant works, but I would hope if someone dying asked me if here is a heaven, I would be honest and say "I'm sorry, I really don't know if there is a heaven, personally I doubt it, but try to see this as an adventure, and you're just about to find out." If we compromise critical thinking for the sake of comforting hopes we can only give some semblence of credence to the woo-merchants. I'm a bit of a hard-ass.

  • I LOVE how Mr. Randi is dropping more of the niceties as he ages (like a fine wine mind you).

  • Rock on James Randi!

  • Hey it's penn! Awesome!

  • Interesting and thoughtful video. I love Randi's take on lying

  • The Alsmart! It resides within the Randi. Autothoughts percieve! We must find it before the Deceptibrains postulate a solution to discover it!

  • i might not have lied. i guess i'd have to be in the situation to know.

  • I love James Randi!

  • WOO :D Hey Randi! Tell penn to stop it with the copyright bullshit, I can't watch his vids in sweden :<

  • Seconded from Germany. I have to use anonymous proxies and sites like downloader9 and stuff in order to watch a few pennsays videos.

  • I wouldn't.

  • I wonder what the trick in the bookstore or library is.

  • Randi looks like a little gnome compared to Penn :D

  • Haha yeah. The most awesome gnome in the universe.

  • I doubt I would lie even under those conditions, even though I'm sure it'd make me feel like shit.

  • Great stuff! :o) Thanks for this.

    I'd really love to see more JRF videos covering the meat and potatoes of what critical thinking is all about, as done so well here.

  • I recall a colleague comforting clients immediately after euthanasia of a beloved pet with the old veterinary saw that they were "chasing butterflies." It's a soothing image in the face of crushing grief, but not anything anyone would consider an outright lie.

  • Personally, I have found that such nonsense is more likely to compound my grief than to soothe it.

  • I never liked the flimsy images myself. It seemed to help some. Over the years of standing with so many during their loss, I've discovered that comfort is such a delicate thing, more silence and potential to cushion the painful spaces than specific medicine for a treatable ill.

  • I surely hope no one would ever lie to me about their beliefs. If I were asking, it's because I want honesty. If I were sick in the hospital, I already know that if I hear one bit of claptrap about praying for me, I'll have the perpetrator booted out. I've heard enough about the deleterious effects of praying to know I don't want it around me. Similarly, I would not want phony comfort about a loved one being "in a better place." I consider that a minimizing of grief and a cruel guilt trip.

  • Why does it have to be so discomforting to face the end? Why can't you simply take comfort in the life you have lived, knowing that you will live on in the memories of those you touched? Is this really so bad? Simply express your gratitude at having lived such a long life and let your end be a reminder to those left behind to cherish their lives even more. Is this really so much worse than hoping for some nebulous eternal afterlife?

  • Who are you to say what someone will or will not be thinking on their deathbed ringworm?

    And what does regret have to do with anything? Regretting the mistakes you make is perhaps the only way to actually learn from them, and can you not live your life trying your best to better yourself? People can (and will) regret decisions and mistakes made in life, but that doesn't mean they can't die happily appreciating the good decisions they've made.

    Please don't make such shallow assertions.

  • Some people just can't.. .some people want more, which i guess is kind of selfish... i mean we have a very very very minute chance of even having a glimpse of life through consciousness and people still want more after that?... I guess once you have something as amazing as life you don't want to let go of it. It's hard for some people to get their head round not existing. Part of the beauty of life is that we might die at any moment, this makes everything so much more beautiful to us.

  • I want more and I'd love to believe that it's possible. However, knowing that the likelihood that there is more is close enough to zero that it might as well be zero, I'm content to accept the reality of it. As has been said before (Mark Twain, perhaps?), non-existence didn't trouble me at all before my birth and I don't expect it to worry me after my death.

  • My father had a fatal diagnosis and I had about five years notice of his dying. What eventually got me to a place of acceptance was this: everyone dies -- no exceptions, no escape. You, your friends, your loved ones, the strangers you pass on the street -- all dying. I contemplated that, dwelt on it, and eventually accepted it.

    The next step is simply to get on with life and LIVE. This is all you get and the more you're aware of that, the more you will value what you have.

  • This wasn't about our own acceptance. The truth is useless without mercy. Not all of use are content to live like automatons. You're taking a very self-centered stance on this. Socrates would not be impressed.

    Huh. Look at that. I just engaged in a dumbass youtube comment slap-fight. No wonder Randi stopped addressing us personally.

  • Yes, I am taking a very self-centred approach. I don't see a problem with that. Where you're going off the rails is when you automatically assume that that means living like an automaton and without mercy.

  • I think one of the best parts of life is that at some point there wont be anymore. Like i said we could die at any moment which makes everything so beautiful to us, and makes our emotions so intense i love it. Facing the reality of it was the most wonderfull thing i have ever done.

    and yeah that's Mark Twain, a very good man.

  • James and penn?!?!?!

    awesome!!!

  • I'm always amazed, as soon as learn something new, I discover how much more is hidden from me.

  • Randi is always compelling when he speaks. I want to be just like him.

  • With all due respect to Randi -- and I do respect him -- I disagree with the last part. I would evade the question, try to change the subject, etc., but, if I was asked directly, I would not lie about what my views are regarding God, the afterlife, and so on.

    What would be lost? My self-respect.

  • The first part, however, seems very wise. When evaluating those who claim paranormal powers, a scientist would be foolish not to contract the services of an experienced conjuror.

  • I'm glad your self respect means more to you than trying to comfort your dying grandfather.

  • False dichotomy. Do you have such poverty of imagination that you cannot comfort an old man without compromising the truth?

  • I would lose more self-respect if I couldn't console my dying grandfather. The comfort of my family comes before the comfort of myself.

  • agreed.

  • I don't consider self-sacrifice to be virtuous.

  • Self-sacrifice is a bit of a dramatic term to use when all you are doing is making a white lie.

  • That depends on one's values, of course. Among other things, it depends on how much you value your integrity.

    It also occurs to me that the assumption that one needs to lie to the old fellow suggests a lack of respect for him. Can you really not offer comfort and emotional support without treating him like a little child?

  • LOL! Judging by the thumbs down, to deny that self-sacrifice is virtuous is nearly as blasphemous to the skeptics as it is to the religionists. I find that rather amusing.

  • Is it not virtuous?

    Calling it blasphemous is a hyperbole. If you're not willing to be -fair- in discourse, you shouldn't engage in it at all.

  • It's a bit rich for you to accuse me of being unfair in discourse when you leap to the assumptions that apparently lead you to believe that I must be a merciless automaton incapable of giving consolation.

  • Am I hypocritical? Probably. The question to be asked is: Am I wrong?

  • You are certainly wrong if you believe that I'm an merciless automaton incapable of giving consolation.

    You are certainly wrong if you think that recognizing self-sacrifice as abhorrent means that one cannot be good to one's fellow beings.

    I believe you are wrong if you think that one cannot give comfort to the dying without lying to them.

  • I don't believe those things. More straw men. I think I'm about done here.

  • Funny. Because of your leaping to conclusions, you were done before you started.

  • Do you have that little self respect that you need to save every little bit of it?

  • If you value something very highly, you don't want to throw any of it away. Aside from that, getting back to the context of this topic, if you're smart and imaginative, you can give comfort to the dying without compromising your personal integrity.

  • Metinks that also depends on the person you want to console.

  • Why would you evade the question? How do you know what the questioner wants to hear? Maybe a person wants to hear one person brave enough to speak the truth before they die. I'm not too hung up on self-respect. I can respect myself, no matter what decision I make, since I know I'll try my best to make a compassionate decision with the known facts. Why not ask the person for more information--why do you want to know? Is this important to you? Just some possibilities.

  • The thumbnail made it look like a last supper parody especially since penn looks like jesus

  • woop woop Randi!

  • that  was a great speech with touching thoughts.

  • Go go Randy!

  • half smart means that you aren't smart enough to grasp how very little you know.

  • i seriously hope this guy lives to be 300. he looks like has the potential to. james randi, phil plait, and penn jillette all in the same room! so cool

  • subject picks book, picks random word on random page in book, magician knows word.

  • ok but how is it done?

  • What is the book trick Randi is talking about?

  • Go Randi Go!

  • well said Randi!!

  • James Randi is made of pure WIN

  • I'd love to see more of this

  • lol thats the first time ive heard him curse...hes a cool old man:)

  • careful looks like Penn wants to eat you Randi!

  • I love hearing Randi lay into these intellectuals who "can't" be fooled!

    I also didn't know about his stance on "white" lies. I'm glad to know that it mirrors my own stance on the subject.

  • :D

    I'd never actually heard Randi speak before. Gotta say, he's good at it. Makes me feel good to be a JREFer.

  • There's tons of videos on YouTube uploaded by other users, and the JREF itself. He's a really kind, noble fellow. Some of his lectures are the best.

  • Whats new about it?

  • Are those the same people that came up with cat herding?

  • the Great James Randi for you!

  • We love you James !

  • Interesting...

  • That was great. It's always nice to hear Randi talk. I've never heard him curse much before, so that was a treat for me as well.

  • Awesomeness