@surgeyX I just watched it. Remember to clear your cache every once in a while. A loaded cache screws with youtube sometimes... not that anything needs to... Youtube tends to screw up all on its own more often than not.
Masterhaico Randy doesn't have to meet Cayce to attack his reputation does he? If Sylvia Browne can diagnosis illness in people at a distance and amaze doctors with her diagnosis which they themselves were unable to perform on some patients, I'd say Cayce was more than Sylvia Browne could ever be. Read up on Cayce, check the documentation at VA Beach and you might feel differently. It changed the minds of many a skeptic.
masterhaico ...and how would Randy feel to have cost the foundation a million dollars? I think he would feel he failed them and created them a loss. That's a big responsibility to carry and one would not want to give away that money easily. Why doesn't Randy attack Edgar Cayce if he feels there is no such thing as psychics? Cayce was a psychic who was the most documented off all time and many like Randy have tried to prove him a fake, but all disbelievers who met him changed their minds.
@Robin18us Cayce's been dead for 65 years, I don't think Randi could meet him if he wanted to. Besides, Cayce's predictions were as reliable as Sylvia Browne's.
He's not motivated by an honest search for truth, he's an angry sad little man who feels the need to belittle people for holding views that he believes are wrong.
No, didn't say that was wrong, I said that Randi was an ideologue, which he is. I'll criticize his work for being inherently pointless, but he's free to do it.
Double sigh. Since you have forgotten your own words let me repeat them:
"Randi is a materialist fundamentalist ideologue. He's not motivated by an honest search for truth, he's an angry sad little man who feels the need to belittle people for holding views that he believes are wrong."
You claimed the above statement. Now prove each claim. The burden of proof is on you. I made no claims and thus have nothing to prove. I did not fail any philosophy classes I took.
Listen, bud, I'm not going to demean myself by bowing to your standards. You are welcome to disagree with me if you must, but don't ask me to play your bullshit games. As I made clear, I have more dignity than to gratify your compulsions.
These are not MY standards. These are the standards of any debate, discussion, or argument. Surely you must have learned at your community college how to argue a thesis. By refusing to back up your claims about Randi, you have conceded your statement was merely slanderous. A man with dignity would show proof instead of hiding behind the anonymity of the internet.
I hope that in your real life, such as it is, you don't demean yourself by slandering others. That would be undignified.
Oh please, how ridiculous. You are fast proving yourself an ideologue as well.
When you are dubious of someone's statement, the polite thing to do is not point your finger in their face demanding "proof" of their "claims" it's to engage in civil discussion in order to understand their perspective.
I'll stop critiquing randi, when he stops slandering people who disagree with his views. I'll gladly engage with you when you show me a modicum of respect.
I'm sorry for adopting informal language, and questioning your credentials. If anything I'd probably respect you more if you had flunked out of philosophy.
It's not that I'm unable to furnish proof, it's that it's useless to do so, and I resent being forced into your methodology. I mean, what standard of proof can you produce? If you listen to him speak, it's self-evident, he speaks negatively about people who don't believe like he does, can you refute that?
It's a shame you have no respect for me. I'm very disappointed. I ought to rethink my life in order to meet your high standards. I endeavor to one day meet your approval.
This isn't MY methodology. It's reason. You make a claim about someone or something and you provide evidence. For example: I claim that my car is blue. I show you a picture of my car. I claim you are a slanderous cretin. I quote you above repeatedly insulting others and dodging questions. QED.
I love you, but you haven't given me anything to respect. If anything when you demand proof of claims, I pity you, because that attitude is so obviously deranged.
This is your methodology, it's not some universal imperative. It's a system of thought based on your subjective perspective. Give me a reason I should abide by your standards of proof. Prove to me that I am required to operate according to your belief system.
By your standards one can make any claim he wants and needs no evidence or proof to back it up. Opinion becomes fact. If that were so, how would the courts function? I can declare you guilty of a crime and I need not back that claim. You are guilty by mere accusation.
What of the scientific method? I could claim that the sun is made of cheese. By your methodology I need not provide evidence to support that claim. If you request any I state that you are an "ideologue."
I agree that Randi speaks negatively of charlatans, swindlers, and con men who for centuries have robbed people by claiming paranormal abilities. I agree he is very negative.
So what? He sees behavior he finds abhorrent and seeks to end it, or at least raise awareness from the public. Is that kind of activism wrong?
He gives his opponents a forum (JREF prize) to prove him wrong. Thus far no one has.
He has also lauded others in writing and speech in the most positive ways.
@Jcolinsol It has nothing to do with belief. He speaks negatively about those that are actively scamming other good-hearted people. The charlatans and swindlers trick people into handing over their hard-earned money over demonstrably falsifiable claims.
You are simplifying Randi's position. He's not only criticizing "charlatans", he is ridiculing anyone who doesn't agree with his beliefs. And they are beliefs, no one has access to "absolute reality" we operate on systems of ideas, or "ideologies".
Demonstrably false according to his limited methodology based on his limited belief system. If you think that we, in defiance of all historical indication, somehow possess knowledge of absolute reality, then you are deluded.
@Jcolinsol The only things that deal with absolutes are Mathematics and religion. Is it a belief that the sun is hot? Is it a belief that computers are more advanced now than they were two decades ago? Is it a belief that cars don't fly? Like I said, this has nothing to do with his beliefs, and everything to do with defending the public from people that make knowingly false claims. This is about knowledge... not beliefs.
Yes, yes, and yes. Remember: Whatever you say it is, it isn't. You are conflating manmade systems of thought with an absolute reality. You cannot escape the subjectivity of human experience.
I think that you are hero-worshipping randi, you should confront his dark side, admit that he's a fallible human who is not always right. Like I say, I don't see him pursuing truth, I see him pursuing notoriety, he has refused to test the claimants who aren't famous charlatans.
@Jcolinsol How in the world could I be conflating "manmade systems of though" with an absolute reality? The first thing I mentioned in my last post is the exclusiveness of absolutes. Let me elaborate: absolutes have nothing... NOTHING to do with science. Our scientific knowledge is subject to change in almost all regards, but it's through the scientific method that those changes come. Not from beliefs. Not from conjecture. Not from claims that are backed up with ZILCH evidence.
If you are not treating science is an absolute, then why are you justifying belief in it? Why are you appealing to factualism, and evidence, as if they somehow mean more than other systems of thought?
@Jcolinsol I'm not justifying a belief in science, I'm justifying the acceptance of it and its methods, because they produce results. Beliefs are irrelevant in that regard. Facts don't cease to be facts based on someone's belief or disbelief. What other system of thought carries the rigor and productivity of scientific methods?
Facts don't exist without someone to create them, so yes, they do rely on belief, and more significantly they rely on a subjective human perspective. Whatever semantic games you want to play with terms like "believe" and "accept" the intention is the same: we should only think like you.
As for science getting results, I can't deny that, though I'm not convinced that proves that the scientific narrative is true. Besides, magic gets results too. I'll take everything I can use.
@Jcolinsol "Facts don't exist without someone to create them" <---- Do you not understand, just how obtuse that statement is? There is no semantic game at play, because believing in something and accepting something are entirely different things. Try a dictionary. Beliefs have no bearing whatsoever on whether or not something is factual. It's completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter if you believe the Earth is flat, because the fact remains that it is a spherical ovoid.
Let me put it this way, the fact that the planet is a spherical ovioid, is not the spherical ovoid. Whatever you say it is, it isn't. You can't experience the absolute reality of the spherical ovoid, you have simply, "accepted" the concept. You have arrived at that conclusion via a system of ideas, an ideology. You are entranced by the idea, but the idea is not the thing, the perception of the thing isn't even the thing, and that's all you've got to go on. Facts are fiction.
You can be dubious all you want, but you are just ignoring what is apparent. You are denying the nature of your experience, in favor of a fantasy. Enjoy Lala land.
@Jcolinsol And as for hero-worshipping, Randi. In a way I do. I wish there were thousands more people like him, actively pursuing the exposure of so-called channelers, psychics, mediums, anon. Because those charlatans not only confuse the public with their non-science, and sometimes pseudo-science, but they also use and abuse the trust and finances of good-willed people.
Heh, randi's version of science is pseudoscience, arguably. This is silly, I'm done, you need to drop all the buzz words and silly dogma and get real man.
Listen: I could call you "an angry sad little man who feels the need to belittle people for holding views that he believes are wrong." Unless I can give examples I would merely be slandering you. What's more, it's an ad hominem attack that doesn't debate the point at hand. It merely attacks the messenger.
One of the reasons that I have been evasive, is that I'm not making a claim, I am making an observation. Either you share that observation or you don't. Watch any number of clips of Randi, he usually speaks derisively of those he's skeptical of, without any justification aside from demanding they abide his methodology. That's why I call him an ideologue.
It's not an ad hominem, I'm attacking his character, not the case in this video.
Randi has a good grasp of the methods and thought processes of the frauds, so it's no real surprise that he knew what to expect. Lying is what they do for a living, so it's only reasonable to assume they will continue to do the same.
Hi Penn fans. Penn Says videos have been discontinued, so you won't be seeing any new content on here. You can check out our Profile on our Channel Page for more info. We'll still be checking in, so hope to keep chatting with you all! Thanks!
what a douche that dowser was! she could've just went home and enjoyed the fame of almost proving dowsing but she really had to go and mess it all up.
also when i have an out of body experience,thirst thing i run to my computer and try to get to the lottery web site.but all i see while typing is some mumbo jumbo and the letters look like chinese writing.But i'm still trying...
Randi had an out of body experience which he called a dream.i wouldn't agree completely.coz when I have astral projection I alway realize what's happening and even mix it up with the reality.I usually stand by the window and always am afraid to jump down.that just seem so real to believe i'm dreaming
Ol' Penn truly loves Randi. They are such different personalities, but I once talked with Penn on the phone and he said: "There would be no Penn as you know it without James Randi." Penn is an amazing human.
seems like an actual psychic would be able to foresee the attempt at cheating and call someones attention to it,or circumvent it altogether....i smell bullshit!
Honestly, though, if one really had psychic abilities, why would they settle for a million dollars when they could hit a powerball for hundreds of millions?
Jezz, people this is the world of the internet. Non-profit corporations in the US have to file with the US government it really isn't that hard to look up stuff like this. I'd post a link, but this is youtube.
Are you saying you are offering a million dollars to prove that the "James Randi Educational Foundation" has the million dollars to award. Because if so, I will be the first in line for that.
Randi has offered proof of this money several times while administering these tests. It does exist and proof can be supplied for much less then a million dollars.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Yeah, keep focusing on entertaining parlor games any child sees through.
But never mention Israel's ongoing apartheid/genocide of the Palestinians, paid for by billions in US tax dollars, based in the Zionist belief that Jews have an INVISIBLE RACIST CLOUD FATHER who tells them they're special & should enslave or kill the rest of humanity, and seize the desert east of the Mediterranen, evicting or slaughtering any families in their way.
Penn's TV show is owned by über-Zionist Sumner Redstone.
I see nothing in Wikipedia about Sumner Redstone being a Zionist. I hope you know the distinction between a Jew, a rich Jew and a Zionist Jew. Lord knows we wouldn't want anyone to think you're racist!
Yup. Randi was right with the Australian "dowsers" too! A few weeks went by, and sure enough, the phone rang... One of the dowsers "figured out" why he failed. LOL (And it was NOT because he couldn't actually DOWSE).
Having a world filled with colorful characters is great, isn't it? LOL - It would be far better if more people noticed the BULLSHIT so we could have larger groups to enjoy it with!
So, why don't "skeptics" James Randi & Penn Jillette ask a devout fanatical Zionist, maybe a Zionist from the terrorist Stern gang or terrorist Irgun party or one of their admirers, to prove they have that INVISIBLE RACIST CLOUD FATHER that commands them to commit apartheid/genocide against the Palestinians and Muslims in general using US tax money, weapons and blood?
Yeah, I guess they're too busy protecting the world from the frightening Sylvia Browne & dangerous James van Praagh.
The Zionist-run US government has killed 100s of 1000s of Iraqi/Afghani Muslims & lost 5,000 soldiers.
Without Mideast oil Israel wd not exist. Zionists exploiting the memory of the holocaust are being used by Big Oil in a conspiracy to dehumanize Islam & take over the Arab sate oil fields.
Penn Jillette says he's "libertarian" & "atheist," thus against unjustified government expense & religion-based government policy, Zionism being the most egregious example of both. Penn says nothing.
Penn Jillette's Viacom TV boss is über-Zionist Sumner Redstone. Penn's Sony TV boss is über-Zionist Howard Stringer.
Like other nonpracticing Jews on TV who claim to be militant atheists, Bill Maher & Christopher Hitchens, Penn Jillette bashes all faiths except Zionism, the dogma of his media mogul masters.
In the past 10 years of conflict about 500 Israelis have died via Palestinian resistance vs. about 5,000 Palestinians massacred by Israeli missiles supplied by the US.
That's just it -- Penn Jillette attacks all religious beliefs on a daily basis BUT NEVER ZIONISM, the myth of Jewish Supremacy, the belief that European Jews have an INVISIBLE RACIST CLOUD FATHER who told their mythical ancestors thousands of years ago that they were special and should enslave or kill the rest of humanity. Zionist fairy tales are the justification for the state of Israel, committing apartheid/genocide against the Palestinians with hundreds of billions in US taxes and weaponry.
I would assume that it would depend on the animal. I believe bats use their hearing primarily to echolocate. But I'm pretty sure dolphins have other receptor locations within their heads that might allow them to echolocate even if deaf.
No, but animals can sense vibrations and electrical fields through their skin and hair. I cant find any evidence that echolocation works without hearing (as it is primarily a kind of hearing).
Annoying the little psychics who play parlor games that any child can see through: frying small potatoes, shooting fish in a barrel, beating a dead horse.
Why not challenge a fanatical Israeli Zionist to prove he has an INVISIBLE RACIST CLOUD FATHER who commands him to enslave or kill the rest of humanity, commit apartheid/genocide against the Palestinians, & do it all with 100s of billions in US taxpayer dollars & unlimited free US state-of-the-art weaponry?
Penn denounces Zionism and all religious zealotry almost daily (as do I).
You're making a huge leap in logic to say that debunking fraudulent psychics is equivalent to shilling for Zionism.
I assume Penn would actually agree with most of the points you make but the coda that you so idiotically include at the end of your rant (in the youtube comments section, no less) proves that correct ideas can be, and often are, put forth by frighteningly ignorant and stupid people.
Man, I sure wish I could see this video. Too bad you're censoring everyone outside the USA and preventing them from seeing it. I can't even pay to see it! You just decided I shouldn't be allowed because of where I live. Assholes.
Are you directing that at Penn? If so why should he stop?
If you mean that he's convinced you that he and Randi are correct that's great but there are still a lot of people left to convince.
If you mean that you concede only this point but are still a believer and don't wish them to further challenge your beliefs, then I think you're SOL and for good reason.
'm not being facetious, I'm just really not sure why you would want Penn (or whoever you're aiming at) to stop questioning belief.
Sure there are more than 5 senses. But do you really think someone could divine some psychic knowledge using echolocation or their pulmonary stretch receptors?
Jesus man, you're being far too literal, beyond pompous and intellectually glib if you think lecturing Penn as if he didn't realize this fact makes you somehow superior to him.
Echolocation is not a sense even in the loosest of terms, so get your facts straight. N'or is it something most humans do.
But, I guess it's better to be ignorant than to be "intellectually glib" if there even is such a distinction, since you clearly are the authority on that.
Echolocation was listed on the wiki page that you provided as a sense. So, in the loosest of terms, you're too lazy to read your own reference material.
Also, all you said in your original post was that there are more than 5 senses. You said nothing about what most humans do so you're making up the rules as you go along.
And while I'll gladly accept your label of ignorant (Do YOU know everything there is to know?), you label yourself a moron as you include an apostrophe in Nor. Well done.
How many PEOPLE have echolocation? Since, you know, the whole five senses thing was referring to animals of the human kind. That whole paragraph had big old letters that said NON-HUMAN SENSES. Further, when we do something similar, it's exclusively done through our senses of touch and hearing, but I guess you knew that and are just playing dumb.
Also, echolocation has not been identified as a true sense, but a combination of other things, which makes it not a sense at all.
Both specialized pages at Wikipedia for echolocation and "human echolocation" show no indication that there are no specialized senses for locating, and that it is just a function of hearing and other senses.
True echo-locators have highly evolved auditory processing, and enlarged ear parts. There does not seem to be any specialized echolocation nerves and tissues that would justify calling it a sense in the way hearing is.
I'll say this one more time and then you can climb back up into your Fortress of Solipsism.
Penn mentions the 5 senses in passing during a 3 min video about debunking psychics and you degrade his intelligence for saying the word 5. I use echolocation as an ironic example while exposing your message as too literal and you spend 2,000 words telling me that echolocation is not a real sense.
Answer this question: Why did you post your first message? Do you really think you're smarter than Penn?
Echolocation was not even an example, since I just explained that it is not a sense in the context mentioned.
Define smart, because I been watching him, and I can say that I am probably more articulate and know more than him about some things; and he may know more than I do about others. Has been ever taken an IQ test?
Echolocation was an example because it was used ironically. I could say, "What are they gonna do aim a cheeseburger at a phenomenon and sense it?" Cheeseburger is an example in this context so echolocation was an example too.
Third time I've asked you...
Why did you write your first message about the five senses?
With each successive dodge, I'm further convinced of my reason for it. Because you're just a dick.
That was easy. you could have admitted to being a dick 6 messages ago.
You are wrong and I am a dick as well. I never denied it, you just never asked.
In answer to your question, I care what you say because intellectual lightweights seem to feel it's their job to impugn the intelligence of smarter folks than themselves while cloaking themselves in the anonymity provided by these forums. You'd never have the balls to say any of this to Penn's face and even if you did, you'd still be wrong.
I can demonstrate there are more than five senses; and I can demonstrate that echolocation is not anything more than super-hearing.
So, on what points am I wrong, unless being wrong means I knew what I was saying the first time I said it, and you came along and had to make an argument out of it. So what if I was being literal: so was he!
In common speach, dicks have nothing to do with being wrong or right, so this admission by either us is just a red herring.
By your own reasoning, I am to assume you are a dick (and a moron, which are your words, not mine) because you dodged two of my questions.
What is ironic, is that you are being just as condescending and pedantic as I am to Penn. In this case, you have no idea whether or not Penn knows there are more than 5 senses, or has ever taken an IQ test, and can not demonstrate it.
I've answered each question you've asked up to this point immediately after I read it except one (poorly phrased, incoherent) question which you know damn well that the answer to doesn't even matter. But since you want to deflect blame once again, I'll answer it: I don't know if he took an I.Q. test.
Also, I can say that Penn knows there are more than 5 senses because I watch Bullshit and he acknowledged as much in s1e10: ESP first aired March 28, 2003.
If you do not know his IQ, then you have no business asking people if they are smarter, or saying is more or less smart than anyone else.
Well, I dont watch all of Bullshit But, I did watch this video, and he was being literal about psychic powers and testing psychic powers. Why would he say 5 senses and not mean it? Are you saying he's lying, or is intentionally being misleading?
"Smart" is also arbitrary, and even more so than IQ. Since you know that, then I do not understand what purpose you serve by asking anyone about either.
Calling me a moron and such is not a refutation of anything. What were you refuting? I certainly do not need to acknowledge if you did, and you certainly are not entitled to it, if that is what you are asking. Just as you are entitled to insult strangers any way you like ;)
Where in Episode 10 does he mention more than 5 senses?
I did watch it. Which is why I asked. There's three parts, and I could not find where he says it, though he does say senses twice I think.
By the way, that happens to be one of the episodes in which one can catch their producers misleading people lol. I wrote to their Showtime forum about it a long time ago, but no one responded.
I could have sworn he listed the senses and then said something like "and a shit ton more that humans aren't lucky enough to possess." My mistake if he didnt.
Either way, I can't prove gravity any more than I can prove that Penn is aware of more than five senses. Although I'm aware that unfalsifiability is just as bad as unverifiability, I think it's a pretty safe bet that Penn would be aware of more than the 5 senses and think it's beneath both of us to examine it further. It's semantics now.
I know academics that do not know it, and at least one that believes everything other than five is just some combination of the others. So, in my experience, it's not uncommon.
I feel bad that they can't see these but you're exactly right. Why wouldn't Penn want them to watch his vids? What could he possibly gain by shutting out a huge audience?
I think I've always been more of a skeptic on psychic nonsense, but after so many tests that have been given and non proven so far, I think I'm leaning in more as a doubter by now. Thanks Penn! You really keep some people in check.
So true. Randi has seen so many of these charlatans that he can accurately predict their behavior.
Incidentally, the test is free but now you have to have some media attention and/or academic "backing" to qualify for the test. If you have any real psychic talent, that should be easy to get. Then again, the academics and media are easy to fool, but Randi is NOT. However, Randi does not even administer the test --- Alison Smith does it all now.
One thing that I always wonder is why people assume that if one is psychic, that one would also be just, moral, intelligent or wise. I would much prefer to have all the items on the list apply to me if I had to leave out being psychic... the 1 million would come in handy though, eh?
a little off topic but im always amazed by the "related videos" that come up when i watch penn says one of them is " my boobs hurt starring demi delia"???
Here's a weird one for you..I'm watching a replay on TV of a baseball game and we are losing. So I say "If I was pitching I would just start goofing around and pitch one right as the batter's head". Next pitch nails the batter square in the head. We're stunned. I had not heard or seen anything about this game. Now the paradox...did I predict the future, being to me it hadn't happened yet..or did I predict the past, being it was a replay?
No, I've farted right when a gun was going off and i thought i had farted so loud that I shook the windows on my house. I go outside to tell my family and I said "Did you hear that?" And they were like "yeah..." And i was like, "I know I can't believe that was my asshole!" And they were like "what?" And then they told me they had fired a gun and i said that i hadn't heard the gun fire. ..
Point is; is that coincidences happen all the time.
That's what makes them coinincidences. If you said "wow I wonder if gravity will make this ball fall" and then you drop it and it falls, would you call that coincidence?
Not to mention you've probably thought millions of things (lets hope =P) in your life that didn't happen. In cases such as yours, people tend only to record the "hits" and not the "misses"; were you to only have "hits" then it's not coincidence but rather freaky mental powers, but otherwise it's just statistical cherrypicking.
I watched the entire test and was disappointed at the end when Banachek didn't do a trick with the left over cards. I guess given the circumstances it would have been inappropriate, but damn, every time I've seen him he does something amazing!
@CodeManFromTheFuture :O i think he got Santa!
ApostateOfTheDamned 1 month ago
Randi is like god...only nicer, and right more often.
MrBrent123t 3 months ago
30 second long ad? You can fuck right off crackle.
JetboyOZ 3 months ago
This video does not work! Please take it down. Flagged!
surgeyX 3 months ago
@surgeyX I just watched it. Remember to clear your cache every once in a while. A loaded cache screws with youtube sometimes... not that anything needs to... Youtube tends to screw up all on its own more often than not.
skywize 1 month ago
@skywize
They fixed it -- it was crackles backend.
surgeyX 1 month ago
what the hell is this crackle thing? none of the vids are running, flagged ...
nextblain 5 months ago
@Jactation2011 please do. I glommed onto that somewhere else. Throw it about with wreckless abandon.
:D
quj0r 6 months ago
None of the old penn says vids work for me anymore.
Naufragus420 8 months ago
I respect and admire Randi. He's honest and wickedly intelligent.
caleab27 11 months ago
my ad blocker doesnt block crackle .....shit
oceanpirate83 1 year ago
Masterhaico Randy doesn't have to meet Cayce to attack his reputation does he? If Sylvia Browne can diagnosis illness in people at a distance and amaze doctors with her diagnosis which they themselves were unable to perform on some patients, I'd say Cayce was more than Sylvia Browne could ever be. Read up on Cayce, check the documentation at VA Beach and you might feel differently. It changed the minds of many a skeptic.
Robin18us 1 year ago
masterhaico ...and how would Randy feel to have cost the foundation a million dollars? I think he would feel he failed them and created them a loss. That's a big responsibility to carry and one would not want to give away that money easily. Why doesn't Randy attack Edgar Cayce if he feels there is no such thing as psychics? Cayce was a psychic who was the most documented off all time and many like Randy have tried to prove him a fake, but all disbelievers who met him changed their minds.
Robin18us 1 year ago
@Robin18us Cayce's been dead for 65 years, I don't think Randi could meet him if he wanted to. Besides, Cayce's predictions were as reliable as Sylvia Browne's.
zackersquackers 1 year ago
Randi is a materialist fundamentalist ideologue.
He's not motivated by an honest search for truth, he's an angry sad little man who feels the need to belittle people for holding views that he believes are wrong.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol yeah, cause exposing swindlers and charlatans is wrong :|
zackersquackers 1 year ago
@zackersquackers
No, didn't say that was wrong, I said that Randi was an ideologue, which he is. I'll criticize his work for being inherently pointless, but he's free to do it.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol Really? Proof?
masterhalco 1 year ago
@masterhalco
Why demand proof?
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
You made a claim. You must back up that claim with evidence. Otherwise you are lying or lazy.
masterhalco 1 year ago
@masterhalco
Sigh, you must have failed philosophy class. I'm not going to gratify your compulsive need for falsification.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
Double sigh. Since you have forgotten your own words let me repeat them:
"Randi is a materialist fundamentalist ideologue. He's not motivated by an honest search for truth, he's an angry sad little man who feels the need to belittle people for holding views that he believes are wrong."
You claimed the above statement. Now prove each claim. The burden of proof is on you. I made no claims and thus have nothing to prove. I did not fail any philosophy classes I took.
masterhalco 1 year ago
@masterhalco
Listen, bud, I'm not going to demean myself by bowing to your standards. You are welcome to disagree with me if you must, but don't ask me to play your bullshit games. As I made clear, I have more dignity than to gratify your compulsions.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
These are not MY standards. These are the standards of any debate, discussion, or argument. Surely you must have learned at your community college how to argue a thesis. By refusing to back up your claims about Randi, you have conceded your statement was merely slanderous. A man with dignity would show proof instead of hiding behind the anonymity of the internet.
I hope that in your real life, such as it is, you don't demean yourself by slandering others. That would be undignified.
masterhalco 1 year ago
@masterhalco
Oh please, how ridiculous. You are fast proving yourself an ideologue as well.
When you are dubious of someone's statement, the polite thing to do is not point your finger in their face demanding "proof" of their "claims" it's to engage in civil discussion in order to understand their perspective.
I'll stop critiquing randi, when he stops slandering people who disagree with his views. I'll gladly engage with you when you show me a modicum of respect.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
I did not lower the standards of this conversation until you called me "bud" and insulted my perceived grades in philosophy class.
I never pointed a finger. I just asked for proof. Why are you unable to furnish any?
Asking for proof of a claim is not a matter of ideology. Admit you have no basis for your insults thrown at Randi.
masterhalco 1 year ago
@masterhalco
I'm sorry for adopting informal language, and questioning your credentials. If anything I'd probably respect you more if you had flunked out of philosophy.
It's not that I'm unable to furnish proof, it's that it's useless to do so, and I resent being forced into your methodology. I mean, what standard of proof can you produce? If you listen to him speak, it's self-evident, he speaks negatively about people who don't believe like he does, can you refute that?
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
It's a shame you have no respect for me. I'm very disappointed. I ought to rethink my life in order to meet your high standards. I endeavor to one day meet your approval.
This isn't MY methodology. It's reason. You make a claim about someone or something and you provide evidence. For example: I claim that my car is blue. I show you a picture of my car. I claim you are a slanderous cretin. I quote you above repeatedly insulting others and dodging questions. QED.
masterhalco 1 year ago
@masterhalco
I love you, but you haven't given me anything to respect. If anything when you demand proof of claims, I pity you, because that attitude is so obviously deranged.
This is your methodology, it's not some universal imperative. It's a system of thought based on your subjective perspective. Give me a reason I should abide by your standards of proof. Prove to me that I am required to operate according to your belief system.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
By your standards one can make any claim he wants and needs no evidence or proof to back it up. Opinion becomes fact. If that were so, how would the courts function? I can declare you guilty of a crime and I need not back that claim. You are guilty by mere accusation.
What of the scientific method? I could claim that the sun is made of cheese. By your methodology I need not provide evidence to support that claim. If you request any I state that you are an "ideologue."
masterhalco 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
I need neither your love nor your pity. I think those would be better spent on your family and friends.
masterhalco 1 year ago
@masterhalco
Well, you get them nonetheless, as well as my fond encouragement that you break out of the chrysalis of fundamentalist materialism.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol
I agree that Randi speaks negatively of charlatans, swindlers, and con men who for centuries have robbed people by claiming paranormal abilities. I agree he is very negative.
So what? He sees behavior he finds abhorrent and seeks to end it, or at least raise awareness from the public. Is that kind of activism wrong?
He gives his opponents a forum (JREF prize) to prove him wrong. Thus far no one has.
He has also lauded others in writing and speech in the most positive ways.
masterhalco 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol It has nothing to do with belief. He speaks negatively about those that are actively scamming other good-hearted people. The charlatans and swindlers trick people into handing over their hard-earned money over demonstrably falsifiable claims.
zackersquackers 1 year ago
@zackersquackers
You are simplifying Randi's position. He's not only criticizing "charlatans", he is ridiculing anyone who doesn't agree with his beliefs. And they are beliefs, no one has access to "absolute reality" we operate on systems of ideas, or "ideologies".
Demonstrably false according to his limited methodology based on his limited belief system. If you think that we, in defiance of all historical indication, somehow possess knowledge of absolute reality, then you are deluded.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol The only things that deal with absolutes are Mathematics and religion. Is it a belief that the sun is hot? Is it a belief that computers are more advanced now than they were two decades ago? Is it a belief that cars don't fly? Like I said, this has nothing to do with his beliefs, and everything to do with defending the public from people that make knowingly false claims. This is about knowledge... not beliefs.
zackersquackers 1 year ago
@zackersquackers
Yes, yes, and yes. Remember: Whatever you say it is, it isn't. You are conflating manmade systems of thought with an absolute reality. You cannot escape the subjectivity of human experience.
I think that you are hero-worshipping randi, you should confront his dark side, admit that he's a fallible human who is not always right. Like I say, I don't see him pursuing truth, I see him pursuing notoriety, he has refused to test the claimants who aren't famous charlatans.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol How in the world could I be conflating "manmade systems of though" with an absolute reality? The first thing I mentioned in my last post is the exclusiveness of absolutes. Let me elaborate: absolutes have nothing... NOTHING to do with science. Our scientific knowledge is subject to change in almost all regards, but it's through the scientific method that those changes come. Not from beliefs. Not from conjecture. Not from claims that are backed up with ZILCH evidence.
zackersquackers 1 year ago
@zackersquackers
If you are not treating science is an absolute, then why are you justifying belief in it? Why are you appealing to factualism, and evidence, as if they somehow mean more than other systems of thought?
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol I'm not justifying a belief in science, I'm justifying the acceptance of it and its methods, because they produce results. Beliefs are irrelevant in that regard. Facts don't cease to be facts based on someone's belief or disbelief. What other system of thought carries the rigor and productivity of scientific methods?
zackersquackers 1 year ago
@zackersquackers
Facts don't exist without someone to create them, so yes, they do rely on belief, and more significantly they rely on a subjective human perspective. Whatever semantic games you want to play with terms like "believe" and "accept" the intention is the same: we should only think like you.
As for science getting results, I can't deny that, though I'm not convinced that proves that the scientific narrative is true. Besides, magic gets results too. I'll take everything I can use.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol "Facts don't exist without someone to create them" <---- Do you not understand, just how obtuse that statement is? There is no semantic game at play, because believing in something and accepting something are entirely different things. Try a dictionary. Beliefs have no bearing whatsoever on whether or not something is factual. It's completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter if you believe the Earth is flat, because the fact remains that it is a spherical ovoid.
zackersquackers 1 year ago
@zackersquackers
Let me put it this way, the fact that the planet is a spherical ovioid, is not the spherical ovoid. Whatever you say it is, it isn't. You can't experience the absolute reality of the spherical ovoid, you have simply, "accepted" the concept. You have arrived at that conclusion via a system of ideas, an ideology. You are entranced by the idea, but the idea is not the thing, the perception of the thing isn't even the thing, and that's all you've got to go on. Facts are fiction.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. Well... I'll just stick with reality, and you can go play in oblivion. Take care.
zackersquackers 1 year ago
@zackersquackers
You can be dubious all you want, but you are just ignoring what is apparent. You are denying the nature of your experience, in favor of a fantasy. Enjoy Lala land.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
@Jcolinsol And as for hero-worshipping, Randi. In a way I do. I wish there were thousands more people like him, actively pursuing the exposure of so-called channelers, psychics, mediums, anon. Because those charlatans not only confuse the public with their non-science, and sometimes pseudo-science, but they also use and abuse the trust and finances of good-willed people.
zackersquackers 1 year ago
@zackersquackers
Heh, randi's version of science is pseudoscience, arguably. This is silly, I'm done, you need to drop all the buzz words and silly dogma and get real man.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jcolinsol
Listen: I could call you "an angry sad little man who feels the need to belittle people for holding views that he believes are wrong." Unless I can give examples I would merely be slandering you. What's more, it's an ad hominem attack that doesn't debate the point at hand. It merely attacks the messenger.
masterhalco 1 year ago
@masterhalco
One of the reasons that I have been evasive, is that I'm not making a claim, I am making an observation. Either you share that observation or you don't. Watch any number of clips of Randi, he usually speaks derisively of those he's skeptical of, without any justification aside from demanding they abide his methodology. That's why I call him an ideologue.
It's not an ad hominem, I'm attacking his character, not the case in this video.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
Randi is always right, because if he admits he's wrong it will cost him a million.
Robin18us 1 year ago
@Robin18us Actually it wouldn't. It would cost the foundation a million and they have more than enough money to cover that.
masterhalco 1 year ago
I'm not able to watch the video because I live in Germany? Fucking bullshit!
RushFugu 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RushFugu Fuck off nazi faggot
klarth1234 1 year ago
@klarth1234 Please go and stick a rusty fork up your ass.
GrandHighGamer 1 year ago
@RushFugu I know...
Sabohaque 1 year ago
I'm not able to watch the video because I live in Germany? Fucking bullshit!!!
RushFugu 1 year ago
Randi owes himself a Million.
dubya3cdotcom 1 year ago
watch?v=haqr_72NTY4
This isn't the only time either a skeptic has debunked science to disprove what they suspect to be paranormal.
I think I will accept Michael Faraday over James Randi.
watch?v=VhWQ-r1LYXY
watch?v=TEVEBzNSwTU
AfterFauve001 1 year ago
Randi has a good grasp of the methods and thought processes of the frauds, so it's no real surprise that he knew what to expect. Lying is what they do for a living, so it's only reasonable to assume they will continue to do the same.
GermanChocolateCake 1 year ago
I hope you change your mind and start making videos again Penn =)
dummbatz48 1 year ago
Hi Penn fans. Penn Says videos have been discontinued, so you won't be seeing any new content on here. You can check out our Profile on our Channel Page for more info. We'll still be checking in, so hope to keep chatting with you all! Thanks!
pennsays 1 year ago
@pennsays why no more vids?
blakcoffey 1 year ago
@blakcoffey Penn's moved on. You can find more info if you go to CrackleDotCom, go to News and type in Penn Says Goodbye to the search box.
pennsays 1 year ago
@blakcoffey He has started a new show, Penn Point.
eldiosdedios 1 year ago
@blakcoffey penn has a new youtube page I believe its called Penns point
MrMohjong 1 year ago
what a douche that dowser was! she could've just went home and enjoyed the fame of almost proving dowsing but she really had to go and mess it all up.
t3rr411 1 year ago
AH HA! Randi knew this Fake would recant her earlier statement due to his own Psychic Abilities!!! Penn you owe Randi ONE Million Dollars!!! ;-)
Cryogenian 1 year ago
Wouldn't she have 'psychically' known he was going to cheat? Fuck, I'm no psychic, but damn if I didn't know my last girlfriend was going to cheat.
JoeDeceiver 1 year ago
also when i have an out of body experience,thirst thing i run to my computer and try to get to the lottery web site.but all i see while typing is some mumbo jumbo and the letters look like chinese writing.But i'm still trying...
ilham78 1 year ago
They call those dreams, dude!
JoeDeceiver 1 year ago
Randi had an out of body experience which he called a dream.i wouldn't agree completely.coz when I have astral projection I alway realize what's happening and even mix it up with the reality.I usually stand by the window and always am afraid to jump down.that just seem so real to believe i'm dreaming
ilham78 1 year ago
@tttapmmman Oh shut the f&%k up!
BJMr666 2 years ago
Never doubt Randi, wise beyond even his years.
xXAkridXx 2 years ago 2
Strong language my ass.
AresCassell 2 years ago
@AresCassell You never can be too careful with Penn.
pennsays 2 years ago
For real. I spilled some Penn on my lab table and it burned a pentagram straight into the marble.
JoeDeceiver 1 year ago
@pennsays
I love Penn, but these 30 second ads for 3 minute videos is some pretty fucking cheap, lame ass shit.
DickJohnson3434 6 months ago
@AresCassell saying "god doesn't exist" is strong language in most circles in the US.
quj0r 1 year ago
@quj0r good point
AresCassell 1 year ago
Ol' Penn truly loves Randi. They are such different personalities, but I once talked with Penn on the phone and he said: "There would be no Penn as you know it without James Randi." Penn is an amazing human.
pitbull103 2 years ago
ill belive in psychics when i read the headline "PSYCHIC WINS LOTTERY"
bluewebheadwb 2 years ago
Well, that alone could just be a coincidence. Now if it were "Psychic wins lottery 12 times in a row" then you might have something.
GumbaMasta 2 years ago 2
@bluewebheadwb I'll believe in psychics when the headline reads "Psychic wins the lottery.... again."
;)
quj0r 8 months ago 2
seems like an actual psychic would be able to foresee the attempt at cheating and call someones attention to it,or circumvent it altogether....i smell bullshit!
ViralMessiah 2 years ago
still whines like andy rooney
locctf 2 years ago
Maybe the "real" psychics don't take the test because they have seen the future and know they will fail ;) - that's a Jack Black wink for Penn.
gdwgdw 2 years ago
My girlfriend is psychic. She knows if I'm gonna get any or not!
unklekranky 2 years ago
haha, that's classic - I think all women might be psychic in that way.
RPR1983 2 years ago
Honestly, though, if one really had psychic abilities, why would they settle for a million dollars when they could hit a powerball for hundreds of millions?
gno671 2 years ago 2
Jezz, people this is the world of the internet. Non-profit corporations in the US have to file with the US government it really isn't that hard to look up stuff like this. I'd post a link, but this is youtube.
sgmarshall 2 years ago
My psychic prediction:
Tomorrow nearly a 100,000 people will die across the world.
Where's my check? Can I cash it at Wal-mart?
phantomspellchecker 2 years ago
The Amazing Meeting should join up with the Penny Arcade Expo to create TAMPAX.
JonathanBlitt 2 years ago 13
WINNER.
valvatica 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
randi is a fraud. i have a miilion dollar challege.i challege randi to show proof that he has this million dollars. he does not.
cassidy99ful 2 years ago
And I challenge your million dollars with my stale powdered doughnut!
svd348 2 years ago 2
Are you saying you are offering a million dollars to prove that the "James Randi Educational Foundation" has the million dollars to award. Because if so, I will be the first in line for that.
Randi has offered proof of this money several times while administering these tests. It does exist and proof can be supplied for much less then a million dollars.
grishnakh77 2 years ago
jokes are fun. i love jokes.
it's common knowledge that you can make goldmann-sachs statements proving you have the $1,000,000, in photoshop.
NOT.
valvatica 2 years ago
You know, it doesn't matter if he has the million or not. No one's ever going to win it.
FourthDerivative 2 years ago 2
Randi now has it in escrow. It's sitting there waiting for anyone with any proof at all. They are really pretty fair about it.
rrpostalagain 2 years ago 5
the rules have changed now you have to be famous in news and / or , saves wasting time on most of these
Obelisk2290 2 years ago
Randi is a rich motherfucker. A million bucks is nothing to him.
phantomspellchecker 2 years ago
who the hell cares if the guy has the money or not? win it first, then you can worry about that.
errskin 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yeah, keep focusing on entertaining parlor games any child sees through.
But never mention Israel's ongoing apartheid/genocide of the Palestinians, paid for by billions in US tax dollars, based in the Zionist belief that Jews have an INVISIBLE RACIST CLOUD FATHER who tells them they're special & should enslave or kill the rest of humanity, and seize the desert east of the Mediterranen, evicting or slaughtering any families in their way.
Penn's TV show is owned by über-Zionist Sumner Redstone.
walterglanz 2 years ago
what?
WACAcameraman 2 years ago
I see nothing in Wikipedia about Sumner Redstone being a Zionist. I hope you know the distinction between a Jew, a rich Jew and a Zionist Jew. Lord knows we wouldn't want anyone to think you're racist!
happymyster 2 years ago
Yup. Randi was right with the Australian "dowsers" too! A few weeks went by, and sure enough, the phone rang... One of the dowsers "figured out" why he failed. LOL (And it was NOT because he couldn't actually DOWSE).
Having a world filled with colorful characters is great, isn't it? LOL - It would be far better if more people noticed the BULLSHIT so we could have larger groups to enjoy it with!
VimisiDigitalMedia 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
So, why don't "skeptics" James Randi & Penn Jillette ask a devout fanatical Zionist, maybe a Zionist from the terrorist Stern gang or terrorist Irgun party or one of their admirers, to prove they have that INVISIBLE RACIST CLOUD FATHER that commands them to commit apartheid/genocide against the Palestinians and Muslims in general using US tax money, weapons and blood?
Yeah, I guess they're too busy protecting the world from the frightening Sylvia Browne & dangerous James van Praagh.
Shills.
tonzimala 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Zionist-run US government has killed 100s of 1000s of Iraqi/Afghani Muslims & lost 5,000 soldiers.
Without Mideast oil Israel wd not exist. Zionists exploiting the memory of the holocaust are being used by Big Oil in a conspiracy to dehumanize Islam & take over the Arab sate oil fields.
Penn Jillette says he's "libertarian" & "atheist," thus against unjustified government expense & religion-based government policy, Zionism being the most egregious example of both. Penn says nothing.
tonzimala 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Penn Jillette's Viacom TV boss is über-Zionist Sumner Redstone. Penn's Sony TV boss is über-Zionist Howard Stringer.
Like other nonpracticing Jews on TV who claim to be militant atheists, Bill Maher & Christopher Hitchens, Penn Jillette bashes all faiths except Zionism, the dogma of his media mogul masters.
In the past 10 years of conflict about 500 Israelis have died via Palestinian resistance vs. about 5,000 Palestinians massacred by Israeli missiles supplied by the US.
tonzimala 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
That's just it -- Penn Jillette attacks all religious beliefs on a daily basis BUT NEVER ZIONISM, the myth of Jewish Supremacy, the belief that European Jews have an INVISIBLE RACIST CLOUD FATHER who told their mythical ancestors thousands of years ago that they were special and should enslave or kill the rest of humanity. Zionist fairy tales are the justification for the state of Israel, committing apartheid/genocide against the Palestinians with hundreds of billions in US taxes and weaponry.
tonzimala 2 years ago
Will echolocation work for an animal that's deaf?
OneEyedJack1970 2 years ago
Long Answer:
I would assume that it would depend on the animal. I believe bats use their hearing primarily to echolocate. But I'm pretty sure dolphins have other receptor locations within their heads that might allow them to echolocate even if deaf.
Short Answer:
I really don't know. :)
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
No, but animals can sense vibrations and electrical fields through their skin and hair. I cant find any evidence that echolocation works without hearing (as it is primarily a kind of hearing).
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago
Annoying the little psychics who play parlor games that any child can see through: frying small potatoes, shooting fish in a barrel, beating a dead horse.
Why not challenge a fanatical Israeli Zionist to prove he has an INVISIBLE RACIST CLOUD FATHER who commands him to enslave or kill the rest of humanity, commit apartheid/genocide against the Palestinians, & do it all with 100s of billions in US taxpayer dollars & unlimited free US state-of-the-art weaponry?
Penn Jillette = Zionist shill.
tonzimala 2 years ago
That's absurd.
undisputedgreatest 2 years ago
Penn denounces Zionism and all religious zealotry almost daily (as do I).
You're making a huge leap in logic to say that debunking fraudulent psychics is equivalent to shilling for Zionism.
I assume Penn would actually agree with most of the points you make but the coda that you so idiotically include at the end of your rant (in the youtube comments section, no less) proves that correct ideas can be, and often are, put forth by frighteningly ignorant and stupid people.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
I think the "physic's", or religious leaders M.O.s has always been completely about dishonesty. Another perfect example.
SkullVodka 2 years ago
HOORAY THE AMAZING RANDI!
blath 2 years ago
Man, I sure wish I could see this video. Too bad you're censoring everyone outside the USA and preventing them from seeing it. I can't even pay to see it! You just decided I shouldn't be allowed because of where I live. Assholes.
realblublu 2 years ago
You've made your point. You've struck oil. Stop Fucking Drilling.
Silverblack81 2 years ago
Are you directing that at Penn? If so why should he stop?
If you mean that he's convinced you that he and Randi are correct that's great but there are still a lot of people left to convince.
If you mean that you concede only this point but are still a believer and don't wish them to further challenge your beliefs, then I think you're SOL and for good reason.
'm not being facetious, I'm just really not sure why you would want Penn (or whoever you're aiming at) to stop questioning belief.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
It's youtube's copyright policy man. Why wouldn't Penn want as many people as possible to see this? Please don't be angry with him.
You're fight is with youtube, not Penn.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
Someone thumbed me down? Really? Who downgrades a fact?
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You sly dog you...
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
Check "senses" at Wikipedia, Penn. There's more than five.
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago
You're just being a dick.
Sure there are more than 5 senses. But do you really think someone could divine some psychic knowledge using echolocation or their pulmonary stretch receptors?
Jesus man, you're being far too literal, beyond pompous and intellectually glib if you think lecturing Penn as if he didn't realize this fact makes you somehow superior to him.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
Echolocation is not a sense even in the loosest of terms, so get your facts straight. N'or is it something most humans do.
But, I guess it's better to be ignorant than to be "intellectually glib" if there even is such a distinction, since you clearly are the authority on that.
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago
Echolocation was listed on the wiki page that you provided as a sense. So, in the loosest of terms, you're too lazy to read your own reference material.
Also, all you said in your original post was that there are more than 5 senses. You said nothing about what most humans do so you're making up the rules as you go along.
And while I'll gladly accept your label of ignorant (Do YOU know everything there is to know?), you label yourself a moron as you include an apostrophe in Nor. Well done.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
How many PEOPLE have echolocation? Since, you know, the whole five senses thing was referring to animals of the human kind. That whole paragraph had big old letters that said NON-HUMAN SENSES. Further, when we do something similar, it's exclusively done through our senses of touch and hearing, but I guess you knew that and are just playing dumb.
Also, echolocation has not been identified as a true sense, but a combination of other things, which makes it not a sense at all.
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago
Both specialized pages at Wikipedia for echolocation and "human echolocation" show no indication that there are no specialized senses for locating, and that it is just a function of hearing and other senses.
True echo-locators have highly evolved auditory processing, and enlarged ear parts. There does not seem to be any specialized echolocation nerves and tissues that would justify calling it a sense in the way hearing is.
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago
I'll say this one more time and then you can climb back up into your Fortress of Solipsism.
Penn mentions the 5 senses in passing during a 3 min video about debunking psychics and you degrade his intelligence for saying the word 5. I use echolocation as an ironic example while exposing your message as too literal and you spend 2,000 words telling me that echolocation is not a real sense.
Answer this question: Why did you post your first message? Do you really think you're smarter than Penn?
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
Echolocation was not even an example, since I just explained that it is not a sense in the context mentioned.
Define smart, because I been watching him, and I can say that I am probably more articulate and know more than him about some things; and he may know more than I do about others. Has been ever taken an IQ test?
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago
uhhhhh...
Echolocation was an example because it was used ironically. I could say, "What are they gonna do aim a cheeseburger at a phenomenon and sense it?" Cheeseburger is an example in this context so echolocation was an example too.
Third time I've asked you...
Why did you write your first message about the five senses?
With each successive dodge, I'm further convinced of my reason for it. Because you're just a dick.
"Has been ever taken an IQ test?"
That's articulation, homes...
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
Penn* oops lol.
Of course I'm being a dick, but you seem to think that makes me wrong, or that gives you license to not be one yourself.
Why do you care whether or not I think Penn does not know there are more than five senses?
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago
That was easy. you could have admitted to being a dick 6 messages ago.
You are wrong and I am a dick as well. I never denied it, you just never asked.
In answer to your question, I care what you say because intellectual lightweights seem to feel it's their job to impugn the intelligence of smarter folks than themselves while cloaking themselves in the anonymity provided by these forums. You'd never have the balls to say any of this to Penn's face and even if you did, you'd still be wrong.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
lol let's see...
I can demonstrate there are more than five senses; and I can demonstrate that echolocation is not anything more than super-hearing.
So, on what points am I wrong, unless being wrong means I knew what I was saying the first time I said it, and you came along and had to make an argument out of it. So what if I was being literal: so was he!
In common speach, dicks have nothing to do with being wrong or right, so this admission by either us is just a red herring.
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago
By your own reasoning, I am to assume you are a dick (and a moron, which are your words, not mine) because you dodged two of my questions.
What is ironic, is that you are being just as condescending and pedantic as I am to Penn. In this case, you have no idea whether or not Penn knows there are more than 5 senses, or has ever taken an IQ test, and can not demonstrate it.
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago
I am a dick but not a moron.
I've answered each question you've asked up to this point immediately after I read it except one (poorly phrased, incoherent) question which you know damn well that the answer to doesn't even matter. But since you want to deflect blame once again, I'll answer it: I don't know if he took an I.Q. test.
Also, I can say that Penn knows there are more than 5 senses because I watch Bullshit and he acknowledged as much in s1e10: ESP first aired March 28, 2003.
Try again.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
If you do not know his IQ, then you have no business asking people if they are smarter, or saying is more or less smart than anyone else.
Well, I dont watch all of Bullshit But, I did watch this video, and he was being literal about psychic powers and testing psychic powers. Why would he say 5 senses and not mean it? Are you saying he's lying, or is intentionally being misleading?
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago
I'm saying you're either a troll or you have no sense of conversational language or word choice and it's usage when advancing a point.
I'm saying these questions are strawmen and I won't dignify them with an answer.
I'm saying that you refuse to acknowledge validity for any refutation I make regardless of how clearly I state them or how correct they are.
I'm saying that I.Q. is an arbitrary measurement of cultural awareness and even Einstein downplayed it's importance in gauging intelligence.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
"Smart" is also arbitrary, and even more so than IQ. Since you know that, then I do not understand what purpose you serve by asking anyone about either.
Calling me a moron and such is not a refutation of anything. What were you refuting? I certainly do not need to acknowledge if you did, and you certainly are not entitled to it, if that is what you are asking. Just as you are entitled to insult strangers any way you like ;)
Where in Episode 10 does he mention more than 5 senses?
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You're right. I'm sorry. I'm just so, so...so sorry.
"Smart" and it's denotative meaning is just as arbitrary as a biased test meant to measure relative cultural intelligence.
And the only refutation I made was that you are a moron. That's the only thing I said of any salient importance.
In fact, the term importance is arbitrary and therefore, I' shouldn't have used it. So you're right before you even point it out.
Episode 10 is available on youtube. Watch if you really want to know.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
I did watch it. Which is why I asked. There's three parts, and I could not find where he says it, though he does say senses twice I think.
By the way, that happens to be one of the episodes in which one can catch their producers misleading people lol. I wrote to their Showtime forum about it a long time ago, but no one responded.
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
I could have sworn he listed the senses and then said something like "and a shit ton more that humans aren't lucky enough to possess." My mistake if he didnt.
Either way, I can't prove gravity any more than I can prove that Penn is aware of more than five senses. Although I'm aware that unfalsifiability is just as bad as unverifiability, I think it's a pretty safe bet that Penn would be aware of more than the 5 senses and think it's beneath both of us to examine it further. It's semantics now.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
I know academics that do not know it, and at least one that believes everything other than five is just some combination of the others. So, in my experience, it's not uncommon.
poorkinghaggard 2 years ago 2
Why is the video restricted to the US? What is he hiding?
Othelie 2 years ago 2
I think its a matter of advertising revenue, they can't sell American products to people outside the US
still, keep pestering them... dirty little corporate fuckers
Nmbrz 2 years ago 2
why are you posting this on every Penn video? What would he be hiding? Because there's some secrets that Europe cant have or something?
StaticFrictionAE 2 years ago
I feel bad that they can't see these but you're exactly right. Why wouldn't Penn want them to watch his vids? What could he possibly gain by shutting out a huge audience?
It's youtube, not Penn.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
lol good one FE
fatmannate 2 years ago
Randi = R.ight A.lways N.ever D.ismiss I.t?! :)
FateEternal 2 years ago
I won't buy any more Sony products until I can watch Penn Says.
Eldxale 2 years ago
I watched it on their youtube channel
llollercoaster 2 years ago
I think I've always been more of a skeptic on psychic nonsense, but after so many tests that have been given and non proven so far, I think I'm leaning in more as a doubter by now. Thanks Penn! You really keep some people in check.
Mortello 2 years ago
So true. Randi has seen so many of these charlatans that he can accurately predict their behavior.
Incidentally, the test is free but now you have to have some media attention and/or academic "backing" to qualify for the test. If you have any real psychic talent, that should be easy to get. Then again, the academics and media are easy to fool, but Randi is NOT. However, Randi does not even administer the test --- Alison Smith does it all now.
pitbull103 2 years ago
Is it free to take the test?
I'd like to attempt it just to see how it works, not saying I'm psychic or anything...
rudenoodle 2 years ago
I shall make a super-psychic prediction: People will down-thumb me for the following comment:
FIRST!!!
Scrapheap71 2 years ago 6
Fail.
JonO387 2 years ago
But I got 4 thumbs up, so either way I win.
X-P
Scrapheap71 2 years ago
One thing that I always wonder is why people assume that if one is psychic, that one would also be just, moral, intelligent or wise. I would much prefer to have all the items on the list apply to me if I had to leave out being psychic... the 1 million would come in handy though, eh?
stefanlittle 2 years ago
Because super powers always make you moral! :)
lordcheetah 2 years ago
Maybe Randi is the psychic....hmmmmm
DarthEvilicus 2 years ago
a little off topic but im always amazed by the "related videos" that come up when i watch penn says one of them is " my boobs hurt starring demi delia"???
bearshaman0 2 years ago
Here's a weird one for you..I'm watching a replay on TV of a baseball game and we are losing. So I say "If I was pitching I would just start goofing around and pitch one right as the batter's head". Next pitch nails the batter square in the head. We're stunned. I had not heard or seen anything about this game. Now the paradox...did I predict the future, being to me it hadn't happened yet..or did I predict the past, being it was a replay?
cranie4 2 years ago
or option three, your stupid... lol..
No, I've farted right when a gun was going off and i thought i had farted so loud that I shook the windows on my house. I go outside to tell my family and I said "Did you hear that?" And they were like "yeah..." And i was like, "I know I can't believe that was my asshole!" And they were like "what?" And then they told me they had fired a gun and i said that i hadn't heard the gun fire. ..
Point is; is that coincidences happen all the time.
cant1be1original 2 years ago 2
Oh..wow..you got me..that was terrific...I'm stupid. I sometimes forget YouTube is available in the Southern US.
Oh wait..I need the disclaimer.. "lol" Actually I don't believe I did anything. However it's a pretty extreme case of coincidence don't you think?
cranie4 2 years ago
That's what makes them coinincidences. If you said "wow I wonder if gravity will make this ball fall" and then you drop it and it falls, would you call that coincidence?
Not to mention you've probably thought millions of things (lets hope =P) in your life that didn't happen. In cases such as yours, people tend only to record the "hits" and not the "misses"; were you to only have "hits" then it's not coincidence but rather freaky mental powers, but otherwise it's just statistical cherrypicking.
Truthiness231 2 years ago
I totally get what you mean. I think it was the lining up of the variables that freaked me out. A sort of one shot "multi coincidence".
cranie4 2 years ago
I hear ya. i would be would've been freaked as well.
As soon as that happened though i would've tried predicting me winning the lotto though.
cant1be1original 2 years ago
I watched the entire test and was disappointed at the end when Banachek didn't do a trick with the left over cards. I guess given the circumstances it would have been inappropriate, but damn, every time I've seen him he does something amazing!
ctastrophe 2 years ago
Nope, I won't win his million dollars. I don't have the power to remove these copyright restrictions.
Eldxale 2 years ago
Hell yeah Randi is always right
:)
cowpacino 2 years ago
I predict that a lot of videos you post will have at least on person say "remove the copyright restrictions" or something similar.
Do I get the $1,000,000.00? Can I at least get enough to buy lunch tomorrow?