Added: 1 year ago
From: ANIideas
Views: 99
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (6)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • "Grail Twaddle" LOL Sometimes I love the screen shots YT selects for us.

  • can I just say that I think that sceptics shouldn't really use james randi as an argument as it never convincies anyone but the sceptics.

  • @greenelf12 It is worth wondering why. After all, James Randi is under a legal obligation to test fairly and with objectivity. Although his tests are often claimed to be biased, someone has only to publish an account of the methodology they were subject to for Mr Randy to be in very hot water indeed. That doesn't happen.

  • @ANIideas well if i'm not mistaken the odds are very high ( 1million to 1 apparently) there are also chalenges that other world views can point to support their veiw like victor zamit's one and the queater million doller creationist challenge in that light I don't find that type of argument convincing, also people just don't like him. I feel a study conductied by somone who dosen't apear to lean to any side would have more weight.

  • I recall that Zamit define's his terms in a way that precludes any attempt at their prize. The JREF prize is not subject to the same kinds of conditions - just science.

    We can disregard Randi though. There have been many studies by such bodies as the SPR that have, where their method is sound, failed to either show significant results or (as importantly) repeatable results. The point is that a phenomenon has yet to be demonstrated under scientific conditions by Randi or anyone else.

  • @ANIideas but if you would like to make that point it is best to stay away from Randi, trust me ;o)

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more