i honestly think "real" magick is performed by people who do not care for a million dollars. and even if they wanted it, theyd use magick to obtain it. who the fuck wants to be known for doing real magick? fuckin people bothering you everyday, every network calling you for a t.v. show, the gov't doing tests on you, etc...money isnt everything, nether is attention.
Your head is planted firmly up your butt Penn, the evidence 9/11 was an inside job is overwhelming. James Randy and JREF are a laughing stock. Stick to "debunking" spoon benders denier because neither you or James Randy have the brain power or the expertise to prop up the laughable 9/11 official story. No one is buying your propaganda denier, in fact more people every day are realizing what a pack of traitors and cowards you JREF clowns really are.
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!
Kreshian doesn't need to analyze his brain while using the irrational side. if he is having an orgasm then the proof of that would be the semen, not how the person having the orgasm can analyze his mind. The experiment doesn't revolve around critical thinking the experiment will TEST his claimed abilities. all the test does is prove it isn't a trick of one kind or another. why not be arrogant? he has been offering 1 mil dollars to anyone who prove they have a supernatural ability 4 40+yrs
first of all its not JR's money he only put in 10k of it and someone else put in the rest of the money. second its not in his clutches, he doesn't have the money its in a trust they can not draw from except for the interest off the top for research. on an other note the "mentalist" obviously doesn't need a "totally relaxed" environment because he has performed on stage NO stage is a totally relaxed environment.
an irrational answer and then told you its right and you have to accept it because for what ever reason you would tell me i was stupid. that the same shit these "mentalist" and "psychics" try to claim every day. it doesn't matter what side of the brain they use. its like saying well he has a lot of typos because he is left handed.
everything you have typed is completely useless. first of all the "mentalist" or "psychic" doesn't have to prove how something works just that it works under controlled conditions. that whole right part of the brain left part of the brain has nothing to do with proving that an ability works. "skeptics tend to be irritable and easily rattled." no they are not. where the hell do you get this shit do you just make it up as you go along? if I told you that 2 + 2 = blue
you obviously have no idea how real scientific test are conducted. Kreshin doesn't have to think rationally about it. kreshian just has to prove that its a legitimate ability and not a trick. you don't ask the mouse while he is running the maze why he went left and not right. the scientist runs many test to find a correlation as to why the mouse keeps turning left.
We do experience it and we know others experience it cause they tell us one way or another. That's all the proof anyone needs.
Just cause the mind can't be made empirical does not mean that anything imaginable is possible. That's why people believe in god.. because of absence of proof. When there is nothing observable, then sound theory is needed. There are no sound theories of god, and no reason to believe Kreskin is legit if he's unwilling to prove it. I wouldn't doubt he's heard of Ranhi.
Nothing is beyond the rational mind. If he's for real, then there's no reason he could not perform under controlled conditions since he has done live shows before with no problem.
By the way, Understand that Penn and Teller are entertainers, not physicists, nor investigative journalists. When it comes to matters of 911 or the JFK assassination for example, they merely regurgitate what other say and what sounds best to them. They are not exactly qualified to make conclusions on such matters.
How is that any different than Alex Jones regurgitating what others say about 9-11, or Jeff Rense regurgitating what others say about chem-trails? Not to say that any of the four have it right, but being an entertainer doesn't disqualify you from everything else.
Every time two or more human creatures get together to break the rules it is a conspiracy. Otherwise there would be no need for babysitters, detectives or accountants.
The very use of the term "conpiracy theory" is a propaganda tool used to preempt critical thinking.
Or do you really think things are always as they seem, especially what the government and corporations say about themselves in press releases?
Excellent point. The word "conspiracy" has been used to turn people off from investigating corruption. We have laws on the books about 'Conspiracy to commit murder/kidnapping/manufacture meth/commit fraud' etc, etc. You can do hard time for conspiring to commit a crime. But politicians? NOOOOO! Authorities and elected officials never conspire with each other to commit crimes(?!). They would never do that...only us "regular" people engage in conspiracies (& go to jail for it).
JREF , as I have witnessed, usually promotes strawmen arguments, group think, doublethink, assertions of 'higher authority' (for some strange reason only known to them), creating their own 'science', .....
Oh and the only thing they really do effectively is expose charlatans, psychics, magicians, etc.
On all other matters, I don't really have a clue what they do other than make noise
JREF shill Penn Jillette promotes childish belief in the Bush regime's 911 fairytale, in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence against it. Penn Jillette also threatens to push down a flight of stairs any quesitoning the official government lie, and exhorst others to perpetrate the same violence upon those questioning the bullshit. Fat fuck dancing monkey shill reads whatever propaganda his Zionist or corporate masters scribble on the teleprompter. Loser.
Absolutely every piece of "evidence" for a conspiracy is flawed. Only people who have a mediocre understanding of science, and rely on so-called "common sense", believe in conspiracy theories.
Why don't they invite a fanatical Israeli Zionist to prove he has an INVISIBLE RACIST HOMICIDAL CLOUD FATHER who thousands of years ago told his mythical ancestors they were special and should enslave or kill the rest of humanity, and seize the desert east of the Mediterranean as their home?
Zionists don't need Randi's million dollar prize, they've already already gotten hundreds of billions of US tax money and unlimited military support to commit apartheid/genocide against the Palestinians.
The same can be said about Christianity and Islam's own sky daddies. Under the names of such "entities" and for the sake of eliminating the competing sky daddies of other cultures, predominately-Christian and predominately-Muslim empires savaged tremendous portions of the world for the last two millenia. The Palestinian Arabs who are Muslim and Christian are also just as potentially genocidal in their beliefs against a non-behemoth of a religion like Judaism as their other religious compatriots.
Maybe its because both Christianity and Islam are much more genocidal, assimilationist and expansionist than Judaism could ever hope to become. They both combine the bitter monotheism of old Judaism with the imperialist expansionism and acculturation of any post-Alexandrian empire, making for a bad mix that kills indigenous and tribal beliefs. This is why Judaism's adherents (and apostates!) are so intensely and stupidly hated by Christianity's converts (and post-Christian apostates!).
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I love twoofers. So many lulz. Though I do wish all the activism you nuts participate in could be channeled in to something, uh, not stupid.
Anyway, someday I want to make it to an Amazing Meeting. I really like James Randi and JREF. It's a dirty job but someone's gotta do it, to quote Faith No More.
Hey Penn, since you said Sonne was Danish, I'm pretty sure her name is pronounced like this: zoh-neh. Doesn't need much emphasis on the e at the end, but the s is usually pronounced like a z and the o has a sort of throaty sound, most similar to the English oh sound. Hope it helps!
I haven't lied about anything. I simply think we need evidence to believe thing. good evidence. I don't see any good evidence that the government inacted 9/11. as soon as I do, I'll believe. Until then, its a disgusting thing to suggest. Penn does make a very good point, about how many people would have to keep quiet in the gov. if that they inacted the attacks. Every other time there has been a gov. cover-up (watergate) people come foward. and 9/11 would require even more people. not plausible
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
It is very difficult to see any evidence when your head is buried in the sand and you refuse to look at it.
Check youtube for "Nano thermite" or "Niels Harrit" or "AE911truth" or watch "ZERO an investigation into 9/11" linked on my channel in playlists.
Remember JakeJax and JREFers for using disinfo tactics as well. 9/11 truth does not claim to know or have proof about who inside government was involved, we do have proof the towers were demolished though. Plenty of proof.
Quick shawnpitman cover your ears and shut your eyes and start screaming so you don't accedentally see or hear something that is true about 9/11. Keep repeating the mantra "Penn is always right, Penn is always right". Typical JREFer tactic AVOID, DENY, DISTRACT, INSULT, RUN AWAY.
It's a two way street. falling for what? you sir are a pretentious nincompoop if you really think perpetuating paranoid conspiracy fantasies is a good thing. explain why JREF is a laughing stock. at least they promote facts, truth, and critical thinking. you're just finger painting and making a mess.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
It's very easy to see "evidence" when you're just making shit up. Last time I checked, crashing a fully loaded 474 into the support column of a skyscraper and then having said plane BLOW UP is generally bad for the building's structural integrity.
To quote Penn, "The government couldn't even cover up a break-in to a psych office at a cheesy hotel. Watergate is the answer to all these conspiracy theories. If they couldn't do that, they can't fucking do anything."
Frank A. DeMartini -- WTC victim. WTC Construction Manager.
"The [Twin Tower] building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door. This intense grid and the jet-plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting."
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Mmhmm... did you SEE the hole the plane made? On top of that, remember the burning jet fuel and office space. The temperature in there topped out at around 1000 degrees. At that temperature, steel loses 60-90% of its strength. Couple that with and EXPLODING 747 and you get a building collapse.
You don't need thermite, you don't need bombs, you don't need even to melt the steel.
Penn and the JREFers will always be remembered for lying about 9/11 and for attempting to prop up the laughable official conspiracy theory about what happened on 9/11. Penn and the JREFers are no match for the hundreds upon hundreds of experts who have proven through research and the scientific method that the WTC towers were demolished. All the JREF clowns and Penn have is cheap insults to dish out. Pathetic.
You're dreaming JREFer if you think "everyone else in the world" buys your BS official conspiracy theory. JREF is a laughing stock and your propaganda is rejected. Penn or Randi himself would not last 5 minutes in a debate with one of our experts because like all JREF wannabe experts they have no credentials, no expertise, and no credibility.
Randi or Penn won't debate 9/11 why? Because they would be exposed as liars and idiots. The best you bozos had was Mark Roberts. Gage demolished him.
Randi has better things to do and is in his 80's....not really in the debating business right now as I understand it, but i'm a fan of his, not his spokesperson. as for Penn, he's a magician. He does a show in vegas. It's not his job to debate 9/11 conspiracy theorists, nor would he tell you he's qualified. There is one friend of the JREF who most certainly will debate you if he hasn't already and thats the wonderful Michael Shermer. Please stop dancing on the graves of peoples dead family.
LOL Shermer? You're not serious are you? I wouldn't bet any money on him comming out on top of a 9/11 debate unless you like losing cash. As for Penn he already opened his big ignorant mouth about 9/11 on his show "Bullshit". Disinfo101 is what his show should be called. In a debate controlled by a neutral moderator Penn would be crushed. You're right Penn is a flim flam man (magician) and has no business whatsoever talking about 9/11 so tell em to shut up or debate it like a man LIVE ON TAPE.
Also JakeJax it is you and those like you who lie to cover up the truth about 9/11 who insult the family members of those lost on 9/11. The 9/11 families are on our side not yours so you can stick that disinfo tactic up where it belongs too. JREF is the same thing as SCUMBAG as far as the family members are concerned.
Problem with the "supernatural" challenge: define supernatural. I mean.. Above/beyond nature? A car is above nature. It´s not naturally occurring and it takes special skills to handle them :P I´m just goofing off, I know. If someone had real abilities.. wouldn´t it worry them, to be honest? I would be worried and trying to handle everyday life acting as a normal human being, not thinking about million-dollar-prizes.
I wonder hgow old this iss. I would LOVE to see the results of the test.
Anyone skeptical of the test shouldn't be because this guy Randi REALLY has 1,000,000 dollars set aside for anyone who can prove ANYTHING supernatural or magical or religious or anything like that. I am excited that this lady will try because i think since he has had the million put aside for several years now he will in a few years take it back and abandoned the challenge which noone has completed!
Oh, I'm sure she has real psychic powers. Of course she does, but unfortunately there will be some kind of interference that will prevent her from demonstrating them at the test. (hey, maybe I'm psychic too???)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Now if you want to advocate randi then please provide scientific evidence for him, otherwise his ability or any so called tests he has done, with whomever will be rejected as unsound, if you cannot provide evidence, then i will move onto the next point, seeing as you have nothing to offer, then might aswell carry on with my debunking of your magician.
What about you to provide some against him? It is your job to proof that he do not have scientific evidence. You doing a classical argument from ignorance.
These test are classic double blind randomised controlled trials overused... This protocol is know to avoid trials to be affected by bias from the experimenter. The only possible thing that could happen is statistical error 1% of the time. So,on the Aura Reader test on youtube, this mean one good. The reader got 2. Not even the majority.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
puthoff and targ and radin have had their work published in peer reviewed journals, their work,not just their names mentioned,they have had their work published,whether you agree with them or not,many scientists do agree with the evidence published for psychic phenomena, you have not provided any peer review paper of randis testing or being able to duplicate anything under scientific conditions,nothing, you have no evidence that you even understand what you are talking about, i piss on you again
It is also know that the formal test would be longer, with repetition. This is basically write in the contract that the "claimant" sign.
And it is also know that scientist are man. And they can be wrong. Other people correcting it. All in your list had been corrected be others, and I do not talk about the JREF as the corrector... So, you have nothing but you don't know it.
Excuse synonym: justification or explanation. Check it.
And you do not answer my question; Why doing some review for something that have not been seen? The test are scientifically correct, they are RCT just like Pfizer do.
Also: their is no evidence, except for magic trick or questionable anecdotes.Nothing empirical exist.
And if Randi is biased; tell my why, since Houdini era (around 1922), no prizes for evidence of the paranormal had been won? Tell my why we have 30 prizes like that?
And where is your proof it exist? Put the task to your word and bring me an objective, scientificaly testable and empirical (not anecdotal) evidence of any paranormal phenomena. But I do not have a penny on me... So.
Just take a look: I don't think we need peer review when you what happen at the Maureen Flynn "test" in 1991 or Hydrick in 1981.
And what about the couple of article in Nature and in Science-Based Medicine magazine?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
im not interested in any tests that have been carried out by randi, unless you can provide peer reviewed papers for his tests and performing under strict conditions, you have nothing, all you are doing is following a magician for your science,that is pseudo science,all your arguments have no weight or credibility, you are an idiot that follows a magician for your science,you have no credibility and have failed.
you have produced no evidence that james randi has scientific understanding, no peer review for his test,no evidence that he can reproduce phenomena under strict scientific studies, nothing,i have given you a list of scientists that except the peer reviewed papers on paranormal phenomena,but where is the papers validating randi,where,nothing you have none, you bet wipe yourself down,you are covered in my piss.
It is funny to see that one of that list said that they MIGHT EXIST (not do), the other have part of her study in the top secret department, an other his know to had been screw 3 times, on other been screw be Geller (who have reverse his position).
A lot of people on your list would not be considered to be in a jury for a stealing case.
So as you follow a magician that has no scientific qualifications, whos testing procedures have never come under scrutiny,who has never produced any phenomena that he has claimed is fake under strict scientific conditions, then you are follow an unqualified magician for your science, you are following pseudo science and it is more evidence that you do not know what you are talking about.
I've been bothered by psychic events throughout my life.........Anyone who claims to "be a psychic" though, is bullshitting or deluded....It just doesn't work like that...........I'll never win the million because you can't test it whenever you want to....It comes and goes......Like an emerging sense.....................................[now start the ridicule
"When a guy discover something, he made his place in the scientific community.Scientist are literate, like the truth and to credit others for their success."
And james randi is not a scientist,most scientists are not knocking on his door and this is according to randi himself.
not only are you commiting an appeal to authority but you are appealing to a majority,two logical fallacies do not make an argument, you have nothing.
I never said he was, I say he his useful.And, in fact, in most JREF challenge, their is a jury composed at least 3 PH.D in science... And not any PH.D: we talk about nano-surgery, neurologies, computer science. Randi is only there to thing about some trick that the performer could use to trick others...
but he is the organ grinder and you defer to him and his organisation, yet his tests do not even meet the scientific standard,science is based on replication,not one off tests, his tests are so badly designed that they are not even published in peer review,james randi has never been able to do trickery of paranormal phenomena under strict scientific conditions,he has never had any duplications published or any of his tests published in peer review,following him is pseudo science.
His test are based to have at leas one reliable evidence. It is better then none. because when you have one you could try to replicate... When you don't have any, you can't. And since the "performer" bargain the condition ;)
Also, to do a trick of a paranormal phenomena it's not that hard. In fact, it is easy... I just need an envelope, some paper and a "plant" and I do clairvoyance. It's call the one-ahead and it's a basic magic trick... Even Peter Popoff had replicated it ;)
his tests are worth nothing, they are unscientific, if his tests meet the scientific criteria then produce the paper
if paranormal tricks are so easy to do then he has never performed them under strict scientific conditions, if you enjoy following a magician for your science, good luck,it is pseudo science but it's not real science.
Who decide that these test worth nothing? Plus, they are not always so unscientific because some of them are really weird... I am sorry, but look at Rosemary Hunter. She claim that she could make everybody urinate with the power of her mind. I am not kidding. No physical contact, no emotional harm and no sound... Just her mental.
How do you scientifically test that? You need the mechanism before testing it. Well, you test her to know if her claim are real. This is call observation.
James Randi don't even make the phenomena. In fact, the JREF test are preliminary test on a subject that claim to do a phenomena. Because one claim that he could make a particular thing, you see it once before being formal. And everyone who have try the preliminary test had no success. They lie, somehow. How could you start to deduce something if the claimant is unable to demonstrate any power he claim to have? Or: How could you start deduce out of nothing? You need observation before deducing.
I'll try again:You accuse the JREF to not being scientific but you never see a JREF formal test.The reason why is simple: they never done any. Because every claimant did not been able to perform their claim in the preliminary testing. So, how do we start thinking about the mechanism behind the phenomena without being able to seen it? And, who's responsible if the claimant can't do his phenomena under accepted condition?
"Because every claimant did not been able to perform their claim in the preliminary testing. "
provide me with evidence that james randis testing procedure whether preliminary or further is scientific, please provide me with evidence that he understands the scientific process, I want scientific credentials and peer reviewed papers, furthermore I want evidence that he himself has duplicated phenomena under strict scientific conditions, where is the beef, to advocate randi,produce the evidence.
O.k...: peer reviewed papers: Their is one, in the Guardien of May 12, 2009. In one in the Word Press in may 2009. Another on amateur scientist in January 2008. Another the 12 may 2009 on the discover magazine. That made 4 recents peer review. evidence that he has duplicated phenomena -> No claimant was able to do the phenomena he claim to had. So, he do not have to replicate it because their is no evidence of the phenomena.
Look: Simple teenager idea: If you claim you can do a front flip,I'll ask you to do it. But you hit your head on the floor when trying it... I would say that you can't do a front flip... And that you need an ambulance.The same principle need to apply ;) May be without the ambulance...
Randi test are not scientific? A lots of them are double-blind trial, highly use in clinical testing.
Plus science start by observation, therefor these test are the first step toward scientific explanation.
There is plently of evidence for phenomena according to many scientists who have scientific qualifications and understanding, so it dosent matter if you keep repeating like some stupid parrot that there is no evidence, that is your opinion,there is no evidence that james randi has any scientific understanding or credibility,he is not able to perform any phenomena whether of geller of of a medium or psychic under strict conditions,the only person that has no evidence is you.
O.k: So, answer this question: why the claimant can't do what he say he can do on set? If their his plenty of evidence about his claim, it should be easy do it again and again no?
So these evidences are not supported,mostly anecdotal, sometime biased by selection and some of them are simply fraud (like the Soal-Goldney).
And it's funny to see Geller name, in an argument like that, AFTER his reversal!Men, your pissing on your own shoes.
"O.k: So, answer this question: why the claimant can't do what he say he can do on set"
in order for you to say the claimant cannot do what he says he can do then you have to show that the way he is being tested is scientifically valid,as you have not,then your claims are rejected.
To say that my claims should be rejected, you have to say that these test are not scientifically valid.
First:The claimant accept it. He say he could do it under these condition... And he can't. He does considered it valid.
2nd:It is know that these test are RCT. What is done be the JREF are accept in clinical study... You see, the technique use by Pfizer and what the JREF do... This are pretty much the same. They are RCT in all case. Therefore... I hope you do not use Viagra.
ProudToBLoud: ... hang on a minute.... you're a creationist, aren't you? A creationist asking for strict adherence to the scientific method and peer reviewed papers? Wow! Does this mean that you swing both ways???
ProudToBLoud: Maybe one day, if you make an effort, you will realize that it is you who has the false dichotomy. The irony of that name, "ProudToBLoud"... loud, indeed. But an unfortunately poor signal to noise ratio, and extremely dogmatic. Check this series of videos and update your info: watch?v=KnJX68ELbAY
I won't reply further to this because it would only be a waste of my time, but for some reason I do think there is hope for you. I used to be as dogmatic once.
...there goes that white noise again... tell me what it is, oh wise one, that I follow like a sheep? The only thing I follow is EVIDENCE. And anyone who knows me knows that I've never been a follower. That's two reasons why I'm not religious! If you follow the doctrine of a religion then you are dogmatic. I really shouldn't indulge you any further. I think I overestimated your potential. Laugh away, oh wise one...
"The only thing I follow is EVIDENCE. And anyone who knows me knows that I've never been a follower"
Then produce the peer reviewed papers I ask for, if you do not produce them then Its obvious you are a sheep that follows without evidence. "If you follow the doctrine of a religion then you are dogmatic"
if you follow anything dogmatically you are dogmatic, being dogmatic is not excusive to religion.
"I really shouldn't indulge you any further. I think I overestimated your potential."
I didn't ask for your lame replies, It is me indulging you.
I don't think you are really in a position to estimate anyone, being estimated by you is like the psychiatric patient making a psychological judgement on the doctor.
By the way, by pretending not to understand what I meant about you being "loud" you have demonstrated your dishonesty. Either that or you're not that smart. Personally I don't think you are unintelligent. Of course, another possibility is that you just want to provoke a response. Still, dishonest. Not in the least bit amusing.
ProudToBLoud: another thing I must add.. I may have missed something because, to be honest, I've only skimmed these comments, but you seem to be asking for repeatable proof of a negative. You're very ardent in your scientific demands here.. what about the fact that science only tries to prove positive claims - not negative ones?
"The point is most recognised scientific said they are a lacks of supporting evidence"
again that is an appeal to majority fallacy, and it dosent matter,i can give you lists of where the majority ridiculed the minority and it was the minority that ended up being right, but will do that some other time as it is 4 in the morning and i will get some sleep
As for pseudoscience, you have no awareness of what is pseudoscience as you follow a magician for your science.
When a guy discover something, he made his place in the scientific community.Scientist are literate, like the truth and to credit others for their success. Just look at Einstein popularity.
Now take ESP: 96% of scientists in the National Academy of Science say they are skeptical of ESP.2% believed in it.
Even if this it is fallacious... You still need to bring good observation before talking about ESP. Because, in stats, this overtake the number of member that like tits in NAS.
physicist Nobel Laureate Professor Brian Josephson, Professor Jessica Utts, physicist Dr Harold Puthoff, Professor Russell Targ, Professor Dr Ernst Senkowski, physicist Dr Amit Goswami, scientist Ron Pearson, physicist Professor John Bockris, physicist Dr Claude Swanson, Professor Marilyn Schlitz, Dr Dean Radin.
truth isnt decided by vote,truth is indepndent of how many people believe in something,you are appealing to who has the most vote, that is an appeal to majority fallacy.
the fact that you would resort to logical fallacy just shows the weakness of your position.
You had enter in the game be placing a long list like that and only with one name on my list, I had more then yours. The point is most recognised scientific said they are a lacks of supporting evidence. So, except if you have good reproducible observations, I would not believe in it. Reproduction is important in science, so a single event would not constitute an evidence.
Plus, the lack of progress in some of these field categorise them as pseudoscience. Like astrology, EMDR, dowsing...
I wasn't playing your game,i was showing you that the there is no agreement of scientists on the paranormal, having a bigger list means nothing as appealing to a majority is a logical fallacy,truth is independent of how many people believe something to be true.
You're still misusing macroevolution. Macroevolution is mutation that happen in a species...Sometime it's in separated gene pools, sometime not. If it survive or not is not important -> natural selection.
What you are actually challenging, when misusing the word (I hate misusing a technical term), is large evolutionary change within species (not even "organism" but species). So, what about the Tigon? If you think that zoo are no lab:
What about the GloFish, available as a pet in store?
Hey guys, you know we love the passion you have for these topics and we want to keep hearing from you. We pass along your comments to Penn so let's keep them focused on the content and not just derogatory slams on each other ok?
"biology is no formal science, so it is validated. "
biology shows micro changes that occur, but the term evolution as darwin meant it has not been proven by biology, in fact the processes in biology have never demonstrated macro evolution, the moth experiments and the fruit fly experiments showed either deformity or death but not macro evolution, aswell as learning english,you should know that darwins theory is barely relevant to biology studies and was dropped from yale university
I actually take English class... But I should said to you "d'être plus littéraire. Tant qu'à faire, va prendre une grosse bière car tu m'ennuies". Now, if you understand that...
I agree that Darwin and Anaximander are not the most relevant in modern bio... But what about Filipchenko? It is his term, and you are misusing them. Macro is at or above the level of species. Micro is change below the level of species. Fruit fly is a specie, so a deformation mean this is macroevolution.
they were trying to create new structures not deformities which is devolution not evolution,the results ended in no new structures and death, try again.
If this deform-mutated fly do not survive, it is because he do not fit his environment. He just do not have the package... This is the part of evolution call natural selection. Therefor, "nonsurvivance" of a "devoluted" fly constitute a part of evolution. In fact, you are calling natural selection as a counterargument against evolution; this is an aberrant contradiction due to the fact that evolution is made of mutation and natural selection. And you tell them I am lost... WTF?
i cant understand your english and you do not understand the fruity fly experiments,instead of me trying to explain to someone that has problems understanding the lingo then it is better that you google it and translate it into a language you speak,
That's the problem trying to explain when your first language is not english.
First, reproduction of something ->We do not start be having life; we need life to start. It could be bacteria (flue), plant (bananas), animal (fruit flies).
Second: some mutation happen. More the mutation help to fit the environment, more change "it" will survive. If they are "bad", "it" will die.
The ones surviving fuck (well... reproduced... You know) so they pass some genes to the next generation.
It fit just there. And if they are species, it is macroevolution.
"And stop taking people for sheep and unrationalist.Because you are human and this mean... Oh, wait, that might explain a lot about the crazy shit you are doing... Sheep without head."
Please tell me what kind of english is this,are you spanish or something, are you trying to mix spanish with english and create a new language like say Spanglish, what boat did you arrive from? please learn to speak english.
"Paranormal, supernatural and occult power are not scientifically proved"
I think you mean proven,but I would say they are not scientifically proven according to whom? dean radin and others have had their work peer reviewed, where is the magicans peer review for his studies?
According to the United States National Science Foundation, the National Science Board, the NASA, the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation Network, the Defence Engineering and Science Group in UK and Canada Science, the Technology Museum in Canada(...); Paranormal, supernatural and occult power had never been proven/proved (Check you're dictionary: both are past participle and came from the old-French "prover" (which mean to prove)).
Just some of the Scientists who accept the paranormal include Sir William Crookes, the most decorated scientist of his time, physicist Sir Oliver Lodge, a Fellow of the prestigious Royal Society, Sir William Barrett, Dr J J Thompson the discoverer of the electron, Alfred Russell Wallace. More recently we have other physicists who have explained the existence of the paranormal, for example, physicist Professor Fred Alan Wolf, cont:
No I am from the uk, though I do not know where you are from but before telling somebody that they need to finish high school then it would help if you could learn to speak proper english, what boat did you come off of?
Thats about 5 challenges that randi could have taken to prove that he is not just a phony that talks like he has the answers but actually can back it up, he is nothing but a talker,it is all bluster,he is no better than peter popoff,sure we can laugh at gullible dupes that followed popoff,but you are a gullible dupe that follows a cowardly magician who runs from challenges and has no peer review for his work, he is a joke.
so thats three challenges that randi cluck cluck,runs from, then there is alex tskairis challenge,thats makes four that your cowardly magician runs from with your lame excuses and special pleading, aswell as running away like a coward you have made an unsubstantiated claim about randi conducting science,produce the peer review of randis test protocols and of randi performing under strict scientific conditions,if he conducts science then produce the peer review, no more lame excuses.
The challenge is a great, but it does pissed off a lot of people... Simply because a lots of people are sore loser and lack of critical rationalism.
Also 1 000 000 might be not enough anymore... The JREF need to raise it a bit (I will like to see 10 millions, but... This is not realistic), because like that they would be a taken more seriously... And it would make more publicity.
The challenge is not science, pointing does pissed off a lot of randis supporters.. Simply because lots of people are follow like a sheep and lack critical rationalism.
Paranormal, supernatural and occult power are not scientifically proved... They probably not existing, but they might exist. 1 millions buck is simply not a lots of money for these.
And stop taking people for sheep and unrationalist.Because you are human and this mean... Oh, wait, that might explain a lot about the crazy shit you are doing... Sheep without head.
"One could win 2 600 000 USD for visible psychic manifestation. None did. "
are we talking about randis challenge, isnt that 1 million, nobody has taken benneths challenge and proven that randis challenge is a geunine and fair challenge,randi has run away from challenges of zammit, benneth, alex tskaris, randi has failed and run from challenges made to him, if we base truth on challenges then randi has no credibility and fails.
The JREF challenge is 1 000 000. Then, you see Prabir Ghosh for 50 000. Then, go in New York and in North Texas and win 14 000. Then you go in Quebec, 10 000. Then, you go in Japan, another of 1 100 000. Then, you go in Australia, and win 90 000. And etc. I find about 30 challenge in the world. That mean 30 legal organization are unfair?
Also, they are watched closely... Be neutral advocate.
Zammit case is a reversal proof... We have to proof that he his wrong. In philo, this is call an argument from ignorance. It do not work like that. If I claim that you kill someone, arrest you and ask the proof that you did not kill someone you will put me to jail... No?
Alex Tsakiris bring a proof and say "give me the money"... Not fair, you have to take the challenge write be somebody else... Who could trust a video?
And benneth... Ah... Common! Homeopathic don't work.
"And, you know that Randi is not the only skeptic around"
hahahhaah well of course everybody around the world is a skeptic if you use the definition in the way that the randi crowd does, true skepticism involves applying skepticism to your own position.beliefs etc,to use the term loosely like the randi crowd makes the word meaningless,thats why randi has a reputation as a pseudo skeptic and rightly so.
I would be coming to the Amazing Meeting, but I'm a bit short on funds, being a college student. However, some of the OU Skeptic Society will be there. Good health, Mr. Jillette.
yeah I just need to go on jref or see the comments on videos on youtube to know how charming randis crowd are,randis crowd aren't exaclty known for their charm or humility for that matter,it is kind of like being condemned by an arsonist for striking a match.
Here's what I think: 1. put a finger in your asshole ... 2. pull that finger out of your asshole 3. put that finger back in your asshole ... 4. pull it out again .... 5. now shove that finger up your nose 6. hold your breath for 5 seconds 7. say the name of your love 8. put that finger back in your asshole ... again 9. that person will ask you out on the next Friday im being sarcastic, I hate these dumb ass retarded loudmouthed comments like the one I'm replying to
but somehow believing that you were created in the image of the creator of the entire universe and everything contained therein was made just for you is somehow humble, right? Christians are the last people who get to make claims about humility.
Hey, charm is not necessary to live so who care if some people in the crowd are ugly? We do not ask you to goes out with every lady in the crowd... In fact, we even ask you to not do that... Because, you can't please a thousand lady.
And, it is better to have a bit less charm and have more intelligence that being morons and look like California.
Well... On charm, every taste is in nature... So, who really care?
But he his not a morons. I mean, any peoples who break an Harry Houdini's Guinness record, like staying in a block of ice for an hour, is certainly not a moron.
And do you know who are idiot? Poor people who believe so much in humbug that they defend them... Like faith healers.
And, you know that Randi is not the only skeptic around. Worldwide, One could win 2 600 000 USD for visible psychic manifestation. None did.
So, you are saying that skepticism is nonsense? To suspended judgment and place systematic doubt is nonsense? To inquire and continually test something before saying "it's true" or "it's false" is nonsense? I think it is good sens... Seriously. I do a lots of science, and well sometime the best to know what happen is to said "I don't know... What about we try, get a bunch of data and look why it's do that?". Weirdly, the JREF do the same thing.
ok so you made your excuses for randi running away from challenges, there is another challenge on zammits site where all he has to do is replicate what a psychic claims she can do and he will get half a million,so thats two challenges he runs from, as for benneths challenge i wasnt talking about homeopathy,i am talking about the challenge to validate the credibility of randis challenge, i might ask john to allow you to apply,no one has passed yet.
None of them actually follow the rule of the contest. Randi do not run from them, it is them who run after Randi without following the rule. If they want the million dollars, they have to make a legal application. We talk about 1 millions bucks, you do not enter by all the ways.
If they do no made an application...This mean they could not cry, made shit and said it is non-fair because if they do... They are as thick as the brick use on the brickyard (and these was really thick bricks).
I am not suprised you do not want to defend your cowardly randi and are running away from defending that chicken shit, he has also made comments about intelligent design yet none of his supporters have taken the origin of life prize either,that's a cool 1 million dollars, he never took the challenge to prove evolution that was around half a million dollars, randi talks the talk but he runs like a chicken when called to back it up,he proves the point, empty vessels make the most noise.
Challenge to prove evolution? What about you to go to finish you're high school? Oh, sorry, you are an American... So, what about you to go to school in England? Seriously, we have proof of evolution: from genetic, from the fossils records, from horse racing, from comparative anatomy, from geographical distribution, from comparative physiology and biochemistry, from antibiotic and pesticide resistance...This is overwhelming evidence. But biology is no formal science, so it is validated.
"Challenge to prove evolution? What about you to go to finish you're high school"
so to be skeptical of naturalistic evolution means that you haven't finished high school eh? so if it is so easy then nothing would prevent randi from proving it,he didn't he ran away from it, that means he is a coward.
Now i wont be suprised if you engage in special pleading,(to be expected by followers of a cult of personality) but dont expect a reply to such nonsense if that is your case as i am not a social worker for people who behave like they are following a cult, you can also provide me some peer review of randis tests protocols and also peer review of randi duplicating that which he says is fake under strict scientific conditions, anything else then go talk to your other magican following buddies.
I am not interested in special pleading and excuses from the randi crowd, when people have a cult of personality around an individual then it is a waste of time showing them their error because they will uncritically and blindly defend their guru,if people are obligated to a magician that scientists for the most part do not take seriously(randi himself said scientists aren't beating a path to his door) then the magician is also oblidged to take up challenges made to him.
the way randi operates is that if people fail to come to agreement or randi does not take their applications then they have failed to meet his challenge,it is obviously dishonest but cannon fodder to his mindless fans, if people should defer to a dishonest magician then at the same time when this magican should meet challenges made to him,and dont give me any special pleading and excuses about other peoples tests that you dont like or a form of ad hominem,cont:
i honestly think "real" magick is performed by people who do not care for a million dollars. and even if they wanted it, theyd use magick to obtain it. who the fuck wants to be known for doing real magick? fuckin people bothering you everyday, every network calling you for a t.v. show, the gov't doing tests on you, etc...money isnt everything, nether is attention.
P.S. (penn is probably a black magician)
GroovLouv 1 year ago
the JREF he is talking about, but hardly mentioned what web site, is randi,org
rich0319726 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Your head is planted firmly up your butt Penn, the evidence 9/11 was an inside job is overwhelming. James Randy and JREF are a laughing stock. Stick to "debunking" spoon benders denier because neither you or James Randy have the brain power or the expertise to prop up the laughable 9/11 official story. No one is buying your propaganda denier, in fact more people every day are realizing what a pack of traitors and cowards you JREF clowns really are.
centrino105 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
like what u did with ur hair
armymedic999 1 year ago
Did you guys know Kreskin had his name *legally* changed to The Amazing Kreskin?
pennsays 1 year ago
part 2
Kreshian doesn't need to analyze his brain while using the irrational side. if he is having an orgasm then the proof of that would be the semen, not how the person having the orgasm can analyze his mind. The experiment doesn't revolve around critical thinking the experiment will TEST his claimed abilities. all the test does is prove it isn't a trick of one kind or another. why not be arrogant? he has been offering 1 mil dollars to anyone who prove they have a supernatural ability 4 40+yrs
karn33333 1 year ago
first of all its not JR's money he only put in 10k of it and someone else put in the rest of the money. second its not in his clutches, he doesn't have the money its in a trust they can not draw from except for the interest off the top for research. on an other note the "mentalist" obviously doesn't need a "totally relaxed" environment because he has performed on stage NO stage is a totally relaxed environment.
karn33333 1 year ago
an irrational answer and then told you its right and you have to accept it because for what ever reason you would tell me i was stupid. that the same shit these "mentalist" and "psychics" try to claim every day. it doesn't matter what side of the brain they use. its like saying well he has a lot of typos because he is left handed.
karn33333 1 year ago
everything you have typed is completely useless. first of all the "mentalist" or "psychic" doesn't have to prove how something works just that it works under controlled conditions. that whole right part of the brain left part of the brain has nothing to do with proving that an ability works. "skeptics tend to be irritable and easily rattled." no they are not. where the hell do you get this shit do you just make it up as you go along? if I told you that 2 + 2 = blue
karn33333 1 year ago
you obviously have no idea how real scientific test are conducted. Kreshin doesn't have to think rationally about it. kreshian just has to prove that its a legitimate ability and not a trick. you don't ask the mouse while he is running the maze why he went left and not right. the scientist runs many test to find a correlation as to why the mouse keeps turning left.
karn33333 1 year ago
We do experience it and we know others experience it cause they tell us one way or another. That's all the proof anyone needs.
Just cause the mind can't be made empirical does not mean that anything imaginable is possible. That's why people believe in god.. because of absence of proof. When there is nothing observable, then sound theory is needed. There are no sound theories of god, and no reason to believe Kreskin is legit if he's unwilling to prove it. I wouldn't doubt he's heard of Ranhi.
TheAmazingRandall 1 year ago
Nothing is beyond the rational mind. If he's for real, then there's no reason he could not perform under controlled conditions since he has done live shows before with no problem.
TheAmazingRandall 1 year ago
wow, i bet you're really full of yourself. if magicians don't test them, then who will...
nbaolam 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
randy is a fraud he does not have a million dollars.
cassidy99ful 2 years ago
Randy has a million dollars up HIS ASS. sitting next to the gerbils.
TheSouthernStar 2 years ago
@TheSouthernStar Here's hoping someone made a million dollar bill for him, then.
pennsays 2 years ago
@TheSouthernStar You seem to have extensive knowledge about Mr Randi's ass.
TasteOfGreen 1 year ago
you can see it on the damn website or call the investment firm to confirm that yes it is there. Jesus do some damn research
Warcorpse666 2 years ago
By the way, Understand that Penn and Teller are entertainers, not physicists, nor investigative journalists. When it comes to matters of 911 or the JFK assassination for example, they merely regurgitate what other say and what sounds best to them. They are not exactly qualified to make conclusions on such matters.
defexorcist 2 years ago
How is that any different than Alex Jones regurgitating what others say about 9-11, or Jeff Rense regurgitating what others say about chem-trails? Not to say that any of the four have it right, but being an entertainer doesn't disqualify you from everything else.
nonamejayal 2 years ago
but they are right about them.
ihatebobsaget1989 2 years ago
the bullet catch was a great show, don't sell yourself short, penn
bhdunn 2 years ago
Every time two or more human creatures get together to break the rules it is a conspiracy. Otherwise there would be no need for babysitters, detectives or accountants.
The very use of the term "conpiracy theory" is a propaganda tool used to preempt critical thinking.
Or do you really think things are always as they seem, especially what the government and corporations say about themselves in press releases?
zooooooperdooooooper 2 years ago 5
Excellent point. The word "conspiracy" has been used to turn people off from investigating corruption. We have laws on the books about 'Conspiracy to commit murder/kidnapping/manufacture meth/commit fraud' etc, etc. You can do hard time for conspiring to commit a crime. But politicians? NOOOOO! Authorities and elected officials never conspire with each other to commit crimes(?!). They would never do that...only us "regular" people engage in conspiracies (& go to jail for it).
defexorcist 2 years ago
Just out of curiosity, what does JREF do aside from not giving people a million dollars?
happymyster 2 years ago 7
JREF , as I have witnessed, usually promotes strawmen arguments, group think, doublethink, assertions of 'higher authority' (for some strange reason only known to them), creating their own 'science', .....
Oh and the only thing they really do effectively is expose charlatans, psychics, magicians, etc.
On all other matters, I don't really have a clue what they do other than make noise
TheLotusMantis 2 years ago
they educate obviously.
ihatebobsaget1989 2 years ago
JREF shill Penn Jillette promotes childish belief in the Bush regime's 911 fairytale, in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence against it. Penn Jillette also threatens to push down a flight of stairs any quesitoning the official government lie, and exhorst others to perpetrate the same violence upon those questioning the bullshit. Fat fuck dancing monkey shill reads whatever propaganda his Zionist or corporate masters scribble on the teleprompter. Loser.
bc9021010001 2 years ago 7
Absolutely every piece of "evidence" for a conspiracy is flawed. Only people who have a mediocre understanding of science, and rely on so-called "common sense", believe in conspiracy theories.
Maytag99 2 years ago
nice way to understand the humor, moron. he doesnt literally mean to "push" someone down the stairs, it's just satire.
ihatebobsaget1989 2 years ago
@bc9021010001 lol penn was so serious about pushing someone down a flight of stairs. you guys are so stupid words can't describe it.
ihatebobsaget1989 7 months ago
Why don't they invite a fanatical Israeli Zionist to prove he has an INVISIBLE RACIST HOMICIDAL CLOUD FATHER who thousands of years ago told his mythical ancestors they were special and should enslave or kill the rest of humanity, and seize the desert east of the Mediterranean as their home?
Zionists don't need Randi's million dollar prize, they've already already gotten hundreds of billions of US tax money and unlimited military support to commit apartheid/genocide against the Palestinians.
tonzimala 2 years ago 8
The same can be said about Christianity and Islam's own sky daddies. Under the names of such "entities" and for the sake of eliminating the competing sky daddies of other cultures, predominately-Christian and predominately-Muslim empires savaged tremendous portions of the world for the last two millenia. The Palestinian Arabs who are Muslim and Christian are also just as potentially genocidal in their beliefs against a non-behemoth of a religion like Judaism as their other religious compatriots.
CryingSinger 2 years ago
Judaism would love to turn Christians into Atheists & Muslims into bombers. Plays into their agenda so perfectly.
TheSouthernStar 2 years ago
Maybe its because both Christianity and Islam are much more genocidal, assimilationist and expansionist than Judaism could ever hope to become. They both combine the bitter monotheism of old Judaism with the imperialist expansionism and acculturation of any post-Alexandrian empire, making for a bad mix that kills indigenous and tribal beliefs. This is why Judaism's adherents (and apostates!) are so intensely and stupidly hated by Christianity's converts (and post-Christian apostates!).
CryingSinger 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I love twoofers. So many lulz. Though I do wish all the activism you nuts participate in could be channeled in to something, uh, not stupid.
Anyway, someday I want to make it to an Amazing Meeting. I really like James Randi and JREF. It's a dirty job but someone's gotta do it, to quote Faith No More.
avooslwuthoqquan 2 years ago
Hey Penn, since you said Sonne was Danish, I'm pretty sure her name is pronounced like this: zoh-neh. Doesn't need much emphasis on the e at the end, but the s is usually pronounced like a z and the o has a sort of throaty sound, most similar to the English oh sound. Hope it helps!
crablord 2 years ago
I haven't lied about anything. I simply think we need evidence to believe thing. good evidence. I don't see any good evidence that the government inacted 9/11. as soon as I do, I'll believe. Until then, its a disgusting thing to suggest. Penn does make a very good point, about how many people would have to keep quiet in the gov. if that they inacted the attacks. Every other time there has been a gov. cover-up (watergate) people come foward. and 9/11 would require even more people. not plausible
JakeJax 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It is very difficult to see any evidence when your head is buried in the sand and you refuse to look at it.
Check youtube for "Nano thermite" or "Niels Harrit" or "AE911truth" or watch "ZERO an investigation into 9/11" linked on my channel in playlists.
Remember JakeJax and JREFers for using disinfo tactics as well. 9/11 truth does not claim to know or have proof about who inside government was involved, we do have proof the towers were demolished though. Plenty of proof.
centrino105 2 years ago
Centrino, you're a gullible fool of the highest degree. Sorry.
shawnpitman 2 years ago
Quick shawnpitman cover your ears and shut your eyes and start screaming so you don't accedentally see or hear something that is true about 9/11. Keep repeating the mantra "Penn is always right, Penn is always right". Typical JREFer tactic AVOID, DENY, DISTRACT, INSULT, RUN AWAY.
JREF is a laughing stock.
centrino105 2 years ago
bold words....oh wait, that's just caps lock. Relax man
spudw2k 2 years ago
If you have nothing to say why do you even speak? Oh wait, that's just an attempt to goad. Relax man I am not falling for it.
centrino105 2 years ago 3
It's a two way street. falling for what? you sir are a pretentious nincompoop if you really think perpetuating paranoid conspiracy fantasies is a good thing. explain why JREF is a laughing stock. at least they promote facts, truth, and critical thinking. you're just finger painting and making a mess.
spudw2k 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Right...JREF is a laughing stock and conspiracy dipshits are the epitome of credibility. Fuck off you fucking crazy asshole.
ZionistJew100 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It's very easy to see "evidence" when you're just making shit up. Last time I checked, crashing a fully loaded 474 into the support column of a skyscraper and then having said plane BLOW UP is generally bad for the building's structural integrity.
To quote Penn, "The government couldn't even cover up a break-in to a psych office at a cheesy hotel. Watergate is the answer to all these conspiracy theories. If they couldn't do that, they can't fucking do anything."
rbogart123 2 years ago
Penn or Frank? Hmmm
Frank A. DeMartini -- WTC victim. WTC Construction Manager.
"The [Twin Tower] building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door. This intense grid and the jet-plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting."
centrino105 2 years ago 9
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Mmhmm... did you SEE the hole the plane made? On top of that, remember the burning jet fuel and office space. The temperature in there topped out at around 1000 degrees. At that temperature, steel loses 60-90% of its strength. Couple that with and EXPLODING 747 and you get a building collapse.
You don't need thermite, you don't need bombs, you don't need even to melt the steel.
Also, 747's are bigger than 707's. Just an FYI.
rbogart123 2 years ago
Penn and the JREFers will always be remembered for lying about 9/11 and for attempting to prop up the laughable official conspiracy theory about what happened on 9/11. Penn and the JREFers are no match for the hundreds upon hundreds of experts who have proven through research and the scientific method that the WTC towers were demolished. All the JREF clowns and Penn have is cheap insults to dish out. Pathetic.
centrino105 2 years ago
hundreds upon hundreds.....vs......everyone else in the world. hmm.
JakeJax 2 years ago
You're dreaming JREFer if you think "everyone else in the world" buys your BS official conspiracy theory. JREF is a laughing stock and your propaganda is rejected. Penn or Randi himself would not last 5 minutes in a debate with one of our experts because like all JREF wannabe experts they have no credentials, no expertise, and no credibility.
Randi or Penn won't debate 9/11 why? Because they would be exposed as liars and idiots. The best you bozos had was Mark Roberts. Gage demolished him.
centrino105 2 years ago
Randi has better things to do and is in his 80's....not really in the debating business right now as I understand it, but i'm a fan of his, not his spokesperson. as for Penn, he's a magician. He does a show in vegas. It's not his job to debate 9/11 conspiracy theorists, nor would he tell you he's qualified. There is one friend of the JREF who most certainly will debate you if he hasn't already and thats the wonderful Michael Shermer. Please stop dancing on the graves of peoples dead family.
JakeJax 2 years ago
LOL Shermer? You're not serious are you? I wouldn't bet any money on him comming out on top of a 9/11 debate unless you like losing cash. As for Penn he already opened his big ignorant mouth about 9/11 on his show "Bullshit". Disinfo101 is what his show should be called. In a debate controlled by a neutral moderator Penn would be crushed. You're right Penn is a flim flam man (magician) and has no business whatsoever talking about 9/11 so tell em to shut up or debate it like a man LIVE ON TAPE.
centrino105 2 years ago
Also JakeJax it is you and those like you who lie to cover up the truth about 9/11 who insult the family members of those lost on 9/11. The 9/11 families are on our side not yours so you can stick that disinfo tactic up where it belongs too. JREF is the same thing as SCUMBAG as far as the family members are concerned.
centrino105 2 years ago
can i go with?
CitricSavage 2 years ago
I really wish I could find a way to go there. Sadly I can't, but it won't deter me from my interests in skepticism and rational thinking.
Shutitup18 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
click on my name for the u r l to see how we won James Randi's fraudulent Million Dollar Challenge....
click and weep, Randi, you old lying fart
felixmab66 2 years ago
Problem with the "supernatural" challenge: define supernatural. I mean.. Above/beyond nature? A car is above nature. It´s not naturally occurring and it takes special skills to handle them :P I´m just goofing off, I know. If someone had real abilities.. wouldn´t it worry them, to be honest? I would be worried and trying to handle everyday life acting as a normal human being, not thinking about million-dollar-prizes.
Jentzi1 2 years ago
I wonder hgow old this iss. I would LOVE to see the results of the test.
Anyone skeptical of the test shouldn't be because this guy Randi REALLY has 1,000,000 dollars set aside for anyone who can prove ANYTHING supernatural or magical or religious or anything like that. I am excited that this lady will try because i think since he has had the million put aside for several years now he will in a few years take it back and abandoned the challenge which noone has completed!
upplsuckimcool16 2 years ago
Oh, I'm sure she has real psychic powers. Of course she does, but unfortunately there will be some kind of interference that will prevent her from demonstrating them at the test. (hey, maybe I'm psychic too???)
wolfinside 2 years ago
im just not money motivated :P
CharlesLazaruz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Now if you want to advocate randi then please provide scientific evidence for him, otherwise his ability or any so called tests he has done, with whomever will be rejected as unsound, if you cannot provide evidence, then i will move onto the next point, seeing as you have nothing to offer, then might aswell carry on with my debunking of your magician.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
What about you to provide some against him? It is your job to proof that he do not have scientific evidence. You doing a classical argument from ignorance.
These test are classic double blind randomised controlled trials overused... This protocol is know to avoid trials to be affected by bias from the experimenter. The only possible thing that could happen is statistical error 1% of the time. So,on the Aura Reader test on youtube, this mean one good. The reader got 2. Not even the majority.
therrydicule 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
puthoff and targ and radin have had their work published in peer reviewed journals, their work,not just their names mentioned,they have had their work published,whether you agree with them or not,many scientists do agree with the evidence published for psychic phenomena, you have not provided any peer review paper of randis testing or being able to duplicate anything under scientific conditions,nothing, you have no evidence that you even understand what you are talking about, i piss on you again
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
where is your evidence for randi
stop making excuses,where is it,where
you have none
hahahahahha, you have nothing.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
It is also know that the formal test would be longer, with repetition. This is basically write in the contract that the "claimant" sign.
And it is also know that scientist are man. And they can be wrong. Other people correcting it. All in your list had been corrected be others, and I do not talk about the JREF as the corrector... So, you have nothing but you don't know it.
therrydicule 2 years ago
stop making excuses
provide the peer review
all i am getting from you is excuses,where is it?
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
Excuse synonym: justification or explanation. Check it.
And you do not answer my question; Why doing some review for something that have not been seen? The test are scientifically correct, they are RCT just like Pfizer do.
Also: their is no evidence, except for magic trick or questionable anecdotes.Nothing empirical exist.
And if Randi is biased; tell my why, since Houdini era (around 1922), no prizes for evidence of the paranormal had been won? Tell my why we have 30 prizes like that?
therrydicule 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
where is the peer review
stop making excuses and dodging
your arguments mean nothing without ,where is it? you have nothing.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
And where is your proof it exist? Put the task to your word and bring me an objective, scientificaly testable and empirical (not anecdotal) evidence of any paranormal phenomena. But I do not have a penny on me... So.
Just take a look: I don't think we need peer review when you what happen at the Maureen Flynn "test" in 1991 or Hydrick in 1981.
And what about the couple of article in Nature and in Science-Based Medicine magazine?
therrydicule 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
im not interested in any tests that have been carried out by randi, unless you can provide peer reviewed papers for his tests and performing under strict conditions, you have nothing, all you are doing is following a magician for your science,that is pseudo science,all your arguments have no weight or credibility, you are an idiot that follows a magician for your science,you have no credibility and have failed.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
No i am pissing all over you
you have produced no evidence that james randi has scientific understanding, no peer review for his test,no evidence that he can reproduce phenomena under strict scientific studies, nothing,i have given you a list of scientists that except the peer reviewed papers on paranormal phenomena,but where is the papers validating randi,where,nothing you have none, you bet wipe yourself down,you are covered in my piss.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
It is funny to see that one of that list said that they MIGHT EXIST (not do), the other have part of her study in the top secret department, an other his know to had been screw 3 times, on other been screw be Geller (who have reverse his position).
A lot of people on your list would not be considered to be in a jury for a stealing case.
therrydicule 2 years ago
So as you follow a magician that has no scientific qualifications, whos testing procedures have never come under scrutiny,who has never produced any phenomena that he has claimed is fake under strict scientific conditions, then you are follow an unqualified magician for your science, you are following pseudo science and it is more evidence that you do not know what you are talking about.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
I've been bothered by psychic events throughout my life.........Anyone who claims to "be a psychic" though, is bullshitting or deluded....It just doesn't work like that...........I'll never win the million because you can't test it whenever you want to....It comes and goes......Like an emerging sense.....................................[now start the ridicule
johnnyk2112 2 years ago
ridicule , human perception , ridicule etc...
JuxTaPose117 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
johnnyk2112 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"When a guy discover something, he made his place in the scientific community.Scientist are literate, like the truth and to credit others for their success."
And james randi is not a scientist,most scientists are not knocking on his door and this is according to randi himself.
not only are you commiting an appeal to authority but you are appealing to a majority,two logical fallacies do not make an argument, you have nothing.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
I never said he was, I say he his useful.And, in fact, in most JREF challenge, their is a jury composed at least 3 PH.D in science... And not any PH.D: we talk about nano-surgery, neurologies, computer science. Randi is only there to thing about some trick that the performer could use to trick others...
therrydicule 2 years ago
but he is the organ grinder and you defer to him and his organisation, yet his tests do not even meet the scientific standard,science is based on replication,not one off tests, his tests are so badly designed that they are not even published in peer review,james randi has never been able to do trickery of paranormal phenomena under strict scientific conditions,he has never had any duplications published or any of his tests published in peer review,following him is pseudo science.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
His test are based to have at leas one reliable evidence. It is better then none. because when you have one you could try to replicate... When you don't have any, you can't. And since the "performer" bargain the condition ;)
Also, to do a trick of a paranormal phenomena it's not that hard. In fact, it is easy... I just need an envelope, some paper and a "plant" and I do clairvoyance. It's call the one-ahead and it's a basic magic trick... Even Peter Popoff had replicated it ;)
therrydicule 2 years ago
his tests are worth nothing, they are unscientific, if his tests meet the scientific criteria then produce the paper
if paranormal tricks are so easy to do then he has never performed them under strict scientific conditions, if you enjoy following a magician for your science, good luck,it is pseudo science but it's not real science.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
Who decide that these test worth nothing? Plus, they are not always so unscientific because some of them are really weird... I am sorry, but look at Rosemary Hunter. She claim that she could make everybody urinate with the power of her mind. I am not kidding. No physical contact, no emotional harm and no sound... Just her mental.
How do you scientifically test that? You need the mechanism before testing it. Well, you test her to know if her claim are real. This is call observation.
therrydicule 2 years ago
if it is scientific then produce the peer reviewed paper,i am waiting for it.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
Why produce a paper on something that did not been seen and that it is non-existing? That look like a big waste of time.
therrydicule 2 years ago
the only thing that is non existing is your evidence.
we have no verification that randis test meets the scientific criteria
and james randi has never been able to replicate phenomena under strict scientific conditions
stop making excuses,please produce the papers validating randis test procedures and his ability toperform under strict scientific conditions.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
James Randi don't even make the phenomena. In fact, the JREF test are preliminary test on a subject that claim to do a phenomena. Because one claim that he could make a particular thing, you see it once before being formal. And everyone who have try the preliminary test had no success. They lie, somehow. How could you start to deduce something if the claimant is unable to demonstrate any power he claim to have? Or: How could you start deduce out of nothing? You need observation before deducing.
therrydicule 2 years ago
Don't take this the wrong way but I could not make any sense of your last post.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
I'll try again:You accuse the JREF to not being scientific but you never see a JREF formal test.The reason why is simple: they never done any. Because every claimant did not been able to perform their claim in the preliminary testing. So, how do we start thinking about the mechanism behind the phenomena without being able to seen it? And, who's responsible if the claimant can't do his phenomena under accepted condition?
therrydicule 2 years ago
"Because every claimant did not been able to perform their claim in the preliminary testing. "
provide me with evidence that james randis testing procedure whether preliminary or further is scientific, please provide me with evidence that he understands the scientific process, I want scientific credentials and peer reviewed papers, furthermore I want evidence that he himself has duplicated phenomena under strict scientific conditions, where is the beef, to advocate randi,produce the evidence.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
O.k...: peer reviewed papers: Their is one, in the Guardien of May 12, 2009. In one in the Word Press in may 2009. Another on amateur scientist in January 2008. Another the 12 may 2009 on the discover magazine. That made 4 recents peer review. evidence that he has duplicated phenomena -> No claimant was able to do the phenomena he claim to had. So, he do not have to replicate it because their is no evidence of the phenomena.
therrydicule 2 years ago
they are not peer review
especially the guardian
i asked you to provide a peer review of his testing procedures and of him duplicating phenomena.
"No claimant was able to do the phenomena he claim to had. So, he do not have to replicate it because their is no evidence of the phenomena. "
in order for you to say there is no evidence of the phenomena, then you have to provide evidence that james randis test is scientific, cont:
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
Look: Simple teenager idea: If you claim you can do a front flip,I'll ask you to do it. But you hit your head on the floor when trying it... I would say that you can't do a front flip... And that you need an ambulance.The same principle need to apply ;) May be without the ambulance...
Randi test are not scientific? A lots of them are double-blind trial, highly use in clinical testing.
Plus science start by observation, therefor these test are the first step toward scientific explanation.
therrydicule 2 years ago
There is plently of evidence for phenomena according to many scientists who have scientific qualifications and understanding, so it dosent matter if you keep repeating like some stupid parrot that there is no evidence, that is your opinion,there is no evidence that james randi has any scientific understanding or credibility,he is not able to perform any phenomena whether of geller of of a medium or psychic under strict conditions,the only person that has no evidence is you.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
O.k: So, answer this question: why the claimant can't do what he say he can do on set? If their his plenty of evidence about his claim, it should be easy do it again and again no?
So these evidences are not supported,mostly anecdotal, sometime biased by selection and some of them are simply fraud (like the Soal-Goldney).
And it's funny to see Geller name, in an argument like that, AFTER his reversal!Men, your pissing on your own shoes.
therrydicule 2 years ago
"O.k: So, answer this question: why the claimant can't do what he say he can do on set"
in order for you to say the claimant cannot do what he says he can do then you have to show that the way he is being tested is scientifically valid,as you have not,then your claims are rejected.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
To say that my claims should be rejected, you have to say that these test are not scientifically valid.
First:The claimant accept it. He say he could do it under these condition... And he can't. He does considered it valid.
2nd:It is know that these test are RCT. What is done be the JREF are accept in clinical study... You see, the technique use by Pfizer and what the JREF do... This are pretty much the same. They are RCT in all case. Therefore... I hope you do not use Viagra.
therrydicule 2 years ago
these evidences are not supported according to you,but that is a proof by assertion fallacy and as such has no validity.
so aswell as evidence supported by ancedotes we also have the evidence accepted by scientists to back it up
you have produced no evidence for your supporting the pseudo science of magician randi,nothing,you are failing big time.
until you do your claims about the paranormal will be rejected as unsound and dismissed.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
ProudToBLoud: ... hang on a minute.... you're a creationist, aren't you? A creationist asking for strict adherence to the scientific method and peer reviewed papers? Wow! Does this mean that you swing both ways???
VirgilFoxMusic 2 years ago
A creationist because I am skeptical of darwinian evolution,a kind of false dichotomy but then that is your fractured thinking.
I just hold randi to the same standard that his flock of sheep hold to others,and all I get is excuses and special pleading.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
ProudToBLoud: Maybe one day, if you make an effort, you will realize that it is you who has the false dichotomy. The irony of that name, "ProudToBLoud"... loud, indeed. But an unfortunately poor signal to noise ratio, and extremely dogmatic. Check this series of videos and update your info: watch?v=KnJX68ELbAY
I won't reply further to this because it would only be a waste of my time, but for some reason I do think there is hope for you. I used to be as dogmatic once.
VirgilFoxMusic 2 years ago
how can i be loud , you find my typing loud, hahahahhaha
you used to be as dogmatic,you should look up the term dogmatic as it is his sheep followers like yourself who are the dogamitists.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
...there goes that white noise again... tell me what it is, oh wise one, that I follow like a sheep? The only thing I follow is EVIDENCE. And anyone who knows me knows that I've never been a follower. That's two reasons why I'm not religious! If you follow the doctrine of a religion then you are dogmatic. I really shouldn't indulge you any further. I think I overestimated your potential. Laugh away, oh wise one...
VirgilFoxMusic 2 years ago
"The only thing I follow is EVIDENCE. And anyone who knows me knows that I've never been a follower"
Then produce the peer reviewed papers I ask for, if you do not produce them then Its obvious you are a sheep that follows without evidence. "If you follow the doctrine of a religion then you are dogmatic"
if you follow anything dogmatically you are dogmatic, being dogmatic is not excusive to religion.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
"I really shouldn't indulge you any further. I think I overestimated your potential."
I didn't ask for your lame replies, It is me indulging you.
I don't think you are really in a position to estimate anyone, being estimated by you is like the psychiatric patient making a psychological judgement on the doctor.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
By the way, by pretending not to understand what I meant about you being "loud" you have demonstrated your dishonesty. Either that or you're not that smart. Personally I don't think you are unintelligent. Of course, another possibility is that you just want to provoke a response. Still, dishonest. Not in the least bit amusing.
VirgilFoxMusic 2 years ago
Alot ofprojective comments going on from you, i dont mind providing you with some therapy but I am not getting paid for it
You need to get out of the cult,offloading is only gonna help you so much,but i wish you the best.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
He bored my... And of course, I have enough time to lose to answer to him.
therrydicule 2 years ago
ProudToBLoud: another thing I must add.. I may have missed something because, to be honest, I've only skimmed these comments, but you seem to be asking for repeatable proof of a negative. You're very ardent in your scientific demands here.. what about the fact that science only tries to prove positive claims - not negative ones?
VirgilFoxMusic 2 years ago
"The point is most recognised scientific said they are a lacks of supporting evidence"
again that is an appeal to majority fallacy, and it dosent matter,i can give you lists of where the majority ridiculed the minority and it was the minority that ended up being right, but will do that some other time as it is 4 in the morning and i will get some sleep
As for pseudoscience, you have no awareness of what is pseudoscience as you follow a magician for your science.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
When a guy discover something, he made his place in the scientific community.Scientist are literate, like the truth and to credit others for their success. Just look at Einstein popularity.
Now take ESP: 96% of scientists in the National Academy of Science say they are skeptical of ESP.2% believed in it.
Even if this it is fallacious... You still need to bring good observation before talking about ESP. Because, in stats, this overtake the number of member that like tits in NAS.
therrydicule 2 years ago
Comment removed
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
physicist Nobel Laureate Professor Brian Josephson, Professor Jessica Utts, physicist Dr Harold Puthoff, Professor Russell Targ, Professor Dr Ernst Senkowski, physicist Dr Amit Goswami, scientist Ron Pearson, physicist Professor John Bockris, physicist Dr Claude Swanson, Professor Marilyn Schlitz, Dr Dean Radin.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
I still have a bare majority...
therrydicule 2 years ago
truth isnt decided by vote,truth is indepndent of how many people believe in something,you are appealing to who has the most vote, that is an appeal to majority fallacy.
the fact that you would resort to logical fallacy just shows the weakness of your position.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
You had enter in the game be placing a long list like that and only with one name on my list, I had more then yours. The point is most recognised scientific said they are a lacks of supporting evidence. So, except if you have good reproducible observations, I would not believe in it. Reproduction is important in science, so a single event would not constitute an evidence.
Plus, the lack of progress in some of these field categorise them as pseudoscience. Like astrology, EMDR, dowsing...
therrydicule 2 years ago
I wasn't playing your game,i was showing you that the there is no agreement of scientists on the paranormal, having a bigger list means nothing as appealing to a majority is a logical fallacy,truth is independent of how many people believe something to be true.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
And it has never been demonstrated in the lab, the experiments for macroevolution have always ended in failure.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
You're still misusing macroevolution. Macroevolution is mutation that happen in a species...Sometime it's in separated gene pools, sometime not. If it survive or not is not important -> natural selection.
What you are actually challenging, when misusing the word (I hate misusing a technical term), is large evolutionary change within species (not even "organism" but species). So, what about the Tigon? If you think that zoo are no lab:
What about the GloFish, available as a pet in store?
therrydicule 2 years ago
Hey guys, you know we love the passion you have for these topics and we want to keep hearing from you. We pass along your comments to Penn so let's keep them focused on the content and not just derogatory slams on each other ok?
pennsays 2 years ago
I stop,because I am really bored with this argument.
therrydicule 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"biology is no formal science, so it is validated. "
biology shows micro changes that occur, but the term evolution as darwin meant it has not been proven by biology, in fact the processes in biology have never demonstrated macro evolution, the moth experiments and the fruit fly experiments showed either deformity or death but not macro evolution, aswell as learning english,you should know that darwins theory is barely relevant to biology studies and was dropped from yale university
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
I actually take English class... But I should said to you "d'être plus littéraire. Tant qu'à faire, va prendre une grosse bière car tu m'ennuies". Now, if you understand that...
I agree that Darwin and Anaximander are not the most relevant in modern bio... But what about Filipchenko? It is his term, and you are misusing them. Macro is at or above the level of species. Micro is change below the level of species. Fruit fly is a specie, so a deformation mean this is macroevolution.
therrydicule 2 years ago
deformity is a macroevolution
hahahhahahahahha
they were trying to create new structures not deformities which is devolution not evolution,the results ended in no new structures and death, try again.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
This is the processes call natural selection with is part of evolution. Shah Mat.
therrydicule 2 years ago
they were testing mutations to create new structures not deformities,they were not testing natural selection, you are lost.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
If this deform-mutated fly do not survive, it is because he do not fit his environment. He just do not have the package... This is the part of evolution call natural selection. Therefor, "nonsurvivance" of a "devoluted" fly constitute a part of evolution. In fact, you are calling natural selection as a counterargument against evolution; this is an aberrant contradiction due to the fact that evolution is made of mutation and natural selection. And you tell them I am lost... WTF?
therrydicule 2 years ago
i cant understand your english and you do not understand the fruity fly experiments,instead of me trying to explain to someone that has problems understanding the lingo then it is better that you google it and translate it into a language you speak,
That's the problem trying to explain when your first language is not english.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
How evolution work:
First, reproduction of something ->We do not start be having life; we need life to start. It could be bacteria (flue), plant (bananas), animal (fruit flies).
Second: some mutation happen. More the mutation help to fit the environment, more change "it" will survive. If they are "bad", "it" will die.
The ones surviving fuck (well... reproduced... You know) so they pass some genes to the next generation.
It fit just there. And if they are species, it is macroevolution.
therrydicule 2 years ago
"And stop taking people for sheep and unrationalist.Because you are human and this mean... Oh, wait, that might explain a lot about the crazy shit you are doing... Sheep without head."
Please tell me what kind of english is this,are you spanish or something, are you trying to mix spanish with english and create a new language like say Spanglish, what boat did you arrive from? please learn to speak english.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
"Paranormal, supernatural and occult power are not scientifically proved"
I think you mean proven,but I would say they are not scientifically proven according to whom? dean radin and others have had their work peer reviewed, where is the magicans peer review for his studies?
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
According to the United States National Science Foundation, the National Science Board, the NASA, the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation Network, the Defence Engineering and Science Group in UK and Canada Science, the Technology Museum in Canada(...); Paranormal, supernatural and occult power had never been proven/proved (Check you're dictionary: both are past participle and came from the old-French "prover" (which mean to prove)).
therrydicule 2 years ago
Just some of the Scientists who accept the paranormal include Sir William Crookes, the most decorated scientist of his time, physicist Sir Oliver Lodge, a Fellow of the prestigious Royal Society, Sir William Barrett, Dr J J Thompson the discoverer of the electron, Alfred Russell Wallace. More recently we have other physicists who have explained the existence of the paranormal, for example, physicist Professor Fred Alan Wolf, cont:
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
Comment removed
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
"Oh, sorry, you are an American"
No I am from the uk, though I do not know where you are from but before telling somebody that they need to finish high school then it would help if you could learn to speak proper english, what boat did you come off of?
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
Thats about 5 challenges that randi could have taken to prove that he is not just a phony that talks like he has the answers but actually can back it up, he is nothing but a talker,it is all bluster,he is no better than peter popoff,sure we can laugh at gullible dupes that followed popoff,but you are a gullible dupe that follows a cowardly magician who runs from challenges and has no peer review for his work, he is a joke.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
so thats three challenges that randi cluck cluck,runs from, then there is alex tskairis challenge,thats makes four that your cowardly magician runs from with your lame excuses and special pleading, aswell as running away like a coward you have made an unsubstantiated claim about randi conducting science,produce the peer review of randis test protocols and of randi performing under strict scientific conditions,if he conducts science then produce the peer review, no more lame excuses.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
put a new one pen :P
CharlesLazaruz 2 years ago
Hmmm definitely a lot of thoughts out there on Randi, but what about the challlenge specifically? Any TAM attendees going to report back to us?
pennsays 2 years ago
The challenge is a great, but it does pissed off a lot of people... Simply because a lots of people are sore loser and lack of critical rationalism.
Also 1 000 000 might be not enough anymore... The JREF need to raise it a bit (I will like to see 10 millions, but... This is not realistic), because like that they would be a taken more seriously... And it would make more publicity.
therrydicule 2 years ago
The challenge is not science, pointing does pissed off a lot of randis supporters.. Simply because lots of people are follow like a sheep and lack critical rationalism.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
Paranormal, supernatural and occult power are not scientifically proved... They probably not existing, but they might exist. 1 millions buck is simply not a lots of money for these.
And stop taking people for sheep and unrationalist.Because you are human and this mean... Oh, wait, that might explain a lot about the crazy shit you are doing... Sheep without head.
therrydicule 2 years ago
if you want to do some nice special pleading for randi go ahead,it'salways nice to see the hypocrisy and excuses from his uncritical devotees.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
"One could win 2 600 000 USD for visible psychic manifestation. None did. "
are we talking about randis challenge, isnt that 1 million, nobody has taken benneths challenge and proven that randis challenge is a geunine and fair challenge,randi has run away from challenges of zammit, benneth, alex tskaris, randi has failed and run from challenges made to him, if we base truth on challenges then randi has no credibility and fails.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
The JREF challenge is 1 000 000. Then, you see Prabir Ghosh for 50 000. Then, go in New York and in North Texas and win 14 000. Then you go in Quebec, 10 000. Then, you go in Japan, another of 1 100 000. Then, you go in Australia, and win 90 000. And etc. I find about 30 challenge in the world. That mean 30 legal organization are unfair?
Also, they are watched closely... Be neutral advocate.
therrydicule 2 years ago
Also:
Zammit case is a reversal proof... We have to proof that he his wrong. In philo, this is call an argument from ignorance. It do not work like that. If I claim that you kill someone, arrest you and ask the proof that you did not kill someone you will put me to jail... No?
Alex Tsakiris bring a proof and say "give me the money"... Not fair, you have to take the challenge write be somebody else... Who could trust a video?
And benneth... Ah... Common! Homeopathic don't work.
therrydicule 2 years ago
nice excuses and special pleading just what i thought
,cluck cluck
excuses for the cowardly magician,your special pleading and hypocrisy dosen't wash.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
"And, you know that Randi is not the only skeptic around"
hahahhaah well of course everybody around the world is a skeptic if you use the definition in the way that the randi crowd does, true skepticism involves applying skepticism to your own position.beliefs etc,to use the term loosely like the randi crowd makes the word meaningless,thats why randi has a reputation as a pseudo skeptic and rightly so.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
What the hell are you blabbing about? And what challenges did Randi run away from? What kind of challenge?
Bluelemonzz 2 years ago
I would be coming to the Amazing Meeting, but I'm a bit short on funds, being a college student. However, some of the OU Skeptic Society will be there. Good health, Mr. Jillette.
grantorndorff 2 years ago
Can't wait to hear your views of the event, PG.
Causa10bserver 2 years ago
You sure talk a lot ProudToBLoud
Dragon555 2 years ago 2
"wow, what a charmer"
yeah I just need to go on jref or see the comments on videos on youtube to know how charming randis crowd are,randis crowd aren't exaclty known for their charm or humility for that matter,it is kind of like being condemned by an arsonist for striking a match.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
gwagblade 2 years ago
"or humility"
but somehow believing that you were created in the image of the creator of the entire universe and everything contained therein was made just for you is somehow humble, right? Christians are the last people who get to make claims about humility.
dawn0293 2 years ago
Hey, charm is not necessary to live so who care if some people in the crowd are ugly? We do not ask you to goes out with every lady in the crowd... In fact, we even ask you to not do that... Because, you can't please a thousand lady.
And, it is better to have a bit less charm and have more intelligence that being morons and look like California.
therrydicule 2 years ago
"And, it is better to have a bit less charm and have more intelligence "
problem is the randi crowd lack both.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
Well... On charm, every taste is in nature... So, who really care?
But he his not a morons. I mean, any peoples who break an Harry Houdini's Guinness record, like staying in a block of ice for an hour, is certainly not a moron.
And do you know who are idiot? Poor people who believe so much in humbug that they defend them... Like faith healers.
And, you know that Randi is not the only skeptic around. Worldwide, One could win 2 600 000 USD for visible psychic manifestation. None did.
therrydicule 2 years ago
"And do you know who are idiot? Poor people who believe so much in humbug that they defend them"
yes like following a magican for science that is humbug, thats why you defend it because you believe in such nonsense
And, you know that Randi is not the only s
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
So, you are saying that skepticism is nonsense? To suspended judgment and place systematic doubt is nonsense? To inquire and continually test something before saying "it's true" or "it's false" is nonsense? I think it is good sens... Seriously. I do a lots of science, and well sometime the best to know what happen is to said "I don't know... What about we try, get a bunch of data and look why it's do that?". Weirdly, the JREF do the same thing.
therrydicule 2 years ago
"Weirdly, the JREF do the same thing"
ok so you made your excuses for randi running away from challenges, there is another challenge on zammits site where all he has to do is replicate what a psychic claims she can do and he will get half a million,so thats two challenges he runs from, as for benneths challenge i wasnt talking about homeopathy,i am talking about the challenge to validate the credibility of randis challenge, i might ask john to allow you to apply,no one has passed yet.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
None of them actually follow the rule of the contest. Randi do not run from them, it is them who run after Randi without following the rule. If they want the million dollars, they have to make a legal application. We talk about 1 millions bucks, you do not enter by all the ways.
If they do no made an application...This mean they could not cry, made shit and said it is non-fair because if they do... They are as thick as the brick use on the brickyard (and these was really thick bricks).
therrydicule 2 years ago
I am not suprised you do not want to defend your cowardly randi and are running away from defending that chicken shit, he has also made comments about intelligent design yet none of his supporters have taken the origin of life prize either,that's a cool 1 million dollars, he never took the challenge to prove evolution that was around half a million dollars, randi talks the talk but he runs like a chicken when called to back it up,he proves the point, empty vessels make the most noise.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
Challenge to prove evolution? What about you to go to finish you're high school? Oh, sorry, you are an American... So, what about you to go to school in England? Seriously, we have proof of evolution: from genetic, from the fossils records, from horse racing, from comparative anatomy, from geographical distribution, from comparative physiology and biochemistry, from antibiotic and pesticide resistance...This is overwhelming evidence. But biology is no formal science, so it is validated.
therrydicule 2 years ago
"Challenge to prove evolution? What about you to go to finish you're high school"
so to be skeptical of naturalistic evolution means that you haven't finished high school eh? so if it is so easy then nothing would prevent randi from proving it,he didn't he ran away from it, that means he is a coward.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
Now i wont be suprised if you engage in special pleading,(to be expected by followers of a cult of personality) but dont expect a reply to such nonsense if that is your case as i am not a social worker for people who behave like they are following a cult, you can also provide me some peer review of randis tests protocols and also peer review of randi duplicating that which he says is fake under strict scientific conditions, anything else then go talk to your other magican following buddies.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
I am not interested in special pleading and excuses from the randi crowd, when people have a cult of personality around an individual then it is a waste of time showing them their error because they will uncritically and blindly defend their guru,if people are obligated to a magician that scientists for the most part do not take seriously(randi himself said scientists aren't beating a path to his door) then the magician is also oblidged to take up challenges made to him.
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago
the way randi operates is that if people fail to come to agreement or randi does not take their applications then they have failed to meet his challenge,it is obviously dishonest but cannon fodder to his mindless fans, if people should defer to a dishonest magician then at the same time when this magican should meet challenges made to him,and dont give me any special pleading and excuses about other peoples tests that you dont like or a form of ad hominem,cont:
ProudToBLoud 2 years ago