"robust phenomenon" - Science is a great tool but "miracles" are not repeatable...they are not robust and cannot be examined by science which demands repeatability....can science prove that ALL natural occurrences are repeatable?
i like randi's answer to dawkins :) i've found dawkins too reluctant to admit error, in this case he sort of shows it very obviously and randi responds perfectly. if such an erroneous idea of something paranormal where to be proven wrong, then that would be fantastic and amazing. even if i don't believe in it and dawkins is a very intelligent man which i admire, we should admit errors happily if found, as it would expand our scope, no matter what the truth is. we're not here to be right.
Unfortunately, Dawkins is politically a childishly naive person. 'Randi' runs a Jewish site - check whether there's any criticism of 'orgone' stuff, which is a Jewish fraud. Where are Dakwins' comments on Jewish racism and violence? Is Dawkins really happy hobnobbing with members of a group that murdered tens of millions of Russian, for example? Why is he happy to promote atheism (fair enough), but never mention the trical and racist-based cult of Judaism? He's just another rent-boy in fact
@rerevisionist Richard Dawkins is not a religious man. He is an atheist and he has no reason to lie about it. The unforgivable sin is blasphemy against the holy spirit and Dawkins has done plenty of it. If he really was a Jew he'd be a bit more tentative about his outwardly disgust of religion. This is just another one of these anti-semitic, racist conspiracy theories connected with the Jewish religion. Just get over yourself and live your life you little vermin.
@Justpooinabush Just out of curiosity how can you blaspheme against something that is made up? I mean that pre-supposes every christian has blasphemed against Zeus, Ra , Zoroaster and Celtic tree spirits etc. etc. for which there is just as much evidence as some form of chrisitan holy spirit. I accept your condemnation of the fascist weirdo but you seem to have replaced it with something equally indefensible?
@tedwilli9 - you're mistaken. Not that many people pay attention to Randi or Dawkins, and many of them - like you - clearly don't understand the issues.
Dawkins is talking out of his ass. He castigates the Rhine experiments for using such large numbers, and that this would skew the figures. In fact the exact opposite is the case. Huge numbers would tend to iron out any aberrations, which is why the Rhine Institute used such huge numbers.
@tigranvartanovitch What he is in fact saying is that the Joseph Banks Rhine experiments at Duke University in Durham, NC, were so massive that if there was indeed a reliable and robust phenomenon, it WOULD have showed up..however, results are often elusive almost evasive. That's what he said and meant.
@8bobthebuilder Don't tell me what "he is in fact saying." I studied math at uni. I know what he's saying, and I don't need any help from you to understand him. What he is saying is that there were no phenomena detected. That is not true. At least Rhine got up off his ass and did something, instead of turning himself into a professional sneerer.
@tigranvartanovitch I read Rhine's book. No doubt the Rhine `30s experiment were important in laying a foundation for future parapsychological research...Although such research is rejected by 99.9% of scientists. Mr Dawkins claims Rhine discovered no "robust phenomenon," suggesting statistical sig..PLease Tigranvart, tell us how Rhine's data demonstrated statistically significant phenomena..Of course, you must cite data from Rhine's experiments, which was apparently invalidated by miscounting.
@8bobthebuilder Read it again.This time get someone to help you with the big words and the math. Read the bit where Rhine autoimproved the telekinesis dice experiments. Randy and Dorkins say Rhine should not have investigated telepathy because it doesn't exist. What kind of an argument is that? Huxley investigated evolution at a time when all "knew" that the Big Boss did it. 99.9% of scientists? Who counted them? You? What methods did you use?
@tigranvartanovitch You didn't tell us the data and results of Rhine's experiments! Tell us how his data shows that psychic stuff is real! Then, tell us how many subsequent studies and by whom replicated his results.
You need to refer specifically to the data in Rhine's book. You need to show us results. Remember, as Randi said, the onus is on you guys so show that it's true, not the other way `round.
So far you have shown no evidence from scientific experiments.
@8bobthebuilder You said that 99.9% of scientists reject Rhine's findings. Before you start barking out orders to me, you will tell me how you arrived at this figure from. Also, I am a skeptic, and I do not believe that you have read Rhine's book. I want to see some evidence that you have. I also want to know what is your criteria of "robust results."
@tigranvartanovitch hehe, :) Less than 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10,000 scientists are parapsychologists -- so 99.9% [or more!] of scientists don;t believe in it. What's more, PSI experiments are NOT in major international scientific journals -- they are in TRASH journals b/c mainstream science won't accept their garbage. "Robust phenomena," as Dawkins said,:"show up reliably & repeatedly" but Psi and pk do not. so they don't count as a phenomene that have been demonstrated by the scientific method!
@8bobthebuilder "Less than 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10,000 scientists are parapsychologists -- so 99.9% [or more!] of scientists don;t believe in it." Is this your idea of "robust statistics"? Let's see your figures: how many parapsychologists are there? How many scientists are there that believe in the paranormal and are not parapsychologists? BTW, I know for a fact that YOU are not a scientist.
@tigranvartanovitch [continued.] It is highly debatable whether parapsychology is even a science! You said earlier, that it "is not true" that no phenomena were detected. For the third time, I ask you to tell us how Rhine et al;'s results in the 1930s demonstrated psychokinesis and telepathy? Moreover, which studies afterwards confirmed his results?
I think we should put as many religious and supernatural claims to the test and settle this once and for all. Religious folks should be encouraged to take a good look at the findings!
Welcome God-Haters, and I’m happy to have an impact on your dismal view of yourself, and the world that you live in.Ask yourself this,”If you don’t believe in Jesus/God then what drives you to attack them?”
Dude, WTF?! Seriously, WTF is WRONG with you?! You may wanna ask a scientist about all that, because that's NOT how homosexuality ACTUALLY works!
If you still believe homosexuality is a choice when geneticists can tell you to within JUST 10-20 bases where EXACTLY the "gay gene" is located in the human genome, then you're honestly fucking retarded. Sorry! You might as well take a straight person and ORDER them to be gay AND LIKE IT, or *DIE*, because *THAT*'s the VERY THING
That's why I hate Ghost Lab from Discovery. They're trying to find mechanisms to a paranormal phenomena that they have yet to prove exist. Many of their evidence, watching their show, is honestly quite shaky. If a test really is to be conducted, I don't think one episode's worth of time (which is approximately 2 weeks at max) won't be enough.
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
I heard Randi's swollowing of Homeopathic Sleeping pills eventually led to his stomach/intestinal cancer. So much for Randi's faith in the ineffectiveness of Homeopathic Medicine. Psalm 14 & Psalm 53, The Dawkins Delusion.
@MrOphachew Then it must take a heck of a long time for homeopathic solvents to work. Also, he should be stone cold dead since he used more then ten times the amount that would be lethal, but he isn't, and he survived his cancer just fine.
@MrOphachew I am not stating it is so the proof is on your side. I take it you dont have any hence that reply. OK, no problem I will just take it you're using guess work.
@MrOphachew Lol, likewise??? Idiot, how the hell can it be likewise when I am not the one making such an outlandish statement that homeopathy caused the cancer. I dont remember making any statement like yours, for or against. So, you either have no evidence or you are a troll. Either way, no proof is no proof. Thanks for confirming that.
I'm an atheist and a skeptic but I don't think Richard and James should only laugh about 2:26 - "any skeptics present" even if it does sound convenient! I can't find any paranormal tests where a skeptic hasn't been present and I'm sure such a test could be constructed robustly.
If a paranormal event such as telepathy is proven then is it any more crazy that skeptics can block such an event?
Atheists appears hold the belief that if God exists, they would be the first to reason that out - as if God would judge mankind by their knowledge of the scientific method.
How cocky they are! Everyone of them believing that they are smarter then 99% of the world´s population, and at the same time believing that the universe appeared out of nothing! ("It sure as hell wasn´t God" ;-)
Still I am glad God shows mercy to atheists - I would still be one if He hadn´t.
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish... . For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people"
"“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.” "
@Bobathefish How cocky believers are to assume that God means what they mean. Who is god? Which one should I believe in? Do tell.
How would your god judge an atheist and more importantly did you learn your judgment from that god? No atheist believes that the universe appeared out of nothing but many of the Christians I know believe that God came from nothing - weird concept.
dogs has better mental sensory than human. They were believeing gods and all kinds of nonsense thereby 6th sense brain dininished so tiny they have become that biology do not know it yet.
"You expect to get a suggestion of statistical significance if your numbers are that great."
Only if you don't know your math.
If you do, then the larger the amount of data, the more surprising you can expect patterns to be by chance, and the more surprising you require them to be to counts as statistically significant.
In fact, the amount of *extra* surprise you can expect to encounter, beyond what is expected from the size of the data, *decreases* with the size of the data.
Can somebody give me a scientific explanation for Deja vu or precognition? i haven't so far found any anywhere. Links to any webpages that are not cynical skeptical based but robustly scientific would be appreciated. This phenomena doesn't appear to have been adequately explained by anybody.
There is a book called "Isten az Agyban" by Gábor Szendi(Hungrian version), Deja Vu and Jamais Vu are also explained in it! It has something to do with the brain(in a nutshell). Many years ago when people did not understand storms, lightning etc. they thought that it has to do something with a higher power, nowadays we know that there is no Zeus above us, it is nature!
@klindred I dont know if its true, but i heard a nice explanation. When you experience something, your left and right part of the brain does not work evenly fast. Sometimes they get so much out of sync, that when the slowest half is done processing it, your short term memory allready "knows" it, and the situation is not just stored in memory, but its also recognized as something from the past. thats allready stored (a few milli seconds ago)
@mysund Thanks. Yeah i heard this before. It doesn't seem to cut it for me. After all, we are talking about experiences that are massively removed in time from each other.
@klindred Perhaps when the situation is recognized, it is recognized befor it is properly stored. It might be that this uncertainty in how well it is stored, makes it seem as something way back. Just a guess, im not expert in these matters. Maby when you recognize it, and then store the last half of the input, the sudden increase in accessibility of that memory tricks the conciousness to think its some old faint memory being brought to the surface.
@mysund Have you experienced it yourself? Lots of people get it as just feelings, faint familiarity. I have experienced it visually. THere is no mistake about it. I'm not claiming any super power. These events happen spontaneously and are not predictable in advance.
@klindred I have experienced it. Both as more recent, and also as very distant (in time) deja-vus. Some feels like i re-experience something from all the way back to my birth.
I think of it as a funny sideeffect of having a complex brain, with lots of different processes working simultaneous.
Its like having a car to take you from a to b. But if you open the backhatch, it can protect you from the rain. So your car is suddently an umbrella :D
@klindred The fenomenon is quite explainable as a natural fenomenon. Not that im sure my own explenation is correct. But it is quite well understood amongst scientists.
It is to me unlikly that something else than pure material is behind this.
No supernatural fenomenon have ever show its workings. As humans we tend to think in supernatural ways, every time we stumble upon something that is nontrivial, or nonambient. That is a "caveman" instinct that once made us more alert towards predators.
@mysund I think there is a problem with saying the phenomenon is well understood by scientists and then questioning whether it is natural or supernatural. The limitations of language present a problem here when we are trying to understand whether this phenomenon is natural or somehow outside the bounds of "natural". It doesn't have to be supernatural because if it was it couldn't exist. Then again, to call it natural doesn't seem to fit with our present scientific knowledge.
@klindred Firstly: You seem to have changed gear here. You asked for me to explain why i have a materialist position on deja-vu, and thats what i did.
Secondly (to your responce): Your absolutely correct. Since it really IS understood by scientist, it cant be supernatural. And yes language limitations... My english is bad.
When i say supernatural i would just as well use the word immaterial, eventhou it istwo different things. Im not up to speed on present sci. knowldg. But saying nonnatural?
I am not going to jump into any paradigm to suit present understanding. I would rather someone came along with a working hypothesis first.
And again, to say it is immaterial doesn't strike me as a workable hypothesis either. It is obviously material in some sense or it couldn't interact with matter.
@klindred We saw or heard something that might be a predator or a foe. If our imagination then starts to create some "acting agent" to be responcible for the glimpse we saw, or sound we heard, we would be alert and ready. This gives lots of false positives like the wind snapping a twigg, but we were alert and aware that something or someone is out there. That gives survival advantage, so our brains evolved over generations to adapt this behaviour.
@mysund I'm sure you have heard of "correllation isn't causation" phrase before. I don't see WHY survival instincts should trump intutive instincts, assuming, of course, that the latter really do exist (which they probably do, since we wouldn't be having this exchange otherwise).
@klindred have heard of it. I wouldnt say surv. instincts trumps. The behaviour kick in when needed, (and also sometimes when not needed) and saves your genes so they can stay in the gene pool of the spieces.
@klindred The opposite behaviour, that is, acting like "its probably nothing" will one day give false negatives, and we get eaten or slain. That has no advantage. So we tend to think there something or someone out there. So variation in the way we react and natural selection on that variation, makes humans superstitious. I hope this answers the "why materialist" and also why we even consider something else that materialist approach.
Randi is an illusionist &has created the illusion he cant find competent psychics or evidence of the supernatural cause the masses don't pay to attend his magic bollocks.His challenge isnt even scientific,for it to be the selection process has to allow a representative of every country, culture and belief system. I am scientifically proven as a telepath but not allowed to enter this challenge cause Ive got no money to pay Randi to attend.
@Bayview05 How often does someone admit they are wrong? Ever...let alone on the internet.
I met Richard Dawkins tonight. He seemed kind of like a dick, really. He also answered questions very lazily. Maybe he wasn't feeling well? Jet-lag? Getting older/cranky? Who knows. But...either way...you're probably right. Still, a brilliant man.
@frankielee77 "Seen the spiritual world?" What mythical, imaginary place is this? Your spiritual world? The one you made up in your head? Or the one you actually live in...where is there is plenty of natural things that are beautiful and breath-taking. If it is the latter, I would imagine they have seen far more of the "spiritual world" than you have.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I believe the reason the presence of skeptics tends to prevent phenomena may be because skeptical energy is perhaps the most powerful psychic energy. I am a graduate of the Berkeley Psychic institute and base that hypothesis on my observations made during hundreds of psychic readings and energy channeling demonstrations.
So, psychic energy, if real, is an unreliable mechanism. I've seen dozens of psychic readings as well. None were convincing unless you wanted to believe it was real. And everyone conveniently ignored all of misses (which was the majority of what the psychics said). But you are right; skepticism is the most powerful 'psychic' energy because its tools are logic and rational thinking. Once employed, it obliterates the metaphysical 'psychic' energies quite easily.
@needparalegal Yeah you are onto something there. Everytime one of these sceptics are around all paranormal powers vanish. The sceptics have some sort of überpower, that cancel out all other supernatural powers. So the only supernatural powers that can be proven are the canceling super powers of the sceptics. And they say that there is no supernatural powers.
An example of what Dawkins is talking about could be the Non-Newtonian Fluids. I believe their discovery is fairly recent. Suppose one of the first people to know about them, told Randi that he or she could walk on a fluid that was 90% water. Randi would have said "Nonsense", and might have lost his money. On the other hand he may have demanded to know the composition of the fluid, to experiment with. Then, as he says, it would become science.
James Randi....is what this world needs. Realists who are willing to speak the truth even if they offend people and are characterized as "abrasive".---It's lke the UFO thing-- WHY WOULD the government cover up UFO's ? It might actually just NASA getting their funding. Most of us somewhat educated FOLK appreciate you Mr. Randi.
I don't see why this guy keeps getting marked as spam - yes, it's kind of unrelated to the video, but nevertheless, the 9/11 false flag attack is something we should all be aware of and research ourselves and come to our own conclusions. If you do manage to do all this, the truth is obvious.
My left ear loves this video but my right one is lonely :(
TomClothier 4 days ago
"robust phenomenon" - Science is a great tool but "miracles" are not repeatable...they are not robust and cannot be examined by science which demands repeatability....can science prove that ALL natural occurrences are repeatable?
wealthwhatisit 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
two idiots ,one video
krishnadas4x 3 weeks ago
some sweet info here
chrispikeyp 1 month ago
i enjoyed this vid
MrBrucebracey 1 month ago
i like randi's answer to dawkins :) i've found dawkins too reluctant to admit error, in this case he sort of shows it very obviously and randi responds perfectly. if such an erroneous idea of something paranormal where to be proven wrong, then that would be fantastic and amazing. even if i don't believe in it and dawkins is a very intelligent man which i admire, we should admit errors happily if found, as it would expand our scope, no matter what the truth is. we're not here to be right.
Devoti 1 month ago 2
@Devoti i think you didn't understand what dawkins was saying. watch the longer version of this video in the related videos section.
glisicv8 1 month ago
@Devoti The video doesn't seem to display any reluctancy for admitting error by Dawkins.
camgan1 1 month ago
WHERE'S THE REST OF THIS? It suddenly ends!!
ElectronicMusicUK 1 month ago
Two heroes, one video :)
sjaf3 1 month ago 13
Unfortunately, Dawkins is politically a childishly naive person. 'Randi' runs a Jewish site - check whether there's any criticism of 'orgone' stuff, which is a Jewish fraud. Where are Dakwins' comments on Jewish racism and violence? Is Dawkins really happy hobnobbing with members of a group that murdered tens of millions of Russian, for example? Why is he happy to promote atheism (fair enough), but never mention the trical and racist-based cult of Judaism? He's just another rent-boy in fact
rerevisionist 2 months ago
@rerevisionist Richard Dawkins is not a religious man. He is an atheist and he has no reason to lie about it. The unforgivable sin is blasphemy against the holy spirit and Dawkins has done plenty of it. If he really was a Jew he'd be a bit more tentative about his outwardly disgust of religion. This is just another one of these anti-semitic, racist conspiracy theories connected with the Jewish religion. Just get over yourself and live your life you little vermin.
Justpooinabush 2 months ago 9
@Justpooinabush - Judaism is an explicitly racist cult, you stinking piece of shit.
rerevisionist 2 months ago
@Justpooinabush Just out of curiosity how can you blaspheme against something that is made up? I mean that pre-supposes every christian has blasphemed against Zeus, Ra , Zoroaster and Celtic tree spirits etc. etc. for which there is just as much evidence as some form of chrisitan holy spirit. I accept your condemnation of the fascist weirdo but you seem to have replaced it with something equally indefensible?
freedomofthought1000 1 day ago
@rerevisionist You are one of the many persons that make me doubt in humanity.
godsadog 2 months ago
@godsadog - I notice you're unable to frame any sort of intelligent response.
rerevisionist 2 months ago
@rerevisionist By estimating one response? Congratulations Einstein.
godsadog 2 months ago
@rerevisionist everyone is laughing at you for being a moron. (including me) : )
tedwilli9 2 months ago
@tedwilli9 - you're mistaken. Not that many people pay attention to Randi or Dawkins, and many of them - like you - clearly don't understand the issues.
rerevisionist 2 months ago
@rerevisionist Wrong.
theafi99000 1 month ago
Randi and Dawkins.
Pop pop pop, watching motherfuckers drop
Nickmanq 4 months ago
i like these two gentlemen..highly intelligent and well spoken, i'd go to their seminar!!!
8bobthebuilder 4 months ago
Dawkins is talking out of his ass. He castigates the Rhine experiments for using such large numbers, and that this would skew the figures. In fact the exact opposite is the case. Huge numbers would tend to iron out any aberrations, which is why the Rhine Institute used such huge numbers.
tigranvartanovitch 4 months ago
@tigranvartanovitch What he is in fact saying is that the Joseph Banks Rhine experiments at Duke University in Durham, NC, were so massive that if there was indeed a reliable and robust phenomenon, it WOULD have showed up..however, results are often elusive almost evasive. That's what he said and meant.
8bobthebuilder 4 months ago
@8bobthebuilder Don't tell me what "he is in fact saying." I studied math at uni. I know what he's saying, and I don't need any help from you to understand him. What he is saying is that there were no phenomena detected. That is not true. At least Rhine got up off his ass and did something, instead of turning himself into a professional sneerer.
tigranvartanovitch 4 months ago
@tigranvartanovitch I read Rhine's book. No doubt the Rhine `30s experiment were important in laying a foundation for future parapsychological research...Although such research is rejected by 99.9% of scientists. Mr Dawkins claims Rhine discovered no "robust phenomenon," suggesting statistical sig..PLease Tigranvart, tell us how Rhine's data demonstrated statistically significant phenomena..Of course, you must cite data from Rhine's experiments, which was apparently invalidated by miscounting.
8bobthebuilder 4 months ago
@8bobthebuilder Read it again.This time get someone to help you with the big words and the math. Read the bit where Rhine autoimproved the telekinesis dice experiments. Randy and Dorkins say Rhine should not have investigated telepathy because it doesn't exist. What kind of an argument is that? Huxley investigated evolution at a time when all "knew" that the Big Boss did it. 99.9% of scientists? Who counted them? You? What methods did you use?
tigranvartanovitch 4 months ago
@tigranvartanovitch You didn't tell us the data and results of Rhine's experiments! Tell us how his data shows that psychic stuff is real! Then, tell us how many subsequent studies and by whom replicated his results.
You need to refer specifically to the data in Rhine's book. You need to show us results. Remember, as Randi said, the onus is on you guys so show that it's true, not the other way `round.
So far you have shown no evidence from scientific experiments.
8bobthebuilder 4 months ago
@8bobthebuilder You said that 99.9% of scientists reject Rhine's findings. Before you start barking out orders to me, you will tell me how you arrived at this figure from. Also, I am a skeptic, and I do not believe that you have read Rhine's book. I want to see some evidence that you have. I also want to know what is your criteria of "robust results."
tigranvartanovitch 4 months ago
@tigranvartanovitch hehe, :) Less than 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10,000 scientists are parapsychologists -- so 99.9% [or more!] of scientists don;t believe in it. What's more, PSI experiments are NOT in major international scientific journals -- they are in TRASH journals b/c mainstream science won't accept their garbage. "Robust phenomena," as Dawkins said,:"show up reliably & repeatedly" but Psi and pk do not. so they don't count as a phenomene that have been demonstrated by the scientific method!
8bobthebuilder 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@8bobthebuilder "Less than 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10,000 scientists are parapsychologists -- so 99.9% [or more!] of scientists don;t believe in it." Is this your idea of "robust statistics"? Let's see your figures: how many parapsychologists are there? How many scientists are there that believe in the paranormal and are not parapsychologists? BTW, I know for a fact that YOU are not a scientist.
tigranvartanovitch 4 months ago
@tigranvartanovitch [continued.] It is highly debatable whether parapsychology is even a science! You said earlier, that it "is not true" that no phenomena were detected. For the third time, I ask you to tell us how Rhine et al;'s results in the 1930s demonstrated psychokinesis and telepathy? Moreover, which studies afterwards confirmed his results?
8bobthebuilder 4 months ago
I think we should put as many religious and supernatural claims to the test and settle this once and for all. Religious folks should be encouraged to take a good look at the findings!
somethingdiffereable 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Welcome God-Haters, and I’m happy to have an impact on your dismal view of yourself, and the world that you live in.Ask yourself this,”If you don’t believe in Jesus/God then what drives you to attack them?”
Somewhat odd huh?
Seigu007 4 months ago
@Seigu007 1. The want/need for knowledge instead of a delusion.
2. to point out how wrong and false it is in my point of view
3. to express our believes
4. to help others that have the same delusion that i once had
5. to show how immoral the bible and the characters in it really are
We aren't driven to attack them more like question them. Any more questions about atheism just ask. (when you say god-haters you mean atheists right?)
ApostateOfTheDamned 4 months ago
@ApostateOfTheDamned Your Atheism is worthless. Why dont you shoot yourself and return to nature. You talking monkey.
Seigu007 4 months ago
@Seigu007 Oh, i get it now, you're a troll. Sorry i though you weren't a douche, my bad.
ApostateOfTheDamned 4 months ago
I had seen demons.I wonder how are those people who never seen one,would say I am in a state of illusion or what?
The greatest two clowns our world had ever seen.
frankielee77 4 months ago
@SpencerBenedict2nd
Lol, WTF?! Did you make that up or something? WTF did you come up with that?! LOL!
macgeek2004 5 months ago
@lightandbeautiful
...you are advocating!
macgeek2004 5 months ago
@lightandbeautiful
Dude, WTF?! Seriously, WTF is WRONG with you?! You may wanna ask a scientist about all that, because that's NOT how homosexuality ACTUALLY works!
If you still believe homosexuality is a choice when geneticists can tell you to within JUST 10-20 bases where EXACTLY the "gay gene" is located in the human genome, then you're honestly fucking retarded. Sorry! You might as well take a straight person and ORDER them to be gay AND LIKE IT, or *DIE*, because *THAT*'s the VERY THING
macgeek2004 5 months ago
That's why I hate Ghost Lab from Discovery. They're trying to find mechanisms to a paranormal phenomena that they have yet to prove exist. Many of their evidence, watching their show, is honestly quite shaky. If a test really is to be conducted, I don't think one episode's worth of time (which is approximately 2 weeks at max) won't be enough.
DeinosDinos 5 months ago
My left ear is very pleased
namnidah 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
SpencerBenedict2nd 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
SpencerBenedict2nd 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible.
SpencerBenedict2nd 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 5 months ago
I heard Randi's swollowing of Homeopathic Sleeping pills eventually led to his stomach/intestinal cancer. So much for Randi's faith in the ineffectiveness of Homeopathic Medicine. Psalm 14 & Psalm 53, The Dawkins Delusion.
MrOphachew 5 months ago
@MrOphachew Then it must take a heck of a long time for homeopathic solvents to work. Also, he should be stone cold dead since he used more then ten times the amount that would be lethal, but he isn't, and he survived his cancer just fine.
Flitteriffic 5 months ago
@Flitteriffic -- too bad.
MrOphachew 5 months ago
@Flitteriffic -- check out the clips titled James Randi: Exposed here on youtube
MrOphachew 5 months ago
@MrOphachew Ahh so Homeopathy causes cancer? Interesting. Any links to this fact about Randi and his cancer being associated?
Haizum74 5 months ago
@Haizum74 -- Any links to Randi and his cancer not being associated?
MrOphachew 5 months ago
@MrOphachew I am not stating it is so the proof is on your side. I take it you dont have any hence that reply. OK, no problem I will just take it you're using guess work.
Haizum74 5 months ago
@Haizum74 --Likewise
MrOphachew 5 months ago
@MrOphachew Lol, likewise??? Idiot, how the hell can it be likewise when I am not the one making such an outlandish statement that homeopathy caused the cancer. I dont remember making any statement like yours, for or against. So, you either have no evidence or you are a troll. Either way, no proof is no proof. Thanks for confirming that.
Haizum74 5 months ago
@Haizum74 --Likewise
MrOphachew 5 months ago
Comment removed
MrOphachew 5 months ago
I'm an atheist and a skeptic but I don't think Richard and James should only laugh about 2:26 - "any skeptics present" even if it does sound convenient! I can't find any paranormal tests where a skeptic hasn't been present and I'm sure such a test could be constructed robustly.
If a paranormal event such as telepathy is proven then is it any more crazy that skeptics can block such an event?
notnek011 5 months ago
Just the potential of knowing that the million dollars is already mine makes me happy.
AClarke2007 6 months ago
@AClarke2007 We'll be watching. Go get that million dollars ...
backwoodsninja 6 months ago
The podium says STARDUST Las Vegas.... They tore that dump down eons ago.
keter1234 6 months ago
@keter1234 Actually its Closing date was November 1, 2006 according to Wikipedia.
Monsoon28 6 months ago
I just had an explosive orgasm from seeing not one, but TWO of the most wonderful people on earth! WOW
triken49 7 months ago
just add Matt Dillahunty and maybe Derren Brown and you've got a team of miracle busters.
ApostateOfTheDamned 8 months ago 56
@ApostateOfTheDamned Jeff Dee as well
yuriythebest 4 months ago
@ApostateOfTheDamned Christopher Hitchens my friend, can't forget ol' cranky, can we?
DelightfulTyrant 4 months ago
@ApostateOfTheDamned hitch shermer mooney also a dream team
phildirt3 3 months ago
How come that scene didn't explode because of the amount of awesome? One of em must have been a fake cuz that shit just aint right.
frysmaktoff 9 months ago
I have one point of contention with Randi:
How can he argue against the existence of Santa Claus when it's so apparent that he is the jolly bearded fellow himself?
dashaftable 9 months ago 46
@dashaftable That made me LOL
DarthKrattus 5 months ago
@dashaftable amnesia
ApostateOfTheDamned 3 months ago
@dashaftable The telltale red clothes, big gut, and the foul habit of taking dives down people's chimneys are all lacking I'm afraid.
mugogrog 2 months ago
@dashaftable It throws people off his trail
BobofWOGGLE 2 months ago
@dashaftable ...lol..that made my hour.
euroman32589 2 months ago
I cant make up my mind which one of the 2 is the biggest luser.
gabydewilde 9 months ago
@gabydewilde First learn how to write . Its loser not luser .
hldemi 9 months ago
"I liiiike Randi." Sing along, everybody! "I liiike Randi."
TampaRed 10 months ago
better duo than kobe + gasol
kidax123 11 months ago
First a video with Derren Brown and Richard Dawkins, now James Randi and Richard Dawkins...... this is turning out to be a good day :)
pureAstonishment 1 year ago
Atheists appears hold the belief that if God exists, they would be the first to reason that out - as if God would judge mankind by their knowledge of the scientific method.
How cocky they are! Everyone of them believing that they are smarter then 99% of the world´s population, and at the same time believing that the universe appeared out of nothing! ("It sure as hell wasn´t God" ;-)
Still I am glad God shows mercy to atheists - I would still be one if He hadn´t.
Bobathefish 1 year ago
@Bobathefish
Try this Einstein Quote:
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish... . For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people"
tellnet 1 year ago 3
@tellnet
So...?
Bobathefish 1 year ago
@Bobathefish
So...
Here is Another Einstein quote:
"“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.” "
tellnet 1 year ago
@Bobathefish
And .
Where did you pull 99% out of .... ??
tellnet 1 year ago
@Bobathefish How cocky believers are to assume that God means what they mean. Who is god? Which one should I believe in? Do tell.
How would your god judge an atheist and more importantly did you learn your judgment from that god? No atheist believes that the universe appeared out of nothing but many of the Christians I know believe that God came from nothing - weird concept.
Jeanikins 11 months ago 4
Those two are heros!
JM2X4 1 year ago
wyllder BRILLIANT!
discos1 1 year ago
Dawkins my boy
XUltra00 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"TEST: Psychokinesis
Dear James Randi has already lost in the Test that I have done on Clouds & Varnish
Imagine If he accepts the TEST to see through the objects
Thanks.
martini4948 1 year ago
El rey de los escépticos y uno de los mayores ateos juntos, creo que esto es como un extasis para los ateos.
rey982 1 year ago
dogs has better mental sensory than human. They were believeing gods and all kinds of nonsense thereby 6th sense brain dininished so tiny they have become that biology do not know it yet.
symmetry08 1 year ago
These dudes are my favourites aswell!!!! What this world needs is some logical thinking!!
SanneBree 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"You expect to get a suggestion of statistical significance if your numbers are that great."
Only if you don't know your math.
If you do, then the larger the amount of data, the more surprising you can expect patterns to be by chance, and the more surprising you require them to be to counts as statistically significant.
In fact, the amount of *extra* surprise you can expect to encounter, beyond what is expected from the size of the data, *decreases* with the size of the data.
roydfox 1 year ago
Can somebody give me a scientific explanation for Deja vu or precognition? i haven't so far found any anywhere. Links to any webpages that are not cynical skeptical based but robustly scientific would be appreciated. This phenomena doesn't appear to have been adequately explained by anybody.
klindred 1 year ago
@klindred
There is a book called "Isten az Agyban" by Gábor Szendi(Hungrian version), Deja Vu and Jamais Vu are also explained in it! It has something to do with the brain(in a nutshell). Many years ago when people did not understand storms, lightning etc. they thought that it has to do something with a higher power, nowadays we know that there is no Zeus above us, it is nature!
szmako 1 year ago
@klindred I dont know if its true, but i heard a nice explanation. When you experience something, your left and right part of the brain does not work evenly fast. Sometimes they get so much out of sync, that when the slowest half is done processing it, your short term memory allready "knows" it, and the situation is not just stored in memory, but its also recognized as something from the past. thats allready stored (a few milli seconds ago)
mysund 1 year ago
@mysund Thanks. Yeah i heard this before. It doesn't seem to cut it for me. After all, we are talking about experiences that are massively removed in time from each other.
klindred 1 year ago
@klindred Perhaps when the situation is recognized, it is recognized befor it is properly stored. It might be that this uncertainty in how well it is stored, makes it seem as something way back. Just a guess, im not expert in these matters. Maby when you recognize it, and then store the last half of the input, the sudden increase in accessibility of that memory tricks the conciousness to think its some old faint memory being brought to the surface.
mysund 1 year ago
@mysund Have you experienced it yourself? Lots of people get it as just feelings, faint familiarity. I have experienced it visually. THere is no mistake about it. I'm not claiming any super power. These events happen spontaneously and are not predictable in advance.
klindred 1 year ago
@klindred I have experienced it. Both as more recent, and also as very distant (in time) deja-vus. Some feels like i re-experience something from all the way back to my birth.
I think of it as a funny sideeffect of having a complex brain, with lots of different processes working simultaneous.
Its like having a car to take you from a to b. But if you open the backhatch, it can protect you from the rain. So your car is suddently an umbrella :D
mysund 1 year ago
@mysund So do you take a materialist position on it?
klindred 1 year ago
@klindred Yes.
mysund 1 year ago
@mysund Would you like to explain why?
klindred 1 year ago
@klindred The fenomenon is quite explainable as a natural fenomenon. Not that im sure my own explenation is correct. But it is quite well understood amongst scientists.
It is to me unlikly that something else than pure material is behind this.
No supernatural fenomenon have ever show its workings. As humans we tend to think in supernatural ways, every time we stumble upon something that is nontrivial, or nonambient. That is a "caveman" instinct that once made us more alert towards predators.
mysund 1 year ago
@mysund I think there is a problem with saying the phenomenon is well understood by scientists and then questioning whether it is natural or supernatural. The limitations of language present a problem here when we are trying to understand whether this phenomenon is natural or somehow outside the bounds of "natural". It doesn't have to be supernatural because if it was it couldn't exist. Then again, to call it natural doesn't seem to fit with our present scientific knowledge.
klindred 1 year ago
@klindred Firstly: You seem to have changed gear here. You asked for me to explain why i have a materialist position on deja-vu, and thats what i did.
Secondly (to your responce): Your absolutely correct. Since it really IS understood by scientist, it cant be supernatural. And yes language limitations... My english is bad.
When i say supernatural i would just as well use the word immaterial, eventhou it istwo different things. Im not up to speed on present sci. knowldg. But saying nonnatural?
mysund 1 year ago
I am not going to jump into any paradigm to suit present understanding. I would rather someone came along with a working hypothesis first.
And again, to say it is immaterial doesn't strike me as a workable hypothesis either. It is obviously material in some sense or it couldn't interact with matter.
klindred 1 year ago
@klindred We saw or heard something that might be a predator or a foe. If our imagination then starts to create some "acting agent" to be responcible for the glimpse we saw, or sound we heard, we would be alert and ready. This gives lots of false positives like the wind snapping a twigg, but we were alert and aware that something or someone is out there. That gives survival advantage, so our brains evolved over generations to adapt this behaviour.
mysund 1 year ago
@mysund I'm sure you have heard of "correllation isn't causation" phrase before. I don't see WHY survival instincts should trump intutive instincts, assuming, of course, that the latter really do exist (which they probably do, since we wouldn't be having this exchange otherwise).
klindred 1 year ago
@klindred have heard of it. I wouldnt say surv. instincts trumps. The behaviour kick in when needed, (and also sometimes when not needed) and saves your genes so they can stay in the gene pool of the spieces.
mysund 1 year ago
@klindred The opposite behaviour, that is, acting like "its probably nothing" will one day give false negatives, and we get eaten or slain. That has no advantage. So we tend to think there something or someone out there. So variation in the way we react and natural selection on that variation, makes humans superstitious. I hope this answers the "why materialist" and also why we even consider something else that materialist approach.
mysund 1 year ago
Them Atheist can Kill Ghost! YEAH!!!
DraskyVanderhoff 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Randi is an illusionist &has created the illusion he cant find competent psychics or evidence of the supernatural cause the masses don't pay to attend his magic bollocks.His challenge isnt even scientific,for it to be the selection process has to allow a representative of every country, culture and belief system. I am scientifically proven as a telepath but not allowed to enter this challenge cause Ive got no money to pay Randi to attend.
hes a trickster who tampers with test results
magnusalexa 2 years ago
Two of the greatest human beings of all time.
undisputedgreatest 2 years ago 67
@undisputedgreatest absolutely ridiculous claim
Bayview05 6 months ago
@Bayview05 Twat.
undisputedgreatest 6 months ago
@undisputedgreatest for being of the opinion that far greater men have lived?
Bayview05 6 months ago
@Bayview05 How often does someone admit they are wrong? Ever...let alone on the internet.
I met Richard Dawkins tonight. He seemed kind of like a dick, really. He also answered questions very lazily. Maybe he wasn't feeling well? Jet-lag? Getting older/cranky? Who knows. But...either way...you're probably right. Still, a brilliant man.
undisputedgreatest 4 months ago
@undisputedgreatest same here except for richard dawkins and james randi
dilligaf450 6 months ago
@undisputedgreatest Wouldn't go that far, Newton and Plank are still on the top of my list
dfunkers 5 months ago
@undisputedgreatest I would disagree.
rza1m 5 months ago
@undisputedgreatest The two clowns who had never seen into the spiritual world and yet dare say things they don't understand?
frankielee77 4 months ago
@frankielee77 "Seen the spiritual world?" What mythical, imaginary place is this? Your spiritual world? The one you made up in your head? Or the one you actually live in...where is there is plenty of natural things that are beautiful and breath-taking. If it is the latter, I would imagine they have seen far more of the "spiritual world" than you have.
undisputedgreatest 4 months ago
Dawkins said he had yet discover paranormal,until such time will come,meaning there is?Is he a nut?
frankielee77 4 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
bollocks to the non believers
Z1Z12 2 years ago
Fuck...! How does Randi define Paranormal?
Does anyone have the rest of this video?
pauloabelha 2 years ago 7
isnt dna a crazy enough phenomenon? who needs more to make life worth living?
stormyrose 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I believe the reason the presence of skeptics tends to prevent phenomena may be because skeptical energy is perhaps the most powerful psychic energy. I am a graduate of the Berkeley Psychic institute and base that hypothesis on my observations made during hundreds of psychic readings and energy channeling demonstrations.
needparalegal 2 years ago
.... and YOUR thought process is hwy the world is in a mess - alkieda believe in magic too
ipage1 2 years ago
So, psychic energy, if real, is an unreliable mechanism. I've seen dozens of psychic readings as well. None were convincing unless you wanted to believe it was real. And everyone conveniently ignored all of misses (which was the majority of what the psychics said). But you are right; skepticism is the most powerful 'psychic' energy because its tools are logic and rational thinking. Once employed, it obliterates the metaphysical 'psychic' energies quite easily.
tantokris 2 years ago 3
@needparalegal Yeah you are onto something there. Everytime one of these sceptics are around all paranormal powers vanish. The sceptics have some sort of überpower, that cancel out all other supernatural powers. So the only supernatural powers that can be proven are the canceling super powers of the sceptics. And they say that there is no supernatural powers.
That so spookey
mysund 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"The God Debate" is on my channel.
atheistfriends 2 years ago
EXCELLENT.
RICHARD DAWKINS is an inspiration.
Many thanks to James Randi.
mohfoz77 2 years ago
Well no but i would certainly doubt even more of the gullible non-scientists superstitious comunnity
Ryosuke1208 2 years ago
Can I ask you where you have seen it demonstrated, and in what way?
I'm curious. :)
rudenoodle 2 years ago
I won't take your word for it ;)
rudenoodle 2 years ago
Two of my heroes, they both are priveliged in a way I wish I was... they got to meet the other one. DC
diabolusdc 2 years ago 5
SAUNDERSacts2618, go back to your bible class, and let the real adults do the talking who aren't religious nut-cases like yourself.
Shutitup18 2 years ago 9
This comment has received too many negative votes show
When these two are in Hell! Well they can think that there not there!
SAUNDERSacts2618 2 years ago
How lovely to hear some common sense
ChokingHorror 2 years ago 4
These men are two of my greates heroes!
pjlehtim 2 years ago 9
An example of what Dawkins is talking about could be the Non-Newtonian Fluids. I believe their discovery is fairly recent. Suppose one of the first people to know about them, told Randi that he or she could walk on a fluid that was 90% water. Randi would have said "Nonsense", and might have lost his money. On the other hand he may have demanded to know the composition of the fluid, to experiment with. Then, as he says, it would become science.
geezzerboy 3 years ago
Ya! How robust, or useful, is a bent spoon?
geezzerboy 3 years ago
where is the rest of it? I want to know more!
Aslapacrosstheface 3 years ago 2
James Randi....is what this world needs. Realists who are willing to speak the truth even if they offend people and are characterized as "abrasive".---It's lke the UFO thing-- WHY WOULD the government cover up UFO's ? It might actually just NASA getting their funding. Most of us somewhat educated FOLK appreciate you Mr. Randi.
brookside1 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
stardust lmao
antimoron08 3 years ago
yes, stardust. it's what we are made of, as well as everything around us.
ronniej1183 3 years ago 5
yea didnt carl sagan once say were star stuff that can contemplate the universe?
indian8217 3 years ago 2
@indian8217 if you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe.
MaxwellBennett 2 years ago
Three words. Freaking. Awesome. Quote. Is that yours or did you get it from somewhere?
darthtanion 2 years ago
@darthtanion Carl Sagan.
MaxwellBennett 2 years ago
@MaxwellBennett Ah very cool. I'm ashamed to say I'd never heard it before. I will plagiarise it frequently.
darthtanion 2 years ago
Fusion creates a lot of dust does it?
dassel27 2 years ago
totally agree lookatme truly great men
nighthawk55565 3 years ago 3
It's like haveing the Shadow & the Batman in one comic;}
clawdfrawg 3 years ago 6
Imagine if Derren Brown was there too :)
chimaeraproductions 3 years ago 2
Imagine if Adam West was there
it would be awesome oh my goodness
ComradeJX8P 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Derren Brown is a fraud himself
vincentgratton16 2 years ago
Eh? How can someone who says that their performance "is a combination of magic, psychology, showmanship and misdirection" be a fraud????? D'oh!!!!
AustinTassletine 2 years ago 5
2 of my favorite dudes ever.
awaywithwords43 3 years ago 133
add Christopher Hitchens in the mix and it's a trifecta!
Mildmannered06 3 years ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
More science, from Italy.
Search here on you tube,
ZERO : An Investigation Into 9/11 - PART 1 of 10
mskydolphin 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't see why this guy keeps getting marked as spam - yes, it's kind of unrelated to the video, but nevertheless, the 9/11 false flag attack is something we should all be aware of and research ourselves and come to our own conclusions. If you do manage to do all this, the truth is obvious.
MaestroMan999 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Science fact proved. Copy and paste following here on you tube search window,
9/11 Science vs. Conspiracy Theories
mskydolphin 3 years ago
To great people. True myth busters.
Lookatmeimdriving5 3 years ago 8