Added: 2 years ago
From: JamesRandiFoundation
Views: 89,492
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (943)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • fear the beard

  • @AfterFauve001 lol I'm supposed to be impressed by a bit of slander and a vid of some folks playing with "magic" coat hangers? get bent.

  • Comment removed

  • You are my hero Mr. Randi!

  • Explain away your magic globe then, Randi.

  • @flobblepop1 i know eh who does this guy think he's fooling lol

  • James Randi,does he believes in ghosts?

  • ANYONE KNOW WHERE TO GET THAT GLOBE IN THE BACKGROUND?! IF SO please..... send me a message....

  • @agronoxdt Things remembered, but I don´t know if it is still available nowadays

  • Randi ... your roomie fooled you or were you in on the FEDERAL CRIME??

  • he sounds like he could be a good voice actor for a cartoon.

  • Randi has a magic globe!!!!!!!

  • once again Randi picks on easy targets. Still running away from sub atomic particles James? This guy is destroying spirituality for dogmatic atheist fanatics

  • @PomBare WHat does sub atomic particles have to do with Randi picking on "easy targets"? Please do tell

  • I worst is trying to explain this stuff to people, and they go, "No, something weird happened to me, ghosts and shit exist, I do not need proof, I experienced it!"

  • The globe is available from ThinkGeek (amongst other places), and is called "Magic Rotating Globe". ThinkGeek (dot) com (slash) b71f. (and fuck you YouTube and your broken "link detector")

    A very appropriate backdrop for James Randi. :-) Yeah, I want one too.

  • It is not all that difficult to fool the masses with trickery, look at christianity, it is accepted as an actual fact, and not the absolute fiction/fairy tale it truly is!

    The mind which is not capable of rational thought can be easily manipulated into believing any such nonsense such as a man sitting on a chair in the sky, while wearing sandals and a long white robe just sitting there looking down upon 'his' creation acting both as judge, and juror!

    Reiteration is a very strong force!

  • WHAT IS HIS VIEW ON THE "Tibetan Buddhist Monks - Meditation and Science"

    HAVE YOU SEEN WHAT THEY DO on youtube?

    Thumbs up so he can see this.

  • @TENBLINGABANGA Wauw... I'm completely underwhelmed. What's your point?

  • @TENBLINGABANGA ah yes because if its in a video on youtube it must be treu/real...lol. learn to think man.

  • WHAT IS HIS VIEW ON THE "Tibetan Buddhist Monks - Meditation and Science"

    HAVE YOU SEEN WHAT THEY DO?

  • That's a sick globe. Had to restart video because I lost the first 30 seconds staring at it.

  • Ahahah I love how he covers his mouth when he says "from the bodies of spirits" xD

    I love you Randi! Thanks for spreading your knowledge :)

  • Anyone else want that globe?

  • @bigandyham Before reading the comments I saw that globe and thought,"Thats awesome I want one."

  • @bigandyham Google "levitating globe" cool ones from 40 dollars from nextag.

  • @bigandyham

    yes i do.

  • @bigandyham I want your globe, James Randi!

  • @bigandyham Definitely.

  • @bigandyham

    yes!!.

  • @bigandyham yeah, I love that globe too.. and I want one too.

  • I had a near death experience in 1991 when I broke my back. I was floating above myself in a hospital room. I could see warped faces of people around me like a fisheye lens. I had the feeling of falling back into myself as I regained consciousness. I realized that I was looking at my own dwindling reflection in a stainless steel medical instrument as it was pulled away from my eyes. My NDE only existed in the morphine-warped reflection of a steel tool. Altered perceptions.

  • What's with all the down thumbs? Let me guess, they've all had..... experiences.,.... lmao!! Most likely a dead relative come to send their best wishes before journeying on to oblivion. It's amazing what the human mind will cook up from time to time.

  • Look, everyone, the globe behind him is moving round and round all by itself. What magical force could be causing this?

  • didnt marylynn hughes prove something big on skeptic radio?

  • @5youmukranda5 what exactly?

  • @5youmukranda5 i will send the link via email, this is an article, you can listen to the show as well. its funny how noone speaks when geniue results happen.

  • When so many scam-artists exists and so many naive victims are taken advantage of, it is imperative that someone like Randi speaks out and shakes people back to their senses.

  • I like how he says "Para-scientists" like someone says "Para-sites" HA HA!!

  • Parapsychology is know for it's extreme theories and experiments. I purpose that we break it down into another scientific study, the study of EVP, in relationship to ghosts and the after life. What are EVP really, perhaps you believe they are words and sounds that are magically put together be random sounds and radio signals that just happen to make sense. I might say that not believing they are real is magical thinking. Voila!

  • although I see your point and this experiment does seem a little out-there you should not be calling the experiment delusional. In the eyes of others some very important discoveries could have also been called delusional or even some may use this term describe you, not that I would.

  • 168 thumbs down = 168 people who believe in ghosts,religion and other various forms of bullshit.

  • @dilwich123 Not all Bull Shit is equal, some Bull Shit has merit while other Bull Shit is just plain Bull Shit

  • I hope he does realize that TV shows like "Ghost Hunters," "Paranormal State" & others are not really interested in doing real parapsychology, but entertaining television. These shows have things happening every episode which real parapsychologists say is totally bogus because the vast majority of the time they take some notes, shoot some video, take readings while there at the location and NOTHING happens. One out every 100 or so something happens while there and even less you get a pic/vid.

  • @Jstedmund Yeah. I just watched an episode of Ghost Hunters. One of the camera operators farted, which made the silly ghost busters scream like a bunch of girl scouts falling off a cliff. No, I'm not making this up, the guy admitted to farting, yet they showed it on the Travel Channel. Those people are highly credulous charlatans promoting superstition.

  • I might have liked this video if I couldn't tell he was reading a TelePrompTer the entire time! Actually that's giving him too much high tech equipment. I'm sure it was just some dork holding up poster boards with marker scribblings.

  • STOP MAKING SENSE!! You are insulting my homeopathic psychic chakra energy flow. Prove I don't have one.

  • "Good morning, afternoon, or night, depending on where you are."

    No Randi. The greeting depends on WHEN the person is watching this video, not where he or she is.

  • @CambridgeHeights If you're gonna be picky, it would depend on when you are watching it and WHERE on the planet you are.

  • @CambridgeHeights Not everyone lives in your time zone dumbass American

  • @ai1888 Ok dumbass. If I was watching this in video in New Zealand, would 'good morning', 'afternoon', or 'night' be correct? Oh yea, it depends on WHEN you would be watching it since morning, afternoon, and night all occur in New Zealand and in every other part of the world. So go fuck yourself.

  • @CambridgeHeights Idiot, the words morning, afternoon and night are meant to imply the time. Noone says good morning when its 10 fucking pm in the night. This should be obvious, but then again, ur a numbnut with a brain the size of a peanut.

  • @ai1888 Haha you're agreeing with me and you don't even realize it. Morning, afternoon, and night ARE meant to imply the time, yet Randi said it depends on WHERE you are instead of WHEN and where.

  • @CambridgeHeights calm down, it doesn't matter if he'd say "when" or "where", because if you are IN moscow AT this time it will be night, and if it's night now then one of the places you could be would be moscow, so it's right if someone says "depending on where you are" because timezones and locations are intertwined. And since it's more conventional in common speech to address people's location rather than the time they live in, I think Randi's choice of "where" was the better choice.

  • @baskoffie Then you're just an idiot I guess. This video could be watched at any time (monring, afternoon, night) no matter where on earth you are. Therefore, the greeting (morning, afternoon, night) does NOT depend on where you are at all. It depends on WHEN you are watching it, (i.e. the time day) or perhaps more specifically, when AND where. The location by itself is irrelevant.

  • @CambridgeHeights why the hostility? i politely explained my view on this to you. my point was that the part of the day you're in is inherent to the location that you're at, so it's not irrelevant.

    I'm in Amsterdam right now, and if I would phone a friend of mine somewhere in the world right now, he'd say "Good night", now why is that? That is because he knows how late it is here DUE TO MY LOCATION in the time zones. He wouldn't say "Ah, good place!".

  • @baskoffie Notice how you said "I'm in Amsterdam right NOW". I bet if someone phoned you now they wouldn't say 'good night'. Because it's not night in Amsterdam right now. Every location has morning, afternoon, and night, and this video can be played at any time of day, so the greeting does NOT depend on WHERE one is. End of story.

  • I am making the globe spin with my mind.

  • John Edward, LOL. """""Im sensing there is someone in tha audience who has lost someone, there name starts with an E, maybe Er or El"""" Person""" Yes, my Elliot"""

    Edward """and im sensing this person was close to you""". Person """Yes, he was my little Elliot""". Edward """Im sensing this was your child"""

    SHUT THE FUCK UP EDWARD. you arent sensing anything, you make stuff up while you talk to them.

  • 166 people will accept anything.

  • What makes that globe spin?

  • @soslothful It's solar powered

  • HELP... where can I find that globe for my office? Thanks

  • @fake2 amazon.

  • The thing or problem, rather, that I have with Randi is that EVERYTHING is fake to him. There is nothing left to the imagination or wonderment. I have seen john Edward in action in the studio and this man knew things about people NOBODY would know except that person. I have also lived in a haunted home for 8 years now and have heard people that weren't there, been touched, hit, poked, hair pulled, I've witnessed ash trays flung off the table with nobody around and there is no explanation for it

  • @sniggity Well the problem with people like you is that you think that the only thing that can be wonderful or imagination inspiring is magicial bunk, John Edward makes vauge generalites (see Cold Reading) and the audience connects the dots later on, occasionally he will get information about a particualr auidence memeber before hand to create a "hot reading". Instead I urge you to find the wonder in the real world.

  • @MonTag666 What makes you think the whole of nature is within human comprehension?

  • @MonTag666 ...Good Teaching, thanks.

  • @MonTag666 yeah...go study anatomy. the human body's functions alone are wondrous...

  • @sniggity Yet every other haunted house has been shown as fake, and the studio is a ripe place for fooling people.

    Wondrous things will be found in the lab as we discover more about quantum physics, some hack claiming to read people's minds using 2000 year old tricks are not so interesting.

  • Sorry to say that Mr. Randi is the best among "I know how it works" type of conditioned mind. The tools for analyzing sixth and higher sense abilities are different. Learn about pranic healing,Pranic scanning, Kirlian photography, Auras, ESP, Clairvoyance, Intuition. Visit spiritualresearchfoundation org

    Read books of spiritual scientists and great yogis like Deepak Chopra, Paramahansa Yogananda, Master Choa Kok Sui, Neale Donald Walsh, Swami Vivekananda, Louis L Hay and similar authors

  • I can prove that the guy who manifested material items from the thin air is a hoax with a very simple thought. If that guy could really do that, he wouldn't manifest coins and goldfish for TV but he would create gold, diamonds and anything else you can imagine for himself and become the richest man in history by far (if he wanted riches) and if he wanted fame? He'd would just manifest even bigger and more complex items in order to impress even more. How do people fall for these...

  • @fablan6 The stupidity is infinite

  • I had a thought about my previous comments. What if I made my device available to both Victor Zammit and James Randi in the same place and at the same time. I know that the device physically works and it can be carefully examined by skilled people.

    If the device is in a room with witnesses, Mr. Zammi, Mr. Randi and a medium and nobody is allowed to touch it the medium should be able to ask "spirits" to operate it.

    Next we remove the medium and see if Mr. Randi can operate it with no medium.

  • Here is my question. What makes you think that modern science is so great when people have been duped into believing in "global warming" that was supposedly measured with the instruments you mention? You did not mention scientists like Sir William Crookes or Sir Oliver Lodge. Arthur Findlay spent many years researching under strictly conditions to prove beyond any doubt that life-after-death is a fact. It won't be too long until James Randi finds out for himself that he has died yet lives.

  • @patthespark There´s not enough evidence for that.

  • @ebrobaru Not enough evidence for what?

    There is abundant evidence for life-after-death.

    There is abundant evidence for scientist fudging the numbers to fake global warming.

    Vist the website iceagenow (dot com) to see what is happening with temperatures.

    Visit the website victorzammit (dot com) for afterlife material. Millions of people have experienced contact with relatives who have died. The relatives provide proof that they still live by providing information known only to family members.

  • @patthespark I´m not talking about global warming. I am talking about life after death. There is not enough scientific evidence to support it. And by scientific I mean done by scientists, not by pseudoscientists and particular testimonies. I know Zammit. He´s a bully that just wants to counter attack skeptics. He just has testimonies, not real proof. His own "challenge" is a mockery. Try again

  • @ebrobaru Arthur Findlay spent several years working with the medium John Sloan in Glasgow Scotland. He used scientific methods under conditions established to exclude fraud. He had many witnesses present and a stenographer on hand to take note of everything that was said by voices coming from an unknown source. The medium was gagged and bound to a chair. Findlay had his ear at the mouth of the medium. Voices identified themselves as those known to people in the room on numerous occasions.

  • @patthespark Arthur Findlay was described as "Prominent British Spiritualist". He was founder or part of several entities such as "Glasgow Society for Psychical Research", "Psychic News", a leading British Spiritualist periodical. Honorary member of the American Foundation for Psychical Research. Honorary Member of the Edinburgh Psychic College. Honorary President of the Institute of Psychic Writers and Artists. A former Honorary President of the Spiritualists' National Union

  • @ebrobaru You overlook that Findlay was first and foremost a successful businessman and stockbroker. He was later a magistrate in England. His interest in spiritualism came about after he had by chance attended a spiritualist church, mistaking it for a typical protestant church near the hospital where his wife was sleeping at the time. He was a total skeptic until he became completely convinced by his own careful study and observation. What is a "scientist" who is afraid to study known facts?

  • @patthespark Exactly my point. He as first a businessman. He knew a good business when he spot one. See the relation here? He founded a number of publications out of this. Good business sense? In any case, we have established that he was no scientist and he had no background to be able to spot any trickery. Yes he was a skeptic at first. Yet, skeptic is not the equivalent of scientific background.

  • @ebrobaru Arthur Findlay donated his estate in England to the continued research into psychic phenomena. He never wrote books to make money and his books, i.e. The Curse of Ignorance have been banned by churches who do not wish their flock (sheep) to read them.

    It is absurd to suggest that any trickery took place. The medium was a poor Glasgow man who did not charge any money. If "scientists" are so special why are they afraid to examine the topic as Crookes and Lodge and others did before now?

  • @patthespark So he donated his estate. He was a filantropist. Still, that doesn´t make him more qualified to spot trickery if indeed it was present. I really doubt that his books never made any profit. You just said that he was a successful businessman. I´m not familiar by the banning of his book, but that wouldn´t be the first time some churches did it. They like to keep the exclusive on the "spiritual realm". Again, that doesn´t mean it was true.

  • @patthespark To try to eliminate the idea of trickery just because he was a poor man is ludicrous. The best tricks are usually free, only restricted by the performers´ wit. Again, the fact that he didn´t charge anything for his "services" doesn´t make him the real deal. And that´s even debatable that he didn´t.

    I wouldn´t think of scientists as "special" other than they have enough training in the scientific method. They don´t assume anything like many people do. As you, for example.

  • @patthespark I don´t think that they are "afraid" to examine these topics. In fact, they´ve had over and over. And nothing has come from those studies when done correctly and with a critical eye. I think that you have it all wrong. How can they prove something that just is not there? At least, so far no solid evidence for it has been ever produced. The question would be, why does these mediums don´t materialize anything when observed under controlled conditions?

  • @ebrobaru Why are today's scientists afraid to provide a "scientific" explanation for phenomena that are certainly present and which have been explained by people who materialize or speak to sitters, telling the sitters that they are family members who still live? If there is a "scientific" explanation and you think that scientists are above others in their ability to observe, why don't the scientists provide the explanation rather than theorize about distant galaxies and black holes in space?

  • @patthespark Yes, usually scientists are above others in their ability to observe. The do theorize a lot. If you are familiar with the scientific method, you´d know that hypothesis is a part of it. Still, we cannot yet go personally to those black holes and distant galaxies. But we can have a so called medium come to our neighborhood lab to be tested. Surprisingly, they never agree to that.-

  • @ebrobaru Now you are getting ridiculous. Scientists could be neck deep in snow yet continue to babble about global warming without "observing" anything unusual.

    Mediums have been tested in labs before. Sir William Crookes had witnesses present in his lab to photograph what happened. I doubt that there is any point continuing to write about this. We shall find out the truth eventually. You may get a pleasant surprise. If there is no afterlife I will just fade to nothing. I have seen a "ghost".

  • @patthespark I told you that global warning is a matter of another topic. Sir William Crookes experiments took place in the late 19th Century. You´d think that you could produce something more modern. He was convinced that the phenomena was real. Later on the sisters that were the supposed mediums, confessed how they did their tricks. Sorry, try again.

  • @patthespark I have never discounted the possibility of the afterlife. Hey, I hope that it is real. What I am saying is that these so called mediums and psychics are just yanking your chain. Aren´t your surprised that all those mediums and scientists you mentioned before, haven´t had come back through other mediums to conclude their investigations?

  • @ebrobaru Some of the mediums and Arthur Findlay have come back through David Thomson ( with Victor Zammit ).

    I have built a device that I hope will either prove or disprove to myself conclusively that there is an afterlife. At the moment, other than the one ghost who didn't speak to me but smiled, I only have what I have read to go by. If I receive contact by way of this device and no scientist can explain an alternative reason, then I shall consider that I have proven the afterlife as real.

  • @patthespark As I´ve said before Victor Zammit has his own agenda, so he can hardly account as an neutral observer. I find it strange that, for example, someone that was killed and the killer was never caught, never comes back to accuse his murderer with solid evidence, like telling where is the body.

    Hey, if you can prove the afterlife with that device, you´ll change the way as we know it. But in order to have credibility, I suggest that you try to prove this to well renowned scientists and...

  • @patthespark skeptics. If it is real, then you won´t have to worry about anything. But if you just limit your tests to the circle of psychic and medium believers, then no credit will be given to you outside of those circles, and you wouldn´t want that

  • @ebrobaru Who is a renowned scientist? I work with scientific instrumentation that scientist rely upon for their measurements. If I don't calibrate an instrument properly he will get a bum result. So what makes him any more of a scientist than myself. If physical effects take place that are claimed by someone unseen to be done by him and there is no other logical explanation, why wouldn't I believe the invisible guy? Crookes began with a teeter-totter that only moved when a medium came near it.

  • @patthespark Do you have any scientific training? So, by your definition, when there is no explanation available, it immediately means it´s supernatural?

  • @ebrobaru You are using "scientific training" as though it was something special. Everybody has some level of scientific training. We all observe cause and effect throughout our lives. But I do have training. I have worked for forty years on electrical and instrumentation. I diagnose problems usually beginning with the effect and searching for the cause. If, for example a light stopped working when someone stood in a particular part of a room, I would look for a wiring problem bellow the floor..

  • @ebrobaru However if the light only stopped working when one special individual stood at that spot, I would examine the clothing or look for some kind of device that might interfere magnetically with a circuit.

    If I could repeatedly show that numerous individuals of the same weight could cause no effect, wearing similar clothing, etc. while only one individual could cause the effect, I would attribute the phenomena to that special guy. To avoid coincidence I would repeat tests at various times.

  • @patthespark That´s exactly what I am talking about. All the phases you describe would be a good way to figure things out. I would applaud that approach at all times. You are right, the scientific method can be applied by anyone.

    The only thing that I guess we differ on is that after completing all the tests, the same subject keeps lightning the same light over and over an not any cause is found. I guess you would immediately call supernatural or paranormal. I would just call it unexplained

  • @ebrobaru Well there will only be one way to find out. It comes to us all and you will never know the moment until it happens. I am originally from Scotland and I was about 50 miles from Lockerbie when the plane fell onto the town. Who would have imagined that happening? (rhetorical)

    As I grow older the list of people who have died in odd ways grows. It would be nice to see them all again but I shall have to wait and see unless they decide to contact me via the device I have built. By the way,..

  • Respond to this video...I contacted Victor Zammit to let him know that I had built a device but did not tell him any details. I asked him to request some of the people whom he claims to visit from the afterlife to contact me via the device. I also said that if they could not do so, then they(the spirits) could at least visit my home and bring back a description of the device to Victor. He could then describe it to me. This seemed like a reasonable test which he declined to take up. 

  • @patthespark sounded very reasonable. Why do you think that he declined?

  • @ebrobaru I can't be sure. We had an email conversation like this but shorter. He seemed very defensive and jumped to "closed minded skeptics" very quickly. I pointed out that I was offering an opportunity to prove or disprove conclusively that contact could be made. He said that it required a medium. This was why I suggested that the sprits provide a description to him. Victor refers to the departed being around others although they are unseen. I invited them to be around me and take a look...

  • Respond to this video...So if Victor has spoken to the spirit "William" whom he claims to be recorded on tapes, telling William about me it should have been easy for William to have a look and give Victor the visual description of my device at the next seance. I must admit that this has caused me to doubt Victor and I would rather believe Findlay and Crookes. It just seems like such an easy test that I was surprised that Victor became so defensive. So the jury's out on Victor.

  • @patthespark See a pattern here? I simple words, he was a believer himself on this matter. That he made "scientific attempts" to study this matter is just wishful thinking. Sorry but bias cannot be ruled out. He would benefit to claim that this was real. We don´t have anything but hos own books to account for what happened. That´s hardly any evidence. He was anything but a scientist.

  • why do James Randi look like a monkey?

  • Has Sylvia Browne accepted the Randi challenge yet?

  • what a cool spinning globe!

    where can you buy one of those?

  • 163 people still believe in fairies

  • I want  globe like the one on the back O_o

  • does the Gspot exist or is it just thin air

  • @Justen1980 It has nothing to do with parapsykology.

    It is a real place.

    This is hardly the right video to discuss that.

  • omg its darwin. 

  • The globe in the background is so cool...

  • Hi Mr Randi, you're only a magician, not even a PHD researcher so u have no say in this! I wish u could speak more scientifically like other parapsychologists who have done intense research! Show me scientific evidence before u made your so-called 'criticisms'! -peace out!

  • @snowygurl87 Whats wrong with being a magician and since when did a person need a PHD to debunk fraudulent claims? He is also speaking to the layman and shows his criticisms with scientific tests and experiments during many of his talks and shows. He will even give a million dollar prize to anyone who can prove their claims. Parapsychologists can be bias, using questionable experiments and in some cases commit fraud. I wonder if you would call TAPS because you think a house is haunted lol.

  • @Seiku u said parapsychologists CAN be bias. are you stating a fact or your own opinion? Are u making a generalization that maybe one or two u came across are frauds so it means all of them are frauds? thats sounds like a generalization to me. scientific evidence and data are a fact, not opinion...

  • @snowygurl87 Thats not the point. There ARE bias researchers but I'm not saying they're all the same. The point is on the qualifications to give accurate results. Aren't you making the same generalizations with Randi just because he was a professional magician?

  • @snowygurl87 You can read criticisms and controversies on parapsychologists on wikipedia if you'd like.

  • @snowygurl87 parapsychologysts are the oens that make up pseudoscience

  • Being a psychic sucks. If Sylvia was real she wouldnt be able to sleep at night. Knowing what the future holds. Walking in a empty building feeling the old energies of people who were there. Or even touching an object an knowing what happened with it. I can do all this but its not fun at all I hate it. An I hate fakes, I dont go around giving fortunes or charging people for stupid readings. If i see something an the urge to tell the person it great. I will say something after introducing myself

  • Jame Randi reminds me of the kid who was told that the Magican was doing magic, so he wanted to disprove it an say it was only an optical illusion. I feel like his pursuit of finding someone who can actually exhibit powers or supernatural stuff is grinding to a hault.

  • "The whole problem with the world is that fools

    and fanatics are always so certain of themselves,

    but wiser people so full of doubts. "

    - Bertrand Rrussel

  • I love James Randi, he's like the elder of atheism.

  • love the globe!!

  • i really admire this man

  • I think it is comforting to think, that we could develop some super powers that would and could make our lives easier, but it should not fog our ability to think rationally. Anyway where I don't believe in mambo jumbo nonsense, I do think that in every story there is a drop of truth and we might be able to achieve some of the abilities we dream to have naturally or as they claim supernaturally. Just take a look at the 6th sense technology presented in TED. Thiis technology is close to magic...:)

  • the guy with goldfish was amazing btw

  • @eadlie24 Teller of Penn and Teller

  • i dont get the guy with the goggles, whats his story?

  • if you look closely the globe doesnt touch the glass

  • If we were all a little bit more like this man the world would be a better and more logical place. 

  • @FullFledged2010 . This kind of people pretend to have an scientific mind but he is actually not interested in knowing the truth but denying the truth which brings more benefit and respect from followers. . He is misleading people

  • @Anoop20111 Well first of all he doesn't have any "followers" and you don't need to be a scientist to see that is in fact telling the truth..

  • @Anoop20111 If ESP was actually scientifically proven to be real, then I have no doubt that Randi would accept it.

  • Sorry I accidentally hit send. I meant to say 'swamp gas' or any other write off. But do you actually believe that out of our infinitely large universe that we're the only life privledged enough to exist? It's laughable!

  • @silverburzt As far as I'm aware Randi is not saying that life doesn't exist elsewhere. However, making the claim that there is life sufficiently advanced that it was able to overcome the hurdles of crossing the vast reaches of space is another matter entirely. Alpha Centauri is our closest stellar neighbor and unless this species can travel faster than light a round trip from their star to ours is about 9 years. Alpha Centauri, however, is unlikely to support life.

  • @captwasabi, the whole distance thing is irrelevant. We're talking about beings that could theoretically be millions of years further ahead of us in technology. They could be generating worm holes or something that we can't even comprehend to travel to the corners of the universe in a fraction of a second. James Randi does good work exposing "psychics" and frauds, but some of these things like ETs are not only possible, but probable. And as for evidence, it's everywhere but mostly discredited

  • @silverburzt They are billions of years ahead of us in technology, but they can´t make a strong solid showing for everyone to see and believe? Seem unlikely

  • @silverburzt Your entire argument is flimsy. As ebrobaru easily points out, any race sufficiently advanced to create wormholes, which requires a simply staggering amount of power to open to a size sufficient to let a pea through much less a spaceship, should likewise be technologically sufficient enough to introduce themselves to us. Moreover, the "evidence exits but it's discredited" argument simply proves there is no evidence. By its nature evidence cannot simply be discredited.

  • @captwasabi Why do you assume a hypothetical advanced alien race would desire to introduce them selves to us? Thats a big assumption. There may be absolutely no gain for a highly advanced race by making their presence known to the general earth population. Consider the opposite scenario, that they wish not to directly contact primitives - perhaps the only value we might have to them might be anthropological - so that they can study and observe us in our pristine and untouched state.

  • At the very least, I'm not a fan. I can understand your quest to stop frauds from being compensated for a life of lies and theft. So the main question is this, your take on aliens. While there is no "proof"-- even though I believe there's more than enough credible evidence that people like yourself dispel as 'saw

  • you really CAN disprove a negative.

    Example: Frogs do not exist.

    Proof: I found a frog, so frogs exist.

  • @ishmael2013 Well, that´s one way to see at it, but you are proving that frogs exist, thus you are proving a positive

  • @ebrobaru

    I think what makes it harder to disprove a positive is that you can't show someone a non-existent frog, However they can't show you one either, they will probably say that's just because you haven't looked everywhere.

  • @sypher113 Well said !

  • @sypher113 and they would have a reasonable point to be honest, so the only viable conclusion is to accept the not-knowing status, and not claim that there either is a frog or that there is not. they can conclude that there might possibly be a frog there, however irrational that sounds. would you agree?

  • @ishmael2013

    Yes, but disproving a positive is more difficult.

    example: I have a magic rock that keeps away goblins.

    disproof: I've never seen a goblin.

    rebuttal: See it works.

  • @sypher113 Again, you make sense. However with the example of the rock, you can actually show the rock. That it keeps away goblins, well that´s another type of dicsussion

  • @ebrobaru

    Yes well it depends on the plausibility of what is being claimed. If I just say "I have a BlackBerry" you are likely to believe that I do in fact have one, even if I can't show it to you at the time. Now if I say "I have a 6 inch tall dragon living in my basement" you probably won't believe me.

  • One thing I find a bit strange. Randi had mentioned in an earlier speech, admittedly a while ago, that he had respect for a pair of parapsychologists who studied this stuff because they believed that there was something there to find. Yet in this one it seems that he's rather against the concept of it.

  • @Darkstar1484 Because nothing has been found

  • @ebrobaru True, but Randi had even brought that up in his speech then. He argued that they were seeking knowledge and that he respected their desire to study and try to find something if they sincerely believed it was there. He even compared the discovery of penicillin to this. It's called 'Parapsychology and the Chimera' I believe.

  • @Darkstar1484 Randi has nothing against parapsychologists who explore. As long of course, that they do it in a professional way. Unfortunately 99% of them aren´t. They are experts on confirmation bias. In other words, they find what they want no matter what

  • @ebrobaru

    I'd say they are the oposite of experts on confirmation bias whatever you may call that. If they were experts in it they would recognize when they are guilty.

  • Intriguing...he has The Golden Dawn book on the shelf behind him =)

  • When James Randi dies, they should shave his beard and put it on a wall in a museum!

    =3

  • Gee, 160 village idiots have been watching you. Hu, you would think that these individuals would 'wake up'....but I guess that's to hard.

  • this man is boring lots of noise and nothing to say

  • @tafferty says the person with too low of an IQ to understand what he's talking about.

  • @IrishHeroMan indeed one does understand when a scientist is talking , unfortunately Randi makes so many personal attacks on individuals he really does damage the good work he does,indeed there are some things science cannot dissect or explain ,please raise your own IQ and i will concern myself with mine,there is one thing Randi agrees with, you can only see others as a reflection of oneself ,look in the mirror my friend what do you see.

  • @tafferty lol I can tell you I see someone who won't waste any more time speaking with you.

  • @IrishHeroMan I think you might want to google IQ.

  • @MichaelnChristine I think you might want to Google, "Mind your own business."

  • @IrishHeroMan Another impressive reply?

  • @arep02008 No, yours wasn't.

  • this man is boring