James Randi Lecture @ Caltech - Cant Prove a Negative

James Randi lecture excerpt from a 2 hour lecture at Caltech in 1992.

James Randi explains why you can not prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the person presenting the claim. He then goes into an example of how you can't prove that Reindeer can fly.

• Category

  Nonprofits & Activism

[David Keenan]

Argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument. Arguments from Authority are also fallacious.

But I've got to admire you for sticking both into a single reply.

[David Keenan]

You don't have to believe me, I only ask that you fairly consider my argument. I care not what Dawkins thinks, other than he's earned my respect & I fairly consider what he says

My view is that we will never be able to discern things outside of the observable universe, & since God is cliamed to exist outside of time & space disproving God's existence is simply impossible

I do not ask you for proof, I do not think that is posssible, but I think it is fair to reject your claims if you provide none

[pumpuppthevolume]

u wouldn't because the claim is not enough

but u still can't prove me wrong

the same way people claim to talk to ghosts and at the same way refuse to demonstrate their powers

[Liam L]

No I would not believe you, we could meet up and share birth certificates to prove that your positive statement was false, james randi is a liar, a fraud and also a supporter of eugenics.

[pumpuppthevolume]

it depends on the kind of the negative

btw i am your cousin we have the same grandfather it is a secret crept from everyone.....would u believe me

can you prove that i am not

if the evidence are lacking or as reliable as chance u cannot distinguish between a claim being true or one that is made up

that is what he is talking about and that is why he is at least trying to demonstrate some unexplained phenomenon that people claim to cause

[Jesper Larsen]

He is amazing! I love this man and the way he is thinking.

[Liam L]

I never said he claimed to be a scientist, just that he was denounced by a scientist as a liar

[OFloreschelsea]

I dont think Randi ever claimed to be a scientist so the term "real scientist" doesn't really apply to him. He's just a guy who got curious, asked questions about topics that are unlikely to be true, and become famous for it.

[Liam L]

extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence, most people say they are spiritual or religious, in that sense being spiritual or religious is normal. The claim that most people are deluded about that experience is extraordinary. Where is the extraordinary evidence for that? Also considering the credentials of the two, i feel it is only right to reject magician randi and listen to scientist dr sheldrake.