|
|
Post by altair4 on Mar 10, 2008 18:22:28 GMT -4
I came here with sincere intentions I will still stick to my guns..I have tried to remain positive
everyone has their own level of understanding
it clear people are just looking for an argument,constantly looking for "proof"
no substitute for experience as far as I am concerned
the 1,000,000 challenge is a joke(JR)(doesn't take into account spontaneous experiences people have)
science doesnt explain everything
Do you trust people!Or do you think everyone is lying or deluded
too many try hards thinking they are smarter than everyone else without taking into consideration that everyone is human and have had different experiences.
I wouldn't change anything
I know we walked on the moon-Echelon
I know there is a NWO-I have worked in a bank
I know Freemasons (not all) are corrupt..I work with them,and I have enough literature
I know God exist...love doesn't come from a random "Big Bang", love is a spiritual energy
I James Randi is wrong (ESP) I have my own experiences(without conscious effort),horses,cards,dice...comes to you when not thinking about it(small inner voice)...the mind is spiritual it trancends time and space!
Whakapono Kia Koe (NZ Maori,it means "believe in Yourself" and thats what I intend to do!!!!!
most importantly I judge people by their attitude(+ve and -ve)..and that hasn't changed
I regard debunker/sceptics as pathetic..with a closed mind your lost
and what is truth...truth is stranger than fiction!! history has shown that...anything can happen!!
it happens on different levels
what is your level?
anyway I am going to make a coffee (no I am not a mormon)
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Mar 10, 2008 18:48:49 GMT -4
$0.60
|
|
Al Johnston
"Cheer up!" they said, "It could be worse!" So I did, and it was.
Posts: 1,453
|
Post by Al Johnston on Mar 10, 2008 18:58:11 GMT -4
Whakapono Kia Koe (NZ Maori,it means "believe in Yourself" and thats what I intend to do!!!!! Fine. Could you keep it to yourself too? |
|
|
|
Post by The Supreme Canuck on Mar 10, 2008 19:45:46 GMT -4
Altair: Asking for proof is not unreasonable. We are not closed-minded.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Mar 10, 2008 20:13:33 GMT -4
Altair4. you could loosen up just a bit. No one is attacking you. You did after all come here, to what is basically a forum that deals with science and logic (most of the time).
Unless you put smileys at the end of all your sentences, yes, you will be asked for some type of proof when making extraordinary type claims. Just see what Jason has to go through - and what he puts other people through!
If you are to be taken seriously, the first thing I would do is post in proper English - use capitals, spaces, and good spelling. It would be a significant improvement to your posts. If I can stop smoking, you can stop using or at least cut down on your exclamation marks.
That said, the areas that you often refer to - ESP, OOBE and other psychic phenomena, can be very difficult to communicate to the average person, us included. But if you communicate clearer, it can only help us respond clearer.
And we don't really argue here that much. Most of the time we are very polite to each other.
Maybe you could give a little more detail to some of your claims.
Like a good example of a supernatural event in your life. Now remember - it will be analized and picked apart word by word, so be prepared for that. And you will probably be asked for even more information that you gave initially.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Mar 10, 2008 20:24:18 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Mar 10, 2008 20:26:24 GMT -4
I know there is a NWO-I have worked in a bank
Hey, my wife works in a bank and she knows nothing about the NWO.
Now, it's not a regular bank, but a credit union.
I regard debunker/sceptics as pathetic..with a closed mind your lost
Some things need to be debunked altair4. Like 'miracle' drugs that don't work, the idea that there are lots of rich Nigerians that want to marry American women, or people who claim we didn't land on the moon.
If you are after the truth, there are lots of strange theories and claims that don't pass the test.
|
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Mar 10, 2008 20:32:26 GMT -4
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Mar 10, 2008 20:34:03 GMT -4
I'm just tallying up how much cash I would be making if I had a nickel for every exclamation point altair4 uses. |
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Mar 11, 2008 2:55:00 GMT -4
the 1,000,000 challenge is a joke(JR)(doesn't take into account spontaneous experiences people have) Those who only have "spontaneous experiences" cannot claim to have an ability. False dilemma. The mind has nothing to do with it. You're hearing the voice of the invisible pink unicorn which follows you everywhere you go. Such creatures are prone to practical jokes, and hence whisper inconsequential remarks in your ear as a distraction. |
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Mar 11, 2008 13:56:01 GMT -4
it clear people are just looking for an argument,constantly looking for "proof"
The purpose of this board is to test ideas for their objective strength. Hence when you make provable statements here, you will be asked for proof. If you want to propose ideas without the risk of critical evaluatoin, then you need to post them on a different site.
no substitute for experience as far as I am concerned
Experience is too often subjective. One's experience with specific domain knowledge is invaluable, because that is the only way non-propositional domain-specific knowledge can be acquired. But where the question lends itself to critical analysis, there is no substitute for critical analysis.
science doesnt explain everything
Science doesn't attempt to explain everything. Nor must it in order to be useful for refutation. What science can explain, it explains very well by nature of the means by which the explanation is derived. When you make statements that are scientific by nature, and testable, they will be tested scientifically. That is not argumentation. That is science.
Do you trust people!Or do you think everyone is lying or deluded
If someone has a history either of trustworthiness or untrustworthiness, I use that data to support my judgment whether to trust them on some particular issue. If I have no information about their trustworthiness, I weigh that decision based on the consequences of having made a poor judgment. Implicit trust is as wrong as implicit distrust. But the consequences of misplacing either can be a factor in the decision.
I know there is a NWO-I have worked in a bank.
But there are others who work in banks who cannot find any evidence of this New World Order of which you speak. That is why experience cannot by itself be considered ultimate proof.
I James Randi is wrong (ESP) I have my own experiences...
But your explanation for those experiences may not be the correct one. As I said, Mr. Randi offers a very substantial reward to any who can prove him wrong about ESP. If you know he's wrong, why haven't you taken him up on his offer? How confident are you really with your interpretation of your experiences? Are you open-minded enough to consider that it might just be coincidence?
...the mind is spiritual it trancends time and space!
But the mind's alleged affect on the natural world does not transcend the laws of physics and observation. If you were to say you can read minds, that's scientifically testable. If you say you can affect the behavior of animals, that's scientifically testable.
The problem is that those who profess psychic ability tend not to want that ability tested in any way that has the ability to expose whether or not it actually exists. They seem more comfortable with the mere belief that they're psychic. They don't really want to know whether they are or not.
I regard debunker/sceptics as pathetic..with a closed mind your lost
There is nothing closed-minded about asking for proof. If we were closed-minded we wouldn't bother asking; we would just conclude that you were wrong without considering your claims. By asking you what you believe and why we believe it, we're accepting the possibility that your claims may be well-founded. That's open-mindedness. But it still falls to you to demonstrate that foundation.
Open-mindedness does not mean simply accepting every idea that comes your way. It means evaluating each idea on its merits and seeing which are likely and which are unlikely based on those merits. In asking for evidence we're trying to put your ideas into an objective context in which open-mindedness can thrive. You simply want your ideas accepted without objection. That's not open-mindedness; that's gullibility.
People who claim to be open-minded and who chide others for their alleged closed-mindedness rarely exhibit open-mindedness toward their own beliefs. Are you open-minded enough to consider the possibility that there is no New World Order? That the Freemasons aren't trying to take over the world? Or are those your pet beliefs that are sacred to you and can't be swayed by logic or reason? If that's the case, then doesn't that make you the closed-minded one?
and what is truth...truth is stranger than fiction!!
That does not mean that all that seems stranger than fiction must necessarily be true. There is a whole lot of hogwash that is stranger than both truth and fiction. Truth has evidence -- strange or not.
history has shown that...anything can happen!!
But history does not show that everything does happen. Just because you think of it doesn't mean it occurred or will occur. You're missing a very important difference between possibility and reality. When we say that something likely did not occur, or likely is not occurring, that's not to say it is impossible for it to occur. We're not shutting out the possibility of it altogether; just saying that there lacks evidence of it.
Investigations in the real world cannot stop at simple lack of impossibility. They must go on to prove likelihood or actuality. That requires evidence. Showing that something is merely possible (or more likely, not impossible) is purely academic. It isn't useful.
what is your level?
My level is that of an investigator who has been well-trained in his fields of expertise, and who must investigate and make judgments whose correctness has effects in the real world, such as the safety of life and limb or the risk of substantial amounts of resources. I do real investigations, not the toy investigations that conspiracy theorists perform.
What is your level?
|
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Mar 11, 2008 15:20:16 GMT -4
Maybe you could give a little more detail to some of your claims. Given the number of threads that Altair has started lately, do we really need him to go into more detail? |
|
|
|
Post by wdmundt on Mar 11, 2008 15:23:14 GMT -4
Maybe he could just stick to one claim and see how that goes.  |
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Mar 11, 2008 15:42:04 GMT -4
Hmmm...one idea at a time... I think you may be onto something!! |
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Mar 11, 2008 17:23:53 GMT -4
In coherent sentences. Please, Gods, in coherent sentences.
|
|
