Skeptics might be jumping to conclusions

[KevinM1]

Public ridicule is a thing. See: Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham.

[Transcended Dimensions]

Public ridicule is a thing.  See: Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham.

Then the question becomes who is using the science improperly and being ridiculed.  Is it Dean Radin and his research or is it the skeptics/materialists and their views/research?  Are the materialists who claim there is no paranormal psuedo skeptics as paranormal researchers claim?  Or is it the paranormal researchers such as Dean Radin who are the pseudo skeptics?

[LostLocke]

Then the question becomes who is using the science improperly and being ridiculed.

The one making a claim and having no data to back up that claim.

[The Grand Nudger]

I think it's funny that you imagine this is some sort of us vs them bullshit.  A person can believe in all sorts of loony psi shit and still realize that radin is a charlatan.  

You could too..ya..just....don't....wanna.

The effect of this, and this isn't just your own little tic..is that people saddle their silly beliefs with charlatans and a defense of charlatans for absolutely no reason whatsoever..discrediting a field they clearly wish was taken more seriously. Ask yourself this, would it alter your belief in silly shit a single iota if it was shown to you, clearly, that radin is a charlatan?

No? Then it's fucking irrelevant. You're smearing your own fantasies in the mud for nothing. Is that how you treat things you wish were true?

[polymath257]

Public ridicule is a thing.  See: Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham.

Then the question becomes who is using the science improperly and being ridiculed.  Is it Dean Radin and his research or is it the skeptics/materialists and their views/research?  Are the materialists who claim there is no paranormal psuedo skeptics as paranormal researchers claim?  Or is it the paranormal researchers such as Dean Radin who are the pseudo skeptics?

If you did an iota of research, you would know.

But you clearly don't want to know enough to find out.

You also clearly don't want to inform yourself enough to actually have an *informed discussion*.

Yet you want to claim others *may* have made up their minds too hastily. With, I might add, no evidence or research to back up even that claim.

And *that* makes you a troll.

[robvalue]

I gave it a fair shot and looked into that Radin guy. I watched videos in which he was putting forward his side of things. I looked at his supporting websites. It was bunk, as I expected; but at least I gave him a chance.

That's more than woo people are prepared to do with real science.

[Transcended Dimensions]

I think it's funny that you imagine this is some sort of us vs them bullshit.  A person can believe in all sorts of loony psi shit and still realize that radin is a charlatan.  

You could too..ya..just....don't....wanna.

The effect of this, and this isn't just your own little tic..is that people saddle their silly beliefs with charlatans and a defense of charlatans for absolutely no reason whatsoever..discrediting a field they clearly wish was taken more seriously.  Ask yourself this, would it alter your belief in silly shit a single iota if it was shown to you, clearly, that radin is a charlatan?

No?  Then it's fucking irrelevant.  You're smearing your own fantasies in the mud for nothing.  Is that how you treat things you wish were true?

But I can't trust the arguments skeptics make in an attempt to prove Dean as being a charlatan.  You are free to set these arguments forth. But I don't think I can be convinced of them right then and there on the spot.  Another important question I have here is, do I have to dedicate my life into studying up on things in order to determine whether the paranormal is bull or not?  Or can I find this out for myself right here and now in a relatively short time?  If it's the former, then I have no interest in doing this research.  But if it's the latter, then I will go ahead with this.

Then the question becomes who is using the science improperly and being ridiculed.  Is it Dean Radin and his research or is it the skeptics/materialists and their views/research?  Are the materialists who claim there is no paranormal psuedo skeptics as paranormal researchers claim?  Or is it the paranormal researchers such as Dean Radin who are the pseudo skeptics?

If you did an iota of research, you would know.

But you clearly don't want to know enough to find out.

You also clearly don't want to inform yourself enough to actually have an *informed discussion*.

Yet you want to claim others *may* have made up their minds too hastily. With, I might add, no evidence or research to back up even that claim.

And *that* makes you a troll.

I will go ahead and ask this same question I asked Khemikal.  Do I have to dedicate my life into studying up on things in order to determine whether the paranormal is bull or not?  Or can I find this out for myself right here and now in a relatively short time?  If it's the former, then I have no interest in doing this research.  But if it's the latter, then I will go ahead with this.

[The Grand Nudger]

But I can't trust the arguments skeptics make in an attempt to prove Dean as being a charlatan. 

Sure you can..ya just...don't....wanna.

You are free to set these arguments forth.  But I don't think I can be convinced of them right then and there on the spot.  Another important question I have here is, do I have to dedicate my life into studying up on things in order to determine whether the paranormal is bull or not?  Or can I find this out for myself right here and now in a relatively short time?  If it's the former, then I have no interest in doing this research.  But if it's the latter, then I will go ahead with this.

No you won't, lol.  Lie to me all day..I don't mind..but lying to yourself is just sad.

[polymath257]

If you did an iota of research, you would know.

But you clearly don't want to know enough to find out.

You also clearly don't want to inform yourself enough to actually have an *informed discussion*.

Yet you want to claim others *may* have made up their minds too hastily. With, I might add, no evidence or research to back up even that claim.

And *that* makes you a troll.

I will go ahead and ask this same question I asked Khemikal.  Do I have to dedicate my life into studying up on things in order to determine whether the paranormal is bull or not?  Or can I find this out for myself right here and now in a relatively short time?  If it's the former, then I have no interest in doing this research.  But if it's the latter, then I will go ahead with this.

No, but you do need to learn the basics of how science works. Don't expect a two paragraph treatment of this. You might need to study a bit. Say, a month or two.

[Transcended Dimensions]

But I can't trust the arguments skeptics make in an attempt to prove Dean as being a charlatan. 

Sure you can..ya just...don't....wanna.

You are free to set these arguments forth.  But I don't think I can be convinced of them right then and there on the spot.  Another important question I have here is, do I have to dedicate my life into studying up on things in order to determine whether the paranormal is bull or not?  Or can I find this out for myself right here and now in a relatively short time?  If it's the former, then I have no interest in doing this research.  But if it's the latter, then I will go ahead with this.

No you won't, lol.  Lie to me all day..I don't mind..but lying to yourself is just sad.

People have told me that drawing a conclusion as to whether the paranormal is lies or not is not a matter of looking into the debates. Instead, it is this some sort of one-time thing when you tell me that I just need to look at one argument and come to the conclusion that Dean is a charlatan.  If this one argument really is the nail in the coffin for these paranormal researchers, then go ahead and present it.  Likewise, I will also look into the "one-hit K.O." argument that the paranormal proponents have as well and compare the two arguments.   

I will go ahead and ask this same question I asked Khemikal.  Do I have to dedicate my life into studying up on things in order to determine whether the paranormal is bull or not?  Or can I find this out for myself right here and now in a relatively short time?  If it's the former, then I have no interest in doing this research.  But if it's the latter, then I will go ahead with this.

No, but you do need to learn the basics of how science works. Don't expect a two paragraph treatment of this. You might need to study a bit. Say, a month or two.

Now, I am quite sure Dean Radin is well aware of all this information I need to learn.  Given this, he should know how science is really done and the skeptics should know as well.  Therefore, I have considered another possibility which is that both Dean and the skeptics are conducting science properly since they know how science works.  From there, there might still be some disagreement for whatever reason which needs to be settled.  I would look into this disagreement and find out whether the paranormal really is lies or not.