Discussion in 'Parapsychology' started by Magical Realist, Apr 23, 2014.
Much like him asking your age, I'm trying to understand how you think. Nothing more, nothing less.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
MR is correct - I did ask him his age on one or two occasions. And I asked him, just as Orgin did, with the honest intentions of wanting to know how old he is/was. I don't mind at all if anyone asks my age (I'm 71) Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! so feel free at any time.
I'm pretty sure that Orgin's reason was the same as mine - to find out if he was a gullible, young person. And there's nothing wrong with that. Also, it's because he seems to fall for ANYTHING that comes along, like this foolish, foolish video. In addition, he has a FIRM penchant for videos rather than text - yet another indicator of a young mind as opposed to a more mature one.
Ever wonder why it is that it easier to fool/trick a child of 4 compared to someone who is 20? For the exact same reason of duping someone at 17 as opposed to 30: They simply haven't lived long enough to easily recognize all the tricks life (and other people) can throw at them.
And speaking very truthfully, there is NO reason to hide your age when asked UNLESS you have some reason to hide it (like being a child).
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
And there's no reason to even bring up age unless you are implying I'm not old enough to understand what you understand. Comprende?
Which is NOT an insult... it is a simple fact. In general, a younger mind has issues at times with more abstract thinking and deductive reasoning... it is a skill that develops as one ages.
There is still no evidence for paranormal entities.
Yes, they do. And they're correct.
The video is sensationalist horseshit. For one, how do we know that these languages written on the film were unknown to the group? Because they said so? Secondly, the signature purported to be scrawled by the ghost of Ivor Novello looks absolutely nothing like the signature he made while alive. Third and finally, the lawyer who claimed there was no possible way the tapes were switched bases this on the alleged fact that he selected the tape itself, still in its original case, opened it, signed it, and put it in the recorder. Even supposing that the tapes weren't all previously recorded on, the description the lawyer provides sounds exactly like a close-up card trick, where the magician allows the volunteer to pick a card, sign a card, place it randomly in the deck, and yet have that self-same card magically re-appear either encased in glass, in the volunteer's wallet, in a friend's pocket, etc., complete with their signature. It's entirely possible that some sleight of hand was used, and the tapes switched without the lawyer's knowledge.
It's also possible that the camera--which, like the tapes, were provided by the Scole group, and not by the lawyer or any of the "researchers" involved--was itself rigged. I mean, we're talking about the mid- to late-90s here, not the 1950s. It's entirely plausible that there was some technological trickery in play even if there was no David Blaine-esque sleight of hand.
It's also worth noting that during the non-recorded sessions, no still cameras or infrared cameras were allowed. This is suspicious. The mediums were all allowed to move around the room in the dark while the seance occurred, which is another red flag. How can we be sure they're not up to something when they're moving around the room in the dark?
It's a hoax. It's no different than a magician making sure they controlled the environment so the setting was just so.
This might be news to you, but the presence of a famous magician does not mean the experiment was scientific.
Where do you get this notion? The video doesn't say that, and everything I've read says the mediums provided the box.
And there it is. The standard excuse of all believers. Why would attempting to make sure there are proper controls interfere with the manifestation of the entities?
People want to know how old you are, MR, because if you're an adult, you're too old to believe this crap. You should know better. You're certainly too smart for it. By a mile.
Yes it is an insult. Saying I lack reasoning skills because of my age is a blatant insult.
Too old to believe in video, photographic, and audio evidence? I don't think so..
Nope..wrong as hell. There's so much video photographic and audio evidence of the paranormal its existence is today undeniable. Unless you live in a cave with your ears plugged.
Duh yeah. None of these participants were experts on ancient languages.
Ofcourse it does. As does Edison's. You just can't handle the possibility of the paranormal actually existing.
Nope..the tapes were new and sealed in their packages. No possibility of trickery there.
Ooo..trickery so sophisticated nobody's even heard of it! Wowee! lol!
Because they all remained in physical contact at the table.
You wanna back that claim with real evidence instead of wild speculations? Didn't think so.
It means the possibility of trickery or sleight of hand was ruled out.
It's in the written article I posted. Keep up with the thread..
Because that's the scientific way isn't it? Everything done in well-lighted laboratories with only scientists present?
For more information on what happened in these experiments, see:
No, all we have are a bunch of recordings and photographs that people claim are evidence of paranormal activity. None of it has any value. Aside from entertainment value, of course.
Again, how do you know?
A follow-up: Since when does it take an expert in ancient languages to copy a poem? Especially one that was already copied by someone these people are aware of and, presumably, look up to?
Uh, no. It does not. I didn't see Edison's signature in the video, but I capped this from youtube:
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Again, those look nothing alike.
Isn't it convenient, though, that these signatures are of notable people? Convenient, that.
Oh, there's plenty of possibility for trickery.
What's funny is that you don't even allow for the potential that this is fraudulent. You just close your eyes and stamp your feet like a child. This, MR, is why people are curious how old you are. Your behavior here is absolutely infantile.
We've already established there's quite a gulf between what nobody's ever heard of, and what you've never heard of. Perhaps if you spent less of your time watching piffle like this...nah, what's the use?
No they did not. The reports of the seances specifically said there was no hand-holding, and that the mediums moved around the room as the strange occurrences were happening.
"Wild speculation?" LMFAO! I'm providing you with plausible ways these events could have been hoaxed. Meanwhile, you've categorically denied the possibility of trickery, and made claims to knowledge you couldn't possibly have.
No it doesn't. As a matter of fact, the magician who was there was James Webster. Yes, he is a professional magician...but he's also a world-class crank who believes in the spirit world, and came into this already believing that the paranormal is real. So if you think he's supposed to be some kind of credible witness, uh...no.
I found it. It says he built one of the boxes. And while that ensures there were no false bottoms or otherwise secret components in one of the boxes, it doesn't change the fact that the box could have simply been opened in the dark and the tapes switched.
I think you know that's not true. I think this is another one of your infamous tantrums.
Try this: The "scientific way" would be one that had reasonable controls. These "experiments" did not. The mediums set up the parameters. They said what could and couldn't be used. They provided tapes in the case of the recording, and the camera. It was their show, not a scientific experiment.
You've seen no video or photographic evidence. You've only seen TV shows and Youtube videos claiming to show evidence. You have no first-hand knowledge of any of this. And there is no credible evidence of any kind. None of it is ever reproduced in any kind of scientifically-valid way.
Magicians such as Penn and Teller are truly amazing performers. They have studied people and understand how we perceive our surroundings and how we process information. They are also technicians that have developed skills that allow them to manipulate objects in ways that prevent us from clearly seeing what they are doing. I greatly admire them. The people that use these skills to trick gullible people into believing in the supernatural are scum of the earth hucksters that are no better than the con men that trick little old ladies out of their retirement money.
I don't know why some people so desperately want to believe in the supernatural and magic, but I fear these people are setting themselves up to eventually get taken in by one of these hucksters.
If it's not reliable and it was collected with no standards consistent with science, then it's useless. Perhaps it's motivation for further investigation, but that's it.
The problem is, all three of those can very easily be faked/fabricated
And the funny (amusing) thing is that MR does not even appear bright enough to realize that NO ONE here agrees with his side of the the story. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! He's all alone in believing all of this foolishness. (huge grin)
No..special precautions were made to rule out fraud. All the people involved were men/women of science and vouched for that. These experiments were performed over 5 years in many locations all over Europe and America. No fraud or trickery has ever been proven, though ofcourse that is the standard allegation of skeptics who weren't even present. Hey, let's believe THEM! They know everything. lol!
"Can be" doesn't equal "was". It "could be" that JFK was never assassinated and the film of it was totally faked. The eyewitnesses? Anecdotal accounts that don't count as scientific evidence. See? Anything can be dismissed as faked.
Reported for insult..
Right. The whole story of the Scole experiments was made up because it's on TV and Youtube. Never even happened. LOL!
Separate names with a comma.