infidelchic

Are you an intellectually dishonest diptard, by any chance?

Veil of Fire

Corwin: *sigh*

This is, again, a host of logical fallacies.

I'll point them out to you:

That's a good start, but by itself it's a Hasty Generalization. 2 is not a large enough sample size.

Appeal to Ridicule. It really makes me wonder if there's such a thing as an OBJECTIVE skeptic. You can make a point without insulting people.

Not a fallacy per se, but again, why would the CIA tell us anything about remote viewing successes when it classifies information on things like mundane spy satellites?

Ok, so he's kinda-sorta-maybe debunking one test that came out supporting psychicness. But he's not REALLY debunking it, just saying "I don't believe it anyway". Telology At Work.

Again, two contradicting studies does not make a conclusion.

Which does not in and of itself prove that psychic abilities don't exist. Red Herring or Questionable Cause? I'd have to look it up.

Again, why on earth would they say "Oh yeah, we know what Saddam Hussien had for lunch today thanks to our remote viewers!"? If we had the capability to do that, it'd be Top Secret at the very least.

***

So what do we have? A few contradicting studies, a few various Appeals, and not one hard fact either way.

Yeah, I'll reject the hypothesis based on this.

infidelchic

Veil,
What other sort of supernatural things do you believe in. This is fascinating in a weird kind of way.

Veil of Fire

I'm not the person resorting to Appeal to Ridicule as the only evidence for my claim!

CAN
YOU
READ?

If you know something I don't, PLEASE, post it. I have yet to see anything that actually leads me to a conclusion one way or the other, you fucking troll.

Coragyps

<Moderator voice>
Tone it down a little, ladies & gents, or I'll have to send this thread to Rants & Raves.
</Moderator voice>

infidelchic

Take a pill.

Veil of Fire

As soon as you actually read my posts, I take a pill. Until then, you're a troll.

Anunnaki

Hey Marduck,
I thought Art bell went off the air a couple years ago. I used to listen to him all the time when I was in my ancient alien phase. I think the last guest I heard before I stopped listening was Michael Dunn (author of the Giza powerplant.)

Btw,Do know if Dunn ever got that flash animation of his pyramid/power plant mechanics online? It was supposed to show how it all worked,but after 4 months of waiting I forgot all about it. I think Dunn was probably too busy arguing with that woman who claimed the pyramid blocks were poured into place. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

clark

There's an axiom in science and philosophy that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Psychic communication with pets is such an extraordinary claim that it certainly requires extraordinary evidence. In my opinion, to even take the idea of psychic pet communication seriously, there would have to be repeatable, double-blind studies published in peer-reviewed journals of animal behavior. Until then, I think someone is justified in considering it silly. Having a presumed charlatan on an entertainment show on the Animal Planet channel is hardly compelling evidence.

One of my favorite adages is "it is important to have an open mind, but not so open as one's brains fall out." Dawkins uses this adage in one of his books, but I think it predates him. Having an open mind is important, but it must be tempered by rigorous skepticism. The degree of skepticism must be related to the bizarreness of the claim.

Therefore, I think it's proper to scoff at the idea of pet psychics until there is voluminous compelling evidence to support it.

THOUGHTfully Yours,
Clark Adams

Veil of Fire

I dunno, I find String Theory pretty damned bizzare.

Problem being here is that you're using highly subjective terms in what should arguably be a completely objective debate.

Further, subjectivity or not, Appeal to Ridicule is never evidence for or against a claim. There always must be some form of reasoning behind any judgement, be it objective or subjective, beyond "thinking about it makes me giggle".

I also reject the notion that until something is proven is must be completely rejected. That kind of mentality fosters a tendency to disbelieve legitimate results when they do emerge. After all, if a study conducted by the US Government comes out proving the existence pet telepathy, I can garauntee you that many people on this board would say "Bah, study or no study, it's still just too stupid to be true", and/or more would simply refuse to take ANY government study seriously from that point foward. "They said they found evidence of PET TELEPATHY! They're a bunch of crocks!"