Psycokinesis
- Thread starter Tristan
- Start date
Heres some info for Mr. G about preminition:
A preminition is a sight of something to come, if it was stopped it would not come into existance and thus wouldn't be a preminition.
For all you know their might have been Psychics that thought of stopping the WTC event from occuring but you have this viscious circle problem similiar from the Grandfather Paradox in time discussions.
i.e.
You see it happening in foresight, you stop it happening, it doesn't happen. Which means there is a point where you don't see it happen because it didn't happen which means it happens.
Perhaps we fell foul of the latter.
There is also a point that to interfer in an Event would create a parallel, and to create parallels without license is just asking for trouble. Of course if you start asking for a Parallel creation license you better be talking to the right people, otherwise you could end up being responsible for alsorts of havoc and mayhem on this planet.
A preminition is a sight of something to come, if it was stopped it would not come into existance and thus wouldn't be a preminition.
For all you know their might have been Psychics that thought of stopping the WTC event from occuring but you have this viscious circle problem similiar from the Grandfather Paradox in time discussions.
i.e.
You see it happening in foresight, you stop it happening, it doesn't happen. Which means there is a point where you don't see it happen because it didn't happen which means it happens.
Perhaps we fell foul of the latter.
There is also a point that to interfer in an Event would create a parallel, and to create parallels without license is just asking for trouble. Of course if you start asking for a Parallel creation license you better be talking to the right people, otherwise you could end up being responsible for alsorts of havoc and mayhem on this planet.
<<...might have been Psychics that thought of stopping the WTC event from occuring but you have this viscious circle problem similiar from the Grandfather Paradox in time discussions.
You see it happening in foresight, you stop it happening, it doesn't happen. Which means there is a point where you don't see it happen because it didn't happen which means it happens...>>
Occam's Razor:
Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate: plurality should not be posited without necessity.
Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora: It is futile to do with more what can be done with less.
non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem: entities are not to be multiplied unnecessarily.
------
The more likely explanation is not the simplest but the one most economically complex.
Having to choose between the paradoxes arising from alleged psychics and their logical limitations, and the notion that psychics do not exist, the least complex concept of the two is that they don't exist.
You see it happening in foresight, you stop it happening, it doesn't happen. Which means there is a point where you don't see it happen because it didn't happen which means it happens...>>
Occam's Razor:
Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate: plurality should not be posited without necessity.
Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora: It is futile to do with more what can be done with less.
non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem: entities are not to be multiplied unnecessarily.
------
The more likely explanation is not the simplest but the one most economically complex.
Having to choose between the paradoxes arising from alleged psychics and their logical limitations, and the notion that psychics do not exist, the least complex concept of the two is that they don't exist.
Psy-learner
Registered Senior Member
Stryderunknown, are you a trekkie?
A foresight is just a foresight...
I heard someone predicted a couple of years ago the in februari 2001 the world would be destroyed, we are still writing on the forum here...
Also, sinds when do you need a licence for something like creating a parallel demention?
We already done that perhaps a thousands of times, by making a desission...
In movies they sometimes say, what if I made the other desission..
If you are a trekkie, you'd known this from the 1st season of Voyager...
And if we create a parallel, would we notice?
An average psychic can change the foresight in to a imagination...
When I get contol over my imagination, I can change what I want, so could you...
A foresight can happen, but not always at the exact way...
I'm not experienced in foresights and stuff, but I know that they have the alias pre-cognition and that it doesn't nessesarilly have to be that exact way...
but nice theory anywayz...
c-yah
A foresight is just a foresight...
I heard someone predicted a couple of years ago the in februari 2001 the world would be destroyed, we are still writing on the forum here...
Also, sinds when do you need a licence for something like creating a parallel demention?
We already done that perhaps a thousands of times, by making a desission...
In movies they sometimes say, what if I made the other desission..
If you are a trekkie, you'd known this from the 1st season of Voyager...
And if we create a parallel, would we notice?
An average psychic can change the foresight in to a imagination...
When I get contol over my imagination, I can change what I want, so could you...
A foresight can happen, but not always at the exact way...
I'm not experienced in foresights and stuff, but I know that they have the alias pre-cognition and that it doesn't nessesarilly have to be that exact way...
but nice theory anywayz...
c-yah
Foresights occur mostly in dreams or out of body experiences.
It is sometimes hard to 'translate' them, for they come in mixed images not in words and then you have to figure out what exactly the foresight is and what to do with it.
If you get a foresight of something important to happen, it is not always that easy to inform other humans about it, because they don't believe it and do not listen to it.
Try to inform the police for instance if you've had a foresight of something bad, which happens in your home-town. They listen, oh yes, but always try to handle first from out their own perspectives and then, later, maybe they will do something with the information they've got from a Psychic. And that is in the Netherlands, guess in America you get locked up right away as being called insane. Put the craze in an asylum for the insane, keep the doors locked and throw away the key....
Psychics are more careful now a days with giving information to the common humans, for they don't listen any way and most of the time they call you just crazy.
Well, let them do so, for the Psychics themselves know better.
It is their loss, not that of the Psychics....
It is sometimes hard to 'translate' them, for they come in mixed images not in words and then you have to figure out what exactly the foresight is and what to do with it.
If you get a foresight of something important to happen, it is not always that easy to inform other humans about it, because they don't believe it and do not listen to it.
Try to inform the police for instance if you've had a foresight of something bad, which happens in your home-town. They listen, oh yes, but always try to handle first from out their own perspectives and then, later, maybe they will do something with the information they've got from a Psychic. And that is in the Netherlands, guess in America you get locked up right away as being called insane. Put the craze in an asylum for the insane, keep the doors locked and throw away the key....
Psychics are more careful now a days with giving information to the common humans, for they don't listen any way and most of the time they call you just crazy.
Well, let them do so, for the Psychics themselves know better.
It is their loss, not that of the Psychics....
The only one prophecy I even slightly believe is the mayan one that the world will end in like 2013 or something like that.
They were right about the spanish guys coming and slaughtering them. they said one day light skined men with powerful weapons would come. That came true. there were also a few others i cant remember... But
Back To The Subject.. Telekinesis!
Psy-learner
Registered Senior Member
Back you psycokinesis
U R right Tristan...
We have to get back to psycokinesis...
I did read a forum about Teleportation, whit the accurate of two weeks difference, a year exactly now...
There wasn't much posting in the end, I posted the most...
Because of costs and space reduction on the server they desided to scrap it, around june or juli it was off...
It was on the site I gave to shrike and Banshee...
About skeptic's there where skeptics, and you won't belive who, when you just started whit all this....
The persons whit TK/PK...
The one who requested the thread did came in later then 2 of those skeptics and a person who wanted to seriously talk about it...
Maybe we have to name the skills whit mind power...
It sounds silly, but I do belive there are some ways to make these skills ordered...
You don't get the abillities on one same order...
But the amount and use of energy is maybe to make an ordered skill hight...
Psycokinesis is the highest level known to most psychics...
I belive there is something beyond it...
Definetly one thing, maybe more...
The one thing beyond is Teleportation...
If you can do TK/PK, you can do almost anything...
Not directly, it depends on your energy...
When you control so much energy that you can do most TK/PK whitout even breaking a sweat, you maybe able to get to teleportation...
It's just a theory for now, just say what you think of it...
c-yah
U R right Tristan...
We have to get back to psycokinesis...
I did read a forum about Teleportation, whit the accurate of two weeks difference, a year exactly now...
There wasn't much posting in the end, I posted the most...
Because of costs and space reduction on the server they desided to scrap it, around june or juli it was off...
It was on the site I gave to shrike and Banshee...
About skeptic's there where skeptics, and you won't belive who, when you just started whit all this....
The persons whit TK/PK...
The one who requested the thread did came in later then 2 of those skeptics and a person who wanted to seriously talk about it...
Maybe we have to name the skills whit mind power...
It sounds silly, but I do belive there are some ways to make these skills ordered...
You don't get the abillities on one same order...
But the amount and use of energy is maybe to make an ordered skill hight...
Psycokinesis is the highest level known to most psychics...
I belive there is something beyond it...
Definetly one thing, maybe more...
The one thing beyond is Teleportation...
If you can do TK/PK, you can do almost anything...
Not directly, it depends on your energy...
When you control so much energy that you can do most TK/PK whitout even breaking a sweat, you maybe able to get to teleportation...
It's just a theory for now, just say what you think of it...
c-yah
What could really amaze me, more than wholesale claims of certain extra-special mind powers, is when all you psychics/telekinetists/paranormalics actually demonstrate mind powers over spelling, grammar and syntax -- certainly mind powers much more easily mastered than thinking things into non-demonstrable motion.
Psy-learner
Registered Senior Member
Read these words Mr. G.
Uri Geller
Run an errand for yourself about him...
He did, he's one of the greatest of all time...
He did demonstrate in Vegas on some nobody's show, did it back in his hometown in Israel, Can't rememver the name...
Come to the Dutch Studio's of the Tros, they have some vid's about him, and an interview whit him...
Mail Micheal Jackson, Gillian Anderson and Mick Jagger...
They met him, I doubt that they'll say he's a fraude...
He isn't, just look up in the internet and ask around for movies about him...
You'll maybe get some good material in your hand about psycokinesis, just try it even for the fun of it...
c-yah
Uri Geller
Run an errand for yourself about him...
He did, he's one of the greatest of all time...
He did demonstrate in Vegas on some nobody's show, did it back in his hometown in Israel, Can't rememver the name...
Come to the Dutch Studio's of the Tros, they have some vid's about him, and an interview whit him...
Mail Micheal Jackson, Gillian Anderson and Mick Jagger...
They met him, I doubt that they'll say he's a fraude...
He isn't, just look up in the internet and ask around for movies about him...
You'll maybe get some good material in your hand about psycokinesis, just try it even for the fun of it...
c-yah
Psy-learner,
<<...Uri Geller...one of the greatest of all time...He did demonstrate...>>
So show me the substance behind your words. Show me the indesputable evidence that Uri Geller is not a very talented charlatan.
It's your claim, it's your burden of proof.
Show me.
<<...Uri Geller...one of the greatest of all time...He did demonstrate...>>
So show me the substance behind your words. Show me the indesputable evidence that Uri Geller is not a very talented charlatan.
It's your claim, it's your burden of proof.
Show me.
Psy-learner
Registered Senior Member
I know that, he started out in his own town on stage...
Do you belive he's cheating?
Everyone has some excuse that it can be fake...
Psychics are pressed away by jerks, for some silly reason...
I even saw a fragment about an old man who didn't belive at al that the man landed first on the moon...
He said it was some kind of a trick, that we couldn't do it...
That's precicely how Mr.G. and a lot of others are...
They don't belive until they see, feel, do and know it...
I need a lot of examples to make it go through your heads that not everything can be proven to a person that is hard against it's belives...
It's whit those people who will never accomplish goals about what they like to belive, cause they press every g*d d*mn pease of it's existance away...
If you collect bit by bit and just allow yourself to belive some of the things, then it'll be more open to you...
I can say you killed somebody by giving you the most realistic looking toy-gun, make a photo of you whit it, kill someone whit the real model and go to the police whit the photo and claim you did it...
I can write a sientific letter and claim that TK is real whit forged statistics and show test results in front of every sientist, and it'll all be fake...
So what kind of way do you want your proof served to you Mr.G.?
And James R., how would you like to be proven a cheater whit forged evidence while you where playing fair all the time?
I do have some disbelives, but I'll exept things to learn if there is some explenation...
I don't think Mr.G. will ever find proof for him, cause everything in his eyes can be some joke or illusion...
That's why I ask how he want the proof of it...
I don't know the thing about god, but Jezus healed people whitout any medicine, gave a whole group of people wine and bread from a one litre jar and one loaf of bread...
Why do we count years if it ain't because of Jezus?
A skeptic of Jezus couldn't explain it, but can theorize "Because some outlaw kids got high and invented the year count just for the fun of it..."
If an average person thinks alot like me, we all had our big doubts and weird theories, but at least I still see the logic at least partially...
No matter how mysterious, at some point I'll see some of the light in a dark spot, that reveals the basic of the logic...
c-yah...
Do you belive he's cheating?
Everyone has some excuse that it can be fake...
Psychics are pressed away by jerks, for some silly reason...
I even saw a fragment about an old man who didn't belive at al that the man landed first on the moon...
He said it was some kind of a trick, that we couldn't do it...
That's precicely how Mr.G. and a lot of others are...
They don't belive until they see, feel, do and know it...
I need a lot of examples to make it go through your heads that not everything can be proven to a person that is hard against it's belives...
It's whit those people who will never accomplish goals about what they like to belive, cause they press every g*d d*mn pease of it's existance away...
If you collect bit by bit and just allow yourself to belive some of the things, then it'll be more open to you...
I can say you killed somebody by giving you the most realistic looking toy-gun, make a photo of you whit it, kill someone whit the real model and go to the police whit the photo and claim you did it...
I can write a sientific letter and claim that TK is real whit forged statistics and show test results in front of every sientist, and it'll all be fake...
So what kind of way do you want your proof served to you Mr.G.?
And James R., how would you like to be proven a cheater whit forged evidence while you where playing fair all the time?
I do have some disbelives, but I'll exept things to learn if there is some explenation...
I don't think Mr.G. will ever find proof for him, cause everything in his eyes can be some joke or illusion...
That's why I ask how he want the proof of it...
I don't know the thing about god, but Jezus healed people whitout any medicine, gave a whole group of people wine and bread from a one litre jar and one loaf of bread...
Why do we count years if it ain't because of Jezus?
A skeptic of Jezus couldn't explain it, but can theorize "Because some outlaw kids got high and invented the year count just for the fun of it..."
If an average person thinks alot like me, we all had our big doubts and weird theories, but at least I still see the logic at least partially...
No matter how mysterious, at some point I'll see some of the light in a dark spot, that reveals the basic of the logic...
c-yah...
Sceptics are pretty much modern time witch hunters, infact the whoe sceptic methodology came into being during the Edwardian times, although this is more noticable in the Victorian times.
Doctors and Professors at that time were busy trying to prove scientific foundations for many things. Of course the occult and Macabre made them feel uneasy as they felt the people dealing with such things as necromancing, fortune-telling and lucky charms.
(At that time they thought that many people were wasting their money on such paraphenalia so they classed these people as petty crooks.)
This meant that there were many written documents, in fact Harry Houdini (The escapologist) believed very much like a sceptic for he saw and did many illusions. (I managed to find the following link on the topic of Spiritualists)
http://www.uelectric.com/houdini/spirits.html
There are many other articles to find (which I haven't found yet)
I believe even Alexander Graham Bell had experience in investigating occurances.
Lets see how can I put this, for a parallel to be created it isn't just about making one of two choices at an instance, it involves a little bit of time/information manipulating (I've mentioned information about this before).
What ever decision you make is a constant, no matter how much you swap you decision and when you get to decide, you are actually following a set destined path which you can not pervert through natural means.
If you were to pervert it you would need to be using a superconductor(possibly even a semiconductor) but that's all I'm going to mention on how.
I mentioned the whole understanding of licensing because of the possibility of what occurs if everybody did start creating parallels all over the show without some form of conformity.
Our world would end up a real state of odd sightings and occurances, far beyond that of what we have now. (In other words our world would be destined to have our civilization suffer a blight of madness far beyond that of lead poisioning from 150+ years ago.)
As for Voyager and Star Trek, it's entertainment and Fiction. Although many things might be based upon scientific discoveries there are still thing that do not and will not exist. It just something to captivate your imagination and make you aspire to create and do great things, not just believe.
As for "Creating a parallel would we notice?" you could open a channel to a parallel world but over time the channel will degrade as the universe grow in difference from each other and you wouldn't necessarily notice the world unless specific changes had occured.
(I mentioned some information on this in the "Ghosts" thread)
http://www.sciforums.com/t4350/s/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4350&perpage=20&pagenumber=2
I also mentioned some more information on this within the "change in past = change in future" topic within Frontier Science threads.
http://www.sciforums.com/f33/s/showthread.php?s=&postid=64811#post64811
Perhaps oneday I'll be able to conform all the information into one document on this subject
Doctors and Professors at that time were busy trying to prove scientific foundations for many things. Of course the occult and Macabre made them feel uneasy as they felt the people dealing with such things as necromancing, fortune-telling and lucky charms.
(At that time they thought that many people were wasting their money on such paraphenalia so they classed these people as petty crooks.)
This meant that there were many written documents, in fact Harry Houdini (The escapologist) believed very much like a sceptic for he saw and did many illusions. (I managed to find the following link on the topic of Spiritualists)
http://www.uelectric.com/houdini/spirits.html
There are many other articles to find (which I haven't found yet)
I believe even Alexander Graham Bell had experience in investigating occurances.
Lets see how can I put this, for a parallel to be created it isn't just about making one of two choices at an instance, it involves a little bit of time/information manipulating (I've mentioned information about this before).
What ever decision you make is a constant, no matter how much you swap you decision and when you get to decide, you are actually following a set destined path which you can not pervert through natural means.
If you were to pervert it you would need to be using a superconductor(possibly even a semiconductor) but that's all I'm going to mention on how.
I mentioned the whole understanding of licensing because of the possibility of what occurs if everybody did start creating parallels all over the show without some form of conformity.
Our world would end up a real state of odd sightings and occurances, far beyond that of what we have now. (In other words our world would be destined to have our civilization suffer a blight of madness far beyond that of lead poisioning from 150+ years ago.)
As for Voyager and Star Trek, it's entertainment and Fiction. Although many things might be based upon scientific discoveries there are still thing that do not and will not exist. It just something to captivate your imagination and make you aspire to create and do great things, not just believe.
As for "Creating a parallel would we notice?" you could open a channel to a parallel world but over time the channel will degrade as the universe grow in difference from each other and you wouldn't necessarily notice the world unless specific changes had occured.
(I mentioned some information on this in the "Ghosts" thread)
http://www.sciforums.com/t4350/s/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4350&perpage=20&pagenumber=2
I also mentioned some more information on this within the "change in past = change in future" topic within Frontier Science threads.
http://www.sciforums.com/f33/s/showthread.php?s=&postid=64811#post64811
Perhaps oneday I'll be able to conform all the information into one document on this subject
Good replies Psy-learner.
Shall I come to the Tros studio's then and ask if they will broadcast it to Mr. G.?
Then he will have his proof...
Sorry, couldn't resist this, to tempting, hahaha...
Good reply Stryder, but you don't convinche the real skepticals with this, there are always some humans who will be convinched that it is not true and that you are cheating one way or another....
Shall I come to the Tros studio's then and ask if they will broadcast it to Mr. G.?
Then he will have his proof...
Sorry, couldn't resist this, to tempting, hahaha...
Good reply Stryder, but you don't convinche the real skepticals with this, there are always some humans who will be convinched that it is not true and that you are cheating one way or another....
Psy-learner,
<<...Mr.G. and a lot of others...don't belive until they see, feel, do and know it...>>
Quite correct. Opinion/anecdotal testimony of others is insufficent evidence of proof.
<<...I need a lot of examples...>>
Or maybe just a single really, really, really good one that I also can verify for myself.
<<...not everything can be proven to a person that is hard against it's belives...>>
Which is why those unprovables amongst 'its' various beliefs are subject to being so 'hard against'.
<<...It's whit those people who will never accomplish goals about what they like to belive...>>
'Like to believe' is too easily equated with 'like to know it's not really real'.
Some of us prefer to accomplish our goals based on what we actually know is real and not invest time and brain energy into intangible fantasy. Sure we like to be entertained but we also like to actually get something done, from time to time.
<<..If you collect bit by bit and just allow yourself to belive some of the things, then it'll be more open to you...>>
That's precisely what us rational skeptics are doing? Step by step. Watching where we step. Not doing the Lemming Leap just because it feels like a really great rush for a while.
<<...I can write a sientific letter and claim that TK is real whit forged statistics and show test results in front of every sientist, and it'll all be fake...>>
Precisely the reason that Peer Review exists as part of science process.
<<...So what kind of way do you want your proof served to you Mr.G.?..>>
Convincingly, of course.
And as you've offered no proof, convincing or otherwise, that Uri Geller is as capable as you previously asserted, I still have reason to consider him a talented fake.
Since you've pridefully invested some measure of yourself in his public defense, now your credibility is open to comment, too.
<<...Mr.G. and a lot of others...don't belive until they see, feel, do and know it...>>
Quite correct. Opinion/anecdotal testimony of others is insufficent evidence of proof.
<<...I need a lot of examples...>>
Or maybe just a single really, really, really good one that I also can verify for myself.
<<...not everything can be proven to a person that is hard against it's belives...>>
Which is why those unprovables amongst 'its' various beliefs are subject to being so 'hard against'.
<<...It's whit those people who will never accomplish goals about what they like to belive...>>
'Like to believe' is too easily equated with 'like to know it's not really real'.
Some of us prefer to accomplish our goals based on what we actually know is real and not invest time and brain energy into intangible fantasy. Sure we like to be entertained but we also like to actually get something done, from time to time.
<<..If you collect bit by bit and just allow yourself to belive some of the things, then it'll be more open to you...>>
That's precisely what us rational skeptics are doing? Step by step. Watching where we step. Not doing the Lemming Leap just because it feels like a really great rush for a while.
<<...I can write a sientific letter and claim that TK is real whit forged statistics and show test results in front of every sientist, and it'll all be fake...>>
Precisely the reason that Peer Review exists as part of science process.
<<...So what kind of way do you want your proof served to you Mr.G.?..>>
Convincingly, of course.
And as you've offered no proof, convincing or otherwise, that Uri Geller is as capable as you previously asserted, I still have reason to consider him a talented fake.
Since you've pridefully invested some measure of yourself in his public defense, now your credibility is open to comment, too.
Stryderunknown,
<<...Sceptics are pretty much modern time witch hunters...>>
Not.
Skeptics are more like the hunted witch -- folks who don't automaticaly subscribe to the native group-think: people willing to risk the native's group-thinking wrath for the freedom of thinking for themselves and of acting in there own interest before having to act as the slaves of others.
<<...Sceptics are pretty much modern time witch hunters...>>
Not.
Skeptics are more like the hunted witch -- folks who don't automaticaly subscribe to the native group-think: people willing to risk the native's group-thinking wrath for the freedom of thinking for themselves and of acting in there own interest before having to act as the slaves of others.
Mr. G
In English would your nonsensical statement mean that your defining everyone that agrees that Psychokinesis exists is only saying so because they are following someone like a Cow with a Bell? And that we can not think for ourselves?
I would say that is a little unfair, as we have all drawn our own conclusions and they do differ from each other.
For instance some believe that it's a natural talent, others like myself believe it's accomplishable with machinery and funding attached, while you seem to cast it aside as a complete fabrication.
How can you cast it aside, but believe in ET's/UFO's or Conspiracies involving the Government?
Anyway skeptics sometimes flaw themselves with narrowed mindedness and overlook things that they would have seen if they had been a bit more investigative than challenging.
As for your constant "where's your proof", be an investigator and find the proof that can tally either "For" or "Against" in the arguement, don't ask people to give you proof. Go look for it youself.
for instance:
Imagine if a scientist asked someone else to always find proof so he could take their word for it. Unless he had done the experiment himself and formulated his own conclusion, then he can not truly conclude what he knows is the reality.
In English would your nonsensical statement mean that your defining everyone that agrees that Psychokinesis exists is only saying so because they are following someone like a Cow with a Bell? And that we can not think for ourselves?
I would say that is a little unfair, as we have all drawn our own conclusions and they do differ from each other.
For instance some believe that it's a natural talent, others like myself believe it's accomplishable with machinery and funding attached, while you seem to cast it aside as a complete fabrication.
How can you cast it aside, but believe in ET's/UFO's or Conspiracies involving the Government?
Anyway skeptics sometimes flaw themselves with narrowed mindedness and overlook things that they would have seen if they had been a bit more investigative than challenging.
As for your constant "where's your proof", be an investigator and find the proof that can tally either "For" or "Against" in the arguement, don't ask people to give you proof. Go look for it youself.
for instance:
Imagine if a scientist asked someone else to always find proof so he could take their word for it. Unless he had done the experiment himself and formulated his own conclusion, then he can not truly conclude what he knows is the reality.
Stryderunknown,
<<...In English...>>
As if you can't already recognize it when it bites you?
<<...your nonsensical statement...>>
Perhaps reading it again will improve comprehension?
<<...your defining everyone that agrees that Psychokinesis exists is only saying so because they are following someone like a Cow with a Bell?..>>
No, only that such persons collectively can offer no evidence able to satisfy peer-reviewed science process.
<<...And that we can not think for ourselves?..>>
The real feat is to think critically. (can not /= cannot.)
<<...you seem to cast it aside as a complete fabrication...>>
In the absence of reproducible, demonstrable evidence, yes.
<<...How can you cast it aside, but believe in ET's...>>
We exist.
<<...,UFO's...>>
Lots of unidentified things exist.
<<...or Conspiracies involving the Government?..>>
Watergate, Contragate, Bay of Pigs, etc.
<<...skeptics sometimes flaw themselves with narrowed mindedness...>>
Skeptics are conservative thinkers, less likely to waste brain cycles on fanciful neurologic tire-spinning. Narrow-mindedness is dismissing out-of-hand the skeptic's approach and point of view.
<<...snd overlook things that they would have seen if they had been a bit more investigative than challenging...>>
Hey, folks like you always can bring such things to our attention so that we don't miss anything. But then, you'll still have to convince us what you have to offer is real. The burden is yours. Are you up to the task?
<<...As for your constant "where's your proof", be an investigator and find the proof that can tally either "For" or "Against" in the arguement, don't ask people to give you proof. Go look for it youself...>>
You want to say something is real? You produce the proof it really is real.
You want to be believed? Taken seriously? Do your own homework and then present it for consideration.
You can't use skeptics like we're your obliged source of Cliffnotes. We're not responsible for your beliefs. You are. Do your own math and then get back to us with your proof.
<<...In English...>>
As if you can't already recognize it when it bites you?
<<...your nonsensical statement...>>
Perhaps reading it again will improve comprehension?
<<...your defining everyone that agrees that Psychokinesis exists is only saying so because they are following someone like a Cow with a Bell?..>>
No, only that such persons collectively can offer no evidence able to satisfy peer-reviewed science process.
<<...And that we can not think for ourselves?..>>
The real feat is to think critically. (can not /= cannot.)
<<...you seem to cast it aside as a complete fabrication...>>
In the absence of reproducible, demonstrable evidence, yes.
<<...How can you cast it aside, but believe in ET's...>>
We exist.
<<...,UFO's...>>
Lots of unidentified things exist.
<<...or Conspiracies involving the Government?..>>
Watergate, Contragate, Bay of Pigs, etc.
<<...skeptics sometimes flaw themselves with narrowed mindedness...>>
Skeptics are conservative thinkers, less likely to waste brain cycles on fanciful neurologic tire-spinning. Narrow-mindedness is dismissing out-of-hand the skeptic's approach and point of view.
<<...snd overlook things that they would have seen if they had been a bit more investigative than challenging...>>
Hey, folks like you always can bring such things to our attention so that we don't miss anything. But then, you'll still have to convince us what you have to offer is real. The burden is yours. Are you up to the task?
<<...As for your constant "where's your proof", be an investigator and find the proof that can tally either "For" or "Against" in the arguement, don't ask people to give you proof. Go look for it youself...>>
You want to say something is real? You produce the proof it really is real.
You want to be believed? Taken seriously? Do your own homework and then present it for consideration.
You can't use skeptics like we're your obliged source of Cliffnotes. We're not responsible for your beliefs. You are. Do your own math and then get back to us with your proof.