This is the claim you made:
SkinWalker said:
If you assert that you have been doing "psychic seances" for some time, you're almost certainly either a fraud or deluded.
The lack of understanding -and the apparent woo-woo factor- is with you. My statement above is a conclusion to a syllogistic argument, not a claim (i.e. a premise).
The conclusions stand: there is almost certainly no reason to accept the existence of "psychics" and "seances" (based on the premises that many have made claims regarding both, none have demonstrated those claims, and no evidence is provided to show these claims to be true). Those that think they have skills in either are, necessarily, deluded or liars (based on the premises that no such claims have been shown to be true). Which are you? If you assert you are neither a liar or deluded, you must, necessarily, have evidence to support your claim.
The final conclusion is, the burden of proof lies with you and/or anyone who asserts that "psychics" and "seances" are anything more than fantasy or fraud.
I don't expect a woo-woo such as yourself, given to flights of many fancy, to accept logic or reason -instead, I expect you to create your own internal justifications and irrational reason.
I never said there were verifiable examples which show psychic seances to be a matter of fact.
Then you're in agreement that there are no good reasons to believe in either? Please... pick a side: reason or fantasy. Stick with it. Are you woo or are you not?
Lack of evidence is not evidence of its lack.
Your example is completely and wholly ignored. You're creating a strawman to support your overall woo-woo mentality. I think, deep down, you realize that "psychic/seance" bullshit is just that -bullshit. But to acknowledge that there is no good reason to believe in such fantasy contradicts your personal woo-woo BS in regards to conspiracy theories in general. You're a significance-junkie and a mystery-monger and thrive on woo. The strawman is this: I never stated lack of evidence is ... blah, blah, blah.
But since you bring it up, in this case it most certainly is. And here's why: Thousands of people have made claims of "psychic" powers and the ability to conduct "seances." These claims have been investigated time and time again with not a single shred of tangible evidence to support them. Indeed, most "pyschics" and "seancers" flat out refuse to be tested lest their lies and delusions be exposed. This then becomes evidence of absence when investigation reveals nothing. It would be like searching your pocket for money. After you've looked and discover you're still broke, you can't then claim that just because you haven't a cent in your wallet you can buy lunch.
Woo-woos and conspiracy nutjobs like you have been coming to SciForums for years. The difference between us and other science forums is that we don't ban you for being a woo-woo. Its more fun to mercilessly run the woo-woo into the ground with their own words.
So, are you saying there's good reason to believe in "psychic" powers and "seances" or aren't you?