12-04-2013, 08:00 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-04-2013, 08:15 PM by cloudkingdom.)
@gemini
personaly i cant know is he biased or not. also i dont know how you know that. you cant know %100 sure he is biased or not. you can just guess.
but if you can demonstrate anything related to psychic under the control and when he couldnt debunk it and then he ignores it, you could be right and you can say he is completely biased. but at this point there no evidence at all under the control. if you know something reliable, accepted by many people and tested again and again please link to here so i can see. but it must be couldnt explained by science because there is zillion of claims in the internet they dont know what they do.
i dont say anything about there is psychic or not but believing something which is has no repeat and multitude, it means it cannot be scientific evidence which is accepted by tons of people and you have to think about its reliability. i dont say its true or not but it cant be reliable.
also if there is something has probability of evidence, i must be exist in nature which scientists call it material world. nobody says there cant anything related to spiritual or psychic not exist. they just say we dont know. there no bias against spiritual or psychic things. if there is evidence, it means exist in nature.
randi does not gives his own money. he has sponsored by a verizon's subsidiary company which is i dont remember its name but if you want to know, you can search on google.
there is no different kind of assumptions on science. if there is something discovered which is spiritual it goes to its first assumption what they call it nature. so when you say something spiritual it must be exist in science's nature. if its exist it cannot be anymore spiritual or only thing you can do is label it as spiritual. labeling or naming is not important.
personaly i cant know is he biased or not. also i dont know how you know that. you cant know %100 sure he is biased or not. you can just guess.
but if you can demonstrate anything related to psychic under the control and when he couldnt debunk it and then he ignores it, you could be right and you can say he is completely biased. but at this point there no evidence at all under the control. if you know something reliable, accepted by many people and tested again and again please link to here so i can see. but it must be couldnt explained by science because there is zillion of claims in the internet they dont know what they do.
i dont say anything about there is psychic or not but believing something which is has no repeat and multitude, it means it cannot be scientific evidence which is accepted by tons of people and you have to think about its reliability. i dont say its true or not but it cant be reliable.
also if there is something has probability of evidence, i must be exist in nature which scientists call it material world. nobody says there cant anything related to spiritual or psychic not exist. they just say we dont know. there no bias against spiritual or psychic things. if there is evidence, it means exist in nature.
(12-04-2013, 07:56 PM)rie Wrote: Randi knows he would never have to give $1 million to anybody bc he knows that the basic assumptions within his scientific paradigm (modernist/materialist - like look @ neuro & physio functions) is limited in its scope to study psi phenom.
It is possible for a researcher who uses phenomenological research to study things like channeling. These researchers use different basic assumptions and don't need materialistic evidence (they are postmodernist and beyond). Stanislav Grof would be an example… and actually Daryl Bem, a social psychologist does study psi, too.
I don't know how Randi could be STS just because he's a skeptic and dramatic. He's just reacting to something he feels is sucking in naive believers (who do get persuaded so easily to believe everything). There's an irony bc anti-science and skeptics demonize each other lol. Better look at one's hyper-reactiveness than blame someone for being STS just bc they don't subscribe to same beliefs and assumptions.
randi does not gives his own money. he has sponsored by a verizon's subsidiary company which is i dont remember its name but if you want to know, you can search on google.
there is no different kind of assumptions on science. if there is something discovered which is spiritual it goes to its first assumption what they call it nature. so when you say something spiritual it must be exist in science's nature. if its exist it cannot be anymore spiritual or only thing you can do is label it as spiritual. labeling or naming is not important.