Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
macqdor

The Unethical Skeptic:

Recommended Posts

macqdor

https://theethicalskeptic.com/tag/unethical-skeptics/?fbclid=IwAR28lZmxHsxilQzKtju8sN8RbNiczLlhaGciO7C6n_acfzBBxun4gKLGoPA

 

Quote

The JREF “Million Dollar Challenge” should have been defined as a ‘contest’ under 12 Unites States Code Lottery Laws.1 The reason the contest (‘challenge’ was equivocation) was not registered as such, was because this would require that the company abide under state lottery laws. As a result, the reserve cash would have fallen under a completely different set of corporate asset and tax laws. Randi could not keep the money, nor draw from it in retirement (even if on paper it is not ‘his’). By registering as an operating company, Randi is able to enjoy your money at this very moment.

Quote

How the Emperor’s New Clothes Cozenage Works:

  • 97% of the population, is easily fooled by celebrity and sciencey sounding jargon used out of proper context (like ‘statistical significance’ and ‘P-values’)
  • 2% real scientists who are not fooled and have actually published studies employing P-values in a professional scientific context.  That group they simply intimidate, and keep them in line with career threats, and (PRB – U.S. Census Bureau)13
  • the final 1% are the nasty skeptic patrol sycophants who do the dirty work, never question the propaganda, and simply spin their pseudo-intellectual discourse to keep these first two bullet point groups in line. (Trust me, the number is way less than 1%, who constitute fake skeptics, but their deleterious impact is enormous. 1% is assumed here for simplicity’s sake). Those who alert to the issue are:  woo pushers, stupid, irrational, credulous, fringe, idiots, pundits, etc.
Quote

SSkeptics b**** and moan about the potential of paranormal researchers employing pseudoscience to make money, when the fact is that their Cabal is committing monetary graft on a large scale. JREF reported a total income from this scientific masquerade of more than $1 million and a balance sheet asset base of in excess of $2 million (2014 IRS Form 990-Tax Exempt Corporation).

More

https://theethicalskeptic.com/tag/unethical-skeptics/?fbclid=IwAR28lZmxHsxilQzKtju8sN8RbNiczLlhaGciO7C6n_acfzBBxun4gKLGoPA

 

 

 

skepticAA.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
macqdor

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/Examskeptics/Prescott_Randi.html?fbclid=IwAR3Srf_AXhH0Dn5ShR96XUO_MQcpcL0W6wlbMaYVz-S1UEhDFdGI6LIQP0I

Quote

Before I began this modest online research project for a rainy afternoon, I had mixed feelings about Randi. I saw him as closed-minded and supercilious, but I also assumed he was sincere and, by his own lights, honest. Now, having explored his contribution to the Targ-Puthoff controversy in some detail, I am thoroughly unimpressed. Randi comes across as a bullying figure, eager to attack and ridicule, willing to distort and even invent evidence - in short, the sort of person who will do anything to prevail in a debate, whether by fair means or foul

A Skeptical Look At James Randi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
macqdor
Quote
Quote

“Scientists don’t settle issues with a single test, so even if someone does win a big cash prize in a demonstration, this isn’t going to convince anyone. Proof in science happens through replication, not through single experiments.”[12]

Hyman and Blackmore are scientists who are among a very tiny handful of skeptics who have actual expertise in parapsychology and have made contributions to the field. While they do not criticize Randi directly, they lightly regard his scholarship and grasp of science.

Randi has been caught red-handed plagiarizing from skeptics on his own forum. He took comments from a forum user known as “Hawkeye” and changed the wording. When confronted, Randi responded with this comment:

“Chris: I admit, I shamelessly took your comments and dropped them in as part of SWIFT, simply because they exactly reflected my observations. I could have changed the wording, but getting SWIFT together each week – amid all the other duties that keep me here at least 60 hours a week – calls for some corner-cutting every now and then. Mea culpa…[13]

http://www.skepticalaboutskeptics.org/investigating-skeptics/whos-who-of-media-skeptics/james-randi/james-randis-foundation/?fbclid=IwAR1gtcQ3lF8PukWw9NE9fwqNdZ5NL-CD6fQKFycWnOCz0CN9H-ReJcy-YhQ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sci-nerd

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
macqdor

"A Big So What"

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/Skepticsmedia/Auerbach_Randi.html?fbclid=IwAR29JbhFFLXY8TEibiIb84g7OtmHZi6PyGJFIaD8kVxJe6ZxEiYZ-FuK1N4

Quote

I might actually title this essay "Why I no longer care about Randi's One Million Dollar Challenge," but honestly "So What!" sums up my feelings these days.

Over the last several years, I've been somewhat outspoken about the specific details of the rules of Randi's challenge. But recently, when being harassed by yet another disbelieving type about the test, some kind of light - an epiphany of sorts - went on in my head. The individual made a statement, with a question, that I often hear in variations from self-described Skeptics (actually disbelievers): 
"The Amazing Randi offers one million dollars for anyone who can demonstrate something paranormal. If psychic abilities are real, why has no one won the prize?" 

Quote

"What would that prove?" I asked.

"Huh?" said the Skeptic.

"Why is Randi offering the money?" I asked.

"For anyone who can prove something paranormal," said the Skeptic. 

"If someone did win the million, what would that actually prove?" I asked.

"Huh?" said the Skeptic.

"I mean, if a psychic won the million dollars, other than the psychic walking away one million dollars richer, what would that prove to the skeptical community or to Science?" I asked.

"That someone could do something psychic," said the Skeptic with some confusion in his voice.

"Would it? If someone won Randi's million dollars, would YOU accept that psychic abilities are real? Or even just possible?" I asked. 

"Huh?" said the Skeptic.

"Would mainstream Science accept the probability of psi, if not the reality, if some psychic won Randi's million?" I asked.

"Uh-uh-huh?" said the Skeptic....................................to be continued at the link below.

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/Skepticsmedia/Auerbach_Randi.html?fbclid=IwAR29JbhFFLXY8TEibiIb84g7OtmHZi6PyGJFIaD8kVxJe6ZxEiYZ-FuK1N4

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timothy

@macqdor, what are you trying to say? 

The fact that your posting coincides with a morning bowel movement may be a paranormal coincidence indeed...

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imaginarynumber1

And yet still, no one can prove their magic powers are real....

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish

So this is a "I hate skeptics" rant/thread. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imaginarynumber1
Just now, XenoFish said:

So this is a "I hate skeptics" rant/thread. 

More like "The mean man won't pretend I'm an X man"

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
1 minute ago, Imaginarynumber1 said:

More like "The mean man won't pretend I'm an X man"

I mean. All someone has to do is legitimately prove such "powers" are real. Same for ghost, demons, poltergeist, hauntings, etc. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imaginarynumber1
Just now, XenoFish said:

I mean. All someone has to do is legitimately prove such "powers" are real. Same for ghost, demons, poltergeist, hauntings, etc. 

Well, we both know why that will never happen. So the only recourse is to attack the ones saying they're wrong. All the while still never albe to prove their make believe superpowers 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hankenhunter

He's not completely wrong in that there are some pretty rabid and disingenuous skeptics on U.M. Maybe

 even some some skeptics who follow James Randi are here on U.M.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
macqdor
Quote

He's not completely wrong in that there are some pretty rabid and disingenuous skeptics on U.M. Maybe

 even some some skeptics who follow James Randi are here on U.M.

Agreed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Hankenhunter said:

He's not completely wrong in that there are some pretty rabid and disingenuous skeptics on U.M. Maybe

 even some some skeptics who follow James Randi are here on U.M.

Maybe some of us have gotten tired of hearing someone say, "I haz majikcall powerz." and there's literally no proof of it. I don't know how many 'psychic readings' I've had that were flat out wrong.

Edited by XenoFish
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saru

I really can't see anything positive coming from this thread, there's no point of discussion - it's centered entirely around baiting/bashing skeptics.

Closed.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.