Revvie®
Main Eventer
Somewhere between Reality, and the Absurd
Joined on: Jun 29, 2005 1:04:26 GMT -5
Posts: 4,327
|
Post by Revvie® on Dec 27, 2010 17:27:47 GMT -5
It is ok to have beliefs, but it is kinda ridiculous to hold those beliefs if they can be proven wrong. There are things that are a matter of opinion, that is fine. It's not ok to believe the sky is green and go out and tell others that it is green when you can be proven wrong. thats interesting cus I thought color was non-existence and its based off our eyes and the reflection of light..so i guess color blind people are ignorant because their genetic anomaly that happens infrequently is uncertifiable and its all an opinion to them...interesting... and unless you can test every human being, you dont know all of whats out there...only what people tell you they can and cant do. Why would anyone step up to submit there lives to tests and research when they would prefer to live. all I am saying is the human mind is not something that can be conditioned into the scientific methods due to the voluntary nature of our being...and how we react to how people treat us. All I said was one could not definitively(without any oddities) that psychic are completely a fools thought. Though the studies before we find things out are so very convincing, when we find something else science jumps on it so they never seem wrong...science has a great thing about it...it can test and its right by those results...then if its retested and found wrong, then they are right again by new results...so its either a fallabalistic method, based on uncertainties and trying to arrive at our most valid answers or its complete nonsense. I embrace science and mind...but that makes me uneducated...or that the education system must have failed me...all I have stated was opinion and have been chastised like fool and told that I know nothing of science or facts in this world.... its just sad, that two people cant intellectual break something down to its etymology, philosophy, scientific study, and psychology to arrive at a conclusion that both sides find a little against there nature but they can conceive where ones themes arrive from intellect and connection. its like hermann hesse's glass bead game...though im probably talking about it wrong since im uneducated...
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Dec 27, 2010 17:34:17 GMT -5
I don't care if you are colorblind or not. You don't go spouting that the sky is green. If you say it is green, I hope someone would correct you and tell you it is blue. Just because you cannot see what color it truly is does not mean what you see is correct.
|
|
Revvie®
Main Eventer
Somewhere between Reality, and the Absurd
Joined on: Jun 29, 2005 1:04:26 GMT -5
Posts: 4,327
|
Post by Revvie® on Dec 27, 2010 17:40:37 GMT -5
|
|
Revvie®
Main Eventer
Somewhere between Reality, and the Absurd
Joined on: Jun 29, 2005 1:04:26 GMT -5
Posts: 4,327
|
Post by Revvie® on Dec 27, 2010 17:42:11 GMT -5
I don't care if you are colorblind or not. You don't go spouting that the sky is green. If you say it is green, I hope someone would correct you and tell you it is blue. Just because you cannot see what color it truly is does not mean what you see is correct. and I dont spout the existence of psychics either...hmmm interesting...so what your saying I shouldnt do...I dont
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Dec 27, 2010 17:47:15 GMT -5
You are saying they may exist or people with odd powers or whatever term you used may exist.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Dec 27, 2010 17:50:12 GMT -5
What those studies have found is laughable.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Dec 27, 2010 17:53:29 GMT -5
thats interesting cus I thought color was non-existence and its based off our eyes and the reflection of light..so i guess color blind people are ignorant because their genetic anomaly that happens infrequently is uncertifiable and its all an opinion to them...interesting... The sky is still blue to a color blind person. Just because they can't see it doesn't mean it's not blue. I saw a magician saw a woman in half. I hate to break it to you, but the magician did not really cut the woman into two pieces and then put her back together again. It certainly looked like that, but that doesn't change the fact that it didn't happen. The sky is blue whether you are color blind or not. Saying otherwise is just ridiculous. If I'm blind, there's still a table in front of me and I'm still doing to hurt myself if I walk into it. Me not seeing it doesn't change the fact that it's still there. The fact is the table still exists. Again, you're betraying the fact that you don't know how science works. Fingerprints are unique to every person. My fingerprints are different from yours which are different from Slappy's which are different from anyone else in the world. That's what science tells us. However, they have not tested the fingerprints of every single person in the entire world. So, we can toss the idea that fingerprints are a reliable identifier at all out the window. It's also a given that DNA is unique to each individual. No, wait a minute. That's not true. There are 6 billion people in the world. We haven't tested every single one so we can't accept that as true. While it's true that we've tested several million people and have yet to find a single case of two people who aren't twins having the same DNA. But we haven't tested everyone so we have to toss that out of the window. It's generally accepted that Penicillin is a great anti-biotic. But then we haven't tested it out on all six billion people in the world. We have to toss that concept out. Most scientists agree that people need oxygen to survive and that if you permanently deprive a human being of oxygen they will die. However, we have not tested this on every single person on the planet and it's possible that there is one person somewhere who has possibly lived at some time in the past who did not need oxygen to live. So we reject the idea that humans need oxygen. In short, we reject each and every claim that science presents us because they have not tested all 6 billion people on the planet. This is a perfectly rational way of seeing the universe. Umm, yes you can. It's been tested over and over. Again, you have no clue how science works. If you run a test and get one set of results and then run it again and get another set of results, you don't just say that the second test is fact and the first test is fiction. Please, please, please, please learn how the scientific method works and stop using words like fallabalistic which aren't words at all. You embrace science yet you have no idea how the scientific method works and you reject every conclusion that science comes to. How does that make any sense. If you stated that you felt the Earth was flat would you not expect people to mock you? Yet by stating that psychics are legit, you're stating the exact same thing. Sure, it's a free country. You can believe the Earth is flat all you want. It's no skin off my nose. Just don't be surprised when people look at you like you're weird for stating your "opinion". The Earth is round regardless of whether you think it is or not. What you think is irrelevant. What I think is irrelevant. What anyone thinks is irrelevant. The Earth is round. The sky is blue. Psychics are bullshit. These are facts no matter what any of us think. There is no need to break it down intellectually. Do you not see that it's not a matter of opinion. The idea that psychics are legit is a testable hypothesis. Furthermore, it's been tested. Furthermore, to date, they've found no evidence that psychics have any sort of special powers or abilities. What is there to break down?
|
|
Revvie®
Main Eventer
Somewhere between Reality, and the Absurd
Joined on: Jun 29, 2005 1:04:26 GMT -5
Posts: 4,327
|
Post by Revvie® on Dec 27, 2010 17:54:30 GMT -5
You are saying they may exist or people with odd powers or whatever term you used may exist. exactly...may exist...i have made no claim either way...lol and studies are laughable to you because you believe in the studies that prove it wrong most of the time...so then we have what? an opinion..tested on both sides by people who could have predertimeed notions and Ideas, we just hope they do not.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Dec 27, 2010 18:15:54 GMT -5
It's laughable because they are saying that if you take a test and then study for it you will do good on the test. How ridiculous is that?
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Dec 27, 2010 18:30:22 GMT -5
You are saying they may exist or people with odd powers or whatever term you used may exist. exactly...may exist...i have made no claim either way...lol and studies are laughable to you because you believe in the studies that prove it wrong most of the time...so then we have what? an opinion..tested on both sides by people who could have predertimeed notions and Ideas, we just hope they do not. Again, you clearly don't understand science. You do realize these are double-blind studies we're talking about right?
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Dec 28, 2010 12:09:26 GMT -5
science cannot explain phenomena. phenomena is exactly what psychic abilities would fall under...you cannot solely speak for the entireity of the history of the human brain, nor can science. there's many scientific tests that have been conducted that lean towards there being some truth to psychic ability...hence the american military having a team of psychics for years and still currently. one obvious example is Daryl J. Bem's studies of esp phenomena that occured (on video, documented) in the 1970s-80s.
you cannot say it doesn't exist. well, you can, but you're certainly not validated to.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Dec 28, 2010 13:08:51 GMT -5
science cannot explain phenomena. phenomena is exactly what psychic abilities would fall under...you cannot solely speak for the entireity of the history of the human brain, nor can science. there's many scientific tests that have been conducted that lean towards there being some truth to psychic ability...hence the american military having a team of psychics for years and still currently. one obvious example is Daryl J. Bem's studies of esp phenomena that occured (on video, documented) in the 1970s-80s. you cannot say it doesn't exist. well, you can, but you're certainly not validated to. Fair enough. I can say that there it's been tested over and over again and there is no evidence to support it. That much is factual. Every indicator we have at this point indicates that psychics are bullshit.
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Dec 28, 2010 13:27:19 GMT -5
what about the esp studies involving sleep that Joseph Banks Rhine conducted in the 70s and 80s? obviously they did not independantly prove psychic ability, however they are definitely scientific studies that resulted in positive results. they have never been debunked though criticized (as much science is), and the only reason the scientific bureaus won't acknowledge it is because it can't be formatively explained...it's a phenomenon. science does not deal in that.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Dec 28, 2010 13:47:23 GMT -5
what about the esp studies involving sleep that Joseph Banks Rhine conducted in the 70s and 80s? obviously they did not independantly prove psychic ability, however they are definitely scientific studies that resulted in positive results. they have never been debunked though criticized (as much science is), and the only reason the scientific bureaus won't acknowledge it is because it can't be formatively explained...it's a phenomenon. science does not deal in that. I'll have to look up the research when I get some time later. I'm on call right now and sick as a dog to boot. Anyway, science does seek to explain phenomena. That's what science does. An apple falls from a tree. Why did that apple fall from the tree? What caused it do fall the way it did? Science spends time and effort attempting to explain these things once it's been established that these things are repeatable (i.e. every time you release an apple from the height of a tree, it falls to the ground.)
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Dec 28, 2010 14:08:05 GMT -5
no i understand that, perhaps i worded my statement improperly. when something occurs and science does not have a formulated explanation, it is labeled as phenomenon instead of fact. it cannot be understood therefore it cannot be conclusively disputed or decided upon. the factors are unknown. such would be the case i believe in this.
i'll try to track down the specific video/written report i learnt in psych a year ago
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Dec 28, 2010 14:22:04 GMT -5
No one has ever been able to replicate Rhine's study not even Rhine himself.
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Dec 28, 2010 14:29:10 GMT -5
No one has ever been able to replicate Rhine's study not even Rhine himself. very nice, you wikipedia'd him. if you were to look more into it, you'd find once again that could be because of any number of factors..but it still does not take away from the test and success of similar ones as well. it would appear that some people are more possibly susceptible to it than others. much like how people's conductivity can be different from one another resulting in higher or lower chances of being hit by lightning drastically, which only within the last 10 years has really came to light. i am not saying i believe in it or that it exists. only that rather you personally believe it or not, you cannot discount it.
|
|
Revvie®
Main Eventer
Somewhere between Reality, and the Absurd
Joined on: Jun 29, 2005 1:04:26 GMT -5
Posts: 4,327
|
Post by Revvie® on Dec 28, 2010 14:45:59 GMT -5
No one has ever been able to replicate Rhine's study not even Rhine himself. very nice, you wikipedia'd him. if you were to look more into it, you'd find once again that could be because of any number of factors..but it still does not take away from the test and success of similar ones as well. it would appear that some people are more possibly susceptible to it than others. much like how people's conductivity can be different from one another resulting in higher or lower chances of being hit by lightning drastically, which only within the last 10 years has really came to light. i am not saying i believe in it or that it exists. only that rather you personally believe it or not, you cannot discount it.Thank God someone gets what I had been trying to say this entire time....though im sure you came to it yourself, I do appreciate another who sees what I was.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Dec 28, 2010 15:00:29 GMT -5
No one has ever been able to replicate Rhine's study not even Rhine himself. very nice, you wikipedia'd him. if you were to look more into it, you'd find once again that could be because of any number of factors..but it still does not take away from the test and success of similar ones as well. it would appear that some people are more possibly susceptible to it than others. much like how people's conductivity can be different from one another resulting in higher or lower chances of being hit by lightning drastically, which only within the last 10 years has really came to light. i am not saying i believe in it or that it exists. only that rather you personally believe it or not, you cannot discount it. If it's true that no one has been able to replicate his study, then it does take away from it. Science is based on the repeatable. If you drop a ball in a vacuum it falls at 9.81 m/sec 2. Therefore that is the force of gravity. Science must be repeatable. You have to be able to drop a ball in a vacuum and get the same results as I do. A guy half way around the world has to be able to drop a ball in a vacuum and get the same results. Science is repeatable at it's core. Studies that produce strange results that aren't repeatable are interesting, but you can't base any conclusions on them if they're not repeatable. They're simply anomalous. Yes, you can absolutely discount it because there is no evidence to back it up. Why can you not discount something for which there is no empirical evidence?
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Dec 28, 2010 15:06:23 GMT -5
no, you can't discount it. i thought we clarified that. using your logic, there is no other forms of life in the universe because there is no evidence to support their existence. this is not true. their existence cannot be verified, but the same can be said for their non-existence.
secondly, as i already stated, there appears to be varying factors as for those who are susceptible/who aren't. they found a particular individual in the 80s who essentially succeeded in dreaming an image 'sent' to him on every occasion.
you cannot discount it. you can say things that support a claim, but it's still 'i think ______". not fact.
|
|