Quote from: qwik2learn on July 12, 2017, 01:07:25 AM

Quote from: Horacewoodwood on July 11, 2017, 05:29:50 PM

Quote from: qwik2learn on July 11, 2017, 05:03:32 PM

Quote from: sirazimuth on July 09, 2017, 03:18:10 PM

Quote from: qwik2learn on July 06, 2017, 02:24:01 PM

Quote from: qwik2learn on June 06, 2017, 07:53:23 PM

Quote from: Horacewoodwood on June 05, 2017, 11:38:35 AM

Quote from: qwik2learn on June 05, 2017, 11:19:57 AM

Actually you took this out of context, horace. Skeptics use often use a double standard, that is their fallacy:

https://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/skeptical_misdirection#skeptical_misdirection_double_standard

The other common tactic is known as Misrepresenting The Scientific Evidence.

I took what out of what context? Speak to me, explain, come up with arguments, enough with the links already. If you are not able to speak to me and you always need to give me links with what others think that us 'skeptics' are wrong about, then you do not understand anything of it. More than that, I can't understand what you are talking about because you solely posted a link. If you want to answer to what I have said, talk about that, you have it there, you can analyze it and tell me what do you believe is wrong and why. In that way, we can have a proper conversation. Otherwise it will be the same as it is with Badecker, everyone trying to have a conversation and a monkey saying anything that crosses his mind. Let's keep this simple and efficient.

The extraordinary evidence (in favor of parapsychology and survival) has already been provided. I also linked to some examples where this evidence was deliberately ignored by skeptics. Since that information is in the link above, I am including it in our conversation by way of reference; surely you have the ability to read through an essay on the topic of skeptical misdirection because it clearly relates to our discussion about parapsychology.

Psychics and telekinesis were tested by the CIA and other spy agencies and on camera by psychologists.

I have posted a lot of other extraordinary evidence, yet skeptics insist there is no reliable evidence. Why keep up the charade? Skeptics should just come out and say what is so unreliable about the tests done to prove telekinesis.

Sources:
On-Camera test: http://eegym.com/can-eeg-tell-if-telekinesis-is-a-magicians-trick-2/
Test by the United States CIA: https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/66xy95/zhang_baosheng_confirmed_cia_psychic_ability_to/

Skeptics in this thread consistently ignore the evidence I posted and it demonstrates that they are not here to learn, instead they like to argue and pat themselves on the back.

Ha! welcome back my friend! great episode as always.
thread was starting look to to like the Astergath smackdown of BADecker (no contest)
with a sprinkling of parapsychology nonsense.
sorry qwik, but telekinesis not even worth discussing, akin to debating a flat earth

How can you say it is not even worth discussing when I have just posted 2 very serious scientific experiments? You do not even have an answer. Prove to me that you are rational and address this.

The pseudo-skeptics went full retard again and actually admitted to being pseudo-skeptics, because according to the skeptic above, there isn't anything else besides scientism! To be more specific, because he has no answer to what was the cause of the experimental results, he believed in scientism because he learned about it in his youth.

Why is it that atheists in this thread all deny experiments that prove telekinesis but never explain what is wrong with these trials?

First of all, they are not very serious, they are mildly serious and unsolved. There is no conclusion after two experiments and that's they way things work. Phenomenons that claim to suspend the way our reality works need greater observation, experimentation and theory than the laws of science that we understand. It's not even close to conclude anything so we can talk about it but we will never reach a common point which shall make the discussion in vain. Not having an answer yet to some questions or results of experiments does not conclude that it must be paranormal. Some things need a greater time of research, some things may be faux, some we may never find out. Also, science is not an -ism, the only idiots calling it that are the ones that try to find different answers for questions we already have answered. Science is not a system of belief, it works, you are posting now with the help of scientific research in the domain of technology, so for once, please, cut the crap off and pay a bit of respect to the ones who have dedicated their lives into researching something that actually helps you at the moment, you mindless prick. Thank you for your consideration, if there is any.

I considered your post but the fact remains that psychics have undergone rigorous testing by psychologists and by the CIA, and I have sourced that claim for you, so therefore to call these tests "mildly serious" would be a colossal error. Nor are these experiments "unsolved" because the conclusion is straightforward and is already suggested by a variety of other phenomena.

You did not try to explain these results, your model does not account for all of the evidence, indicating that it is a rather weak model of reality. Survival can explain these results, you should read more about it:
Survival is a theoretical model designed to describe observed phenomena and results of considerable study by many researchers. Even though metaphysics has been around for centuries, this current view is based at least in part on research enabled by the introduction of instrumental forms of transcommunication (communication across the veil).
http://ethericstudies.org/trans-survival-hypothesis/

Will you ever explain what specifically is unscientific about these trials? The methods seem quite sound to me, and the astonishing results should be explained.

Why do you believe in this shit and what have you gained by it? Have you ever been able to apply any of what you claim to the real world? Wake up.