debunking paranormal skeptics

[woodwater]

Well, I think the title of this should read "dumb," rather than
"interesting," but I'll bite.

> "If my friend told me that on the way here he was delayed because his car got a flat tire, then I would believe it because it is an ordinary claim.

I wouldn't, not necessarily. Still, we know that cars exist, we know
that tires exist, and we know that tires do go flat sometimes. Your
friend might be lying, but a flat tire is a common sort of excuse just
because it DOES happen, sometimes. But since we have no evidence that
aliens exist, that UFOs exist (except in the literal sense of something
"unidentified"), claiming that you were briefly held up because you were
abducted by aliens can hardly be taken seriously without corroborating
evidence. What's hard to understand about that?

> For example, the internal body energy of chi gong (or quigong) is a mystical force to Westerners but has been a natural everyday part of life for thousands of years in China. There, chi is used, felt, and observed by its practitioners much the same as the effects of gravity are felt and observed by us.

Gee, the Chinese have never felt the effects of gravity? Must be an
interesting place.

> a) It is possible for something to exist without leaving behind collectable evidence as a souvenir to us. For example, planes, radio waves, electromagnetism, and light move around without leaving "hard evidence" yet they exist.

Nonsense! There are all sorts of "hard" evidence for radio waves,
electromagnetism, and light. What, does this guy live in a cave? And
regarding planes, is he talking about flying vehicles or wood-working
tools? There's overwhelming evidence, hard evidence, that they exist, too.

> b) It is possible for something to exist yet the evidence for it hasn't been found or understood yet, which is the case for almost every discovery in history from fire and wheels to gunpowder and gravity, to planets, atoms and electromagnetism.
>

Sure, but there's an infinite number of things that DON'T exist. So,
without using evidence, how else would you distinguish what exists from
what doesn't?

> c) It is possible that the evidence is already there but that it's subject to interpretation, making it controversial. This is true for instance, of the alleged mysterious implants found by doctors and surgeons in alleged alien abductees.

Heh, heh. Well, there's nothing controversial about that! But again, so
what? We might misinterpret evidence for awhile, but without evidence,
how else would you determine anything at all (especially without
"misinterpreting" it).

> 5) Fifth, the argument favors conservatism or retaining the established theory in spite of contrary evidence.

Not true. It favors retaining the established theory (the one backed
with good evidence) UNTIL there is contrary evidence.

> It can be said that there is extraordinary evidence to support the existence of UFO's from unexplainable photographs, video camera footage, multiple eyewitness sightings, abduction reports, Air Force radar reports, etc. ... Although much of it can be explained as misperceptions, natural phenomena, weather balloons, aircraft, birds, balls of lightning, luminous Earth lights, etc. there are still many cases which are unexplainable and display features not known of any natural phenomena.

Ah, of course. If we can't conclusively prove that they are something
else, then obviously they *must* be aliens (probably with anal probes)!

> if I saw a UFO at close range and didn't have my camera with me and then it flew away, how am I expected to have extraordinary evidence?

You're not. But why would you expect anyone else to believe you? After
all we don't have evidence that aliens even exist, but we do have *very*
good evidence that human beings lie, that human beings hallucinate, that
insanity exists, that a person can make a great deal of money writing a
book about a supposed "close encounter," etc.

> Paranormal investigators have even used geiger counters that detected electrical activity in a haunted area.

Heh, heh.

> In fact, studies show that about 2/3 of Americans claim to have had psychic experiences, making them quite common rather than "extraordinary".

More than 2/3 of Americans also claim that they are "above-average" drivers.

> Report author Jan Walsh, commenting on the statistics that found that two out of three surveyed believed in an afterlife, said that as far as the British public was concerned, "the supernatural world isn't so paranormal after all."
>

Well, that settles it. Apparently, then, the Earth used to be flat,
since most human beings believed that it was.

> I like the example of the person working in an inner office with no windows. A co-worker could come in and tell them it is raining out. IF they accept That as truth... it is ONLY a chosen belief. But.. If they were to go outside themselves and stand in the driving rain and get soaking wet... then that is no longer a chosen belief... that would qualify as an actual Knowing.. by Direct experience.
>

Or someone could just be peeing off the roof.

> You cannot really know that what I say is really illogical babble either...

Hmm,... but it really SOUNDS like illogical babble. If it looks like a
duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck,...

Honestly, I don't know whether to laugh or cry, when I read something
like this.

Bill

--
In those parts of the world where learning and science have prevailed,
miracles have ceased; but in those parts of it as are barbarous and
ignorant, miracles are still in vogue. - Ethan Allen (1784)

__._,_.___