Is it me or is it that skeptics of the James Randi variety like the old 17th century priests who burn people at the stake for being physcic read this link and see for yourself

By the way James ("%$£&*NG W"£K£R!") Randi has the typical close-minded biggot website dedicated to disproving physcics.

the address is http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html

The close-minded biggot set up a $1million  challenge to prove  physcic phenomena under laborartory conditions.  No doubt that the applicant will be put under all sorts of emotinal stress and unparralled levels of mental stress and humiliation.

My good friend Mr Zammit has also set up a similar site as I'm sure your all aware of which runs an opposit challenge to him.

The amazing thing is neither of the two challenges have been won yet!

Randi egotistically boasts about how many appliacants "have tried and failed, to my delight"

Does that not prove wat a complete and utter moron this man is!

I hiope when he does pass away he will enjoy his stay at the lower astral realm >:(

To prove exactly how bent and extremely crooked and false this hocum challenge is we need to look at the case of a German man who applied for the test

these are the links for the story

http://www.alternativescience.com/james-randi.htm

Randi's somewhat brilliant reaction

http://www.alternativescience.com/randi-retreats.htm

I wouldn't say they are the same as those who burned witches et al at the stake. That is an unfair characterization. I don't like what they do either, but I wouldn't accuse them of being potential murderers.

Rob

lol I was just angry at the time mate!  But people like him are very dangerous folk!

Let those replys rain  ;D

People either love him or hate him.
Personally, I suspect he is sincere. What does he
have to gain by debunking "psychics", except the
hatred of millions of supernaturalists (many of whom
would be more useful as FRIENDS to him, rather than
enemies.)
I've noticed that the people who bash Randi the hardest are people like Victor Zammit in America, and Michael
Roll in England (both of whom claim scientific "evidence" of the afterlife based on 19th-century paranormal research done by the English scientist William Crookes... whom many suspect was seduced by the medium he was doing his "occulto-scientific" research with.)
They also trot out paranormal "research" done by the likes of Edison and Tesla (who despite their great brilliance - or perhaps DUE to it! - were truly WEIRD men with a MILE-WIDE streak of eccentricity in both of them...)
Great genius is often INIMICAL to common sense - ever noticed that? THAT is one of life's great paradoxes..!
Also... the "ectoplasm" seen in the 19th-century photos of Crookes' research(?) appears as a "substance" which greatly resembles BEDSHEETS.
Top all that off with the fact that Crookes (although a brilliant scientist) spent much of his life working with toxic metals like thallium (which he discovered!) using typical 19th-century safety standards... and may well have suffered brain damage from his work, much as Madame Curie suffered radiation poisoning. Is it therefore surprising that a brilliant chemist may have been steered toward superstition due to very subtle neurological damage?
Add that to the feminine charms of the medium he worked with... "a black magic woman" (to quote Santana) and what chance would a brain-damaged "nerd" have? (And most truly brilliant scientists ARE "nerds", socially speaking! I'll bet that was even more true in Victorian England than it is today..!)
So I'll withhold judgement on Randi. The burden of proof lies with the BELIEVERS, not the skeptics (despite Zammit's million-dollar counter-reward for DISPROOF of the afterlife. Isn't placing a reward for proof of a NEGATIVE just a little bit disingenous?)
Somebody's taking us for a ride all right...
But WHO???

B-man

I like him, he gives the fakes a good pasting.

he offers 1 million dollars to back up his beliefs. Now thats what i call conviction!.

Since no one has claimed it. It just adds to the case, that psychics are frauds.

and i have no dont they come out with stuff like "money does'nt matter to them". But thats just a load of hocus pocus, money might not be everything, but it sure takes the sting out of being poor.

The problem with Randi is that he puts restrictions on what he will accept as proof beyond what would be reasonable for "accepted" phenomena.  

The example I always use is AM radio...say you have an AM radio of a certain vintage...it's as good as it's going to get, you can't improve it with any new parts (sort of like the human brain).  It will only pick up what the radio stations (spirit) sends out, interference (negative thoughts/skeptics) plays hob with reception, and you've gotta speak the language of the broadcaster, or you're finished before you start.  And yet no one is claiming AM radio doesn't work.  

Yes, there are other forms of radio, but that's not the issue...the issue is, does that one not exist because it's fuzzy, intermittant, unreliable and susceptable to interference?

James Randi's FAQ's on his website is pretty dumb.

Randi asks where are the big names like George Anderson, Sylvia Browne, John Edward, etc, and why aren't they getting the one million dollar prize? Psychics probably CAN'T prove what they're doing. I, for one, can't prove that I've astral projected many times by accident. I know I did astral project -- but astral projecting isn't a physical event that can be seen with the physical eyes. How can anyone prove a non-physical event?

What an idiot James Randi is. The guy seems to be spending the rest of his life going to different places and putting down things he doesn't understand and has never done.

The word paranormal, in itself, is a complex word. Just a few 100 years ago, creating rockets to land on the moon would seem paranormal. A man walking on the moon would seem paranormal. With the right tools and technology, finding out that people astral project, or can see spirits, may not be considered paranormal in the future.

Don't listen to James Randi. I can assure you he has never, never, done nor understands any of those library definitions at the top of his website. Just an old man with too much time on his hands.

Wouldn't you agree that a post entitled Idiotic Skeptics is in violation of the posting standards?

Suppose someone were to title a post Idiotic New Agers?  How long would that remain before it would be removed?

Roger

There may be good skeptics, scientifically based or idiotic skeptics who will dismiss everything no matter what.  I don't think this title is offensive.


M

wrote on Dec 24^th, 2005 at 5:19pm:

I like him, he gives the fakes a good pasting. he offers 1 million dollars to back up his beliefs. Now thats what i call conviction!. Since no one has claimed it. It just adds to the case, that psychics are frauds. and i have no dont they come out with stuff like "money does'nt matter to them". But thats just a load of hocus pocus, money might not be everything, but it sure takes the sting out of being poor.

Some people say there's strong psychics out there that will, somehow, 'attack' anyone that effectively tries to prove any kind of supernatural phenomena.

Maybe that one million's well earned if achieved.

It seems to me that you can put most belief systems that have any kind of opposition into one of 5 mentalitys

yes - maybe yes - neither yes or nor - maybe no - no

To apply it to psychic phenomena and skeptics you have:

1) Hardcore skeptics, these guys will never accept anything they dont agree with is real.
2) The real skeptics, these guys look at something and if they cant figure it out they rightly admit so and admit the possibility its real
3) The middle men, they neither believe nor disbelieve they just watch.
4) The believer, these guys believe what they see, when they see it done real, they can spot fake mediums and real mediums they can spot the crackpots from the real deal.
5) Hardcore believer, just like the skeptics, if they believe it, its real, if they believe god talks to us all in 5.1 surround sound and puts on a multicoloured lightshow in the sky, its real.

Having had a brief look at the forums on the Randi website sadly something becomes all to clear, and thats that even the hardcore skeptic like Randi can draw their own hardcore following, people who choose the same mindset for all the wrong reasons.

Sadly these extreme mindsets have always existed and probably will always exist, but until Randi turns up on me door threatening to burn me at the stake for thinking psychics are real I wont worry to much ;)