Is Telepathy Real? My Personal Experience with Grandparents and a Tractor

[FlexGunship]

I'm still 95% convinced this was not a trick set up in some Randi type deal. I'm sorry if I can't convey more of why I believe this, you will have to accept this...or not...

W

This is very telling. At this point you can officially stop claiming to hold any scientific clout.

You should read up on the "Carlos" incident in Australia.

In[/PLAIN] 1988, Randi tested the gullibility of the media by perpetrating a fraud of his own. By teaming up with Australia's 60 Minutes program and by releasing a fake press package, he built up publicity for a spirit channeler named Carlos who was actually artist Jose Alvarez, a friend of Randi's. Randi would tell him what to say through sophisticated radio equipment. The media and the public were taken in, as no reporter bothered to check Carlos's credentials and history, which were all fabricated. The hoax was exposed on 60 Minutes; Carlos and Randi explained how they pulled it off.

Read a few books about James Randi and you'll see why he's such a high-value member of our species. He would routinely go out of his way to fool people like you as hard as he possibly could for the sole purpose of proving that you're easy to fool. And he would smile, have a laugh, and go again.

I'm easy to fool, too, which is why I carry my skepticism in my front pocket with me everywhere I go.

 

[DaveC426913]

Let's remove the chaff in the middle and just look at your first paragraph and your last paragraph.

The scientific method has to be a 2 way street. I propose one thing you come up with an explanation. As the only observer of the event I am in the unique position of being judge and jury. If I say a particular explanation doesn't work you can't just give up and say I'm irrational. I guess you can but that isn't very scientific.

I'm still 95% convinced this was not a trick set up in some Randi type deal. I'm sorry if I can't convey more of why I believe this, you will have to accept this...or not...

You have a belief.
Which you cannot explain.
But are almost certain is true.

You want us to provide explanations.
Which you have already eliminated.

Hmm...

 

[Whalstib]

No, you are not "judge or jury".

Ok poor choice of words...you guys are touchy and leap upon phases instead of enjoying the big picture. Simply I am the only one who observed and can comment intelligently on others ideas.

- Magic trick? It is similar to other magic tricks that are and have been rife throughout all forms of media for a long time.

This is where your argument falters as you have not provided ANY. Several have been put forth with a dismissive air of authority but these I rejected as they were far off the mark

Everything you say seems to come as a veneer to some supernatural belief.

Have I provided any supernatural explanations? NO. You are assuming and painting me as you prefer to make it easier to dismiss.

face it you are uncomfortable with anything you can't explain and are politely casting mud my way as I refuse to tote the company line and say there is definitely a rational explanation, all the while down playing my several rational explanations. It is assumed I live in a vacuum and am gullible and of course there is no way to refute this on my end.

Once again the default mode here is hard core skepitism that is a good thing in general but IMO it should not be the only tool and in fact can blind some.

This is just idle chat but no one besides myself has come up with an original though and simply recycled well known debunking from 20 years ago.

Randi is as much a charlatan as Geller. He never brought anything new to the table and his act of arm waving some how appeals to the intellectual. His reactions make it obvious he was duped for a long time as his audience must have been because he only refutes obviuos frauds and performs parlor tricks.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Ok poor choice of words...you guys are touchy and leap upon phases instead of enjoying the big picture. Simply I am the only one who observed and can comment intelligently on others ideas.

I wasn't just responding to your choice of words, I was responding to your idea. The fact that you were there in no way makes you the only one who can "comment intelligently on others ideas". Why on Earth would you think this? If I told you that I just saw a man drop down dead does that mean that I am the only one who can comment on Bob's answer that the man was killed by flying aliens? Of course not!

This is where your argument falters as you have not provided ANY. Several have been put forth with a dismissive air of authority but these I rejected as they were far off the mark

You are denying that such magic tricks exist? Here's a good link for you http://www.skepdic.com/sealedenvelope.html

Have I provided any supernatural explanations? NO. You are assuming and painting me as you prefer to make it easier to dismiss.

You are suggesting that it wasn't a trick and it wasn't coincidence and you weren't lying or mistaken. So what is your explanation?

face it you are uncomfortable with anything you can't explain and are politely casting mud my way as I refuse to tote the company line and say there is definitely a rational explanation, all the while down playing my several rational explanations. It is assumed I live in a vacuum and am gullible and of course there is no way to refute this on my end.

I am not uncomfortable at all with saying "I don't know" however in this case everything you have said suggests that it is a common magic trick

Once again the default mode here is hard core skepitism that is a good thing in general but IMO it should not be the only tool and in fact can blind some.

So what do you want? That we, on the basis of an account of something that is indistinguishable in description from a magic trick, run off to find this old man? If you were looking for a discussion based on how it could have happened you could have engineered the whole thing far better without coming across as someone who has already made up their own mind. Seriously, how are people meant to have a constructive conversation with you if you insist that it was definitely not a magic trick based on...nothing.

This is just idle chat but no one besides myself has come up with an original though and simply recycled well known debunking from 20 years ago.

What do you mean here? What exactly are you after when you present a situation that appears to be exactly like a magic trick but you are insisting it isn't?

Randi is as much a charlatan as Geller. He never brought anything new to the table and his act of arm waving some how appeals to the intellectual. His reactions make it obvious he was duped for a long time as his audience must have been because he only refutes obviuos frauds and performs parlor tricks.

Please substantiate this claim with evidence, consider that an official warning. James Randi spends his time debunking supernatural and magic claims, in what way is he as much a charlatan as the thoroughly discredited scam artist Uri Geller?

 

[Whalstib]

You have a belief.
Which you cannot explain.
But are almost certain is true.

You want us to provide explanations.
Which you have already eliminated.
.

Dave...I don't think you paid much attention to the explanations, they were feeble and far off the mark by any measure. It was as if I said something fantastic like "I saw a 3 legged fish" and your rebuttal was "Birds don't have 3 legs, here's a picture of a bird"

And now you are suspicious because I point out it is a picture of a bird not even fish.

Hmmm.. indeed.

What is being employed here is a misdirection where the "facts" can be ignored and the focus is put upon the presenter; Me.

if it would make any of you happy I will clearly state the event was not supernatural in the sense of the "magician" conveying a thought.

I'm pretty well convinced the event is explained by one of the 2 methods I put forth. I stated I doubt the trickster scenario based on unprovable information, my direct observation of the "magicians" character. Leaving suggestion, coincidence and the logical explanation.

But I'm not entirely convinced... You really had to have been there. Trust me it was not like a Rani trick... it was not set up as such nor play out as such. Feel free to quote this passage and create an entire argument around it and ignore the rest...just know it's obvious what you're doing.

BTW But I should also say this was Encinitas Ca in the 1980's. CA fruitcake capital. I worked at a vegetarian restaurant where occult kook was the daily special. There is no way you can build up a skepticism as I have until you spend months and years around these poor souls who actually claim car repairs with quartz crystals, or use pendulums to chose a meal or search for channeler crystals that Atlantis encoded there entire civilization upon. And are serious!

Ya had to be there!

W

 

[FlexGunship]

Trust me it was not like a Rani trick... it was not set up as such nor play out as such.

Yeah, Randi is only the world's greatest illusionist. It's pretty unlikely that the guy you know could even be compared to Randi.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2-QwMXTrHY

You're digging yourself a very deep hole. We've all seen impressive tricks, but you're not doing yourself any favors by continually claiming it wasn't a trick.

 

[Whalstib]

Yeah, Randi is only the world's greatest illusionist. It's pretty unlikely that the guy you know could even be compared to Randi.

EXACTLY!

And on the examples you provide Randi is obviously holding the paper and drawing the image as BW describes it.

If the "worlds greatest illusionist" can only pull this off in such a clumsy fashion what about "my guy"?

W

 

[Ryan_m_b]

This thread has gone far enough. Magic tricks exist, magic does not, telepathy does not.