http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_topics_characterized_as_pseudoscience (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_topics_characterized_as_pseudoscience)
Anyone find these things intriguing? I am a big fan of the Ancient Astronaut theory personally. Psychology is still considered pseudoscience in some sectors
You should talk to P3nt about the "Lunar Effect" one.
*ducks*
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 05:53:49 PM
I am a big fan of the Ancient Astronaut theory personally.
That is not a "theory". FFS.
My fave pseudo science topic is Christian Science and Inteligent Design.
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 05:53:49 PM
Psychology is still considered pseudoscience in some sectors
certain forms.
For example in the 70's it was thought if you let out your anger by hitting a pillow it was beneficial because it made you feel good and released your aggression. Now it's known that hitting a pillow just creates the habit of punching things when you get angry. The therapy though didn't go away and was taken up by hucksters, and since it offers temporary release people get suckered into it.
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 05:53:49 PM
am a big fan of the Ancient Astronaut theory personally.
I was thought Van Danikens was :| but I just read a review of his new book (http://archyfantasies.blogspot.com/2010/08/aliens-in-closet.html) and it seems pretty :lulz: I think im going to read it when I get back to university
It is a pretty all encompassing big list, I think... For me, this guy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi) and his reasons for leaving SCICOP are interesting. Though I know this will might get another "FFS" or at least an "SMH" from Dok Howl, I'll put it out there:
I believe in Ghosts, ESP, and lots of other "Sciences" on that list. What I relate it in my head is often to the Geiger Counter. Before that, there was no accurate way of measuring radioactivity though we sort of knew something was up. The Geiger Counter gave us a way to quantify that energy. Ghosts, dreams that predict the future etc etc, are all parts of the natural world that have yet to be explained. I believe that matter cannot be created or destroyed. From that, I postulate that there are types of energy, methods of releasing that energy, and eventually, ways of measuring and explaining that energy.
On the other hand, things like Phrenology and the Hongcheng Magic Liquid are rather funny
1. There were plenty of ways to measure radioactivity before the geiger counter. Film, for example.
2. Whatever. Live in a fantasy world if you can't deal with the actual weirdness that surrounds you every day.
I ONCE SAW A GHOST!!! :eek:
it turned out to be my fucking imagination
:sad:
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on August 26, 2010, 06:21:50 PM
I ONCE SAW A GHOST!!! :eek:
it turned out to be my fucking imagination ASSTRAL PLANEZ!
:sad:
Fixed for the retard set.
This just kills me. The world is full of weird shit that
actually exists/happens but people ignore it completely, and then make shit up to compensate for there being no weird shit.
I dunno, I think ghosts and ESP are Law of Five type things. I think people who want to see or experience ghosts see or experience ghosts. Same with ESP. When I was a kid I convinced myself I had ESP because I managed to guess a number my friend was thinking of like 3 or 4 times in a row. But when I thought about it some more, and proceeded to get the next 5 wrong, I realized it was just lucky coincidence.
People remember the hits and forget the misses. That's why cold reading works.
Well that and they want to feel special
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:23:56 PM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on August 26, 2010, 06:21:50 PM
I ONCE SAW A GHOST!!! :eek:
it turned out to be my fucking imagination ASSTRAL PLANEZ!
:sad:
Fixed for the retard set.
This just kills me. The world is full of weird shit that actually exists/happens but people ignore it completely, and then make shit up to compensate for there being no weird shit.
What is weird shit that actually happens but people ignore?
As for Urine Therpary, you've gotta admire a person who can literally sell piss to their customers uh, patients. That's a tough sell. Plus, low overhead.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:25:05 PM
People remember the hits and forget the misses. That's why cold reading works.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on August 26, 2010, 06:25:31 PM
Well that and they want to feel special
I tend to make people angry. By people I mean practitioners of 'martial arts' the kind that go on and on about having strong ki. And other people that claim to be able to project energy from their hands.
The reasons you hands feel warm is because you rubbed them together for like 5 minutes before making your fucking chi-ball.
Quote from: Secret Level on August 26, 2010, 06:25:41 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:23:56 PM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on August 26, 2010, 06:21:50 PM
I ONCE SAW A GHOST!!! :eek:
it turned out to be my fucking imagination ASSTRAL PLANEZ!
:sad:
Fixed for the retard set.
This just kills me. The world is full of weird shit that actually exists/happens but people ignore it completely, and then make shit up to compensate for there being no weird shit.
What is weird shit that actually happens but people ignore?
1. Spend a few hours travelling on the city bus. All will be explained.
2. The sheer number of people with crippling (and funny) neurosis (Dunning/Krueger is my favorite), that interact with you in bizarre ways.
3. Weird cults. We have them.
4. Scollay Square in Boston.
5. The tunnels under Portland and Chicago.
6. Perverts are everywhere. Most of them are really fun people.
I could go on, but there's really no point. If you start
looking around you, you start seeing all manner of bizarre shit that's been going on all along, and your list will look very different from mine.
ZOO PORN
Also, biology.
Nothing specific, just that.
Did you know theres an insect that as a larvae, lives in streams and lakes and is an obligate parasite of freshwater sponges? And then, when it goes to pupate it crawls some thirty feet from the water body and spins a "geodesic" dome of silk as protection? They're called spongillaflies, btw, and the adults feed on flowers. And I caught one in my light trap.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:31:06 PM
Quote from: Secret Level on August 26, 2010, 06:25:41 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:23:56 PM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on August 26, 2010, 06:21:50 PM
I ONCE SAW A GHOST!!! :eek:
it turned out to be my fucking imagination ASSTRAL PLANEZ!
:sad:
Fixed for the retard set.
This just kills me. The world is full of weird shit that actually exists/happens but people ignore it completely, and then make shit up to compensate for there being no weird shit.
What is weird shit that actually happens but people ignore?
1. Spend a few hours travelling on the city bus. All will be explained.
2. The sheer number of people with crippling (and funny) neurosis (Dunning/Krueger is my favorite), that interact with you in bizarre ways.
3. Weird cults. We have them.
4. Scollay Square in Boston.
5. The tunnels under Portland and Chicago.
6. Perverts are everywhere. Most of them are really fun people.
I could go on, but there's really no point. If you start looking around you, you start seeing all manner of bizarre shit that's been going on all along, and your list will look very different from mine.
Man i was expecting shit I had been missing.
Quote from: Kai on August 26, 2010, 06:36:07 PM
Also, biology.
Nothing specific, just that.
Did you know theres an insect that as a larvae, lives in streams and lakes and is an obligate parasite of freshwater sponges? And then, when it goes to pupate it crawls some thirty feet from the water body and spins a "geodesic" dome of silk as protection? They're called spongillaflies, btw, and the adults feed on flowers. And I caught one in my light trap.
AND GEOLOGY
if you don't believe me ILL HIT YOU WITH A ROCK
Quote from: Secret Level on August 26, 2010, 06:37:43 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:31:06 PM
Quote from: Secret Level on August 26, 2010, 06:25:41 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:23:56 PM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on August 26, 2010, 06:21:50 PM
I ONCE SAW A GHOST!!! :eek:
it turned out to be my fucking imagination ASSTRAL PLANEZ!
:sad:
Fixed for the retard set.
This just kills me. The world is full of weird shit that actually exists/happens but people ignore it completely, and then make shit up to compensate for there being no weird shit.
What is weird shit that actually happens but people ignore?
1. Spend a few hours travelling on the city bus. All will be explained.
2. The sheer number of people with crippling (and funny) neurosis (Dunning/Krueger is my favorite), that interact with you in bizarre ways.
3. Weird cults. We have them.
4. Scollay Square in Boston.
5. The tunnels under Portland and Chicago.
6. Perverts are everywhere. Most of them are really fun people.
I could go on, but there's really no point. If you start looking around you, you start seeing all manner of bizarre shit that's been going on all along, and your list will look very different from mine.
Man i was expecting shit I had been missing.
Sorry I didn't meet your standards.
Dok,
Wonders why he bothers at all.
Fuck it. Done with this. You spend a few minutes trying to make your case, and the response is "OH IS THAT ALL? I'M SO FUCKING WEIRD AND ZANY THAT YOUR POST IS OLD HAT!"
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:39:29 PM
Sorry I didn't meet your standards.
Dok,
Wonders why he bothers at all.
Meh, don't bother with people who only want to see what they want to see Dok.
Meanwhile, I have become distressed ever since I stopped noticing all that stuff. So yeah, plz to let's find The Weird this Friday, okay?
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 06:18:36 PM
It is a pretty all encompassing big list, I think... For me, this guy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi) and his reasons for leaving SCICOP are interesting. Though I know this will might get another "FFS" or at least an "SMH" from Dok Howl, I'll put it out there:
I believe in Ghosts, ESP, and lots of other "Sciences" on that list. What I relate it in my head is often to the Geiger Counter. Before that, there was no accurate way of measuring radioactivity though we sort of knew something was up. The Geiger Counter gave us a way to quantify that energy. Ghosts, dreams that predict the future etc etc, are all parts of the natural world that have yet to be explained. I believe that matter cannot be created or destroyed. From that, I postulate that there are types of energy, methods of releasing that energy, and eventually, ways of measuring and explaining that energy.
On the other hand, things like Phrenology and the Hongcheng Magic Liquid are rather funny
wut
1) That's not a matter of belief, that's the way the universe is. A natural law, even. One does not "believe" natural laws any more than one "believes" in anything that can be clearly tested, observed, and proven. We call that sort of belief "knowledge" (and I will internet-punch anybody who goes all "Reality Tunnels LOLOLOL" on this discussion).
2) How in gibbering splutterfuck does that have anything to do with ghosts, ESP, or any other hoo-hah spunkdiddling nonsense that middle-aged women dressed in gaudy clothing use to weasel money out of your gullible ass (a profession which I have the utmost respect for, btw; milk the suckers dry!)?
Or are you gonna tell me that a person's "soul" is made out of some kind of "energy", and therefore ghosts and spirits must exist
becuz science sez so, you guys!
Quote from: Mistress Freeky, HRN on August 26, 2010, 06:42:01 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:39:29 PM
Sorry I didn't meet your standards.
Dok,
Wonders why he bothers at all.
Meh, don't bother with people who only want to see what they want to see Dok.
Meanwhile, I have become distressed ever since I stopped noticing all that stuff. So yeah, plz to let's find The Weird this Friday, okay?
I think we can manage that. No point posting any of it, though, as it's all old news.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:43:14 PM
Quote from: Mistress Freeky, HRN on August 26, 2010, 06:42:01 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:39:29 PM
Sorry I didn't meet your standards.
Dok,
Wonders why he bothers at all.
Meh, don't bother with people who only want to see what they want to see Dok.
Meanwhile, I have become distressed ever since I stopped noticing all that stuff. So yeah, plz to let's find The Weird this Friday, okay?
I think we can manage that. No point posting any of it, though, as it's all old news.
As long as we find it, I'm good. :D
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 06:18:36 PM
It is a pretty all encompassing big list, I think... For me, this guy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi) and his reasons for leaving SCICOP are interesting. Though I know this will might get another "FFS" or at least an "SMH" from Dok Howl, I'll put it out there:
I believe in Ghosts, ESP, and lots of other "Sciences" on that list. What I relate it in my head is often to the Geiger Counter. Before that, there was no accurate way of measuring radioactivity though we sort of knew something was up. The Geiger Counter gave us a way to quantify that energy. Ghosts, dreams that predict the future etc etc, are all parts of the natural world that have yet to be explained. I believe that matter cannot be created or destroyed. From that, I postulate that there are types of energy, methods of releasing that energy, and eventually, ways of measuring and explaining that energy.
On the other hand, things like Phrenology and the Hongcheng Magic Liquid are rather funny
We have lots of ways to measure energy, ghosts as a psychological disfunction don't appear on them because they have no mass and are mearly ideas, its not a case that we will one day have a way to measure them.
Quote from: Mistress Freeky, HRN on August 26, 2010, 06:44:49 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:43:14 PM
Quote from: Mistress Freeky, HRN on August 26, 2010, 06:42:01 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:39:29 PM
Sorry I didn't meet your standards.
Dok,
Wonders why he bothers at all.
Meh, don't bother with people who only want to see what they want to see Dok.
Meanwhile, I have become distressed ever since I stopped noticing all that stuff. So yeah, plz to let's find The Weird this Friday, okay?
I think we can manage that. No point posting any of it, though, as it's all old news.
As long as we find it, I'm good. :D
Hey now, we're not all know-it-all fuddy-duddy's. Please to be sharing.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on August 26, 2010, 06:46:57 PM
Quote from: Mistress Freeky, HRN on August 26, 2010, 06:44:49 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:43:14 PM
Quote from: Mistress Freeky, HRN on August 26, 2010, 06:42:01 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:39:29 PM
Sorry I didn't meet your standards.
Dok,
Wonders why he bothers at all.
Meh, don't bother with people who only want to see what they want to see Dok.
Meanwhile, I have become distressed ever since I stopped noticing all that stuff. So yeah, plz to let's find The Weird this Friday, okay?
I think we can manage that. No point posting any of it, though, as it's all old news.
As long as we find it, I'm good. :D
Hey now, we're not all know-it-all fuddy-duddy's. Please to be sharing.
Yeah, of course we will. I'm just a little annoyed with the fact that I wasted time on a serious post to SL. He deliberately blew past the
idea I was trying to convey, in favor of showing that he's seen it all, done it all, yada yada whatever.
I'm a slow learner, sometimes, but eventually the message sinks in...Don't bother.
Quote from: Mistress Freeky, HRN on August 26, 2010, 06:44:49 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:43:14 PM
Quote from: Mistress Freeky, HRN on August 26, 2010, 06:42:01 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:39:29 PM
Sorry I didn't meet your standards.
Dok,
Wonders why he bothers at all.
Meh, don't bother with people who only want to see what they want to see Dok.
Meanwhile, I have become distressed ever since I stopped noticing all that stuff. So yeah, plz to let's find The Weird this Friday, okay?
I think we can manage that. No point posting any of it, though, as it's all old news.
As long as we find it, I'm good. :D
It's Tucson. If we don't find IT, it will find US.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:42:01 PM
Fuck it. Done with this. You spend a few minutes trying to make your case, and the response is "OH IS THAT ALL? I'M SO FUCKING WEIRD AND ZANY THAT YOUR POST IS OLD HAT!"
Dude, over reacting. I was just expecting some more weirdness. I've seen a lot of that already is all. It wasn't meant to be "your shit is weak." It was meant as "oh ok, that's cool" I've seen weird shit, acknowledged it as weird and moved on. I was expecting some specific examples of weirdness you have encountered.
Or I could just go back to deliberately pissing you off.
Quote from: Secret Level on August 26, 2010, 06:51:48 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:42:01 PM
Fuck it. Done with this. You spend a few minutes trying to make your case, and the response is "OH IS THAT ALL? I'M SO FUCKING WEIRD AND ZANY THAT YOUR POST IS OLD HAT!"
Dude, over reacting. I was just expecting some more weirdness. I've seen a lot of that already is all. It wasn't meant to be "your shit is weak." It was meant as "oh ok, that's cool" I've seen weird shit, acknowledged it as weird and moved on. I was expecting some specific examples of weirdness you have encountered.
Or I could just go back to deliberately pissing you off.
Do whatever you like. I was trying to convey an idea, not give a list of all the cool shit I've ever noticed.
You managed to piss me off before because I wasn't aware that you aren't to be taken seriously on any subject. Only works once.
COCK PIERCINGS
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:53:50 PM
Quote from: Secret Level on August 26, 2010, 06:51:48 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 06:42:01 PM
Fuck it. Done with this. You spend a few minutes trying to make your case, and the response is "OH IS THAT ALL? I'M SO FUCKING WEIRD AND ZANY THAT YOUR POST IS OLD HAT!"
Dude, over reacting. I was just expecting some more weirdness. I've seen a lot of that already is all. It wasn't meant to be "your shit is weak." It was meant as "oh ok, that's cool" I've seen weird shit, acknowledged it as weird and moved on. I was expecting some specific examples of weirdness you have encountered.
Or I could just go back to deliberately pissing you off.
Do whatever you like. I was trying to convey an idea, not give a list of all the cool shit I've ever noticed.
You managed to piss me off before because I wasn't aware that you aren't to be taken seriously on any subject. Only works once.
Right then. Piss off Dok. Or lighten the fuck up.
Quote from: Cainad on August 26, 2010, 06:42:20 PM
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 06:18:36 PM
It is a pretty all encompassing big list, I think... For me, this guy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi) and his reasons for leaving SCICOP are interesting. Though I know this will might get another "FFS" or at least an "SMH" from Dok Howl, I'll put it out there:
I believe in Ghosts, ESP, and lots of other "Sciences" on that list. What I relate it in my head is often to the Geiger Counter. Before that, there was no accurate way of measuring radioactivity though we sort of knew something was up. The Geiger Counter gave us a way to quantify that energy. Ghosts, dreams that predict the future etc etc, are all parts of the natural world that have yet to be explained. I believe that matter cannot be created or destroyed. From that, I postulate that there are types of energy, methods of releasing that energy, and eventually, ways of measuring and explaining that energy.
On the other hand, things like Phrenology and the Hongcheng Magic Liquid are rather funny
wut
1) That's not a matter of belief, that's the way the universe is. A natural law, even. One does not "believe" natural laws any more than one "believes" in anything that can be clearly tested, observed, and proven. We call that sort of belief "knowledge" (and I will internet-punch anybody who goes all "Reality Tunnels LOLOLOL" on this discussion).
2) How in gibbering splutterfuck does that have anything to do with ghosts, ESP, or any other hoo-hah spunkdiddling nonsense that middle-aged women dressed in gaudy clothing use to weasel money out of your gullible ass (a profession which I have the utmost respect for, btw; milk the suckers dry!)?
Or are you gonna tell me that a person's "soul" is made out of some kind of "energy", and therefore ghosts and spirits must exist becuz science sez so, you guys!
The whole point of Truzzi's 'pseudoskeptic' argument is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"... on both sides of the argument.
QuoteIn science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. The true skeptic takes an agnostic position, one that says the claim is not proved rather than disproved. He asserts that the claimant has not borne the burden of proof and that science must continue to build its cognitive map of reality without incorporating the extraordinary claim as a new "fact." Since the true skeptic does not assert a claim, he has no burden to prove anything. He just goes on using the established theories of "conventional science" as usual. But if a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, that he has a negative hypothesis—saying, for instance, that a seeming psi result was actually due to an artifact—he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof.
I think that CSICOP fell victim to the same kind of issue that atheists have... they got an influx of nominal members that BELIEVED they KNEW THE TRUTH instead understanding that they were not holding a position, but rather awaiting extraordinary evidence to back up an extraordinary claim. Skepticism is a neutral position, but most monkeys need to take a pro or anti position which seems to be the crux of the problem.
Heh, this one still makes me giggle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society)
I have lightened the fuck up. I have processed new information, and revised my view. You're a fun guy to hit the goof threads with, but not really someone for whom I'd spend time writing out a long or well thought out response to, because you won't take it seriously anyway.
Little tiny paradigm shift, and the irritation is all gone.
Whoah down there nellies... My point was there is all sorts of weird shit and stuff out there, from Dok's list, to the wikipedia list I posted etc etc. For god's sakes, I live in NYC and ride the subway! To me, uh oh, Illuminati Quote Coming through: skip this you anti-RAW people : All things are false, all things are true and all things meaningless. Also, in this day and age, you sometimes have to say that you buy "natural laws": 'cause there are plenty of people who don't. I do not need Penn and Teller's show to prove that one out. I am saying that the preponderance of fakes and charlatans combined with people who think all is explained sometimes stifle discussion and exploration of the full because their ideas are all ready in place. Oh, and yes, I do believe that the phenomenon we call ghosts will someday be explained as an energy we haven't discovered yet, and will have nothing to do with what we 21st centurians think of as a Soul or some such. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet
Also, on a side note, is their someplace explaining how to put a picture into a post? I have a great NYC subway photo from the E train last week that is amazingly weird and funny to share.
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 06:57:25 PM
The whole point of Truzzi's 'pseudoskeptic' argument is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"... on both sides of the argument.
Hmm...Define "extraordinary proof".
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 07:00:45 PM
All things are false, all things are true and all things meaningless.
Nihilism FTL.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:01:28 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 06:57:25 PM
The whole point of Truzzi's 'pseudoskeptic' argument is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"... on both sides of the argument.
Hmm...Define "extraordinary proof".
The weight of evidence for an extraordinary claim must be proportioned to its strangeness. - Pierre-Simon Laplace
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 07:00:45 PM
Whoah down there nellies... My point was there is all sorts of weird shit and stuff out there, from Dok's list, to the wikipedia list I posted etc etc. For god's sakes, I live in NYC and ride the subway! To me, uh oh, Illuminati Quote Coming through: skip this you anti-RAW people : All things are false, all things are true and all things meaningless. Also, in this day and age, you sometimes have to say that you buy "natural laws": 'cause there are plenty of people who don't. I do not need Penn and Teller's show to prove that one out. I am saying that the preponderance of fakes and charlatans combined with people who think all is explained sometimes stifle discussion and exploration of the full because their ideas are all ready in place. Oh, and yes, I do believe that the phenomenon we call ghosts will someday be explained as an energy we haven't discovered yet, and will have nothing to do with what we 21st centurians think of as a Soul or some such. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Hamlet
Also, on a side note, is their someplace explaining how to put a picture into a post? I have a great NYC subway photo from the E train last week that is amazingly weird and funny to share.
Type IMG in brackets, then the URL then /IMG in brackets.
Fixed
KAT STACKS
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 07:05:24 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:01:28 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 06:57:25 PM
The whole point of Truzzi's 'pseudoskeptic' argument is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"... on both sides of the argument.
Hmm...Define "extraordinary proof".
The weight of evidence for an extraordinary claim must be proportioned to its strangeness. - Pierre-Simon Laplace
Sounds like crap. Einstein changed physics entirely with some very simple proofs. Nothing extraordinary about what he used to prove his viewpoint.
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 06:57:25 PM
Quote from: Cainad on August 26, 2010, 06:42:20 PM
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 06:18:36 PM
It is a pretty all encompassing big list, I think... For me, this guy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi) and his reasons for leaving SCICOP are interesting. Though I know this will might get another "FFS" or at least an "SMH" from Dok Howl, I'll put it out there:
I believe in Ghosts, ESP, and lots of other "Sciences" on that list. What I relate it in my head is often to the Geiger Counter. Before that, there was no accurate way of measuring radioactivity though we sort of knew something was up. The Geiger Counter gave us a way to quantify that energy. Ghosts, dreams that predict the future etc etc, are all parts of the natural world that have yet to be explained. I believe that matter cannot be created or destroyed. From that, I postulate that there are types of energy, methods of releasing that energy, and eventually, ways of measuring and explaining that energy.
On the other hand, things like Phrenology and the Hongcheng Magic Liquid are rather funny
wut
1) That's not a matter of belief, that's the way the universe is. A natural law, even. One does not "believe" natural laws any more than one "believes" in anything that can be clearly tested, observed, and proven. We call that sort of belief "knowledge" (and I will internet-punch anybody who goes all "Reality Tunnels LOLOLOL" on this discussion).
2) How in gibbering splutterfuck does that have anything to do with ghosts, ESP, or any other hoo-hah spunkdiddling nonsense that middle-aged women dressed in gaudy clothing use to weasel money out of your gullible ass (a profession which I have the utmost respect for, btw; milk the suckers dry!)?
Or are you gonna tell me that a person's "soul" is made out of some kind of "energy", and therefore ghosts and spirits must exist becuz science sez so, you guys!
The whole point of Truzzi's 'pseudoskeptic' argument is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"... on both sides of the argument.
QuoteIn science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. The true skeptic takes an agnostic position, one that says the claim is not proved rather than disproved. He asserts that the claimant has not borne the burden of proof and that science must continue to build its cognitive map of reality without incorporating the extraordinary claim as a new "fact." Since the true skeptic does not assert a claim, he has no burden to prove anything. He just goes on using the established theories of "conventional science" as usual. But if a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, that he has a negative hypothesis—saying, for instance, that a seeming psi result was actually due to an artifact—he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof.
I think that CSICOP fell victim to the same kind of issue that atheists have... they got an influx of nominal members that BELIEVED they KNEW THE TRUTH instead understanding that they were not holding a position, but rather awaiting extraordinary evidence to back up an extraordinary claim. Skepticism is a neutral position, but most monkeys need to take a pro or anti position which seems to be the crux of the problem.
You appear to be addressing a completely different issue than the one I was talking about.
I'm talking about using the Law of Conservation of Energy to support extraordinary hypotheses that lack any real proof. I find it very annoying to do so.
I mean, shit, I've seen ghosts, usually of my recently deceased pets. I don't need to go believing that some "essence" of their being was preserved by conservation of energy to validate my personal, subjective experience.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:00:03 PM
I have lightened the fuck up. I have processed new information, and revised my view. You're a fun guy to hit the goof threads with, but not really someone for whom I'd spend time writing out a long or well thought out response to, because you won't take it seriously anyway.
Little tiny paradigm shift, and the irritation is all gone.
"The real world is fucking weird enough. We don't need no fucking fairies or dragons or majiqs you fucking hippies."
Sorry I came off as flippant, or whatever.
Errr, sorry I meant that as a supporting argument to your post regarding Truzzi's stance vs Apikoros's post.
Quote from: Secret Level on August 26, 2010, 07:12:32 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:00:03 PM
I have lightened the fuck up. I have processed new information, and revised my view. You're a fun guy to hit the goof threads with, but not really someone for whom I'd spend time writing out a long or well thought out response to, because you won't take it seriously anyway.
Little tiny paradigm shift, and the irritation is all gone.
"The real world is fucking weird enough. We don't need no fucking fairies or dragons or majiqs you fucking hippies."
Sorry I came off as flippant, or whatever.
S'ok.
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 07:12:52 PM
Errr, sorry I meant that as a supporting argument to your post regarding Truzzi's stance vs Apikoros's post.
Whoops. :lulz: Sorry dude, I've been spending too much time in this basement. I think the mold spores have taken a foothold in my brain.
Quote from: Secret Level on August 26, 2010, 07:12:32 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:00:03 PM
I have lightened the fuck up. I have processed new information, and revised my view. You're a fun guy to hit the goof threads with, but not really someone for whom I'd spend time writing out a long or well thought out response to, because you won't take it seriously anyway.
Little tiny paradigm shift, and the irritation is all gone.
"The real world is fucking weird enough. We don't need no fucking fairies or dragons or majiqs you fucking hippies."
Sorry I came off as flippant, or whatever.
Word of advice:
Saying "That's some good stuff there Dok, could you show me more of the weird you have come across" is more polite than "That's it?"
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 06:18:36 PM
I believe that matter cannot be created or destroyed. From that, I postulate that there are types of energy, methods of releasing that energy, and eventually, ways of measuring and explaining that energy.
Ok, you realize that this quote basically affirms you believe in all of what both Newtonian and Particle Physics has to say on the matter, right?
Where the hell do you get an affirmation of pseudoscience from?
Science can't exist within certainties.
Like lets take Flat Earth. If I did a meta-study on flat earth theory the best I could come out with as a conclusion is "flat earth theory has no evidence in support and all evidence in contrary." And that's probably the most crazy of the geological claims.
So that puts science always on the defense when it comes to pseudoscience. People don't like living their lives in levels uncertainty.
And it also makes it easy for people to import ideas which have no evidence in support, or little evidence, into an event they have experienced.
The best science can do is tell people whats probably going on, if it can.
Lets take a UFO sighting, seeing something strange in the sky. The best which could be done is tell people what it probably is, or what it probably isn't within certain degrees of uncertainty. Since the extraterrestrial hypothesis is so exciting (though so incredibly weak it's not one I would take serious) peoples imaginations will go to accept that, and it also provides certainty in the event.
So again science has to go on the defense.
On the other hand, I have no direct evidence that the world is spherical.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:22:53 PM
On the other hand, I have no direct evidence that the world is spherical.
There's tons of evidence that the world is spherical. Not the least being photographs of earth looking back from space.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:22:53 PM
On the other hand, I have no direct evidence that the world is spherical.
I have evidence that its at least curved rather than flat. Climbing radio towers can be enlightening ;-)
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on August 26, 2010, 07:24:26 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:22:53 PM
On the other hand, I have no direct evidence that the world is spherical.
There's tons of evidence that the world is spherical. Not the least being photographs of earth looking back from space.
Looks like a disc in those pics. Also, photoshop. The shadow of the Earth on the moon also supports the flat disc approach just as much as the sphere approach.
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 07:24:54 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:22:53 PM
On the other hand, I have no direct evidence that the world is spherical.
I have evidence that its at least curved rather than flat. Climbing radio towers can be enlightening ;-)
Okay, so it's shaped like a contact lens.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:22:53 PM
On the other hand, I have no direct evidence that the world is spherical.
With all due respect, you've never done the experiments. All science
should be able to be replicated with enough resources and time, but most of us tend to draw a line of trust at a certain point.
Also, TI: What the gibbering fuck are you talking about? "Science can't exist within certainties"?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:26:28 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 07:24:54 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:22:53 PM
On the other hand, I have no direct evidence that the world is spherical.
I have evidence that its at least curved rather than flat. Climbing radio towers can be enlightening ;-)
Okay, so it's shaped like a contact lens.
With SE Ohio at the center apparently. ;-)
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 07:27:35 PM
Also, TI: What the gibbering fuck are you talking about? "Science can't exist within certainties"?
Sorry,
It's probably very poorly worded on my part.
I can't fix it right now though cause I gotta take off.
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 07:27:35 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:22:53 PM
On the other hand, I have no direct evidence that the world is spherical.
With all due respect, you've never done the experiments. All science should be able to be replicated with enough resources and time, but most of us tend to draw a line of trust at a certain point.
Also, TI: What the gibbering fuck are you talking about? "Science can't exist within certainties"?
Science can deal with functional certainties... ie. Close enough for human thinking. But I don't think that certainty is really even the 'goal' of science. Science is a process of refining ideas based on observation:
Quote
Question: Is there certainty in science?
Sam Harris: Certainty is, I think, a false goal. I mean we're not achieving . . . We're achieving functional certainties in science and in just . . . in our day-to-day lives. I mean it's a functional certainty that I'm sitting here talking to you, though it's possible I could be dreaming or, you know, deceived by an evil demon. Those kinds of philosophical, ______ worries don't really relate too much to the ordinary practice of science, the very useful practice of science, and our ordinary task of just negotiating our lives and finding happiness in this world. We recognize that there's a range . . . that there's a continuum of, "I'm not sure, there's a coin toss, fifty-fifty" understanding of a circumstance to being functionally certain about what is so. And many people are pretending to be functionally certain, or believe themselves to be functionally certain about things like Jesus is gonna come back and judge the world in their lifetime. Twenty percent of the American population claims to be functionally certain that that is gonna come to pass, and 78% think that Jesus is gonna come back sometime – not necessarily in their lifetime. And these certainties do real work for us. I mean the person who is certain that the soul enters the zygote at the moment of conception is the person who wants to veto stem cell research, despite the fact that tens of millions of people are suffering from conditions for which stem cell research is the best line of research to generate therapies. So these are ideas that are not just of academic interest, or person, private, or spiritual relevance. I mean these are shaping policy. They're shaping a national conversation. And then when you look to the Muslim world, they are causing people to blow themselves up on street corners.
Recorded on: July 4 2007
To be honest I probably should have kept my mouth shut cause although Im not in a rush Im busy tearing apart my desk looking for a prescription.
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 07:27:35 PM
With all due respect, you've never done the experiments.
This is exactly my point.
I have neither seen the world from space, nor have I gone to alledged "other countries" for the purpose of taking measurements.
As I said, I have no
direct evidence. I'm not stating that the world isn't a sphere, I'm saying that all the observations I can make, combined with what I
know about the universe indicates that a sphere, a contact lens shape, and a carrot shape are all equally possible.
I can name at least two absolute certainties that science can claim.
I'm still not convinced the earth spins on it's axis like everybody claims.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 07:36:20 PM
I'm still not convinced the earth spins on it's axis like everybody claims.
What axis?
I honestly can't say for sure that the universe doesn't disappear when I blink.
And I am now aware of every time I blink. And so are you.
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 07:38:35 PM
I honestly can't say for sure that the universe doesn't disappear when I blink.
And I am now aware of every time I blink. And so are you.
I should probably mention that Jeff and I have been shooting each other with the stunner all morning (I nailed him first, and I have to report that even when unprepared, he didn't shit himself. Failure.), and my thinking seems a little different. It occurs to me that teachers and politicians have lied to me about everything else, so why not this? So, while I'm prepared to accept that the world is spherical in nature, I'm not totally sold on the concept, either.
Another possibility is that this argument is an elaborate lead up to a joke I thought of, and nobody's biting.
One or the other.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:43:25 PM
Another possibility is that this argument is an elaborate lead up to a joke I thought of, and nobody's biting.
Damn, I'm missing this one.
Quote from: Cainad on August 26, 2010, 06:42:20 PM
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 06:18:36 PM
It is a pretty all encompassing big list, I think... For me, this guy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi) and his reasons for leaving SCICOP are interesting. Though I know this will might get another "FFS" or at least an "SMH" from Dok Howl, I'll put it out there:
I believe in Ghosts, ESP, and lots of other "Sciences" on that list. What I relate it in my head is often to the Geiger Counter. Before that, there was no accurate way of measuring radioactivity though we sort of knew something was up. The Geiger Counter gave us a way to quantify that energy. Ghosts, dreams that predict the future etc etc, are all parts of the natural world that have yet to be explained. I believe that matter cannot be created or destroyed. From that, I postulate that there are types of energy, methods of releasing that energy, and eventually, ways of measuring and explaining that energy.
On the other hand, things like Phrenology and the Hongcheng Magic Liquid are rather funny
wut
1) That's not a matter of belief, that's the way the universe is. A natural law, even. One does not "believe" natural laws any more than one "believes" in anything that can be clearly tested, observed, and proven. We call that sort of belief "knowledge" (and I will internet-punch anybody who goes all "Reality Tunnels LOLOLOL" on this discussion).
2) How in gibbering splutterfuck does that have anything to do with ghosts, ESP, or any other hoo-hah spunkdiddling nonsense that middle-aged women dressed in gaudy clothing use to weasel money out of your gullible ass (a profession which I have the utmost respect for, btw; milk the suckers dry!)?
Or are you gonna tell me that a person's "soul" is made out of some kind of "energy", and therefore ghosts and spirits must exist becuz science sez so, you guys!
I'm sure when he says "believe" he means belief in belief. Which is not the same thing as belief (=anticipation of reality). He doesn't anticipate seeing ghosts, experiencing ESP, or any of the rest of it. It's more like cheering, really.
When I say, "The sun will rise at 6 am", that is a belief, an anticipation of reality. Which is, to say, most people who say they believe in supernatural/paranormal things don't actually anticipate them.
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 07:52:00 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:43:25 PM
Another possibility is that this argument is an elaborate lead up to a joke I thought of, and nobody's biting.
Damn, I'm missing this one.
It's too good to ruin. If nobody catches it now, I'll find some way to use it later. On the other hand, if people try to prove that the world is spherical, it will probably come up.
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 07:21:14 PM
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 06:18:36 PM
I believe that matter cannot be created or destroyed. From that, I postulate that there are types of energy, methods of releasing that energy, and eventually, ways of measuring and explaining that energy.
Ok, you realize that this quote basically affirms you believe in all of what both Newtonian and Particle Physics has to say on the matter, right?
Where the hell do you get an affirmation of pseudoscience from?
It reminds me of the logic of alot of David Icke followers(Yes theyre are people stupid/crazy enough to believe his reptile theory and his other theories too)
Like this one video where someone showed a physicist talking about other dimensions and then it cut to David Icke talking about reptiles being from other dimensions. They reasoned that because something David Icke said kind of sort of resembled actual science that it proved he was right about Reptiles ruling the world.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:54:10 PM
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 07:52:00 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:43:25 PM
Another possibility is that this argument is an elaborate lead up to a joke I thought of, and nobody's biting.
Damn, I'm missing this one.
It's too good to ruin. If nobody catches it now, I'll find some way to use it later. On the other hand, if people try to prove that the world is spherical, it will probably come up.
All I can say is that all the pictures from space show the earth as flat and not spinning.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 07:56:12 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:54:10 PM
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 07:52:00 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:43:25 PM
Another possibility is that this argument is an elaborate lead up to a joke I thought of, and nobody's biting.
Damn, I'm missing this one.
It's too good to ruin. If nobody catches it now, I'll find some way to use it later. On the other hand, if people try to prove that the world is spherical, it will probably come up.
All I can say is that all the pictures from space show the earth as flat and not spinning.
To be fair, those pictures aren't holographic images, and it's damn hard to see 3 dimensions on a large sphere.
So they aren't "proof" for either viewpoint, IMO. If you could stand on the moon and observe the Earth, and the same point came around, you could reasonably assume the world was both rotating and spherical. But I've never been to the moon.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:00:23 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 07:56:12 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:54:10 PM
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 07:52:00 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:43:25 PM
Another possibility is that this argument is an elaborate lead up to a joke I thought of, and nobody's biting.
Damn, I'm missing this one.
It's too good to ruin. If nobody catches it now, I'll find some way to use it later. On the other hand, if people try to prove that the world is spherical, it will probably come up.
All I can say is that all the pictures from space show the earth as flat and not spinning.
To be fair, those pictures aren't holographic images, and it's damn hard to see 3 dimensions on a large sphere.
So they aren't "proof" for either viewpoint, IMO. If you could stand on the moon and observe the Earth, and the same point came around, you could reasonably assume the world was both rotating and spherical. But I've never been to the moon.
I see your point about the sphere. Let's assume the moon rotates around the earth. As the moon circles the earth your view would change. Now let's assume the earth is spinning. If it were spinning the same direction as the moon is rotating then your view may not change. If it is rotating the opposite direction your view may be blurred.
Or my meds are running rampant and I am an idiot.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 08:07:21 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:00:23 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 07:56:12 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:54:10 PM
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 07:52:00 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:43:25 PM
Another possibility is that this argument is an elaborate lead up to a joke I thought of, and nobody's biting.
Damn, I'm missing this one.
It's too good to ruin. If nobody catches it now, I'll find some way to use it later. On the other hand, if people try to prove that the world is spherical, it will probably come up.
All I can say is that all the pictures from space show the earth as flat and not spinning.
To be fair, those pictures aren't holographic images, and it's damn hard to see 3 dimensions on a large sphere.
So they aren't "proof" for either viewpoint, IMO. If you could stand on the moon and observe the Earth, and the same point came around, you could reasonably assume the world was both rotating and spherical. But I've never been to the moon.
I see your point about the sphere. Let's assume the moon rotates around the earth. As the moon circles the earth your view would change. Now let's assume the earth is spinning. If it were spinning the same direction as the moon is rotating then your view may not change. If it is rotating the opposite direction your view may be blurred.
Or my meds are running rampant and I am an idiot.
If the moon orbits the Earth, and the Earth rotates, you'll see a steady rotation of the Earth no matter what, unless the moon is in geosynchronous orbit, which it isn't, as the shadow of the Earth on the moon changes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum
Is that good enough?
I am going to have to math. The moon circles the earth at 2,290 MPH, or a 28 day orbit. The earth rotates at 100 MPH, or a 24 hour orbit.
I will be back in.....about a year! :D
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum
Is that good enough?
Assumes a North and South pole, and an equator.
Also, assumes you can make those measurements there, and get the results given. At the moment, I cannot travel to either location. The experiment without latitudinal dependence merely implies rotation, which I have not disputed. Charley Brown might be interested in that bit, though.
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum
Is that good enough?
wutdiditsay?
lol
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 08:24:07 PM
I am going to have to math. The moon circles the earth at 2,290 MPH, or a 28 day orbit. The earth rotates at 100 MPH, or a 24 hour orbit.
I will be back in.....about a year! :D
1000 MPH rotation.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:25:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum
Is that good enough?
Assumes a North and South pole, and an equator.
Also, assumes you can make those measurements there, and get the results given. At the moment, I cannot travel to either location. The experiment without latitudinal dependence merely implies rotation, which I have not disputed. Charley Brown might be interested in that bit, though.
On a serious note, wouldn't it logically follow that gravity would be less at the poles and greater at the equator?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:26:36 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 08:24:07 PM
I am going to have to math. The moon circles the earth at 2,290 MPH, or a 28 day orbit. The earth rotates at 100 MPH, or a 24 hour orbit.
I will be back in.....about a year! :D
1000 MPH rotation.
Typo, thanks.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 08:27:59 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:25:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum
Is that good enough?
Assumes a North and South pole, and an equator.
Also, assumes you can make those measurements there, and get the results given. At the moment, I cannot travel to either location. The experiment without latitudinal dependence merely implies rotation, which I have not disputed. Charley Brown might be interested in that bit, though.
On a serious note, wouldn't it logically follow that gravity would be less at the poles and greater at the equator?
No. Gravity is independent of rotation, or anything else other than mass.
On the other hand, we kind of have to take that on faith, as we can measure the strength of gravity, but we have no idea how it works, just as we don't know what mass actually is, other than Mach's Principle, which is the second best example of circular reasoning that exists outside of religion.
Oh spaceballs, now I have to research Machs Principle.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:25:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum
Is that good enough?
Assumes a North and South pole, and an equator.
Also, assumes you can make those measurements there, and get the results given. At the moment, I cannot travel to either location. The experiment without latitudinal dependence merely implies rotation, which I have not disputed. Charley Brown might be interested in that bit, though.
Wouldn't it make sense for an object continually rotating over the span of trillions of years to gradually shift into a spherical shape, though?
This, of course, is not addressing the issue of how a flat disc-shaped object would spontaneously form in the middle of space.
EDIT: Ancient astronauts did it.
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:32:25 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:25:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum
Is that good enough?
Assumes a North and South pole, and an equator.
Also, assumes you can make those measurements there, and get the results given. At the moment, I cannot travel to either location. The experiment without latitudinal dependence merely implies rotation, which I have not disputed. Charley Brown might be interested in that bit, though.
Wouldn't it make sense for an object continually rotating over the span of trillions of years to gradually shift into a spherical shape, though?
This, of course, is not addressing the issue of how a flat disc-shaped object would spontaneously form in the middle of space.
1. I have no direct evidence of the age of the Earth.
2. Then why is the solar system allegedly disc shaped instead of spherical?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:33:38 PM
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:32:25 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:25:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum
Is that good enough?
Assumes a North and South pole, and an equator.
Also, assumes you can make those measurements there, and get the results given. At the moment, I cannot travel to either location. The experiment without latitudinal dependence merely implies rotation, which I have not disputed. Charley Brown might be interested in that bit, though.
Wouldn't it make sense for an object continually rotating over the span of trillions of years to gradually shift into a spherical shape, though?
This, of course, is not addressing the issue of how a flat disc-shaped object would spontaneously form in the middle of space.
1. I have no direct evidence of the age of the Earth.
2. Then why is the solar system allegedly disc shaped instead of spherical?
Possibly due to slinging itself OUT of round.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:33:38 PM
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:32:25 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:25:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum
Is that good enough?
Assumes a North and South pole, and an equator.
Also, assumes you can make those measurements there, and get the results given. At the moment, I cannot travel to either location. The experiment without latitudinal dependence merely implies rotation, which I have not disputed. Charley Brown might be interested in that bit, though.
Wouldn't it make sense for an object continually rotating over the span of trillions of years to gradually shift into a spherical shape, though?
This, of course, is not addressing the issue of how a flat disc-shaped object would spontaneously form in the middle of space.
1. I have no direct evidence of the age of the Earth.
2. Then why is the solar system allegedly disc shaped instead of spherical?
Sure, an object spinning for long enough would flatten, but this doesn't explain the movement of the sun from our perspective. The earth would be spinning like a frisbee to flatten, while for days and nights to occur it would have to be flipping like a coin. Anyway, I've got to to for now.
Rotating objects tend towards disc-shaped. Earth has a measurable bulge around the equator; sea level is "higher" there.
This is because the points far away from the axis of rotation move faster than those closer in. (A point at the edge of a record travels one whole circumference every revolution, a point halfway between the edge and the middle travels much less per revolution.) The faster you are going, the more centripetal force it takes to keep your orbit constant. Without enough centripetal force, the object naturally moves further and further away from the center.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 08:27:59 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:25:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum
Is that good enough?
Assumes a North and South pole, and an equator.
Also, assumes you can make those measurements there, and get the results given. At the moment, I cannot travel to either location. The experiment without latitudinal dependence merely implies rotation, which I have not disputed. Charley Brown might be interested in that bit, though.
On a serious note, wouldn't it logically follow that gravity would be less at the poles and greater at the equator?
It's the other way around - because of the aforementioned flattening effect, gravity is slightly stronger at the poles because the poles are slightly closer to the center of the Earth. The equator is slightly further away, and for that reason gravity is slightly weaker. Pretty sure the effect is less than the difference in gravity from climbing an especially tall mountain, though.
ETA: didn't see this was a flat earth argument. Carry on.
So let's go with science. The earth is in an elliptical orbit. Is this orbit perfect or is it deteoriating at the furthest points and getting closer to the sun on the flatter parts? If this is the case will we crash into the sun or break orbit and drift away first?
I admit I am over my head here.
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:39:34 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:33:38 PM
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:32:25 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:25:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 08:20:41 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum
Is that good enough?
Assumes a North and South pole, and an equator.
Also, assumes you can make those measurements there, and get the results given. At the moment, I cannot travel to either location. The experiment without latitudinal dependence merely implies rotation, which I have not disputed. Charley Brown might be interested in that bit, though.
Wouldn't it make sense for an object continually rotating over the span of trillions of years to gradually shift into a spherical shape, though?
This, of course, is not addressing the issue of how a flat disc-shaped object would spontaneously form in the middle of space.
1. I have no direct evidence of the age of the Earth.
2. Then why is the solar system allegedly disc shaped instead of spherical?
Sure, an object spinning for long enough would flatten, but this doesn't explain the movement of the sun from our perspective. The earth would be spinning like a frisbee to flatten, while for days and nights to occur it would have to be flipping like a coin. Anyway, I've got to to for now.
It could be rotating in both senses. I can spin a disc and rotate it.
I have to say, this has become an incredibly interesting thread.
ONWARD!
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 08:45:25 PM
So let's go with science. The earth is in an elliptical orbit. Is this orbit perfect or is it deteoriating at the furthest points and getting closer to the sun on the flatter parts? If this is the case will we crash into the sun or break orbit and drift away first?
I admit I am over my head here.
If the world is as described, given enough time, it would crash into the sun. Breaking orbit would require added energy that would have to come from somewhere, and we are actually inside the sun's "atmosphere", which means we very, very gradually slow down.
However, if the world is as described, two events would happen first:
1. The moon would crash into the Earth for the same reason, and
2. The sun would go red giant and pfffft!
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 08:48:56 PM
I have to say, this has become an incredibly interesting thread.
ONWARD!
It's a damn shame when a fluff thread gets coopted into an actual discussion.
That being said, I'm having a great deal of fun challenging basic assumptions about the universe and how it operates, at least as a form of mental pushups. When I get serious about it, shoot me.
I agree, this has me completely absorbed right now.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:49:06 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 08:45:25 PM
So let's go with science. The earth is in an elliptical orbit. Is this orbit perfect or is it deteoriating at the furthest points and getting closer to the sun on the flatter parts? If this is the case will we crash into the sun or break orbit and drift away first?
I admit I am over my head here.
If the world is as described, given enough time, it would crash into the sun. Breaking orbit would require added energy that would have to come from somewhere, and we are actually inside the sun's "atmosphere", which means we very, very gradually slow down.
However, if the world is as described, two events would happen first:
1. The moon would crash into the Earth for the same reason, and
2. The sun would go red giant and pfffft!
Couldn't we measure slowing down by the length of days? If we go slower wouldn't days get longer?
Lost me on the sun going red.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 08:54:02 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:49:06 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 08:45:25 PM
So let's go with science. The earth is in an elliptical orbit. Is this orbit perfect or is it deteoriating at the furthest points and getting closer to the sun on the flatter parts? If this is the case will we crash into the sun or break orbit and drift away first?
I admit I am over my head here.
If the world is as described, given enough time, it would crash into the sun. Breaking orbit would require added energy that would have to come from somewhere, and we are actually inside the sun's "atmosphere", which means we very, very gradually slow down.
However, if the world is as described, two events would happen first:
1. The moon would crash into the Earth for the same reason, and
2. The sun would go red giant and pfffft!
Couldn't we measure slowing down by the length of days? If we go slower wouldn't days get longer?
Lost me on the sun going red.
When a star of our sun's type runs low on fuel, it does fun things.
Go to wikipedia and search "red giant".
SHARK WEEK
I'll bite on the round earth argument.
I observe that anywhere I go, I can see a horizon effect, provided there isn't too much stuff in the way (buildings, fog, etc.) I can see the horizon further away if I'm high up off the ground (on a plane, top of a tall building, etc.) This is consistent with the round earth theory. TGRR mentioned his contact lens shaped earth theory, which would only be consistent with a true horizon at two points - everywhere else, the horizon would be much closer on one side than the other.
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on August 26, 2010, 09:00:49 PM
I'll bite on the round earth argument.
I observe that anywhere I go, I can see a horizon effect, provided there isn't too much stuff in the way (buildings, fog, etc.) I can see the horizon further away if I'm high up off the ground (on a plane, top of a tall building, etc.) This is consistent with the round earth theory. TGRR mentioned his contact lens shaped earth theory, which would only be consistent with a true horizon at two points - everywhere else, the horizon would be much closer on one side than the other.
If the lens is large enough, you wouldn't be able to see that.
It seems the moon is slowly moving away from the earth.
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=124
The earth is moving away from the sun for the same reason, but the sun will go pfffft before it matters.
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=317
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on August 26, 2010, 09:02:44 PM
It seems the moon is slowly moving away from the earth.
Well, then, I think we have to question a few other basic assumptions, don't we?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:58:00 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 08:54:02 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 08:49:06 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 08:45:25 PM
So let's go with science. The earth is in an elliptical orbit. Is this orbit perfect or is it deteoriating at the furthest points and getting closer to the sun on the flatter parts? If this is the case will we crash into the sun or break orbit and drift away first?
I admit I am over my head here.
If the world is as described, given enough time, it would crash into the sun. Breaking orbit would require added energy that would have to come from somewhere, and we are actually inside the sun's "atmosphere", which means we very, very gradually slow down.
However, if the world is as described, two events would happen first:
1. The moon would crash into the Earth for the same reason, and
2. The sun would go red giant and pfffft!
Couldn't we measure slowing down by the length of days? If we go slower wouldn't days get longer?
Lost me on the sun going red.
When a star of our sun's type runs low on fuel, it does fun things.
Go to wikipedia and search "red giant".
OH!!!
The Sun is predicted to become a red giant in approximately five billion years.[7] It is calculated that the Sun will become sufficiently large to engulf the current orbits of the solar system's inner planets, up to Earth,[11][12][13] and its radius will expand to a minimum of 200 times its current value.[14] The Sun will lose a significant fraction of its mass in the process of becoming a red giant, and there is a chance that Mars and all the outer planets will escape as their resulting orbits will widen.[15] Mercury and most likely Venus will have been swallowed by sun's outer layer at this time. Earth's fate is less clear. Earth could technically achieve a widening of its orbit and could potentially maintain a sufficiently high angular velocity to keep it from becoming engulfed. In order to do so, its orbit needs to increase to between 1.3 AU (190,000,000 km) and 1.7 AU (250,000,000 km).[16] However the results of studies announced in 2008 show that due to tidal interaction between sun and Earth, Earth would actually fall back into a lower orbit, and get engulfed and incorporated inside the sun before the sun reaches its largest size, despite the sun losing about 38% of its mass.[17] Before this happens, Earth's biosphere will have long been destroyed by the Sun's steady increase in brightness as its hydrogen supply dwindles and its core contracts, even before the transition to a Red Giant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_giant
Ok, what's really making me giggle is how you're going back and questioning/re-exploring Copernicus and Gallileo, but are totally cool with accepting the astrophysics of what the sun is made of and how it behaves.
Dammit, I have to leave now, but I will come back to this.
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 26, 2010, 09:07:06 PM
Ok, what's really making me giggle is how you're going back and questioning/re-exploring Copernicus and Gallileo, but are totally cool with accepting the astrophysics of what the sun is made of and how it behaves.
Actually, I said "if the universe is as described". I can think of several other explanations for the sun being what it is, that don't require the sun to behave as predicted.
Everyone knows that the sun runs on coal.
Wow--- This has gotten very heavy, I was hoping for witty comments about phrenology and the Maya. I will ask though if people think Mithc McConnell is part reptile ala David Ickes and John McCain mostly Lizard?
(http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/mccainassgrab.jpg)
(http://infinitesearch.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/mitch-mcconnell-09081.jpg)
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 09:33:09 PM
Everyone knows that the sun runs on coal is made of iron.
Seriously. They used to believe this in the 1930s.
Ohhh, and here is one of the weirder things I have seen on the E Train:
(http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/7048/nkedguy.jpg)
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 09:45:33 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 09:33:09 PM
Everyone knows that the sun runs on coal is made of iron.
Seriously. They used to believe this in the 1930s.
Really? That makes no sense, even with 1930s science. :?
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 26, 2010, 09:45:33 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 09:33:09 PM
Everyone knows that the sun runs on coal is made of iron.
Seriously. They used to believe this in the 1930s.
Coal was believed in the 16th/17th centuries. Coal burned hotter than everything else so... SCIENCE! :lulz:
Proof that the earth is spheroid?
Okay, here's what you do.
Get a tall pole in an open field. Choose an easy day to remember, say, the spring equinox. Measure the length of the shadow at noon. Then next spring equinox set up another tall pole of the same length in an open field 1000 miles south. The lengths of the shadows will be different.
Now, logically, that doesn't make any sense if the Earth is flat, because the sun would be casting light at the same angle along the whole surface of the earth and the shadows would be the same length on the same day of the year. But they aren't, because the surface of the earth is curved, not flat. You can even, by the difference in shadow lengths and the distance between the poles estimate the circumference, which is approximately 24,000 miles.
Aritosthenes did this, 2000+ years ago.
Was fun while it lasted.
Hawk,
retreating back to the shadows.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 10:58:20 PM
Was fun while it lasted.
Hawk,
retreating back to the shadows.
:sad: I was enjoying that.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 10:58:20 PM
Was fun while it lasted.
Hawk,
retreating back to the shadows.
Wait, what?
Quote from: Kai on August 26, 2010, 10:00:36 PM
Proof that the earth is spheroid?
Okay, here's what you do.
Get a tall pole in an open field. Choose an easy day to remember, say, the spring equinox. Measure the length of the shadow at noon. Then next spring equinox set up another tall pole of the same length in an open field 1000 miles south. The lengths of the shadows will be different.
Now, logically, that doesn't make any sense if the Earth is flat, because the sun would be casting light at the same angle along the whole surface of the earth and the shadows would be the same length on the same day of the year. But they aren't, because the surface of the earth is curved, not flat. You can even, by the difference in shadow lengths and the distance between the poles estimate the circumference, which is approximately 24,000 miles.
Aritosthenes did this, 2000+ years ago.
You get back into the lens theory that Roger mentioned. That experiment demonstrates that the surface is curved, not the the curve continues all the way.
You would have to calculate the circumference of the earth based on the curve, then establish that there are things in both directions going so far that the lens is in fact a sphere.
Quote from: Kai on August 26, 2010, 11:05:05 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 26, 2010, 10:58:20 PM
Was fun while it lasted.
Hawk,
retreating back to the shadows.
Wait, what?
Maybe an admin could snip that part and start a thread about it, I dunno.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 26, 2010, 11:11:19 PM
Quote from: Kai on August 26, 2010, 10:00:36 PM
Proof that the earth is spheroid?
Okay, here's what you do.
Get a tall pole in an open field. Choose an easy day to remember, say, the spring equinox. Measure the length of the shadow at noon. Then next spring equinox set up another tall pole of the same length in an open field 1000 miles south. The lengths of the shadows will be different.
Now, logically, that doesn't make any sense if the Earth is flat, because the sun would be casting light at the same angle along the whole surface of the earth and the shadows would be the same length on the same day of the year. But they aren't, because the surface of the earth is curved, not flat. You can even, by the difference in shadow lengths and the distance between the poles estimate the circumference, which is approximately 24,000 miles.
Aritosthenes did this, 2000+ years ago.
You get back into the lens theory that Roger mentioned. That experiment demonstrates that the surface is curved, not the the curve continues all the way.
You would have to calculate the circumference of the earth based on the curve, then establish that there are things in both directions going so far that the lens is in fact a sphere.
Or, you could simply keep repeating the experiment until you come round back to where you started.
That's the same as just traveling all the way around though, obviously that works.
How to prove that the Earth is round:
Take an airplane over the Pacific ocean from America to Japan.
Come back over the Atlantic.
Though I suppose this doesn't prove that it isn't a ring or a moebius strip.
To anyone who seriously believes in ghosts- Here's a video of famed mentalist derren brown investigating what a "Ghost hunter" does.
You'll soon see, the ghost hunter is just a huuuuuuge victim of lawl of 5's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPDvEXS-71g&feature=fvst
Also, ESP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtlhjsiBEDw
Watch and be enlightened, or choose to believe in bullshit.
No skin off my back.
Anyone want a psychic reading? I only charge $200 for a genuine one.
Re: ghosts,
I remember reading about a scientists who heard that this lab was haunted, and after hanging out in the lab for a while he occasionally noticed things out of the corner of his eye. It turns out that the extractor fan for the room was vibrating at about 19Hz, which is roughly the resonant frequency for the eye.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 26, 2010, 07:07:32 PM
Sounds like crap. Einstein changed physics entirely with some very simple proofs. Nothing extraordinary about what he used to prove his viewpoint.
1) At least for Special Relativity (I'm not sure about general relativity) the model they had before Einstein didn't work, so they needed a new theory. Unlike theories about ghosts, for instance, our current picture of the universe works fine without ghosts.
2) I'm not sure that complexity is what was meant. I believe that the quote is more saying that the wilder the claim the more proof you need to back it up. In fact I would believe the simpler the proof the better, less chance of making a mistake, and less assumptions made.
Quote from: Doktor Plague on August 27, 2010, 02:39:56 AM
Though I suppose this doesn't prove that it isn't a ring or a moebius strip.
Just fly over the poles then.
Also, I think it wouldn't really count unless you were flying the plane (or at least in the cockpit), because pilots are probably in on the spherical earth hoax too.
One time, at space camp, i stuck a rocket up my ass. It went off and I went to the moon. When I got back, I knew the earth was flat and physics was a lot of hogwash because the moon people told me it was.
We are the moon peoples experiment and they will exterminate us when they are done.
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 02:53:17 AM
To anyone who seriously believes in ghosts- Here's a video of famed mentalist derren brown investigating what a "Ghost hunter" does.
You'll soon see, the ghost hunter is just a huuuuuuge victim of lawl of 5's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPDvEXS-71g&feature=fvst
Also, ESP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtlhjsiBEDw
Watch and be enlightened, or choose to believe in bullshit.
No skin off my back.
Anyone want a psychic reading? I only charge $200 for a genuine one.
I have seen and been touched by ghosts. I do not choose to believe, belief iin something is a thing that has not been seen or experienced. Please feel free to flame away.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:18:07 AM
You'll soon see, the ghost hunter is just a huuuuuuge victim of lawl of 5's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPDvEXS-71g&feature=fvst
Hrmm.. just started this... he seems kind of cool.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:18:07 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 02:53:17 AM
To anyone who seriously believes in ghosts- Here's a video of famed mentalist derren brown investigating what a "Ghost hunter" does.
You'll soon see, the ghost hunter is just a huuuuuuge victim of lawl of 5's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPDvEXS-71g&feature=fvst
Also, ESP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtlhjsiBEDw
Watch and be enlightened, or choose to believe in bullshit.
No skin off my back.
Anyone want a psychic reading? I only charge $200 for a genuine one.
I have seen and been touched by ghosts. I do not choose to believe, belief iin something is a thing that has not been seen or experienced. Please feel free to flame away.
Sure Charlie, I believe *you* have seen and been touched by ghosts, it doesn't mean though that there is any outside evidence that ghosts are real.
Personally, I used to read lots of books on ghosts stories and ghost hunting when I was a child.
I could of sworn I heard voices that weren't coming from anywhere, seeing things in the dark that were moving, and I did EVP tests which I found "ghostly" voices talking.
I grew up though and realised it was probably just my imagination because I was believed in ghosts, so I wanted to find evidence of them.
Ever since I came to that conclusion, I've never seen or heard a ghost again.
Hell, I even went on a "haunted" tour of melbourne once, being completely skeptical.
I found it funny other people were seeing the ghosts and jumping at every little sound while I remained calm and could only see evidence of natural activity.
Therefore, ghosts exist if you believe in them, and ghosts don't exist if you don't believe in them.
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 05:24:54 AM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:18:07 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 02:53:17 AM
To anyone who seriously believes in ghosts- Here's a video of famed mentalist derren brown investigating what a "Ghost hunter" does.
You'll soon see, the ghost hunter is just a huuuuuuge victim of lawl of 5's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPDvEXS-71g&feature=fvst
Also, ESP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtlhjsiBEDw
Watch and be enlightened, or choose to believe in bullshit.
No skin off my back.
Anyone want a psychic reading? I only charge $200 for a genuine one.
I have seen and been touched by ghosts. I do not choose to believe, belief iin something is a thing that has not been seen or experienced. Please feel free to flame away.
Sure Charlie, I believe *you* have seen and been touched by ghosts, it doesn't mean though that there is any outside evidence that ghosts are real.
Personally, I used to read lots of books on ghosts stories and ghost hunting when I was a child.
I could of sworn I heard voices that weren't coming from anywhere, seeing things in the dark that were moving, and I did EVP tests which I found "ghostly" voices talking.
I grew up though and realised it was probably just my imagination because I was believed in ghosts, so I wanted to find evidence of them.
Ever since I came to that conclusion, I've never seen or heard a ghost again.
Hell, I even went on a "haunted" tour of melbourne once, being completely skeptical.
I found it funny other people were seeing the ghosts and jumping at every little sound while I remained calm and could only see evidence of natural activity.
Therefore, ghosts exist if you believe in them, and ghosts don't exist if you don't believe in them.
Excuse me while me, my wife, 2 cats and one dog who actually saw such a thing try to convince ourselves that we were wrong.
My ex used to have a psychic phone thingy.
Hardest part was finding excuses to leave the room so not to laugh in her face when she went on talking about it.
EDIT: sorry now out of context
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:26:34 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 05:24:54 AM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:18:07 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 02:53:17 AM
To anyone who seriously believes in ghosts- Here's a video of famed mentalist derren brown investigating what a "Ghost hunter" does.
You'll soon see, the ghost hunter is just a huuuuuuge victim of lawl of 5's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPDvEXS-71g&feature=fvst
Also, ESP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtlhjsiBEDw
Watch and be enlightened, or choose to believe in bullshit.
No skin off my back.
Anyone want a psychic reading? I only charge $200 for a genuine one.
I have seen and been touched by ghosts. I do not choose to believe, belief iin something is a thing that has not been seen or experienced. Please feel free to flame away.
Sure Charlie, I believe *you* have seen and been touched by ghosts, it doesn't mean though that there is any outside evidence that ghosts are real.
Personally, I used to read lots of books on ghosts stories and ghost hunting when I was a child.
I could of sworn I heard voices that weren't coming from anywhere, seeing things in the dark that were moving, and I did EVP tests which I found "ghostly" voices talking.
I grew up though and realised it was probably just my imagination because I was believed in ghosts, so I wanted to find evidence of them.
Ever since I came to that conclusion, I've never seen or heard a ghost again.
Hell, I even went on a "haunted" tour of melbourne once, being completely skeptical.
I found it funny other people were seeing the ghosts and jumping at every little sound while I remained calm and could only see evidence of natural activity.
Therefore, ghosts exist if you believe in them, and ghosts don't exist if you don't believe in them.
Excuse me while me, my wife, 2 cats and one dog who actually saw such a thing try to convince ourselves that we were wrong.
Everyone else on the tour all saw the same ghosts too, you know, except for me. I must be supernaturally blind or something...
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on August 27, 2010, 05:27:41 AM
My ex used to have a psychic phone thingy.
Hardest part was finding excuses to leave the room so not to laugh in her face when she went on talking about it.
Well, I am just simply crazy then. Good to know.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:28:51 AM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on August 27, 2010, 05:27:41 AM
My ex used to have a psychic phone thingy.
Hardest part was finding excuses to leave the room so not to laugh in her face when she went on talking about it.
Well, I am just simply crazy then. Good to know.
I think everyone is crazy in some way
Anyway, I don't want to argue with you about this Charlie.
I accept that you want to believe in ghosts, please accept that I've never encountered or seen any real evidence personally that ghosts exist.
I may change my mind one day, but til then, I believe most supernatural things can be easily explained and put down to natural phenomena.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on August 27, 2010, 05:30:23 AM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:28:51 AM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on August 27, 2010, 05:27:41 AM
My ex used to have a psychic phone thingy.
Hardest part was finding excuses to leave the room so not to laugh in her face when she went on talking about it.
Well, I am just simply crazy then. Good to know.
I think everyone is crazy in some way
This.
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 05:24:54 AM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:18:07 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 02:53:17 AM
To anyone who seriously believes in ghosts- Here's a video of famed mentalist derren brown investigating what a "Ghost hunter" does.
You'll soon see, the ghost hunter is just a huuuuuuge victim of lawl of 5's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPDvEXS-71g&feature=fvst
Also, ESP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtlhjsiBEDw
Watch and be enlightened, or choose to believe in bullshit.
No skin off my back.
Anyone want a psychic reading? I only charge $200 for a genuine one.
I have seen and been touched by ghosts. I do not choose to believe, belief iin something is a thing that has not been seen or experienced. Please feel free to flame away.
Sure Charlie, I believe *you* have seen and been touched by ghosts, it doesn't mean though that there is any outside evidence that ghosts are real.
Personally, I used to read lots of books on ghosts stories and ghost hunting when I was a child.
I could of sworn I heard voices that weren't coming from anywhere, seeing things in the dark that were moving, and I did EVP tests which I found "ghostly" voices talking.
I grew up though and realised it was probably just my imagination because I was believed in ghosts, so I wanted to find evidence of them.
Ever since I came to that conclusion, I've never seen or heard a ghost again.
Hell, I even went on a "haunted" tour of melbourne once, being completely skeptical.
I found it funny other people were seeing the ghosts and jumping at every little sound while I remained calm and could only see evidence of natural activity.
Therefore, ghosts exist if you believe in them, and ghosts don't exist if you don't believe in them.
What? So two people, two cats and one dog with their eyes followed this person that wasn't there through the room. And it only exists because I choose to believe it?
After all these years I begin to realize that the 'open mindedness' of PD is a fucking myth.
[size=24]JERSEY SHORE[/size]
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:32:23 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 05:24:54 AM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:18:07 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 02:53:17 AM
To anyone who seriously believes in ghosts- Here's a video of famed mentalist derren brown investigating what a "Ghost hunter" does.
You'll soon see, the ghost hunter is just a huuuuuuge victim of lawl of 5's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPDvEXS-71g&feature=fvst
Also, ESP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtlhjsiBEDw
Watch and be enlightened, or choose to believe in bullshit.
No skin off my back.
Anyone want a psychic reading? I only charge $200 for a genuine one.
I have seen and been touched by ghosts. I do not choose to believe, belief iin something is a thing that has not been seen or experienced. Please feel free to flame away.
Sure Charlie, I believe *you* have seen and been touched by ghosts, it doesn't mean though that there is any outside evidence that ghosts are real.
Personally, I used to read lots of books on ghosts stories and ghost hunting when I was a child.
I could of sworn I heard voices that weren't coming from anywhere, seeing things in the dark that were moving, and I did EVP tests which I found "ghostly" voices talking.
I grew up though and realised it was probably just my imagination because I was believed in ghosts, so I wanted to find evidence of them.
Ever since I came to that conclusion, I've never seen or heard a ghost again.
Hell, I even went on a "haunted" tour of melbourne once, being completely skeptical.
I found it funny other people were seeing the ghosts and jumping at every little sound while I remained calm and could only see evidence of natural activity.
Therefore, ghosts exist if you believe in them, and ghosts don't exist if you don't believe in them.
What? So two people, two cats and one dog with their eyes followed this person that wasn't there through the room. And it only exists because I choose to believe it?
After all these years I begin to realize that the 'open mindedness' of PD is a fucking myth.
Please see two posts ago Charlie.
Quote from: cheezer on August 27, 2010, 05:33:29 AM
[size=24]JERSEY SHORE[/size]
Who the fuck are you and why are you going out of your way to piss me the fuck off? If you have something intelligent to add then do it, otherwise shut the fuck up.
I don't know, he's some jack-ass who thinks saying stupid shit is funny or something.
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 05:37:36 AM
I don't know, he's some jack-ass who thinks saying stupid shit is funny or something.
Good. I am in the perfect mood to eat this prick as a small snack. Want to troll me you sick fuck? Be damn sure. I have no mercy when it comes to the likes of you.
Tear him a new one Charlie, I don't have the patience for his shit either anymore.
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 05:41:47 AM
Tear him a new one Charlie, I don't have the patience for his shit either anymore.
Obviously some chickenshit little cunt. Come on dick, I need to hurt somebody tonight. I have recently outed one of the best trolls I have ever known. Are you ready for me?
Quote from: cheezer on August 27, 2010, 05:33:29 AM
[size=24]JERSEY SHORE[/size]
You are making 20 posts a day currently. So far none of them have any substance. Do you think you are being original? Do you think we haven't seen this before? DO YOU HAVE THE BALLS TO STAND UP AND DEBATE? Or will you simply continously to post in a drive by manner? Are you a coward?
See, nothing but a cowardly troll. AS PD we need to start a trolling school. Because these beginners are iving me a rash.
Cheezer's first post:
Quote from: cheezer on August 26, 2010, 07:32:40 AM
did this work
This post occured just after Major Gen. Kirby got banned.
When Sally showed up she posted this:
Quote from: sally on August 26, 2010, 08:22:58 AM
Hi,
I'm sally. I like timecube.
lolololol
I think cheezer is pretty kool but not as kool Maj Gen Franklin Kirby
Cheezer eventually said this:
Quote from: cheezer on August 26, 2010, 09:09:02 AM
It's pretty obvious that Sally is this Kirby guy, right?
I think that should fully explain who Cheezer is.
I don't care who he is, I feel the need. The need for speed. I haven't eaten a troll in a while. I am owed one.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 06:15:26 AM
I don't care who he is, I feel the need. The need for speed. I haven't eaten a troll in a while. I am owed one.
I've got my suspicions that Miss BeBe is probably also them. All yours dude.
Quote from: Doktor Blight on August 27, 2010, 06:13:33 AM
Cheezer's first post:
Quote from: cheezer on August 26, 2010, 07:32:40 AM
did this work
This post occured just after Major Gen. Kirby got banned.
When Sally showed up she posted this:
Quote from: sally on August 26, 2010, 08:22:58 AM
Hi,
I'm sally. I like timecube.
lolololol
I think cheezer is pretty kool but not as kool Maj Gen Franklin Kirby
Cheezer eventually said this:
Quote from: cheezer on August 26, 2010, 09:09:02 AM
It's pretty obvious that Sally is this Kirby guy, right?
I think that should fully explain who Cheezer is.
I dunno, I don't actually think Cheezer is that general guy, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Wish I had the ability to confirm these things.
From what I can tell, the Gen. person seems ok now in chat. If it really is him pulling this shit, it'll be the final straw.
Before we go jumping to conclusions, we should really wait and see what the mods have to say.
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 06:19:14 AM
Before we go jumping to conclusions, we should really wait and see what the mods have to say.
I base my actions on the posts of the individuals, not the mods findings.
It seems pretty fishy to me.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 06:23:34 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 06:19:14 AM
Before we go jumping to conclusions, we should really wait and see what the mods have to say.
I base my actions on the posts of the individuals, not the mods findings.
Oh no, by all means, call them on being assholes. Let them know we suspect they're the same person. But just watch your step being certain and accusing them of altishness, might regret it in the morning.
But otherwise, you don't have to listen to me, I'm just cautious about this kinda stuff, cus you know what they say about assuming.
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 06:28:24 AM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 06:23:34 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 06:19:14 AM
Before we go jumping to conclusions, we should really wait and see what the mods have to say.
I base my actions on the posts of the individuals, not the mods findings.
Oh no, by all means, call them on being assholes. Let them know we suspect they're the same person. But just watch your step being certain and accusing them of altishness, might regret it in the morning.
But otherwise, you don't have to listen to me, I'm just cautious about this kinda stuff, cus you know what they say about assuming.
If they want to play alts the they deserve it.
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 06:28:24 AM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 06:23:34 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 06:19:14 AM
Before we go jumping to conclusions, we should really wait and see what the mods have to say.
I base my actions on the posts of the individuals, not the mods findings.
Oh no, by all means, call them on being assholes. Let them know we suspect they're the same person. But just watch your step being certain and accusing them of altishness, might regret it in the morning.
But otherwise, you don't have to listen to me, I'm just cautious about this kinda stuff, cus you know what they say about assuming.
I don't think that I said that I was certain that they were the same person, just that I suspected. If I said otherwise, I have mispoken.
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 26, 2010, 09:33:09 PM
Everyone knows that the sun runs on coal.
Its an exploding tardis.
If cheezer is an alt, he's using a proxy. All of his posts are from the same IP and no other accounts have posted from that IP.
ETA: IP resolves to America, making it unlikely (though not impossible) to be a proxy.
I think he might just be a douche.
Quote from: Exit City Hustle on August 27, 2010, 02:41:52 PM
If cheezer is an alt, he's using a proxy. All of his posts are from the same IP and no other accounts have posted from that IP.
ETA: IP resolves to America, making it unlikely (though not impossible) to be a proxy.
I think he might just be a douche.
It's a she. And, by our standards, a kid.
Quote from: Apikoros II on August 26, 2010, 09:41:34 PM
Wow--- This has gotten very heavy, I was hoping for witty comments about phrenology and the Maya. I will ask though if people think Mithc McConnell is part reptile ala David Ickes and John McCain mostly Lizard?
Shut up. This isn't your thread anymore.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:32:23 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 05:24:54 AM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:18:07 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 02:53:17 AM
To anyone who seriously believes in ghosts- Here's a video of famed mentalist derren brown investigating what a "Ghost hunter" does.
You'll soon see, the ghost hunter is just a huuuuuuge victim of lawl of 5's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPDvEXS-71g&feature=fvst
Also, ESP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtlhjsiBEDw
Watch and be enlightened, or choose to believe in bullshit.
No skin off my back.
Anyone want a psychic reading? I only charge $200 for a genuine one.
I have seen and been touched by ghosts. I do not choose to believe, belief iin something is a thing that has not been seen or experienced. Please feel free to flame away.
Sure Charlie, I believe *you* have seen and been touched by ghosts, it doesn't mean though that there is any outside evidence that ghosts are real.
Personally, I used to read lots of books on ghosts stories and ghost hunting when I was a child.
I could of sworn I heard voices that weren't coming from anywhere, seeing things in the dark that were moving, and I did EVP tests which I found "ghostly" voices talking.
I grew up though and realised it was probably just my imagination because I was believed in ghosts, so I wanted to find evidence of them.
Ever since I came to that conclusion, I've never seen or heard a ghost again.
Hell, I even went on a "haunted" tour of melbourne once, being completely skeptical.
I found it funny other people were seeing the ghosts and jumping at every little sound while I remained calm and could only see evidence of natural activity.
Therefore, ghosts exist if you believe in them, and ghosts don't exist if you don't believe in them.
What? So two people, two cats and one dog with their eyes followed this person that wasn't there through the room. And it only exists because I choose to believe it?
Thats one of those situations where I try to think in ePrime. I've been in situations before where others AND myself see something that is not easily/possibly explained. Was it a ghost? Was it some kind of shared hallucination? I dunno. So I just consider it an experience and try not to give it an official label. Its particularly useful here cause if you use labels that have baggage people tend to focus on the baggage.
Quote
After all these years I begin to realize that the 'open mindedness' of PD is a fucking myth.
:lulz:
Welcome to the club.
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 27, 2010, 04:02:39 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:32:23 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 05:24:54 AM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:18:07 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 02:53:17 AM
To anyone who seriously believes in ghosts- Here's a video of famed mentalist derren brown investigating what a "Ghost hunter" does.
You'll soon see, the ghost hunter is just a huuuuuuge victim of lawl of 5's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPDvEXS-71g&feature=fvst
Also, ESP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtlhjsiBEDw
Watch and be enlightened, or choose to believe in bullshit.
No skin off my back.
Anyone want a psychic reading? I only charge $200 for a genuine one.
I have seen and been touched by ghosts. I do not choose to believe, belief iin something is a thing that has not been seen or experienced. Please feel free to flame away.
Sure Charlie, I believe *you* have seen and been touched by ghosts, it doesn't mean though that there is any outside evidence that ghosts are real.
Personally, I used to read lots of books on ghosts stories and ghost hunting when I was a child.
I could of sworn I heard voices that weren't coming from anywhere, seeing things in the dark that were moving, and I did EVP tests which I found "ghostly" voices talking.
I grew up though and realised it was probably just my imagination because I was believed in ghosts, so I wanted to find evidence of them.
Ever since I came to that conclusion, I've never seen or heard a ghost again.
Hell, I even went on a "haunted" tour of melbourne once, being completely skeptical.
I found it funny other people were seeing the ghosts and jumping at every little sound while I remained calm and could only see evidence of natural activity.
Therefore, ghosts exist if you believe in them, and ghosts don't exist if you don't believe in them.
What? So two people, two cats and one dog with their eyes followed this person that wasn't there through the room. And it only exists because I choose to believe it?
Thats one of those situations where I try to think in ePrime. I've been in situations before where others AND myself see something that is not easily/possibly explained. Was it a ghost? Was it some kind of shared hallucination? I dunno. So I just consider it an experience and try not to give it an official label. Its particularly useful here cause if you use labels that have baggage people tend to focus on the baggage.
Quote
After all these years I begin to realize that the 'open mindedness' of PD is a fucking myth.
:lulz:
Welcome to the club.
But if it fits the basic description of a ghost, why not call it a ghost for simplicity anyway? It's a good term for what Charley saw. He doesn't have to go into an explanation of how ghosts work for the basic term to work.
Quote from: Doktor Blight on August 27, 2010, 04:10:14 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on August 27, 2010, 04:02:39 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:32:23 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 05:24:54 AM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:18:07 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on August 27, 2010, 02:53:17 AM
To anyone who seriously believes in ghosts- Here's a video of famed mentalist derren brown investigating what a "Ghost hunter" does.
You'll soon see, the ghost hunter is just a huuuuuuge victim of lawl of 5's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPDvEXS-71g&feature=fvst
Also, ESP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtlhjsiBEDw
Watch and be enlightened, or choose to believe in bullshit.
No skin off my back.
Anyone want a psychic reading? I only charge $200 for a genuine one.
I have seen and been touched by ghosts. I do not choose to believe, belief iin something is a thing that has not been seen or experienced. Please feel free to flame away.
Sure Charlie, I believe *you* have seen and been touched by ghosts, it doesn't mean though that there is any outside evidence that ghosts are real.
Personally, I used to read lots of books on ghosts stories and ghost hunting when I was a child.
I could of sworn I heard voices that weren't coming from anywhere, seeing things in the dark that were moving, and I did EVP tests which I found "ghostly" voices talking.
I grew up though and realised it was probably just my imagination because I was believed in ghosts, so I wanted to find evidence of them.
Ever since I came to that conclusion, I've never seen or heard a ghost again.
Hell, I even went on a "haunted" tour of melbourne once, being completely skeptical.
I found it funny other people were seeing the ghosts and jumping at every little sound while I remained calm and could only see evidence of natural activity.
Therefore, ghosts exist if you believe in them, and ghosts don't exist if you don't believe in them.
What? So two people, two cats and one dog with their eyes followed this person that wasn't there through the room. And it only exists because I choose to believe it?
Thats one of those situations where I try to think in ePrime. I've been in situations before where others AND myself see something that is not easily/possibly explained. Was it a ghost? Was it some kind of shared hallucination? I dunno. So I just consider it an experience and try not to give it an official label. Its particularly useful here cause if you use labels that have baggage people tend to focus on the baggage.
Quote
After all these years I begin to realize that the 'open mindedness' of PD is a fucking myth.
:lulz:
Welcome to the club.
But if it fits the basic description of a ghost, why not call it a ghost for simplicity anyway? It's a good term for what Charley saw. He doesn't have to go into an explanation of how ghosts work for the basic term to work.
Well, if it was he and I talking, I would be cool with that. But at PD.com, using labels that have baggage lead to people pointing and laughing. Having been on the receiving end of that many times, I was just offering my perspective. (See my threads on magic, sigils, egrigores etc which always devolve into people screaming about the words rather than discussing the ideas)...
Its just how this tribe rolls....
I was screaming about the ideas, personally.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 04:30:07 PM
I was screaming about the ideas, personally.
What ideas?
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 04:34:30 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 04:30:07 PM
I was screaming about the ideas, personally.
What ideas?
Quotemagic, sigils, egrigores etc
On the subject of ghosts, I personally don't believe they exist, but that's just belief. There is no evidence to support their existence that has satisfied me.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 04:37:15 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 04:34:30 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 04:30:07 PM
I was screaming about the ideas, personally.
What ideas?
Quotemagic, sigils, egrigores etc
On the subject of ghosts, I personally don't believe they exist, but that's just belief. There is no evidence to support their existence that has satisfied me.
I can understand that. I always say the only people who don't believe in ghosts are the ones who have never seen one. :lulz:
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 04:40:30 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 04:37:15 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 04:34:30 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 04:30:07 PM
I was screaming about the ideas, personally.
What ideas?
Quotemagic, sigils, egrigores etc
On the subject of ghosts, I personally don't believe they exist, but that's just belief. There is no evidence to support their existence that has satisfied me.
I can understand that. I always say the only people who don't believe in ghosts are the ones who have never seen one. :lulz:
Well, there's a few problems with them. For example, if you can't see them, they're blind. If they walk through walls, then they can't interact with us in any fashion. Poor sort of ghost, if you ask me.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 04:41:48 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 04:40:30 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 04:37:15 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 04:34:30 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 04:30:07 PM
I was screaming about the ideas, personally.
What ideas?
Quotemagic, sigils, egrigores etc
On the subject of ghosts, I personally don't believe they exist, but that's just belief. There is no evidence to support their existence that has satisfied me.
I can understand that. I always say the only people who don't believe in ghosts are the ones who have never seen one. :lulz:
Well, there's a few problems with them. For example, if you can't see them, they're blind. If they walk through walls, then they can't interact with us in any fashion. Poor sort of ghost, if you ask me.
I prefer that kind over the ones who throw shit at you. Yes, had that happen several times as well.
Where did that kid troll go?
I have bottled up hate issues.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 04:37:15 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 04:34:30 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 04:30:07 PM
I was screaming about the ideas, personally.
What ideas?
Quotemagic, sigils, egrigores etc
On the subject of ghosts, I personally don't believe they exist, but that's just belief. There is no evidence to support their existence that has satisfied me.
You've never experienced any form of odd (shared) audio irregularity?
My personal unexplained one which my family label as ghosts was a sound, it was the sound of someone walking down the stairs.
It would happen a few times every day, the sound of a thump that was most definitely coming from each stairs you could even hear which direction it was going up or down and count the number of steps to match the noise.
Its not a ghost story, its just something bizarre I could never explain.
Quote from: Faust on August 27, 2010, 04:53:35 PM
You've never experienced any form of odd (shared) audio irregularity?
Of course I have. I think most people have.
Doesn't mean there's ghosts. It meant you heard something that you couldn't positively identify. Maybe ghosts, maybe something more prosaic.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 05:00:18 PM
Quote from: Faust on August 27, 2010, 04:53:35 PM
You've never experienced any form of odd (shared) audio irregularity?
Of course I have. I think most people have.
Doesn't mean there's ghosts. It meant you heard something that you couldn't positively identify. Maybe ghosts, maybe something more prosaic.
Like irregular expansion/contraction of shit...
Quote from: Secret Level on August 27, 2010, 05:02:35 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 27, 2010, 05:00:18 PM
Quote from: Faust on August 27, 2010, 04:53:35 PM
You've never experienced any form of odd (shared) audio irregularity?
Of course I have. I think most people have.
Doesn't mean there's ghosts. It meant you heard something that you couldn't positively identify. Maybe ghosts, maybe something more prosaic.
Like irregular expansion/contraction of shit...
Sure. I don't deny the existence of ghosts, though. I just haven't personally seen any first hand or properly documented evidence that leads me to believe they exist.
Maybe it's not ghosts at all, maybe it's just god trolling.
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:51:39 PM
Maybe it's not ghosts at all, maybe it's just god trolling.
If we consider the Dok Howl "Malevolent God" theory, this becomes fairly plausible.
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 27, 2010, 06:22:02 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:51:39 PM
Maybe it's not ghosts at all, maybe it's just god trolling.
If we consider the Dok Howl "Malevolent God" theory, this becomes fairly plausible.
Point.
Here is an essay by Neil deGrasse Tyson about all the things you can find out about the shape, orbit and gravity of the Earth, using only a stick hammered into the ground:
http://www.haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/read/2003/03/01/stick-in-the-mud-astronomy
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 27, 2010, 06:22:02 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:51:39 PM
Maybe it's not ghosts at all, maybe it's just god trolling.
If we consider the Dok Howl "Malevolent God" theory, this becomes fairly plausible.
What theory is this?
Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 28, 2010, 12:26:04 AM
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 27, 2010, 06:22:02 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:51:39 PM
Maybe it's not ghosts at all, maybe it's just god trolling.
If we consider the Dok Howl "Malevolent God" theory, this becomes fairly plausible.
What theory is this?
http://trotsky311.xanga.com/329025430/item/
"Hypothesis - If god exists, it is a god that hates you."
Makes sense to me :roll:
Quote from: nekk on August 28, 2010, 05:49:17 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 28, 2010, 12:26:04 AM
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 27, 2010, 06:22:02 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:51:39 PM
Maybe it's not ghosts at all, maybe it's just god trolling.
If we consider the Dok Howl "Malevolent God" theory, this becomes fairly plausible.
What theory is this?
http://trotsky311.xanga.com/329025430/item/
"Hypothesis - If god exists, it is a god that hates you."
Makes sense to me :roll:
If you're going to go theistic, it's the only thing that makes sense other than apatheism or polytheism.
There are plenty of other options off the top of my head, actual creation myths include:
There are two gods, and only one of them hates you.
An insane aborted fetus made the world, God came in to clean up the mess afterward.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 28, 2010, 07:17:17 AM
There are plenty of other options off the top of my head, actual creation myths include:
There are two gods, and only one of them hates you.
An insane aborted fetus made the world, God came in to clean up the mess afterward.
Those still count, technically, as polytheism. The poly just happens to be 2.
Quote from: nekk on August 28, 2010, 05:49:17 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 28, 2010, 12:26:04 AM
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 27, 2010, 06:22:02 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:51:39 PM
Maybe it's not ghosts at all, maybe it's just god trolling.
If we consider the Dok Howl "Malevolent God" theory, this becomes fairly plausible.
What theory is this?
http://trotsky311.xanga.com/329025430/item/
"Hypothesis - If god exists, it is a god that hates you."
Makes sense to me :roll:
Don't fucking answer for me. You were fucking wrong anyway.
Goddammit.
In that case might I request the correct answer?
Just to keep the weird shit theme going, here is a VERY NSFW sent to me of more unusual doing in the NYC Subway System: http://nyc.barstoolsports.com/random-thoughts/just-some-chick-getting-eaten-out-on-the-4-train-nsfw/
Quote from: nekk on August 28, 2010, 05:49:17 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on August 28, 2010, 12:26:04 AM
Quote from: Doktor Alphapance on August 27, 2010, 06:22:02 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 27, 2010, 05:51:39 PM
Maybe it's not ghosts at all, maybe it's just god trolling.
If we consider the Dok Howl "Malevolent God" theory, this becomes fairly plausible.
What theory is this?
http://trotsky311.xanga.com/329025430/item/
"Hypothesis - If god exists, it is a god that hates you."
Makes sense to me :roll:
I forgot about that one. Must be where my husband got his theory that if there's a god, it's a child that uses humans as its playthings.
RE the video.
How is exhibitionism or just not caring in away way weird? I'm fairly certain those are pretty standard characteristics in this day in age.