## The POPE against..........

Hot topics in delusion and rationalization.
thaiboxerken
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 9:51 pm
Location: Oregon, and it rocks!
Carlos to Latin wa baka desu, ne?
Carlos is on my ignore list.
Carlos
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 10:40 pm
Pyrrho wrote: Yes, they educate. It is an educational foundation.
Are they educating people to be skeptic the way his leader is?
Pyrrho wrote: Yes, James Randi, leader of the JREF, is a skeptic.
If James Randi is a skeptic , are the belief and faith in GOD compatible with skepticism?
Pyrrho wrote: Yes, this board is related to skepticism.
Of course it is . It is a "community" formed at the JREF forum.
Pyrrho wrote: A complicated question. There are users here who also post at the JREF Forum. There are users here who are probably members of the JREF. This site exists because the JREF Forum will be eliminating parts of itself that it does not want. Other than that, there is no relation between this forum and the JREF. The JREF does not own this forum, nor does it administer this forum. The JREF itself has nothing to do with this forum.
But it is stilll a "community" formed around James Randi and the JREF.
You forgot to tell the people that also donate money to the JREF , buy merchandise related to the JREF and go to the annual reunion TAM.

Pyrrho wrote: Some of them are, some of them are not.
Most of the members until now are related to the JREF forum.
Which mmebers do you think are not related to the JREF forum until now?
Less than five? More than five?
Pyrrho wrote: I do not know. Why don't you post a poll and ask them?
If you don't know if the majority of members are supporters of the ideas of James Randi /JREF , then I am missing something.
Are you a supporter?
Do you believe in the results of polls ?, I mean this kind of "skeptics" polls.
Pyrrho wrote:
Mr. Randi/JREF in the official page of the JREF said this

http://www.randi.org/jr/050903.html
Can a person be both a skeptic and a person of faith?

The answer is, Mr. Randi and I agree, a resounding YES.

Is Faith something paranormal and /or supernatural?
You have not defined "faith", but I assume you mean "faith in God". Faith is the combination of human emotion and intellect. It is neither paranormal nor supernatural. It is human.
JREF/Randi and Hal were the ones who defined faith. Under that concept was my question directed.

Pyrrho wrote: It is a personal decision. I would not call it skepticism; however, if a person has faith yet continues to question his faith, he is practicing skepticism.
Faith in God is faith in GOD, under that circunstances that faith don't need to question the existence of God. Is the principle of all religions.
Pyrrho wrote: A person may have developed "faith" as a result of skeptical questioning of his beliefs, thoughts, and outside events. Again, if one continues to question one's faith, one may still be practicing skepticism. This can be considered natural.
Maybe your response is not related to my question. Or my question was not clear enough.
Since Faith in God is natural , is God paranormal or supernatural?
Pyrrho wrote: Some people never question their faith. This is called "true belief". Others question their faith, whether that faith is in God or in science.
We are talking about people with Faith in God. A "true belief" according to some "skeptick" ideas.
Pyrrho wrote:
Are not they promoting, given their own example, to be a person of faith and also an skeptic?
That's pretty much what Hal Bidlack says in his article.
Then you agree they(JREF) are promoting to be a person a faith and also an skeptic.
Pyrrho wrote: The consequences are that people such as you will complain about it. Also, that the JREF might not be seen as an organization that promotes atheism. which it isn't.
Are you telling us that James Randi is not an atheist and that maybe this is a kind of strategy that will reach donations from true believers?

Thanks,
Carlos
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Yes, they educate. It is an educational foundation.
Are they educating people to be skeptic the way his leader is?
I don't know.
Pyrrho wrote: Yes, James Randi, leader of the JREF, is a skeptic.
If James Randi is a skeptic , are the belief and faith in GOD compatible with skepticism?
The second part of your question is not conditional upon the first. Whether or not James Randi is a skeptic, belief and faith in God are incompatible with skepticism.
Pyrrho wrote: Yes, this board is related to skepticism.
Of course it is . It is a "community" formed at the JREF forum.
This forum is the bastard child of a misbegotten notion to excise content that the JREF does not like from the JREF Forum. This forum has no official ties to the JREF. If by "community" you mean a group of people who post on the forum, some are skeptics and some are not skeptics. It is not a "skeptics only" forum; the JREF Forum is not a "skeptics only" forum either.
Pyrrho wrote: A complicated question. There are users here who also post at the JREF Forum. There are users here who are probably members of the JREF. This site exists because the JREF Forum will be eliminating parts of itself that it does not want. Other than that, there is no relation between this forum and the JREF. The JREF does not own this forum, nor does it administer this forum. The JREF itself has nothing to do with this forum.
But it is stilll a "community" formed around James Randi and the JREF.
You forgot to tell the people that also donate money to the JREF , buy merchandise related to the JREF and go to the annual reunion TAM.
The JREF Forum is the "community formed around James Randi and the JREF". This "community" exists because it is no longer wanted by the JREF. What's this "you forgot" business? That wasn't part of your question.
Pyrrho wrote: Some of them are, some of them are not.
Most of the members until now are related to the JREF forum.
Which mmebers do you think are not related to the JREF forum until now?
Less than five? More than five?
I don't know. I won't guess. People from the JREF Forum are here because on July 8 they will not be able to post content at the JREF Forum that does not fit the undefined criteria of the "JREF Mission". The content we post has been defined as being unrelated to the JREF Mission, so how can this forum be related to the JREF? The JREF does not want to be related to this forum.
Pyrrho wrote: I do not know. Why don't you post a poll and ask them?
If you don't know if the majority of members are supporters of the ideas of James Randi /JREF , then I am missing something.
Are you a supporter?
Do you believe in the results of polls ?, I mean this kind of "skeptics" polls.
I believe in asking the right people the right questions. If you want to know what people here think, post a poll. Why make me a spokesman for other people? Why should I know if they support the JREF or not? Ask them yourself if you truly want the answer.
Pyrrho wrote:
Mr. Randi/JREF in the official page of the JREF said this

http://www.randi.org/jr/050903.html
Can a person be both a skeptic and a person of faith?

The answer is, Mr. Randi and I agree, a resounding YES.

Is Faith something paranormal and /or supernatural?
You have not defined "faith", but I assume you mean "faith in God". Faith is the combination of human emotion and intellect. It is neither paranormal nor supernatural. It is human.
JREF/Randi and Hal were the ones who defined faith. Under that concept was my question directed.
I answered your question. Faith in god is not paranormal or supernatural. It is uniquely human behavior.
Pyrrho wrote: It is a personal decision. I would not call it skepticism; however, if a person has faith yet continues to question his faith, he is practicing skepticism.
Faith in God is faith in GOD, under that circunstances that faith don't need to question the existence of God. Is the principle of all religions.
Faith is not permanent. People lose faith all the time, every day. It is just as subject to question as any other human behavior.
Pyrrho wrote: A person may have developed "faith" as a result of skeptical questioning of his beliefs, thoughts, and outside events. Again, if one continues to question one's faith, one may still be practicing skepticism. This can be considered natural.
Maybe your response is not related to my question. Or my question was not clear enough.
Since Faith in God is natural , is God paranormal or supernatural?
That was not the question you asked. I did answer the question you did ask. As to this question, "Is God paranormal or supernatural?" I can only say that I do not know, because I do not know if God exists. If for the sake of discussion we assume that God does exist, we see that God is paradoxical -- in order to exist, God must be natural...and in order to exist, God must be supernatural. We could spin around the paradox indefinitely and never come to a conclusion.

For my own part, I think God is a figment of human imagination, and is thus merely natural, and does not objectively exist outside of the human imagination.
Pyrrho wrote: Some people never question their faith. This is called "true belief". Others question their faith, whether that faith is in God or in science.
We are talking about people with Faith in God. A "true belief" according to some "skeptick" ideas.
Some people never question their Faith in God. This is called "true belief." Others question their Faith in God, even if they have not discarded their Faith in God. Questioning your faith is skepticism.
Pyrrho wrote:
Are not they promoting, given their own example, to be a person of faith and also an skeptic?
That's pretty much what Hal Bidlack says in his article.
Then you agree they(JREF) are promoting to be a person a faith and also an skeptic.
I am agreeing that that is pretty much what Hal Bidlack says in his article. It is an article containing his opinions; it is no more a promotion of faith in God than Randi's opinions about religion are a promotion of atheism. They are merely opinions. Promoting something requires more activity than writing opinions. For example, selling books about atheism could be considered promotion of atheism; selling books about deism could be considered promotion of deism. The JREF does not do either of those things, or other similar promotion activities.
Pyrrho wrote: The consequences are that people such as you will complain about it. Also, that the JREF might not be seen as an organization that promotes atheism. which it isn't.
Are you telling us that James Randi is not an atheist and that maybe this is a kind of strategy that will reach donations from true believers?

Thanks,
Carlos
I do not know if James Randi is an atheist. The JREF is more than James Randi. Its stated purposes do not contain language that promotes atheism. Its activities do not include actions that promote atheism. Its purpose is to promote critical thinking about the paranormal, the normal, and other things, not just about religion or God.

If James Randi wanted donations from true believers, he'd probably start a church. You're speculating, Carlos. Be careful -- someone might think you were a skeptic.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Carlos
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 10:40 pm
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Yes, they educate. It is an educational foundation.
Are they educating people to be skeptic the way his leader is?
I don't know.
You don't know if the leader' ideas are the examples of any organization?
You don't know if a skeptic like James Randi , leader of the JREF don't pretend to form and educate people under an skeptical point of view?

Pyrrho wrote: The second part of your question is not conditional upon the first. Whether or not James Randi is a skeptic, belief and faith in God are incompatible with skepticism.
Then, their own quote is incompatible with skepticism.
Pyrrho wrote: This forum is the bastard child of a misbegotten notion to excise content that the JREF does not like from the JREF Forum. This forum has no official ties to the JREF. If by "community" you mean a group of people who post on the forum, some are skeptics and some are not skeptics. It is not a "skeptics only" forum; the JREF Forum is not a "skeptics only" forum either.
Yes , sometimes I see this forum as a bastard child of the JREF forum.
Sometimes I see it like an aborted child .
Anyway is a community formed at the JREF forum.
Pyrrho wrote: The JREF Forum is the "community formed around James Randi and the JREF". This "community" exists because it is no longer wanted by the JREF. What's this "you forgot" business? That wasn't part of your question.

Since you wrote this :"There are users here who also post at the JREF Forum. There are users here who are probably members of the JREF. This site exists because the JREF Forum will be eliminating parts of itself that it does not want."
Then I just added this :You forgot to tell that are also members that donate money to the JREF , buy merchandise related to the JREF and go to the annual reunion JREF TAM.
Pyrrho wrote: I don't know. I won't guess. People from the JREF Forum are here because on July 8 they will not be able to post content at the JREF Forum that does not fit the undefined criteria of the "JREF Mission". The content we post has been defined as being unrelated to the JREF Mission, so how can this forum be related to the JREF? The JREF does not want to be related to this forum.
It is related in the way the same posters now here were part of the JREF forum.
Pyrrho wrote:
If you don't know if the majority of members are supporters of the ideas of James Randi /JREF , then I am missing something.
Are you a supporter?
Do you believe in the results of polls ?, I mean this kind of "skeptics" polls.
I believe in asking the right people the right questions. If you want to know what people here think, post a poll. Why make me a spokesman for other people? Why should I know if they support the JREF or not? Ask them yourself if you truly want the answer.
You didn't anwer my questions.
Pyrrho wrote: Faith is not permanent. People lose faith all the time, every day. It is just as subject to question as any other human behavior.
Is skepticism other human behavior?
If it is so , can you lose it all the time?
Pyrrho wrote:
Maybe your response is not related to my question. Or my question was not clear enough.
Since Faith in God is natural , is God paranormal or supernatural?
That was not the question you asked. I did answer the question you did ask. As to this question, "Is God paranormal or supernatural?" I can only say that I do not know, because I do not know if God exists. If for the sake of discussion we assume that God does exist, we see that God is paradoxical -- in order to exist, God must be natural...and in order to exist, God must be supernatural. We could spin around the paradox indefinitely and never come to a conclusion.
I already told you that maybe my question was not clear enough.
But now your answer telling us you don't know what God is (paranormal or supernatural without evidence ), under an skeptic point of view , can be interpretated that you are asumming that God is real and natural.

For the real skeptics , God is something that has no proof.
For the ones who have Faith in God , God is something that vcan not be questioned.
Pyrrho wrote: For my own part, I think God is a figment of human imagination, and is thus merely natural, and does not objectively exist outside of the human imagination.

Here is something that can be interpretated as a double speech from a confessed skeptic like you. Read the above.
Pyrrho wrote: I am agreeing that that is pretty much what Hal Bidlack says in his article. It is an article containing his opinions; it is no more a promotion of faith in God than Randi's opinions about religion are a promotion of atheism. They are merely opinions. Promoting something requires more activity than writing opinions. For example, selling books about atheism could be considered promotion of atheism; selling books about deism could be considered promotion of deism. The JREF does not do either of those things, or other similar promotion activities..
When an article on the official page of the JREF , states what their main leaders think , then it is a promotion.
Pyrrho wrote:
Are you telling us that James Randi is not an atheist and that maybe this is a kind of strategy that will reach donations from true believers?
I do not know if James Randi is an atheist. The JREF is more than James Randi. Its stated purposes do not contain language that promotes atheism. Its activities do not include actions that promote atheism. Its purpose is to promote critical thinking about the paranormal, the normal, and other things, not just about religion or God.

If James Randi wanted donations from true believers, he'd probably start a church. You're speculating, Carlos. Be careful -- someone might think you were a skeptic.
The JREF is formed around the main figure of James Randi. He is the leader and the main representant of the JREF.
He is a confessed athiest skeptic telling you that a person can be both a skeptic and a person of faith......in God.

James Randi/JREF doesn't need a church to collect donations or to sell merchandise or souvenirs. It is called the JREF. The strategies are different , the results are the same.

Thanks,
Carlos
latinijral
Posts: 488
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 3:27 am
Carlos wrote:
MRC_Hans wrote:I will make an exception and answer a Carlos post:

Carlos, there is no contradiction between faith and scepticism, quite the contrary.

To say "I have faith in this" means "I do not know, but I choose to accept this"; a true skeptical stance.

In contrast, believers say "I know this is so". That is not a skeptical stance because without proof, you cannot know.

Comprendes?

Hans
Hi MRC Hans :
I know that when things are getting diffcult to the JREFers you need to come in their rescue. Besides you are another JREFer.
I understand that your ignore buttom just make you be more curious.

The point here is that FAITH in something that you pray to obtain something.

That something that you pray to , is ( under the skeptic perspective ), unknown , something without any evidence or proof of existence , something not scientifically explained , something that has to be questioned.

Yes , we are talking about that kind of Faith.
http://www.randi.org/jr/050903.html

Then that FAITH is a true belief.

So please tell me . under what circunstances you accept that a true believer is also an skeptic?
Can a person be both a skeptic and a person of faith?

The answer is, Mr. Randi and I agree, a resounding YES.
We have already Thaiboxerken point of view , he is in disagree with the JREF "skeptical" announce.
I understand his bad/insulting style , since I was the one who was questioning him and made him think.

What it counts is how SKEPTICISM can easily be involved in a double speech.

Are you saying that you completely agree with the "skeptical" position of the JREF regarding that kind of faith?

What about the persons that thinks that is just a marketing strategy in order to collect money from true believers(aka woo woos)?
Is that an honest position?

Theres is a difference about being sceptic and being skeptic.

I hope you "comprende".

Thanks,
Carlos
To Carlos and Pyrro: ..in the copy of Kramers letter I see in the left column a board of advisors:

ASTROLOGY
Geofre Dean (Australia)
ASTRONOMY
Jack Horkheitmer (Florida)
ASTROPHYISICS
Javier Amentler (Spain)
CHEMISTRY
Rolf Manne (Norway)
EDUCATION
Ricahrd Dawkins (England)
ELECTRONICS
Giles-Maurice (Belgium)
FORENsics
Alexander Jason (Califormia)
ORGANIC CHEMISTRY
Luigi Garlasshelli (Itlay)
PHYSICS
Robert Park (Maryland)
STATISTICS
Chip Denman (Maryland)
UFO AUTHORITY
Rovert Sheaffer (San Jose California

FOREINGN REPRESENTATIVES
Massimo Pedorro (Italy)[/quote]
I love you all !!!
Pure skeptic
Doctor X
Posts: 73562
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
TaiKickboxerKen-San:

Hontõ desu!

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out." – Don
DocX: FTW. – sparks
"Doctor X wins again." – Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry." – His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone." – clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far." – Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig." – Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power." – asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." – gnome

WS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X6!!!!!!
MRC_Hans
Posts: 519
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Denmark
Carlos wrote:

Hi MRC Hans :
I know that when things are getting diffcult to the JREFers you need to come in their rescue.

Thank you, but you overestimate my importance. However, I don't see the JREFers in any kind of trouble. Certainly not from you.

Besides you are another JREFer.

Depends on your definition of a JREFer.

I understand that your ignore buttom just make you be more curious.

It is for my convinience. I'm not a slave of it, however.

The point here is that FAITH in something that you pray to obtain something.

That is not my definiton of faith.

That something that you pray to , is ( under the skeptic perspective ), unknown , something without any evidence or proof of existence , something not scientifically explained , something that has to be questioned.

Faith is when you choose to accept something even if you have not seen evidence. This can be because you simply want to, or because you assume that evidence does exist, or no doubt other reasons. Praying has nothing to do with it.

So please tell me . under what circunstances you accept that a true believer is also an skeptic?

Having faith is not the same as being a "true believer". But, of course it is possible to be a true beleiver in some things and a skeptic about others.

For instance, even ardent true believers are usually hard-core skeptics when it comes to buying a used car .

What about the persons that thinks that is just a marketing strategy in order to collect money from true believers(aka woo woos)?
Is that an honest position?

Ehh? Who is collecting money from woowoos? What on earth are you talking about??

Theres is a difference about being sceptic and being skeptic.

Not according to my dictionary.

I hope you "comprende".

?????

Thanks,
Carlos
Frankly, I think you are getting weirder and weirder.

Hans
[i]Fly pretty, anyone can fly safe...[/i]
Carlos
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 10:40 pm
MRC_Hans wrote:
Thank you, but you overestimate my importance. However, I don't see the JREFers in any kind of trouble. Certainly not from you.
Since you claimed I were in your ignore list. is this your second post to me after you put me in ignore?
MRC_Hans wrote: Depends on your definition of a JREFer.
A JREF er is a JREF er. You tell us what kind do you think you are.
MRC_Hans wrote: It is for my convinience. I'm not a slave of it, however.
I know you read all my posts . And I know you always like to claim I am in your ignore list.

MRC_Hans wrote: Faith is when you choose to accept something even if you have not seen evidence. This can be because you simply want to, or because you assume that evidence does exist, or no doubt other reasons. Praying has nothing to do with it.
People that has faith ..........prays to the "unknown".
And you know what kind of faith we are talking about.
MRC_Hans wrote: For instance, even ardent true believers are usually hard-core skeptics when it comes to buying a used car
Don't mix skepticism with scepticism.
MRC_Hans wrote: Ehh? Who is collecting money from woowoos? What on earth are you talking about??
Under a skeptic "definition" , what is a person who prays to something that has not a evidence? It is "woo woo" the way you prefer to call them or not?

Thanks,
Carlos
Skeeve
Posts: 13375
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:35 am
Carlos wrote:Under a skeptic "definition" , what is a person who prays to something that has not a evidence? It is "woo woo" the way you prefer to call them or not?

Thanks,
Carlos
Yes, he's mean. Really, really mean.

Carlos, why are you mean?

Why do you play pretend skeptic?

Why don't you just take your lens flare and go home? Everybody, even me, now, can tell what you're on about.
Then Skank Of America could start in...
MRC_Hans
Posts: 519
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Denmark
Carlos wrote:
MRC_Hans wrote:
Thank you, but you overestimate my importance. However, I don't see the JREFers in any kind of trouble. Certainly not from you.
Since you claimed I were in your ignore list. is this your second post to me after you put me in ignore?
Once I engage in a discussion, I find it most polite to conduct it to some kind of conclusion, no matter whom the other part is.
MRC_Hans wrote: Depends on your definition of a JREFer.
A JREF er is a JREF er. You tell us what kind do you think you are.
MRC_Hans wrote: It is for my convinience. I'm not a slave of it, however.
I know you read all my posts . And I know you always like to claim I am in your ignore list.
MRC_Hans wrote: Faith is when you choose to accept something even if you have not seen evidence. This can be because you simply want to, or because you assume that evidence does exist, or no doubt other reasons. Praying has nothing to do with it.
People that has faith ..........prays to the "unknown".
And you know what kind of faith we are talking about.
I dont see what praying has to do with it. And I'm not going to play guessing games with you.
MRC_Hans wrote: For instance, even ardent true believers are usually hard-core skeptics when it comes to buying a used car
Don't mix skepticism with scepticism.
In my dictionary, there is no difference between the two words.
MRC_Hans wrote: Ehh? Who is collecting money from woowoos? What on earth are you talking about??
Under a skeptic "definition" , what is a person who prays to something that has not a evidence? It is "woo woo" the way you prefer to call them or not?
You don't make sense.

Thanks,
Carlos[/quote]

Hans
[i]Fly pretty, anyone can fly safe...[/i]
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Yes, they educate. It is an educational foundation.
Are they educating people to be skeptic the way his leader is?
I don't know.
You don't know if the leader' ideas are the examples of any organization?
You don't know if a skeptic like James Randi , leader of the JREF don't pretend to form and educate people under an skeptical point of view?
I don't know if the JREF is educating people to be the kind of skeptic James Randi is, because I have not attended any of their seminars, I have not attended any of the "Amaz!ng Meetings", I have not purchased any of their books, and so on. I do not know.

You appear to be asking rhetorical questions. If you have statements to make, make them. Asking me rhetorical questions won't work.
Pyrrho wrote: The second part of your question is not conditional upon the first. Whether or not James Randi is a skeptic, belief and faith in God are incompatible with skepticism.
Then, their own quote is incompatible with skepticism.
Which quote is that? Who is "they"?
Pyrrho wrote: This forum is the bastard child of a misbegotten notion to excise content that the JREF does not like from the JREF Forum. This forum has no official ties to the JREF. If by "community" you mean a group of people who post on the forum, some are skeptics and some are not skeptics. It is not a "skeptics only" forum; the JREF Forum is not a "skeptics only" forum either.
Yes , sometimes I see this forum as a bastard child of the JREF forum.
Sometimes I see it like an aborted child .
Anyway is a community formed at the JREF forum.
More or less. Come July 8, there will be no "community" at the JREF Forum.
Pyrrho wrote: The JREF Forum is the "community formed around James Randi and the JREF". This "community" exists because it is no longer wanted by the JREF. What's this "you forgot" business? That wasn't part of your question.

Since you wrote this :"There are users here who also post at the JREF Forum. There are users here who are probably members of the JREF. This site exists because the JREF Forum will be eliminating parts of itself that it does not want."
Then I just added this :You forgot to tell that are also members that donate money to the JREF , buy merchandise related to the JREF and go to the annual reunion JREF TAM.
Do not put words in my mouth, Carlos. Say what you have to say, but don't pretend that it is I who must say it. Be honest.
Pyrrho wrote: I don't know. I won't guess. People from the JREF Forum are here because on July 8 they will not be able to post content at the JREF Forum that does not fit the undefined criteria of the "JREF Mission". The content we post has been defined as being unrelated to the JREF Mission, so how can this forum be related to the JREF? The JREF does not want to be related to this forum.
It is related in the way the same posters now here were part of the JREF forum.
That's your opinion. Please remember that the JREF does not want to be connected to the material posted here. They specifically said that it was detrimental to their organization, and must be removed from their Forum.
Pyrrho wrote:
If you don't know if the majority of members are supporters of the ideas of James Randi /JREF , then I am missing something.
Are you a supporter?
Do you believe in the results of polls ?, I mean this kind of "skeptics" polls.
I believe in asking the right people the right questions. If you want to know what people here think, post a poll. Why make me a spokesman for other people? Why should I know if they support the JREF or not? Ask them yourself if you truly want the answer.
You didn't anwer my questions.
Are you a supporter?
No.
Do you believe in the results of polls ?, I mean this kind of "skeptics" polls.
No.
Pyrrho wrote: Faith is not permanent. People lose faith all the time, every day. It is just as subject to question as any other human behavior.
Is skepticism other human behavior?
If it is so , can you lose it all the time?
Yes, skepticism is human behavior. Yes, people can stop being skeptical.
Pyrrho wrote:
Maybe your response is not related to my question. Or my question was not clear enough.
Since Faith in God is natural , is God paranormal or supernatural?
That was not the question you asked. I did answer the question you did ask. As to this question, "Is God paranormal or supernatural?" I can only say that I do not know, because I do not know if God exists. If for the sake of discussion we assume that God does exist, we see that God is paradoxical -- in order to exist, God must be natural...and in order to exist, God must be supernatural. We could spin around the paradox indefinitely and never come to a conclusion.
I already told you that maybe my question was not clear enough.
But now your answer telling us you don't know what God is (paranormal or supernatural without evidence ), under an skeptic point of view , can be interpretated that you are asumming that God is real and natural.

For the real skeptics , God is something that has no proof.
For the ones who have Faith in God , God is something that vcan not be questioned.
I am giving you an honest answer to your question. I am a skeptic; I do not know if God exists, or if God is natural, or if God is supernatural. I do not have enough information in order to make a decision one way or the other. If I were to declare that "God does not exist," that is a decision based on insufficient evidence. If I were to declare that "God exists," that, too, would be a decision based on insufficient evidence. Your personal interpretation of my answer is only your opinion. Once again, I ask you not to put words in my mouth. You do not speak for me.
Pyrrho wrote: For my own part, I think God is a figment of human imagination, and is thus merely natural, and does not objectively exist outside of the human imagination.

Here is something that can be interpretated as a double speech from a confessed skeptic like you. Read the above.
No interpretation is necessary. I have given my opinion. Please stop trying to wring a meaning you prefer out of my words.
Pyrrho wrote: I am agreeing that that is pretty much what Hal Bidlack says in his article. It is an article containing his opinions; it is no more a promotion of faith in God than Randi's opinions about religion are a promotion of atheism. They are merely opinions. Promoting something requires more activity than writing opinions. For example, selling books about atheism could be considered promotion of atheism; selling books about deism could be considered promotion of deism. The JREF does not do either of those things, or other similar promotion activities..
When an article on the official page of the JREF , states what their main leaders think , then it is a promotion.
At the time it was written, Hal was not a "leader" of the JREF. He was only a friend of Randi who ran the JREF Forum for Randi, and who helped with the JREF meeting. Now, of course, he is a director of the JREF, so his words carry more weight. I maintain that a "promotion" has to be more than the expression of an opinion. Weighed against the many words of Randi's many commentaries, Hal's opinion isn't much.
Pyrrho wrote:
Are you telling us that James Randi is not an atheist and that maybe this is a kind of strategy that will reach donations from true believers?
I do not know if James Randi is an atheist. The JREF is more than James Randi. Its stated purposes do not contain language that promotes atheism. Its activities do not include actions that promote atheism. Its purpose is to promote critical thinking about the paranormal, the normal, and other things, not just about religion or God.

If James Randi wanted donations from true believers, he'd probably start a church. You're speculating, Carlos. Be careful -- someone might think you were a skeptic.
The JREF is formed around the main figure of James Randi. He is the leader and the main representant of the JREF.
He is a confessed athiest skeptic telling you that a person can be both a skeptic and a person of faith......in God.

James Randi/JREF doesn't need a church to collect donations or to sell merchandise or souvenirs. It is called the JREF. The strategies are different , the results are the same.

Thanks,
Carlos
"Confessed"...as if being an atheist is a sin or a crime..."confessed"...as if being a skeptic is a sin or a crime...

There's nothing wrong with the JREF seeking donations. Hal Bidlack's article does not ask for money from people who believe in God.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
latinijral wrote:
Carlos wrote:
MRC_Hans wrote:I will make an exception and answer a Carlos post:

Carlos, there is no contradiction between faith and scepticism, quite the contrary.

To say "I have faith in this" means "I do not know, but I choose to accept this"; a true skeptical stance.

In contrast, believers say "I know this is so". That is not a skeptical stance because without proof, you cannot know.

Comprendes?

Hans
Hi MRC Hans :
I know that when things are getting diffcult to the JREFers you need to come in their rescue. Besides you are another JREFer.
I understand that your ignore buttom just make you be more curious.

The point here is that FAITH in something that you pray to obtain something.

That something that you pray to , is ( under the skeptic perspective ), unknown , something without any evidence or proof of existence , something not scientifically explained , something that has to be questioned.

Yes , we are talking about that kind of Faith.
http://www.randi.org/jr/050903.html

Then that FAITH is a true belief.

So please tell me . under what circunstances you accept that a true believer is also an skeptic?
Can a person be both a skeptic and a person of faith?

The answer is, Mr. Randi and I agree, a resounding YES.
We have already Thaiboxerken point of view , he is in disagree with the JREF "skeptical" announce.
I understand his bad/insulting style , since I was the one who was questioning him and made him think.

What it counts is how SKEPTICISM can easily be involved in a double speech.

Are you saying that you completely agree with the "skeptical" position of the JREF regarding that kind of faith?

What about the persons that thinks that is just a marketing strategy in order to collect money from true believers(aka woo woos)?
Is that an honest position?

Theres is a difference about being sceptic and being skeptic.

I hope you "comprende".

Thanks,
Carlos
To Carlos and Pyrro: ..in the copy of Kramers letter I see in the left column a board of advisors:

ASTROLOGY
Geofre Dean (Australia)
ASTRONOMY
Jack Horkheitmer (Florida)
ASTROPHYISICS
Javier Amentler (Spain)
CHEMISTRY
Rolf Manne (Norway)
EDUCATION
Ricahrd Dawkins (England)
ELECTRONICS
Giles-Maurice (Belgium)
FORENsics
Alexander Jason (Califormia)
ORGANIC CHEMISTRY
Luigi Garlasshelli (Itlay)
PHYSICS
Robert Park (Maryland)
STATISTICS
Chip Denman (Maryland)
UFO AUTHORITY
Rovert Sheaffer (San Jose California

FOREINGN REPRESENTATIVES
Massimo Pedorro (Italy)
[/quote]
Robert Sheaffer is a debunker of UFOs.

http://www.debunker.com/ufo.html
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Skeeve
Posts: 13375
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:35 am
Pyrrho wrote: Do not put words in my mouth, Carlos. Say what you have to say, but don't pretend that it is I who must say it. Be honest.
I'm sorry, Mr. Pyrrho, but I've come to the conclusion that he is a very mean person, and that your request will be honored only in the breach.

I am sorry to say that I haven't the patience or the tenacity to actually attempt a discussion with this fellow Carlos, based simply on his behavior in this thread, and on his and that latin.... person's interjections and backslapping that appears here and there whenever they think they have a chance of an argument.

Perhaps you know better than I do, but I fear you won't be treated civilly, sir.
Then Skank Of America could start in...
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Skeeve wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Do not put words in my mouth, Carlos. Say what you have to say, but don't pretend that it is I who must say it. Be honest.
I'm sorry, Mr. Pyrrho, but I've come to the conclusion that he is a very mean person, and that your request will be honored only in the breach.

I am sorry to say that I haven't the patience or the tenacity to actually attempt a discussion with this fellow Carlos, based simply on his behavior in this thread, and on his and that latin.... person's interjections and backslapping that appears here and there whenever they think they have a chance of an argument.

Perhaps you know better than I do, but I fear you won't be treated civilly, sir.
[Clouseau]
Yes...yes...I know that, yes...the old circular argument ploy. What a pity that my detective's instincts told me this long ago, yes...
[/Clouseau]

Yeah, well, I've dealt with them before. Look at it this way, it keeps them off the streets.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Carlos
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 10:40 pm
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Yes, they educate. It is an educational foundation.
Are they educating people to be skeptic the way his leader is?
I don't know.
You don't know if the leader' ideas are the examples of any organization?
You don't know if a skeptic like James Randi , leader of the JREF don't pretend to form and educate people under an skeptical point of view?
I don't know if the JREF is educating people to be the kind of skeptic James Randi is, because I have not attended any of their seminars, I have not attended any of the "Amaz!ng Meetings", I have not purchased any of their books, and so on. I do not know.
I accept your answer that you don't know if the skeptic James Randi don't pretend to form and educate people under an skeptical point of view.

I accept the answer and the excuses gave by an ex-administrator of the JREF forum.
Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: The second part of your question is not conditional upon the first. Whether or not James Randi is a skeptic, belief and faith in God are incompatible with skepticism.
Then, their own quote is incompatible with skepticism.
Which quote is that? Who is "they"?
The quote is this one : "Can a person be both a skeptic and a person of faith?

The answer is, Mr. Randi and I agree, a resounding YES.

http://www.randi.org/jr/050903.html

And they are : James Randi ( leader of the JREF ) and Hal Bidlack ( actual director of the JREF )

Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: This forum is the bastard child of a misbegotten notion to excise content that the JREF does not like from the JREF Forum. This forum has no official ties to the JREF. If by "community" you mean a group of people who post on the forum, some are skeptics and some are not skeptics. It is not a "skeptics only" forum; the JREF Forum is not a "skeptics only" forum either.
Yes , sometimes I see this forum as a bastard child of the JREF forum.
Sometimes I see it like an aborted child .
Anyway is a community formed at the JREF forum.
More or less. Come July 8, there will be no "community" at the JREF Forum.
Pyrrho wrote: The JREF Forum is the "community formed around James Randi and the JREF". This "community" exists because it is no longer wanted by the JREF. What's this "you forgot" business? That wasn't part of your question.

Since you wrote this :"There are users here who also post at the JREF Forum. There are users here who are probably members of the JREF. This site exists because the JREF Forum will be eliminating parts of itself that it does not want."
Then I just added this :You forgot to tell that are also members that donate money to the JREF , buy merchandise related to the JREF and go to the annual reunion JREF TAM.
Do not put words in my mouth, Carlos. Say what you have to say, but don't pretend that it is I who must say it. Be honest.
Please tell me what words don't belong to you and what words do you think I am atributing to you.
If you show me I made a mistake , I will apologize to you.
Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: I don't know. I won't guess. People from the JREF Forum are here because on July 8 they will not be able to post content at the JREF Forum that does not fit the undefined criteria of the "JREF Mission". The content we post has been defined as being unrelated to the JREF Mission, so how can this forum be related to the JREF? The JREF does not want to be related to this forum.
It is related in the way the same posters now here were part of the JREF forum.
That's your opinion. Please remember that the JREF does not want to be connected to the material posted here. They specifically said that it was detrimental to their organization, and must be removed from their Forum.
I understand the JREF technicism.
I was refering about the other connection.
Fine , thanks.
Pyrrho wrote:
Are you a supporter?
No.
Where you a voluntary administrator of the JREF forum?
Can that action be interpretaded as a support the JREF recieved or that you made?

Pyrrho wrote:
Do you believe in the results of polls ?, I mean this kind of "skeptics" polls.
No.
If you don't believe in polls , why you asked me do do a poll?
You already knew I think polls is not an skeptical way to know a truth , as I assume you do.

Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Faith is not permanent. People lose faith all the time, every day. It is just as subject to question as any other human behavior.
Is skepticism other human behavior?
If it is so , can you lose it all the time?
Yes, skepticism is human behavior. Yes, people can stop being skeptical.
Based in your quote there is corelation between faith an skepticism.
Then : Skepticism is not permanent. People lose skepticism , every day. It is just as subject to question as any other human behavior.

Can we conclude that skepticism is not a Philosophy?

Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Maybe your response is not related to my question. Or my question was not clear enough.
Since Faith in God is natural , is God paranormal or supernatural?
That was not the question you asked. I did answer the question you did ask. As to this question, "Is God paranormal or supernatural?" I can only say that I do not know, because I do not know if God exists. If for the sake of discussion we assume that God does exist, we see that God is paradoxical -- in order to exist, God must be natural...and in order to exist, God must be supernatural. We could spin around the paradox indefinitely and never come to a conclusion.
I already told you that maybe my question was not clear enough.
But now your answer telling us you don't know what God is (paranormal or supernatural without evidence ), under an skeptic point of view , can be interpretated that you are asumming that God is real and natural.

For the real skeptics , God is something that has no proof.
For the ones who have Faith in God , God is something that vcan not be questioned.
I am giving you an honest answer to your question. I am a skeptic; I do not know if God exists, or if God is natural, or if God is supernatural. I do not have enough information in order to make a decision one way or the other. If I were to declare that "God does not exist," that is a decision based on insufficient evidence. If I were to declare that "God exists," that, too, would be a decision based on insufficient evidence. Your personal interpretation of my answer is only your opinion. Once again, I ask you not to put words in my mouth. You do not speak for me.
I am not .
You were the one who wrote that is a paradox , and you knew we were talking about an skeptical definition of God. It was your opinion , not mine.

Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: For my own part, I think God is a figment of human imagination, and is thus merely natural, and does not objectively exist outside of the human imagination.

Here is something that can be interpretated as a double speech from a confessed skeptic like you. Read the above.
No interpretation is necessary. I have given my opinion. Please stop trying to wring a meaning you prefer out of my words.
I wrote that it can be interpretated. Remember that interpretation is just another human behavior.

Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: I am agreeing that that is pretty much what Hal Bidlack says in his article. It is an article containing his opinions; it is no more a promotion of faith in God than Randi's opinions about religion are a promotion of atheism. They are merely opinions. Promoting something requires more activity than writing opinions. For example, selling books about atheism could be considered promotion of atheism; selling books about deism could be considered promotion of deism. The JREF does not do either of those things, or other similar promotion activities..
When an article on the official page of the JREF , states what their main leaders think , then it is a promotion.
At the time it was written, Hal was not a "leader" of the JREF. He was only a friend of Randi who ran the JREF Forum for Randi, and who helped with the JREF meeting. Now, of course, he is a director of the JREF, so his words carry more weight. I maintain that a "promotion" has to be more than the expression of an opinion. Weighed against the many words of Randi's many commentaries, Hal's opinion isn't much.
I mantain that is a promotion gave by the leader and the actual director of the JREF on the official web page of the JREF.

The commentaries of the leaders of any organization are reflects what the organization is , when those commentaries are related to goals of the organization.
Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Are you telling us that James Randi is not an atheist and that maybe this is a kind of strategy that will reach donations from true believers?
I do not know if James Randi is an atheist. The JREF is more than James Randi. Its stated purposes do not contain language that promotes atheism. Its activities do not include actions that promote atheism. Its purpose is to promote critical thinking about the paranormal, the normal, and other things, not just about religion or God.

If James Randi wanted donations from true believers, he'd probably start a church. You're speculating, Carlos. Be careful -- someone might think you were a skeptic.
The JREF is formed around the main figure of James Randi. He is the leader and the main representant of the JREF.
He is a confessed athiest skeptic telling you that a person can be both a skeptic and a person of faith......in God.

James Randi/JREF doesn't need a church to collect donations or to sell merchandise or souvenirs. It is called the JREF. The strategies are different , the results are the same.

Thanks,
Carlos
"Confessed"...as if being an atheist is a sin or a crime..."confessed"...as if being a skeptic is a sin or a crime...

There's nothing wrong with the JREF seeking donations. Hal Bidlack's article does not ask for money from people who believe in God.
There is nothing wrong that James Randi is a self confessed atheist.
Also there is nothing wrong for seeking donations , it doesn't matter if the ones who ask for it are an official church , a cult , a foundation or whatever.

Thanks,
Carlos
latinijral
Posts: 488
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 3:27 am
Skeeve wrote:
I'm sorry, Mr. Pyrrho, but I've come to the conclusion that he is a very mean person, and that your request will be honored only in the breach.

I am sorry to say that I haven't the patience or the tenacity to actually attempt a discussion with this fellow Carlos, based simply on his behavior in this thread, and on his and that latin.... person's interjections and backslapping that appears here and there whenever they think they have a chance of an argument.

Perhaps you know better than I do, but I fear you won't be treated civilly, sir.
What is your conclution about the Popes commentary...or you are only giving "palmaditas en el poto" to Pyrro?
I love you all !!!
Pure skeptic
Skeeve
Posts: 13375
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:35 am
latinijral wrote:
Skeeve wrote:
I'm sorry, Mr. Pyrrho, but I've come to the conclusion that he is a very mean person, and that your request will be honored only in the breach.

I am sorry to say that I haven't the patience or the tenacity to actually attempt a discussion with this fellow Carlos, based simply on his behavior in this thread, and on his and that latin.... person's interjections and backslapping that appears here and there whenever they think they have a chance of an argument.

Perhaps you know better than I do, but I fear you won't be treated civilly, sir.
What is your conclution about the Popes commentary...or you are only giving "palmaditas en el poto" to Pyrro?
Alexander Pope? Pope John XXIII? Who and what are you talking about? As I have discarded the need to have an old man in a robe, one who has sworn off both woman and life as it were, to tell me how to live my maritial life, I don't think that what any Pope, meaning head of the Roman Universal Church, has much meaning at all.

If that is what you mean, he is not my Pope, does not lead me, and I have nothing much to say about his humanly fallable ponderings. I am, sir, not particularly interested in what he has to say, as long as he does not try to force me to live by his 2000 years antiquated rules for the survival of the group.
Then Skank Of America could start in...
Carlos
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 10:40 pm
Pyrrho wrote: Robert Sheaffer is a debunker of UFOs.

http://www.debunker.com/ufo.html
Pyrrho:

Thanks,
Carlos
hgc
Posts: 166
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:47 pm
Skeeve wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Do not put words in my mouth, Carlos. Say what you have to say, but don't pretend that it is I who must say it. Be honest.
I'm sorry, Mr. Pyrrho, but I've come to the conclusion that he is a very mean person, and that your request will be honored only in the breach.

I am sorry to say that I haven't the patience or the tenacity to actually attempt a discussion with this fellow Carlos, based simply on his behavior in this thread, and on his and that latin.... person's interjections and backslapping that appears here and there whenever they think they have a chance of an argument.

Perhaps you know better than I do, but I fear you won't be treated civilly, sir.
You are correct in your assessment of these characters. It is the likes of Carlos and his pet monkey latininjuredanus that turned me into the crusty coot that I am.

As you know, I am well past civility myself.
Skeeve
Posts: 13375
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:35 am
hgc wrote:
Skeeve wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Do not put words in my mouth, Carlos. Say what you have to say, but don't pretend that it is I who must say it. Be honest.
I'm sorry, Mr. Pyrrho, but I've come to the conclusion that he is a very mean person, and that your request will be honored only in the breach.

I am sorry to say that I haven't the patience or the tenacity to actually attempt a discussion with this fellow Carlos, based simply on his behavior in this thread, and on his and that latin.... person's interjections and backslapping that appears here and there whenever they think they have a chance of an argument.

Perhaps you know better than I do, but I fear you won't be treated civilly, sir.
You are correct in your assessment of these characters. It is the likes of Carlos and his pet monkey latininjuredanus that turned me into the crusty coot that I am.

As you know, I am well past civility myself.
Well, as you may be able to observe in one or another of these threads, it is possible for a person to be a crusty old coot when dealing with floating detritus like Carlos, and be a polite, civil person when dealing with someone who can carry on a dialog.

Carlos wrote another lie
He is such a phony,
Caught some lens flare on his film,
And turned it to baloney!

Carlos, you're a little jerk
Carlos, you're a phony,
Carlos we all know your kind,
Then Skank Of America could start in...
Skeptoid
Posts: 1296
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 5:28 am
Location: Wisconsin
Actually, Skeeve, most of us came to the conclusion that the object in question was a bird, as the flapping of wings was quite evident in the video.
Skeeve
Posts: 13375
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:35 am
Skeptoid wrote:Actually, Skeeve, most of us came to the conclusion that the object in question was a bird, as the flapping of wings was quite evident in the video.
Oh, sorry, Carlos, I guess, then, you were just trying to give us all the bird!
Then Skank Of America could start in...
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Yes, they educate. It is an educational foundation.
Are they educating people to be skeptic the way his leader is?
I don't know.
You don't know if the leader' ideas are the examples of any organization?
You don't know if a skeptic like James Randi , leader of the JREF don't pretend to form and educate people under an skeptical point of view?
I don't know if the JREF is educating people to be the kind of skeptic James Randi is, because I have not attended any of their seminars, I have not attended any of the "Amaz!ng Meetings", I have not purchased any of their books, and so on. I do not know.
I accept your answer that you don't know if the skeptic James Randi don't pretend to form and educate people under an skeptical point of view.

I accept the answer and the excuses gave by an ex-administrator of the JREF forum.
Very well.
Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: The second part of your question is not conditional upon the first. Whether or not James Randi is a skeptic, belief and faith in God are incompatible with skepticism.
Then, their own quote is incompatible with skepticism.
Which quote is that? Who is "they"?
The quote is this one : "Can a person be both a skeptic and a person of faith?

The answer is, Mr. Randi and I agree, a resounding YES.

http://www.randi.org/jr/050903.html

And they are : James Randi ( leader of the JREF ) and Hal Bidlack ( actual director of the JREF )
Do they mean "faith" as in practicing a religion, or "faith" as in holding a belief without question? It's not clear to me what they mean. If by "faith" they mean a belief without question, it's incompatible with skepticism. If by "faith" they mean practicing a religion, that's not necessarily incompatible.
Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: This forum is the bastard child of a misbegotten notion to excise content that the JREF does not like from the JREF Forum. This forum has no official ties to the JREF. If by "community" you mean a group of people who post on the forum, some are skeptics and some are not skeptics. It is not a "skeptics only" forum; the JREF Forum is not a "skeptics only" forum either.
Yes , sometimes I see this forum as a bastard child of the JREF forum.
Sometimes I see it like an aborted child .
Anyway is a community formed at the JREF forum.
More or less. Come July 8, there will be no "community" at the JREF Forum.
Pyrrho wrote: The JREF Forum is the "community formed around James Randi and the JREF". This "community" exists because it is no longer wanted by the JREF. What's this "you forgot" business? That wasn't part of your question.

Since you wrote this :"There are users here who also post at the JREF Forum. There are users here who are probably members of the JREF. This site exists because the JREF Forum will be eliminating parts of itself that it does not want."
Then I just added this :You forgot to tell that are also members that donate money to the JREF , buy merchandise related to the JREF and go to the annual reunion JREF TAM.
Do not put words in my mouth, Carlos. Say what you have to say, but don't pretend that it is I who must say it. Be honest.
Please tell me what words don't belong to you and what words do you think I am atributing to you.
If you show me I made a mistake , I will apologize to you.
The words "You forgot to tell, etc." imply that the statement is something I would have made, but forgot. It's your statement; make it yourself. Don't say that I forgot to say it.
Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: I don't know. I won't guess. People from the JREF Forum are here because on July 8 they will not be able to post content at the JREF Forum that does not fit the undefined criteria of the "JREF Mission". The content we post has been defined as being unrelated to the JREF Mission, so how can this forum be related to the JREF? The JREF does not want to be related to this forum.
It is related in the way the same posters now here were part of the JREF forum.
That's your opinion. Please remember that the JREF does not want to be connected to the material posted here. They specifically said that it was detrimental to their organization, and must be removed from their Forum.
I understand the JREF technicism.
I was refering about the other connection.
Fine , thanks.
Pyrrho wrote:
Are you a supporter?
No.
Where you a voluntary administrator of the JREF forum?
Can that action be interpretaded as a support the JREF recieved or that you made?
I was a voluntary administrator of the JREF Forum. That action was support given to the JREF by me. I no longer serve in that capacity. My support has ended.
Pyrrho wrote:
Do you believe in the results of polls ?, I mean this kind of "skeptics" polls.
No.
If you don't believe in polls , why you asked me do do a poll?
You already knew I think polls is not an skeptical way to know a truth , as I assume you do.
So don't post a poll. Just ask the other people what they think.
Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Faith is not permanent. People lose faith all the time, every day. It is just as subject to question as any other human behavior.
Is skepticism other human behavior?
If it is so , can you lose it all the time?
Yes, skepticism is human behavior. Yes, people can stop being skeptical.
Based in your quote there is corelation between faith an skepticism.
Then : Skepticism is not permanent. People lose skepticism , every day. It is just as subject to question as any other human behavior.

Can we conclude that skepticism is not a Philosophy?
Skepticism is a philosophy; it is a very old philosophy.
Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Maybe your response is not related to my question. Or my question was not clear enough.
Since Faith in God is natural , is God paranormal or supernatural?
That was not the question you asked. I did answer the question you did ask. As to this question, "Is God paranormal or supernatural?" I can only say that I do not know, because I do not know if God exists. If for the sake of discussion we assume that God does exist, we see that God is paradoxical -- in order to exist, God must be natural...and in order to exist, God must be supernatural. We could spin around the paradox indefinitely and never come to a conclusion.
I already told you that maybe my question was not clear enough.
But now your answer telling us you don't know what God is (paranormal or supernatural without evidence ), under an skeptic point of view , can be interpretated that you are asumming that God is real and natural.

For the real skeptics , God is something that has no proof.
For the ones who have Faith in God , God is something that vcan not be questioned.
I am giving you an honest answer to your question. I am a skeptic; I do not know if God exists, or if God is natural, or if God is supernatural. I do not have enough information in order to make a decision one way or the other. If I were to declare that "God does not exist," that is a decision based on insufficient evidence. If I were to declare that "God exists," that, too, would be a decision based on insufficient evidence. Your personal interpretation of my answer is only your opinion. Once again, I ask you not to put words in my mouth. You do not speak for me.
I am not .
You were the one who wrote that is a paradox , and you knew we were talking about an skeptical definition of God. It was your opinion , not mine.

Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: For my own part, I think God is a figment of human imagination, and is thus merely natural, and does not objectively exist outside of the human imagination.

Here is something that can be interpretated as a double speech from a confessed skeptic like you. Read the above.
No interpretation is necessary. I have given my opinion. Please stop trying to wring a meaning you prefer out of my words.
I wrote that it can be interpretated. Remember that interpretation is just another human behavior.

Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: I am agreeing that that is pretty much what Hal Bidlack says in his article. It is an article containing his opinions; it is no more a promotion of faith in God than Randi's opinions about religion are a promotion of atheism. They are merely opinions. Promoting something requires more activity than writing opinions. For example, selling books about atheism could be considered promotion of atheism; selling books about deism could be considered promotion of deism. The JREF does not do either of those things, or other similar promotion activities..
When an article on the official page of the JREF , states what their main leaders think , then it is a promotion.
At the time it was written, Hal was not a "leader" of the JREF. He was only a friend of Randi who ran the JREF Forum for Randi, and who helped with the JREF meeting. Now, of course, he is a director of the JREF, so his words carry more weight. I maintain that a "promotion" has to be more than the expression of an opinion. Weighed against the many words of Randi's many commentaries, Hal's opinion isn't much.
I mantain that is a promotion gave by the leader and the actual director of the JREF on the official web page of the JREF.

The commentaries of the leaders of any organization are reflects what the organization is , when those commentaries are related to goals of the organization.
Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Are you telling us that James Randi is not an atheist and that maybe this is a kind of strategy that will reach donations from true believers?
I do not know if James Randi is an atheist. The JREF is more than James Randi. Its stated purposes do not contain language that promotes atheism. Its activities do not include actions that promote atheism. Its purpose is to promote critical thinking about the paranormal, the normal, and other things, not just about religion or God.

If James Randi wanted donations from true believers, he'd probably start a church. You're speculating, Carlos. Be careful -- someone might think you were a skeptic.
The JREF is formed around the main figure of James Randi. He is the leader and the main representant of the JREF.
He is a confessed athiest skeptic telling you that a person can be both a skeptic and a person of faith......in God.

James Randi/JREF doesn't need a church to collect donations or to sell merchandise or souvenirs. It is called the JREF. The strategies are different , the results are the same.

Thanks,
Carlos
"Confessed"...as if being an atheist is a sin or a crime..."confessed"...as if being a skeptic is a sin or a crime...

There's nothing wrong with the JREF seeking donations. Hal Bidlack's article does not ask for money from people who believe in God.
There is nothing wrong that James Randi is a self confessed atheist.
Also there is nothing wrong for seeking donations , it doesn't matter if the ones who ask for it are an official church , a cult , a foundation or whatever.

Thanks,
Carlos
It's wrong if the donations are sought under false pretenses, such as the frauds who pretend to work miracles on sick people.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Sundog
Posts: 2578
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 4:27 pm
Dang, Pyrrho, when you finally show up you don't fiddle around, do you?
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Robert Sheaffer is a debunker of UFOs.

http://www.debunker.com/ufo.html
Pyrrho:

Thanks,
Carlos
I don't know. Why don't you ask him personally?
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Sundog wrote:Dang, Pyrrho, when you finally show up you don't fiddle around, do you?
I'm tone deaf. Can't play a note.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Doctor X
Posts: 73562
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Becomes a drummer.

We do not need notes. . . .

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out." – Don
DocX: FTW. – sparks
"Doctor X wins again." – Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry." – His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone." – clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far." – Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig." – Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power." – asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." – gnome

WS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X6!!!!!!
Carlos
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 10:40 pm
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
I accept your answer that you don't know if the skeptic James Randi don't pretend to form and educate people under an skeptical point of view.

I accept the answer and the excuses gave by an ex-administrator of the JREF forum.
Very well.
Yes, it is.
Pyrrho wrote:
The quote is this one : "Can a person be both a skeptic and a person of faith?

The answer is, Mr. Randi and I agree, a resounding YES.

http://www.randi.org/jr/050903.html

And they are : James Randi ( leader of the JREF ) and Hal Bidlack ( actual director of the JREF )
Do they mean "faith" as in practicing a religion, or "faith" as in holding a belief without question? It's not clear to me what they mean. If by "faith" they mean a belief without question, it's incompatible with skepticism. If by "faith" they mean practicing a religion, that's not necessarily incompatible.
Ask them. Or try to understand what they mean.
Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:

Do not put words in my mouth, Carlos. Say what you have to say, but don't pretend that it is I who must say it. Be honest.
Please tell me what words don't belong to you and what words do you think I am atributing to you.
If you show me I made a mistake , I will apologize to you.
The words "You forgot to tell, etc." imply that the statement is something I would have made, but forgot. It's your statement; make it yourself. Don't say that I forgot to say it.
Then I was not putting words in your mouth.
You are correct , it is more polite to say that I was just helping you all to remember that are also members that donate money to the JREF , buy merchandise related to the JREF and go to the annual reunion JREF TAM.
We were talking about all kind of relationship of the members of this board and the JREF.
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:

Are you a supporter?
No.
I was a voluntary administrator of the JREF Forum. That action was support given to the JREF by me. I no longer serve in that capacity. My support has ended..
Then you were a supporter of the JREF.
I mean :what were your reasons to don't continue supporting them?
I think you were doing a great honest job administrating that forum.

Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Do you believe in the results of polls ?, I mean this kind of "skeptics" polls.
No.
So don't post a poll. Just ask the other people what they think.
Uhh.I asked you since you seem to knew.
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Yes, skepticism is human behavior. Yes, people can stop being skeptical.
Based in your quote there is corelation between faith an skepticism.
Then : Skepticism is not permanent. People lose skepticism , every day. It is just as subject to question as any other human behavior.

Can we conclude that skepticism is not a Philosophy?
Skepticism is a philosophy; it is a very old philosophy.
I though you said skepticism is just another human behavior.
As well as Faith.
What is the philosophy of Faith?
What is the philosophy of Skepticism?
I am not refering about the old Greeck school of Scepticism .

Pyrrho wrote:

There is nothing wrong that James Randi is a self confessed atheist.
Also there is nothing wrong for seeking donations , it doesn't matter if the ones who ask for it are an official church , a cult , a foundation or whatever.
It's wrong if the donations are sought under false pretenses, such as the frauds who pretend to work miracles on sick people.
If they are frauds then the law must caught them and send them to prison.
But the reality is other.

Maybe because it is just a matter of faith and skepticism involved .
Just human behaviors as you wrote it.

Thanks,
Carlos
Carlos
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 10:40 pm
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Robert Sheaffer is a debunker of UFOs.

http://www.debunker.com/ufo.html
Pyrrho:

Thanks,
Carlos
I don't know. Why don't you ask him personally?
Yes , I know you don't know.
I know , since you posted a link and told us who this JREF advisor is , that there is nothing related to that case in the link you posted.

I know that James Randi never wrote about that topic also.
I know that web is still full of interpretations about that case.

Thanks,
Carlos
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
I accept your answer that you don't know if the skeptic James Randi don't pretend to form and educate people under an skeptical point of view.

I accept the answer and the excuses gave by an ex-administrator of the JREF forum.
Very well.
Yes, it is.
It is it.
Pyrrho wrote:
The quote is this one : "Can a person be both a skeptic and a person of faith?

The answer is, Mr. Randi and I agree, a resounding YES.

http://www.randi.org/jr/050903.html

And they are : James Randi ( leader of the JREF ) and Hal Bidlack ( actual director of the JREF )
Do they mean "faith" as in practicing a religion, or "faith" as in holding a belief without question? It's not clear to me what they mean. If by "faith" they mean a belief without question, it's incompatible with skepticism. If by "faith" they mean practicing a religion, that's not necessarily incompatible.
Ask them. Or try to understand what they mean.
Pyrrho wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:

Do not put words in my mouth, Carlos. Say what you have to say, but don't pretend that it is I who must say it. Be honest.
Please tell me what words don't belong to you and what words do you think I am atributing to you.
If you show me I made a mistake , I will apologize to you.
The words "You forgot to tell, etc." imply that the statement is something I would have made, but forgot. It's your statement; make it yourself. Don't say that I forgot to say it.
Then I was not putting words in your mouth.
You are correct , it is more polite to say that I was just helping you all to remember that are also members that donate money to the JREF , buy merchandise related to the JREF and go to the annual reunion JREF TAM.
We were talking about all kind of relationship of the members of this board and the JREF.
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:

Are you a supporter?
No.
I was a voluntary administrator of the JREF Forum. That action was support given to the JREF by me. I no longer serve in that capacity. My support has ended..
Then you were a supporter of the JREF.
I mean :what were your reasons to don't continue supporting them?
I think you were doing a great honest job administrating that forum.
I am not in a "bad mood" toward the JREF. I just don't support it with my time and effort anymore. I still support skepticism.

I had to quit being the adminstrator because I did not have time to do the job properly. I expressed that concern to Hal before May 4.

I don't participate at the JREF anymore because of the way the change was done at the JREF Forum. I was angry about it, now I am not. I am only saddened that in one single minute all the weeks of effort toward making it a "friendlier" and more reasonable forum was wasted.
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Do you believe in the results of polls ?, I mean this kind of "skeptics" polls.
No.
So don't post a poll. Just ask the other people what they think.
Uhh.I asked you since you seem to knew.
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote:
Yes, skepticism is human behavior. Yes, people can stop being skeptical.
Based in your quote there is corelation between faith an skepticism.
Then : Skepticism is not permanent. People lose skepticism , every day. It is just as subject to question as any other human behavior.

Can we conclude that skepticism is not a Philosophy?
Skepticism is a philosophy; it is a very old philosophy.
I though you said skepticism is just another human behavior.
As well as Faith.
What is the philosophy of Faith?
What is the philosophy of Skepticism?
I am not refering about the old Greeck school of Scepticism .
It can be a "behavior" and a "philosophy". The two are not mutually exclusive.
Pyrrho wrote:

There is nothing wrong that James Randi is a self confessed atheist.
Also there is nothing wrong for seeking donations , it doesn't matter if the ones who ask for it are an official church , a cult , a foundation or whatever.
It's wrong if the donations are sought under false pretenses, such as the frauds who pretend to work miracles on sick people.
If they are frauds then the law must caught them and send them to prison.
But the reality is other.

Maybe because it is just a matter of faith and skepticism involved .
Just human behaviors as you wrote it.

Thanks,
Carlos
Nobody knows the whole truth.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Carlos
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 10:40 pm
Pyrrho wrote: I am not in a "bad mood" toward the JREF. I just don't support it with my time and effort anymore. I still support skepticism.

I had to quit being the adminstrator because I did not have time to do the job properly. I expressed that concern to Hal before May 4.

I don't participate at the JREF anymore because of the way the change was done at the JREF Forum. I was angry about it, now I am not. I am only saddened that in one single minute all the weeks of effort toward making it a "friendlier" and more reasonable forum was wasted.
Do you think it was not a reasonable and friendler JREF forum before you were not administrating it? I mean in Hal's administration.
Pyrrho wrote: It can be a "behavior" and a "philosophy". The two are not mutually exclusive.
Those were not my questions.
What is the philosophy of Faith?
What is the philosophy of Skepticism?
I am not refering about the old Greeck school of Scepticism .

Pyrrho wrote:

If they are frauds then the law must caught them and send them to prison.
But the reality is other.

Maybe because it is just a matter of faith and skepticism involved .
Just human behaviors as you wrote it.
Nobody knows the whole truth.
You said it. It is just your skeptic opinion.

Thanks,
Carlos
Skeeve
Posts: 13375
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:35 am
Carlos wrote:You said it. It is just your skeptic opinion.

Thanks,
Carlos
Carlos, what is your evidences on the 10 commandments? Why don't you reply to Doctor X in the thread about the 10 commandments?

It's very enlightening, and it's much more certain that Johnathan Livingston Twin Towers...

I am sorry, I'd thought you were selling lense flare when it turns out you were trying to sell seagull. They're hardly in short supply, you know.
Then Skank Of America could start in...
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: I am not in a "bad mood" toward the JREF. I just don't support it with my time and effort anymore. I still support skepticism.

I had to quit being the adminstrator because I did not have time to do the job properly. I expressed that concern to Hal before May 4.

I don't participate at the JREF anymore because of the way the change was done at the JREF Forum. I was angry about it, now I am not. I am only saddened that in one single minute all the weeks of effort toward making it a "friendlier" and more reasonable forum was wasted.
Do you think it was not a reasonable and friendler JREF forum before you were not administrating it? I mean in Hal's administration.
I've said enough about that on other forums. It doesn't matter what it was. What is is now is what matters.
Pyrrho wrote: It can be a "behavior" and a "philosophy". The two are not mutually exclusive.
Those were not my questions.
What is the philosophy of Faith?
Belief without question.
What is the philosophy of Skepticism?
I am not refering about the old Greeck school of Scepticism .
Contemporary skepticism is defined here:

http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/s/skepcont.htm
Pyrrho wrote:

If they are frauds then the law must caught them and send them to prison.
But the reality is other.

Maybe because it is just a matter of faith and skepticism involved .
Just human behaviors as you wrote it.
Nobody knows the whole truth.
You said it. It is just your skeptic opinion.

Thanks,
Carlos
Yes. It is only my opinion.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Skeeve wrote:
Carlos wrote:You said it. It is just your skeptic opinion.

Thanks,
Carlos
Carlos, what is your evidences on the 10 commandments? Why don't you reply to Doctor X in the thread about the 10 commandments?

It's very enlightening, and it's much more certain that Johnathan Livingston Twin Towers...

I am sorry, I'd thought you were selling lense flare when it turns out you were trying to sell seagull. They're hardly in short supply, you know.
No, it was probably a common starling. Probably a deep roller.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Carlos
Posts: 669
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 10:40 pm
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:

Do you think it was not a reasonable and friendler JREF forum before you were not administrating it? I mean in Hal's administration.
I've said enough about that on other forums. It doesn't matter what it was. What is is now is what matters.
I asked you because you wrote here about your efforts to make that forum "friendlier" and more reasonable. So my question was related to that quote in order to know how it was before you entered.
In my opinion , in your short period administarting the JREF forum, you made it more reasonable and you were honest .

Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:

What is the philosophy of Faith?
Belief without question.
That is the definition of faith.
Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
What is the philosophy of Skepticism?
I am not refering about the old Greeck school of Scepticism .
Contemporary skepticism is defined here:

http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/s/skepcont.htm
Just another definition.

Pyrrho wrote:
Carlos wrote:
You said it. It is just your skeptic opinion.
Yes. It is only my opinion.
Then is not a fact that nobody knows the whole truth.
Or maybe it is.

Thanks,
Carlos
latinijral
Posts: 488
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 3:27 am
Carlos wrote:
Pyrrho wrote: Robert Sheaffer is a debunker of UFOs.

http://www.debunker.com/ufo.html
Pyrrho:

Thanks,
Carlos
Maybe Kramer and Co. forgot to send it?
I love you all !!!
Pure skeptic
Doctor X
Posts: 73562
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Maybe he forgot to reply to Kramer:

Evidences

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out." – Don
DocX: FTW. – sparks
"Doctor X wins again." – Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry." – His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone." – clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far." – Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig." – Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power." – asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." – gnome

WS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X6!!!!!!
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Ah, I see. They forgot Carlos even existed.

But, they should allow Carlos to post on their forum. If they're going to tell their side of the story on that forum, Carlos should be allowed to tell his side of the story.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Doctor X
Posts: 73562
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Perhaps when they received no evidence his claim existed they moved on to more likely claims.

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out." – Don
DocX: FTW. – sparks
"Doctor X wins again." – Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry." – His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone." – clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far." – Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig." – Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power." – asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." – gnome

WS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X6!!!!!!
Pyrrho
Posts: 30924
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 2:17 am
Title: Man in Black
Location: Division 6
Doctor X wrote:Perhaps when they received no evidence his claim existed they moved on to more likely claims.

--J.D.
His application existed, at least. He never advanced to the "claimant" level.

Bah. I don't want to rehash this stuff. Better for Carlos if he talks directly to the persons who were involved, which weren't us.
The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.