missing forums...

Time spent in front of a computer screen can mean many things.
That's certainly true. In the case of strange phenomena the role of the armchair in proponentry, and especially debunking, is almost universal. There's no shoe leather wasted, very few people care enough to investigate cases personally, which means the barmiest hypotheses for and against become the gold standard simply because there's nothing higher. I'm thinking of one forum where a sceptic is allowed to push the most egregious and comical explanations for sometimes well-attested phenomena, and those are allowed to stand as valid by moderation. Unless someone is prepared to put in the hours logically unpicking the labyrinth of supposition and straw legions upon which their case rests, their point of view is as good as the next. That's basically what the internet has become, a game with no entry requirements and leading to entirely notional goals. For those of us attempting to unpick the truth, the web is at best a mixed blessing.

Example, the Mad Gasser of Mattoon (look it up) is an example of c20th high weirdness, an apparent genuine mystery, uncritically repeated in numerous tomes dealing with the strange. Some years ago a chap was suitably intrigued by the case to head out from the UK to Mattoon, Illinois, to discover the case had been cleared up to the satisfaction of the locals, years before. A local eccentric/nutcase was the guilty party, evidence was unequivocal and the town had moved on decades ago. In the annals of the weird however, the Mad Gasser was still a live bugbear reaching out from the imagination. No one had bothered to ask.
Example 2, I've long had an interest in Mariology, the study of the claimed intervention of Christ's mother in the world of the living, especially cases like Lourdes, Fatima, Medjugorje, but also in numerous other less well known apparitions for over a millennium. This interest long predates any religious convictions I may hold, and if they're are informed by study of such apparitions it is obliquely. I've travelled reasonably extensively in attempt to uncover truth from fiction, and discovered a sea of gullibility and wishful thinking, with a few islands of startling credibility. Having talked to people first hand who have been cured of incurable illnesses in advanced stages seemingly over night, with a medical paper trail to back up their claims, it's difficult to read armchair sceptics wave the phenomenon away as spontaneous remission, as though the term meant anything, especially when the circumstances require degrees of coincidence greater than the manifest facts.

I'm not done investigating such cases, nor even more left field weirdness, but I've tired of submitting witness accounts to the churn of armchair disapproval. My criticality for and against is intact, but the internet is about content, not discernment.
 
Last edited:

Ian Gordon

Ninshub
Member
Ironically, I noticed on the new psiscience quest forum set up by some former Skeptiko members that the "rules" there suggest that those who are truly skeptics actually limit their posts to particular threads so that real conversations can happen by the proponents.
I'll respond to this here, so as not to disrupt the No. 257 show thread. And I'll just say this one thing and then drop it...

That is some strange twisting and interpretation of those rules-in-the-works. Your post shows you're new to Skeptiko - they're pretty much a crossover (though probably less strict) than the ones here (see last part):
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/forum-rules-please-read-before-posting.4/
 
I'll respond to this here, so as not to disrupt the No. 257 show thread. And I'll just say this one thing and then drop it...

That is some strange twisting and interpretation of those rules-in-the-works. Your post shows you're new to Skeptiko - they're pretty much a crossover (though probably less strict) than the ones here (see last part):
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/forum-rules-please-read-before-posting.4/

I don't think I twisted anything. Here's the text from the PsiscienceQuest "rules" page -- in relevant part:

"...Heated debate is welcome, but not so much personal attacks. This forum is open to both proponents and what are traditionally called "skeptics". Said skeptics are allowed to participate on all the forums. However, if an individual does not accept the reality of any of the various phenomena in the Extended Consciousness Phenomena forum, and the intent is strictly to "debunk", that type of post should be reserved for the Skeptic vs. Proponent Discussions subforum, so that proponents can have discussions that extend beyond the "is it real or not real?" variety and not always feel they're about to be pounced on at any moment."

http://psiencequest.net/forums/showthread.php?tid=39

Does this not suggest that those "skeptics" who are just going to be debunkers of the things the psi-proponent crowd wants to discuss be both respectful and to limit their debunking to particular threads so that proponents don't feel pounced on all the time? I was trying to make a similar plea in the Pizzagate thread so that people who want to discuss the issue can discuss it. So how did I misinterpret?

And let me get this straight: it's ok to discuss invisible energy beings eating our emotions as Loosh -- or an invisible, absentee "God" or a "Demiurge" -- those things are totally plausible, but don't even remotely suggest that high level powerful people engage in pedophilia, despite all the historical precedent....now that's just crazy talk!
 
Last edited:

Ian Gordon

Ninshub
Member
Feel free if you want to discuss this further to join PQ, because all suggestions are welcome, and because this is Skeptiko and not the place to discuss this. I was ALSO pointing out that similar rules apply here that you do not seem to be aware of.
 
Last edited:
Feel free if you want to discuss this further to join PQ, because all suggestions are welcome, and because this is Skeptiko and not the place to discuss this. I was pointing out that similar rules apply here that you do not seem to be aware of.
No, you were suggesting that I somehow twisted or misinterpreted the rules-in-the-works over at the new forum that you apparently wrote yourself if you are Ninshub. "That is some strange twisting and interpretation of those rules in the works...." I think I pretty accurately paraphrased those rules in progress.
 

Ian Gordon

Ninshub
Member
No, you were suggesting that I somehow twisted or misinterpreted the rules-in-the-works over at the new forum that you apparently wrote yourself if you are Ninshub. "That is some strange twisting and interpretation of those rules in the works...." I think I pretty accurately paraphrased those rules in progress.
Sorry, Arya. I should have added a word. I've edited my post to include it.
 
Sorry, Arya. I should have added a word. I've edited my post to include it.
Fine. I still don't see how I misinterpreted your rules-in-progress? Were you not suggesting that skeptics who were only going to be "debunkers" refrain from doing so except in certain sub-forums geared towards that so that others who want to have discussions on pro-psi stuff could have them without feeling pounced on? If so, and you and others desire this courtesy, why wouldn't you and others do the same here, just because you don't like or "believe in" a particular topic? Trying to understand what's going on here and the double standard cause it's seems pretty weird/intolerant for a forum that is intended to explore out-of-the-box ideas.
 
Actually, this IS the place to discuss this since I'm talking about the hostile/derisive debunker posts here, not at PQ. And I can't imagine that I would be welcome at PQ anyway, given my crazy views/ideas. If you welcomed me, next thing you know, Alex Jones would want in....
 
Actually, this IS the place to discuss this since I'm talking about the hostile/derisive debunker posts here, not at PQ. And I can't imagine that I would be welcome at PQ anyway, given my crazy views/ideas. If you welcomed me, next thing you know, Alex Jones would want in....
I don't know your ideas/views, but I've seen enough psi debate on the internet to know that politics is always lurking, and it's a certain killer of intelligent enquiry. Politics is writ large in the trend towards conspiracy theories, and most sceptic argument is intrinsically political, promising a sunlit upland of progress that's indistinguishable from the claims of your local party politician.

What kills psi forums isn't counter claims about the reality of fugitive phenomena, it's the service some people would put such ideas to, and the lengths they'll go to in framing reality within a polemic.
 
And let me get this straight: it's ok to discuss invisible energy beings eating our emotions as Loosh -- or an invisible, absentee "God" or a "Demiurge" -- those things are totally plausible, but don't even remotely suggest that high level powerful people engage in pedophilia, despite all the historical precedent....now that's just crazy talk!
For some people, these two ideas are directly related. ("Loosh" and suffering, that is.) Not limited to politicians, but including all kinds of abuse, organized or not, that spreads like a cancer across the human organism. I'm positive that idea will be discussed at PQ. How could it not be? The idea seems a natural progression of thought for those who begin to accept and grok ideas surrounding non-physical entities interacting with the physical sphere, possible reincarnation of "evil" as well as good (anti-bodhisattvas). Hell. We have tons of human who are energy and emotional vampires. It isn't much of a stretch to suggest a matrix style farm system on Earth designed to produce such energies.
 
For some people, these two ideas are directly related. ("Loosh" and suffering, that is.) Not limited to politicians, but including all kinds of abuse, organized or not, that spreads like a cancer across the human organism. I'm positive that idea will be discussed at PQ. How could it not be? The idea seems a natural progression of thought for those who begin to accept and grok ideas surrounding non-physical entities interacting with the physical sphere, possible reincarnation of "evil" as well as good (anti-bodhisattvas). Hell. We have tons of human who are energy and emotional vampires. It isn't much of a stretch to suggest a matrix style farm system on Earth designed to produce such energies.
Please.
 
I don't know your ideas/views, but I've seen enough psi debate on the internet to know that politics is always lurking, and it's a certain killer of intelligent enquiry. Politics is writ large in the trend towards conspiracy theories, and most sceptic argument is intrinsically political, promising a sunlit upland of progress that's indistinguishable from the claims of your local party politician.

What kills psi forums isn't counter claims about the reality of fugitive phenomena, it's the service some people would put such ideas to, and the lengths they'll go to in framing reality within a polemic.
I actually agree with you here about politics typically killing intelligent discourse/inquiry. And even for someone like me, who thinks I've moved beyond the left-right false political paradigm, I see that when you finally get around to musing about potential solutions, I/one will still tend to allow my/his/her dominant/entrenched political/ideological views to color any such proposed solutions.

So I get that some members would like to have a discussion of "fugitive phenomena" or "God/Force/Energy/Psi" etc without having it devolve into heated and often silly political debate -- and that that heated debate is often instigated by the raising/discussion of so called "conspiracy theories." But I think other members here believe that there is a connection between the two -- and want to explore that possible link without being pounced on. I just don't see how a discussion of "evil" -- which most acknowledge exists in this world (other than moral relativists), particularly by those who believe in or are open to discussing a metaphysical aspect/nature of reality and what that means/includes, excludes the open-minded discussion of how it might manifest here.
 
I actually agree with you here about politics typically killing intelligent discourse/inquiry. And even for someone like me, who thinks I've moved beyond the left-right false political paradigm, I see that when you finally get around to musing about potential solutions, I/one will still tend to allow my/his/her dominant/entrenched political/ideological views to color any such proposed solutions.

So I get that some members would like to have a discussion of "fugitive phenomena" or "God/Force/Energy/Psi" etc without having it devolve into heated and often silly political debate -- and that that heated debate is often instigated by the raising/discussion of so called "conspiracy theories." But I think other members here believe that there is a connection between the two -- and want to explore that possible link without being pounced on. I just don't see how a discussion of "evil" -- which most acknowledge exists in this world (other than moral relativists), particularly by those who believe in or are open to discussing a metaphysical aspect/nature of reality and what that means/includes, excludes the open-minded discussion of how it might manifest here.
Can you give an example of where you have been 'pounced on' or unfairly challenged? The leader/moderator of the forum is clearly on your side, and has already fired warning shots towards your opponents.

You're accusing innocent folk of peadophilia and simultaneously claiming snowflake status?

Welcome to the forum.
 
Can you give an example of where you have been 'pounced on' or unfairly challenged? The leader/moderator of the forum is clearly on your side, and has already fired warning shots towards your opponents.

You're accusing innocent folk of peadophilia and simultaneously claiming snowflake status?

Welcome to the forum.
Wow, Malf. You really ARE the Village Idiot. And I thought your profile was just trying to be funny. Since I have found all of your posts useless and too toxic for my sensitive "snowflake" status, I'll be implementing the ignore function from now on with you.

And yeah, "innocent" folk....sleep well at night believing that -- and that all of your posts are coming from a good person place.
 
Last edited:
Top