Why We Need Skeptics in the Skeptiko Forum

Discussion in 'Critical Discussions Among Proponents and Skeptics' started by alex.tsakiris, Dec 9, 2013.

  1. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,537
    Finally got around to watching this youtube: (thx again to whoever posted it)

    In the video Dr. Lloyd Rudy, a pioneer of cardiac surgery, tells stories of two patients who came back to life after being declared dead. Very compelling, but even more so in light of all the Skeptical nonsense that still surrounds NDE science.

    I mean, come on, who do you want to discuss this video with... someone who acknowledges the obvious implications of cases like this... i.e. that consciousness survives death and therefore atheism is an even bigger joke than the baby Jesus thing. Or would you rather discuss it with a bobo doll skeptic who's going to challenge you to prove that's really Rudy... and then tell you it's just an anecdote? Now, I realize that we our skeptics (i.e. on this forum) are a lot better informed than Bobo dolls, but it will still be fun to see how the conversation goes :)


    I
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2013
    Reece likes this.
  2. Larry

    Larry Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    134
    Regarding this type of testimony – yeah the bobo doll thing gets kind of old but when examining world views at a philosophically sophisticated level it’s really edifying to see two smart people of different orientations hash it as with Bernardo and Paul’s discourse in the recent thread "Why materialism is baloney" which unfortunately got derailed when Paul was temporarily banned.
     
  3. Kay

    Kay New

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2013
    Messages:
    231
    Is Paul banned now, too?
     
  4. Larry

    Larry Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    134
    I think he was for a week or something. At any rate he had to drop out of the thread that I mentioned above
     
  5. Kay

    Kay New

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2013
    Messages:
    231
    Huh. Has malf been banned, too? And fls only sort of unbanned and on some sort of probation?

    I'm starting to feel like a character in an Agatha Christie novel. :) lol
     
  6. fls

    fls Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    2,658
    You are correct that the Ed One Act passed in 2013, making undocumented stories a valid and reliable form of evidence. However, you've jumped the gun a bit. It doesn't go into effect until January 1, 2014. Wait a few weeks to play your video and then you can make fun of us all you like. Well, those of us in the US, anyway. ;)

    Linda
     
  7. fls

    fls Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    2,658
    I'm supposed to operate under the same conditions as you (unless Alex lifted your restriction) - confine your posts to the Critical Discussion area (plus any relevant Guidelines discussions).

    Linda
     
  8. Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

    Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Nap, interrupted. Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,486
    You're banned from all forums except CDAPaS, too. There is some confusion regarding a PM that Alex sent on November 30 to a select group of members. In this PM he asked us not to post on any forums except this one. I am trying to get Alex to tell us whether that ban is still in effect. I'm also trying to convince the moderators to post suspensions and bannings.

    Meanwhile, I'd be happy to talk about the Rudy interview. Specifically, what is missing from the interview.

    ~~ Paul
     
  9. north

    north Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    306
    I was curious about this thread, based on the title. As yet there is no light thrown on the matter.

    There appears to be one class of "skeptics" who are of an organized movement that mindlessly repeat the talking points fed to them such as "anecdote is not evidence". There is actually no conversation with this type and I use the ignore feature to avoid wasting time.

    The second class of "skeptics" is of the nit picking variety. They believe if they can find one rusty nail, then there is no Noah's ark. They will not see a forest, only one leaf that looks shady. Lengthy dialogues can go one with this type about the oxidation of the nail and whether it might be due to transient lighting, but there is little real conversation. There is no discussion of the implications because they are too different from the skeptic's worldview.

    The third class of skeptics is actually interested in the topic and has read materials with some care, but is held back from full acceptance. At times there are interesting discussions clarifying the perspectives and experiences. These conversations can be illuminating but are too often rare.
     
    Larry, Bucky and Ian Gordon like this.
  10. Michael

    Michael Guest

    I think who we need are people who have an actual interest in the topics of discussion in this forum. People who have an actual interested in furthering our understanding and support us asking these question and reconsidering our assumptions. Who we do not need are those who are interested in stopping discussion, or who simply want to interfere with the discussion with the intent to bring it to a full stop. What we don't need are those folks who would answer the question by simply stating: don't worry, science will eventually find an answer just accept the current consensus and stop questioning it. We don't need that here.
     
  11. steve001

    steve001 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    2,053
    Alex you can't seem to understand that skeptics, at least this one, don't follow their hearts desires, they go wherever the truth goes. Unlike you we don't have a need for a thing to be true, we want to know if something is true.

    Explain how this particular account or generally disproves atheism?
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2013
  12. steve001

    steve001 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    2,053
     
  13. fls

    fls Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    2,658
    Completely agree.

    Linda

    (Admittedly, this isn't any more informative than hitting the "like" button, but I'm allergic to those things. :))
     
  14. Smithy

    Smithy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    381
    [quote="alex.tsakiris, post: 6408, member: 1"
    In the video Dr. Lloyd Rudy, a pioneer of cardiac surgery, tells stories of two patients who came back to life after being declared dead. Very compelling, but even more so in light of all the Skeptical nonsense that still surrounds NDE science.
    I[/quote]


    Alex, I can tell you that in the forthcoming issue of the Journal of Near-Death Studies Titus Rivas MA MSc and I will report how we tracked down a prime witness of the case as reported by Dr Lloyd Rudy in that video. It was Dr Rudy's assistent-surgeon who confirmed word for word everything that was said by Dr Rudy. Thus the case seems pretty strong.

    But of course quite a few pseudo-skeptics will dismiss the whole case with their usual crap: it happened too long ago, it was not documented on the spot, the patient could not be traced, and how do we know those surgeons did not not make it all up, and so on and so forth.

    I know how that kind of "skeptics" think: always distrustful, even on the brink of paranoia. In other words: not sound skepticism, but plain denialism and debunkery.
     
    tim, Ian Gordon, LoneShaman and 4 others like this.
  15. Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

    Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Nap, interrupted. Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,486
    I'm sure Rudy is reasonable and trustworthy. The problem is that we have no idea what was said to the patient before the story was told, nor how the story may have evolved over weeks and months.

    What might be useful is compiling a list of exactly what the patient said that appears extraordinary.

    ~~ Paul
     
  16. fls

    fls Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    2,658
    Smithy, who are you doing this for? Why do you go to the trouble if you know beforehand that this isn't the kind of information skeptics are looking for? I think you are right about that - even Ian Stevenson realized the weakness of depending upon stories which are collected well after the interested parties have exchanged information. His solution was to attempt to collect statements/information prior to any attempts at verification.

    http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_02_2_stevenson.pdf (page 218-219)

    A bit of a pipe dream, but what if it became part of the routine, after a medical crisis or a period of unconsciousness, to ask the patient whether they had any auditory or visual experiences during the time they seemed to be unresponsive, just like we ask other routine medical questions? If someone says yes, then a blinded party could interview them before there is any information exchange - especially if it's one of the rarer deep NDEs. Could you put your efforts into something like that?

    Linda
     
  17. Smithy

    Smithy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    381
    Ah well - I see progress: Dr Rudy is reasonable and trustworthy! :)

    For the rest I would say: just wait until our report in JNDS is on the doormat.
     
    K9! likes this.
  18. Smithy

    Smithy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    381
    Linda! Rivas and I are people that in contrast to armchair critics like you and Paul go after the real thing , i.e. doing field work! And, besides that, always start out by TRUSTING the people we encounter.

    Anyway - it should be enough that all that has been said by Dr Lloyd Rudy was confirmed by this assistent-surgeon.

    And I repeat - just wait and see until our report arrives. I am not going to say more about it, because I am bound by copyright regulations.
     
    tim, Slorri, Haruhi and 4 others like this.
  19. fls

    fls Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    2,658
    I wasn't criticizing you. I was just curious why you perform the kind of research where you expect skeptics to "dismiss the whole case"? Since you do the field work, have you considered adopting Stevenson's methods and going after cases before there has been an exchange of information?

    Linda
     
  20. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,537
    I did: http://www.skeptiko.com/221-atheist-john-loftus-biological-robot/
     

Share This Page