How many practice telekinesis?

Theweirdtophat wrote: No one has really shown it's impossible either.

The burden of proof rests on the one who asserts the claim. If you say that telekinesis exists, it's on you to provide evidence to substantiate that claim, not the rest of us to prove it doesn't exist.

Furthermore, typically the "evidence of absence" is enough to sufficiently substantiate a negative claim. If telekinesis existed as any kind of practical skill, there would be an abundance of evidence of individuals using this to further their own goals in some substantial way. There is not, so it can be safely assumed that in the absence of any positive evidence, this lack of evidence provides substantial reason to doubt the existence of telekinesis.

Theweirdtophat wrote: No one has really shown it's impossible either.

What steam said...

I really don't like it when people act like they don't have to back up their claims but you have to.

Well, if you are going to claim stuff, we are quite entitled to kindly ask you to back it up, whether you like it or not. Of course, you don't have to back up everything you say, but if you get all whiny about the bad bad reasonable people having actual standards and asking for reasons to pay attention to anything you say instead of giving reasons, to us your claims look like they aren't worth any attention after all. If we made a claim ourselves, we would have to back it up, too. But we don't. And as steam already explained (and as did I on multiple occasions), in a circumstance where evidence of presence would be expected, absense of evidence indicates absence of the thing.

You say it can't happen...

No. We don't. You say we do. But we don't. That's just a lie you keep repeating because it is convenient to your cause. But despair not, for ye are not alone in this. All woo-peddlers, pseudo-scientists and creationists share these tactics. It is only us evil skeptics who bother arguing in dignity and honour.

... because you have never seen it happen? Not a very convincing argument.

Again, not an argument anybody actually made. Now, of course, you are free to attack straw men all day and all night if burning those makes you feel like you have made a case. But if you must know, I have a little bird cage in my room with a living fire-breathing pet dragon inside. His name is Albert. It hatched from an egg a few months ago and then bit me so that there is a compound in my blood now that allows me to see and hear it, for normally it is invisible to the ordinary human eye. Its fire is visible, but I have trained it to only breath any fire in the absense of anybody else, lest it scare someone who cannot see it. You have never seen my dragon. Are you saying I don't have one just because you can't see it? Not a very convincing argument, now, is it? In fact, a rather "arrogant" presumption, if we consider what Yabuturtle said on the matter...

Did germs not exist because we couldn't see them in most of our history? Of course not. They always existed but later we found out ways to see them.

We couldn't see germs for most of our history. Does that mean those germs never existed? Did cells not exist until we had a means of looking at them? No, they always existed but found out ways of looking into it.

Yabuturtle in post #212419

But I do find it rude that people act as if my personal experiences or others experiences never happened. Did you follow me with a camera? How would you or anyone else know what I experienced?

What is it that makes you think anybody should care in the least what you find rude? I find your lying rude and your whining also and your second account, too. But yet here I am actually addressing your points intellectually and making no appeals to emotion in the hopes of evading the devastating soundness of your argument. Come on now, have some dignity. If you can't respect us, at least respect yourself for once. Anyway, to answer your point, I'll ask right back: Did you follow yourself with a camera? How do you know what you experienced? Setting aside completely for now how you can make anybody else know it, of course...

When I see I'll believe it. If this was humanly possible I think it would have been exploited thousands if years age. IMHO

I don't really what makes people think they other people's experiences more than others. It doesn't make sense to me. No one know what I have experienced and they have the gall to tell me what I experienced wasn't real. So how would you know?

It's that kind of arrogance I can't stand. I know what I saw was real. I have experienced lots of things but obviously you can't record it. Not all of it. Has it ever occurred to the naysayers that maybe they should do something? Like, actually try to experience it or talk to people who know such things.

I also would consider for others to learn more about our universe. Piscine and magic play a part in it. If I didn't think it was true, why would I write this? Why would I waste my time?

Theweirdtophat wrote: I also would consider for others to learn more about our universe. Piscine and magic play a part in it. If I didn't think it was true, why would I write this? Why would I waste my time?

To get peoples goat and generate 11 pages of posts?
Not saying that's what its all about but I have one question. If you so believe this stuff why are you on a Jedi site and not a Magic site or paranormal site? Seems like those sites would have a lot more valid info that you seem to be searching for than a Jedi site?

Many are, Kyrin. Lots of people here who believe in this stuff are ALSO on those sites.

Jedi in the movies used Force Powers. So, it's relevant to talk about it... even if it seems ridiculous.

Gisteron wrote: (literally everything Gisteron said)

Theweirdtophat wrote: I don't really what makes people think they other people's experiences more than others. It doesn't make sense to me.

It doesn't make sense to me either, tophat, because you're missing some very important verbs in that sentence. I literally have no idea what you're trying to say here; without the context of the next two paragraphs, this would be utterly indecipherable.

No one know what I have experienced and they have the gall to tell me what I experienced wasn't real. So how would you know?

Firstly, no one knows what you've experienced because you've provided no substance with which to back your claim. At all. You didn't take notes (like the remote viewing tests by gov't agencies), you didn't record yourself on camera, we weren't in the room with you, and you didn't give any procedural notion to your experiments so we can independently verify. For all scientific purposes, that literally means it didn't happen because it doesn't count.

Secondly, it's not gall. It's logic. It's reasoning. It's scientific inquiry. No one here who has a brain in their head is going to just accept that you've seen or done any of these things without asking you questions about it. Questions you've yet to be able to answer. And since you're the one making the claim here, as I said before, the burden of proof is on you, not us. You're the one that has to prove that it happened. We don't require any proof at all to counterclaim, and yet we have more than enough to do so because of the overwhelming absence of any evidence to support your claim.

It's that kind of arrogance I can't stand. I know what I saw was real. I have experienced lots of things but obviously you can't record it. Not all of it. Has it ever occurred to the naysayers that maybe they should do something? Like, actually try to experience it or talk to people who know such things.

It's not arrogance. It's how "proof" works. You cannot show us the experiment you performed, you cannot provide an eyewitness to the experiment, you did not isolate the experiment from all other variables, and even if you did or can do all of those things, you still haven't provided us with the proof that you did them. Furthermore, you cannot prove you were in a stable mindset at that time, you cannot prove that you didn't experience some kind of consciousness shift or hallucination, and since you have no records of it, you can't even prove you weren't on drugs at the time you "experienced" these things.

Gisteron and I aren't saying your experiences never happened. We're saying that they're completely invalid when it comes to proving that paranormal or supernatural abilities exist. It's not that we're saying you're wrong, we're just saying they don't count.

steamboat28 wrote:

Gisteron wrote: (literally everything Gisteron said)

Theweirdtophat wrote: I don't really what makes people think they other people's experiences more than others. It doesn't make sense to me.

It doesn't make sense to me either, tophat, because you're missing some very important verbs in that sentence. I literally have no idea what you're trying to say here; without the context of the next two paragraphs, this would be utterly indecipherable.

No one know what I have experienced and they have the gall to tell me what I experienced wasn't real. So how would you know?

Firstly, no one knows what you've experienced because you've provided no substance with which to back your claim. At all. You didn't take notes (like the remote viewing tests by gov't agencies), you didn't record yourself on camera, we weren't in the room with you, and you didn't give any procedural notion to your experiments so we can independently verify. For all scientific purposes, that literally means it didn't happen because it doesn't count.

Secondly, it's not gall. It's logic. It's reasoning. It's scientific inquiry. No one here who has a brain in their head is going to just accept that you've seen or done any of these things without asking you questions about it. Questions you've yet to be able to answer. And since you're the one making the claim here, as I said before, the burden of proof is on you, not us. You're the one that has to prove that it happened. We don't require any proof at all to counterclaim, and yet we have more than enough to do so because of the overwhelming absence of any evidence to support your claim.

It's that kind of arrogance I can't stand. I know what I saw was real. I have experienced lots of things but obviously you can't record it. Not all of it. Has it ever occurred to the naysayers that maybe they should do something? Like, actually try to experience it or talk to people who know such things.

It's not arrogance. It's how "proof" works. You cannot show us the experiment you performed, you cannot provide an eyewitness to the experiment, you did not isolate the experiment from all other variables, and even if you did or can do all of those things, you still haven't provided us with the proof that you did them. Furthermore, you cannot prove you were in a stable mindset at that time, you cannot prove that you didn't experience some kind of consciousness shift or hallucination, and since you have no records of it, you can't even prove you weren't on drugs at the time you "experienced" these things.

Gisteron and I aren't saying your experiences never happened. We're saying that they're completely invalid when it comes to proving that paranormal or supernatural abilities exist. It's not that we're saying you're wrong, we're just saying they don't count.

What's with you and Gisteron? You have this weird obsession about me, following my posts nitpicking every single thing I say and go out of your way to be rude. Why is it always the rudest posts get the most applause?

Then people act as if I'm being rude when I share experiences that I know is real and I have people here just laugh at it. Surely even you can relate to that. Wouldn't you find it rude if you found something you know was real and people scoff at it. I can understand being a little skeptical but whether you want to admit it or not, you and others have pretty much ridiculed my experiences.

Almost every time I go to sites and share experiences. I have skeptics but then I have people that basically throw sophomoric insults and say what I experienced wasn't real or I was on drugs or something absurd. They don't even bother to approach with an open mind. Is rudeness on this forum celebrated or something? Because I have had a lot of it here and it seems like no one could care less.

Theweirdtophat wrote: What's with you and Gisteron? You have this weird obsession about me, following my posts nitpicking every single thing I say and go out of your way to be rude. Why is it always the rudest posts get the most applause?

It's not a weird obsession. This is just what we do. We're educated skeptics. We bring logic and reasoning to the table where it's necessary. Where we find it lacking, we show up like superheroes and start dropping books on folks' heads. Ask anybody.

Then people act as if I'm being rude when I share experiences that I know is real and I have people here just laugh at it. Surely even you can relate to that. Wouldn't you find it rude if you found something you know was real and people scoff at it. I can understand being a little skeptical but whether you want to admit it or not, you and others have pretty much ridiculed my experiences.

People laugh at it because, without any form of proof, it's laughable. These things just don't happen normally, and if you're going to posit that you have seen the extraordinary, you need to give a little bit more than anecdotal evidence wherever it's possible.

I'm not saying you need to go to a lab and buy mice or anything. But if these things really happened to you once, they can happen again--even the supernatural obeys the laws of scientific inquiry, even if it's outside the bounds of science as we know it. Replicate your experiences, record everything you can about them, and then present them. You'll find us far more accomodating if you give data to go with your anecdotal evidence, even if it's amateurly recorded.

Almost every time I go to sites and share experiences. I have skeptics but then I have people that basically throw sophomoric insults and say what I experienced wasn't real or I was on drugs or something absurd.

Can you prove it was real? Can you prove you weren't on drugs? Can you prove you weren't hallucinating? Without evidence and record, we can't verify anything you're saying is fact. And since we can't, we're under no obligation to believe it is such, or allow you to suffer the same delusion.

They don't even bother to approach with an open mind.

The scientific mind is a perfectly open mind; it simply requires evidence before backing a claim.

Is rudeness on this forum celebrated or something? Because I have had a lot of it here and it seems like no one could care less.

We aren't being rude. We're being honest. You haven't seen us be rude yet. Take your personal feelings out of the matter and discuss it rationally, and you'll find yourself far less offended by the absolute nothing we've done to offend you.