Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Debunking Debunkers] Imagination Deficiency Disorder: Study on skeptics

Expand Messages
  • Ruby Honey
    Why in the world would you find it odd that I d find it odd I a scientific study is , well, odd? Funny you think it s scientific though, tons of debunkers over
    Message 1 of 5 , Sep 18, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Why in the world would you find it odd that I'd find it odd I a scientific study is , well, odd?
      Funny you think it's scientific though, tons of debunkers over on DD Two are tripping over themselves saying how it isn't.

      Also, who the heck appointed you Grand Poobah: "since I have to point this out to you, I will." This isn't my fourm anymoe so I can't
      say what I want to say to THAT. So instead I'll suggest you pleasure yourself.

      It's not "my study," I didn't conduct the study. Anyway...moving on. It does not merely prove as you beleive, in error, that "people are
      people" it illustrates specific traits and behaviors of a specific group of people; debunkers and skepti heads.

      Sheesh.

      ~ ruby





      -- In debunkingdebunkers@y..., "> Rush <" <milhouse-vanhouten@a...> wrote:
      > >>I love this! Just LOVE it! A study that verifies my rants and observations
      > all these long months, LOL. I'm thinking of posting a version of this on the
      > Start page:<<
      >
      > Don't you find it odd that you would need a scientific study? One that uses
      > the rules of science?
      >
      > Since I have to point this out to you, I will: Many skeptics are no better
      > than believers. Anyone who calls themselves a skeptic, and then "believes"
      > is just another believer. In fact, I think they are worse. Hell, many
      > so-called skeptics believe in god, of all things.
      >
      > Your study? Shows that humans are humans.
      >
      > I think we knew that.
      >
      > Cordially,
      > Rush
      >
      > "Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We
      > WANT them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch
      > of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it...
      > There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is
      > the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough
      > criminals one MAKES them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it
      > becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a
      > nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just
      > pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or
      > objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of law-breakers--and then
      > you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system Mr. Reardon, that's the game,
      > and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." -Ayn Rand,
      > Atlas Shrugged
    • > Rush <
      ... study is, well, odd?
      Message 2 of 5 , Sep 18, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        >>Why in the world would you find it odd that I'd find it odd I a scientific
        study is, well, odd?<<

        Given that it seems that many of your positions contradict scientific
        analysis.

        >>Funny you think it's scientific though, tons of debunkers over on DD Two
        are tripping over themselves saying how it isn't.<<

        I have no idea if it is or isn't, I didn't read the entire thing. The
        quotes you provided suggested to me that it wasn't, but it wasn't worth
        going on about.

        >>Also, who the heck appointed you Grand Poobah: "since I have to point this
        out to you, I will." This isn't my fourm anymoe so I can't say what I want
        to say to THAT. So instead I'll suggest you pleasure yourself.<<

        Your post suggested that you were of the mind that only skeptics do what the
        "study" mentioned.

        >>It's not "my study," I didn't conduct the study. Anyway...moving on. It
        does not merely prove as you beleive, in error, that "people are people" it
        illustrates specific traits and behaviors of a specific group of people;
        debunkers and skepti heads.<<

        Heh, those "traits and behaviors," as you quoted them, are displayed by all
        groups of people, in significant numbers. In other words, people are
        people.

        Cordially,
        Rush

        "Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We
        WANT them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch
        of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it...
        There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is
        the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough
        criminals one MAKES them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it
        becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a
        nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just
        pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or
        objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of law-breakers--and then
        you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system Mr. Reardon, that's the game,
        and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." -Ayn Rand,
        Atlas Shrugged
      • Clyde Wary
        Don t you find it odd that you would need a scientific study? One that uses the rules of science? One does not need a scientific study; these things are
        Message 3 of 5 , Sep 19, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          "Don't you find it odd that you would need a scientific study? One
          that uses the rules of science?"

          One does not need a scientific study; these things are intuitively
          clear. But it's nice to see confirmation from that quarter.

          "Since I have to point this out to you, I will: Many skeptics are no
          better than believers."

          They are "true belivers," in the most debased of that terms
          definitions! The most dogmatic are the atheists, who hold a negative
          belief about something, which by definition, can hide
          Himself/Herself/Itself from being detected.

          "Hell, many so-called skeptics believe in god, of all things."

          Maybe there's hope for some of them...:)
        • Clyde Wary
          Given that it seems that many of your positions contradict scientific analysis. Are you saying that many of her positions defy such analysis, or that the
          Message 4 of 5 , Sep 19, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            "Given that it seems that many of your positions contradict scientific
            analysis."

            Are you saying that many of her positions defy such analysis, or that
            the topics she has those positions about defy analysis? If the
            former, I would suggest that any position an individual takes on any
            topic can be analyzed in view of the psychological motives that enter
            into such formulations. Anyway, give some examples...and even if
            they are unanalyzable, that still doesn't make them wrong...
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.