Is rejecting supernatural explanations close-minded? (page 3)

Warlock

I used to work in an office that was haunted, and the toilet seat would go down by itself.

So, explain that.

Warlock

inkling

Schroedinger's toilet?

Lol!!!!

I used to work in an office that was haunted, and the toilet seat would go down by itself.
So, explain that.

Am I the only one who has hard time telling if warlock is joking? Or maybe high?

VM44

*** g35 11/20 p. 116 British Empire ***

Fire-Walking in Britain

Unwilling to learn anything from the Bible a flock of British scientists built a pit filled with seven tons of oak logs, one ton of firewood, one load of charcoal and ten gallons of kerosene, and after it had been burning for eight hours, and the surface heat was found to be 800 degrees Fahrenheit, they saw Kuda Bux, a young Hindu, walk the length of the pit, pausing fire seconds at each step, and emerge unscathed. This happened at Carshalton, Kent, and was a case of demonism, pure and simple. Two British medical students who attempted to emulate the feat were severely burned after a few steps and had to jump to safety.

The above was written by Clayton J. Woodworth, the "open-minded" editor of The Golden Age magazine.

WTWizard

Notably, the Washtowel Slaveholdery demands that people accept their own claims without question, despite that it can be proven wrong both from the Bible and from science. Anyone that disagrees with what its Filthful and Disgraceful Slavebugger puts out is going to be cut off, protecting the remaining witlesses from those ideas that may be more valid than what they already have.

Even accepting the Bible itself without critical analysis is dangerous. Our history is full of wars and Dark Ages that stem from accepting the Bible without analyzing it. The Bible says that the earth is a circle, and it says it is a 4-sided polygon (depending on which scriptures you read) if taken literally. The Bible tells of a global flood that could not have produced the results we observe. The Bible tells of a loving God that demands people to give up themselves and make "acceptable sacrifice", to add to the "perfect sacrifice, to which nothing ever need be added" or [die, go to hell] (depending on whose interpretation you subscribe to). All of which help retard science and knowledge.

And, when you have evangelists on missionary work for the Christian denominations (cults or otherwise) going into Hindu or Muslim regions that believe another book equally blindly, you set up strife. You may well get killed or locked up (or deported). If you are successful in getting your churches set up and many people join, they lose their cultures. Civil wars, often lasting decades, can result when newly Christianized people go up against Islam or Hindu governments and laws, creating disorder and riots. All because both sides refuse to look at the possibility that the other side might be right, or that both sides might lie.

Warlock

Am I the only one who has hard time telling if warlock is joking? Or maybe high?

inkling,

I have not been 'high' in 30 years.

I am NOT joking.

I am as serious as a heart attack.

By the way, that was not the only thing that happened.

Warlock

parakeet

Mysterious: If I refuse to believe that my bad breath is a result of the fact that my lawn grows is that close-minded?

In statistical analyses, you can have a correlation, like the one you present.

The study most often cited to demonstrate the difference between correlation and causality is the one that concluded that businessmen who wore red neckties were financially more successful than businessmen who wore green ties. Does it mean that wearing a red tie will increase your financial well-being? No. A correlation merely notes that a relationship between those two variables exists, but it does not imply causality.

Your bad breath (so glad we're having this discussion online) may correlate with the growth of your lawn, but further study would be needed to determine whether one variable causes or affects the other.

Warlock: I used to work in an office that was haunted, and the toilet seat would go down by itself. So, explain that.

The ghost was female.

kanootcha

So, explain that.

Someone was messing with you and had a remote way to close it, the wind blew it down, it had an automatic closing mechanism you didn't know of.

There's absolutely no way for US to explain YOUR anecdotal evidence.

Just check out one of this guys other videos...about the unreliability of anecdotal evidence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPqerbz8KDc

The vids from this guy are mostly excellent...good link OP, thanks!

drwtsn32

Be sure to check out some of this guy's other videos....lots of great stuff!

Warlock

There's absolutely no way for US to explain YOUR anecdotal evidence.
Exactly.
Someone was messing with you and had a remote way to close it, the wind blew it down, it had an automatic closing mechanism you didn't know of.
Impossible.
Warlock

inkling

inkling,
I have not been 'high' in 30 years.
I am NOT joking.

My apologies. I was not implying that you WERE, just that it was such a bizare story with little
context that sounded almost satirically random.

My reply is the same as the excellent wording in the video:

"Although it's quite reasonable to describe an experience and say YOU can't explain it,
telling your audience THEY can't explain it is senseless, because your audience has no
independent access to the events you describe, nor any way of investigating which details
you may have missed or edited out"

This is conversation quite frustrating to me, becuase your reply to the video (of an anecdotal
"ghost story" type memory of a perception of an event) is exactly the sort of thing that would
prompt me to urge someone to view the video in the first place.

With all due respect, I think somthing is failing to sink in.

I agree with Kanootcha, and recomend THIS video, which is an exact response to that type of claim:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPqerbz8KDc

If have honestly watched these two videos, and still don't understand even slightly why Skeptics
are not impressed into belief by your story and its ilk, I don't see that this conversation has anywhere
productive to go.

[inkling]

Is rejecting supernatural explanations close-minded?

Share this