ouija board

by The-Borg 170 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  TD

  The burden of proof does fall upon the claimant. That's why it's so easy to be a skeptic There's no work involved.

  I have an aging relative that recalls when he was a little boy there was a cow in his father's herd that wouldn't milk. He followed the cow all day long and eventually discovered that it was being milked by black snakes.

  None of the anatomical features of a snake that make this impossible phase him. He swears this is what he saw.

  The nature of this type of claim precludes disconfirmation. Proving a negative is a logical fallacy.
• 

  bluecanary

  Warlock, I did a little research on burden of proof before I posted earlier to make sure I was not mistaken. Did you research your point of view or are you just stating your own opinion? I can point you to some information if you'd like to verify your postion through an outside source:

  http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience#Over-reliance_on_confirmation_rather_than_refutation

  http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/pecorip/scccweb/etexts/phil_of_religion_text/chapter_5_arguments_experience/burden-of-proof.htm

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof#Science_and_other_uses
• 

  The-Borg

  I didn't want this to become an argument, I just wanted peoples experiences.
• 

  bluecanary

  The-Borg, I just experienced an argument, does that count?

  Sorry to hijack the thread. And since I'm done running in the special olympics here, I'll be quiet.
• 

  drwtsn32

  Why don't YOU and those who believe like you go and interview actual people who have had experiences with the oujia.
  
  YOU do some research and read some first hand accounts.

  For the last time, please watch the video I posted on anecdotal evidence and why it is insufficient in proving a claim such as this. It really will help you understand the position many of us take on this matter.
• 

  drwtsn32

  The-Borg, I just experienced an argument, does that count?

  LOL
• 

  Warlock

  sherlock,

  The "lab", the "controlled environment", the "controlled conditions", are NOT real world.

  In the real world, things happen when and where they happen.

  Like I said, YOU must re-create, under the same conditions, EVERY experience, with proof in each re-created experience of your alternative explanation of that experience, for your "science" to have any validity.

  I'm not the one asking for proof of anything.

  YOU ARE.

  Warlock
• 

  drwtsn32

  The "lab", the "controlled environment", the "controlled conditions", are NOT real world. In the real world, things happen when and where they happen.

  Exactly. That is the point. The "real world" is riddled with human bias, flawed perception, and even open to intentional trickery by others. A controlled test is designed to eliminate those things so we can come to the actual truth.

  Like I said, YOU must re-create, under the same conditions, EVERY experience, with proof in each re-created experience of your alternative explanation of that experience, for your "science" to have any validity.

  As others have mentioned, that is flat out wrong. Proving a such negative is not possible. For example, I say a purple unicorn came into my house this morning and ate my car keys. You would rightly ask for objective evidence to back that up as my claim is extraordinary. I don't like that because I have no proof, just my subjective experience (even though I may feel it is hard evidence). If I were to ask you to prove that it didn't happen, could you? Nope. The fact that it is impossible to prove something didn't happen is not evidence that it did happen.

  I'm not the one asking for proof of anything. YOU ARE.

  I'm well aware of that. You are the one making the claim, though. Not me.
• 

  Warlock

  A controlled test is designed to eliminate those things so we can come to the actual truth.

  Oh, bullshit!

  You just want the result to be YOUR result.

  Warlock
• 

  drwtsn32

  You just want the result to be YOUR result.

  First of all, we're all biased. I perceive you as having no critical thinking ability on this topic and just accept things at face value because you like the conclusion. You perceive me as someone that will accept no evidence to support this claim because I don't want it to be true.

  Dude, I would love for there to be something to ANY paranormal claim. It would be fascinating to study supernatural phenomena that didn't disappear once you put it under the scrutiny of a controlled test.