View Single Post
  #729  
Old 10-08-2010, 07:13 PM
J_Player's Avatar
J_Player J_Player is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 4,382
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Qiaozhi
OK guys ... I think it's time to stop the bickering. As I stated earlier:

And this is still true. If either of you insist that signal lines exist then you need to provide proof, otherwise we are back to the tea tray analogy. However (as I understand it) you both believe that signal lines do not exist, so this continued arguing makes no sense.

Please leave the burden of proof to the dowsing fraternity where it belongs, and let's return to the original purpose of this thread ... which (in case you've forgotten) is "RangerTell Examiner Field Tests". The results of which we are all eagerly awaiting...
The bickering already stopped when Theseus discovered nobody will believe he conducted a test that proves signal lines don't exist. I think you are correct. The burden of proof that signal lines exist belongs with the LRL/dowsing community. This is why I cannot understand why a skeptic would make false claims he ran tests that prove they do not exist, and hide his evidence. As you said, that kind of test is not possible.

But you are mistaken about what people believe.
I believe things that I can see proof of. For signal lines, I have not seen any conclusive proof they exist or don't exist. All I can say is I am of the opinion there is no such thing as a signal line, but I don't know for sure. And I am very interested to see any test that proves they don't exist.

There is the difference between an opinion and a belief. Having a belief that signal lines don't exist depends on having faith in things you cannot prove. In order to believe signal lines don't exist a person would have to have faith that nobody will ever demonstrate conclusive evidence of signal lines from now to eternity. Like most skeptics, I think it is highly unlikely, but I don't have the blind faith to believe it can never happen, ever.

Let's put it this way:
A lot of people including the best scientist had the belief that the world is flat for centuries. They believed there was danger for people who sailed their ships too close to the edge, where they might fall off the earth. The burden of proof was on the people who claimed the earth was round, which they did not prove at that time, so a lot of people continued to believe the earth is flat. Nobody could devise a test for earth-flattness, so the experts used the argument that earth-flattness is self-evident, without any way to prove the flattness. The point is all those experts and average people believed in flat-earth on faith. And they had faith that nobody would ever be able to prove otherwise. Doesn't clinging to faith in leiu of facts indicate a lack of critical thinking? Eventually somebody did provide credible proof the earth is not flat.

Who's to say someone won't someday show credible evidence that there are signal lines? Not me. I can't prophesize the future any more than early experts could prophesize living in a round earth. I can have an opinion, about the non-existence of signal lines, but I won't elevate the glory of signal lines to a faith belief that they exist or do not exist. I prefer to see the proof first. Otherwise signal lines might take on religious attributes. If Theseus really has the proof they don't exist, let him prove it. As you say, "the burden of proof is on the claimant".

If there is no proof of testing claims coming from Theseus, I think you are right. Time to move on.


Best wishes,
J_P
Reply With Quote