Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)
I put proof up here and all the pseudo-skeptics can try to do is ridicule it. Just goes to show that they are not only insincere, but have the inferiority complex, cannot admit the truth.
FUNNY THING IS COLIN KEAY IN THE FOUNDER OF THE AUSTRAILIAN SKEPTICS GROUP!!!
I guess all you randi-lovers are jealous.  At least this guy is for real, not some phony fraud with a chip on his shoulder like your hero. Never has it been clearer to me the meaning of "Birds of a feather flock together."
And Colin Keay has quite a list of honors.
http://home.pacific.net.au/~ddcsk1 |
Mike - your modus operandi appears to consist of initially attacking skeptics with a torrent of nonsense verbage, followed by a link to some equally nonsense theory or pseudo-scientific idea. If you want to present an idea here, however outlandish, then please try to do so without the accompanying rant.
By the way, you will note that I used the term "skeptic", and not your incorrect "pseudo-skeptic" terminology. As I've no idea what the term "pseudo-skeptic" is supposed to infer, I looked it up on your preferred source of information - wikipedia - and found it to mean:
"
Pseudoskepticism (or pseudoscepticism) refers to arguments which use scientific-sounding language to disparage or refute given beliefs, theories, or claims, but which in fact fail to follow the precepts of conventional scientific skepticism."
which is clearly a feeble [pseudo-scientific?] attempt to twist the "pseudo" concept back onto the skeptics. Nice try, but no cigar.
There is absolutely no need to post pejorative remarks against skeptics, as our responses are firmly based in the real world using established scientific ideas. Finally, I do not see any connection between the work of Dr Colin Keay and your dowsing activities. or is this another poor attempt to lend credence to your outlandish ideas?