| RETURN TO TELEKINESIS PAGE - TELEKINESIS -> Keith's logic debunked! | Start A New Topic | CLOSED |
| Post Info | TOPIC: Keith's logic debunked! |
| Posted By: anomaly Posted On: Feb 16, 2005 Views: 1609 | Keith's logic debunked! Kudos to Nick and Placebo for taking the bull by the horns! |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Feb 16, 2005 Views: 1607 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! Yes, and making total idiots of themselves in the process. Well done both of you! Reading through your postings is a real joy for those of us that live in the real world and do not need to create a fantasy world where we have super powers: super powers that allow us to move very small pieces of paper balanced on a pin, and other equally mind boggling demonstations of awesome power. It's all so highly amusing . Keep up the good work all of you. Oh yes, my logic has been debunked for sure, a quick read through all your clever, rational and logical arguments is proof of that. Or am I just being sarcastic again? I treat you poor tkers very badly don't I? It's sympathy I should really be giving you. |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 16, 2005 Views: 1604 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! >Yes, and making total idiots of themselves in >the process. >Well done both of you! >Reading through your postings is a real joy for >those of us that live in the real world and do >not need to create a fantasy world where we >have super powers: super powers that allow us >to move very small pieces of paper balanced on >a pin, and other equally mind boggling >demonstations of awesome power. >It's all so highly amusing . >Keep up the good work all of you. >Oh yes, my logic has been debunked for sure, a >quick read through all your clever, rational >and logical arguments is proof of that. >Or am I just being sarcastic again? >I treat you poor tkers very badly don't I? >It's sympathy I should really be giving you. Well, let's see what this comment looks like without the Ad Hominem attacks. By the way, this is what I mentioned in my other post back there. :) >Oh yes, my logic has been debunked for sure, >Or am I just being sarcastic again? >I treat you poor tkers very badly don't I? Ok, if you are being sarcastic, please point out why my argument doesn't make sense... You have yet to say how my arguement doesn't make logical sense. |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 16, 2005 Views: 1599 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! As for that one Ad Hominem attack about me making an idiot out of myself.... I can only make an idiot out of myself if I say or do something idiotic. I have done nothing except for put forth an argument attacking your logic. If you do not respond to the argument, but rather attack me by calling me an idiot, all you have shown is that you can't defend yourself. Who's the idiot? |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 16, 2005 Views: 1586 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! >Reading through your posting I can't see where >you have demonstrated any fault in my logic, So you deny contradicting yourself? You said: >My own videos showing how to rotate a psi >wheel and straw by natural means are not proof >If anything, they are only there to clarify >my instructions on how to do it. Then you say: >Here are my reasons for believing that TK does >not exist: > >1) The two main TK stunts are not TK. Where have you shown that the two main stunts are not TK? This is a statement, it's either true or false, and you my friend say it's true. Where's your backup for this statement? Obviously not the videos, right? Because you said yourself they are there to prove nothing... By the way, just incase I have to spell it out for you, that question about if you deny contradicting yourself was rhetorical. I mean, either your statement about the two TK stunts not being TK is unsubstantiated, or you're using something to prove it. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Feb 16, 2005 Views: 1581 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! Yes I do deny contradicting myself. As I keep on telling you its just you getting it all wrong. There is NO contradiction in my saying that the videos are not proof that TK does not exist and then saying that the two main TK stunts are not TK. Where is the contradiction in that? The two statements are not linked and I make it very clear they are not linked and have explained to you three times already they are not linked. I even say, in bold letters, after listing my reasons for not believing in TK on the main page ....However, that is just my belief, you will have yours. Did you miss that line? You ask where have I shown that the two main TK stunts are not TK, as it is not my videos. Simple, I cant see why you have such a problem with it. I EXPLAIN how to rotate a psi wheel and straw without TK. I give detailed explanations on how to do it. I PROVE I can do it without TK BY GIVING INSTRUCTIONS how anyone can do it. By following my instructions to the letter anyone can test it for themselves, which is why I dont need the videos as proof of anything, just for clarification for those that have a problem following instructions. By doing this I have demonstrated that the two main TK stunts can be done without TK. Therefore these stunts are useless as a guide as to whether or not anyone can demonstrate TK because a tker is not doing anything that anyone else can do. Therefore how is it possible to claim that they have TK by using those two tests? They cant. They would have to do something that could ONLY be done by TK. Therefore I can rightly say that those two tests are not TK, because in the true tradition of both science and logic, ANY CLAIM MADE HAS TO BE DEMONSTRATED IN ORDER TO BE PROVEN AS EXISTING AS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE A THING DOES NOT EXIST. I am therefore perfectly justified in saying that the two main TK stunts are not TK because there is no way you can show they are. So without any proof whatsoever existing it is nothing more than a belief. You may believe it is TK, but what good is that? Where is the logic you profess to be so keen on using? You want to use science and logic in an area that has nothing but belief??????? So as far as the psi wheel and rotating straw are concerned, TK does not exist, you just happen to have a belief that it does. That is your choice, but has nothing to do with either logic or science. There is no fault in my logic, the fault is in your comprehension, and that is what I first said. |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 16, 2005 Views: 1578 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! >Simple, I cant see why you have such a problem >with it. >Therefore I can rightly say that those two >tests are not TK, because in the true tradition >of both science and logic, ANY CLAIM MADE HAS >TO BE DEMONSTRATED IN ORDER TO BE PROVEN AS >EXISTING AS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE A THING >DOES NOT EXIST. >I am therefore perfectly justified in saying >that the two main TK stunts are not TK >because there is no way you can show they are. Basically the third block is a recap of the previous two. The conclusion, shall we say. So you're logical conclusion is that since there are no videos that exist that prove that the two main stunts are not TK, then they aren't? This is the same as saying that since I can make no videos to prove that my hair is red, then my hair is not red. |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 16, 2005 Views: 1576 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! Oh, and my hair is definently red. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Feb 16, 2005 Views: 1571 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! Nick. This is what you said in reply to my post where I clearly explained my logic and my argument in as clear and simple and logical way as possible. You STILL just can't understand it though can you? "So you're logical conclusion is that since there are no videos that exist that prove that the two main stunts are not TK, then they aren't? This is the same as saying that since I can make no videos to prove that my hair is red, then my hair is not red." How you manage to draw that "logical conclusion" from my remarks is beyond all understanding!!!!!!! Why you are so fixated on videos is also beyond understanding. Why can't you understand that videos have NOTHING to do with it.? What is with you that makes you unable to grasp even a simple explanation? What actual words do I need to employ that will somehow manage to convey to your very befuddled and tinylittle mind that the videos have nothing to do with my logic or my argument. I'm sorry Nick, but yet again you have demonstrated a level of stupidity that is beyond belief. It is utterly impossible to have a discussion with you because you simply cannot understand what is being said to you. You simply just don't get it. This is not the first time I have said this. Just give it up Nick, every comment you make just digs you deeper into a hole, honestly. |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 17, 2005 Views: 1567 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! You haven't answered my question. What substantiates your statement that the two main TK stunts aren't TK? |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 17, 2005 Views: 1566 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! I'm sorry, maybe it isn't a question. For a person of your level of reading comprehension though, you must be able to figure out that you hae a statement: >The two main TK stunts aren't TK. And you have no way of substantiating that claim. If the videos aren't used to prove it, then what? |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 17, 2005 Views: 1563 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! >I am therefore perfectly justified in saying >that the two main TK stunts are not TK >because there is no way you can show they are. This is utterly illogical in itself. Just because you can't show they are doesn't mean that you can say they are not. |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 17, 2005 Views: 1561 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! You say you are having a good time? A great laugh? I'm having fun too. You seem too great to be true. A skeptic who, instead of just admitting that he doesn't know, says that it doesn't exist. And why doesn't it exist? Because you can't show him. >I am therefore perfectly justified in saying >that the two main TK stunts are not TK >because there is no way you can show they are. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Feb 17, 2005 Views: 1544 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! Nick, You are just making a fool of yourself. You keep asking the same question although it has been answered. What more can I do other than keep repeating the answer? I accept the fact that you are just unable to grasp what I have explained to you, but there is nothing more I can say, I cant make it any clearer. The problem is with you and your inability to understand what is being said to you, so Im afraid I cant help you. All I can suggest is that you ask someone else to read it and explain it to you. This is what you keep saying.....The two main TK stunts aren't TK. And you have no way of substantiating that claim. If the videos aren't used to prove it, then what? As I have already given a full answer and explanation I honestly find it difficult to believe that you just ask the same question yet again. In truth no explanation is necessary, as its all made clear on my main page anyway. Correction, made clear to people with an IQ that runs into double figures. Its dumb jerks like you that give tkers such a bad name in the intelligence department. I bet most of them reading your comments wish to God you would just shut up and stop making such a total arse of yourself. Read again my explanation on this thread, its the second posting I made. Read it carefully, all is explained. If however you still dont get it, then tough, your stupidity is your problem and I cant help you with that. You asking the same dumb question another twenty times and me giving the same answer isnt going to help you one bit. You just dont have the brains to understand a logical argument when presented with it, so there is no point in you asking for it in the first place. Run along and get your scanner bouncing off the desk again....... |
| Posted By: powdered_water Posted On: Feb 17, 2005 Views: 1537 | RE: Keith's logic debunked! Look when he says "The two TK stunts are not TK" He simply means that what he did was not tk. He does not mean that you can not do the first two tk stunts. Ok? |
| Pages [ 1 2 ] Next Page -> |