| RETURN TO TELEKINESIS PAGE - TELEKINESIS -> A couple of questions for Keith | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: A couple of questions for Keith |
| Posted By: Woodpecker Posted On: Jun 23, 2006 Views: 898 | A couple of questions for Keith (1)"I am unable to respect your beliefs because all you have is a silly belief." (2)"It is not possible to respect someone when they talk such obvious nonsense." (3)"An intelligent response would be appreciated. Show me you hold a meaningful argument." I have been reading your posts with much interest over the last few weeks, and I've noticed most of your posts are based on the above comments, so I have some questions for you: 1. Statement (1) is usually followed by statement (2). If so, this means that if someone believes in tk, you do not respect their beliefs, and then because you do not respect their beliefs you cannot respect them. Hence the many insults you have thrown. Is this true? 2. Statement (3) is a common request from you, yet I am unsatisfied as to your approach with the replies. When you say, "An intelligent response would be appreciated. Show me you hold a meaningful argument." Do you mean that you will only consider the argument intelligent and well-argued if it is not in favour of tk? That is to say, you will only consider it valid if the argument agrees with you? I look forward to your reply. |
| Posted By: maxus Posted On: Jun 23, 2006 Views: 895 | RE: A couple of questions for Keith i wouldnt bother addressing anything to kieth, that tit wont bother replying to anything he doesnt have a reasonable answer for, like your post. Kieth seems to enjoy the finer things in life, like knitting, the structure of churches, small children, the list goes on and on.......and im sure hes too busy doing those things to give a f*ck about what anyone who believes has to say. EDITOR: AND YOU EARN MY RESPECT WITH C R A P LIKE THIS? THIS THE BEST YOU CAN DO. RUN ALONG KID. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jun 23, 2006 Views: 891 | RE: RE: A couple of questions for Keith Look under the thread "The results.." dated May 10 I have put a simple question to Nightshade, who falsely accuses me of refusing to engage in a sensible discussion, and I am still waiting for a sensible reply. Let's wait and see the reply. What more can I do? |
| Posted By: Woodpecker Posted On: Jun 23, 2006 Views: 889 | RE: A couple of questions for Keith Well, you could answer my first question which isn't covered in the thread you mention. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jun 23, 2006 Views: 884 | RE: A couple of questions for Keith Okay. When someone posts a message and they claim they can levitate bricks, move chairs around, rotate just about anything, etc. etc. I have no respect for them or their beliefs. Because this is NOT about beliefs. This person is saying they CAN do these things. Because I know they can't I know they are just lying. If they really could do those things then why do they need to tell the world via a silly message board? We would already know! Something like that just can't be kept a secret. That is why I say this poster is just posting pure nonsense. If they could do it they would do it, not just say they could do it. Oh yeah, I almost forgot, they don't want the world to know for fear of ridicule, kidnap by the government, don't want the fame or fortune, blah blah. Yeah right! Why post it then? If you think what that poster says makes sense, think again, from the point of view of someone who does not have a firm opinion on the matter but does think about it a lot. So does it make any sense? All those that raised their hands are firm believers of TK. No sensible person would swallow any of those claims. Is my argument flawed then? Should I simply acept that what this person says is the truth. On what grounds can I accept it? Over to you. ps. See how much typing just to make this one point. WHY should I bother? You will still think me wrong, Tk exists, the guy is genuine, etc. etc. This is such a waste of time. But hey, go for it. |
| Posted By: Woodpecker Posted On: Jun 23, 2006 Views: 878 | RE: RE: A couple of questions for Keith Ok, there's no need to be so aggressive. I'm not going to favour either side in this discussion, my only intention is to be objective and fair. No, of course you shouldn't accept things at face value. There should be a critical evaluation of the evidence presented. "This person is saying they CAN do these things. Because I know they can't I know they are just lying." You say you know they can't because otherwise it would be public knowledge. When someone tries to break the high jump record, there has been no previous proof that such a feat can be achieved. It is only in testing everybody that such an achievement can be discovered. Therefore, it is possible that someone really could do tk, it's just that they haven't been discovered yet. If this hypothesis is true, it's going to take a long time to check all the 6.5 billion people on this planet. "If you think what that poster says makes sense, think again, from the point of view of someone who does not have a firm opinion on the matter but does think about it a lot. DSo does it make any sense? All those that raised their hands are firm believers of TK. No sensible person would swallow any of those claims. Is my argument flawed then?" No, your argument isn't flawed because people tell lies and/or don't know what they are doing. However, it is possible for someone to post with an intelligent and well-argued point even if it is wrong. I could make such an argument 'proving' the world is flat, but of course we know that it is not. "Something like that just can't be kept a secret." Actually, when you consider the number of people who kept the existence of the world's first electronic computer a secret (Colossus at Bletchley Park, England) it does not seem such an unreasonable task at all. The Americans got the credit for it yet they were not the first, and I would bet that Tommy Flowers, it's inventor and designer, had a hard time with the disappointment. "No sensible person would swallow any of those claims." Maybe not, but it has certainly provoked scientists into doing some interesting and useful research. You might think that there is no point to it, but the research might actually produce the clinching evidence that tk DOES NOT exist. I'm sure you would be delighted should that be the case. "Oh yeah, I almost forgot, they don't want the world to know for fear of ridicule, kidnap by the government, don't want the fame or fortune, blah blah. Yeah right! Why post it then?" This is an interesting point, and fair enough I suppose. However, there are people who play in the National Youth Orchestra (In Britain) which takes people who have the promise of being professionals and some of them give up music after their time is up and go on to do other things. They can play their instruments like the best, they just can't conceive it as their career. IF people who believe they can do tk actually can, they may not show it off because to them it would only be a hobby, which would be similar to the NYO musicians. Of course this a purely hypothetical situation, but I'm sure you can see my point. "If they really could do those things then why do they need to tell the world via a silly message board?" If they really could do those things, they would tell the world on a message board because: 1)It is a convenient place to write about such things, 2)A large audience is guaranteed, especially on a controversial topic like this. You have also answered my second question. Only an argument that is stacked against tk is considered by you as valid. Thanks for clearing these issues up. I feel much more comfortable now that I (and the other posters on this site) know exactly where you stand. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jun 23, 2006 Views: 871 | RE: A couple of questions for Keith Woodpecker, Your comments are in the quotes that follow: "No, of course you shouldn't accept things at face value. There should be a critical evaluation of the evidence presented." My point entirely. So why are we having this discussion? "When someone tries to break the high jump record, there has been no previous proof that such a feat can be achieved. It is only in testing everybody that such an achievement can be discovered" This argument is totally pointless and invalid. We already know people can jump. "No, your argument isn't flawed because people tell lies and/or don't know what they are doing. " My point exactly. That's why we require evidence. That's why I do not respect a poster who says out of the blue with zero evidence, even circumstantial evidence, even a newspaper cutting, that they can throw stuff around with TK. Its nonsense and we all know it. "However, it is possible for someone to post with an intelligent and well-argued point even if it is wrong. I could make such an argument 'proving' the world is flat, but of course we know that it is not." This is true. However, this poster did not present any sort of argument to justify that TK existed. He only made outrageous claims. That is not a discussion. That is just making a totally unsubstantiated claim. "Actually, when you consider the number of people who kept the existence of the world's first electronic computer a secret (Colossus at Bletchley Park, England) it does not seem such an unreasonable task at all" This is just being silly. They didn't post their secret on the internet (it didn't exist) or tell the world's press or TV. They kept it a secret. Tkers tell everyone about it then say they want it to be a secret. Doh! And that's a valid argument? I give up. "..."No sensible person would swallow any of those claims." Maybe not" You almost got that bit right. No sensible person would swallow any of those claims. Definitely not. "IF people who believe they can do tk actually can, they may not show it off because to them it would only be a hobby" Why then spend so much energy trying to convince us via the internet that they can do TK if they want to keep it as a 'hobby' and not actually show it to anyone? Sorry, but that is just about as pathetic an argument as it can get! I refuse to demonstrate that I can walk on water although I tell the world I can because I only do it for my own bit of fun. Yeah right! "You have also answered my second question. Only an argument that is stacked against tk is considered by you as valid. Thanks for clearing these issues up. I feel much more comfortable now that I (and the other posters on this site) know exactly where you stand." That is not true. I have just replied to every point you made and shown how it was either an invalid argument or just doesn't stand up. It is not true to say that only an argument that is stacked against Tk is valid. However, it is true to say that I have not seen on this message board ONE argument for the case of TK that makes sense. Your comments prove my point. Nothing more needs be said. |
| Posted By: maxus Posted On: Jun 24, 2006 Views: 862 | RE: A couple of questions for Keith when you made your best efforts to insult me, i dont think you noticed you had the caps lock on. Hehe, you made me smile Kieth. |
| Posted By: Woodpecker Posted On: Jun 24, 2006 Views: 856 | RE: A couple of questions for Keith You are still being hostile and aggressive. Please stop. You will notice I am being polite and I think it is only fair that I be treated with the same respect I am giving you. Now, some comments on what you have said: "My point entirely. So why are we having this discussion?" Because there are some issues on which you have not been to clear and I wanted to be sure of where you stood. "This argument is totally pointless and invalid. We already know people can jump." Yes of course we do. That is not the point I am making. The point is, we don't know what the maximum height people can physically jump is. Only how far people have previously got. The fact that people CAN jump is taken as a given. "This is just being silly. They didn't post their secret on the internet (it didn't exist) or tell the world's press or TV. They kept it a secret. Tkers tell everyone about it then say they want it to be a secret. Doh! And that's a valid argument? I give up." They kept it a secret because they had to. It was covered under the official secrets act. But in saying "something like that couldn't be kept a secret", you imply that you want everybody to know about it. And yet, when people post about it on the internet, the easiest place to talk about anything, you flame them for it. Isn't that hypocrisy? Also, as you rightly said, the internet did not exist back then. I'm sure if the internet had existed and the official secrets act did not, the internet would be the first place they mentioned it (after the patent office, of course). "Why then spend so much energy trying to convince us via the internet that they can do TK if they want to keep it as a 'hobby' and not actually show it to anyone?" You may have noticed that some posters on this site have offered to do exactly that. Take a look at the first post of "Remote TK" by Lucidness. You cannot defend yourself on this point. ""..."No sensible person would swallow any of those claims." Maybe not" You almost got that bit right. No sensible person would swallow any of those claims. Definitely not." I say the word, "maybe" because I haven't asked all the 6.5 billion people on this planet, and until I have I cannot be certain. "I have just replied to every point you made and shown how it was either an invalid argument or just doesn't stand up." That is not relevant to what I said. Also, you have shown how you have misunderstood many of my points. "Your comments prove my point." Certainly I agree with you on several points. The ones I wasn't sure where you stood I asked about. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jun 24, 2006 Views: 851 | RE: A couple of questions for Keith So if I don't reply it is because I have no answer, and if I do I am being hostile and agressive. Now perhaps you can see why I don't expend to much energy in attempting to debate with Tkers. You really should try harder to present an argument. The anolgy with high jumping IS totally irrelevant. The fact that you can't see why is just another reason why you are wasting my time. |
| Posted By: Placebo Posted On: Jun 25, 2006 Views: 841 | RE: A couple of questions for Keith "The anolgy with high jumping IS totally irrelevant. " For whatever it's worth (not much I suppose), I disagree with you too. We already know people can jump. We also know that people can spin paper pinwheels. We DON'T know that people can jump eg. 5 meters high or that people can move pinwheels without touching it or blowing on it. I agree though that the analogy seems to be taking on a life of it's own and being more of a waste of time than being useful in discussion. My unwanted 2 cents |
| Posted By: SHROOMS is one hellova drug. Posted On: Jun 27, 2006 Views: 824 | RE: A couple of questions for Keith I think until we have video proof of TK. Like physically moving bricks (Xmen style) w/o any camera tricks, keith would be happy. Until then, everything else, no matter how logical it is to have (atleast) a 1 in 6 billion chance for someone to abnormal powers... Is meaningless. Current physics does a good job explaining things. But a bad job predicting things. Because it seems physically impossible to move objects with the mind, doesn't mean it can't exist. Physics has major trouble explaining the whole black hole phenomenon, but physicists don't exactly write off the existance of black holes because of it. |
| Posted By: Placebo Posted On: Jun 30, 2006 Views: 816 | RE: A couple of questions for Keith No, you're wrong - if you record a levitating brick, sceptics will simply call it a fake. Someone needs to *consistently* move an object, even a small/light one, in a *controlled* situation in front of hard *sceptics*. Ideally the object needs to be moved in predetermined directions, etc - to indicate *intent*. No bricks are necessary. |