| RETURN TO TELEKINESIS PAGE - TELEKINESIS -> Inadequate | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: Inadequate |
| Posted By: no one Posted On: Jan 13, 2011 Views: 1032 | Inadequate Unfortunately, I feel I must criticize you on your beliefs of why TK doesn't work. While it is true that Telekinesis has never been proven scientifically, there still remains the possibility that it can be. While skepticism in science is necessary to maintain an objective viewpoint, skepticism is NOT science. I quite understand your reasoning, being of a scientific mindset myself. That being said, I go by what’s irrefutable. Unless you can either prove or disprove the existence of this bio-ethereal sentient phenomenon with complete documented evidence that is IRREPROACHABLE, then I feel that these kinds of experiments will continue, to no avail of shaking the headstrong masses of their conviction; I, included. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jan 15, 2011 Views: 1027 | RE: Inadequate Hi, It seems to me from your comments that you believe we should have irrefutable proof of a thing not existing before we can say we don't think it exists. If I understand you correctly I can only say you are not making any sense. It is impossible to prove that a thing does not exist which is why the burden of proof rests with those making the claim that it does exist. You cannot prove wrong my claim that I can walk on water, but it doesn't mean you have to keep an open mind on it, instead it is up to me to prove I can do it. Until then you may treat my claim as the nonsense it is, that is how science works. |
| Posted By: no one Posted On: Jan 18, 2011 Views: 1016 | apologies I'm sorry; after reading your reply and a moment of thinking, I realize that my words were both hasty and unreflective. You are right that I didn't make sense, and one cannot prove something doesn't exist. So, I'll try explaining myself agian, hopefully a little better: If you don't have proof of somthing's existence, that does not necessarily mean it doesn't. Simply because a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, that doesn't mean the tree doesn't still makes a sound. Absurd though it may seem, I think that telekinesis is real and what it all comes down to is if learned people are able to unveil its existence. It's only a matter of time and patience. That's all I am trying to convey. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jan 19, 2011 Views: 1013 | RE: Inadequate It is true that not having proof of something existing does not in itself preclude its existance. This does not however mean that we need to keep an open mind on the subject, we have to use common sense, depending on the nature of the thing in question, in other words every case is different. If for example someone said they could fly we would not keep an open mind on it, it is too ridiculous, and why don't they just go ahead and prove it? Any sensible person would reject the claim and give it no more thought. Telekinesis is different, we have thousands of people claiming they have TK so it requires a little more thought than a claim of flying. So rather than dismissing it out of hand I did a lot of research into the matter and also ran a few tests. The outcome of this was to show that the two most popular examples of TK were not TK at all, just regular normal physics. So with that knowledge, together with the over-riding fact that it has never been properly demonstrated, I can now dismiss TK as nonsense, no need to keep an open mind, all they have to do is demonstrate it, so why don't they? No prizes given for working out the answer! |
| Posted By: no one Posted On: Jan 31, 2011 Views: 994 | RE: Inadequate That is your prerogative, to not keep an open mind on the fantastic and ethereal, however, despite your skepticism, please aquiesce my inquiry further. Yes, it would be ludicrous to assume that someone can fly, but if by an inconceivable |
| Posted By: Common Sense Posted On: Feb 8, 2011 Views: 983 | RE: Inadequate Hey you just used a lot of big words to try to sound smart! It might have worked if it made any sense! |
| Posted By: no one Posted On: Feb 16, 2011 Views: 968 | my bad Half way through, I may have pressed a wrong button. My bad. Anyhow, what i meant to say was: That is your prerogative, to not keep an open mind on the fantastic and ethereal, however, despite your skepticism, please acquiesce my inquiry further. Yes, it would be ludicrous to assume that someone can fly, but if by an inconceivable |
| Posted By: no one Posted On: Aug 27, 2011 Views: 898 | RE: Inadequate Sorry agian for annother unfinished reply, as well as such a late response. What I'm trying to convey basically is that being skeptical is necessary in science to maintain a viewpoint of objectivity. Objectivity is key in any kind of scientific strive. However, being too skeptical could produce one sided, predestined, and overall, contrived conclusions. I'm not saying your are though, just stating a fact. |