| RETURN TO TELEKINESIS PAGE - TELEKINESIS -> Why Keith's Science Is Flawed | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Feb 11, 2005 Views: 256 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed Endothermal Torahs, Why don't you give up trying to make out my logic is wrong when it is obvious that you are way too stupid to know how to even present a simple argument. Think about what you have just said, provided that is if you are able to actually have a sensible thought in what you have instead of a brain. You have just said that I claim that the ridiculous claims that Tkers make on the internet are facts. Eh!!!! Honestly, I ask again, just how stupid are you? I honestly don't know why you bother, hell will freeze over before a fool like you will find fault with my logic. |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 11, 2005 Views: 251 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed >I honestly don't know why you bother, hell will >freeze over before a fool like you will find >fault with my logic. What about me? Am I a fool too? You haven't yet responded to my arguments against you logic. What are you waiting for? |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Feb 11, 2005 Views: 246 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed Nick, Already made my point under your thread "what a bunch of crap". As you have such a massive problem with comprehension ask an adult to explain it to you. |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 11, 2005 Views: 240 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed Ask an adult to explain it to me? Okay, since you say that I have such a hard problem with reading comprehension, as that is your defense againt my argument about your logic: What has my reading comprehension to do with your flawed logic? I have taken my SAT and scored very, very well in reading comprehension and I am an adult, with a fairly competent job. Therefore, according to your advice to consult an adult, I choose to consult myself. |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 11, 2005 Views: 240 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed So I propose to you. Either attack my argument, or admit that you can't. Or you can continue to make illogical Ad Hominem attacks on my character... |
| Posted By: Endothermal Torahs Posted On: Feb 12, 2005 Views: 227 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed Leave it Nick, Keith can't respond to me either except to call me stupid. That's all he's got and all the other skeptics are usually so keen to beat us down seem to be rather quite on this thread. I hope the Devil has a nice pair of gloves because it seems that hell has indeed frozen over. |
| Posted By: rob Posted On: Feb 12, 2005 Views: 224 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed one them skeptics is on another thread asking some honest questions :) stop the bickering and put forward an argument or a model, or a theory, or a paper, or even some ideas and thoughts. That way you will even get so called skeptics listening :) but you must be prepared like ANY theory to have your results and thoughts tested or argued. |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 13, 2005 Views: 216 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed >one them skeptics is on another thread asking >some honest questions :) > >stop the bickering and put forward an argument >or a model, or a theory, or a paper, or even >some ideas and thoughts. Of course, but that's not what this thread about. Keith has made some serious logical faults. The most used informal fallacy in his arsenal is the Ad Hominem attack. It seems to be his favorite. |
| Posted By: Endothermal Torahs Posted On: Feb 14, 2005 Views: 201 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed It's definitely game over for Keith on this thread. The clear facts are that: 1 - He based his Randi style TK tests on information given by those who 'claim' TK ability 2 - Pursues the idea that anyone who claims to have TK is an idiot because TK 'doesn't exist' 3 - Has shown himself to be to be rather foolish Have any other TK'ers enjoyed beating Keith at his own game as much as I have? |
| Posted By: Placebo Posted On: Feb 15, 2005 Views: 193 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 15, 2005 Views: 187 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed Thank Placebo for your addition to this thread. I think that after all these accumulated arguments against his basic arguments, he has nothing really to say. That is why I don't really expect him to reply. I am interested though in your blog; what's the address? I have been practicing for two weeks now and I have very strong control over the wheel without my hands. The reason I believe that what I'm doing is legitimate is the 'geisting that I experienced. It nearly scared me to death. I fell asleep in my office for a quick nap at break-time and I woke up to my scanner bouncing up and down off my desk like an inch in the air. It was freaky. I just wish that I could do that consciously though, :P |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Feb 15, 2005 Views: 185 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed Oh, here's my blog: http://nickstk.blogspot.com/ |
| Posted By: Placebo Posted On: Feb 15, 2005 Views: 182 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed Haha, my url is predictably similar to Nick's : http://placebotk.blogspot.com I've had no geisting myself :) Placebo |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Feb 15, 2005 Views: 174 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Feb 15, 2005 Views: 172 | RE: Why Keith's Science Is Flawed |
| Pages [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next Page -> |