| RETURN TO TELEKINESIS PAGE - TELEKINESIS -> website | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: website |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Oct 1, 2005 Views: 780 | RE: website Anonymous, You are making a mistake. The videos that I show on my page "Silly Stuff" are clearly described as me making fake videos. The purpose of this is simply to demonstrate that videos cannot be accepted as proof of TK, they are way too easy to fake. This does not mean, and I do not say it, that because of this I have proven that all TK videos are fake. How can I? It just means what I say it means, they can't be accepted as proving TK. Videos are worthless. I think I have made that point clear enough. If TK exists then why has it NEVER been demonstrated under controlled scientific conditions? Because it hasn't, and for other reasons, I do not believe it exists. Anyone that reckons they can do it should either do it or shut up. |
| Posted By: Anonymous Posted On: Oct 2, 2005 Views: 776 | RE: website Right... and all I see you spouting is a bunch of childish banter. You're like a skipping record, Keith. No theory ever will be proven under circumstances that rule out every single thing possible. There will always be some obscure way that they could be faked. |
| Posted By: Anonymous Posted On: Oct 2, 2005 Views: 775 | RE: website Take a look at the example of Uri Geller. His remote viewing session was torn apart... it even came down to the scientists saying that he had some sort of radio transmitter hidden somewhere. What fools... |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Oct 2, 2005 Views: 774 | RE: website Yawn........ |
| Posted By: Anonymous Posted On: Oct 2, 2005 Views: 772 | RE: website I could probably fall asleep myself waiting for you to come up with a valid way to counter my argument. |
| Posted By: Grant Posted On: Oct 2, 2005 Views: 768 | RE: website You want a valid way to counter your argument!?! That has already been done. You seriously must be nick, you make arguments go in circles. Just end your sad attempt at making this a big debate and just actually do something about it, like actually prove your special TK powers. All i am seeing is you ranting on about videos when really you can prove skeptics wrong by actually proving TK exists. You are making no attempt to do this other than acting like a prat. |
| Posted By: Anonymous Posted On: Oct 3, 2005 Views: 764 | RE: website Actually, the last thing that I said was that you can never entirely prove something that rules out all circumstances of fraud. And then you said... "Yawn." I just pointed out that you never really responded to my argument there. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Oct 3, 2005 Views: 761 | RE: website Yawn.......yawn.........burp......yawn |
| Posted By: Grant Posted On: Oct 4, 2005 Views: 758 | RE: website I have to admit keith he is boring, he goes in circles. Anonymous, why are you so up-tight about a couple of videos. There is no issue, it is easy to demonstrate the straw and psi test without TK. Your complaining because you believe this still does not prove you used TK but come on its a fricking straw and psi-wheel hardly convincing evidence. Why not give up this pointless rant of yours and actually do something positive about it. After all it's not down to us to prove TK exists. |
| Posted By: Anonymous Posted On: Oct 4, 2005 Views: 753 | RE: website Question... Do you contest the following statement? Keith's videos do not prove all other TKer's videos to be from static and other TK-unrelated factors. This simple question I think deserves a simple answer. You do not need to try and argue around it like you have been doing. |
| Posted By: Grant Posted On: Oct 5, 2005 Views: 714 | RE: website I wonder what my computer looks like outside my office window? |
| Posted By: Grant Posted On: Oct 5, 2005 Views: 717 | RE: website that posted alright, i'm confused!!!! |
| Posted By: Grant Posted On: Oct 5, 2005 Views: 714 | RE: website No I don't contest, the whole point of the Straw and psi-wheel videos Anonymous was to show how easy it is to fake. Regardless weather TK is used or not the straw and psi-wheel videos are easy to fake, Keith used no TK. Who could tell the difference between his and the videos of someone who claim they used TK, they couldn't because to watch you would see no difference. Question for you Anonymous... Has TK been proven? Yes or No Why? I believe that randi's money hasn't been claimed because no one can perform TK, do you agree? Yes or No (I'm expecting No) If your answer is No then why? Can you perform TK? Yes or No If yes why don't you actually do something positive with your time and try and prove TK rather than ranting on about a couple of fricking videos and arguing about something that has NOT been proved to exist. These simple questions I think deserves a simple answer. |
| Posted By: Grant Posted On: Oct 5, 2005 Views: 712 | RE: website There is a god! Sorry for the mess again keith. I shortened my post right down and it seems to have worked |
| Posted By: Anonymous Posted On: Oct 9, 2005 Views: 699 | RE: website Question for you Anonymous... Has TK been proven? Yes or No ----------------------------- I believe that it has an hasn't. Why? ---- It depends on one's own level of satisfaction. Proving something to exist is a tricky thing which requires that "special level" of proof which would "prove" it. I believe that randi's money hasn't been claimed because no one can perform TK, do you agree? Yes or No (I'm expecting No) ------------------------ No If your answer is No then why? ------------------------------ Because, first of all, I've read plenty of stuff on Randi to know that even if someone who could genuinely move something across a table went to him, they wouldn't win. For example... if Jack Becker went to try and win, Randi would find something to disqualify him. Can you perform TK? Yes or No ----------------------------- Yes. If yes why don't you actually do something positive with your time and try and prove TK rather than ranting on about a couple of fricking videos and arguing about something that has NOT been proved to exist. ------------------------------------------------- I think the real question is... why do you feel it neccessary to rant on and on by posting on this board how TK doesn't exist when you obviously can't prove it doesn't exist anyways? |
| Pages [ 1 2 3 ] Next Page -> |