FriendsCommunitiesMetaphyiscalHeader

Forums Forums Answering Skeptics and Debunking Cynics Welcome to the Answering Skeptics and Debunking Cynics Folder

12 voices
21 replies
  • Author
    Posts
  • #75325
    RC
    Participant

    Hi everyone. I have also visited Randi’s board and have even been posting. I enjoy discussion/debate with skeptics.

    I have to say honestly that so far I have been treated politely and with respect. There are definitely some insults posted about regulars on this board and I’m going to do my best to call them on it.

    However, I think it’s fair to say that not all people who come from Randi’s site are negative, mean-spirited, Randi-worshipers. I guess we shouldn’t make assumptions based on our bad experience with Cantata. Just my two cents.

    #75322
    Pam B
    Keymaster

    I agree RC, I posted there a while back, and one of the first things that I said to them was something to the effect of, “I would never assume that everyone here is identical in thought.”

    #75307
    marcia
    Participant

    I saw your posts also RC, and you certainly seem more than fair to both sides of the coin and I did see that you called some of them on the name calling and the like. I’m sure they aren’t all so nasty, maybe I was just a little taken aback by it…..I wasn’t expecting to see some of the foul language, etc….I’ve definitely never seen that here.
    I look at the site because I sincerely want to leave that door open at least a crack, but don’t think I will go back to the forum area.
    Maybe someone from there will make their way back to this site and have something interesting to post. I don’t think it ever quite managed to get around to that with asa’s posts, and maybe I am partially to blame for that. I’ll try to do better next time.

    Thank you for responding……I appreciate it.

    #75302
    Yardbird
    Participant

    My sentiments exactly, RC. It was never my intent to insult Asa, or anyone for that matter. I apologize to Asa and others if I did so. As a skeptic of most things paranormal, I am in complete agreement that there are skeptics out there who aren’t mean-spirited or negative ( :D ). It would be in poor taste and darn-near hypocritical of me to deflate a true skeptic stance.

    But as the first moderator to stumble across Asa’s post, I had to be forthright with the board’s intentions. The majority of posters here would not approve of debate upon Mr. Edward personally (as that is what the term “opinion” means- where is that dictionary of mine?) , and to come to a private forum specifically geared towards the positive work of Mr. Edward’s with a “negative” opinion, the poster would find themselves agitated and unsupported in their beliefs. I wouldn’t want to put up with that, and I felt it right to prepare Asa for such consequences.

    And may I extend a thank you for your calling upon the insensitive and downright shameful posters on other boards. While I personally do not feel this is necessary, I do appreciate your sense of debate/discussion (at least with the skeptics- I cannot abide cynics in any field of thought). Keep up the good fight, RC, and thanks for visiting- Yardbird

    #75289
    RC
    Participant

    Originally posted by RC
    Hi everyone. I have also visited Randi’s board and have even been posting. I enjoy discussion/debate with skeptics.

    I have to say honestly that so far I have been treated politely and with respect. There are definitely some insults posted about regulars on this board and I’m going to do my best to call them on it.

    However, I think it’s fair to say that not all people who come from Randi’s site are negative, mean-spirited, Randi-worshipers. I guess we shouldn’t make assumptions based on our bad experience with Cantata. Just my two cents.

    Hey everyone–I feel the need to clarify what board I’m talking about. First, I am a regular member on this board, just changed my screenname. I’m also not a skeptic, but a believer in mediumship. Just enjoy discussing with skeptics.

    The insults board I am talking about in this posting are on Randi’s board, not here. When I re-read my posting, it seemed kind of unclear.

    #75735
    lptimmtruckin
    Participant

    I along with I’m sure others… like a healthy debate/discussion over different possibilities.

    What bothers me about most cynics and won’t-get-off-the-fence skeptics is their negativity.

    Just my 2 cents :)
    Laurryn

    #75730
    Pam B
    Keymaster

    For me, this isn’t about discouraging discussion. I’m all for debate, but not on this board — there are many other boards where each side can “debate”. TVTALK, About.com and the SCIFI boards already have months of debates going on. Discussion which is welcome here, is not debate.

    What I have a problem with, is the insulting and abusive verbiage that’s used by people who who frequent a website, encouraged by the hate-inspiring rhetoric of a man like Randi. Randi’s words give them permission to ridicule and spit words of hate. They’re emulating him, and attempting to imitate him.

    I certainly won’t lump everyone who posts at the Randi website into the same category as the ones who make the most idiotic and wasteful hate posts towards us. There’s different degrees of skepticism on up to cynicism.

    **** Update 2002 *****

    We’ve opted to close this area of discussion for new posts. There are several reasons:

    * Because of the nature of human communication the internet, and our strict publicized rules about “keep it respectful” – very few people were able to make sound, skeptical arguments in a way that was respectful of our beliefs. Some did, and we tip our hat to them for their skillfull communicaiton skills, and respectful, tolerant view points.

    * It’s all been said, there’s nothing new to discuss. After over 2 years of Crossing Over being aired on TV, the arguments of huge conspiracies of audience plants and searchable databases that contain highly intimate information about people’s personal relatiolnships and conversations, hidden microphones and ear speakers are not only tired, they are laughable. We’ve hashed and rehashed “cold/warm/hot” reading theories over and over again with no more education to be had.

    * No one’s interested in any more. The few who asked for access to this group mostly read and lurked, and the ones who were trolls couldn’t even post an interesting insult, much less take the time to spell check their name-calling. How boring. ;)

    * It takes too much time to moderate, granting access, responding to emails, etc.

    The benifit of keeping it open for discussion does not outweigh the cost of time and energy. However, we do support open-minded skepticism because I strongly feel that a belief unquestioned is not worth having. Sometimes your beliefs will be stronger after appropriate skepticism, and we feel there’s very valuable information contained within these threads, so we’re keeping the forum intact, but in read only mode.

    Enjoy, keep an open mind, keep your skepticism level appropriate, and always, ALWAYS be tolerant of other’s beliefs you don’t share. :love:

Viewing 7 posts - 16 through 22 (of 22 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.