| User | Post |
|
10:05 pm
January 2, 2010
|
Dr. Herbert West
| | Dr. Herbert West | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 8 |
|
|
I'm sorry but I have to make a few comments about this thread.
Is this a thread about critisisms of PS or is an attack on Christianity and Christians? Please clarify. I thought this site was a forum for sceptics to talk about all the shows on TV that are being deceptive, PS being one of them.
Of that, I am in total agreement. The attack on Christianity, however, I am not. Oubliette does not even try to hide her hatred for Christianity or Christians, IMHO.
Just because some nut jobs like Ryan Buell and Lorraine Warren throw around Christian terms like artillery shells does not make them Christians or representatives of Christianity. I find them far from it. They are con men and women, that's all.
The reason I need to know the answer to this question is to know whether I am welcome here or not. As a Christian, I hold these shows in great disdain because of the obvious.
Christianity states that once someone dies, they are either with God or they are in hades awaiting judgement. I'm not preaching here, just telling you what the scripture states. It is my opinion that all these "sightings" and "EVPs" of ghosts are nothing but demonic activity.
If Ryan and Lorraine would open up the book they claim to believe in, they would have the answers to their questions. This is how I know they are con men plus their actions on the little screen.
Now if you want to be an athiest or anything else, then go ahead but keep your attacks to yourself. I won't attack you for what you believe and I want the same consideration.
|
|
|
1:37 am
January 3, 2010
|
emma
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 15 |
|
|
Uh, what are you talking about, "Doctor?" I just read the whole thread and didn't see anyone bashing Christianity. At least not in a way that merits your obviously-defensive response. Are you talking about the link to which this thread refers? Because then I would suggest that you take your issues up with the writer of that particular blog.
In general, though, since you brought it up, I think you willl find that most philosophical and scientific skeptics think Christianity is bunk. When was the last time you proved the veracity of Christianity's claims using the scientific method? If you can't handle your beliefs being challenged, I worry that a SKEPTICS' forum may not be a comfortable place for you.
I will be glad to respect your beliefs. But if you make them a part of the conversation, then it is fair game for them to be challenged.
(edited by author)
|
|
|
8:32 am
January 3, 2010
|
alicat
| | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1214 |
|
|
Dr. West,
While I appreciate you want to post on this site, let me introduce you to reality. Before you wish to go on a tirade about something or someone (in this case, Oubliette) , please actually read the forum thread before you post and make sure you have your facts straight. Two examples:
"Is this a thread about critisisms of PS or is an attack on Christianity and Christians?" You actually read that in this thread? Please back up your claims.
"The attack on Christianity, however, I am not. Oubliette does not even try to hide her hatred for Christianity or Christians, IMHO." Again, you read that in this thread or any other thread or review Oubliette posted on this entire site? I think not. Again, please back up your claims.
You then finish your post with the following comments which I find quite ironic.
"Now if you want to be an athiest or anything else, then go ahead but keep your attacks to yourself. I won't attack you for what you believe and I want the same consideration."
And emma,
For the record, "I think you willl find that most "skeptics" think Christianity is bunk." Sorry emma, such a general and sweeping comment is so presumptuous and inaccurate, it's unbelievable. So, please don't presume to speak for anyone other than yourself. There are many who don't conform to "your" version of a skeptic.
And, please watch your phrasing. In the forum on How TAPS finds their Investigation Sites…., you said: "for the functionally retarded among you who are incapable of a google search:". In the future, kindly do not post such an extremely offensive comment.
|
|
|
11:42 am
January 3, 2010
|
emma
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 15 |
|
|
thank you, alicat. i do apologize for offending anyone with my comment in the other thread- it was not meant to be offensive; it was a rather flip comment meant to point out the obvious lack of research put into various posts. it was directed at no one in particular and everyone in general.
as to the Christianity comment, well, i'll edit that to say that most philosophical and scientific skeptics think Christianity is bunk.
Can you provide evidence that my "sweeping generalization" is "inaccurate?" Because otherwise, I do believe that you are doing the exact same thing that you accuse me of: making inacurate sweeping generalizations without any evidence to back it up. And if you'd like a thesis on how the faith required of Christianity is philosophically-inconsistent with the tenets of skepticism, let me know.
A "sweeping generalization" is not inaccurate just because there are exceptions. I think you'll notice that I said MOST, not ALL. And I stand by that comment.
|
|
|
12:06 pm
January 3, 2010
|
emma
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 15 |
|
|
furthermore, I take issue with your idea that making a generalization, or commenting about a trend, is "speaking for someone else."
If I say, "Most people who work at Wal-Mart are lacking college diplomas" am I speaking for them? No.
|
|
|
12:42 pm
January 3, 2010
|
alicat
| | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1214 |
|
|
emma,
I have no desire to debate you. I think you have proven my point in a number of ways already. As a new poster, perhaps you should revisit your own comments before chastising others. In particular "I must admit that I have not read all of the posts yet on this particulat thread nor on the forum so this may already be a topic somewhere esle," (found in the How Taps Finds…. Investigations Sites).
|
|
|
12:59 pm
January 3, 2010
|
emma
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 15 |
|
|
alicat,
your words say one thing, but your behavior says another. obviously you DO have a deisre to debate me, as well as to tell me what to say and how to say it. your quote has no relevance to this discussion whatsoever.
|
|
|
9:11 pm
January 5, 2010
|
Logisti
| | |
| Admin
| posts 177 |
|
|
Clearly we are not ready to have any sort of Science vs Religion debate here, so let's not go anywhere near that road please.
|
|
|
6:27 pm
January 16, 2010
|
Buffy
| | |
| Investigator | posts 87 |
|
|
I watch pretty much every paranormal show that exists, whether it be story, tour, or investigative in nature. "I want to believe" as the saying goes, but this site is just awesome in giving me a different more skeptical view of what I am watching. I have often found myself saying, "wow they might have actually caught something" only to come here and have someone explain it away using scientific knowledge I didn't even know. One of the reasons why I chose this forum to read (and recommend to many people) versus a site as the one talked about in this post, is that the reviewers are intelligent people who make their arguments and defend their skepticism not by resorting to name calling and using a ton of explicatives, but by actually giving scientific answers with some great social commentary. It's what makes this site a great site and keeps me coming back for more! There is an actual debate going on here.
Whereby, I agree that Paranormal State is a ridiculous show, the arguments as to why it is, was lost amongst the blogger's unintelligent sounding rants.
|
|
Login 
Register 
The Forum [is where Ancient Roman skeptics hang out.]
Reply to Post
Quote and Reply 
Print this Post 
Topic RSS 
