Thread: Magick VS Atheists

Originally Posted by yodatalk

I do not mean hollywood magic. I mean Magic. The thing we have been talking about.
I used to study the occult like I have stated before, and I also used ot be wiccan. I am not arguing, I am only stating my opinions.
I don't see why one of the members here saw fit to be extremely rude to me, but what ever.
I have studied this, I have been around the occoult community for awhile(I just change my name and don't draw attention to myself). 6 or 7 years to be precise. have seen no evidence of magic, subtle or no, in that time.

Personal encounters mean nothing to me. Unless it happens to me personally, I do not take others experiances as fact. People lie. People misinterpret things as supernatural.
I have never seen a spell work that wasn't something that could have happened anyway without the spell. In the same vein, praying has never worked, and thats toned down spell casting in my opinion.

And a note, if anyone else would like to insult me just because i believe something different than you, do it through pm and don't show your ignorance in public. It's embarresing.

Ha Ha Ha Do you call that an insult? What an emotional "man of science" you are. As I mentioned before, all you do is keep repeating the same bs, like "personal encounters mean nothing to me", "I have never seen a spell work", even in your latest post. You never say anything constructive. You know what? If you're such a big science freak, show us some empirical evidence that magic doesn't work. That would be fun. Until then, you're nothing but another guy with his own subjective and newbish opinion lol.

I don't have to prove a negative. There is no scientific data saying magic exists. Tghe ones trying to prove then egative need ot provide the proof.
I have reported your post. Try ot be civil, I have not insulted ANYONE on this board and i do not deserve this treatment.

show us some empirical evidence that magic doesn't work.

http://www.phact.org/e/z/enright.txt

The long and the short of it is that dowsing performance in the Scheunen experiments was not reproducible. It was not reproducible inter-individually: from a pool of some 500 self-proclaimed dowsers, the researchers selected for their critical experiments 43 candidates whom they considered most promising on the basis of preliminary testing; but the investigators themselves ended up being impressed with only a few of the performances of only a small handful from that select group. And, even more troublesome for the hypothesis, dowsing performance was not reproducible intra-individually: those few dowsers, who on one occasion or another seemed to do relatively well, were in their other comparable test series usually no more successful than the rest of the "unskilled" dowsers (Enright “Water Dowsing: the Scheunen Experiments,” Naturwissenschaften, vol. 82 1995).

Challenge Applications - JREF Forum

Every single one of those occult practitioners failed even preliminary tests.

Long and short: there's empirical evidence. You're giving this guy a hard time unnecessarily.

Edit: Please don't misconstrue what I'm saying, I'm not saying magick does not exist, I'm simply stating that there're a lot of bullcrap claimants out there which failed rigorous trials.

That some fakers failed some tests doesn't mean that magic doesn't work. What you provided is a funny joke, not empirical evidence.

Thank you Plarkenstorf.

not empirical evidence.

Empirical - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Empirical evidence can sometimes be flawed, certainly. But there is empirical evidence out there that a lot of experienced practitioners of magic fall flat when tested under scientific rigor.

Edit: To Yodatalk. No worries.

Originally Posted by DetonatorZ

That some fakers failed some tests doesn't mean that magic doesn't work. What you provided is a funny joke, not empirical evidence.

To yoda-the-crying-insulted-little-boy: I've never insulted you. Something's wrong with your nerves man. Or maybe you're just another emo kid, who knows. Regarding your post, If science is so omnipotent it should be able to disprove the existence of magic. So don't make excuses.

PS. "experienced practitioners of magic" don't go to freakshows lol

Hey Yoda, have you been kicked out of the Maths forum for being too emo or what? Really, what are you doing here? Practicing how to make infertile and aimless arguments or what? 'Cause all I hear from you is unsubstantiated garbage.

Originally Posted by DetonatorZ

PS. "experienced practitioners of magic" don't go to freakshows lol

No true Scotsman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They thought it was magic, it's within what is generally defined as magic.

Originally Posted by DetonatorZ

Hey Yoda, have you been kicked out of the Maths forum for being too emo or what? Really, what are you doing here? Practicing how to make infertile and aimless arguments or what? 'Cause all I hear from you is unsubstantiated garbage.

Why're you continuing to insult him?

1. "Generally" ? Sorry dude but you represent science here, so I want concrete stuff from you. + formal logic and all that stuff. Oh, and clowning around with symbols from logic like you did in some former post of yours is not good enough, sorry.

2. I've never insulted Yoda. He's just immature and emotional, that's all.