|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Ouija board, useful information from? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
What is the box enthusiasts of the theory of evolution box themselves in? "Propositions should not be accepted without sufficient evidence to support them."
What is the box enthusiasts of the Big Bang theory box themselves in? "Propositions should not be accepted without sufficient evidence to support them." Those are the boxes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9199 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.2 |
I just read your post 3 times. Each time I tried really, really hard to understand what you were saying. Each time my brain tried to lock down.
I ahve come to the conclusion that this is all just gibberish. You aren't really saying anything. Can someone try to translate this and let me know if he actually is trying to make a point and what it is. More importantly; what the hell does this have to do with the Ouija board. My only response is a quote attributed to many people, but I guess Max Radin is the earliest.
quote: Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1283 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
I suspect he composed it during a peyote aided communion with the spirit of this person.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate ...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Have you obtained useful information from the ouija board or by way of the ouija board? Well, there was this one time... Thanks, grandpa!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Yrreg writes:
No. It's boxes all the way down. Is there such a box that contains all the boxes people are thinking inside? "It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 334 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
What is the box enthusiasts of the Big Bang theory box themselves in? The mental space between on the one end the point of the Big Bang socalled and the limit of the expanding observable universe, but there is a bigger box containing the metal space between these two boundaries of the point of the Big Bang beginning and the ballooning edge of the expanding observable universe. yea and a few scientist are thinking about it super string theory and and M theory if i am not mistaken its also based on a lot of speculation like are there cosmic strings would they actualy do what they speculate would happen if 2 of them collided although there is still more evidence for these strings thant a so called god Edited by frako, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
The point is, all the way up, there are also boxes, and the biggest box is the one we ourselves are in. Thinking outside that box would be beyond human capability.
For the purposes of a discussion on occult(hidden knowledge) phenomena, only gullible people would allow themselves to follow the voice of the "spirit world". This even includes the supposed voice of God Herself!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
What some people don't seem to understand is that the world of occult and religious experience is one of the inner boxes that many of us are already habitually outside of. The point is, all the way up, there are also boxes, and the biggest box is the one we ourselves are in. Thinking outside that box would be beyond human capability. There may be a biggest box that humans can never get outside of and there may be a God outside that box. There may also be a box that God can't get outside of. Who knows what's outside that box? "It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tram law Member (Idle past 4733 days) Posts: 283 From: Weed, California, USA Joined: |
Yeah, but why does it have to be Former President Bush and not Obama?
Or Clinton? Or Roosevelt? Or Lincoln? Or Washington?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 4.5 |
Tram law writes:
Presumably, that's because the message you were responding to was actually posted during the Bush administration.
Yeah, but why does it have to be Former President Bush and not Obama?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4046 Joined: Member Rating: 7.4 |
What then is the useful information or generally usefulness of the ouija board? You can never ever ascertain the actual accuracy of a predictive tool by only looking for its successes. You are setting yourself up for confirmation bias by asking for peoples' personal, anecdotal testimony regarding useful gleanings of information from a ouija board. This means that you are asking to only hear about the successes without any sort of statistical context. If I give you a broken clock and a working clock and ask you to tell me stories about when each clock was useful, we would expect results from both clocks to be positive, with a 100% accuracy rate - even a broken clock is right twice per day, and if I only ask you to report successful incidents, that 100% accuracy rate will never diminish. You cannot determine accuracy unless you actively seek falsification of your hypothesis. If you think that ouija boards are actually privy to some outside information not already present in teh minds of the participants, you need to perform tests like what Granny Magda proposed - blindfold everyone using the board, and use a video camera to record the results of the blind participants. If an unobserved source is actually moving the (cup? lens? whatever) around the board, you would anticipate finding readable messages on the video. If instead the messages are the result of unconscious or semi-conscious movements by the participants, then you would expect gibberish to be recorded. In any case, you would need to ask the same set of verifiable questions to many groups of ouija board users in a controlled environment and record the results. Analyze the statistical distribution of correct vs. incorrect answers and compare them to a group of people who are asked to randomly guess answers to the same questions. If the correct/incorrect ratios are similar, you can conclude that it is likely that the ouija board is no more "useful" than random guessing - it might be right now and again, but why bother with the board if you could just make up a random guess on the spot with the same probability of accurate results? Only if the board demonstrates a repeatable and clear statistical increase in the accuracy of responses over random guesses can you conclude that the board is useful in some way. Obviously, you aren't going to get that by asking people for success stories on a web forum.
Is that the nature? which is 'in charge' of natural selection as in Charles Darwin's natural selection in his work Natural selection doesn;t require anything to be "in charge," and in fact it bears every possible appearance of having no intellect in charge. After all, what intelligent designer would ever create or guide to be created the platypus? Joking aside, natural selection is an inevitability given finite resources. So long as living things need to compete for food, space, etc to survive, it is utterly inevitable that those individuals within a population that are better adapted to their current environment will survive more frequently and thus produce more offspring than those with less effective adaptations to their current environment; the passing of traits from parent to offspring means that those more beneficial traits will inevitably take an ever-increasing statistical hold over the population as a whole over many generations. It's a self-perpetuating system that simply results from the conditions of life, where resource are limited, limited spontaneous changes happen during reproduction (what we call mutations), and traits are inherited from parents.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yrreg Member (Idle past 4953 days) Posts: 64 Joined: |
You are talking about empirical evidence, unless I am mistaken.
That is a box which you should not box yourself in because there are things which an intelligent mind is certain of even if you cannot produce empirical evidence to support them. For example, if you think intelligently and not be boxed in by empirical evidence, you will have certainty that there is something outside the box that is the existence extending from the point of the socalled big bang and the ballooning edge of the observable universe. Yrreg
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8563 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
Interesting, Yrreg.
You are saying that you are certain there is something outside the known universe? There must be a reason, some evidence (empirical or otherwise), that leads you to be certain there is an "outside" to the Universe. Can you walk me through the chain of evidence and reasoning that leads you to this certainty? The more specific, to facilitate my understanding, the better.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22502 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
What's this got to do with Ouija boards? Do want to figure out whether they work or not? How are you going to do that without empirical evidence? If you have a feeling they work because you're not "boxed in by empirical evidence" and I have empirical evidence that they don't work, who will other people believe? You and your feelings? Or me and my pages of data, tables and charts?
Actually, not to go off topic, but now that I think of it most people will believe you, not me. Shortly after I start presenting my data they'll fall asleep, so if you go first you'll win. People believe in Ouija boards because of how they feel about them, not because they've examined and reasoned through the evidence, and you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3671 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
who will other people believe? You and your feelings? Or me and my pages of data, tables and charts? Have you been outside in the last 30 years, Percy?
Actually, not to go off topic, but now that I think of it most people will believe you, not me. And here I learn my lesson to read both paragraphs before starting my reply Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024