Leslie Kean

PSI, Mediums, Ghosts, UFOs, Things That Go Bump In The Night
User avatar
JO 753
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9437
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Leslie Kean

Postby JO 753 » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:38 am

She has a new book about UFO reports by all sorts of very credible witnesses.

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?hl=en&q=UFOs+leslie+kean&cid=10507667719574049164&ei=8IB0TPDBGJ_swAW8ibDMDg&sa=title&ved=0CAcQ8wIwADgA#p

Saw her on MSNBC and Colbert tonite. The accounts are actually written by the witnessez.

User avatar
fromthehills
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9534
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:01 am
Location: Woostone

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby fromthehills » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:43 am

What do you think about it, Jo?

My assumption is that a cover up would only be successful if there were only two witnesses, and one shot the other.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22029
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: amethyst
Location: Transcona

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Gord » Wed Aug 25, 2010 8:32 am

JO 753 wrote:She has a new book about UFO reports by all sorts of very credible witnesses.

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?hl=en&q=UFOs+leslie+kean&cid=10507667719574049164&ei=8IB0TPDBGJ_swAW8ibDMDg&sa=title&ved=0CAcQ8wIwADgA#p

Saw her on MSNBC and Colbert tonite. The accounts are actually written by the witnessez.

Leslie Kean on Colbert Report talking about her new UFO book 23-Aug-2010: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcfMOCw0Lmk

She seems like a "wants-it-to-be-true"-er. For instance: "Something has to be phsyical to be seen on radar." No it does not. Radar does, under some circumstances, pick up things that aren't physically there.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
JO 753
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9437
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby JO 753 » Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:57 am

I believe the gummit did a fantastic job uv covering up UFOz. That sumtime after the alienz reveal themselvez to the world in general, the big story will be how the cover up wuz accomplished.

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Thu Aug 26, 2010 1:25 pm

Gord wrote:She seems like a "wants-it-to-be-true"-er. For instance: "Something has to be phsyical to be seen on radar." No it does not. Radar does, under some circumstances, pick up things that aren't physically there.

How is that different from a "wants-it-to-be-hoax"-er?

Just askin'.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

surrounded
Poster
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby surrounded » Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:58 am

or a wants- to- sell- a- book-er?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22029
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: amethyst
Location: Transcona

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Gord » Fri Aug 27, 2010 10:56 pm

landrew wrote:
Gord wrote:She seems like a "wants-it-to-be-true"-er. For instance: "Something has to be phsyical to be seen on radar." No it does not. Radar does, under some circumstances, pick up things that aren't physically there.

How is that different from a "wants-it-to-be-hoax"-er?

Just askin'.

It's the opposite, duh! :P
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:07 am

Gord wrote:
landrew wrote:
Gord wrote:She seems like a "wants-it-to-be-true"-er. For instance: "Something has to be phsyical to be seen on radar." No it does not. Radar does, under some circumstances, pick up things that aren't physically there.

How is that different from a "wants-it-to-be-hoax"-er?

Just askin'.

It's the opposite, duh! :P

Not exactly. When the verdict is firmly in your sights, the process is exactly the same, either way.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Squishua
Regular Poster
Posts: 522
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:33 am
Custom Title: Invisible Man
Location: California, USA

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Squishua » Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:33 am

Every December there are 1000's of "sightings" of Santa's sleighride reported by people. Television "news" stations even issue weather reports for the route he will take on the magic sleigh.

Summarily dismissing each and all of them without further scrutiny doesn't seem unreasonable - especially compared to accepting them all as real..
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:42 am

Squishua wrote:Every December there are 1000's of "sightings" of Santa's sleighride reported by people. Television "news" stations even issue weather reports for the route he will take on the magic sleigh.

Summarily dismissing each and all of them without further scrutiny doesn't seem unreasonable - especially compared to accepting them all as real..

False analogy. Scrutiny is the key to attributing the weight you need to achieve a level of certainty/uncertainty.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Squishua
Regular Poster
Posts: 522
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:33 am
Custom Title: Invisible Man
Location: California, USA

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Squishua » Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:58 am

landrew wrote:
Squishua wrote:Every December there are 1000's of "sightings" of Santa's sleighride reported by people. Television "news" stations even issue weather reports for the route he will take on the magic sleigh.

Summarily dismissing each and all of them without further scrutiny doesn't seem unreasonable - especially compared to accepting them all as real..

False analogy. Scrutiny is the key to attributing the weight you need to achieve a level of certainty/uncertainty.

I've scrutinized the premise of extraterrestrial spaceships visiting us quite well, and both they and Santa Claus are equally fantastic nonsense.
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:17 am

Squishua wrote:
landrew wrote:
Squishua wrote:Every December there are 1000's of "sightings" of Santa's sleighride reported by people. Television "news" stations even issue weather reports for the route he will take on the magic sleigh.

Summarily dismissing each and all of them without further scrutiny doesn't seem unreasonable - especially compared to accepting them all as real..

False analogy. Scrutiny is the key to attributing the weight you need to achieve a level of certainty/uncertainty.

I've scrutinized the premise of extraterrestrial spaceships visiting us quite well, and both they and Santa Claus are equally fantastic nonsense.

Opinion noted.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Squishua
Regular Poster
Posts: 522
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:33 am
Custom Title: Invisible Man
Location: California, USA

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Squishua » Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:54 am

landrew wrote:Opinion noted.

:-)
Thank you! And indeed, it is only my opinion.
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken

User avatar
JO 753
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9437
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby JO 753 » Sat Aug 28, 2010 7:39 am

Squishua wrote:I've scrutinized the premise of extraterrestrial spaceships visiting us


Hav you scrutinized any uv the reports?

However, wut didnt work for you about the premise?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22029
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: amethyst
Location: Transcona

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Gord » Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:40 pm

landrew wrote:
Gord wrote:
landrew wrote:
Gord wrote:She seems like a "wants-it-to-be-true"-er. For instance: "Something has to be phsyical to be seen on radar." No it does not. Radar does, under some circumstances, pick up things that aren't physically there.

How is that different from a "wants-it-to-be-hoax"-er?

Just askin'.

It's the opposite, duh! :P

Not exactly. When the verdict is firmly in your sights, the process is exactly the same, either way.

No, I got it in one. One wants one thing, the other wants the opposite. You did, after all, ask "how is that DIFFERENT," not "how is that THE SAME." Therefore, I pointed out the difference, not the similarity. :razz:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:10 pm

Gord wrote:
landrew wrote:
Gord wrote:
landrew wrote:
Gord wrote:She seems like a "wants-it-to-be-true"-er. For instance: "Something has to be phsyical to be seen on radar." No it does not. Radar does, under some circumstances, pick up things that aren't physically there.

How is that different from a "wants-it-to-be-hoax"-er?

Just askin'.

It's the opposite, duh! :P

Not exactly. When the verdict is firmly in your sights, the process is exactly the same, either way.

No, I got it in one. One wants one thing, the other wants the opposite. You did, after all, ask "how is that DIFFERENT," not "how is that THE SAME." Therefore, I pointed out the difference, not the similarity. :razz:

Except that the mentality is the same, whenever the conclusion comes before the evidence.

Whether its a creationist, "proving" that Darwin was wrong, or a Swiss motel owner "proving" that aliens built the pyramids, or a skeptic "proving" that anything unusual on a radar screen is swamp gas, it's still the opposite of the scientific method.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Pyrrho
Administrator
Posts: 9629
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 12:31 am
Contact:

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Pyrrho » Sat Aug 28, 2010 10:14 pm

J. Allen Hynek was the one who came up with "swamp gas" as an explanation. I haven't heard of that being used as an explanation since, except possible as tongue-in-cheek reference to the original statement or as ridicule. It doesn't seem like a hypothesis anyone who wanted to keep their reputation as a learned scholar would present, considering the reaction to Hynek's explanation--which, as the Wikipedia article claims, was not intended to explain all of the sightings in question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Allen_Hynek
For any forum questions or concerns please e-mail skepticforum@gmail.com or send a PM.

The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.

User avatar
Squishua
Regular Poster
Posts: 522
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:33 am
Custom Title: Invisible Man
Location: California, USA

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Squishua » Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:00 am

JO 753 wrote:
Squishua wrote:I've scrutinized the premise of extraterrestrial spaceships visiting us

Hav you scrutinized any uv the reports?

Not these particular reports, no.
JO 753 wrote:However, wut didnt work for you about the premise?

Distance, flight time, energy expenditure, plus a whole new realm of unknown theory and technology to make it possible... remnants of such would be massively more evident than mere word-of-mouth reports.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

An aside: A group of friends and I often attended the Bay Area UFO Expo each September. It's a carnival. There's even a booth for aluminum foil hats, which is certainly tongue-in-cheek, but make no mistake - there are some batshit crazy people there. Gary Busey even got kicked out of one a few years ago.
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8874
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby OlegTheBatty » Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:43 am

"We don't know what it is, therefore we know what it is." . . . It seems to me there are a few steps missing.
In any great organization it is far, far safer to be wrong with the majority than to be right alone. — John Kenneth Galbraith

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22029
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: amethyst
Location: Transcona

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Gord » Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:49 pm

landrew wrote:
Gord wrote:
landrew wrote:
Gord wrote:
landrew wrote:How is that different from a "wants-it-to-be-hoax"-er?

Just askin'.

It's the opposite, duh! :P

Not exactly. When the verdict is firmly in your sights, the process is exactly the same, either way.

No, I got it in one. One wants one thing, the other wants the opposite. You did, after all, ask "how is that DIFFERENT," not "how is that THE SAME." Therefore, I pointed out the difference, not the similarity. :razz:

Except that the mentality is the same, whenever the conclusion comes before the evidence.

Whether its a creationist, "proving" that Darwin was wrong, or a Swiss motel owner "proving" that aliens built the pyramids, or a skeptic "proving" that anything unusual on a radar screen is swamp gas, it's still the opposite of the scientific method.

Mentality schmentality, you need to ask the proper questions to get the answers you're looking for.


...and by "you," I mean landrew. It wasn't meant to be a general statement. :nyaah:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:51 pm

Gord wrote:Mentality schmentality, you need to ask the proper questions to get the answers you're looking for.


...and by "you," I mean landrew. It wasn't meant to be a general statement. :nyaah:

You mean like a shark lawyer, asking the defendant how often he beats his wife?

Oh wait, you mean, like a creationist asking how could "random chance ever create life?" Or maybe you meant "how could intelligent life ever have visited earth when interstellar travel is impossible."

Those are all good questions skewed towards getting the "right" answers.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22029
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: amethyst
Location: Transcona

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Gord » Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:28 pm

landrew wrote:
Gord wrote:Mentality schmentality, you need to ask the proper questions to get the answers you're looking for.


...and by "you," I mean landrew. It wasn't meant to be a general statement. :nyaah:

You mean like a shark lawyer, asking the defendant how often he beats his wife?

Oh wait, you mean, like a creationist asking how could "random chance ever create life?" Or maybe you meant "how could intelligent life ever have visited earth when interstellar travel is impossible."

Those are all good questions skewed towards getting the "right" answers.

No, I mean like asking "How is that different from a "wants-it-to-be-hoax"-er?" when you want to actually know how it's actually different. Actually.

Because I answered the question you asked, rather than the one you meant to ask. :P

P.S. Sharks have lawyers now? :?
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:36 pm

Gord wrote:
landrew wrote:
Gord wrote:Mentality schmentality, you need to ask the proper questions to get the answers you're looking for.


...and by "you," I mean landrew. It wasn't meant to be a general statement. :nyaah:

You mean like a shark lawyer, asking the defendant how often he beats his wife?

Oh wait, you mean, like a creationist asking how could "random chance ever create life?" Or maybe you meant "how could intelligent life ever have visited earth when interstellar travel is impossible."

Those are all good questions skewed towards getting the "right" answers.

No, I mean like asking "How is that different from a "wants-it-to-be-hoax"-er?" when you want to actually know how it's actually different. Actually.

Because I answered the question you asked, rather than the one you meant to ask. :P

P.S. Sharks have lawyers now? :?


Actually Gord, I know that you got my point long ago, that frontloaded conclusions are all similar in the category of anti-scientific reasoning, albeit different in other respects, (as any Mensa member would clearly know) but you do like to have fun, so don't let me spoil it for you by duking it out with you for too long.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22029
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: amethyst
Location: Transcona

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Gord » Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:44 pm

landrew wrote:Actually Gord, I know that you got my point long ago, that frontloaded conclusions are all similar in the category of anti-scientific reasoning, albeit different in other respects, (as any Mensa member would clearly know) but you do like to have fun, so don't let me spoil it for you by duking it out with you for too long.

Yeah, but you still know you're wrong, though, right? :mrgreen:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Sun Aug 29, 2010 5:46 pm

Gord wrote:
landrew wrote:Actually Gord, I know that you got my point long ago, that frontloaded conclusions are all similar in the category of anti-scientific reasoning, albeit different in other respects, (as any Mensa member would clearly know) but you do like to have fun, so don't let me spoil it for you by duking it out with you for too long.

Yeah, but you still know you're wrong, though, right? :mrgreen:

Whatever floats your rubber duckie.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Squishua
Regular Poster
Posts: 522
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:33 am
Custom Title: Invisible Man
Location: California, USA

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Squishua » Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:21 pm

Gord wrote:Yeah, but you still know you're wrong, though, right?

Everyone reading it knows that. His persistence is quite amusing.
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken

JJM
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2131
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 6:48 pm
Location: Taxachusetts

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby JJM » Sun Aug 29, 2010 6:24 pm

Gord wrote:
landrew wrote:Actually Gord, I know that you got my point long ago, that frontloaded conclusions writing about myself is important ...
JJM wrote:fixed it for you.

Yeah, but you still know you're wrong, though, right? :mrgreen:
You are tilting at a windmill, Gord. It is all about Landrew.

User avatar
JO 753
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9437
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby JO 753 » Sun Aug 29, 2010 9:49 pm

Squishua wrote:
JO 753 wrote:However, wut didnt work for you about the premise?

Distance, flight time, energy expenditure, plus a whole new realm of unknown theory and technology to make it possible... remnants of such would be massively more evident than mere word-of-mouth reports.


So your skepticizm iz based on the notion that our science iz advanced enuf to declare wut iz & iz not possible.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.


To deni a report frum a credible source iz to make an extraordinary claim. And in general the least incredible explanation for theze sitingz iz extraterrestrial vizitorz.

User avatar
Squishua
Regular Poster
Posts: 522
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:33 am
Custom Title: Invisible Man
Location: California, USA

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Squishua » Sun Aug 29, 2010 10:18 pm

JO 753 wrote:
Squishua wrote:
JO 753 wrote:However, wut didnt work for you about the premise?

Distance, flight time, energy expenditure, plus a whole new realm of unknown theory and technology to make it possible... remnants of such would be massively more evident than mere word-of-mouth reports.

So your skepticizm iz based on the notion that our science iz advanced enuf to declare wut iz & iz not possible.

That's not what I said. Maybe you should re-read what you quoted.
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8874
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby OlegTheBatty » Sun Aug 29, 2010 10:47 pm

JO 753 wrote:To deni a report frum a credible source iz to make an extraordinary claim. And in general the least incredible explanation for theze sitingz iz extraterrestrial vizitorz.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA06Z5e1ZFc
In any great organization it is far, far safer to be wrong with the majority than to be right alone. — John Kenneth Galbraith

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:44 am

Squishua wrote:
Gord wrote:Yeah, but you still know you're wrong, though, right?

Everyone reading it knows that. His persistence is quite amusing.

The facts can also be quite persistent. Please tell me how simple declarations made without supporting arguments are valid.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
JO 753
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9437
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby JO 753 » Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:53 am

Squishua wrote:That's not what I said.


That's rite. Its the implication uv wut you sed.

User avatar
Squishua
Regular Poster
Posts: 522
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:33 am
Custom Title: Invisible Man
Location: California, USA

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Squishua » Mon Aug 30, 2010 3:03 am

landrew wrote:
Squishua wrote:
Gord wrote:Yeah, but you still know you're wrong, though, right?

Everyone reading it knows that.  His persistence is quite amusing.

The facts can also be quite persistent. Please tell me how simple declarations made without supporting arguments are valid.

Why don't you read through this thread again from the beginning. There's the supporting argument.

Don't you feel silly now?
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Mon Aug 30, 2010 3:24 am

Squishua wrote:
landrew wrote:
Squishua wrote:
Gord wrote:Yeah, but you still know you're wrong, though, right?

Everyone reading it knows that.  His persistence is quite amusing.

The facts can also be quite persistent. Please tell me how simple declarations made without supporting arguments are valid.

Why don't you read through this thread again from the beginning. There's the supporting argument.

Don't you feel silly now?

Not at all. You've contributed nothing to the discussion but empty declarations.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Squishua
Regular Poster
Posts: 522
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:33 am
Custom Title: Invisible Man
Location: California, USA

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Squishua » Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:39 am

Very well, if I must:
[paraphrasing for simplicity]
landrew: "what's the difference between a "wants-it-to-be-true"-er and a "wants-it-to-be-hoax"-er?
Gord: "they're the opposite! :P"
landrew: [moves the goal post and digresses into pontification]

I don't know why this should be repeated, as it's all in the posts above. Interesting that you act oblivious to it... Have a good night.
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:03 pm

Squishua wrote:Very well, if I must:
[paraphrasing for simplicity]
landrew: "what's the difference between a "wants-it-to-be-true"-er and a "wants-it-to-be-hoax"-er?
Gord: "they're the opposite! :P"
landrew: [moves the goal post and digresses into pontification]

I don't know why this should be repeated, as it's all in the posts above. Interesting that you act oblivious to it... Have a good night.

You've obviously chosen to ignore the point I was making; in that the two attitudes are quite similar in that they start with the conclusion first, then work backwards, which is contrary to the scientific method.

The simple declaration that they are "opposites" is not a refutation, but a subjective opinion. For example, what is the opposite of a carrot? Your debating style appears to consist of saying the other person is wrong and not much else.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22029
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: amethyst
Location: Transcona

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Gord » Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:22 pm

landrew wrote:The simple declaration that they are "opposites" is not a refutation, but a subjective opinion.

Not subjective, but objective...in that I object to the subject. :mrgreen:

For example, what is the opposite of a carrot?

A notcarrot.

What's the opposite of an orange? :lol:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:38 pm

Gord wrote:
landrew wrote:The simple declaration that they are "opposites" is not a refutation, but a subjective opinion.

Not subjective, but objective...in that I object to the subject. :mrgreen:

For example, what is the opposite of a carrot?

A notcarrot.

What's the opposite of an orange? :lol:

Very entertaining, but no relevance to the argument. It's also a bit ironic that you're the one who claims I can't admit when I'm wrong.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Squishua
Regular Poster
Posts: 522
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:33 am
Custom Title: Invisible Man
Location: California, USA

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby Squishua » Mon Aug 30, 2010 7:11 pm

landrew wrote:The simple declaration that they are "opposites" is not a refutation

That's right it is not a refutation! :-D. It is a simple statement of fact; TRUE is the opposite of FALSE (aka "hoax"). Besides, I've only been on this forum for a month and I've figured out Gord likes to have fun with people. Yet you still feel compelled to defend against this statement.
Last edited by Squishua on Mon Aug 30, 2010 7:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken

User avatar
landrew
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6917
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am

Re: Leslie Kean

Postby landrew » Mon Aug 30, 2010 7:12 pm

Squishua wrote:[quote="landrewl]The simple declaration that they are "opposites" is not a refutation[/quote]
That's right it is not a refutation! :-D. It is a simple statement of fact; TRUE is the opposite of FALSE (aka "hoax"). Besides, I've only been on this forum for a month and I've figured out Gord likes to have fun with people. Yet you still feel compelled to defend against this statement.[/quote][/quote]

Yes, true is the opposite of false, and it's also the opposite of any of your other declarations I suppose.
:roll:
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.


Return to “UFOs, Cryptozoology, and The Paranormal”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests