home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.demon.co.uk!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!alterdial.uu.net!not-for-mail
- From: twitch@hub.ofthe.net
- Newsgroups: alt.paranormal,sci.skeptic,alt.astrology,alt.alien.visitors,alt.alien.research,alt.paranet.ufo
- Subject: Re: What Bruce Daniel Kettler has against Twitch
- Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 16:22:55 GMT
- Lines: 336
- Message-ID: <4puobf$su7@news0-alterdial.uu.net>
- References: <31C15B23.1A3A@ns.vvm.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: lbb09.hub.ofthe.net
- X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
- Xref: news.demon.co.uk alt.paranormal:19431 sci.skeptic:71482 alt.astrology:50391 alt.alien.visitors:87528 alt.alien.research:25675 alt.paranet.ufo:53076
-
- I didn't go to Yahoo but checked my outbox and this is indeed the
- article which started the whole brouhaha. If you have any doubts or
- merely wish to check, please feel free to look in dejanews, or Yahoo
- for this.
-
- I posted this on a public newsgroup and therefore, I have no right to
- complain if Bruce or anyone else wishes to use this as it is in the
- public domain.
-
- Enjoy.
-
-
- Dan Pressnell <dpressne@ns.vvm.com> wrote:
-
- #I can't remember all the newsgroups that Bruce has posted to, so I'm
- #taking a stab at just a few of them. The champion of don't-crosspost
-
- #just copies the message to a bunch of groups, rather than putting all
- the
- #groups into the header.
-
- #He's now made reference to how he and others are going to plaster his
-
- #smear campaign "all over usenet". Perhaps some people are wondering
- just
- #what it is that Bruce has against Twitch. You can find out by using
- #DejaNews (or Yahoo--they are the same thing in searching usenet) and
- #viewing this reference:
-
- #http://xp4.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?recnum=%3c4ls04g$8ka@alterdial.UU.NET%3e&server=dnserver..dbapr&CONTEXT=834747246..28343&hitnum=77
-
- #I give that reference for the benefit of Bruce and the anonymous
- #co-authors of his soon-to-be world famous, Nobel Prize winning book
- on
- #skeptics. You see, Bruce would otherwise accuse me of distortion;
- #because I'm going to copy the evil Twitch's article below, written on
-
- #April 27, 996, that caused Bruce to embark on his hate campaign
- toward
- #Twitch. Notice, dear reader, how terrible Twitch's posting was.
-
- #Bruce, why don't you put the article by Twitch into your book that is
-
- #going to be propogated throughout usenet? I'm sure Twitch will give
- you
- #permission to use the article.
-
- #Do I expect Bruce to do this? Of course not. Bruce wouldn't do
- #something like that, because that would be honest, and would give his
-
- #readers the truth. Bruce doesn't want the readers of his book to
- know
- #the truth. He only wants them to THINK they know the truth.
-
- #Dan
-
- #Twitch's article follows:
-
- #Article 78 of 78
-
- #Subject: Re: IS "PARANORMAL" NEWSGROUP BECOMING
- "ANTI-PARANORMAL"?
- #From: twitch@hub.ofthe.net
- #Date: 1996/04/27
- #Message-Id: <4ls04g$8ka@alterdial.UU.NET>
- #References: <4ln7dn$559@dfw-Ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>
- #Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
-
-
- #dkettler@ix.netcom.com (Bruce Daniel Kettler) wrote:
-
-
- #<snip>
- ##Are the "skeptics" chasing away those who want to constructively
- ##contribute to this group?
-
- #Are you indicating that to constructively contribute you must agree
- or
- #else?
-
- ##People interested in the subject are gradually losing interest here,
- ##since so many messages are ANTI-PARANORMAL. So many, also, are
- ##"flames."
-
- ##There are "flames" coming from both those for and those against the
- #idea
- ##that paranormal activities are real.
-
- #Congratulations! This is one of the first times a believer has
- #admitted that the fault is not just with the skeptics. Thank you.
-
- # Indeed, this message can be
- ##construed as a "flame."
-
- #Not so far. Any reasonable complaint against constant flaming is not
- #a flame.
-
- ##I believe that those who find that they are interested in discussion
- #of
- ##the paranormal, but are not interested in either reading the
-
- ## SNIDE REMARKS
- ## DEMANDS FOR PROOF OF "CLAIMS"
-
- #Not being interested in snide remarks is legit. But requests for
- #evidence of paranormal ability or other unusual claims is perfectly
- #legit. The Earls, Uris, Nancys, Hoaglands, Lazars, etc. are so
- common
- #that any claim to be taken seriously should be greeted with a request
- #for some evidence that this is not another hoax, person who has lost
- #all touch with reality, etc. Why do you object to a request for
- #evidence? If someone came to you and told you that he would make you
- #wealthy by paranormal means and it would only cost you $5,000 up
- #front, wouldn't you ask for some evidence?
-
- ## FLAMES
- ## SO-CALLED "PROOFS" that
-
- ## no-one is "psychic"
- ## there are no UFO'S
- ## etc.
-
- ## and the religion of "orthodox"
- ## science views
-
- ##should post a message under this heading, this title, "...becoming
- ##anti-paranormal," stating that opinion.
-
- ##Also, I want to recommend to proponents of paranormal phenomena,
- that
- ##they do not debate the so-called "skeptics." I believe they will go
- ##away if there's no-one to "fight."
-
- #Just the opposite. The legitimate skeptic isn't looking for a fight,
- #but to avoid talking with those who don't believe you are correct, is
- #the way of the paranoid. They are out to get us! Or those nasty
- #unbelievers, how dare they doubt that I can fly just using the power
- #of my mind!
-
- ##If one really want's to *PROVE* that ESP is real, that UFO'S exist,
- #they
- ##never will to people with closed minds and little or no knowledge of
- #the
- ##subject,
-
- #Many of us have as great or greater knowledge of the subject. And
- #some of us have far greater knowledge of physics, biology, etc. I'm
- #afraid that I would say that the closed minds are on the other side.
-
-
- # but if their attempt is so irrestible, why not post at
- ##SCI.SKEPTIC and similar newsgroups?
-
- #Debate among people who all think alike is intellectually sterile.
- #Many skeptics think that believers should post the evidence or at
- #least provide this evidence for the very simple reason that belief
- #without a scientific basis is a religion. If you wish to state that
- #what you are practicing and advocating is a religion, most of us
- won't
- #object or even disagree. Religions are, by their very nature, beyond
- #skepticism. God, if she exists, goes beyond the natural. But the
- #instance that you claim the ability to influence the natural, you are
- #in the realm where it is unscientific to not proceed in a scientific
- #fashion. And many sceptics feel that to allow you to state something
- #which they feel is false, without sufficent evidence, is to betray
- our
- #scientific backgrounds.
-
- # Why attract people to
- ##ALT.PARANORMAL to actually crowd the bandwidth with their ravings,
-
- #We don't mind believers here. You shouldn't either. People who
- #advocate the paranormal have just as much right to rave here as
- anyone
- #else.
-
- #and
- ##the writings of such zealots.
-
- #I have no desire to stop the believers from writing either. You
- #shouldn't be so closeminded. Give the believers a chance. After
- all,
- #if you stop the believers from writing, we will never know if they
- #indeed have found something.
-
- #(By the way, you are becoming a flame!)
-
- ##The so-called "skeptics" rhetoric is not new. It's a collection of
- ##doctrines.
-
- #It's called the scientific process.
-
- # They rant and rave about the "gullible," yet they never
- ##question the writings of their high-priest, James Randi.
-
- #Of course we do. But he has never posted a belief about something
- #outside the scientific known. And, so far, none of the believers who
- #have taken the Randi Challange, which they agree on in advance!, have
- #ever passed it. Actually that is incorrect. One person passed the
- #Randi Challange. Which Randi admitted. Virtually ever one of the
- #people who failed the Challange, which they agreed to in advance,
- have
- #not admitted that they have failed. Most question the test and the
- #conditions, which they agreed to in advance. It is amazing that so
- #many people find the conditions acceptable until the fail, then what
- #they agreed to is totally improper. If they had succeeded, I get the
- #impression that the wouldn't have complained about the test.
-
- ##I've noticed the observation of a number of pro paranormal people's
- ##exchange with these "skeptics" as they call themselves.
-
- #You are absolutely correct. That is what we call ourselves.
-
- # I've read their
- ##writing in other newsgroups such as alt.paranet.psi, and they all
- see
- ##the same thing I've seen for years. These "skeptics" distort what
- #you
- ##write, and rewrite a new meaning again in their replies. Either they
- ##distort or they lie.
-
- #Would you please post some evidence for this claim?
-
- ##I believe that whether paranormal claims are valid is a non-issue.
-
- #Oh, you don't believe in it either? Or are you implying that
- claiming
- #that science is all wrong is perfectly proper and that claims need
- not
- #be accurate.
-
- #"I see money in your future. It only requires a simple act of
- #generosity on your part. Send me $1,000 and your wealth will
- #multiply!" Earl claims that he makes $5,000 a weekend off his
- #"intuition" (read psychic abilities) Does any of this come from
- #people who give him money for "readings"? How about the poor people
- #who phone the 900 lines to get psychic advice? Why shouldn't these
- #claims of psychic ability be challanged? If they are real and valid,
- #fine. If not, also fine. But whether claims are valid is a real
- #issue.
-
- # I
- ##also believe that proving how smart one is or how stupid another is,
- #is
- ##childish, and showing how silly that person was, etc. I mean that
- #which
- ##ever side you're on.
-
- #So far, you've violated this one by your remarks about skeptics. The
- #generalization fallacy is a poor one at best, and mixed with the ad
- #hominem fallacy doesn't improve it.
-
- ##I don't intend to show smartness or stupidness, but I do *WONDER*
- why
- ##people spend so much time and energy attempting to debunk the
- ##paranormal.
-
- #Simple, if it is real we need to know, if it isn't valid (to use your
- #term) then people shouldn't be led astray to lose money or perhaps
- #their lifes.
-
- # It's questionable. Indeed, isn't it kind of fanatical?
- ##Fundamentalist Christians spend a lot of energy against what they
- #call
- ##the "occult," and they stink like the people of the Catholic
- #Inquistion,
- ##and the witch hunters who legally hung people on this continent just
- #a
- ##few centuries ago.
-
- #Over generalization fallacy.
-
- ##So, much "anti" coming from the so-called "skeptics," makes one
- #wonder,
- ##doesn't it?
-
- #Not with the evidence provided so far.
-
- # Kind of negative, don't you think?
-
- #Asking someone to proof an extraordinary claim is always negative.
- #Especially when they thing whether the claims are valid isn't
- #important.
-
- # Why, indeed, do they
- ##care so much?
-
- #Because if you can't provide evidence for your extaordinary claims,
- #you are doing a disservice to other people and contibuting to an
- #anti-scientific attitude without knowing what science is.
-
- # To me, a "skeptic" is just "skeptical."
-
- #A skeptic should be skeptical until he sees some reasonable evidence
- #that shows him that a claim is real. Extraoridinary claims require
- #extraoridinary evidence. That should be obvious.
-
- # I don't believe
- ##the people who behave as they do are "skeptical," at all. They have
- ##made up their minds, and they intend to try to prove their so-called
- ##"truth," no matter who is or is not interested."
-
- #Would you please post the evidence for this claim? Thank you.
-
- # When a person corners
- ##you on the street, and you tell him, "look, man, I'm not
- interested,"
- ##and he insists on telling you need to be "saved" after that
- #("skeptics"
- ##saved from delusion) he's a fanatic, pure and simple.
-
- #But the fanatic on the street is the believer. The skeptic is asking
- #how he knows that he will be saved? What does being saved mean? Why
- #do you push your agenda if you don't have any evidence or data of any
- #reasonable quality? Why do believers keep acting like science isn't
- #relevant to their claims when they claim things that can be checked?
- #But I agree, the person who insists that extraordinary claims don't
- #need any evidence and that it doesn't matter whether or not the claim
- #is valid, is a fanatic.
-
- #This started out with such real promise. But to make the claim that
- #it doesn't matter whether or not the paranormal claims are valid,
- #just threw me.
-
- ##--
-
-
- ## ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- ## ' '
- ## ' \\\\
-
- #Twitch@hub.ofthe.net
-
-
- Twitch
-
-