Has Skeptiko gone completely wacko?

"Has Skeptiko gone completely wacko?"

I don't think so. The direction in which Alex has taken it seems valid to me, and I still check in regularly now that I am back online after several months away, although it's been a while since I was a regular listener to the podcast itself.

That said, I do find some of the political views of some of the posters on the forum to be objectionable, and I am disappointed to see those views expressed there, although I accept Alex's implicit support for a kind of free speech on his forum in that respect. I would like to see the context in which one such poster was required to apologise to the Woolley Stannoth - and kudos to him for standing up to that offensiveness.

Have you forgotten his take on pizzagate?

I’ve been meaning to reply to this post since I first read it and it resonated with me.
The first sentence I highlighted because I came to a similar conclusion after putting in three or four years of solid investigation after I had my stroke. That’s why I sometimes see some conversations here as ‘Zombie tennis’ that are going nowhere but exciting the egos of those involved. I say that knowing that I am just as capable of exercising my own ego in similar ways.

As most of you know, I am keen on keeping a more practical or ‘down to earth’ aspect of the forum open. I do so without having a great argument to show, it is more a feeling - maybe in the wrong direction, I’m not sure. One thing I am sure of is that I’ve moved on from ‘zombie tennis’ of a type seen here, perhaps I’ve skipped to another form of the same ? I’m learning a hell of a lot by trying not to be definite about anything. Listening to David Icke this morning as I sometimes do, it occurred to me that he states his opinions as though they were facts, as many people do. It’s amazing how many things are stated as factual without the person being able to provide any real evidence. I happen to think this often applies more to the newsreader reading a dubious article than to the mother of an autistic child who’s trying to convince others of the reason why her child became that way. I’m trying to find out if this type of thinking is a flaw in my own psychological makeup - or a strength?

The second bit I highlighted has been shown to be ‘true’ by seeing how both the Labour Party In the UK and the Democrats in the US have become totally twisted in much of their thinking. I can’t understand it, but I see it and have to believe what I see. Don’t I?

One thing David Icke and I seem to agree about, is that love is the answer.

What do you think about that statement Mediocre?




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I didn't get an alert for this, despite you very clearly having quoted me, which is odd. And I also don't see what you've highlighted in the quote, nonetheless. I also avoid the zombie tennis because it solves nothing. But moreso, at least for my own recent conviction for my incredibly crazy life, you can have evidence that is objective that cannot be presented in an objective format. What that means is that it makes sense for YOU to believe it, but it doesn't make sense for you to think OTHER people should believe it. For example, I KNOW that magic is possible because I've done the work and gotten the results to show it. However I have no way, currently, to demonstrate that in a purely objective way. But that should not prevent me from acknowledging the evidence I have gathered for it from multiple vectors. To do so would be truly irrational given the amount and strength of it.

Besides, when you think about it, no one really knows how anything in the world works very well outside of a few hyper specialists. All you know is THAT it works and that people SAY it works a certain way, but you don't really know unless you build it yourself or otherwise experience it. But it also doesn't matter so long as it works. So I've always figured it's going be a better use of my time trying to just make things happen rather than obsess or argue about why or if they can happen.

For example, if I'm able to legitimately make a glowing, crackling, ball of energy in my hand, do you really think I'm going to care if it's happening via biophotons, heat, electrostatics and hystemines, or consciousness? No, I'm not, I'm going to care that i have a GLOWING BALL OF ENERGY in my hand. And though other people would debate whether it's real or not, because they will, I can still sit there secure knowing what I really have. I mean I haven't done this yet so it's hypothetical, but still.


Or as a more mundane and clear example. I am male and almost 32 years old. These are facts. No one else reading this has any reason whatsoever to believe me, they could demand evidence for my claim, as they should if they are skeptics, and I could choose to not provide it, actually I wonder if I even could right now now that I think of it. They could go away saying I'm irrational for believing that those are my age and gender but they would be flat out wrong, and that's just a fact. The only issue is that the objective evidence I have at my disposal is not in a format that can be objectively shown in this context. Doesn't make me wrong, doesn't mean I've gotta start doubting my convictions or beliefs, just means I shouldn't be angry or annoyed that others wouldn't believe me because it makes perfect rational sense for them not to.

I don't know if any of this is even clear or not, it's kinda rambly. Nonetheless it's a big part of why I avoid zombie tennis

Couldn't help smiling at this:
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/an...ost-131693

FFS 

This thread seems a little tacky and unnecessary.

FFS 

Oh, you are deep in some stuff now malf!

This thread seems a little tacky and unnecessary.

Hi Hurm

I disagree.

Surely it’s quite normal to critique other forums, especially one that many of us have been so heavily involved with in the past? I mourn the old Skeptiko and think it very useful to comment on the possible reasons why things moved on, and the direction in which things seem to be moving.

You may say that it’s a bit ‘tacky’ to write about certain individuals in a negative manner, but under the circumstances, I think pointing out ‘unusual’ posts is fair game. David’s mediation was a big part in the ‘downfall’ of Skeptiko and the formation of this forum. I think his position ought to allow some criticism. After all, I don’t think the spirit of it is nasty. Malf was adding some light hearted teasing, I think most would recognise the overreaction by David.

I do think that we ought to remember that when we point the finger at others, three more point back at us. 

I can’t ever remember a situation that you have been critical of others, it may be fair to say. But I do think Malf’s contribution added something positive to the thread despite his posts slightly ‘edgy’ nature. I think that it was worth pointing out David’s reaction.

Or as a more mundane and clear example. I am male and almost 32 years old. These are facts. No one else reading this has any reason whatsoever to believe me, they could demand evidence for my claim, as they should if they are skeptics, and I could choose to not provide it, actually I wonder if I even could right now now that I think of it. They could go away saying I'm irrational for believing that those are my age and gender but they would be flat out wrong, and that's just a fact. The only issue is that the objective evidence I have at my disposal is not in a format that can be objectively shown in this context. Doesn't make me wrong, doesn't mean I've gotta start doubting my convictions or beliefs, just means I shouldn't be angry or annoyed that others wouldn't believe me because it makes perfect rational sense for them not to.

This makes a lot of sense to me.

It is the very reason why I now say that there is really very little that we think we know that can be proven. Even direct experience is filtered by our brain. 

It’s a propagandist’s (is that a word?) dream when you think about it.

This thread seems a little tacky and unnecessary.

The good thing is you don’t have to read it if you feel that way.

I think David is trying his best as a mod, it certainly isn't a job I would want...Andy was similarly strict, arguably stricter. But ultimately a lot of this is serving in the capacity Alex desires, and thankfully this site exists as an alternative with a different modding structure.

FWIW, I'll always be thankful to Skeptiko for helping me find an interesting community.

Similarly I am glad this site exists as my interests no long align with Alex's interests or the nature of his site.

Actually, the impression I get is that the ill-feeling in some quarters about what happened at Skeptiko has diminished with the passage of time. There seems to be more of a "live and let live" attitude these days. I don't think the odd bit of amusement at how things are done over there really detracts from that.