If qualia is real, why does it have to be paranormal

Single event? I admire your optimism. Lol.

I’ll stick to my analogy thanks.

It's multiple witness reports of multiple events across time & place versus one event from what I assume is a reference to American politics.

Isn't it clear which is closer to the accounts of the paranormal? This isn't to say they are equivalent.

It's multiple witness reports of multiple events across time & place….

Yep. This describes the range of election fraud claims perfectly. Many and varied from all corners of the world.

Yep. This describes the range of election fraud claims perfectly. Many and varied frors of the world.

Yes, including the statements from those who's literal job was to be observers to prevent vote fraud, security camera footage of ballet boxes being tampered with, usage of voting machines proven in courts to be easily hacked, and so much more. Likewise, there are similarly credible accounts for paranormal events that can include highly credible people, multiple witnesses, physical effects, etc. It is a logical fallacy to state that all stories of all events are equally credible or incredible and that therefore they can all just be dismissed as "stories" forever. Unless of course, you choose to apply zero critical reasoning of your own, never bother looking into any of them so that all you know is the "culturally acceptable" story that its all just bullshit.

Yep. This describes the range of election fraud claims perfectly. Many and varied from all corners of the world.

You first said the 2020 election?

But even if you expand this to elections globally I don't think claims of the paranormal have the same single focus as election fraud which pertains to transfers of political power.

Regardless, I'm sure there are stories of election fraud across world history that people would say are more legitimate than others.

A person can discount any and all reports of the paranormal, but it seems odd to dismiss them all definitely not worthy of attention without some a priori reason. Since consciousness is irreducible/fundamental, this dismissal would be doubly odd.

You first said the 2020 election?

Yes. The fraud claim stories for the 2020 us election had chapters out of Italy, Germany, Canada , China. Etc

Yes. The fraud claim stories for the 2020 us election had chapters out of Italy, Germany, Canada , China. Etc

So it is a single historical event you are talking about right?

Which is what makes it different than the varied anecdotes about the paranormal.

So it is a single historical event you are talking about right?

Which is what makes it different than the varied anecdotes about the paranormal.

It’s lots of reported events relating to an overarching theme, which is why it’s such a great analogy.

There is an appetite for these reports and stories, and that demand creates a market. 

Thus, there will always be a lot of these reports driven by all sorts of desires and motives. 

It is a logical fallacy to say due to the number of these stories, at least one must be true.

An analogy might be with the number of ‘patriots’ that came forward with stories of fraud following the 2020 election. Surely some of these stories are true?

Ah the logical fallacy which, together with the argument from incredulity, must be at the top of the sceptics guide to lazy responses. You can do better, malf.

It might be a logical fallacy but if you dismiss them all without consideration, because of some pre-decided ideological position - what would you call that? 

Shit analogy too. I kind of expected something like that but more along the lines of "you might as well say that one of those loony conspiracy theories must be true because they are all over the internet". No - because those people are pre-disposed to thinking that way.

I, like just about everyone I know, can relate some incident from a close family member who has a story which would fit the paranormal or PSI category. I bet that you have too. My step-mother was a hard-nosed, no-nonsense Yorkshire woman who was intolerant of talk about ghosts and spooky stuff in our home. Yet, as she lay on her death-bed she related how she had come out of her body and watched the doctor and nurses come and go. She had certainly never heard or read about NDEs (she was functionally illiterate due to missing school due to polio as a child). I could tell several similar stories from my family - people who were definitely not pre-disposed to believing (or even knowing about) such things.

Yet you dismiss them all? They are all lying or deluded?

Ah the logical fallacy which, together with the argument from incredulity, must be at the top of the sceptics guide to lazy responses. You can do better, malf.

It might be a logical fallacy but if you dismiss them all without consideration, because of some pre-decided ideological position - what would you call that? 

Shit analogy too. I kind of expected something like that but more along the lines of "you might as well say that one of those loony conspiracy theories must be true because they are all over the internet". No - because those people are pre-disposed to thinking that way.

I, like just about everyone I know, can relate some incident from a close family member who has a story which would fit the paranormal or PSI category. I bet that you have too. My step-mother was a hard-nosed, no-nonsense Yorkshire woman who was intolerant of talk about ghosts and spooky stuff in our home. Yet, as she lay on her death-bed she related how she had come out of her body and watched the doctor and nurses come and go. She had certainly never heard or read about NDEs (she was functionally illiterate due to missing school due to polio as a child). I could tell several similar stories from my family - people who were definitely not pre-disposed to believing (or even knowing about) such things.

Yet you dismiss them all? They are all lying or deluded?

One of the strongest effects I've had so far with the energy transmissions I've done for people was on a doctor of over 50 years experience. It was so strong on him that he asked me to do another transmission right after the first, and then messaged me 3 hours later saying that he was still having effects. And he's requested another session more recently. Now, why would someone of that level of credentials do that? Is he just delusional and irrational? What would that say about doctors and the licensing process if that's true? Was he trying to trick me and make me think I was being effective when I wasn't? Well I've had multiple people have strong reactions, did they all do the same? are they also all delusional? I fully admit that I can't get that level of effect on everyone, and a few people have reported no effect at all. I'm still trying to figure out all the factors that effect it.

I of course won't give you their names as that would breach confidentiality and so naturally that makes this just another story. But according to the skeptics the doctor must be delusional or lying, the software engineer who was crying after the session from the emotional release and telling me that I really had a future with this, the guy who's chronic abdominal problems that had plagued him daily for 2 years which evaporated during a group session, never came back and has enabled them to eat spicy food again must somehow never have happened.

I don't pay attention to the skeptics at this point, I know, empirically, that I can do this, not because of what I think, but because of what numerous other people have told me after their sessions, even after only the 4 months I've been doing this. Let alone the decade+ of experience before shifting to this as part of my overall goal.

Everyone on this forum knows how long I've been talking about this and how long I've been practicing and trying every little thing I could. That's what makes people like me different from the skeptics, I'm willing to actually put effort in. I'm not just some armchair scientist too lazy to get their boots in the mud and actually do something. I'm not just sitting back reading other peoples opinions on primary sources I've never bothered to read, watch, or listen to myself. What psi experiments have the skeptics done? Where's all their write ups, theories, etc? And when they do do them they give up and declare it all crap after one failure, whereas I've continued this long, refining as I go, recognizing the imperfection and working with it to improve.

At this point I don't consider skeptics to have anything to say worth listening to. They'll continue to act like its all woo woo while others are building it. It doesn't mean every claim is valid what matters is the evidence. And so those who handwave things as woo woo are just stating they aren't interested in evidence, only justifying their own prejudices and laziness.

It’s lots of reported events relating to an overarching theme, which is why it’s such a great analogy.

It doesn't really seem comparable. Accounts of the paranormal stretch back to early recorded history, with witnesses talking about their own experience not a singular election that seems - in some of these cases you cite - are literally a world away.

But this also assumes that every claim of the paranormal is of equal weight, which is as untrue as every claim of election fraud is plausible or even every sexual harassment claim is given equal weight to people hearing the claims.

You're basically taking a single claim of election fraud you expect most of the people here to believe is false, and then making a false equivalence between this conspiracy theory and every claim of the paranormal across time.

It's just very, very flawed as an analogy. It works well as an attempt at emotional manipulation though I guess?