Mega-thread for help with rebuttals against skeptical talking points

I don't understand what's wrong with challenging these arguments? Surely by challenging them, we can show that we are aware of their claims and have debunked/refuted them. As a result, we are showing that we are well-aware of them and can confidently explain why they are wrong, especially for lurkers and newcomers. Perhaps I'm thinking of this too much like some kind of war?

What are you challenging? To challenge an argument about probability modeling you have to learn about probability - the equations, the proofs, and some knowledge of debate relating to how probability models are created?

You just post some random comment, then move on to mentioning some new skeptic site that maybe we should check out. Over and over you've been told that - for your own mental health - you should work on your own personal journey. At first you agree, then you just continue to rapidly spam some new skeptic argument. People try to answer it, you give some half-hearted or generic agreement that the skeptic is wrong, but then move on.

If you insist on aiding the "war" effort pick a topic or set of topics - philosophy of mind, NDEs, historical investigations by the SPR, etc. Then actually study it. You simply are unqualified to fight this "war".

Right now it's impossible to distinguish your spamming from a troll, assuming that you are actually honest in your intentions.

What are you challenging? To challenge an argument about probability modeling you have to learn about probability - the equations, the proofs, and some knowledge of debate relating to how probability models are created?

You just post some random comment, then move on to mentioning some new skeptic site that maybe we should check out. Over and over you've been told that - for your own mental health - you should work on your own personal journey. At first you agree, then you just continue to rapidly spam some new skeptic argument. People try to answer it, you give some half-hearted or generic agreement that the skeptic is wrong, but then move on.

If you insist on aiding the "war" effort pick a topic or set of topics - philosophy of mind, NDEs, historical investigations by the SPR, etc. Then actually study it. You simply are unqualified to fight this "war".

Right now it's impossible to distinguish your spamming from a troll, assuming that you are actually honest in your intentions.

I challenged his claim that it's Sagan's quote and Occam's Razor are objective by posting out where the subjective elements come into play. If I'm going to try and pursue my own journey, I'll have to deal with things that may upset me. I feel like these topics can be double edged swords. I often rely on near-deathnews, and they do post stuff sometimes that can be distressing, or exciting. 

I apologise that I'm coming across as a troll Sci, but I can assure you I have no intention of upsetting people or provoking responses or deceiving people. I appreciate your advice nonetheless, but these people anger me so much and make me feel bad about myself. That means I feel the need to respond to this kind of treatment. If I don't, it can fester. But yes you're right, I'm not qualified.

I challenged his claim that it's Sagan's quote and Occam's Razor are objective by posting out where the subjective elements come into play. If I'm going to try and pursue my own journey, I'll have to deal with things that may upset me. I feel like these topics can be double edged swords. I often rely on near-deathnews, and they do post stuff sometimes that can be distressing, or exciting. 

I apologise that I'm coming across as a troll Sci, but I can assure you I have no intention of upsetting people or provoking responses or deceiving people. I appreciate your advice nonetheless, but these people anger me so much and make me feel bad about myself. That means I feel the need to respond to this kind of treatment.

Yeah I still think you're a troll. If you were honest as a skeptic when you posted an argument about probabilities you'd have to actually show us you had some in-depth understanding of the argument.

But now you can manipulate our good nature and just post the argument, say you don't understand it, and put the onus on us to decipher it. You get to name drop sites, spam us with random articles and posts from skeptics, and not have to show that you yourself have any knowledge of the topics. They just "scare" you and "make you feel bad".

Also whatever happened to your buddy Silver?

And your therapist who is a proponent and big believer in reincarnation research?

Lol.

Yeah I still think you're a troll. If you were honest as a skeptic when you posted an argument about probabilities you'd have to actually show us you had some in-depth understanding of the argument.

But now you can manipulate our good nature and just post the argument, say you don't understand it, and put the onus on us to decipher it. You get to name drop sites, spam us with random articles and posts from skeptics, and not have to show that you yourself have any knowledge of the topics. They just "scare" you and "make you feel bad".

But the argument is a skeptical one? I'm trying to refute that. That's what I said. I don't understand your point. But yes, I don't understand probabilities, I'll admit that. I was hoping someone here did. I do understand though that Emil claiming that Occam's Razor and Sagan's quote being objectively in favour of skeptics is probably wrong because he fails to understand the subjectivity of his own judgements. I can send you the link to my refutation that I wrote myself of his series of you want. I wouldn't waste my time making that if I was a troll. And yes, these things do scare me and make me feel bad. But you don't believe me and that's honestly understandable at this point. I will try and avoid posting as many skeptical claims in the future, and leave most of them to private discussions.

I don't know what happened to Silver. He said he's a lurker. If you want to ask me about my therapist I'd rather do that in private. My sessions with her are finished.

I don't know what happened to Silver. He said he's a lurker. If you want to ask me about my therapist I'd rather do that in private. My sessions with her are finished.

Looks like Silver showed up, sure he'll conveniently comment any moment now lol...

Also whatever happened to your buddy Silver?

And your therapist who is a proponent and big believer in reincarnation research?

Lol.

I said this before when I first joined but I’m more of a lurker than an active participant. I prefer to just watch and read and only occasionally give my thoughts on something. And like last time, I don’t appreciate the insinuation here just like last time cuz ur annoyed with Omni. And to be clear, other than the troll bit I actually do agree. I don’t see the point in arguing against every skeptic argument found online, especially when the person hasn’t taken the time to actually look over the thing first before bringing it forward. I don’t see the value in digging up an argument from several years ago just cuz the guy has some mathematical proof in it. Like if this was occasionally then alright, but it has been a lot. I also agree on the working on the personal side of things for proof, cuz that’s what I’ve been working on, so I can know as opposed to just believe. So despite u thinking we’re the same person, I overall agree with what you’re saying and hope Omni does actually take that to heart.

Looks like Silver showed up, sure he'll conveniently comment any moment now lol...

Yeah, I showed up cuz u mentioned it and it annoyed me. Be angry and annoyed with Omni but I’ll at least defend myself.

Yeah, I showed up cuz u mentioned it and it annoyed me. Be angry and annoyed with Omni but I’ll at least defend myself.

Lol, sure...just happened to be around to post right after I asked where you were...come on. You and Omni are the same person or in cahoots.

Just admit you guys are skeptics, and maybe you won't get banned.

I'd like to clarify that I don't actively go seeking out these skeptical bloggers or articles. I mainly brought it up just because I doubted we'd ever seen something so strangely argued before. Sorry that you got dragged into this Silver, and I'm sorry that you're getting frustrated with me again Sci. Like I said, if you want to discuss my personal life I think it's better now to do so in a private chat. Also Sci, as Silver said, he's a lurker usually, and given that this thread is very active ATM, it shouldn't be suprising that it would get his attention.