Obiwan
Message
- Forum Info
- Additional Info
- Ratings
- Signature
- Contact
Forum Info
Joined:
2017-08-13
2017-08-13
Status:
Offline
Last Visit:
53 minutes ago
Time Spent Online:
3 Weeks, 6 Days, 5 Hours
Additional Info
DOB:
Not Specified
Location:
Manchester
Sex:
Undisclosed
Total Posts:
696 (0.26 posts per day | 1.24 percent of total posts)
[Find All Posts]
Total Threads:
2 (0 threads per day | 0.04 percent of total threads)
[Find All Threads]
Members Referred:
0
0
| Obiwan's Most Liked Post | ||
| Post Subject | Post Date/Time | Numbers of Likes |
| RE: Keith Augustine interview | 2018-04-02, 10:52 PM | 9 |
| Thread Subject | Forum Name | |
| Keith Augustine interview |
Related Topics
Skeptic vs. Proponent Discussions
|
|
| Post Message | ||
| What exactly is Keith Augustine an expert in? Perhaps philosophy - I think that’s his background but to be honest I can’t be bothered to confirm it. I’m puzzled as to why he is considered any kind of authority on the subject of psi. I’ve seen his discussions online for many years (admittedly it’s been a while since I have read his material) and found his arguments partial (ie he seems to largely ignore evidence that doesn’t support his position or hand-waves it away) and sometimes seemingly disingenuous in the sense that he didn’t appear to have much understanding of the the research into psi but had paid close attention to the debunking arguments of others. I haven’t read anything new in his lines of argument. He reads like a professional debunker to me and in that sense he seems to be simply ‘noise’ on the subject of psi. A personal opinion only of course, fwiw. That doesn’t mean he isn’t able to ask valid questions of course, but as a balanced debater of the phenomena he seems to speak so confidently about, I think he offers very little value. Rather than him being a person who has a genuine interest in the subject in terms of finding out the truth of the matter, he seems to be the very opposite. A person approaching the subject for the first time might well read his writings, but they would, IMHO, be very ill-advised to consider him as a source of balanced opinion or information. Like a great many others of his stripe. IMHO the only way to develop an informed view on the complex subject of psi and its varied specialist areas - which in themselves often have many decades of research - is to actually look at the research that has been carried out for oneself first. I don’t think philosophical debates add anything to the body of evidence or help people to form a clear view of the facts, nor does sniping at the research of others - as opposed to asking genuine questions with a view to learning the truth of the matter. As for the suggestion that the surgeons might have produced a paper - I think perhaps this would have been very difficult because the phenomenon wasn’t something that was planned or expected and therefore it’s difficult to see why or how they might have made sufficient provision to have produced a report that would be acceptable in their professional environment. They were performing an urgent medical procedure weren’t they? Not excecuting a research project. | ||
| Obiwan's Received and Given Likes | ||
| Likes Received | Likes Given | |
| Last week | 0 | 2 |
| Last month | 0 | 6 |
| Last 3 months | 0 | 12 |
| Last 6 months | 2 | 33 |
| Last 12 months | 21 | 97 |
| All Time | 1403 | 2354 |
| Most liked by | ||
| tim | 308 | 22% |
| Sciborg_S_Patel | 167 | 12% |
| Typoz | 150 | 11% |
| Ninshub | 112 | 8% |
| Doug | 75 | 5% |
| Most liked | ||
| tim | 457 | 19% |
| [Deleted member] | 237 | 10% |
| Typoz | 208 | 9% |
| Sciborg_S_Patel | 169 | 7% |
| Kamarling | 155 | 7% |
Ratings
Here's what users think of Obiwan