talkmagic.co.uk

I must say that a miracle has already taken place. I think this thread should be sent over to Randi to claim the prize. It appears that Bobby Cat has achieved something which makes spoon bending pale into insignificance. He has made Reverend Browning stop talking. Truly this is an acheivement beyond science. He must immediately claim the prize. If Randi doesn't pay up on this one that will indeed be proof of his great duplicity.

Even I need sleep every once in a while Mark, so don't get too excited about spliting Randi million (you greedy old hustler).

Abraxus, thank you for expressing points I have likewise attempted to bring out, but in a more concise way.

BobbyCat... if you're not a "typical skeptic" stop doing what the typical skeptics do; playing the victim, trying to constantly shift the issue and focus of the issue, puffing your chest because someone dropped out of your game due to "the inability to prove their point" when that's not the truth (and you know that). I've give more than enough points of reference for tracking down the information I've shared but as I've stated, I'm not your go-for... I charge for research hours and unless you want to cut me a retainer check to do your footwork shove-off! You are supposedly a "mature" human being so get off your duff and actually read material outside that which is skeptic approved and cult endorsed.

I've tried to not get personal on this but you have constantly striven to drag me into a mud slinging contest. That is precisely why I've asked you to just drop it so things don't become tense. It has become obvious that, like Randi himself, you want things to become tense so that I or whomever, looses their cool... another classic tactic used by "sketpics" but most particularly the bullies allied with Randi & Co.

I and a few others have attempted to nudge this thread back to the actual subject posted initially vs. this massive side-track you have created. Again, an action common to the cynic in that they only work on one area of perspective vs. taking a broad sense of obsvation into consideration. God forbid you suggest that they live up to their own standards... that really gets them riled!

Now, I've been nice and I've tried earnestly to be civil. You are however pushing a point and intentionally making digs towards me personally, seeking to discredit me and what I've stated and give you plenty resources for finding confirmation. Obviously, you are afraid to do the footwork encourage because you really don't want to learn... to discover that your points of view may be wrong or worse, you've been lied to by the gurus of the cynic's cult. Then again, you may not want to do the footwork for another, more typical reason given our era -- you're the typical lard butt magic-buff with a big mouth and little in way of integrity when it comes to the act of actually learning more than what's presented on the surface of things.

Bottom line is, I've had it! This game is over and you sir, need to get to your corner.

thank you for the direction taneous and i will indeed have a look. perhaps you can also consider, i asked a question, i did not make a statement. and as the "inverted commas" suggest, it is the gyst of my question to which i seek an answer. that being, i understand Mark to mean his "friend" does not actually glean the information from the card, rather that is just part of the process that assists the information to come forward so it can be intuitively interpreted.

i dont believe i suggested i know anything about Tarot, hence the question i have asked Mark to clarify. i am simply asking Mark to clarify what he means here. and i bet he is not even remotely offended that i have asked him to clarify this either.

i sincerely hope that helps you understand a BIG bit about what i am asking.

My guess is he has better things to do than waste his time answering this stuff.

With all due respect to Craig, that would be a first. And, for what it's worth, I find his posts interesting.

thanks for your comments Craig, so does that mean you are not going to substantiate your claim that a scientific test was performed on a bent spoon, and this test proved the spoon was bent by "paranormal" means?

B0bbY_CaT wrote:i dont believe i suggested i know anything about Tarot, hence the question i have asked Mark to clarify. i am simply asking Mark to clarify what he means here.

Don't worry - that wasn't what I thought you were suggesting. You made it quite obvious, actually.

Any way - enough of all this.

B0bbY_CaT wrote:thanks for your comments Craig, so does that mean you are not going to substantiate your claim that a scientific test was performed on a bent spoon, and this test proved the spoon was bent by "paranormal" means?

No SMART ASS it means YOU need to get off your arrogant butt and follow the leads I've given you. The proof is out there but I'm not your f^&*(ing fetch-dog. If you honestly want to learn, then get up off your butt and actually do some of the research your cynics claim you do.

Charles Calthrop wrote:

My guess is he has better things to do than waste his time answering this stuff.

With all due respect to Craig, that would be a first. And, for what it's worth, I find his posts interesting.

I have to confess, I don't understand what's being said here

Charles Calthrop wrote:

My guess is he has better things to do than waste his time answering this stuff.

With all due respect to Craig, that would be a first. And, for what it's worth, I find his posts interesting.

Oh - I agree with you Charles. The 'stuff' I was reffering to was a euphemism for .. well, another word .

with all due respect Craig, you made the statement about the spoon bending test. i merely asked you to substantiate it. i really dont understand why that has become such a problem. in any case it does appear with your most recent language this thread will be closed before long so i guess you get your wish anyway... shame that.

Right - enough. There have been ample opportunities to end this stupidity but such chances have been ignored. The debate ends here. Nuff Sed.