ivandh wrote:
People will use any argument they like to avoid doing something they don't want to do.
Yeah, if only all the ad hominids around here would become better acquainted with debate-club realpolitik. 
psychic chess masters
Sort:
I would have thought a sceptic like you Andy would mock those who believed in psychic ability.
Myself, I'm with sapient dust, and I think what was quoted on post #122 is a pretty good alternative explanation. There are tons of things that happen exactly the way we expect (for example, for every time you "just happen," without planning for it, to meet one of your friends at a store at one specific time, there are countless times where nothing of the sort happens), and often this is so banal we don't even make note of the fact that the "non-coincidence" is happening (I know I sure don't).
Of course you can't prove that psychics aren't real just as you can't disprove the existence of deities. In any case, I'm not surprised there would be instances where humans can't rationally explain something, because we are after all, stupid humans. We're lucky we can explain what we can -- imagine how clueless other species are compared to us. It doesn't mean there isn't a rational explanation out there (think about how many phenomenons throughout history that used to seem magical or random that we have now figured out).
"why would anybody be mocking anyone for anything"
People mock 
Not by the human mind it cant. (be explained) Yet cats think we are silly and they are psychic.
Well Looby, a skeptic like me is as inclined to mock those who disbelieve as those who do.
Also, there is nothing necessarily "irrational" about psychic abilities. And regarding your last remark...remember when the universe used to be deemed to be like some great machine? I wonder what Newton and his cohorts would have made of quantum theory.
May 11, 2013
0
#87
Look, "psychic" ability could mean many things. Most psychics are frauds. And the ones who were genuine were murdered by the Spanish Inquisition.
Victor Korchnoi thought in 1978 that Karpov's team was using psychic weaponry to get Korchnoi to blunder. So that means that there must be something to it.
Elubas wrote:
"why would anybody be mocking anyone for anything"
People mock
linuxblue1 wrote:
Victor Korchnoi thought in 1978 that Karpov's team was using psychic weaponry to get Korchnoi to blunder. So that means that there must be something to it.
I thought it was the two dead flies. Or wait, maybe it was the yogurt...
Damn, chess players are nuts.
May 11, 2013
0
#90
I have a more hopeful view. We can understand part of how the human mind works. We will understand more as time goes on, especially if we don't just throw our hands in the air and exclaim that it can't be understood.
In the meantime, I enjoy reading about the developments.
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/category/neuroscience/
But they did find two dead flies.
That was proof. There was something there.
Those flies could have been up to any shenanigans.
Well, you can mock me for not believing in Santa too; I won't be offended
In general I think that when we try to explain things without properly defining terms (for example, where would psychic energy (or whatever they use), if it exists, come from? What would it consist of?), we are probably getting further from the truth rather than closer. I see no reason to make up explanations and hope they are true simply because we don't have one (although I do think we have an explanation in this case).
It's not an "explanation"; it's simply saying, "Wow, that was pretty weird...and hard to account for in the usual scheme of things."
ucanthandlethetruth wrote:
there isn't a flying man in the north pole.
Poor Rudolph (all that work for nothing)...
Was it a crystal set?
"If I have a radio in the 1700's, then does that make it magic?" Depends on the method of time travel you used to get to the 1700's, of course
And rotational as well.
okay, now I understand!