• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

SCEPCOP - A new coalition countering Pseudoskeptics (JREF, CSICOP, etc)

Free episodes:

WWu777

Paranormal Novice
Hi all,
Have you seen the new site for SCEPCOP yet? It is a new coalition countering pseudoskepticism and stands for "Scientific Committee to Evaluate Pseudoskeptical Criticism of the Paranormal". Here is their site, resources, articles and forum:

SCEPCOP - Scientific Committee to Evaluate Pseudo-Skeptical Criticism of the Paranormal (Debunking CSICOP, JREF, James Randi, Michael Shermer, etc.)

What do you think?

Paracast should host a debate between the SCEPCOP committee and some skeptics or debunkers out there. That'd make for a great show!
 
As seen in the recent Paracast Episode with the Pseudo-Skeptic on UFOs, it's pretty obvious that all in all it's fruitless to debate people who aren't willing to process new data, aren't willing to consider even the possibility they could be wrong about their "everything we don't understand is actually all bullshit nonsense" worldview, and have the motto of "when the skeptic has sung, the thinking has been done, case closed, end of story, it's all Santa Claus hogwash nonsense."

Those who believe that no one has ever experienced anything unexplainable, that it's all mindless idiotic misidentification in all documented cases throughout all of human history, are not really up for serious discussion.

Having the position that nothing anyone experiences can ever be considered valid for anything, unless of course, it already agrees with what the debunker believes, then anecdotal evidence is paradoxically valid. (I.E. You get a case where thousands of credible witnesses see a structured craft, then one eyewitness who clearly has a debunker agenda claims everyone was lying and that he didn't see anything like that, that it was clouds or something, the debunkers will tout his anecdotal story as the true version of events, even if it doesn't match the facts of the case. This happened with the phoenix lights case, not long ago a skeptical tower guard claimed he saw what people claimed was a structured craft that night and that it wasn't a UFO, and that simple critical thinking demolishes it, debunkers on the bad astronomy forum were praising this guy, even though what he said doesn't match other accounts.)

I myself am a Member of Scepcop (you can see me on the list of members on the main page, Travis Basinger), but I must say, Gene and Dave do more than an excellent job on exposing the BS of Pseudo-Skeptics and Discredited "Paranormal Researchers" and Gullible Believers on their show themselves. It takes the logical middle road, not going down either extreme, but accepting there is a true mystery here. That's the best position to take.

However, it would be great to someday see a reasonable Skeptic Cage debate between several well known Pseudo-Skeptics and several Credible Paranormal Researchers. But The Paracast is Gene and Dave's show, and the two of them can take pretty much anyone to task on their BS by themselves on their show.

Setting up a Scepcop Members versus Pseudo-Skeptics Debate would be interesting though. (Especially our fellow Scepcop Member and Nobel Prize Winning Scientist Brian Josephson, if he agreed to a debate he would slaughter Debunkers on the topic of PSI Research. The man know his stuff.) [Hey, maybe Brian Josephson would make a great future guest, Gene and Dave. A nobel prize winning scientist who takes great interest in PSI Research. ;)]

And in the end, I don't think it would convince the Debunkers, but it would show them up as not knowing what the hell they are talking about when presented with the best material from serious research on these topics to anyone else who listens who actually cares about the data.
 
It's actually a waste of time debating with pseudoscience. Skepticism is about having standards for evidence. If your evidence is poor quality, then it's useless.

IMO, SCEPCOP is a fine example of what skepticism is not. The website appears to believe everything unless it’s backed by science.
 
It's actually a waste of time debating with pseudoscience. Skepticism is about having standards for evidence. If your evidence is poor quality, then it's useless.

IMO, SCEPCOP is a fine example of what skepticism is not. The website appears to believe everything unless it’s backed by science.

Sorry but you aren't facing the facts, evidence and examples. There is evidence. Here is a summary of them:

Perpetual Denial of Evidence and Cognitive Dissonance by Pseudo-Skeptics

The problem is that pseudoskeptics keep denying them, out of their faith based reasoning and emotional fanaticism, which has NOTHING to do with skepticism or logic.

Read this list of the characteristics of pseudoskeptics.

Characteristics and Behaviors of Pseudo-Skeptics

This has nothing to do with real skepticism or wanting evidence. You are on the wrong track completely.

Skepticism is about WITHHOLDING judgment, not about the fanatical belief that "ALL paranormal evidence and claims are bunk and impossible". That's fanaticism, not logic or skepticism.

In fact, these pseudo-skeptics know nothing about the true meaning of skepticism nor practice it. Pyrrho, the founder of "Skepticism", intended for it to be about open inquiry and suspension of judgment.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeptic

  • In classical philosophy, skepticism refers to the teachings and the traits of the 'Skeptikoi', a school of philosophers of whom it was said that they 'asserted nothing but only opined.' (Liddell and Scott) In this sense, philosophical skepticism, or Pyrrhonism, is the philosophical position that one should suspend judgment in investigations.[1]
What these pseudoskeptics fail to <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">understand, as an insightful YouTuber who hit the bull's eye eloquently put it, is this:


  • <i>"What skeptics fail to <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">understand is that skepticism involves being skeptical of your own position, it does not mean just being skeptical of that which you do not believe in, otherwise we are all skeptics and that renders their use of the term "skeptic" meaningless. A true skeptic casts skepticism on their own position as well. Since the Randi crowd do not employ skepticism in this respect then they are fairly termed pseudo skeptics and demean the term skepticism."</i>


And as someone observed to me:



  • <i>"The original definition of skeptic was a person who questions ALL beliefs, facts, and points-of-view. A healthy perspective in my opinion. Today's common definition of skeptic is someone who questions any belief that strays outside of the status quo, yet leaving the <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">status quo itself completely unquestioned. Kind of a juvenile and intellectually lazy practice in my opinion."</i>


Even Wikipedia indirectly admits that modern skepticism is really about rejecting new information:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeptic

  • The word skepticism can characterize a position on a single claim, but in scholastic circles more frequently describes a lasting mind-set and an approach to accepting or rejecting new information.

In addition, despite their worship of science, they do not even follow the Scientific Method, because they do not update their hypotheses to fit the data, but instead reject data that doesn't fit into their hypothesis, which is a direct violation of the Scientific Method of course. There are plenty of examples of this.
 
Isn't skepticism about having and holding a provisional position?? This means as more evidence comes in a level headed person (skeptic) is apt to change their tune. I certainly don't see this in bulldog skepticism. These hard core atheists like Dawkins aren't holding the skeptical position that god probably doesn't exist. They are proclaiming, in stentorian manner, that GOD DOES NOT EXIST!! How do you prove that god does not exist?? You don't. You can't prove for or against. However, I think what is going on is that they are so pissed and enraged by religious fundamentalism that they purposely take the Anti-position. Just because they hate these people and their beliefs. Who cares why, but this isn't being skeptical it is pronouncing another equal and opposite belief. Am I missing something there??

And one listen to a show like, for example Brian Dunning's Skeptoid, tells you quite firmly that if you think UFO's or ghosts could possibly be "real", then you are a complete dumbass. Listen to the tone in his podcast. Since when is ridicule and belittling part of skepticism and the scientific method?? How is taking the complete oppostie point of view skeptical?? Either there is some evidence or there is not. Until further facts surface, the skeptical thing to do is remain open and wait for more evidence. But the bulldogs don't do that. They basically call people idiots, delusional, misinformed, and laugh at them. And then they have the audacity to say these things cannot exist, end of story. Whaaat??? This is skepticism?? Being downright rude, offensive, and dismissive. These are the same people, I would guess, that said planes couldn't fly and that we could not get off our planet. Etc, etc.

I think the problem is that these personalities cannot help but want to win. They can't stand just saying the evidence is not good and leave it at that. They have to win. Meanwhile people are having real experiences of strange nature. What's left for them?? Whats left is a few turds that are telling them they are too ignorant and unintelligent to realize there isn't any phenomena.
 
If your "evidence" doesn't follow the protocols that qualify it as such, then it's not evidence regardless of whether you consider it to be or not. That is a fact.

Show me some peer reviewed scientific journals that back these studies. Then show me some credible evidence that follows protocols. Then you'll have skeptical community support. Until then....

Please don't mix Atheism and Skepticism. They aren't the same thing and most certainly do not belong in the same camp by default. A genuine skeptic would never say "God does not exist". In fact, I don't think I've ever said anything like "Ghosts don't exist" or "UFO's don't exist" because they would be very silly of me. The facts are, I've also had experiences. Unfortunately, none of which can qualify as proof or evidence of anything.

Skeptics simply ask you to present credible proof that follows protocols. That's all. I guess it's too hard.
 
"....In fact, I don't think I've ever said anything like "Ghosts don't exist" or "UFO's don't exist" because they would be very silly of me. The facts are, I've also had experiences. Unfortunately, none of which can qualify as proof or evidence of anything."

Please tell us of your experiences.:)
 
Can't right now due to work but I will when I get home. One experience involved many individuals. We all experienced the same thing. Some are strange. Others are logically explained.

It's a long...long story.
 
Please don't mix Atheism and Skepticism. They aren't the same thing and most certainly do not belong in the same camp by default.

I know I may have went beyond the discussion a bit, but I look at Dawkins as a skeptic. He is right?? I guess I may not understand the definition in it's whole sense. But I'm not clear where skepticism starts and atheism enters. It seems to me that atheism in one step further down the road of being skeptical of God. I may be misunderstanding this. As the scientist he is, I don't understand where the lack of facts for god initiate a belief that there isn't one. If you get time Jose help clear this up for me.

And I would love to hear about your experiences as well. Thanks.
 
Where Atheism and Skepticism generally meet, is when the Skeptic was a Child, Teenager, or College Student, having been raised Religious, they have their world view shattered by starting to broaden their perceptive on life and by using logic, starting to learn to critically think for themselves, and then Church "doesn't make sense anymore", and then they declare they will "never be fooled again" and then get into the mindset that "If religion is a hoax, then everything even remotely associated with it, like life and death, the paranormal, etc, is likewise a hoax", and seeing all sorts of similar gullible people likewise believing in Paranormal Topics and not using critical thinking (just like in Religion!) they end up auto-dismissing it as well as just an extension of Religion which they "grew out of" long ago. Go on YouTube or Atheist Websites and read their "Testimonials" of how they become Atheist and Skeptical, many of them repeat a story very similar to what I just wrote.

That's generally why many people tend to lump Atheism and Skepticism together.
 
Where Atheism and Skepticism generally meet, is when the Skeptic was a Child, Teenager, or College Student, having been raised Religious, they have their world view shattered by starting to broaden their perceptive on life and by using logic, starting to learn to critically think for themselves, and then Church "doesn't make sense anymore", and then they declare they will "never be fooled again" and then get into the mindset that "If religion is a hoax, then everything even remotely associated with it, like life and death, the paranormal, etc, is likewise a hoax", and seeing all sorts of similar gullible people likewise believing in Paranormal Topics and not using critical thinking (just like in Religion!) they end up auto-dismissing it as well as just an extension of Religion which they "grew out of" long ago. Go on YouTube or Atheist Websites and read their "Testimonials" of how they become Atheist and Skeptical, many of them repeat a story very similar to what I just wrote.

That's generally why many people tend to lump Atheism and Skepticism together.

I understand where you're coming from but it's not fair for people to lump skepticism and atheism together. Being a skeptic and an atheist are two completely different things and someone who insists they are both is perfectly acceptible. They simply do not believe in God. Belief and skepticism, again, are two different entities (pardon the pun). I personally know skeptics who believe in God. So not believing in God is the exact same thing.

Ok...now I'm confusing myself. I think if a skeptic were to say God didn't exist they'd either have to state is as an assumption or speculation because they clearly cannot prove he/she doesn't exist.

Anyway....back to the ghost stories.

I grew up in a house here in Australia where as a child I'd have experiences. Seems as though they were only directed at me. Things like being wide awake and having something tug on my ears was a frequent event. Eventually, it stopped. Now my skeptical side tells me that I could have potentially just been dreaming or in a state entering sleep and simply imagined it. That's kind of hard to explain away when I'd cry and go to sleep in my mums bed and have the same thing happen soon after getting into bed. I'd also wake and hear what I thought was a lion roaring or drum rolls. The more I ignored it, the louder it got. Again, that could have been my father snoring and me simply interpreting it as a lion or drums. It may have gotten louder because I was waking from sleep and becoming more aware of my surroundings. Also, my senses may have just been heightened at this stage due to fear.

The same house had very small events happen. Mostly months or years apart from each other. The large kitchen window has violently shake. This happened a handful of times. Although we'd witness it, we never felt vibrations around the window that could cause it. Possibly infrasound from the large road directly in front of the house. We also had glasses explode occasionally. This could be for many reasons. We were a large family and the kids weren't the most careful so I assume possible stress fractures in the glass from use would have caused it to explode when the glass was heated or cooled quickly or over a certain period of time.

Still the same house and I was always uncomfortable alone in it. The back end of the house where all the kids rooms were was the most uncomfortable. I assume this was fear instilled from the ear pulling etc.

Most of what happened in that house could be explained. All except one. I used to work nights to get me through school and I'd come home late and have a shower. I had once fallen asleep in the bathroom after taking a shower and my dad, who was quite a comedian, loudly banged on the bathroom door and startled me. After that, I'd get home from work, jump in the shower and he'd quietly walk to the bathroom door and bang on it loudly just in case. Then I'd hear him walk away bare foot whilst quietly laughing to himself.

One night, I got home and was just about to jump in the shower. I heard bare foot footsteps walk up to the door. I waiting silently assuming my dad would bang on the door as he had done before. I waited for a good minute or so and then the sound of bare feet walked away from the door. I found this pretty strange but didn't think anything of it. Then I heard my sister call out "Jose, I know it's you". I was a little puzzled so I responded asking what she was talking about. She asked where I was and I responded "In the bathroom...why?" She went dead quiet. So I unlocked the door and walked through the hallway and into her room. I asked he what she was talking about and both my sisters, who slept in bunk beds, had the covers over their heads.

My sister went on to tell me that she saw a dark figure walk through the hall and past her bedroom door. It then returned, peered through her doorway and walked away. The reason she thought it was me was because I'd often scare my sisters by stalking them in the dark.

At this point I figured it was my dad. Until my mum walked into the hallway in a pretty pissed off fashion and asked us who was walking around the house. She was scared we'd wake my dad. I asked her if my dad was asleep and she said yes. She wanted to know who was walking around the lounge room which was on the other end of the house near her bedroom. At that point, I thought we had an intruder. My sisters tried to convince my mum that it wasn't any of us but she wasn't buying it until I started turning on all the lights in the house in search of someone who'd broken in. All the doors and windows were locked. My dad then woke and was pretty pissed off. Neither him or my mother were buying it. I went to my room and sat on my bed flicking through a magazine. All of a sudden I could hear the sound of bare feet in the bathroom near our bedrooms. My sister asked if it was me. I responded and again, she hid under her covers. I walked slowly to the bathroom. All the while I could hear something walking around. I got to the bathroom and it was empty.

We've never been able to explain that.

Other events have been my mother hearing me calling out to her from inside the house. She called me at work asking if I had been home. I worked over an hour away. That happened a few times.

When I moved out, I rented some run down town house. It was pretty big and myself and my girlfriend were the only occupants for a while until my sister moved in. Before my sis moved in, I remember really weird things happening. Firstly, for the first couple of weeks, I'd wake up and there would be a light on inside the house (or I assumed so). As I got up, the light would turn off. I assumed it may have been a remote light from the neighbors house and it was a coincidence I was waking while it was on.

I had an old stereo that would change stations on it's own. At this stage I figured the house was haunted whilst trying to find rational explanations for events. The radio may have been faulty or influenced by some interference but the dial would not turn and the stations would change. That was easy to dismiss even though it freaked me out.

One night I had to work late on freelance work. I sat in the house with only the lights from my Mac to light the room. It was early morning and all of a sudden I heard a woman speak a sentence with a hoarse voice. She spoke actual words but they didn't fit together to form a coherent sentence. That freaked me out. I sat there listening and only when the voice finished did I shut my Mac down and go straight to bed. My art director wasn't too happy about me not submitting my work to say the least.

I was still living in the house and had to fly to Spain for my dad's funeral. At this stage I had told people the house was haunted. When I got home from overseas, my sister was living with us. I got home suffering jetlag and fell asleep in the spare room. I woke with the bed shaking. I figured it was jetlag. I woke again with the headboard shaking. Same thing, jetlag. Finally, I woke with a weight sitting on my feet. I thought it was the dog so I kicked it off and it got up, but never hit the ground. I got the hell out of that room.

I moved out of that house a while later. Little things happened. Noises etc but never saw anything. Can't explain some events, other are easily explainable.

Worked on a TV show about the paranormal. 13 locations and nothing ever happened except for a few strange events. I'll post again when I get home. Sorry, lunch break and I gotta get back to the grind...
 
Ahhhh...some spare time. Such a rare opportunity!

Back to the strange events.

We filmed in 16 locations the series aired 13 locations. Nothing ever happened. We used high end recording gear for any EVPs and got absolutely nothing. The broadcast cameras never caught the slightest dust. Absolutely nothing...nada.

Some strange things did happen though. Firstly, I set up a camera in an area that was locked away from people in the cast and crew. The location was a morgue which was offset from the main wards.

Here's the location...
Anyway, so what I got on camera was quite strange. It appeared to be as though something came out of the wall. The sound that followed the motion from the video was replicated by opening one of the body cavity freezers. The visual was almost replicated. So we assumed the freezer door opened and the IR reflecting off the wall onto the stainless steel freezer caused another reflection. So the question was, who or what opened the fridge? Ooooooer!

Second event in the same creepy location. We had a production manager, camera man, director and on cast member almost pass out in one area of the psych hospital. They all reported the same pressure pushing down on them. All except one were avid skeptics. All reported the same uncomfortable feeling. None were aware of this area and were taken through it in groups as an experiment to see if we could repeat what had happened. Possible causes were that the floor may have been slightly uneven and walking across it in the dark could effect some more than others. Just outside the area was an open walk way that was housed in metal sheeting. This metal sheeting could have caused friction from the high winds and generated some charge.

Arrrrrrrrgghhhhhh....ran out of time again
 
Jose. It's curious that you say nothing happened...

We filmed in 16 locations the series aired 13 locations. Nothing ever happened. We used high end recording gear for any EVPs and got absolutely nothing. The broadcast cameras never caught the slightest dust. Absolutely nothing...nada.

But then you say some things did happen...

Some strange things did happen though. Firstly, I set up a camera in an area that was locked away from people in the cast and crew. The location was a morgue which was offset from the main wards.
Anyway, so what I got on camera was quite strange. It appeared to be as though something came out of the wall. The sound that followed the motion from the video was replicated by opening one of the body cavity freezers. The visual was almost replicated. So we assumed the freezer door opened and the IR reflecting off the wall onto the stainless steel freezer caused another reflection. So the question was, who or what opened the fridge? Ooooooer!

Second event in the same creepy location. We had a production manager, camera man, director and on cast member almost pass out in one area of the psych hospital. They all reported the same pressure pushing down on them. All except one were avid skeptics. All reported the same uncomfortable feeling. None were aware of this area and were taken through it in groups as an experiment to see if we could repeat what had happened. Possible causes were that the floor may have been slightly uneven and walking across it in the dark could effect some more than others. Just outside the area was an open walk way that was housed in metal sheeting. This metal sheeting could have caused friction from the high winds and generated some charge.
So it looks like something did happen but i am puzzled as to the way you framed your comments.

I had a quick look at the youtube link provided but did not see it all. Did the events you say "happened" appear in any of the shows? Or were they edited out?
By the way, thanks for the vid.:)
 
Nothing happened that couldn't rationally be explained. We didn't get anything on either video or audio that warranted airplay. We could have easily aired a lot of things but chose not to because all of them were far from anything that couldn't rationally be explained.
 
A very quick experiment for the OP, take a look at the jref forum, first a quick glance at the paranormal pages, and just see how many posters will repeatedly dismiss eye-witness testimony, whether its pilots, or anyone, its is TOTALLY unreliable.

Righto fair enough you would think.


Then take a look in the 911 forum, hey presto, now eye-witness testimony is the dogs bollox.


The hypocrisy of the cult mind-set in action 24/7.
 
A very quick experiment for the OP, take a look at the jref forum, first a quick glance at the paranormal pages, and just see how many posters will repeatedly dismiss eye-witness testimony, whether its pilots, or anyone, its is TOTALLY unreliable.

Righto fair enough you would think.


Then take a look in the 911 forum, hey presto, now eye-witness testimony is the dogs bollox.


The hypocrisy of the cult mind-set in action 24/7.

To be fair, it's a different topic altogether. There's actual video of 9/11, there's very little of UFOs.
 
I consider myself a "skeptic." The problem with the word skeptic is it was hijacked some time ago by the Randi types. So, most folks who you hear calling themselfs skeptics are nothing of the sort. Don Ecker is a skeptic. James Randi is an athiest. Big difference. I do agree that a skeptic can be an athiest or a skeptic can believe in a higher power. Martin Gardner (hope I spelled that right) was a well known skeptic but not an athiest. Now, before my friend Angel (and ya know you will) ;) gets onto me for picking on atheist, I'm not trying to. It's just the way the conversation is going. I am not (in this post) saying anything about who is right and who is wrong.

Although, I'm right. :cool:
 
I consider myself a "skeptic." The problem with the word skeptic is it was hijacked some time ago by the Randi types. So, most folks who you hear calling themselfs skeptics are nothing of the sort. Don Ecker is a skeptic. James Randi is an athiest. Big difference. I do agree that a skeptic can be an athiest or a skeptic can believe in a higher power. Martin Gardner (hope I spelled that right) was a well known skeptic but not an athiest. Now, before my friend Angel (and ya know you will) ;) gets onto me for picking on atheist, I'm not trying to. It's just the way the conversation is going. I am not (in this post) saying anything about who is right and who is wrong.

Although, I'm right. :cool:

I don't think being an atheist has anything to do with it. I got married in a church way after I stopped believing in ghosts.
 
I don't believe in "ghosts" either. I do however, believe in the reality of my being and my soul. I have reasons for that just as a non believer has their own reasons. The thing that I find troubling in the paranormal is not the different ways of looking at life. It's the condesending attitude on all sides. The snappy little names such as creationsist, psuedo scientist, woo woo. These things deride the honest search and life expeirence of men and women who have an inner life. On the other side you have the ones calling all that don't agree names such as: Demonic, decieved, liar, and at times simply tuning out honest discussion.
The reason I call myself a "true" skeptic is just that. I have read Sheldrake and Pin Lomel and Penrose. But, I have also read some of Wiseman and Dawkins and I am old enough that I actually got a hold of the first printing of Randi's "Flim Flam." So, that is why I call myself a "true" skeptic. I honestly don't have a "hero" or a guru that I have to defend. I will never, ever be a reductionist. But, not becaue I've never read them or engaged with them. I have. So many people feel they have to defend a dogma. It may be Christianity or Islam or even athiesm. There is no need to "defend" the truth. There is also no way in hell, heaven or earth that we on this planet have the "truth." A theory of everything in an evolving spiritual/physical universe might not even be possible. I really don't know.
 
Back
Top