Dennis Clark <dlc at io.frii.com> wrote:
>William Tanksley Google <wtanksleyjr at cox.net> wrote:
>: Dennis Clark <dlc at io.frii.com> wrote:
>:>Now, do the same with Uri Geller, tell him to "psychic" up
>:>something in that same room. Did it work? Nope.
>: Wrong. He's done it often enough. He's fooled labs full of
>: So have the magicians who've done such a good job of discrediting
> Hmm, according to my sources he's never made his tricks work in a controlled
>experiment for scientists. Only on talk shows and similar ilk. I
>reading books by skeptics, it clears the mind of accumulated
No, he's often "demonstrated his abilities" (to fool people) in
"controlled" environments -- the problem is that the wrong variables
were being controlled. As soon as someone who knows deception (usually
a professional magician) shows up and gets some control, the "psychic
ability" vanishes. In the same way, the magician will fool the
scientists, and explain to them that they were fooled (although very
seldom will they explain HOW).
Our society has something of a cult of scientism. As long as we're
being warned against one cult, we have to keep a watch against all the
others. Decievers don't usually believe the things they propound, and
they can be more dangerous than the merely ignorant -- even against
those "scientists" we set up as our sole guardians.
Science is great, but it's only knowledge. It's a profession of
people, and scientists are just people.
Sometimes you need dogmatism, whether it's to profess an utter and
uncritical materialism or an utter and uncritical faith in Christ
alone. If the miracle-worker wants your money, at LEAST put an utter
and uncritical faith in the fact that in a few years he'll be gone.