1-26-2016 Daily Chat and Super Tuesday Show Thread

[7Critter]

 

[7Critter]

9 pm EST - Malliard report. Topic is: See post #104 for details
Live link is: http://www.tmr247.space/

10 pm EST Bob Bain's Farside. Topic is:
Live link is . .

 

[Debi]

Should be a good night tonight! Hope to see everyone during the shows!

 

[Debi]

OK! Let's get everyone over here to today's thread! Moving the old thread to archives, folks.

 

[Debi]

Good luck on your second show tonight, Brian, but we will be supporting Duck's show during that time period.

We will discuss how to properly apply science to paranormal research, how to validate data and how to debunk hoaxes.

During that discussion, I do hope that you scientifically based researchers remember to consider one thing....I see many who take an automatic approach to debunk without their own facts backed up at times. EX: They view a video of something and call a hoax because they assume they see a POSSIBLE photo shop, etc. They aren't sure, but go ahead and immediately declare it a hoax. Granted, many are! But I also see many skeptics declare something a hoax in an almost automatic fashion on "hunches" or "assumptions". The scientific community needs to have the facts to back up the statements they make. And they also need to be open to the possibilities of unknown phenomena being something that is currently not able to be explained or measured by our current knowledge base. ie. I see a lot of automatic assumptions out there on both sides of the board.

 

[Mokey]

Good luck on your second show tonight, Brian, but we will be supporting Duck's show during that time period.


During that discussion, I do hope that you scientifically based researchers remember to consider one thing....I see many who take an automatic approach to debunk without their own facts backed up at times. EX: They view a video of something and call a hoax because they assume they see a POSSIBLE photo shop, etc. They aren't sure, but go ahead and immediately declare it a hoax. Granted, many are! But I also see many skeptics declare something a hoax in an almost automatic fashion on "hunches" or "assumptions". The scientific community needs to have the facts to back up the statements they make. And they also need to be open to the possibilities of unknown phenomena being something that is currently not able to be explained or measured by our current knowledge base. ie. I see a lot of automatic assumptions out there on both sides of the board.

Amen

 

[JoMama]

Good luck on your second show tonight, Brian, but we will be supporting Duck's show during that time period.


During that discussion, I do hope that you scientifically based researchers remember to consider one thing....I see many who take an automatic approach to debunk without their own facts backed up at times. EX: They view a video of something and call a hoax because they assume they see a POSSIBLE photo shop, etc. They aren't sure, but go ahead and immediately declare it a hoax. Granted, many are! But I also see many skeptics declare something a hoax in an almost automatic fashion on "hunches" or "assumptions". The scientific community needs to have the facts to back up the statements they make. And they also need to be open to the possibilities of unknown phenomena being something that is currently not able to be explained or measured by our current knowledge base. ie. I see a lot of automatic assumptions out there on both sides of the board.

You tell 'I'm!!

 

[JoMama]

You tell 'I'm!!

Gods

You tell him, Debi!!

 

[Bob Bain]

If you want to know what I think about Brian Parsons... head over to:

Open Lines - Paranormal Degree Mills

Make your own mind up about that "pretend" (IMO) Dr.