Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

[b]Let's try to keep things civil here folks.

And let this be a lesson not to brag about your warning rating to the other members...we keep them private for a reason

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

(And before anyone starts thinking Ustwo is a liar in this thread, he does have a different warning rating now and it's none of your business as to why)

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

As for the thread itself, a simple observation (more like a rhetorical question): why is it that the majority is necessarily bad? This is a common theme among believers in....stuff like this (for lack of a better term/phrase). People post over and over again with what amounts to "95% of the scientific community says this is B.S." and then believers come by and post something done by that other 5% and imply it's better because it's not the majority or the status quo. Perhaps sometimes something is the majority and the status quo for a reason?

Similarly, I always find it interesting (and frustrating) when I see comments like "it seems pointless since no matter what studies I post the detractors will always say the data is flawed." The phrase "pot calling the kettle black" comes to mind. 1) If 95% (or whatever) of respected and educated scientists disagree with your 5% of scientists (which is most certainly the case when it comes to things such as E.S.P.), which is the group being presented with information and ignoring it? 2) Again, if the large majority of the scientific community rejects the claims....maybe there's merit to the idea that the data is flawed?

Not that I expect anyone here to admit to this - and some will probably be offended and upset that I even make this assertion - but I think some people have a certain need to be special, to be outside of the mainstream, to have some sort of uncommon knowledge. In many people, this takes the form of religion, and then there are those who replace the more standard religions with something like belief in astrology, or E.S.P. or whatever else. One common thread though is this idea that because the opinion is "mainstream" it is inherently bad. This is a very strong indication that there is an ulterior motive to belief in such things...that being outside of the mainstream is a necessary characteristic of that person's personality. It's also interesting that many such people are drawn to what they must know, subconsciously at least, is a losing battle. You're not going to convince the majority that E.S.P. exists, and that's OK, because it's not actually about convincing the majority, it's about being in the minority...feeling somehow special. If, by chance, the majority DID become convinced that E.S.P. (or whatever other supernatural, new-agey phenomenon) is real...most of the people who so easily shrug off the majority opinion against E.S.P. now would find some other new-agey phenomenon to follow instead.

And just like other religious people get offended when you imply that there may be more going on under the surface of their religious dedication than they admit, I expect plenty of people here to be offended and adamantly deny everything I said here. That's OK though, because I'm not trying to win you all over...but maybe one person will be encouraged to take a closer look at why they are who they are and choose to believe what they believe.

Either way, I doubt I'll be participating much more in this thread. I only have so many endless-debates-that-go-nowhere in me per year.