[Edgar Alan Hoe]

Ohh, I get it.

If I pay The Amazing Randi to perform some feats for me, which he explains with as "magic", its a social contract. But if I pay one of the people he doesn't like all that much to perform some feats, which they describe as "magic", they are frauds. Got it!

I actually think we should leave this alone now. The nonsense is actually starting to get strangely creepy.

[Frocious]

Ohh, I get it.

If I pay The Amazing Randi to perform some feats for me, which he explains with as "magic", its a social contract. But if I pay one of the people he doesn't like all that much to perform some feats, which they describe as "magic", they are frauds. Got it!

As mentioned already, Randi is extremely open to letting people know that his "magic" is simply trickery. I am not sure how you can claim to compare him to someone like Geller.

"According to James Alcock, at a meeting where Randi was duplicating the performances of Uri Geller, a professor from the University at Buffalo shouted out that Randi was a fraud. Randi said: "Yes, indeed, I'm a trickster, I'm a cheat, I'm a charlatan, that's what I do for a living. Everything I've done here was by trickery."

[Curious Squirrel]

Ohh, I get it.

If I pay The Amazing Randi to perform some feats for me, which he explains with as "magic", its a social contract. But if I pay one of the people he doesn't like all that much to perform some feats, which they describe as "magic", they are frauds. Got it!

I...wow. It amazes me that you can twist words that badly, and seem actually sincere about your point. Edgar seems to have the right idea here, there doesn't appear to be any purpose in pursuing this with you, as you either have no desire to actually attempt to understand the differences, or you're simply in it for the lulz at this point.

As for the topic, I suppose we'll have to see who allows their names to be posted alongside this video. I think that should be rather telling of some things, and if possible give some avenues of people to discuss how the video creators present and discuss things within the video. See if things are accurate from their perspective, and if they agree with his conclusions.

[AATW]

Ohh, I get it.

It's funny how you started a post this way and then went on to demonstrate that you don't get it at all.
Except I expect you do really, you're just on the wind up.

If you go and see a "magician" you understand, unless you a complete imbecile, that the person on stage is tricking you.
Most people understand that the Harry Potter films are not hard hitting documentaries. Magic isn't real.
So you go, you're entertained, you maybe guess how some of the tricks are done, some you can't work out. A good time is had by all.
But you don't go home believing the person has "powers" unless you are stupid, you understand that some trickery is involved.
Only a child would think that the person had some "powers". The magician is not claiming to have any.

If you go and see a "psychic "though then
a) You're an idiot
b) You are doing so because you believe they actually have some "powers". That is what the person is claiming. But they don't have powers, they are using cold reading techniques and other things to con people, often people in this scenario who are vulnerable and desperately hoping to hear from departed loved ones. It's exploitative.

The first person is tricking you but you know they are, the second person is tricking you but you don't know they are.
Is this really such a hard distinction to understand?

[Tom Bishop]

Ohh, I get it.

If I pay The Amazing Randi to perform some feats for me, which he explains with as "magic", its a social contract. But if I pay one of the people he doesn't like all that much to perform some feats, which they describe as "magic", they are frauds. Got it!

As mentioned already, Randi is extremely open to letting people know that his "magic" is simply trickery. I am not sure how you can claim to compare him to someone like Geller.

"According to James Alcock, at a meeting where Randi was duplicating the performances of Uri Geller, a professor from the University at Buffalo shouted out that Randi was a fraud. Randi said: "Yes, indeed, I'm a trickster, I'm a cheat, I'm a charlatan, that's what I do for a living. Everything I've done here was by trickery."

Are you claiming that in every one of his magic performances he prefaced or ended with an admission that he was a charlatan?

The first person is tricking you but you know they are, the second person is tricking you but you don't know they are.
Is this really such a hard distinction to understand?

Unless Rani explained that it is fake in each of his performances throughout his career, he's clearly leaving the audience to think that something magical or paranormal may have occurred. I don't really see a difference. Not everyone goes to magic and paranormal shows under the pretense of "what I'm about to see is fake" like you do.

You are clearly championing a guy who thinks its okay to lie to people and pretend that you have magic.

[Frocious]

Ohh, I get it.

If I pay The Amazing Randi to perform some feats for me, which he explains with as "magic", its a social contract. But if I pay one of the people he doesn't like all that much to perform some feats, which they describe as "magic", they are frauds. Got it!

As mentioned already, Randi is extremely open to letting people know that his "magic" is simply trickery. I am not sure how you can claim to compare him to someone like Geller.

"According to James Alcock, at a meeting where Randi was duplicating the performances of Uri Geller, a professor from the University at Buffalo shouted out that Randi was a fraud. Randi said: "Yes, indeed, I'm a trickster, I'm a cheat, I'm a charlatan, that's what I do for a living. Everything I've done here was by trickery."

Are you claiming that in every one of his magic performances he prefaced or ended with an admission that he was a charlatan?

The first person is tricking you but you know they are, the second person is tricking you but you don't know they are.
Is this really such a hard distinction to understand?

Unless Rani explained that it is fake in each of his performances throughout his career, he's clearly leaving the audience to think that something magical or paranormal may have occurred. I don't really see a difference. Not everyone goes to magic and paranormal shows under the pretense of "what I'm about to see is fake" like you do.

You are clearly championing a guy who thinks its okay to lie to people and pretend that you have magic.

This is my last post on the topic -- you are being willfully dense here.

James Randi most likely did not explain that he was a trickster and a charlatan during all of his performances. He did not have to, as he never claimed to have mysterious "powers" or "psychic abilities" or that he had been visited by aliens to be able to perform his feats.

If you can't see the difference between that and a guy like Geller, there is no helping you.

I don't believe anyone here is "championing" Randi. But if we had been, consider the man you're championing yourself.

[garygreen]

Unless Rani explained that it is fake in each of his performances throughout his career, he's clearly leaving the audience to think that something magical or paranormal may have occurred. I don't really see a difference. Not everyone goes to magic and paranormal shows under the pretense of "what I'm about to see is fake" like you do.

You are clearly championing a guy who thinks its okay to lie to people and pretend that you have magic.

Unless marvel's agents of shield explains that it is fake in each episode, it's clearly leaving the audience to think that something magical or paranormal may have occurred. I don't really see a difference. Not everyone watches fiction under the pretense of "what I'm about to see is fake" like you do.

You are clearly championing a show that thinks its okay to lie to people and pretend superheroes are real.

[Tom Bishop]

It is just hypocritical that you can trust the word of one person with a history of trickery and deceit and defend it as entertainment, but make judgement calls of another person's shtick as a liar or a conman.

This article clearly calls Urnadir a "magician" and describes what he does as "entertainment".

"the cave that Urandir has in his property is the lastest hit in ufologic entertainment"

"former goldwasher and amateur magician Urandir Fernandes de Oliveira used primary tricks with laser pens, operated by his employees camouflaged in the bush, to illude the about 70 members of his sect, that today has more than a thousand followers"

This is probably not the best man to trust that he is still not doing "entertainment" in any future work he does, but neither is trusting James Randi that he is still not doing "entertainment" when he goes onto talk shows and claims that science has it all figured out and there is nothing in the world  that is not explainable by science.

[Frocious]

It is just hypocritical that you can trust the word of one person with a history of trickery and deceit and defend it as entertainment, but make judgement calls of another person's shtick as a liar or a conman.

This article clearly calls Urnadir a "magician" and describes what he does as "entertainment".

"the cave that Urandir has in his property is the lastest hit in ufologic entertainment"

"former goldwasher and amateur magician Urandir Fernandes de Oliveira used primary tricks with laser pens, operated by his employees camouflaged in the bush, to illude the about 70 members of his sect, that today has more than a thousand followers"

This si probably not the best man to trust that he is still not doing "entertainment," but neither is trusting James Randi's organization that he is still not doing "entertainment."

You're digging yourself deeper if you want to bring Randi's organization into this -- it was created solely to disprove the claims of psychics and other paranormals. The organization had absolutely nothing to do with entertainment.

Anyway, going back to your quote there is a fundamental difference there between "The Amazing Randi" and that guy -- Urandir, as claimed by your own quote, didn't do it for entertainment. He did it to trick people into joining his sect.

And to answer to your edit, Randi is all for researching pseudoscience. He doesn't dismiss it out-of-hand, and is well aware that scientific progress could occur through it. He is also well aware that most (essentially all, up to this point) if it is bullshit.

[Tom Bishop]

Anyway, going back to your quote there is a fundamental difference there between "The Amazing Randi" and that guy -- Urandir, as claimed by your own quote, didn't do it for entertainment. He did it to trick people into joining his sect.

As far as we know he is just operating a fun adventure theme park on his ranch for the people of Brazil to escape into. That's basically what magicians do -- provide escapism from the boring real world.

Maybe the people of Brazil just go there for fun like we go see magic shows here for fun. Have you ever thought about that?

You're digging yourself deeper if you want to bring Randi's organization into this -- it was created solely to disprove the claims of psychics and other paranormals. The organization had absolutely nothing to do with entertainment.

Its a form of entertainment. That is why Randi is featured on talk shows and speaks of big prizes, rather than writing any scientific papers or engaging in scientific research. I don't see any other scientists appearing on talk shows and announcing "prove me wrong, you'll win big money!"

There are numerous accusations that Randi does not let the people who accept his challenge even perform their feat as they claim to be able to perform it. Things along the line of "Oh you claim to be able to use a dousing rod to find water wells? Well, we've hidden a bottle of water somewhere in this building. Find it!" There is no real scientific examination of the claims.

[Frocious]

Anyway, going back to your quote there is a fundamental difference there between "The Amazing Randi" and that guy -- Urandir, as claimed by your own quote, didn't do it for entertainment. He did it to trick people into joining his sect.

As far as we know he is just operating a fun adventure theme park on his ranch for the people of Brazil to escape into. That's basically what magicians do -- provide escapism from the boring real world.

Maybe the people of Brazil just go there for fun like we go see magic shows here for fun. Have you ever thought about that?

I don't believe that would be described as a "sect."

When did you start caring about scientific papers, anyway?

[StinkyOne]

Anyway, going back to your quote there is a fundamental difference there between "The Amazing Randi" and that guy -- Urandir, as claimed by your own quote, didn't do it for entertainment. He did it to trick people into joining his sect.

As far as we know he is just operating a fun adventure theme park on his ranch for the people of Brazil to escape into. That's basically what magicians do -- provide escapism from the boring real world.

Maybe the people of Brazil just go there for fun like we go see magic shows here for fun. Have you ever thought about that?

You're digging yourself deeper if you want to bring Randi's organization into this -- it was created solely to disprove the claims of psychics and other paranormals. The organization had absolutely nothing to do with entertainment.

Its a form of entertainment. That is why Randi is featured on talk shows and speaks of big prizes, rather than writing any scientific papers or engaging in scientific research. I don't see any other scientists appearing on talk shows and announcing "prove me wrong, you'll win big money!"

There are numerous accusations that Randi does not let the people who accept his challenge even perform their feat as they claim to be able to perform it. Things along the line of "Oh you claim to be able to use a dousing rod to find water wells? Well, we've hidden a bottle of water somewhere in this building. Find it!" There is no real scientific examination of the claims.

Tom, what does Randi have to do with a nutter in Brazil claiming the Earth is convex? It is truly an epic strawman, but you can stop attacking it now. Your original post has been shown to have been created by someone not horribly concerned with being factual. Case closed. All this other stuff is just your typical Tom Bishop derailment. I'm waiting for you to claim the plate was broken by perspective.

[Edgar Alan Hoe]

Anyway, going back to your quote there is a fundamental difference there between "The Amazing Randi" and that guy -- Urandir, as claimed by your own quote, didn't do it for entertainment. He did it to trick people into joining his sect.

As far as we know he is just operating a fun adventure theme park on his ranch for the people of Brazil to escape into. That's basically what magicians do -- provide escapism from the boring real world.

Maybe the people of Brazil just go there for fun like we go see magic shows here for fun. Have you ever thought about that?

You're digging yourself deeper if you want to bring Randi's organization into this -- it was created solely to disprove the claims of psychics and other paranormals. The organization had absolutely nothing to do with entertainment.

Its a form of entertainment. That is why Randi is featured on talk shows and speaks of big prizes, rather than writing any scientific papers or engaging in scientific research. I don't see any other scientists appearing on talk shows and announcing "prove me wrong, you'll win big money!"

There are numerous accusations that Randi does not let the people who accept his challenge even perform their feat as they claim to be able to perform it. Things along the line of "Oh you claim to be able to use a dousing rod to find water wells? Well, we've hidden a bottle of water somewhere in this building. Find it!" There is no real scientific examination of the claims.

Tom do yourself a favor and go have a lie down for a bit, your posts have completely degenerated into full on nonsense now.

[AATW]

Unless Rani explained that it is fake in each of his performances throughout his career, he's clearly leaving the audience to think that something magical or paranormal may have occurred.

No, he isn't.
Before each film at the cinema you don't get a disclaimer explaining that what you're about to see is fiction. In fact, they do the reverse - they explicitly state that some films are based on true events. By default you expect a film to be fictional, and you expect a stage magician to be tricking you. They are literally called magic tricks or illusions!
Unless you are a child or a complete idiot you understand the premise of a magic show.

I don't really see a difference. Not everyone goes to magic and paranormal shows under the pretense of "what I'm about to see is fake" like you do.

Why are you mixing up magic and paranormal shows? There is a massive difference. One which I'm struggling to believe you don't understand.

Everyone (again, apart from children or complete idiots) goes to see a magic show understanding that they are going to be tricked.
No-one thinks David Copperfield can really fly, or he can really make the Statue of Liberty disappear.
You might not know exactly how he's doing it, but you understand it's a trick.

But paranormal shows, the people doing those ARE claiming that they have supernatural powers and the people going to them buy into that, otherwise they wouldn't go.
I have no idea why you'd go and see a medium unless you actually thought they really have the power to talk to "the other side".
Those shows exploit gullible people. Do not conflate those with magic shows which are designed to entertain.

You are clearly championing a guy who thinks its okay to lie to people and pretend that you have magic.

And you clearly either reason at the level of a 5 year old child who has yet to understand the difference between fantasy and real life, or you're just on the wind up and you're arguing the toss for the lolz.
I'm more inclined to think the latter, if you were as dumb as you come across on here I don't know how you'd function in life.
Which leads me to believe that you don't really believe any of this flat earth nonsense at all, maybe you just enjoy trying to defend the indefensible and have fun playing dumb.

[Frocious]

Hold up we need to go back to something here:

rather than writing any scientific papers or engaging in scientific research.

Tom, do you expect this Brazilian team to publish a paper in Nature (or another such peer-reviewed journal), and does that factor in to whether or not you will believe their claims? Does publishing a scientific paper only matter when it comes to James Randi?

Are there any peer-reviewed scientific papers, at all, that support your world view that the earth is flat?

[Tom Bishop]

Tom, what does Randi have to do with a nutter in Brazil claiming the Earth is convex?

Randi is a former magician who you think as trustworthy. This guy is also described as a magician. What's the difference? Is it okay when Randi amazes people with "magic" but not other people?

I'm waiting for you to claim the plate was broken by perspective.

There is no context to the video that was provided. I provided a source which describes the Brazilian guy as a magician. Magicians perform tricks for amusement and entertainment.

Unless Rani explained that it is fake in each of his performances throughout his career, he's clearly leaving the audience to think that something magical or paranormal may have occurred.

No, he isn't.
Before each film at the cinema you don't get a disclaimer explaining that what you're about to see is fiction. In fact, they do the reverse - they explicitly state that some films are based on true events. By default you expect a film to be fictional, and you expect a stage magician to be tricking you. They are literally called magic tricks or illusions!

I have not been to many magic shows which have a disclaimer "Everything you are about to see is fake" before the show starts. The audience is led to believe that something physically impossible happened. At no point are we told "it was all fake." It is an entire industry based on lies.

We are supposed to leave thinking "what I saw was truly unexplainable!" with wonder of whether we really saw something that was magic.

Unless you are a child or a complete idiot you understand the premise of a magic show.

There are children and people of various capacities at these shows. Why is it okay to lie to children? Rather than downplaying and justifying lies, you would do better just to admit that magicians are liars, and their job is to lie to people. And, if it is the magician's job to lie to people, what is the difference between a magician who goes one step further with his backstory and says that he was touched by angles or given his powers by a sorcerer?

Since lies and deception are perfectly okay in your book - where is the line between good lie and bad lie? They are all just magicians with different backstories. What makes a magical backstory acceptable and unacceptable?

[Tom Bishop]

According to his Wikipedia article Randi described himself as a "conjuror" in his act.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Randi#Magician

"Though defining himself as a conjuror, Randi began a career as a professional stage magician"

Why is this okay, but defining yourself as a psychic or someone who was granted powers by a sorcerer/aliens/devils, not okay?

[Frocious]

According to his Wikipedia article Randi described himself as a "conjuror" in his act.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Randi#Magician

"Though defining himself as a conjuror, Randi began a career as a professional stage magician"

Why is this okay, but defining yourself as a psychic or someone who was granted powers by a sorcerer/aliens/devils, not okay?

You will have to answer that for yourself, as it is a matter of opinion.

Please respond to the questions regarding scientific papers rather than go around in circles regarding whether or not magicians are trustworthy.

[StinkyOne]

Randi is a former magician who you think as trustworthy. This guy is also described as a magician. What's the difference? Is it okay when Randi amazes people with "magic" but not other people?

No, those are your words. I have no idea who the guy is. If you'd like to discuss Randi, you should create a new thread. This thread is about some Brazilian guy that claims the Earth is convex and that he has paranormal powers. I'm not entertaining your thread derailment any further than that and would request that you get back on topic.

There is no context to the video that was provided. I provided a source which describes the Brazilian guy as a magician. Magicians perform tricks for amusement and entertainment.

I posted his own words where he claimed he had paranormal powers and the title of the video references paranormal. I know you want to claim he is saying he is just a magician, but that is not the case at all. A man of your age should know that sometimes it is just better to admit you were wrong and move on. You're like a guy stuck in a hole who just keeps digging.

[pablozablo]

There are children and people of various capacities at these shows. Why is it okay to lie to children? Rather than downplaying and justifying lies, you would do better just to admit that magicians are liars, and their job is to lie to people. And, if it is the magician's job to lie to people, what is the difference between a magician who goes one step further with his backstory and says that he was touched by angles or given his powers by a sorcerer?

Since lies and deception are perfectly okay in your book - where is the line between good lie and bad lie? They are all just magicians with different backstories. What makes a magical backstory acceptable and unacceptable?

Tom - given your strong moral stance on lying to children are you going to add something to the Wiki about Santa Claus not being real either?