Proof that psychic occurrences/intuition EXISTS!!!!!

[mayday]

For a week in 1991 I could not get my mind off Freddie Mercury, the singer for Queen. He was on my mind day and night. Night and day. The end of the week when he invaded my thoughts, he announced he was HIV positive and died very soon after.

One weekend a couple of years ago I felt this feeling of impending doom. Very VERY strong feeling, I knew someone close to me was going to die, maybe even me...I was thinking "Wonder what it will be like to be the first sibling to die?" That Monday my mother called me to let me know my cousin died unexpectedly.

For the past couple of weeks, my whole life has been devoted to Neil Young. He is on my mind all the time...now I know why he has been on my mind so strongly lately:

http://entertainment.tv.yahoo.com/entnews/eo/20050401/111242190000.html

Neil needs Big Mama to come take care of him! I wish I could be there for him!

Yes, psychic happenings and intuition exist. Not in such a way that people can use their abilities at will to capitalize off it, but our brains DO work in mysterious ways.

[CFLarsen]

Unverifiable anecdotes. Not proof.

Try again.

[mayday]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Unverifiable anecdotes. Not proof.

Try again.

Look at some of my other posts, where Neil was the topic. Happens to be right before his hospitalization.

It is pretty obvious.

[geni]

Post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy

[apoger]

It is pretty obvious.


... that you are connecting the events after the fact.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by mayday
Look at some of my other posts, where Neil was the topic. Happens to be right before his hospitalization.

It is pretty obvious.

....why?

[Thomas]

Originally posted by mayday
It is pretty obvious.
Good good, so who's on your mind now? Who's next? Let's hear it please.

[KelvinG]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
....why?

Cause she says so! Geez, what more proof do you skeptics need!;)

[Lisa Simpson]

Phbbt. She didn't even know anything was wrong with Neil Young until I pointed it out on another thread. Some psychic power.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Lisa Simpson
Phbbt. She didn't even know anything was wrong with Neil Young until I pointed it out on another thread. Some psychic power.
Oh, and thousands of people gets hospitalized every hour worldwide, but somehow it's only the famous ones and her family who hold the ability to channel her their problems - before they occur.

Now mayday, who's next to get hospitalized? Tell us please.

[mayday]

Originally posted by Lisa Simpson
Phbbt. She didn't even know anything was wrong with Neil Young until I pointed it out on another thread. Some psychic power.


See what I mean? You suffering from skeptimania can't see the forest for the trees!

DON'T flatter yourself, Lisa. I saw the news about Neil last night on CNN. The point ISN'T that I didn't know anything about his being sick, it was that HE HAS BEEN ON MY MIND. SOMETHING was up! Can you get that through your skull??? Can ANY of you get it through your skulls??? Or am I REALLY in the Twilight Zone, the land of zombified Randi disciples???

And the creep who mentioned I started talking about Neil AFTER the fact...you need to go back and read some of my posts. DATED BEFORE Neil got sick.

He looks so old and gray...but I still love him, anyway.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by mayday
See what I mean? You suffering from skeptimania can't see the forest for the trees!

DON'T flatter yourself, Lisa. I saw the news about Neil last night on CNN. The point ISN'T that I didn't know anything about his being sick, it was that HE HAS BEEN ON MY MIND. SOMETHING was up! Can you get that through your skull??? Can ANY of you get it through your skulls??? Or am I REALLY in the Twilight Zone, the land of zombified Randi disciples???

And the creep who mentioned I started talking about Neil AFTER the fact...you need to go back and read some of my posts. DATED BEFORE Neil got sick.

He looks so old and gray...but I still love him, anyway.

Do you ever think of someone, without anything happening?

[Thomas]

Answer the previous question please mayday:

Who is on your mind now? Who's next?

[Beady]

Originally posted by Lisa Simpson
Phbbt. She didn't even know anything was wrong with Neil Young until I pointed it out on another thread. Some psychic power.

This seems to happen a lot on these boards. Month or two ago, someone was wondering why they were thinking about Russell Johnson ("The Professor" on Gilligan's Island). I'm still not sure what the deal was, and I forget who the poster was, but they were apparently going to keep track of Johnson to see if he died "in the next few days." I got my head bitten off for insisting there would be no causal connection between a randomly-occurring thought about a former TV star and his subsequent death at age 80.

Anyway, "in the next few days" must surely have passed by now. Last I heard, Mr. Johnson is still alive, but the poster doesn't appear to have announced the results of his experiment.

Edit: Found it! The thread is "Premonitions of Death."

[Lisa Simpson]

Originally posted by mayday
[B
DON'T flatter yourself, Lisa. I saw the news about Neil last night on CNN. The point ISN'T that I didn't know anything about his being sick, it was that HE HAS BEEN ON MY MIND. SOMETHING was up! Can you get that through your skull??? Can ANY of you get it through your skulls??? Or am I REALLY in the Twilight Zone, the land of zombified Randi disciples???

[/B]

Don't flatter myself?!?! Why not? You are doing it, thinking you have some psychic connection to Neil Young's physical state. Not to mention flattering yourself thinking he needs "Big Momma" to come take care of him. Presumably, that's Mrs. Young's job.

[mayday]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Do you ever think of someone, without anything happening?

Yes I do, but for the most part they don't become an obsession.

Thomas, no one else is on my mind right now, but I'll be sure and let you know when something comes up.

My cockatiel is more reasonable than some of you folks, and he just sits in his cage most of the day ringing a little bell with his beak. At least it is something he can SEE and FEEL...lol

[Ipecac]

Ooh! Ohh! I can play this game too!

For the last couple of weeks, I've been thinking about Terri Schiavo. Just out of the blue; it's not like I even know her. And then bam! she dies.

Here's another one. The Pope has been on my mind a lot lately. I'm not Catholic, so this is certainly unusual. If he kicks off soon, it will certainly verify my psychic abilities.

[mayday]

Originally posted by Ipecac
Ooh! Ohh! I can play this game too!

For the last couple of weeks, I've been thinking about Terri Schiavo. Just out of the blue; it's not like I even know her. And then bam! she dies.

Here's another one. The Pope has been on my mind a lot lately. I'm not Catholic, so this is certainly unusual. If he kicks off soon, it will certainly verify my psychic abilities.

You don't even get it...NEIL YOUNG HAS NOT BEEN IN THE NEWS RECENTLY. I would have had no other reason to suddenly start thinking about him.

Oh yea...I can think of another incident I had. Two weeks before the 9/11 tragedy, I, living on a farm in Tennessee, had a dream/nightmare that my young daughter and myself were in a big tall building in NYC going down flights of stairs after we had been kidnapped by Muslims. When I had the dream I thought nothing of it, but when I read the news on the internet and the initial shock wore off, it all started falling into place.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by mayday
Yes I do, but for the most part they don't become an obsession.

"Most part"? How often does it happen that it becomes an "obsession"?

How do you know what is an "obsession" and what is not?

[Thomas]

Originally posted by mayday
You don't even get it...NEIL YOUNG HAS NOT BEEN IN THE NEWS RECENTLY. I would have had no other reason to suddenly start thinking about him.

Ahem..

Originally posted by mayday 03-22-2005
This thread reminds me of that Neil Young song..

[TruthSeeker]

I think I may also be psychic. When I heard the news I had two thoughts "I hope he will be ok" and "Mayday will be all over this somehow"

Please send my million dollars ASAP

Thanks

[Lisa Simpson]

Neil Young was in the news on 3/19/05 when he inducted the Pretenders into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. Several days before mayday told us about her newest stalking victim.

[Thomas]

I'll redraw my "Ahem..". It was vague anyway, and didn't implicitly carry that she began thinking about the poor guy at that point.

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

Originally posted by mayday
Look at some of my other posts, where Neil was the topic. Happens to be right before his hospitalization.

It is pretty obvious.

What is obvious is that you create a meaningful relation where there is nothing but wishful thinking. You could have been talking about Rainiero, and claim the same thing, you could have been talking about Uma Turman, and forget about it because you cant attach a meaning to it.

[Ipecac]

Originally posted by mayday
You don't even get it...NEIL YOUNG HAS NOT BEEN IN THE NEWS RECENTLY. I would have had no other reason to suddenly start thinking about him.


If Thomas hasn't demonstrated conclusively why you started thinking of Neil Young, here's something else. Neil Young was in the news recently.

Neil Young (http://noted.blogs.com/westcoastmusic/2005/03/neil_young_will.html)

Do you imagine that Freddy Mercury wasn't in the news in the weeks leading up to his death? You don't just drop dead of AIDS. Usually you're ill for months before.

[mayday]

Originally posted by Lisa Simpson
Neil Young was in the news on 3/19/05 when he inducted the Pretenders into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. Several days before mayday told us about her newest stalking victim.

I knew nothing about that.

[Lisa Simpson]

Originally posted by mayday
I knew nothing about that.

You said he was not in the news. But he was. Twice. ASCAP and RRHoF. Your whole story just fell apart.

[Thomas]

Be honest now mayday: Did you begin to think about Young because the thread mentioned above, reminded you of a song of his?

[mayday]

Originally posted by Lisa Simpson
You said he was not in the news. But he was. Twice. ASCAP and RRHoF. Your whole story just fell apart.

What is ASCAP and RRHoF???

How? Bottom line: when people get stuck on my mind it is usually for a reason. I will touch Neil's life for the better in one way or another. We are even looking into buying some land near his ranch. We will be neighbors. One of these days I might save his life by being his neighbor. Maybe there really is a plan and a reason for everything.

This is why it can be hard to prove psychic occurrences exist. In my case, I don't realize there is a reason I am thinking of these people until it happens. Indeed, I was worried that I was thinking of Neil for the same reason I was thinking of other people (they were in ill health) but I HOPED that wasn't the case. Thank goodness he is expected to make a full recovery...poor old guy.

Yes, Claus, there have been strange people I never heard of who have been stuck in my mind, but since they are not famous I have no way of verifying why they came to mind.
This past winter a man named "Phil" kept hanging in my mind. Phil was a tall chubby guy who was good at cooking and was an anesthetist. I kept thinking about Phil. Don't know if it ever meant anything, but it *was* odd that I got a strange call one night during that time from someone asking for Phil...

[Lisa Simpson]

Originally posted by mayday
What is ASCAP and RRHoF???


The two times Neil Young was in the news despite you saying he wasn't.

ASCAP honored him on 3/18/05
on 03/19/05 he inducted the Pretenders into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame.

You first mentioned Neil on 03/22/05. Get it? Get it? Three days after he was in the news.

[Suezoled]

Hey, you know what I found at the grocery? Ice cream tacos. Only, it's just the sugar ice cream cone in a taco-ey shape with ice cream and some toppings stuffed in there. On the other hand, it would be different. I mean, do you bite it like a taco? Won't you get an ice cream headache then? Is it even a real taco?

[mayday]

Originally posted by Thomas
Be honest now mayday: Did you begin to think about Young because the thread mentioned above, reminded you of a song of his?

I was listening to a lot of Neil Young. For some reason I was at Hasting's and saw his Decade CD. Even though it was $30 I bought it (and I am a real cheapskate, usually buy off the discount rack) So I was listening to this CD a lot while I was posting on that thread, and what I was reading on the thread made me think of the songs I was listening to.

Hey...now THIS is poetry:
******************************
In awhile will the smile on my face turn to plaster
Stick around while the clown who is sick does the trick of disaster...
******************************
Don't know what it means but I sure dig it...I'm listening to that now...

[mayday]

Originally posted by Lisa Simpson
The two times Neil Young was in the news despite you saying he wasn't.

ASCAP honored him on 3/18/05
on 03/19/05 he inducted the Pretenders into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame.

You first mentioned Neil on 03/22/05. Get it? Get it? Three days after he was in the news.

That just goes to prove I didn't know anything about it.

Further and MOST more....just because I mentioned him on the 22 doesn't mean that is the first time I started thinking of him...it was earlier than that.

[Lisa Simpson]

Originally posted by Suezoled
Hey, you know what I found at the grocery? Ice cream tacos. Only, it's just the sugar ice cream cone in a taco-ey shape with ice cream and some toppings stuffed in there. On the other hand, it would be different. I mean, do you bite it like a taco? Won't you get an ice cream headache then? Is it even a real taco?

Those are yummy. You eat them kind of like a taco, but from the top downward, so the ice cream stays in the shell. You'll have to ask Dragonrock what the GTITS thinks about them.

I saw at the ballpark "ice cream hot dogs". The ice cream was shaped like the hot dog and a twinkie-like cake was the bun. Then you got whipped cream and stuff instead of mustard, etc.

[Lisa Simpson]

Originally posted by mayday
That just goes to prove I didn't know anything about it.

No, it proves that Neil Young was in the news. Perhaps you don't consciously remember hearing about it. But he was in the news.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by mayday
I was listening to a lot of Neil Young. For some reason I was at Hasting's and saw his Decade CD. Even though it was $30 I bought it (and I am a real cheapskate, usually buy off the discount rack) So I was listening to this CD a lot while I was posting on that thread, and what I was reading on the thread made me think of the songs I was listening to.
You have a very calm style about it all, that's good, many people tend to get carried away by the skeptics inquisition.

Assuming that you didn't hear about him in the news (although you may have, I wouldn't know), the question now remains:

Do you think you would've thought about him while reading that thread, if this Decade CD hadn't caught your attention at Hasting's?

[Patricio Elicer]

Originally posted by mayday
Oh yea...I can think of another incident I had. Two weeks before the 9/11 tragedy, I, living on a farm in Tennessee, had a dream/nightmare that my young daughter and myself were in a big tall building in NYC going down flights of stairs after we had been kidnapped by Muslims. When I had the dream I thought nothing of it, but when I read the news on the internet and the initial shock wore off, it all started falling into place. Mayday, the 9/11 events were aweful, impressive, overwhelming. They certainy shook every thinking being's emotions. All this combined with the brain's fallibility to retain detailed memories of dreams are the perfect ingredients to make up amazing "supernatural" ocurrances.

I don't doubt that you dreamt "something". That something may have slightly resembled some 9/11 facts, so after the event you unconciously filled in the "holes" in your dream to make it fit with what really happened. In other words, you fooled yourself, your rational side was blocked by your strong emotions, you chose to interpret the dream that way. My opinion.

A quite different story would be that you accurately write down your thoughts, premonitions, dreams, etc. to the slightest possible detail, before the dreadful event that you sensed would happen, takes place. That way you'd have tangible evidence for your claims, available for all to examine and judge.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Patricio Elicer
A quite different story would be that you accurately write down your thoughts, premonitions, dreams, etc. to the slightest possible detail, before the dreadful event that you sensed would happen, takes place. That way you'd have tangible evidence for your claims, available for all to examine and judge.
She has agreed to tell me/us when she get's another obsession with a given person. Then we can test her claim in the manner you suggest. I'm looking forward to it.

Untill then, I'm just looking forward to hear her answer to my last question.

[mayday]

Originally posted by Patricio Elicer
Mayday, the 9/11 events were aweful, impressive, overwhelming. They certainy shook every thinking being's emotions. All this combined with the brain's fallibility to retain detailed memories of dreams are the perfect ingredients to make up amazing "supernatural" ocurrances.

I don't doubt that you dreamt "something". That something may have slightly resembled some 9/11 facts, so after the event you unconciously filled in the "holes" in your dream to make it fit with what really happened. In other words, you fooled yourself, your rational side was blocked by your strong emotions, you chose to interpret the dream that way. My opinion.

A quite different story would be that you accurately write down your thoughts, premonitions, dreams, etc. to the slightest possible detail, before the dreadful event that you sensed would happen, takes place. That way you'd have tangible evidence for your claims, available for all to examine and judge.

I wish I had written it down, but see? I didn't think anything of it.
I wish I had mentioned that I suspected my obsession with Neil Young may have had something to do with his health, as my obsession with others before have proven.
I'm going to have to keep up with things like that better. Thing is...who knows when my next obsession will be.

Don't mean to change the subject, but hey, Powerball is tonite! Maybe I will give the old pendulum another try.

[mayday]

I have an idea....how do you start a BLOG?

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by mayday
Yes, Claus, there have been strange people I never heard of who have been stuck in my mind, but since they are not famous I have no way of verifying why they came to mind.
This past winter a man named "Phil" kept hanging in my mind. Phil was a tall chubby guy who was good at cooking and was an anesthetist. I kept thinking about Phil. Don't know if it ever meant anything, but it *was* odd that I got a strange call one night during that time from someone asking for Phil...

Prove it.

I'm not interested in your unverifiable anecdotes. Prove it.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by mayday
I have an idea....how do you start a BLOG?
Just do it here, that's BLOG'y enough for now, and please answer my last question.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Prove it.

I'm not interested in your unverifiable anecdotes. Prove it.
What does it matter. Even if it's right, it's still anecdotal.. I think a lot about diffrent persons, and let's say I think a lot about a guy named Peter for a while, and then someone dials the wrong number and asks for a guy named Peter. So what? Nothing.

I figure that Phil is a common name in the US, and likewise Peter is a common name in Denmark. That story is rather insignificant.

[Azrael 5]

Ive been thinking about Robbie Coltrane lately.Very soon(surely in a day or two I feel this will become relevant)Unless some smart alec on here figures out my cryptic premonition!!! ;)

More entertaining than Mayday's attempt :D

[Patricio Elicer]

Originally posted by mayday
I wish I had written it down, ... That's OK, but don't forget to do it next time you have such an "obsession". It would be great to be able to examine the evidence, but remember it must be before the event.

[Patricio Elicer]

Originally posted by mayday
I have an idea....how do you start a BLOG? Sorry, but what is a BLOG? :confused:

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Patricio Elicer
Sorry, but what is a BLOG? :confused:
It's sort of an Internet diary - a journal to keep track of past events. I think it's a slang term for web-log.

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

Originally posted by mayday
I have an idea....how do you start a BLOG?

Good idea. Maybe you can even state when you think some intuition, or dream, is going to become a reality.

You can go here:

www.blogger.com

[Thomas]

If she can edit that BLOG on blogger.com, well, then I would feel more safe if she just makes a BLOG thread here on these boards, or BLOGs in this thread.
I'm not implying that she's a fraud, but I do like to be absolutely certain though.

[Sharon]

I smiled when I read this thread. I too, like Mayday, believed I used to think about people outof the blue and then something would happen to them. Don't laugh, seriously because it's not funny, but I used to dread thoughts coming into my mind about people as things seemed to happen to them. The worse one was my beloved pet dog Robbie. I was walking him one day, over the nature reserve and I just got a dreadful feeling about him. He died within months. I really believed I had somehow made it happen, that I was either privvy to future events or that maybe I walked pass a gypsy and not purchased her Lavender and had a curse on me.

Good news is I eventually read 'How We Know What Isn't So' by Thomas Gilovich and I understand it all now. Pages 174 and 175 explain it perfectly.

I write this not because I think Mayday will purchase the book and realise her coincidence is not that extrodinary, I write it because I imagine lurkers who are in no-mans land(started to doubt but want to ask about stuff that happened to them but not sure where to start) , as I used to be, might find the book explains things that they thought where beyond coincidence just ain't so.

As I say 'How We Know What Isn't So' by Thomas Gilovich pages 174-175;) Great book.
Sharon

[T'ai Chi]

Prove it.

I'm not interested in your unverifiable anecdotes. Prove it.


you mean "provide evidence", not proof. Science talks about evidence.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by jzs

you mean "provide evidence", not proof. Science talks about evidence.
Evidence is synonymous to proof. Get out of that hamster wheel please, and get down with the act.

[Beady]

Originally posted by Thomas
Evidence is synonymous to proof.

No, it is not. "Evidence" is open to interpretation. "Proof" is evidence so compelling that disagreement would ordinarily be unreasonable. It's quite possible, and it happens all the time, to provide evidence that proves nothing and convinces no one.

Get out of that hamster wheel please, and get down with the act.

Don't you think it would be a good idea to know what you're talking about before you become so belligerent?

[mayday]

Originally posted by Sharon
I smiled when I read this thread. I too, like Mayday, believed I used to think about people outof the blue and then something would happen to them. Don't laugh, seriously because it's not funny, but I used to dread thoughts coming into my mind about people as things seemed to happen to them. The worse one was my beloved pet dog Robbie. I was walking him one day, over the nature reserve and I just got a dreadful feeling about him. He died within months. I really believed I had somehow made it happen, that I was either privvy to future events or that maybe I walked pass a gypsy and not purchased her Lavender and had a curse on me.

Good news is I eventually read 'How We Know What Isn't So' by Thomas Gilovich and I understand it all now. Pages 174 and 175 explain it perfectly.

I write this not because I think Mayday will purchase the book and realise her coincidence is not that extrodinary, I write it because I imagine lurkers who are in no-mans land(started to doubt but want to ask about stuff that happened to them but not sure where to start) , as I used to be, might find the book explains things that they thought where beyond coincidence just ain't so.

As I say 'How We Know What Isn't So' by Thomas Gilovich pages 174-175;) Great book.
Sharon

Oh boy, I *knew* we would have one of those. The old "usda" analogy.

I usda think such and such...before I became enlightened through a book...

lol. You folks are so predictable. It's kind of endearing in as much a way as it is annoying.

[GaryWPS]

I've been thinking about my chocolate cookie now for owww, several minates.

*DUNKS SAID COOKIE INTO TEA*

....Cookie breaks...


OMG!!!! I must be psychic!!!

Don't you hate cookie teaspoon rescue missions :v:

[Sharon]

Oh boy, I *knew* we would have one of those. The old "usda" analogy.

See you are psychic..LOL;) As if!

lol. You folks are so predictable. It's kind of endearing in as much a way as it is annoying.

Ok then, while we are on the subject of annoying.

I find what your behaivour ( note I'm not attacking you, but your actions) annoying. Your behaviour spoils it for other people. I used to be a lurker here in 'no mans land'. Had so many experiences, yet doubt had set it. You spoil it for other people like that because you use arrognance in your thread starters( with you shouting caps lock) which I believe you know will get peoples 'backs up' which in turn will lead to name calling and then those who had the same experience, but didn't get the nudge where to find out the answer, are the losers because I'm sure they must worry they will get the same treatment, through behaviour like yours. I can understand why you get the treatment you do. I myself am a patient person, work with children and patience is a must, but even I can see your just pushing/testing the boundaries, and even I find your behaviour annoying and that really is saying something.

I think that's selfish of you Mayday. You are a parent and by now I'm sure you have realised that it's not all about you and your needs ( I haven't yet sussed out your need to be on here). So try to think of others and don't spoil it for them. When you post something be mindful that many may have had simular experience but unlike you would like alternative info without the provoked name calling.

Sharon

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by Thomas
Evidence is synonymous to proof. Get out of that hamster wheel please, and get down with the act.

Ad hominem aside........ evidence is certainly not synonymous with proof as you claim.

Scientists speak in terms of evidence, not proof.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Beady

Don't you think it would be a good idea to know what you're talking about before you become so belligerent?
Enough of the banter, evidence is synonymous to proof (http://dico.isc.cnrs.fr/dico/en/search?b=1&r=evidence&send=Look+it+up)..

[edited for arrogant statements]

[Thomas]

Originally posted by jzs
Scientists speak in terms of evidence, not proof.
True, but I fail to see that it matters in this particular scenario.

[Thomas]

[edited for nonsense]

[GaryWPS]

Thomas can't you say what you need to say in one post?

[Thomas]

No, it's a birth defect (they say).

[GaryWPS]

A Spammy one at that

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by Thomas
True, but I fail to see that it matters in this particular scenario.

If people ask for proof, they are asking for the wrong thing. They are not taking a scientific approach by asking for evidence.

If people talk up science like it is important, at least they should act like they actually understand it.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by jzs
If people ask for proof, they are asking for the wrong thing. They are not taking a scientific approach by asking for evidence.

If people talk up science like it is important, at least they should act like they actually understand it.
Well, as long as this thread doesn't become another hamster wheel for you and Larsen, I don't really care.

[thaiboxerken]

This thread inspired my new signature.

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by Thomas
Well, as long as this thread doesn't become another hamster wheel for you and Larsen, I don't really care.

If you're asking for proof, you don't really know what you are talking about because science isn't about proof, but evidence.

That is a basic fact.

Unless you don't want to approach it with a scientific mindset... and this is a whole other issue.

[thaiboxerken]

Jzs, you may stop with the semantic garbage that you are spewing out. Most people here understand that Thomas is asking for evidence when he says "proof".

Proof n.: The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true.

Just one of many definitions of proof. The one that makes sense in his context of use.

[Quinn]

Mayday, look at it this way: Neil Young was on your mind, and not long after that he was in the news. Admittedly, a somewhat unusual coincidence. But here's the important question: How many other equally unusual coincidences could have happened to you within that same time, but didn't? How many times did the phone ring and the person calling you wasn't the person you were just thinking about? How many times did you have a song in your head and then not hear it blaring out of the car that passed you? How many times did you go through your day and not have an experience related to a dream you had the night before?

The point is, we all experience a whole lot of stuff every minute of every day, and every once in a while there will be seemingly eerie connections between some of said stuff. But it only seems eerie because we notice it, while we forget the rest of the stuff because, well, it's not memorable.

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
Jzs, you may stop with the semantic garbage that you are spewing out.


You beg me to stop with "semantic garbage" yet you offer more "semantic garbage" of your own. Nice going dude! :D

"Proof" and "evidence" are very different things, Ken. The latter is suggestive; the former is a certainty.

[Dr Adequate]

Originally posted by mayday
Oh boy, I *knew* we would have one of those. The old "usda" analogy.

I usda think such and such...before I became enlightened through a book...

lol. You folks are so predictable. Well here's an interesting insight into how mayday's mind works.

Again, she finds the past "so predictable".

Hey, mayday --- how about predicting the future? Just once?

It's kind of easy to say "I predicted that" after the event.

Now if you find Sharon so "predictable", couldn't you have given the details of her post to a trusted third party before she made her post, rather than calling her "predictable" after she made it?

No, you couldn't. That's not the sort of prediction you make. Because you do not have magic powers.

I too have powers like yours. I can fly vertically downwards, I can communicate with the living, and I have evidence of a species of hornless unicorn. And I can claim to have predicted things after they happened.

By the way, mayday, you may want to asking the spirits what "analogy" means. If that doesn't work, and it won't, try looking it up.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by jzs
"Proof" and "evidence" are very different things, Ken. The latter is suggestive; the former is a certainty.

No, it isn't.

Evidence is not a certainty. Certainty means "a state of being free from doubt".

There are no certainties in science, only approximated truths. There will always be doubt in science - that's the whole idea.

[ilk]

Originally posted by jzs

"Proof" and "evidence" are very different things, Ken. The latter is suggestive; the former is a certainty.

Well, that sure is a pretty declarative statement, but how does it square with Ken's point regarding context of usage?

[Thomas]

The evidence in this thread suggests that Jzs is full of crap. Prove me wrong.

[CFLarsen]

It should be noted, that Danish has the same word for both proof and evidence: "bevis".

So, for Danes, it's easy to be misunderstood.

[thaiboxerken]

Originally posted by jzs


You beg me to stop with "semantic garbage" yet you offer more "semantic garbage" of your own. Nice going dude! :D

"Proof" and "evidence" are very different things, Ken. The latter is suggestive; the former is a certainty. [/B]


Definition of evidence:

1. A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment: The broken window was evidence that a burglary had taken place. Scientists weigh the evidence for and against a hypothesis.
2. Something indicative; an outward sign: evidence of grief on a mourner's face.
3. Law. The documentary or oral statements and the material objects admissible as testimony in a court of law.


www.dictionary.com


Instead of trying to force Thomas to use words that you want him to use, why not let him use the word he wants? It's perfectly inline with the dictionary definitions and common definitions that people use the word for.



Thomas, jzs is a woo freakboy, so I wouldn't worry too much about his opinions.

[Thomas]

Claus, I did Google search for fun on "scientists prove" yesterday, it gave me more than 11.000 hits. All these webpages are clearly unscientific according to jzs. Try to do the same with "scientists provide evindence to suggest", and you'll get zero hits.

In the context you used "prove" (which spawned this pathetic hamster wheel), everybody clearly understood what you meant, but I'm afraid you got yourself some sort of a stalker in jzs.

Ken, it actually wasn't me who used "prove", it was claus, and bam! jzs was all over him as usual. I just told him that "proof" is synonymous to "evidence", and provied a link a to a synonym dictionary.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Thomas
I'm afraid you got yourself some sort of a stalker in jzs.

It's not the first time that happens. (shrugs)

[thaiboxerken]

Originally posted by Thomas

Ken, it actually wasn't me who used "prove", it was claus, and bam! jzs was all over him as usual. I just told him that "proof" is synonymous to "evidence", and provied a link a to a synonym dictionary.

I see that now. Yes, JZS is stalking CFL on this forum, he really doesn't like CFL and the skepticreport website. It's typical for woos to nitpick and try to make irrelevant points. Showing Jzs the dictionary and pointing out contextual usage doesn't help, because it's evidence that supports our conclusions that "proof" and "evidence" is synonymous in everyday english usage, evidence that doesn't agree with his unsane point.

Just let him alone and let him keep thinking that he's smarter than the rest of the people that speak english. Let him use his own definitions for words. Ian does it much better than JZS ever will. JZS doesn't even have an original gimmick.

[Beady]

Originally posted by Thomas
Enough of the banter, evidence is synonymous to proof (http://dico.isc.cnrs.fr/dico/en/search?b=1&r=evidence&send=Look+it+up)..

[edited for arrogant statements]

The link is to an online thesaurus, apparently written by a French-language source. A thesaurus is not a dictionary; it gives equivalent meanings, not definitions, and a non-English source for English equivalents can only be considered approximate, at best. The accepted authority on American English definitions is Merriam-Webster (http://www.m-w.com/), where we find the following:

Evidence: 1 a : an outward sign : INDICATION b : something that furnishes proof : TESTIMONY; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter

Proof: 1 a : the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact b : the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning

[Thomas]

Beady, my claim was that evidence is synonymous with proof, and it is, a thesaurus is used to justify such a claim, so quit changing the subject. My claim is correct, end of story.

You know, I spend most of my youth studying philosophy of science, and no one has ever really agreed fully on what science actually is, but why don't you tell me what science is, I would just looove to hear it from you since you really have understood it all so well.

I have a project you can do, why don't you go about correcting all the 11.000+ incorrect websites that uses the illegal phrase "scientists prove" instead of wasting your time on us idiots?

[Francois Tremblay]

Believe me, I've heard this "science can't prove anything" nonsense many times. A fellow on Paltalk tried to argue vehemently with me that Newton's law of gravity was not proven (and before you mention it, I know that Relativity is more precise - the discussion was not about that at all).

[Beady]

Originally posted by Thomas
Beady, my claim was that evidence is synonymous with proof, and it is, a thesaurus is used to justify such a claim, so quit changing the subject. My claim is correct, end of story.

Your justification is insufficient. You used a non-standard, non-English source as evidence (not proof) of English usage. A synonym is not a definition, and your context makes it clear you were claiming that 'evidence' and 'proof' are the same. They are not. Again, citing Webster (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=synonym):

Synonym: 1 : one of two or more words or expressions of the same language that have the same or nearly the same meaning in some or all senses

My emphasis. IOW, a synonym is not exact.

Claus' explanation that the two words truly are equivalent in Danish explains your misunderstanding. However, this conversation is taking place in English, and it strikes me as unreasonable that a person educated enough to converse fluently in a non-native language (an ability which I, myself, do not have) would apparently expect direct linguistic correlation. It strikes me as even more unreasonable to take it personally when someone points out your apparent misperception.

You know, I spend most of my youth studying philosophy of science, and no one has ever really agreed fully on what science actually is, but why don't you tell me what science is, I would just looove to hear it from you since you really have understood it all so well.

I have not belittled your education.* However, since you bring it up, "studying" (your word) is not necessarily learning, and I am therefore not impressed by it.

As for no one agreeing what science is, in McLean v Arkansas, 1981, a Federal judge, on the testimony of Steven Jay Gould, among others, ruled that science has five essential characteristics:

(Quoting from Shermer's Why People Believe Weird Things, Chapter 11):
1) It is guided by natural law;
2) It has to be explanatory by reference to natural law;
3) It is testable against the empiracle world;
4) Its conclusions are tentative...
5) It is falsifiable.

Do you disagree with this description?

I have a project you can do, why don't you go about correcting all the 11.000+ incorrect websites that uses the illegal phrase "scientists prove" instead of wasting your time on us idiots?

Someone here has a sig line, something to the effect that thousands of people believing an incorrect thing does not make it correct.

Is your apparent resistance to correction, based upon authorative sources, a valid scientific attitude?

Don't you think you're worth the effort?

*I deleted the to-with remark immediately after posting, because I realized it was bitchy and insulting. I regret that I apparently wasn't fast enough, and I apologize for any offense.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Beady
Claus' explanation that the two words truly are equivalent in Danish explains your misunderstanding. However, this conversation is taking place in English, and it strikes me as unreasonable that a person educated enough to converse fluently in a non-native language (an ability which I, myself, do not have) would apparently expect direct linguistic correlation.

I'll wager a guess here and say that, like me, Thomas has learned most of his English from other sources than school-books. That means that we have picked up our English on-the-fly, in a non-structured way. We may be fluent, but we're not perfect. I don't think many people will discover that we don't have English as our native language, when you read our posts, but, once in a while, we make errors. Some may be tiny, some not.

One thing is for sure: English is not easy to learn. The hardest part is the huge vocabulary. So, bear with us.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Beady
Your justification is insufficient. You used a non-standard, non-English source as evidence (not proof) of English usage. A synonym is not a definition, and your context makes it clear you were claiming that 'evidence' and 'proof' are the same. They are not. Again, citing Webster (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=synonym):

Well, here is an american thesaurus (http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=evidence), it actually defines evidence as proof.

source: Roget's New Millennium™ Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.1.1)
Main entry: Evidence
Definition: Proof


I think that pretty much clears the whole issue up once and for all.



Claus' explanation that the two words truly are equivalent in Danish explains your misunderstanding.

Don't forget it was Claus who, according to you, made the wrongdoing.


However, this conversation is taking place in English, and it strikes me as unreasonable that a person educated enough to converse fluently in a non-native language (an ability which I, myself, do not have) would apparently expect direct linguistic correlation. It strikes me as even more unreasonable to take it personally when someone points out your apparent misperception.


According to the american thesaurus it's not a misperception on my part. Since no theory is conclusive - as in absolutely adequate, I fail to see the relevance of seperating proof and evidence. So does the already mention thesaurus, in fact, both of them.


I have not belittled your education.* However, since you bring it up, "studying" (your word) is not necessarily learning, and I am therefore not impressed by it.

As for no one agreeing what science is, in McLean v Arkansas, 1981, a Federal judge, on the testimony of Steven Jay Gould, among others, ruled that science has five essential characteristics:

Do you disagree with this description?


Yes I do, it's inadequate. Look at this, for a start:

http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/Kuhn.html

Also, Popper's falsification is still undergoing heavy debates (and not among woo's).


Someone here has a sig line, something to the effect that thousands of people believing an incorrect thing does not make it correct.

Is your apparent resistance to correction, based upon authorative sources, a valid scientific attitude?


I think the links above will be adequate for now.


Don't you think you're worth the effort?

*I deleted the to-with remark immediately after posting, because I realized it was bitchy and insulting. I regret that I apparently wasn't fast enough, and I apologize for any offense.

You should be aware that the reason to why I reacted on jzs' attack on Claus, is because he's doing this on a very regular basis, all because Claus refused to publish some of his woo stuff on skepticreport.com.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Francois Tremblay
Believe me, I've heard this "science can't prove anything" nonsense many times. A fellow on Paltalk tried to argue vehemently with me that Newton's law of gravity was not proven (and before you mention it, I know that Relativity is more precise - the discussion was not about that at all).
So? I don't think anyone in this thread have said that "science can't prove anything". Why don't you have a look at this link (http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/Kuhn.html) as well.

[mayday]

Originally posted by Francois Tremblay
Believe me, I've heard this "science can't prove anything" nonsense many times. A fellow on Paltalk tried to argue vehemently with me that Newton's law of gravity was not proven (and before you mention it, I know that Relativity is more precise - the discussion was not about that at all).

Ya'll still go on Paltalk? When?

Whatever happened to Mr.Skinny?

[Throg]

Originally posted by Thomas
Well, here is an american thesaurus (http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=evidence), it actually defines evidence as proof.


I think that pretty much clears the whole issue up once and for all.


I'm sorry to butt in, Thomas but that's just not what a thesaurus does (at least it's not what an English thesaurus does). A thesaurus, as I think Beady has already pointed out, provides words which are similar in meaning to a given word in certain contexts. It does not provide definitions.

Proof and evidence are most definitely distinct concepts in English.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Throg
Proof and evidence are most definitely distinct concepts in English.
Well, then I'm seriously confused. Why do they define evidence as proof in that thesaurus then?

[Thomas]

Anyway, I guess I must bow to the force (dispite the thesaurus), because I sure would be a prick if you natives began to lecture me on the meaning of danish words..

If you would like to do so anyway, you can start with "kværulant" :)

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Thomas
Well, then I'm seriously confused. Why do they define evidence as proof in that thesaurus then?

Not "define". Equate.

Therein lies great confusion.

[Pragmatist]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
It should be noted, that Danish has the same word for both proof and evidence: "bevis".

So, for Danes, it's easy to be misunderstood.

Interesting. So I take it that the best title for a thread discussing jzs's ideas about proof/evidence would be "Bevis and Butthead"? :D

[Thomas]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Not "define". Equate.
Have you read the link? They define it as proof, and equate it with many-many other words.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Pragmatist
Interesting. So I take it that the best title for a thread discussing jzs's ideas about proof/evidence would be "Bevis and Butthead"? :D
Heh, I was just waiting for that remark, but I must disappoint you, butthead means pragmatist on danish. I just decided :)

[Aussie Thinker]

Dr A,

I too have powers like yours. I can fly vertically downwards, I can communicate with the living, and I have evidence of a species of hornless unicorn. And I can claim to have predicted things after they happened.

That is priceless.. it was worth wading through another inane Mayday thread just to read that !

Thanks !

[Beady]

Originally posted by Thomas
Well, here is an american thesaurus (http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=evidence), it actually defines evidence as proof.

Thesauruses don't give definitions, they give synonyms (and antonyms). See my earlier post.

What is this apparent aversion you have to using a dictionary? I don't understand. A thesaurus is not a dictionary; they have different purposes.

And why are you so determined to prove the unprovable? Is it ego?

...I fail to see the relevance of seperating proof and evidence.

If I give evidence that you raped an underage girl, is that proof that you did it? If I give evidence that little green men regularly visit this planet, disect our people and sexually probe our cattle, is that proof that it happens?

Yes I do, it's inadequate. Look at this, for a start:

http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/Kuhn.html

That appears to be several pages long. Why not just paste the relevant part?

You should be aware that the reason to why I reacted on jzs' attack on Claus, is because he's doing this on a very regular basis, all because Claus refused to publish some of his woo stuff on skepticreport.com.

From what I've seen over the past several months, Claus is quite capable of taking care of himself. Besides, reading ahead in this thread, several of Claus' friends also seem to think you're wrong on this matter. If this is your effect on Claus' friends, are you really doing him a favor in regard to his opponents?

[Beady]

Originally posted by Thomas
Well, then I'm seriously confused. Why do they define evidence as proof in that thesaurus then?

Thomas, do yourself a favor and forget about the thesaurus. It is not a dictionary. To attempt to use it as a dictionary is incorrect. A thesaurus is used, for example, when you want to express a specific idea, but none of the words that come to mind are adequate to convey your exact meaning.

[Cthulhu]

Originally posted by mayday
you need to go back and read some of my posts. DATED BEFORE Neil got sick.


I know I am a bit late here, but wanted to chime in:

from the CNN.com article on Mr. Young being sick, found here. (http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Music/04/01/neil.young/index.html)

Young began experiencing problems in New York nearly three weeks ago, on March 14, after he performed with The Pretenders at their induction ceremony at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Later that night, he experienced blurred vision.

Emphasis mine.


Now scanning through the boards, the first time MayDay mentions Mr. Young.....

This thread reminds me of that Neil Young song, it's a real good one...you can feel it coming down...to the wire

In a post, dated March 22. Found here. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54186&perpage=40&pagenumber=3)

That is all I have to say.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Beady
[B]Thesauruses don't give definitions, they give synonyms (and antonyms). See my earlier post.

What is this apparent aversion you have to using a dictionary? I don't understand. A thesaurus is not a dictionary; they have different purposes.

And why are you so determined to prove the unprovable? Is it ego?



If you remember what this entire debate began with, it was you charging because I said: "Evidence and proof is synonymous". That statement is still correct, but you began to twist the debate in the direction of definitions when you realized that the thesaurus' were backing my claim.

You even tried to dodge it with ridiculing the french based thesaurus, but ran back to your definition-debate when you realized that the american thesaurus held the exact same content.


If I give evidence that you raped an underage girl, is that proof that you did it? If I give evidence that little green men regularly visit this planet, disect our people and sexually probe our cattle, is that proof that it happens?


I guess not then. I stand corrected on that behalf - as I already said earlier in the thread. Actually, the next time I see someone use the term "proof" I will shout out loud: "unscientific!".


That appears to be several pages long. Why not just paste the relevant part?


Well, because it's all very relevant, and a quite small part of the mandatory curriculum when you study philosophy of science (theory of science in denmark). It's quite important, and Kuhn introduced the term paradigm, in the manner it is used in science today. This was a major missing part in your resume.


From what I've seen over the past several months, Claus is quite capable of taking care of himself. Besides, reading ahead in this thread, several of Claus' friends also seem to think you're wrong on this matter. If this is your effect on Claus' friends, are you really doing him a favor in regard to his opponents?


Oh please, I'm not looking out for Claus, we're two rather diffrent types of skeptics, in fact I have just bought www.skepticresort.com a couple of weeks ago, because I find that Claus' site isn't sarcastic enough.
Also, as I stated in the post which ignited this debate, I was trying to make sure the thread wouldn't become another hamster wheel for Claus and jzs. However, the result was that you and I became the hamsters. What can you learn from that?

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
No, it isn't.

Evidence is not a certainty. Certainty means "a state of being free from doubt".


No kidding.

I said

"Proof" and "evidence" are very different things, Ken. The latter is suggestive; the former is a certainty. "


The "latter" being suggestive means that evidence is suggestive. The "former" being a certainty means that proof is a certainty.

Now about those reading comprehension skills...

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Beady
Thomas, do yourself a favor and forget about the thesaurus. It is not a dictionary.
Listen now, we were debating if the terms were synonymous, not if they held the same definition for crying out loud! Show me where I have stated that they hold the same definition or quit that nonsense.

I say: "the terms are synonymous."

you say: "the terms don't hold the same definition, so you're wrong"

That's a strawman my friend.

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
Definition of evidence:


You can post definitions until you're blue in the face and I'm sure you will... but proof and evidence are very different things.. not the same at all.


The broken window was evidence that a burglary had taken place.


Yes, exactly. It is suggestive. It is not proof that a burglary had taken place. Perhaps the own home owner broke in because they were locked out and didn't want to call a locksmith? Perhaps a rock got kicked up from a car speeding by? Perhaps a baseball flew through the window? etc.

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by Thomas
Claus, I did Google search for fun on "scientists prove" yesterday, it gave me more than 11.000 hits. All these webpages are clearly unscientific according to jzs. Try to do the same with "scientists provide evindence to suggest", and you'll get zero hits.


Try Goolgleing for

"science proof"

vs.

"science evidence"


but I'm afraid you got yourself some sort of a stalker in jzs.


Ad hom all you want, but proof is not evidence as was claimed.

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by thaiboxerken
Yes, JZS is stalking CFL on this forum,


You can use whatever words you like. I'm sure you could actually provide evidence though, and tell us if I have more posts to or about him, or if he has more posts to or about me?


because it's evidence that supports our conclusions that "proof" and "evidence" is synonymous in everyday english usage,


"everyday use" is one thing. Scientifically, however, the use is as different as night and day.

The rest of your post was just ad hom, so it was ignored.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by jzs

Ad hom all you want, but proof is not evidence as was claimed.
It's not ad hom, you're stalking him.

Furthermore, I never claimed they were the same by definition, but I claimed they were synonymous. You can burn that strawman now.

[Beady]

Originally posted by Thomas
Listen now, we were debating if the terms were synonymous, not if they held the same definition for crying out loud! Show me where I have stated that they hold the same definition or quit that nonsense.
jzs:
you mean "provide evidence", not proof. Science talks about evidence.

You:
Evidence is synonymous to proof.
If, in context, you were not claiming proof and evidence to be the same, precisely what was your point in taking issue with jzs' statement?

[Beady]

Originally posted by Thomas
That's a strawman my friend.

Just out of curiosity, are we friends, or are you trying to be patronizing?

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Beady
If, in context, you were not claiming proof and evidence to be the same, precisely what was your point in taking issue with jzs' statement?
That I found it to be irrelevant in the context Claus used the term.

To me it looked like nothing more another stalking attempt from jzs. Remember the title of this thread, in this regard.

[Beady]

Originally posted by Thomas
That I found it to be irrelevant in the context Claus used the term.

And...?

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Beady
Just out of curiosity, are we friends, or are you trying to be patronizing?
Hehe, let's just say we're friends. You can bring the strawman to the party as well :)

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by Thomas
It's not ad hom, you're stalking him.


I'm sure you could actually provide evidence though, and tell us if I have more posts to or about him, or if he has more posts to or about me?

Please, spare us your emotional evidence-less accusations.


Furthermore, I never claimed they were the same by definition, but I claimed they were synonymous. You can burn that strawman now.

:rolleyes:

A synonym is a word that means that same as another. By saying A and B are synonyms, you are saying they mean the same thing. But proof and evidence do not mean the same thing.

Take the broken window example. It may be evidence of a break in, but the broken window itself is not proof. For example, the glass shards could be on the outside, not on the inside... or a baseball could have been hit into it by accident, etc.

[Beady]

Originally posted by jzs
A synonym is a word that means that same as another.

A synonym is, more properly, a word that means nearly the same as another. That's the whole crux of this sub-thread.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Beady
And...?
Could you elaborate that question, I would say it seems to be slightly insufficient for me to answer it.

[Throg]

Originally posted by jzs


I'm sure you could actually provide evidence though, and tell us if I have more posts to or about him, or if he has more posts to or about me?

Please, spare us your emotional evidence-less accusations.



:rolleyes:

A synonym is a word that means that same as another. By saying A and B are synonyms, you are saying they mean the same thing. But proof and evidence do not mean the same thing.
[/B]

To be fair to Thomas I think he is a victim of the rather loose way in which Thesauri use the word synonym. They really stretch the defintion from "the same or nearly the same" to "quite similar".

As has been pointed out several times, Thesauri do not provide definitions, it was never their intended purpose. That is what dictionaries are for.



Originally posted by Thomas

Have you read the link? They define it as proof, and equate it with many-many other words
[/B]

Thomas, you have made a completely understandable mistake regarding the use of Thesauri. For examples of the differernce in purpose between the two look up "synonym" in a dictionary. Now look up "definition" in both a dictionary (which does provide definitions) and in a thesaurus (which provides sysnonyms and pseudo-synonyms). Compare the two.

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by Beady
A synonym is, more properly, a word that means nearly the same as another. That's the whole crux of this sub-thread.

The same or nearly as same I suppose.

Either way, asking for proof is wrong if you want to approach things from a scientific viewpoint, since science goes on evidence, not proof.

If you aren't interested in science, then by all means, ask for "proof".

[Beady]

Originally posted by Thomas
Could you elaborate that question, I would say it seems to be slightly insufficient for me to answer it.

Was the point you were trying to make worth it? Did you, in fact, make it?

Also, you said, "Remember the title of this thread, in this regard." Seems to me that the OP, in naming the thread, had a problem with the difference between "proof" and "evidence." That jzs was commenting on the problem, and making a correct statment in doing so, only makes more obscure your purpose in taking issue with him.

Just to clear things up, do you understand the difference, in the English language, between "proof" and "evidence?"

And, while I'm at it, do you understand the difference, again in the English language, the difference between a thesaurus and a dictionary?

I aplogize if any of this sounds patronizing but, quite frankly, I can't tell whether you do.

BTW, we appear to have been conversing in almost real-time. I have to go shopping with the wife, so 'm now signing off.

[Beady]

Originally posted by Throg
Thomas, you have made a completely understandable mistake regarding the use of Thesauri. For examples of the differernce in purpose between the two look up "synonym" in a dictionary. Now look up "definition" in both a dictionary (which does provide definitions) and in a thesaurus (which provides sysnonyms and pseudo-synonyms). Compare the two.

I've got time for one more post:

The difference between a definition and a synonym is similar to the difference between my geographic location as expressed under my avatar, and my saying that I live in northwest Vermont. Both are accurate statements, but the long-lat under my avatar is far more precise (Thomas would find the long-lat far more useful for shutting me up, for example). Similarly, a dictionary gives a precise meaning, while a thesaurus gives an approximate meaning.

[Thomas]

Originally posted by Beady
[B]Was the point you were trying to make worth it? Did you, in fact, make it?


Also, you said, "Remember the title of this thread, in this regard." Seems to me that the OP, in naming the thread, had a problem with the difference between "proof" and "evidence." That jzs was commenting on the problem, and making a correct statment in doing so, only makes more obscure your purpose in taking issue with him.


It was irrelevant alright. If you were to examine the words used in every single thread title, as being scientific or not, you would become quite busy. At this point I do concur that "prove" shouldn't be used in the lab though.


Just to clear things up, do you understand the difference, in the English language, between "proof" and "evidence?"


proof (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=proof)

evidence (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=evidence)


And, while I'm at it, do you understand the difference, again in the English language, the difference between a thesaurus and a dictionary?

I aplogize if any of this sounds patronizing but, quite frankly, I can't tell whether you do.


You're right, that's quite patronizing, but I'm gonna answer it anyway (just for the fun of it):

thesaurus (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=thesaurus)

Uhm.. What's a dictionary?

[edited for patronizing statements]

[H'ethetheth]

What wat this thread about again?

:xlipseal:xlipseal:k:

[Thomas]

Originally posted by H'ethetheth
What wat this thread about again?


I think it's a thread where you're supposed to agree with everything Beady and Mayday says, but I don't think I understand this game. Silly me.


:xlipseal:xlipseal:k:


The black knight always triumphs.

[Thomas]

Now that Elvis and Elvis has left the building, maybe we can get back on topic (for a while at least).

Mayday,

Have you decided wether you want to post your "obsessions" here, at blogger.com or somewhere else where we can verify it?

[Gr8wight]

Originally posted by mayday
I have an idea....how do you start a BLOG?


Blog (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=blog&btnG=Google+Search)

Why do people insist on asking questions they could have the answer to in less time than it takes to type the question?

[Beady]

Originally posted by Thomas
I think it's a thread where you're supposed to agree with everything Beady and Mayday says, but I don't think I understand this game.

It's obvious that you don't understand. It also appears obvious that it's intentional.

[Thomas]

Oh, it's you again..

You know, we were actually about to have mayday writing down her psychic hunches in a blog (to verify/falsify her claims), when you and jzs came barging into the middle of the conversation like ill-mannered children - making a commotion out of irrelevant issues.

Now, do you have anything to say with reference to the topic of this thread?

[Minkster]

I went through a large portion of my life believing that I had two premonitions - one, of a girlfriend who I discovered was cheating with a specific person that I had dreamt about the night before and another where I randomly thought of someone I hadn't seen for a number of years and then ran into them literally hours later in a completely different part of the country to where I would expect to see them.

The first could easily be put down to 'gut feelings' due to her behaviour or comments perhaps made about the chap in question (which I may not have seen as significant at the time), the second is far less easy to explain but it was surely just pure co-incidence and whilst it was a different part of the country, I was at an age where we would have moved in similar circles where-ever we were (it was a nightclub by the way).

The point is, its easy to interpret things as premonitions whereas the truth is far more mundane than that. Perhaps you heard a news story about Neil Young but didn't pay any attention, this maybe jogged you into listening to his music, linking what is said in a thread to one of his songs and getting you into an obsessive state about him. I often obsess about music or TV shows to the point where I maybe won't listen to anything else for a while or I buy all DVDs/CDs I can of that artist/show for a while. It doesn't mean anything....I've just found a connection with something, thats all.

And as for blog sites, I wouldn't recommend them mayday simply because they are essentially normal websites and therefore can be edited after the fact to change dates or details. Any 'evidence' on there would be disregarded immediately because of it. Why not agree to have a thread somewhere on the JREF forums where you will post everything you obsess about or dream about (without too many details obviously) and that no-one else will post in? Keep this up for (say) a month and see how many specific events have come true. If nothing else, it may help to demonstrate to you how many 'misses' there are....

[mayday]

Originally posted by Minkster
And as for blog sites, I wouldn't recommend them mayday simply because they are essentially normal websites and therefore can be edited after the fact to change dates or details. Any 'evidence' on there would be disregarded immediately because of it. Why not agree to have a thread somewhere on the JREF forums where you will post everything you obsess about or dream about (without too many details obviously) and that no-one else will post in? Keep this up for (say) a month and see how many specific events have come true. If nothing else, it may help to demonstrate to you how many 'misses' there are....

Then I will have my blog on here, and I will quote myself down the page so the quote will be there and I can't change it.
Only thing is, it takes time, sometimes months.
But if no one has any objection I will start a thread just for that purpose and write in it everyday. Then when something happens I will be able to have the last laugh.
maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but one day. Maybe I'll get that prize yet.

[Ashles]

Originally posted by mayday
Then I will have my blog on here, and I will quote myself down the page so the quote will be there and I can't change it.
Only thing is, it takes time, sometimes months.
But if no one has any objection I will start a thread just for that purpose and write in it everyday. Then when something happens I will be able to have the last laugh.
maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but one day. Maybe I'll get that prize yet.
So just to confirm, you will repeatedly make guesses on these forums, then if one ever comes true you will claim psychic success?

See my amazing predictions (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50909) at the bottom of the first post in this thread.

Think you can match those?

[Throg]

Originally posted by mayday
Then I will have my blog on here, and I will quote myself down the page so the quote will be there and I can't change it.
Only thing is, it takes time, sometimes months.
But if no one has any objection I will start a thread just for that purpose and write in it everyday. Then when something happens I will be able to have the last laugh.
maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but one day. Maybe I'll get that prize yet.

Sounds like a good idea. Could you try to be as precise and detailed as possible with your descriptions of your premonitions, feelings etc. Rather than, for example, writing "I thought about a particular singer", tell us whether you "saw" his name, or saw a picture of him in your head - and if you saw a picture describe as much as you can about the picture. Every detail might conceivably be relevant.

[Cthulhu]

I love it.

I am going to think about something/someone. And when something happens to that something/someone, it will prove that I am right. No matter HOW long away it happens after I think about it.

ooo..I want to play.....

I am thinking about baseball right now. I say someone is going to win the World Series this year.

/waits until October.

[Blondin]

I wonder how many Neil Young fans bought the same CD as Mayday the same week and had Neil Young on their minds just before they heard the news about him going into hospital.

I'm willing to consider the evidence that you have supernormal powers but I haven't seen any yet. Are you willing to consider that maybe it was just a coincidence?

[joesixpack]

I had ben thinking a lot about Susannah McCorkle for a few weeks before I heard about her suicide. Does that make me psychic?

No.

What would be weird is if NO ONE was thinking about a specific public figure in the days or weeks prior to them dying or showing up in the news for one reason or another.

[mayday]

Originally posted by Blondin
I wonder how many Neil Young fans bought the same CD as Mayday the same week and had Neil Young on their minds just before they heard the news about him going into hospital.

I'm willing to consider the evidence that you have supernormal powers but I haven't seen any yet. Are you willing to consider that maybe it was just a coincidence?

Yes, I am. But considering my other experiences I highly doubt it.

Also, those of you who try to use pointed situations to try to prove your point need to give it up, because that is lame, lame, lame!!!

[mayday]

Maybe I should mark *this* in my little book...

I was sitting here about an hour ago, looking at the same old boring sites for nurses, feeling so fat and ugly and wishing I could go ahead and die as I couldn't bear to think of living like this much longer, when I get a phone call from this guy at Trimspa.

I entered a contest a couple of months ago to see who could make the most dramatic change using Trimspa's products. Well, after trying the Trimspa thing about a day, I get depressed and start eating, so I forgot about the contest. He asks me how I'm coming along. "Not too well", I tell him. "Did you get the congratulations letter?" he asks.
"Yea", I mumbled
He tells me not to get discouraged, he wanted to let me know that out of over 10,000 people who entered the contest, I was one of the few they chose to actually compete and that they think I show the promise of being able to convey the image they want to convey for their product...So I get off the phone and am all excited and think it's time to get to hoofing it, maybe I *do* still have half a chance and I run down the road and back and fell in a pot hole and nearly busted my kneecap in two...but I'm motivated again!

If I win that car and that money I'll be sure to post a picture on here!

Just wanted to share!

[Garrette]

It be a skillful troll.

[Ashles]

:con2:

[mayday]

Originally posted by Garrette
It be a skillful troll.

Hey, you jerk, I can post my letter on here if it be requested.
Maybe you're sour grapes because you didn't enter the contest?

[mayday]

BTW, if I can stick with my diet this time, I predict I will at least place in the contest.

[CurtC]

I just looked into this thread, without reading it all. Has anyone determined whether mayday is BigFig?

[mayday]

Originally posted by CurtC
I just looked into this thread, without reading it all. Has anyone determined whether mayday is BigFig?

LOL. Curt, that has been out in the open for awhile now. I was having trouble signing in as bigfig so I changed my name and reregistered.

How in the world have you been?

[Garrette]

Mayday has admitted to being Bigfig. I think Crimresearch was the first to guess it.

---

Originally posted by Maytroll:

Hey, you jerk, I can post my letter on here if it be requested.

Aye and aargh, matey. You right surely can if it be...


Originally posted by Trollday:

Maybe you're sour grapes because you didn't enter the contest?

That's the thing, though. See, I was going to enter the contest because even though I don't really need to lose any weight (I was voted Regional Cute Buns last fall I can show you the plaque if you want or maybe post a picture if someone will show me how--anyway it's not really legitimate anymore because it was before the holidays but I've been working out so I think I still deserve it) but it sounded like a good way to meet friends and stop being depressed over the cat I accidentally killed last month when I was trying to level the sights on my pellet gun but it was a sort of pesky cat anyway and I think the neighbors really appreciated it being got rid of but that doesn't mean I didn't cry about it.

So I had the materials all ready to mail but no one was around to lick the stamps for me and I can't do it because of that incident with the priest WHO I TOTALLY FORGAVE and it really helped me--you should ask Stevie Nicks because we have been helping each other through some tough times--but I though if I left it on the porch during the rain it would get wet enough for me to apply but then I forgot about when I went to work which is an awesome job except it's boring and pays extremely well but not enough.

So there I was at work watering the parakeets when someone laughed at me because I had a stamp on the bottom of my shoe but I though she was laughing because I need to lose weight WHICH I CERTAINLY DO NOT.

But at least they postponed the hearing.

And oh yeah: I hear deaf people.

[EHocking]

Originally posted by Garrette
It be a skillful troll. Not wrong. Considering the Competition rules (http://www.trimspa.com/mdm/rules.html) state that the submission period ends on the 9th April and the judging doesn't start until the 17th...

[Garrette]

Originally posted by EHocking:

Not wrong. Considering the Competition rules state that the submission period ends on the 9th April and the judging doesn't start until the 17th...


Wow, MayTroll! You really must have PSI powers.

Can't wait to hear the explanation for this.

[mayday]

Originally posted by Garrette
Wow, MayTroll! You really must have PSI powers.

Can't wait to hear the explanation for this.

Explain what???

Explain this?....http://www.geocities.com/artraveller/contest.html

[mayday]

Originally posted by EHocking
Not wrong. Considering the Competition rules (http://www.trimspa.com/mdm/rules.html) state that the submission period ends on the 9th April and the judging doesn't start until the 17th...

This is what the guy told me...they got over 10,000 entries and I was one of a FEW they were going to choose....take it how you want it. It's no skin off my nose, you *little* person.

[Garrette]

I invite all those who are still actively engaging Maytroll in conversation to look first at EHocking's link and then at May's last link.

Corner. Painted. Stuck.

Troll.

[mayday]

Originally posted by Garrette
I invite all those who are still actively engaging Maytroll in conversation to look first at EHocking's link and then at May's last link.

Corner. Painted. Stuck.

Troll.

What the hell are you talking about, you lowlife loser?

[EHocking]

Originally posted by mayday
This is what the guy told me...they got over 10,000 entries and I was one of a FEW they were going to choose....take it how you want it.You've never heard of a form letter? All this shows is that your "before" entry has been received. Here's a hint for free. Don't believe that the first letter you get from Reader's Digest is a guarantee of $1m. It's no skin off my nose, you *little* person. [/B]You don't think that an ad hominem attack of *little* person may be a touch imprudent, considering the topic?

In boxing it's called leading with your chin - and I'm not so inclined...

[thaiboxerken]

Bigfig feels fat. Contest person calls bigfig about a dieting contest. Bigfig feels encouraged to try again, and also feels like this validates her belief that she has superpowers.

Interesting.

[Ashles]

Is anyone here old enough to remember when Mayday used to make psychic claims?

I realise that most of you have settled down, raised families and look forward to a restful dotage, but I dimly remember a time when Maytroll claimed to be able to do, well, paranormal stuff.

Will s/he ever come clean?

[Red Siegfried]

The title of the thread was all I needed to read. (sigh)

Hey, Mayday, why don't you post some porn so the admins are FORCED to ban you? Or tell us how you really feel about Randi? Have you had any dreams about him doing something ... you know .. illegal? That would be cool. Because then we can ban you for libel.

C'mon, I dare you. Think about it, if you got banned, you could REALLY tell everyone how biased we are on this board and you'd be RIGHT! Really!! Then you can create another two or three sock puppets and carry on!

Admins, do you think we have enough here to justify ridding the boards of this troll? Please? I come here to debate and read things that will provoke thoughtful contemplation. In my opinion Mayday has proven repeatedly that "she" is not interested in either.

I really hate to put people on ignore on the off chance that they have something thoughtful, interesting or ... I don't know .. relevant to say. But on the other hand I may have to rethink that policy based on what I have have "divulged in my previous utterances."

[Red Siegfried]

Ever read Freerepublic.com? It's a conservative "news" site, but that's not my point. They have a long tradition of "zotting" trolls, that is, after giving the viking kittens some time to play with them.

Lurk there for about five minutes and you'll see what I mean.

[Red Siegfried]

Anyone like cheese? I like cheese. Especially that co-jack stuff, colby and monterey jack mixed together.

[Red Siegfried]

I like the Wizard of Oz.

I like the Tin Man.

Okay, I think I made my point. Pardon my spam, spam, spam, spam, spam spam, spam, etc.

[mayday]

I dare someone to call Trimspa and ask #1, how can a person be accepted as a contestant if there are only a certain number of people they will take and the cut off for entries isn't until April 19?

Ask them how many people applied.

Ask them how many people they allow in the contest.

Why don't you call them and ask? Or are things as I suspect, you people just like to sit on your asses and run your pie holes? (as usual)

Number is right there on the site. You were resourceful enough to find the site, be resourceful to get off your ass and get some information, before you go slamming people for something you know nothing about.

[P.S.A.]

Number is right there on the site. You were resourceful enough to find the site, be resourceful to get off your ass and get some information, before you go slamming people for something you know nothing about.

I think all the posters here know enough about you to realise that someone who denies she's BigFig for weeks, and then finally admits that, surprise surprise, she's was spotted correctly all along, really isn't worth paying attention to a second time... Still, if you want to keep on playing this silly game of desperate attention seeking, why don't you prove your first name really is "Jennifer" for a start? Or indeed, show us the entire letter, in a high resolution image, so we can read clearly all it says...? You see, you've told us nothing at all which proves your claims so far... so why not educate us if you care so much about what we think, hmmm?

And that's the point where you pout that you don't care what we think, and then we all laugh at you for not being able to prove anything. And then, if I recall correctly, you threaten us all at the next TAM, yes? Or something equally violent and imbalanced. So what are you waiting for...? Off you go; time to catch the woo woo train...

[Gr8wight]

Originally posted by mayday
This is what the guy told me...they got over 10,000 entries and I was one of a FEW they were going to choose....take it how you want it. It's no skin off my nose, you *little* person.


My poem has been awarded the prestigious Editor's Choice Award because it displays a unique perspective and original creativity -- judged to be the qualities most found in exceptional poetry. It has already been published in a handsome hardbound edition, which I can have a copy of for only $49.95 plus $11.00 shipping and handling. As well, I can have my poem mounted on a beautiful walnut-finish plaque under lexan for a mere $34.00 plus $11.00 shipping and handling. And that's not all! My poem is so distinctive it has been considered for inclusion in a unique three CD album of spoken poetry read by professional poetry readers that can impart to it the dignity and gravitas it so richly deserves. The three CD set can be delivered to my door for a mere $49.00 plus $11.00 shipping and handling.

[Dr Adequate]

That ... was ... really ... odd.

I declare this thread collapsed. It will now be shredded, recycled into its individual letters, and reconstituted as something useful.

[mayday]

Just as I suspected, no one willing to put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. Just a bunch of sarcastic, cynical losers who melt away when it comes down to actually DOING something.

Yes, I got a "form" letter, albeit a form letter sent out only to certain people. Most who sent in applications did not even get a letter, as the contest rules specifically state not to expect acknowledgement. Yet I got at least as far as acknowledgement with a "form" letter AND a phone call. And I am happy about that.

It used to make me angry. Now I just pity you. If it weren't for the PM's of encouragement I wouldn't even bother to hang around here with such negative people, all you do is try to bring others down. You'uns are just some real miserable little weazles.

[Jeff Corey]

Weasels? We don't got no weasels.
We don't got no steenkin' badgers, neither.

[Dr Adequate]

Er, mayday, when I made that last post, I was and I wasn't joking. I have no idea what you're talking about. What's this stuff about a "form letter"? What's this stuff about "putting my money where my mouth is"? Or dong so "so to speak", as you put it? I've looked through the previous posts, and I really can't work out what you're talking about, or, for some posts back, what anyone else is talking about. The thread has gone into meltdown.

I did find this : ... wishing I could go ahead and die as I couldn't bear to think of living like this much longer ... I'm sorry you're in trouble. That won't make me agree with you about The Strange Mysteries Of The Unseen, of course, but that's just an argument. Be strong --- and, if possible, make sense.

[Gr8wight]

Originally posted by mayday
Just as I suspected, no one willing to put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. Just a bunch of sarcastic, cynical losers who melt away when it comes down to actually DOING something.

We are all here because of one man who has put his money where his mouth is. Oh, and speaking of that, have you sent in your application yet, Mayday? Didn't think so. Will you be actually DOING something, or are you still all talk?

Yes, I got a "form" letter, albeit a form letter sent out only to certain people. Most who sent in applications did not even get a letter, as the contest rules specifically state not to expect acknowledgement. Yet I got at least as far as acknowledgement with a "form" letter AND a phone call. And I am happy about that.

Does this Trimspa organisation by any chance sell a product? Are you by any chance now more motivated to buy more of their product? Do you honestly believe that they sent out any less than 10,000 letters? Of course you do. You have consistently shown you will believe anything.

It used to make me angry. Now I just pity you. If it weren't for the PM's of encouragement I wouldn't even bother to hang around here with such negative people, all you do is try to bring others down. You'uns are just some real miserable little weazles.

Uh huh. There you have it, people. If you would only stop sending those blasted PMs, she might go away.

[mayday]

Dammit, Dr. Adequate! I was just trying to share a situation and it got blown out of proportion. In February, I entered a contest with Trimspa to see who could make the most dramatic change in appearance using Trimspa (I've gained quite a bit of weight the last couple of years, and I mean Orca fat). I had to take pictures of myself in a two piece suit holding a national paper so they could verify when the picture was taken. Anyway, I tried the plan for a day or two and then got discouraged and fell of the wagon. I didn't think I stood a chance of winning anyway (the prize is $100,000, a Dodge Viper, a vacation, and a few other things).
March 15 I got a letter from Trimspa saying congratulations. I didn't pay much attention to it. I was like, whoopie doo because I figured just about everyone would at least get a letter. So I put it in the cabinet and forgot about it. Yesterday I was sitting here at the computer, in a blue funk, feeling fat and horrible and useless, thinking that I would not want to live to be 60, not even 50 or 40, because what was the point? Well, I was surfing the same old boring sites and dreading waking up the next day when I get a phone call from this cheery sounding guy from Trimspa. He wanted to know how I was doing with my plan and I told him not too good and he told me not to get discouraged, because there were more than 10,000 applicants and they were only choosing a few, and I should feel good about at least making it that far. So I get all excited and start running around. I have started a very strict exercise plan and I am going to give these last 5 weeks a shot and see what I can get accomplished (they assured me they weren't looking for the "thinnest", but the one who made the most significant change.) Well, what have I got to lose? I'll give it another whirl. I even went and signed up for a tanning bed and burned my ass up in it today, I itch all over. I'm going to go to a spa and get workover, get rid of some of this facial hair. Get my hair done. I am actually feeling good and optimistic and I want to share it. So I come on here to share.
Then, here come the troops. Like those flying monkeys in the Wizard of Oz. Like vultures, who have come to eat up the optimism and good vibes. Swallow them up. tell me I'm lying. So I tell them to put their money where their mouth is and call Trimspa up. No surprise. They won't do it. Basically, I am talking to these jokers. I also think it is odd that they come on here and whine and complain because I come to this board and they wish I would get banned or go away. It is odd because there are certain posters here I have absoluetly NO use for. How do I deal with them? I don't read their posts! How hard can it be?!?!?!?

[P.S.A.]

Ok Bigfig, listen carefully... I'm going to explain this to you step by step to show you where you have fallen prey to an obvious marketting ploy. The fact that you've chosen to not only believe in a blatant scam, but convinced yourself of pyschic powers too is precisely why you are unhappy... the things that make you happy aren't real, so how do you expect anyone else to believe in them?.

Observe.

1.) You state this:

In February, I entered a contest with Trimspa to see who could make the most dramatic change in appearance using Trimspa.

Simple, yes? You entered the competition. Then you state that this occured next;

2.)

Anyway, I tried the plan for a day or two and then got discouraged and fell of the wagon.

So you did not follow the diet plan. Understood? You didn't follow it. You also stated this;

3.)

(I've gained quite a bit of weight the last couple of years, and I mean Orca fat)

THIS IS IMPORTANT. Not because of any snide comments about your weight, but because it shows that, rather than lose weight which the competition is about, you've gained it. At least, in your eyes. But what does the Trimspa company itself know? You then state this;

4.)

Well, I was surfing the same old boring sites and dreading waking up the next day when I get a phone call from this cheery sounding guy from Trimspa. He wanted to know how I was doing with my plan and I told him not too good

Read that again and again and again BigFig. You TOLD them you weren't doing well. THIS IS ALL THEY KNOW ABOUT YOUR WEIGHT AT PRESENT, that you think you've gained it.

Ask yourself this seriously now; why would they choose people who were failing the competition? And there's another extremely strong clue this is dodgy;

5.)

March 15 I got a letter from Trimspa saying congratulations. I didn't pay much attention to it.

Can you see what's really wrong with this? YOU GOT THE LETTER BEFORE YOU EVEN TOLD THEM HOW YOU WERE DOING ON THE TELEPHONE. At the point they sent the letter, they didn't even have a clue whether you were losing weight at all, but they supposedly accepted you into the competition.

Look, the facts are simple; you submit the original application form, but nothing else, as you give up dieting after 2 days. Trimspa then writes to you telling you how impressed they are with the dieting they have no new information about at all, and which you haven't actually done... and then they call you too to encourage you. Why?

Because it's a scam, BigFig. Do you want proof? It's very simple to find...

6.) Do a google search for "Trimspa Scam".

Trimspa is being prosecuted by the New Jersey Attourney General for another scam, unsurprisingly... It's the very first link you'll see, but there are more.

This present competition appears to be nothing more than a public relations exercise designed to remove the negative press they are getting for the last. THEY KNOW NOTHING ABOUT YOU BIGFIG AND NOR DO THEY CARE TOO. It's just a way of making lonely, self hating people like you think Trimspa loves them... and therefore buy lots of their products... When the person who should be loving you is yourself.

I also think it is odd that they come on here and whine and complain because I come to this board and they wish I would get banned or go away. It is odd because there are certain posters here I have absoluetly NO use for. How do I deal with them? I don't read their posts! How hard can it be?!?!?!?

People here don't want to take away your joy BigFig. But you are setting youself up to ruin your own joy, time and time and time again... You come to a skeptical board, and then you make claims which you can't back up. And then you make stupid, stupid mistakes like believing in Trimspa and tying that to pyschic powers, when a scientificly researched diet would genuinely lose you weight, and a scientifical approach to the supernormal would be far more accurate and honest. But you refuse to follow these paths, and insult anyone who tells you you would have better success abandoning your misconceptions. Misconceptions which eventually make you miserable again. BUT YOU ARE DOING IT TO YOURSELF.

People will not believe in powers you don't have. They won't be sympathetic when they warn you you are being taken for a ride, and then you insist that you aren't being and are going on the ride anyway... and then end up miserable when you discover what a mistake it was all the same. YOU HAVE TO HELP YOURSELF BECAUSE NO ONE WANTS TO SHARE IN YOUR MISERY. Love yourself, and honestly do so, and people will honestly be more sympathetic towards you...

But Trimspa doesn't give a flying monkey poo for you personally... Apart from your original submission, they neither know nor care about what you look like now. ITS A SCAM. AND NO ONE HERE IS GOING TO CHEER YOU ON IN GETTING SCAMMED.

For your own sake BigFig, try and see some sense. They just want to find a few people to advertise their products with, and get the rest of you hooked on their stuff... that's all.

[P.S.A.]

Further proof Trimspa isn't a responsible company?

1.) 4.6.04 - The FDA has ordered 16 companies to stop making false and misleading claims for weight-loss products promoted online. Many of these products are falsely claimed to block starch, carbohydrates and fat calories while allowing consumers to lose weight without any lifestyle changes. The products included: ... TrimSpa Carb Blocker, TrimSpa Fat Blocker,...

http://quinnell.us/natural/skepticism/dontaltmed2.html

2.) NEW YORK--TrimSpa is facing a second class action lawsuit alleging the company's TrimSpa Completely Ephedra Free (EF) does not contain the labeled appetite suppressant and practiced false and misleading adverti