SCEPCOP Forum

Why are skeptics interested in the paranormal here, if it's all bunk to them?

I don't get it.

I mean, I consider Amway, MLM and religious fundamentalism to be bunk. But I would not spend time reading about them or participating in forums about them, cause I've made up my mind. I'd simply post a few links or my articles debunking them and leave. It'd be a waste of time to me to even debate about them. It simply wouldn't be worth the opportunity cost. I'd rather learn and discuss about something that's more interesting and real to me, like history and culture for instance.

So why would skeptics repeatedly discuss the paranormal in forums like this, if it's all false and bunk? If I were them, I sure wouldn't.

Any explanations?

I'm with you Scepcop. If I don't believe in something I sure don't waste my time looking for those topics and arguing the point.

then youll never learn
i am an atheist, yet i love to read about religion and teology

talking about the paranormal
i do wanna believe there is something more, it is exciting to talk about the mothman and pk
but then.. you see that is only stories and no proof
and that believers standards are way lower, sometimes even kindergarden level

lets see....
Highflyertoo was a guy whose name i know
this guy was in a psychiatric institution,
he was a believer (in all the sense of the word, telepathy, pk, christian, messiah and anti-randi)

and he believed that he teleported stuff in his dreams because he left stuff out of his house and then when he wake up the stuff was inside.. is that kindergarden level or not?
is the same as if ¨when i close my eyes, the world doesnt exists¨

is that kindergarden level or not?
i still dont know why you want to be offended by why i say
it is just an opinion which i am entitled and i just mentioned an example in which i am right or am i not?
i didnt say ALL BELIEVERS have kindergarden level, i said sometimes the standards are lower

so we had a guy diagnosted with Schizophrenia
will you admit that his standards were kindergarden level? or is that still insulting?
you wont admit it, would you ?

A good question, and a fair one. I can see where this would be a mystery to some people.

I can only speak for myself, of course, but the answer in my case is very simple.

I love the paranormal.

That's all there is to it. I grew up in a house of believers, and was a believer myself. I read and watched every thing I could about the subject. Even after I came to my current understanding of things, I never lost my enthusiasm or delight at the possibilities that paranormal subjects offer.

Far from ruining it for me, my skepticism offers me a new way to enjoy my favorite topic.

You see, for me skepticism and critical thinking is about much more than the paranprmal. I utilize my critical thinking skills in almost every aspect of my life. They inform my choices and have always served me well. I use them in my work, when making a major purchase, and when pursuing my other hobbies, the study of history. I enjoy geting to use and improve my skills, and the paranormal is another way to do it.

I also hope to meet some interesting people and have some good conversations.

While I am on the subject, I would like to list a couple things I do not come to paranormal forums for:


I don't come to fight.
I don't come to ridicule.
I don't come to judge others.
I don't come to make people see things my way.
I don't come to build myself up by tearing someone else down.

Sincerely, Canis

Craig Browning,
Those are excellent points and right on the money. You certainly tell it like it is and expose the folly of the paranormal hating skeptics, who have no criticism of pharmaceutical drugs.

They are worshippers of power and establishment.

So why is Sylvia Browne so successful? Is it cause she is more accurate than other psychics? She seems like an ordinary person.

Skeptics, what about psychics who don't even charge any money for readings, and want no publicity? Are they con artists too?

The pseudo-skeptics I have had debates with tend to not want to know facts, scientific or otherwise. They also tend to not want to understand me or see me as a person. They twist my words, avoid answering questions when they feel cornered, omit facts, etc. All in all, my experiences of arguing with pseudo-skeptics has been the same as arguing with fanatical, religious fundamentalists. It has been my experience that they take up the challenge of debating the paranormal because they have fallen into the clutches of some fanatical group or they idolize some professor somewhere who told them that this was all bunk and therefore they need to spread the word and convert the heathens. They have been saved, they are awakened, they are educated (even if they can't spell or string two sentences together), they alone depend on science for information, and armed with egotistical and fanatical view, they venture out into the world looking for targets to convert or educate or save.

Been there, done that myself. I have been on both sides of this, I've been the arrogant jerk and the victim of arrogant jerks. I try to not engage in this behaviour anymore, not always successfully, but I try to be aware of it. Most often though, I present them with scientific statistics and its amazing how quickly the thread comes to an end and pseudo-skeptics disappear.