In the beginning they probably had people who knew what they were doing running things (or at least in the position of advisor closely listened to) but overtime I suspect they’ve lost them and so became easy prey for the crap peddlers.

Just so you all know.

I don’t remember who said it, I think it might have been Jerry Seinfeld, and excuse me if I butcher this quote, but there is someone famous who once said “When I got my first real stalker, that was when I realized I had finally made it to the big time.”

A little tongue-in-cheek, by the way. It looks like you’ve upset someone else who is making it their mission to tell everyone how bad you are for insulting the great spirits and demons of the world.

        pzdum@er.net said:

VAGUE, eh?

Yes extremely vague. Just a jumble of words and abstract BS that could mean almost anything. Vague as vague could be.

BTW, to everyone else, this is a real person, not a joke. This individual is some guy who apparently connects “psychics” and Nostradamus with religion and believes atheists are the evil of the world and the biggest ones are the active promoters of empirical skepticism.

He has sent me a bunch of emails, some of them not even making much sense. He also has deluged the forums, blog and email boxes at the JREF and other skeptic organizations. When he sends out emails he sends them to myself and also to Jeff Wagg, the executive director of the JREF, Phil Plait, the president, Randi himself, Randi’s office manager, Alison, who runs the million dollar challenge etc.

While I don’t care to diagnosis anyone, this person is likely mentally ill given the obsession he has. When I mentioned him to Jeff Wagg, I was told “welcome to the club.” HE apparently does this to any high profile skeptic. Actually I felt a little flattered when Jeff said “High profile skeptic.” I mean, does this mean I am actually prominent enough for this little wacko to consider me a threat? How flattering!

Anyway, the others have blocked his email a long time ago, but he creates new email addresses and stuff, so it’s an ongoing thing.

and on the article on me you FAIL to mention the link to which it refers…

you deluded fu7ker

________________________________________________________

btw, this HAS been sent to entire university of morris:

http://liberalforum.org/liberalforum/index.php?/topic/71800-atheists-are-the-cause-of-911/

____________________________________________________________

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/705-as-predicted-a-psychic-failure.html

“However, I’d like to consider another aspect that is rarely discussed: the events were never in any way predicted by any of

the self-proclaimed psychics or future-seers out there. While some have claimed that the vague words of Nostradamus or some

other cryptic phrase contains clues, the fact is that nobody, no professional nor amateur psychic gave any indication that

there would be a major terrorist attack in New York City or Washington in September 2001.”

VAGUE, eh?

and on the article on me you FAIL to mention the link to which it refers…

you deluded ****er

________________________________________________________

btw, this HAS been sent to entire university of morris:

http://liberalforum.org/liberalforum/index.php?/topic/71800-atheists-are-the-cause-of-911/

____________________________________________________________

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/705-as-predicted-a-psychic-failure.html

“However, I’d like to consider another aspect that is rarely discussed: the events were never in any way predicted by any of

the self-proclaimed psychics or future-seers out there. While some have claimed that the vague words of Nostradamus or some

other cryptic phrase contains clues, the fact is that nobody, no professional nor amateur psychic gave any indication that

there would be a major terrorist attack in New York City or Washington in September 2001.”

VAGUE, eh?

I saw an outstanding program on the History Channel last night, or at least part of it was outstanding. It actually had historical value… I mean the production of this program lead to the funding of something that changes our perception of history.

There is a skull fragment in the Russian archives. The fragment was retrieved from the shell crater that Adolf Hitler’s body was burned in. After he committed suicide, his aids put his body and that of Eva Braun into a crater outside the Furherbunker and poured gasoline on them. They did not have enough gasoline to burn them completely. The Russians found them and took them for autopsy. Eventually they were moved from grave to grave until around 1970 when they were completely cremated.

Shortly he bodies being in bad shape, having been partially burned, pieces were falling off etc. After the bodies were removed, a piece of human skull was found in the crater. It has a bullet hole in it indicating a shot from bellow and forward (such as a pistol placed in one’s mouth). This is the only part of Adolf Hitler’s mortal remains thought to still exist, as it was in the Russian archives.

This program included the first comprehensive pathological exam, including fragments removed from the skull and taken for DNA analysis. The pathologist who examined it believe the skull was not consistent with a man of 50 years old or so. It was too thin, the suchers were not completely smooth over. He thought it looked like a younger person and very possibly a woman. The DNA analysis indicated it was a female. They got enough dna to conclusively detect two X chromosomes.

That was actually something that just about dropped my jaw to the floor, as I was well aware of this skull piece and that it had always been considered to be Hitler’s. It could be that it is Eva Braun’s or it may be totally unrelated and just some random piece of bone found in Berlin or even elsewhere.

        An Actual Scientist said:

Oh, just to add one thing.

You might ask, why would a legitimate scientific researcher do a study that finds that there is a .01% corolation between two things when their error and noise threshold precludes measurement under .2% and then go and write the introduction as if they had actually found something.

I don’t mean the study is flawed, but just that on first glance, the “headlines” are inflated.

Two words: Grant money.

I think your comment may be associated with the wrong thread. It looks more like a follow up to the one on homeopathy. Am I right? I can move it if so