I’m just concerned things have moved too far off topic and away from cat tennis.

I didn’t see that one coming.

Craig, hang on — the first claim is that Randi is a charlattan because he doesn’t have $1M. But now the “debate” has shifted to whether he will give the money. Looks like a classic [fallacious] debating move, make one point after the other in rapid fire. Again, if you think there is no $1M I can let that speak for itself.

As for the mention of sexual assault, now that’s a REAL ad hominem since you seem to be throwing it in to undermine whether or not Randi’s magic is/was “impressive”? In any case I haven’t heard of this conviction nor has a Google search yielded anything so I’ll reserve judgement until I see something more.

Now about whether the money will actually be given, that’s obviously a weird one as per what Alan said. Are you saying there’s been an applicant who should have won? Hmm.

This, for example, is gold:

“I’ll believe Randi when he hands over the million bucks.”

You’re basically saying that you’ll only take him seriously when he agrees with you. Which he won’t, because neither you or anyone like you has managed to pass even the preliminary stage of his challenge, which is there for the taking. Amazing! One million bucks, all yours, but you don’t seems to want it. Or you can’t get it because your supernatural powers and those of everyone you know are fake.

There’s been no personal abuse – it’s all people’s opinions, almost all of them based in fact and logic. Except yours. You don’t have to engage with us or respond to us, but you should get used to people calling you on your claims and ridiculing things that are well outside the realms of grown-up logic.

Ignore the perceived insults and address the issues. So far everything you’ve claimed has been fairly openly and honestly rebuffed.

I’ll believe Randi when he hands over the million bucks.I could make a similar claim especially when I know I don’t have to pay up. I know Geller personally and have spent a lot of time with him and have seen him do extraordinary things and he’s a far more impressive person than Randi (who also forgets to mention his conviction for sexual assault)

How many times do I have to say it-I’ve put on the record that the lies told in the Sydney Morning Herald which were repeated on here have been shown to be false and that’s all that matters to me.

I’m not here to preach, convert or defend what I believe in especially as I think the level of debate on this particular board borders on personal abuse.

*So* owned.

http://www.libelreform.org/

This one is particularly enlightening:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/04/roman-polanski-nick-cohen-law

Now Craig, to be fair, my bringing up of the prize was not directed at you (since at that point you indicated that you didn’t have time for writing these comments) but at those remaining. But if you believe the JREF does not have a million dollars and that they have a forged deposit slip from Goldman Sachs on their site then I think this says more about you and your use of argument than it does about Randi.

As for use of the ad hominem label, this page is always enlightening:
http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html

Indeed, Randi was a magician. A stage magician, using trickery and sleight of hand and admitting it. When he was challenged once for being a fraud he replied: “Yes indeed, I’m a trickster, I’m a cheat, I’m a charlatan, that’s what I do for a living. Everything I’ve done here was by trickery.”

The person actually challenged back that Randi was a fraud because he was actually using magic and pretending he wasn’t. *shakes head*

With regard to Geller, Uri won a case in Japan, Randi refused to pay and Geller later agreed not to pursue the money in a seperate case. Later Geller UNsuccessfully sued Randi and the case was thrown out. Geller and Randi settled their difference confidentially out of court. Hardly damning evidence and more like a very shaky premise.

The James Randi Educational Foundation is the body that sponsors the $1 million challenge and it still stands.

What was that you said about research?

This has been embarrassing for quite a while now. Like shooting fish in a barrel.

no-I’m not ‘parciticing’ my material but by his own account Randi is a magician. He isn’t a scientist-he’s a showman.

and he doesn’t have a million dollars to spare and he does have a line of creditors from his various failed enterprises. One being Uri Geller who took him into a British libel court, won and that’s why he never mentions Geller’s name these days.(yes yes ..I know what you think of Geller)

Does some research before you sound off.