Reply With QuoteNanotechnology and Kevlar skin.
Jon Donnis the Bad Psychics webmaster has left the site.
He apparently finds the stress of the unpaid job too much.
He is also upset by a lack of support from some sceptics.
Was Jon too much of a one "man band".
How do the administrators of UK-Skeptics handle all of this?
Nanotechnology and Kevlar skin.
Last edited by asthmatic camel; 22nd July 2010 at 07:03 AM.
It's a pity all the stories and articles on the various cold readers...sorry psychics couldn't be archived as it was a great resource when you needed some info on a particular deluded individual.
With laughter!Originally Posted by wombatwal
TBH, I really don't like the crass, tabloid style approach that BadPsychics has taken over the years. It's not skepticism, it's simply spouting the position of non-belief.
Sadly, it gets perceived as a skeptics' website and so only serves to promote the misconception of what skepticism actually is.
So unless Donnis is prepared to learn something about skepticism and clean up his act (and he's never shown the capacity or willingness to do so) I'll be glad to see it remain closed.
But as he's done this several times in the past, I expect we'll see him back in a matter of days.
.
I've never seen Bad Psychics so erm not fussed.
OUr Julia did some good work on there investigating Gary Mannion and others.
Thanks, Matt!
*buys Matt a virtual pint*
There was a lot of valuable info on BadPsychics, but I have to agree with John that the tabloidy aspect of the site was off-putting.
Donnis (from here):
One word: EgomaniaThe funny thing is that the more people talk about me now I have closed the site, the more my legend will grow.
What so many of the haters and jealous skeptics dont seem to understand is, that they are making my name, and the name of BadPsychics truly legendary, the more the moan, the more people talk.
And part of his MO is to go around joining believers' forums, hurling abuse at them and telling them how 'deluded' they all are!
.
Although his heart was in the right place, he never really promoted real critical thinking - it was more the others around him. I got into a debate with him once and his style of argumentation was flawed to say the least. A good woo would wipe the floor with him.
Dont get me wrong, we have all had our dust ups over the years with woo, but to simply have a site that shout's "you're wrong and you're stupid" all the time is never going to engage with anyone.
Julia and our good friend Bob Dezon have a much more productive approach to these matters and were the shinning stars.
as for his ego, i have never really heard of him that much (does not actually publish anything much at all) so has never really been on my radar other than when i have had to respond to him getting things wrong.
Its a shame to see people lose enthusiasm - so i wish him well on his future work.
Sounds like an obituary...
A famous quote attributed to Mark Twain comes to mind.
er ... What exactly is a "good woo" ?A good woo would wipe the floor with him.
Your point being that nobody who practices woo can be good?
[I need a little smiley that is trying to look innocent]
Sounds like an obituary...
A famous quote attributed to Mark Twain comes to mind.
er ... What exactly is a "good woo" ?
A woo that can spot the fallacies in your argument (though most cannot spot it in their own).
I think Sheldrake (for example) has put forward some arguments against Wiseman recently - not all of which are as full of poppycock as you might think. Don't get me wrong, I with Wiseman on this - but I am not necessarily always convinced by the arguments skeptics themselves put forward.
I may share the conlcusion - but not the argument for it. A good old fashioned woo is usually well versed in this. Look at some fo the old stalwarts of the SPR as there are some interesting arguments to be considered (not necessarily convincing ones, but very clever in construction)
The least said about modern woo the better....
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks