The Instigator
nonprophet
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Ajab
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

All psychics are frauds

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open with Elo Restrictions Point System: Select Winner
Started: 5/15/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,150 times Debate No: 54564
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (55)
Votes (0)

 

nonprophet

Pro

No voting debate
First round is for acceptance only
Ajab

Con

I thank nonprophet for looking past my age and challenging me,
I accept this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
nonprophet

Pro

A psychic is a person who claims to have an ability to perceive information hidden from the normal senses through extrasensory perception (ESP), or who is said by others to have such abilities.

In 1988, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences gave a report on the subject and concluded there is "no scientific justification from research conducted over a period of 130 years, for the existence of parapsychological phenomena."

There are several techniques used by self-described psychics to give the illusion that they do indeed, have psychic abilities. They include:
prestidigitation, cold reading, and hot reading.

Prestidigitation is also known as "Sleight of hand" and is used by magicians to  manipulate objects such as cards.

Cold Reading consists of analyzing a person's body language, age, clothing or fashion, hairstyle, gender, sexual orientation,
religion, race or ethnicity, level of education, manner of speech, place of origin, etc., in order to quickly obtain a great deal of
information about the person they are trying to convince. These techniques convince people that the reader knows
much more about them than they actually do.

Hot Reading is just getting personal information about a person before meeting them in person. This can be done on the internet
by use of collaborators who work for the "psychic".

By using these three techniques, it can become very easy for an experienced user of these techniques to convince somebody
that they are indeed "psychic".

Many psychics prey upon people who have recently lost loved ones and have a desire to communicate with them. Their desire
and emotional state of mind, makes them very susceptible to gullibility.

The scientific community does not have sufficiently verified evidence for scientific acceptance, and there exist
many non-paranormal alternative explanations for claimed instances of psychic events.

In conclusion, it would be fair to say that all psychics are frauds.

Ajab

Con

I hope you can forgive me this one round, I am not well. Please give me a day, I promise to write my arguments next round. If you would allow we can have this debate again after a few days.
Debate Round No. 2
nonprophet

Pro

I'll skip saying anything this round. Feel better. If you are still sick after the debate ends, we'll call it a tie.
Ajab

Con

nonprophet I am so sorry, I am still sick. I hope we can re do this debate. I am honestly very very sorry. I know you worked hard on your argument. Thank you for the challenge.
Debate Round No. 3
55 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 21 through 30 records.
Posted by nonprophet 7 years ago
nonprophet
Here's another example of why I don't allow votes anymore:

http://www.debate.org...

I declined the debate on the grounds that I was already debating that exact same thing with the exact same user. So instead of respecting my decline to debate, he just went on "debating" and ignoring my decline.

And the voters gave him a free win for such conduct.

If that's what voters think is fair, there will be no more voting on my debates.

DONE.
Posted by Defro 7 years ago
Defro
You're right, he did break your rule. But that would only lose him points in conduct. Not the entire debate. I didn't read the RFDs, but perhaps he won because he had better sources, better spelling and grammar, or more convincing arguments.
Posted by nonprophet 7 years ago
nonprophet
Here is an example of a debate I should win, because my opponent broke the rules I set up in round 1.

http://www.debate.org...

As you can see, I'm losing this debate and that's the major reason why I don't allow voting anymore.

If I can't win a debate where the rules were broken, then forget the whole idea of voting.
Posted by nonprophet 7 years ago
nonprophet
I'm glad you agree with my point of view on voting, Ajab. Unfortunately, you are not 21, yet.
Posted by Ajab 7 years ago
Ajab
nonprophet I would love to debate you but I cannot accept. I find it pleasant that there is no voting on your debates, all should be allowed to do as they wish. I think it would actually help because we would try to be more honest than rhetorical. If you wish to debate me, please send me a request. :)
Posted by Defro 7 years ago
Defro
Meh, fair enough.
Posted by nonprophet 7 years ago
nonprophet
"I'd be willing to accept this debate if you allow voting."
It's easy to earn a block, but not that easy to get of my block.
Plus, it's my policy not to debate with anyone under 21.
If I took the block off, you still couldn't accept this debate.
Posted by XLAV 7 years ago
XLAV
Oh gawd, stop commenting! This debate will give us a bad name!
Posted by Defro 7 years ago
Defro
Wow, at the rate we're commenting this debate will make it to the front page next week.
Posted by Defro 7 years ago
Defro
Thus showing that i will follow your rules and regulations.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.