14th October 2008

[Average Joe]

Originally Posted by Ali Quadir

When did this become a discussion of scientific method? The philosophy of the "Burden of proof" seems a little irrelevant to me.

Its not a discussion of scientific method but one of common sense.

Sanat stated many times that if you do not believe in the event then the discussion as far as he is concerned is meaningless.

I do not believe anything will happen but that does not render discussion meaningless for he, or other people may have something which changes my mind?

Call that what you will but in the end it means he's not trying to convince.

I would say that if he is calling some channellers credible then he is using that to convince......so what is so credible about these channellers, thats all I want to know?