Evidence that Wicknight can be a tit. Yes I know, its hard to believe

Zombrex

solas wrote:

at no point during the thread did I convey my beliefs.

Are you taking the piss?

solas wrote:

I wanted to be sure that the topic remain connected to animal divination and not get swayed into the area of walking under ladders. In my opinion there is a vast difference. The latter being something of an urban legend rather than anything based in cultural traditions.

solas

no I'm not taking the piss.
and as to your posting at the atheism forum, there were several posts from you prior to the one you referenced, which were the result of the mod stepping in to point to the validiity of the discussion, which I proposed.

wicknight wrote:

Solas you seem to not really crasp what athemism is .. it is not a belief system, it is not a religion. It is a personal belief, or more specifically, a personal lack of belief in a God(s)

I am an athethist and I have never heard of Prof Flew, and I care even less about his personal beliefs. I am sure his writings are very interesting, but they don't shape atheism as a movement, I doubt atheism could even be considered a movement.

Him changing his mind (which I don't think he actually did) has no bearing on my beliefs, any more than you believing in God (I assume you do) has a bearing on my beliefs.

If someone was only an atheist because Prof. Flew told them to be one then that person should really look at the reasons they claim to believe what they believe.

see also post #20 on the same thread.

wicknight wrote:

Are you taking the piss?

solas wrote:

I wanted to be sure that the topic remain connected to animal divination and not get swayed into the area of walking under ladders. In my opinion there is a vast difference. The latter being something of an urban legend rather than anything based in cultural traditions

I gave my opinion, you gave yours, and you stated it as fact. You don't agree with my opinion and thats fine, but it is irrelevant.
But then again you want to discuss the illogical reasonings of superstition.
I urged you to stay away from the topic of general superstitions and to keep it in line with the topic of birds in relation to the OP's recent experience.

Zombrex

psi wrote:

in post 5, the poster clarified (if you could call it that) that he wanted to know if it had a basis (in a paranomal context) or was it a superstition.

So that means a discussion of the origin of the concept is against the forum chater. That doesn't make sense.

psi wrote:

I think that solas wanted to keep the discussion in a paranomal vein. As is the context of the forum, where the OP (whatever they really wanted) posted.

No, Solas quite clearly states she wants to keep the topic on animal divination. Animal divination has very little to do with the topic even if the phenomon actually happens.

psi wrote:

Or you decided to ignore the warning on ladders.

I decided to ignore Solas's ignorance on the topic, I will freely admit to that.

psi wrote:

Incidently, I think your portrayal of the superstition is wrong, as many cultures (as stevemu pointe out one) outdate your examples in animals are dark omens.

Then you didn't read my post

wicknight wrote:

The idea that birds carried messages of the future is probably as old as man's imagination.

wicknight wrote:

Hissy fit that really doesn't do you any favours.

Point taken ... but to be honest I am getting quite pissed of about this.

I expect Solas to come on here and point out exact the lines and arguments that broke the charter. I would then attempt to explain my position, or why it didn't brake the charter.

That hasn't happened.

Instead Solas has claimed the events didn't happen in the order they clearly did (anyone is free to read the forum), called me a troll again, said that all I want to disrupt Paranormal forum (seemingly with my 2 posts), compared me to Stormfront, and when pressed for where all this is coming from complained about something I said to her in the Atheism forum. All I can remember in Atheism forum is when I defended her and asked the others to give her the benefit of the doubt.

I am still waiting for the bits of my post that are believed to have been trolls, thread-spoils or debunking the OPs personal beliefs to be presented to me.

stevenmu

Stark wrote:

What do the Spirituality mods think of the thread's relevance to the Spirituality forum?

I think it's pretty relevant. Spirituality forum threads don't really need to involve 'religion' or complete and complex spiritual systems. As a part of a belief system, I think discussion of superstitions on their own is relevant. It's equally relevant in the Paranormal too, and under ideal circumstances their shouldn't have been any reason to move it from Paranormal to Spirituality (or vice versa), but seeing the way it started going I can see why Solas thought a move would be a good idea.

(or else she knew the trouble it was going to cause and thought she could offload it on to me first :v:)

solas

wicknight wrote:

I expect Solas to come on here and point out exact the lines and arguments that broke the charter. I would then attempt to explain my position, or why it didn't brake the charter.

k. First point.
1. I didn't claim you broke the charter. I asked you to stay on topic then warned you when you continued to sway the discussion to suit your own needs.
now, I know you want to return here with a comeback which suggests I swayed the discussion to suit my beliefs, but I'm more interested in the beliefs and directive of the forum, which have already been pointed out to you on a number of occasions.
2. I called you a troll. (which I've since apologised for and yet feel a great urge to retract as a result of this thread)
I have reason to believe you have no interest in the paranormal forum other than to stir the pot. You have already claimed you have no belief in it so I don't see why you go there tbh.

You weren't banned, you were warned. I'm sure you feel an injustice with the situation but I expect its because your just not getting your own way or you feel oppressed and you wish to fight the powah.

solas

steve wrote:

or else she knew the trouble it was going to cause and thought she could offload it on to me first

sorry steve. (actually I moved it to paganism as I thought thead was offering constructive advice but she felt it better in the spirituality forum)

Zombrex

solas wrote:

no I'm not taking the piss.
and as to your posting at the atheism forum,

So all this is coming from me saying you don't seem to fully understand what Atheism is ... ok then, yes I can see why that would put you into a blind rage and call me a troll and say my opinions are baseless

solas wrote:

I gave my opinion, you gave yours, and you stated it as fact.

You gave your opinion and then said no one can discuss things that you believe are urban myths.

I pointed out that you are wrong in your understanding of the ladder superstition (you are wrong btw), and I gave my understand of the origin of the OPs superstition, and explained why it is little to do with animal divination.

Was that against the charter?

I never stated anything about it not being possible, I never attempted to debunk it, despite the fact the OP had not even stated he believed it was possible, despite the fact the OP was asking about the superstition not stating he believe in it, despite the fact that debunking is not against the charter.

solas wrote:

You don't agree with my opinion and thats fine, but it is irrelevant.

It isn't irrelevant when not agreeing with your opinion gets a threaten of being banned from the forum and being called a troll.

solas wrote:

But then again you want to discuss the illogical reasonings of superstition.

Sigh .... :rolleyes:

please please please post a quote the mentions the illogical reasoning of superstition.

In fact I will help you here is my original post

"Technically walking under a ladder is not an urban legend, neither is the idea that a bird flying into a window means death. Both these things are superstitions, or to give them a cultural name "Old Wives Talls", and they are very related to each other in how they come about and spread through culture.
The not walking under the ladder has roots in the Holy Trinity and Christianity, and has also been linked to public hangings.
A bird flying into a house signifying death a superstition dating from before the middle ages, linked to the wider idea that any event out of the ordinary, that causes fright to those in the house, signifies trouble is on the way. This "trouble", and the bird flying inside specifically, eventually got tied to death.
This superstition is very similar to a black cat crossing your path or the breaking of a mirror.
It has very little to do with the idea of balance with nature or accient respect for other animals. In fact during the Black Death medieval people used to kill cats by the truck load because they believed they brought bad luck. Ironically what they actually did was kill the rats that spread the plague.
Accient ties with nature, such as the Eyptians and Native Americans, might be a topic that is quite interesting, but it doesn't really relate to the OPs original post which is clearly about superstitions, so I would suggest (politely since you are a mod ) it is a topic for another thread."

Please high light the parts that deal with the illogical nature the OPs beliefs (going to be kinda hard since the OP didn't state his beliefs).

I posted two posts about the origin and history of the superstition. There was one line about ladders, that simply corrected a mistake of yours. That is all

solas wrote:

I urged you to stay away from the topic of general superstitions and to keep it in line with the topic of birds in relation to the OP's recent experience.

Why?

The OP is talking about a very specific superstition, that is well know in western culture.

Why is discussion of other western superstitions when discussing the origin of this superstitions wrong, off topic, or against the charter?

It seems to me the only reason is that you personally don't believe in other superstitions such as the ladder against the wall.

solas

because the question wasn't in relation to general superstition.

wicknight wrote:

Why is discussion of other western superstitions when discussing the origin of this superstitions wrong, off topic, or against the charter?

it's not,when its in context.
If the thread openly asked that question then it would have been permitted. But it didn't.

pH

solas wrote:

the muppet who also comes to the paranormal forum to voice his cirticisms and who had come close to a ban the previous week for his own actions there.

Still can't resist a little name calling after your blatant troll in the atheism forum backfired on you?

Its like dealing with a stormfront invasion.

And a Nazi reference! ... how Very unoriginal

solas

look.

leRack wrote:

I've heard of different animal activity being slightly profetic, birds included but don't know any full things about it. So basically, do birds have some weird connection to deaths and that or is my great aunt in law just a tad spooky?

there's no mention of ladders, mirrors or touching wood.
I asked for the topic to remain about "animal divination".

we could spend an eternity going around in circles on each of those topics. I'm sure you find it easier to just apply a similar value to all superstition and "end of discussion" but I think there is some good in discerning between them, particularly when someone has relayed a specific experience.

ph wrote:

Still can't resist a little name calling after your blatant troll in the atheism forum backfired on you?

I called you a muppet. I stand by those words.
I didn't troll in the atheism forum but I did make a point.
Between yourself and wicknight this is obviously nothing more than a personal attack on the forum and I really no longer feel the need to explain myself any further.
Take it to dev.

Zombrex

solas wrote:

If the thread openly asked that question then it would have been permitted. But it didn't.

So even though it was clear from the OPs later posts that yes he actually was interested in superstitions (he himself mentions other superstitions, maybe you should ban him), we should just go on the completely literal understanding of the original post.

So you are stating now, in writing, that a rule of the Paranormal forum is that a person cannot discuss anything in a similar vain to the original question, anything that is similar but not mentioned directly by the OP, unless that is brought up in the first post.

So if the original poster mentions a superstition, similar in structure, origin and history to a lot of other well known superstitions, we may not discuss other superstitions even if the mod states something about them that is incorrect, unless the orginal poster asks about them in general.

I assume that means if someone asks a question about the Loch Ness monster we may not talk about other lake monsters around the world unless the original poster specifically asks about other lake monsters around the world, or asks about lake monsters in general.

Or if someone discusses the ability to bend spoons we cannot discuss other telekentic abilities like levitation, or that ability to lift weights with the human mind, unless the original poster specifically asks about other telekentic abilities.

Am I clear on this? Am I understand the new rigid rules that people must follow when posting in Paranormal?

I give it a week before you have to ban everyone ... :rolleyes:

solas

wicknight wrote:

So even though it was clear from the OPs later posts that yes he actually was interested in superstitions (he himself mentions other superstitions, maybe you should ban him), we should just go on the completely literal understanding of the original post.

So you are stating now, in writing, that a rule of the Paranormal forum is that a person cannot discuss anything in a similar vain to the original question, anything that is similar but not mentioned directly by the OP, unless that is brought up in the first post.

So if the original poster mentions a superstition, similar in structure, origin and history to a lot of other well known superstitions, we may not discuss other superstitions even if the mod states something about them that is incorrect, unless the orginal poster asks about them in general.

I assume that means if someone asks a question about the Loch Ness monster we may not talk about other lake monsters around the world unless the original poster specifically asks about other lake monsters around the world, or asks about lake monsters in general.

Or if someone discusses the ability to bend spoons we cannot discuss other telekentic abilities like levitation, or that ability to lift weights with the human mind, unless the original poster specifically asks about other telekentic abilities.

see the post above.

look.

LeRack wrote:

I've heard of different animal activity being slightly profetic, birds included but don't know any full things about it. So basically, do birds have some weird connection to deaths and that or is my great aunt in law just a tad spooky?

there's no mention of ladders, mirrors or touching wood.
I asked for the topic to remain about "animal divination".

we could spend an eternity going around in circles on each of those topics. As mod of the forum I watch this occur occasionally and the discussion goes nowhere. I'm sure you find it easier to just apply a similar value to all superstition and "end of discussion" but I think there is some good in discerning between them, particularly when someone has relayed a specific experience.

wicknight wrote:

Am I clear on this? Am I understand the new rigid rules that people must follow when posting in Paranormal?

the rules haven't changed, just the users. It never caused any problems before.

wicknight wrote:

I give it a week before you have to ban everyone ..

There have never been any incidents which required banning prior to christmas week.

now, hope all your questions have been answered.

Zombrex

solas wrote:

look.
there's no mention of ladders, mirrors or touching wood.
I asked for the topic to remain about "animal divination".

Yes but there was a mention of this "superstition"

http://death.monstrous.com/death_superstitions.htm
"If a bird gets into a house there will be a death"

You can check that webpage for about a thousand other superstitions in a similar vain.

So naturally it is safe to assume that a discussion or even mention of any other superstition in common culture would result in a banning ... wait, what? .. :rolleyes:

solas wrote:

this is obviously nothing more than a personal attack on the forum and I really no longer feel the need to explain myself any further.

The only one who has ever made a personal attack Solas is you, you called pH a muppet and you called me a troll. You have also called my opinions baseless, claimed I am only interested in disrupting Paranormal forum and threatened to ban me. After 2 posts. Actually you called me a troll after 1 post

Hobart

solas wrote:

look.
there's no mention of ladders, mirrors or touching wood.
I asked for the topic to remain about "animal divination".

I personally know SFA about the Paranormal etc... However is "So basically, do birds have some weird connection to deaths and that or is my great aunt in law just a tad spooky" and "Superstition! That's the word!" directly related to Animal divinity? If the answer is yes, well then the mod is perfectly correct in their ascertain that the thread was going off topic. If the answer is NO well then they are incorrect, simple as!

Secondly I have read the thread, and I have seen no real evidence where any bird=death theory/suspicion/whatever has been debunked. Just a clarification of what his opinon of this "superstition" was, backed up by relevant linkage when asked. Wicknick seemed to explain, in clear terms to me anyhow, what his opinion on the subject matter was, and when his views seemed to conflict with that of the mod, again put forward the view that his points were valid points.

IMO the "Besides wicknight is a troll and his opinions are baseless" line is the most ignorant attack on a poster I have seen in quite a while. It's not even the Troll comment, which the mod obviously does not have a clue what the term means, but it's the "opinions are baseless" comment that would stick in my graw. Irrespective of your retarded attempt (and I mean retarded in the To cause to move or proceed slowly; delay or impede meaning) to apologise for calling him a troll, you are bang out of order with your comment, and should stick by your apology.

Syke, yes you used to mod the board and you did the charter, I get the message. However I do remember you once having a go at the mod of christianity for something similar in the past. I had forgotten about your ability to flip flop!

solas

wicknight wrote:

The only one who has ever made a personal attack Solas is you, you called pH a muppet and you called me a troll.

yes, yes I did.

solas

hobart wrote:

I personally know SFA about the Paranormal etc... However is "So basically, do birds have some weird connection to deaths and that or is my great aunt in law just a tad spooky" and "Superstition! That's the word!" directly related to Animal divinity? If the answer is yes, well then the mod is perfectly correct in their ascertain that the thread was going off topic. If the answer is NO well then they are incorrect, simple as!

Secondly I have read the thread, and I have seen no real evidence where any bird=death theory/suspicion/whatever has been debunked. Just a clarification of what his opinon of this "superstition" was, backed up by relevant linkage when asked. Wicknick seemed to explain, in clear terms to me anyhow, what his opinion on the subject matter was, and when his views seemed to conflict with that of the mod, again put forward the view that his points were valid points.

IMO the "Besides wicknight is a troll and his opinions are baseless" line is the most ignorant attack on a poster I have seen in quite a while. It's not even the Troll comment, which the mod obviously does not have a clue what the term means, but it's the "opinions are baseless" comment that would stick in my graw. Irrespective of your retarded attempt (and I mean retarded in the To cause to move or proceed slowly; delay or impede meaning) to apologise for calling him a troll, you are bang out of order with your comment, and should stick by your apology.

as recently as last week, there was a thread in a similar vein which ended up as nothing more than flame grilling of a psychic. Two people were banned. Prior to that I never had reason to ban anyone.

Wicknight and Ph are both trolls in my opinion, they have both taken temporary leavge of the atheism forum (and at times the skeptics society) to have a go at the paranormal.

While you may not agree with my actions, I stand by them. As I've currently stated the charter is up for evaluation to make sure the flaming and abuse and trolling by said society's doesn't become routine.

Hobart

solas wrote:

as recently as last week, there was a thread in a similar vein which ended up as nothing more than flame grilling of a psychic. Two people were banned. Prior to that I never had reason to ban anyone.

Wicknight and Ph are both trolls in my opinion, they have both taken temporary leavge of the atheism forum (and at times the skeptics society) to have a go at the paranormal.

While you may not agree with my actions, I stand by them. As I've currently stated the charter is up for evaluation to make sure the flaming and abuse and trolling by said society's doesn't become routine.

Why apologise to him for calling him a troll then? He either is or is not?

As I have said I know nothing of the subject matter, and I hold an opinion neither one way or another. Your actions are your actions. Mod as you see fit, I have no opinion as to your rolw as a moderator, and I have stated no opinion one way or the other.

If, as you state, the users are trolls, why have they not been banned? Are you of the belief that attempting to flame a so called "troll" by calling their opinions "baseless" is the correct action to take? Maybe you do. But if you do, stick by it, don't apologise and/or ban them.

Zombrex

solas wrote:

Wicknight and Ph are both trolls in my opinion, they have both taken temporary leavge of the atheism forum (and at times the skeptics society) to have a go at the paranormal.

I have posted on 3 forums in Paranormal, a total of 4 posts.

Not once have I ever "had a go" at anything paranormal

The first time I came to the forum through the Irish Skeptics forum because a regular Paranormal poster was claiming that a number of the Irish Skeptics society was "shocked" by her apparent ability to for tell Bertie Ahern was going to break up with his partner Celia.

I posted what I believed was a very plausable explination as to how it is possible that some people can seem to predict something and then it turns out correct. I didn't realise that everyone on the Paranormal forum had to agree that everything suggested there was completely true even when more plausable explinations are avaiable, but there you go, I will know in the future.

The 2nd time I posted on Paranormal forum was to explain the origin of certain superstitions, such as the walking under a ladder superstition and the bird flying into the house superstition. I actually find the topic extremely interesting, my grandparents knew a lot of stories and superstitions around birds of Ireland and England, and I though that I would share this in the Paranormal forum. I also took acception to the mod trying to steer the discussion down a path that was clearly irrelvent. When I pointed this out I was threatened with a banning.

The 3rd forum I posted on was in relation to photographic phenomon that can appear in photographs ("orbs"). I stated that blurring caused by a camera lens can cause shapes to appear on a photography. I asked the OP to provide the photos for examination where it should be possible to tell if it is simply a case of refracted light or something more interesting.

While I made a (not very well recieved) attempt to debate/debunk what was being presented in a thread with in my very first post, I made no attempt to comment on the validity of the superstitions mentioned my second time posting, and the third forum discussion I am waiting for the photograph before I comment further.

Despite this I have been constantly been attack on Paranormal, by Solas an others, I have been called a troll, my comments have been called baseless and I have been treatened with banning. The mod of Paranormal has stated he believes I am only interested in distrupting the forum.

I have never posted any abuse in Paranormal, I have never called anyone stupid or even said they were wrong. Only once did I posted that a plausable explination exists as to when an person seems able to predict the future.

solas

hobart wrote:

Why apologise to him for calling him a troll then? He either is or is not?

this thread has confirmed my suspicions.

As I have said I know nothing of the subject matter

I couldn't agree with you more.
Anyone who is interested in knowing more of the subject matter can read about it here.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054867650

If, as you state, the users are trolls, why have they not been banned? Are you of the belief that attempting to flame a so called "troll" by calling their opinions "baseless" is the correct action to take? Maybe you do.

as I've already stated, I'm not in the habit of banning people, but the above thread might give you some insight as to the action I have taken. (moving the thread somewhere more apt)

Maybe you do. But if you do, stick by it, don't apologise and/or ban them.

no one was banned. Wicknight was warned for going off topic and the thread in questioned was consequently moved to allow him and others the oppertunity to discuss the subject in more apt surroundings.
__________________

Hobart

solas wrote:

this thread has confirmed my suspicions.

Ah...right. So he is trolling here then?

I couldn't agree with you more.

What is that supposed to mean?

Anyone who is interested in knowing more of the subject matter can read about it here.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054867650

Good

as I've already stated, I'm not in the habit of banning people,

Banning people is not a "habit" you should get into. Ban on merit only, not as an unconscious pattern of behavior.

no one was banned. Wicknight was warned for going off topic and the thread in questioned was consequently moved to allow him and others the oppertunity to discuss the subject in more apt surroundings.
__________________

As I have stated I already have seen the action you have taken. I have no interest in reading any links to any paranormal discussions. My personal opinion is that it is all clap trap, but that's just my opinion. I voiced an opinion on your name calling, and asked a question on the validity of your "divinity" claim. It was presented in a simple yes/no format, however, as is your wont, you have addressed neither of these points, and that's fair enough.

solas

hobart wrote:

Banning people is not a "habit" you should get into. Ban on merit only, not as an unconscious pattern of behavior.

no one was banned. He is complaining because the thread was moved.

Ah...right. So he is trolling here then?

it seems to me that he is more interested in trolling the paranormal because since the thread has been moved he has had no input on the discussion or just seems more interested in having it returned to the paranormal.

As I have stated I already have seen the action you have taken. I have no interest in reading any links to any paranormal discussions.

the link I provided is a reference to the charter and is a reflection of the current status of the paranormal, withinput from the other users. In response to "As I have said I know nothing of the subject matter".

Hobart

solas wrote:

no one was banned. He is complaining because the thread was moved.

I appreciate that, I was replying to you saying that you were not in the habit of banning people. I was maintaining that bannings should not be taken out as a matter of "habit" more as a justifiable action. I understand that nobody was banned. Sorry if I did not make that clear.

it seems to me that he is more interested in trolling the paranormal because since the thread has been moved he has had no input on the discussion.

It seems to me that he was (rightly or wrongly) arguing that the discussion should have been held in the paranormal. I would have some sympathy with him in this regard, as if he was correct and I don't know if he was, tyhe moving of the thread would stifle the "debate/discussion" as the people with an interest in what he and/or the OP where talking about would be happily posting on the paranormal board. That's just my reading of it. His initial post on this thread was to have it moved back to what he had percieved to be the correct audience. I see his point on that wrt his abscence from posting on it in a different forum. Do you not?

the link I provided is a reference to the charter and is a reflection of the current status of the paranormal, withinput from the other users. In response to "As I have said I know nothing of the subject matter".

Ah.. grand. Thanks. But I really have no interest in the forum per-se. I was just voicing an opinion on your ascertation that his opinions were baseless and that he was a troll, not really on what is or is not up for discussion on that board.

Shabadu

Try digging *up* Solas.

solas

hobart wrote:

It seems to me that he was (rightly or wrongly) arguing that the discussion should have been held in the paranormal. I would have some sympathy with him in this regard, as if he was correct and I don't know if he was, tyhe moving of the thread would stifle the "debate/discussion" as the people with an interest in what he and/or the OP where talking about would be happily posting on the paranormal board. That's just my reading of it. His initial post on this thread was to have it moved back to what he had percieved to be the correct audience. I see his point on that wrt his abscence from posting on it in a different forum. Do you not?

I do, but as I pointed out to him earlier in the paranormal forum

wicknight wrote:

Does that include discussion of the history and origin in human culture of paranormal ideas?

solas wrote:

these things can be discussed in their own context, you just seem to have difficulty in understanding that concept.

solas

shabadu wrote:

Try digging *up* Solas.

I could sit here and dig up a variety of boardsies and use that as ammo to defend my own position but its irrelevant to the subject and something which has already been used as a defence.
to quote ISAW

This is appaling behaviour and anyone partaking in it could in no way call themselves a sceptic devoted to logical argument.

In fact it is a form of logical fallacy called "ad hominem" . Attacking the person. It is usually done by people who are either inept and inexperienced at debate or people who are being defeated an resort to personal attack because they have nothing objective to offer.

but I've come to expect nothing less from here and is essentially wicknights form of attack. (albeit its very subtle and almost misleading)

Zombrex

solas wrote:

it seems to me that he is more interested in trolling the paranormal

I have never trolled the Paranormal forum.

solas wrote:

because since the thread has been moved he has had no input on the discussion

Seriously, what are you talking about.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=50629250&postcount=24

Since the thread was moved a posted a rather long and detailed expansion of my original post (which you obviously have not bothered to read, or even be aware of its existance). Since that post there has been no discussion. the real ramon posted an interesting piece that I have no need to query or call into question, and Kernel wondered why the post was moved.

You may also notice I have the last post of the thread.

Jesus, do you think we can't just check this stuff in like 30 seconds?

solas wrote:

or just seems more interested in having it returned to the paranormal.

I think it should be returned to paranormal. It has nothing to do with spirituality, as has been pointed out by a number of posters.

Shabadu

solas wrote:

I could sit here and dig up a variety of boardsies and use that as ammo to defend my own position but its irrelevant to the subject and something which has already been used as a defence.
to quote ISAW


but I've come to expect nothing less from here and is essentially wicknights form of attack. (albeit its very subtle and almost misleading)

Sorry- this coming from a moderator who calls users with different viewpoints shít-stirrers and trolls? That's bloody rich, Solas.

solas

qicknight wrote:

Since the thread was moved a posted a rather long and detailed expansion of my original post (which you obviously have not bothered to read, or even be aware of its existance).

I have no interest in reading it, but surely you should be satisfied you had the oppertunity to continue the discussion.

I think it should be returned to paranormal. It has nothing to do with spirituality, as has been pointed out by a number of posters.

as far as I can see, the thread ended in your favour and is now dormant. I think you should be content.

Zombrex

solas wrote:

essentially wicknights form of attack. (albeit its very subtle and almost misleading)

Er, don't you mean non-existant and all in your head.:rolleyes:

Anytime you want to post where in the Paranormal forum I attacked another poster, or the Paranormal forum, or the concept of paranormal existance, Solas, please go right a head

solas

shabadu wrote:

Sorry- this coming from a moderator who calls users with different viewpoints shít-stirrers and trolls? That's bloody rich, Solas.

I havent the motivation to continue this discussion. They are **** stirrers and trolls. They will firmly tell you they have no belief in the paranormal.