James Randi is a professional skeptic.
He also claims to research and debunk cults, although :
[
www.factnet.org]
Quote
Randi disagreed with the distinction FACTNet and other anti-cult organizations make between cults and religions, and referred to the scientific implausibility of events depicted in the Old Testament of the Bible. The distinction between cults and religions we use is based upon cults’ use of deception, fraud, and mind control techniques, to the detriment of their members and wider society. Randi stated in his talk and letter that, "I'm sorry, folks, I still can't see much difference between what they referred to as ‘cults,’ and organized religions."
So at the same time as branding others such as David Icke as anti Semetic Randi is himself openly against all religions and beliefs.
FACT Net notes The letter includes several untrue statements and a mischaracterization of F.A.C.T.Net’s actions. There is a wealth of information on Randi's untrue statements and mischaracterizations as well as relying on unnamed sources which may or may not exist, admitting to compromising other's research, and profitting from his own brand of belief as much as any cult leader.
Randi is a former magician with absolutely no scientific qualifications, and yet he has made matters of science his career.
Whether or not he encourages it Randi has a cult like following and undertakes the same actions that he criticises others for - writing and selling books on what to believe, profitting from giving lectures on what others should believe, running a website telling others what should believe. There are many who accept whatever Randi says without any discerning thought or research into the issues for themselves, and who refute any criticisms with claims that they are descended from those out to get him. Randi boasts that he is 'always right' and his faithful rush to defend that he is just joking - much like my former cult leader's disciples when he announced that Canada was worthless because of it's liberal views on homosexuals and America should just take it over.
As an ex-cult member what I hear from Randi and those who for ease of reference I will term as his followers, brings back bad memories.
I do not think that any research into any claims that manipulate other's beliefs or seek to make profit through fraud are ethical or should be unchallenged. I devote my time and my own modest resources to attempting to educate about the cult which I was a member of and expose the many levels of manipulation and deception.
Those who are ex-cult members or cult researchers, or even those who simply wish to be aware of the risks that exist and avoid them should not be goaded into taking anything for granted. Just because someone presents themselves as a good guy loudly proclaiming at every opportunity they are out to protect everyone does not mean they should be met with unconditional trust.
Randi is granted a level of credibility on account of offerring one million dollars for anyone that can prove a paranormal ability, a stunt that has been denounced by his own colleague at CSICOP of which Randi was a founding member and remains a contributor. The results which Randi dismisses are not made public and the conditions which he imposes on his 'tests' are highly controversial.
[
skepdic.com]
Quote
His rules are little more than what any reasonable scientist would require. If you are a mental spoon bender, you can't use your own spoons. If you are going to see auras, you will have to do so under controlled conditions. If you are going to do some remote viewing, you will not be given credit for coming close in some vague way. If you are going to demonstrate your dowsing powers, be prepared to be tested under controlled conditions. If you are going to do psychic surgery or experience the stigmata, expect to have cameras watching your every move.
On top of that Randi does not have any set criteria, it is changeable for every potential person that comes along - hardly standard scientific metodology and he does not make public any failed results so that they may be subject to scrutiny by anyone.
Randi works on the premise that anything which is not proven is automatically disproven - a dangerous and unscientific viewpoint. Such 'reasoning' is the same notion that allowed early scientists to be persecuted for daring to state that the Earth was not flat or that it orbited around the sun. It ignores that many ideals in science which are not considered to be outlandish or delusional at all are infact theories, such as the theories of evolution or the theory of relativity.
If one were to follow Randi's mindset they would remain ignorant to many conspiracy facts (note not theories) for just one example of what goes on the world, despite skeptics discover MK Ultra
[
www.mindspring.com] (there are many other links as Google will reveal)
For anyone who wants to examine James Randi rather than simply accepting that his work is valid and the many references that show up to skeptic pages in this forum also criticise and debunk him.
[
www.skepticalinvestigations.org]
Quote
He used to be a leading figure in CSICOP, but had to resign because of litigation against him. Carl Sagan, in his sympathetic introduction to Randi’s book The Faith Healers (1987) described him as an “angry man.” His work as a debunker has attracted lavish funding and in 1986 he was the recipient of a $286,000 MacArthur Foundation Fellowship.
Randi's whole career is based on a feud that he established with Uri Geller. While he has denounced Geller as a 'charlatan' it would seem that both have made their livings from Geller's claims of paranormal ability. Infact it seems a reasonable estimate that Randi profitted considerably better.
[
www.answers.com]
Quote
In the early 1970s Randi published The Magic of Uri Geller
The original edition contained a number of factual errors, including the claim that Geller had been convicted of fraud in a criminal trial, and misstatements about whether there was a clear view of the window in the room where Geller did his work, a place Randi had never been to.
[
jeff.zaadz.com]
Quote
The irony, with regard to the James Randi Educational Foundation is that, while it claims to encourage critical thinking, it actually functions in some ways to stifle exactly that!
[
www.skepticalinvestigations.org]
Quote
In his “points to remember,” he noted that skepticism is not cynicism and that skeptics must be open-minded. “If you have evidence,” he said, “bring it on.”
So it’s ironic that actual science was hardly touched on. Instead it was one speaker after another reinforcing the conceit, almost universal among conference participants, that they are the enlightened ones, that they are charged with the burden of defending sense against nonsense, that they alone can be counted on to stand their ground against the tide of irrationalism that threatens to engulf our civilization and undo all the gains that have been wrought in the name of Science.
[
www.skepticalinvestigations.org]
This is a comprehesive article about a former believer in Randi who examined his book Flim-Flam! Psychics, ESP, Unicorns and other Delusions and details the lack of accuracy he found such as factual errors, unnamed sources to support allegations to confirm his accounts of bungled research, which he did not even back up by inspecting the premises himself, and generally expects the reader to place a lot of faith in what he tells them.
Quote
Maybe so, but it's an indictment that would never hold up in court. The reader is expected to take Randi's word that his unidentified sources are trustworthy - and that the sources themselves are well-informed about experimental procedures they may or may not have witnessed.
Thus when Randi alleges that "hundreds of [failed] experiments that were done by SRI ... were never reported," we must take the statement on faith, as it is unsupported by any documentation. Similarly, when Randi says definitively, "All the other tests [i.e., the successful ones] lacked proper controls and were useless," we search in vain for any footnote to back up this assertion.
[
www.skepticalinvestigations.org]
Quote
The January 2000 issue of Dog World magazine included an article on a possible sixth sense in dogs, which discussed some of my research. In this article Randi was quoted as saying that in relation to canine ESP, "We at the JREF [James Randi Educational Foundation] have tested these claims. They fail." No details were given of these tests.
[
www.skepticalinvestigations.org]
Quote
"The fact is that people who do not accept the laboratory and other evidence for psi that already exists are unlikely to change their minds or their beliefs simply because someone beats Randi's challenge and wins Randi's money. In the name of Science, many keep raising the issue of parsimony, of Occam's Razor where psi is concerned. In this case, wouldn't the simpler explanation as far as the Skeptics are concerned be that Randi was scammed out of the money? In the name of Science, many raise the issue of repeatability. If someone beat Randi's Challenge once, how does this meet the criteria of repeatability? What does this prove?"
www.skeptic.com/archives03.html
Quote
leading Fellow of CSICOP, Ray Hyman, has pointed out, this "prize" cannot be taken seriously from a scientific point of view: "Scientists don't settle issues with a single test, so even if someone does win a big cash prize in a demonstration, this isn't going to convince anyone. Proof in science happens through replication, not through single experiments."
[u:b084651386][b:b084651386]Is this ruining a life?[/b:b084651386][/u:b084651386] It is certainly guiding someone into what career they should take, and expecially under the circumstances described seems to be a destructive action, particularly since debunking chiropratics has no solid scientific merit. Note that Randi poo poos all 'alternate' medicines - what an age we live in where what is based in nature is deemed alternative!
[
www.randi.org]
Quote
BITTEN BY CHIROPRACTIC
A reader, formerly a chiropractor, and who wishes anonymity, writes:
I do not believe I will ever practice chiropractic again, because I see no ethical way to practice. Spinal manipulation has limited uses at best and some forms of manipulation can be dangerous, cervical manipulation, for example. The problem is that I now have over $150,000 worth of non-dischargeable student loans and it looks like my credit is ruined for the rest of my life.
I realize this is my own fault for taking out the loans. I was stupid and lacking in critical thinking skills at the time. But, just curious, what would you do if you were me? Would you try to hire an attorney and fight the school for fraud? Would you just move on and try to forget about it? Would you write a book to warn other potential students?
I often feel like I have ruined my life with this massive debt. I still have a lot of joy in my life: I have a great wife, a rewarding (non-chiropractic) job, and many wonderful friends. But I still feel like I was bamboozled by the chiropractic profession.
No rush to answer me, but I’m just curious about your thoughts on this subject. I cannot encourage you enough to continue warning potential students about the rampant quackery in the chiropractic profession. Many students take out massive loans when they are in their early 20s only to discover later that chiropractic is a fake, unethical profession. By then, it’s too late and they are in debt forever.
Yes, my friend, you were certainly bamboozled – as any victim of chiropractic is. As for writing a book warning others of your plight, I cannot see it becoming a popular read because it contains facts that the public just doesn’t want to know. Another problem here is that those who sign up for instruction in chiropractic, obtain diplomas, and start into practice, discover that the monetary rewards are so huge, that they can’t resist staying with the business, even if they recognize that they’re quacks.
You’re an exception; you care.
[
en.wikipedia.org]
Quote
Chiropractic was founded in 1895... Though its use has been documented from the time of the ancient Egyptians,[2] spinal manipulation in an attempt to correct the theoretical vertebral subluxation is solely a chiropractic endeavor. Chiropractic's contribution to the field of manipulative therapies is the concept of applying a precise adjustment to a specific affected vertebra, as opposed to the generalized maneuvers of the early osteopaths. While some chiropractors adhere strictly to the use of only spinal manipulation in their adjustment, others include a broad range of methods directed at correcting the subluxation and/or just relieving musculoskeletal pain.
There are currently thousands of qualified chiropractors practicing throughout the world and no evidence to sugguest that the profession is subject to any more litigation or claims of malpractice than any other field of medicine or alternative medicine.