Help me to prove the validity of tarot

[choccybiccy]

Wow, sorta seems like he is responding to my post, doesn't seem like much ignoring to me.  That doesn't sound logical.

I'm receiving your posts telepathically.

 

 

 

[thepeaguy]

What's ironic about this thread is that an atheist is proving tarot to be either genuine or not by empirical evidence while its supporters are doing nothing of the sort to support their bullshit hobby.

Science wins again.

[driftingblizzard]

Next thing you know, people will be trying to tell us that there are particles smaller than atoms! 

[thepeaguy]

Next thing you know, people will be trying to tell us that there are particles smaller than atoms! 

Um, there are?

[ALLDAYGLOWRANDY]

The people who think I am pawned have a few pieces missing

[choccybiccy]

What's ironic about this thread is that an atheist is proving tarot to be either genuine or not by empirical evidence while its supporters are doing nothing of the sort to support their bullshit hobby.

Science wins again.

I've already put my bit in the indigo children thread. I find this thread irrelevant.

[thepeaguy]

What's ironic about this thread is that an atheist is proving tarot to be either genuine or not by empirical evidence while its supporters are doing nothing of the sort to support their bullshit hobby.

Science wins again.

I've already put my bit in the indigo children thread. I find this thread irrelavent.

Peter doesn't lie, you guys do -- to yourselves.

[driftingblizzard]

Next thing you know, people will be trying to tell us that there are particles smaller than atoms! 

Um, there are?

No, there aren't, but some upstart is always poking around with new theories...

Well, that was the common thought in the 19th century... 

Now we know that the particles are made up of particles.

So, didn't they exist before we had proof of them, of course they did, we just didn't believe it.

[choccybiccy]

What's ironic about this thread is that an atheist is proving tarot to be either genuine or not by empirical evidence while its supporters are doing nothing of the sort to support their bullshit hobby.

Science wins again.

I've already put my bit in the indigo children thread. I find this thread irrelavent.

Peter doesn't lie, you guys do -- to yourselves.

I don't see peter as a liar either, and I like his seeming dislike of generalisation and genuine love of knowledge (cringe, sounds awful) which was the only reason I kept up with dialogue at all.

[ALLDAYGLOWRANDY]

This thread grew out of controll when Peter attacked me, but that is not as important as that fact their is a time for serious and joking.  I was willing to make amends, and I still am willing.

[Blasted]

Can't be arsed to get into this discussion to be frank. 

I'm taking pics of my dream catcher and that's it.

I find these sort of discussions pointless really, because most people don't change their point of view that easily, especially when they are convinced that something is a load of bollocks.

[thepeaguy]

 

[Lucifer]

Can't be arsed to get into this discussion to be frank. 

I'm taking pics of my dream catcher and that's it.

I find these sort of discussions pointless really, because most people don't change their point of view that easily, especially when they are convinced that something is a load of bollocks.

how about me then, petal: i'm convinced it's bollocks, i read the tarot and am fucking good at it, and i've seen enough evidence (i.e. "results") to think it works. 

[Lucifer]

 

i take it you'd like me to read your tarot next time you come round then, pea? 

[choccybiccy]

Can't be arsed to get into this discussion to be frank. 

I'm taking pics of my dream catcher and that's it.

I find these sort of discussions pointless really, because most people don't change their point of view that easily, especially when they are convinced that something is a load of bollocks.

how about me then, petal: i'm convinced it's bollocks, i read the tarot and am fucking good at it, and i've seen enough evidence (i.e. "results") to think it works. 

Doesn't seem to apply to me either   Everything Peaguy is saying seems to apply to Peter more, especially the ad hom attacks.