Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-24297761-20140324233006/@comment-24276288-20140326015238

you know these videos where people do incredibly realistic portraits

it's incredibly difficult to do these portraits but we don't go breaking the person to prove she did that

the point is because although it's a absurd claim it don't break any rule

psi does break or at least seems like

but once you can do psi you should have no trouble believing that it was psi

and even if it wasnt there should be nothing of weird or wrong in you having believed it since it was a completely possible task

we know psi exist soon this video can be true and can be fake just like the video of someone painting a portrait could be someone else with the same shirt

remember it i will only say things like it could be faked to let clear for the video guy that this would not convince skeptical but it doest mean i dont believe him

of course if its a obvious fake i will state it i am not a blind believer just someone who know psi exist

let's say i see a video of someone holding its hands next to the psiwheel

i would tell the person it would be convection and if she insist in claiming that she can feel it and its not convection then i would give her the  benefit of the doubt

but simply because i find rude to assume people are lying besides it's not a video to prove anything just a demonstration

of course if the finality was to be proof i could take it more seriously

occam's razor say that you shouldn't complicate a explanation more than necessary

since i know of the existence of psi

and i see a video of someone moving a object

what would be more complicated? he lying and using some unbelievable gimmick? or simply psi?

if you hear a bark it could be a dog or a cat(yes cats can bark)

if you know dog exist it would be logical to assume it's a dog

but if you think dogs are extinct you would find a cat or a person to be a more believable explanation

of course it could be a cat or a human

but since i know dogs exist i find it more logical to be a dog

of course i could be wrong but there is nothing of wrong with my logic