🚀 go-pugleaf

"DanielSan" <danielsan@speakeasy.net> wrote ...
> On 8/29/2010 9:51 PM, Dakota wrote:
>> On Sun 8/29/10 21:48, DanielSan wrote:
>>> On 8/29/2010 7:41 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
>>>> "DanielSan" <danielsan@speakeasy.net> wrote ...
>>>>> On 8/29/2010 6:59 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
>>>>>> "DanielSan" <danielsan@speakeasy.net> wrote ...
>>>>>>> On 8/29/2010 6:34 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
>>>>>>>> "DanielSan" <danielsan@speakeasy.net> wrote...
>>>>>>>>> On 8/29/2010 6:26 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Davej" <galt_57@hotmail.com> wrote ...
>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 26, 7:38 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Davej" <galt...@hotmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>> > On Aug 25, 11:16 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Been there done that. Hung the Camgirls.com $100,000,000 per
>>>>>>>>>>>> year
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> typical profits on my wall.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> > You can't even afford a new tinfoil hat -- and you really
>>>>>>>>>>>> need one
>>>>>>>>>>>> > since you claim the secret service has been reading your
>>>>>>>>>>>> brainwaves
>>>>>>>>>>>> > for eight years.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Broadcasting my brainwaves 8 1/2 years. Worse than most physical
>>>>>>>>>>>> torture.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Reading my brainwaves since 1995 or before.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Nobody believes me because they think the USA would have no
>>>>>>>>>>>> reason to.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You are not psychic. You are just an ordinary psychotic with
>>>>>>>>>>> various
>>>>>>>>>>> typical delusions.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's clearly evident I can state a question and open a book to a
>>>>>>>>>> random
>>>>>>>>>> page
>>>>>>>>>> and it consistently answers the question.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> After uploading 30 videos doing such, I cannot grasp the limited
>>>>>>>>>> nature of
>>>>>>>>>> your mental faculties to deny (potential) superpowers demonstrated
>>>>>>>>>> thus.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Herc: Anyone can.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> NOBODY CAN.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, they can.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have a book here. Ask me a question.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who will win the Chicago 2010 Marathon?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only answers on video accepted
>>>>>
>>>>> "simply takes control"
>>>>
>>>> Very good, but I'm going to bail on this conversation as no skeptic
>>>> seems to have a clue how bibliomancy works.
>>>
>>
>> It's true that we don't have a clue. Please explain how bibliomancy
>> works so we will know what sort of questions you can answer using that
>> power.
> 
> The pseudoscience of bibliomancy, the kind that Herc claims to be able 
> to do, is to pick "randomly" pick a phrase from any book and it would 
> "answer" any question posed.
> 
> The posed question that Herc had was "When will I win Randi's bet?"
> The "answer" was "whenever you respond".
> 
> You can take nearly any phrase and twist it to suit the answer.  That's 
> not anything special.


Some answers are better than others.  That's clearly a million to one hit, better
than 1,000,000 random quotes from a typical novel.

I have no idea why none of you can understand that simple assertion.  The answer
"Whenever you respond" not only addresses the question PERFECTLY, it got Randi
to respond with an email the next day.  Would ANY quote have that effect?

here is a mortal attempting bibliomancy
http://tinyurl.com/JEFF-WAGG-JREF-DEBUNKER-CHEATS

here is the son of God doing bibliomancy
http://tinyurl.com/JREF1Mchallenge

All you reasons that MY BIBLIOMANCY is not legitimate are merely assumptions
that BIBLIOMANCY ITSELF is not legitimate and my claims are not given any real judgment.


Herc