Just want to know if anyone or known anyone gone to Peter so and if so...do they think he is accurate in predicting.
Edited by pinyin753, 21 December 2009 - 03:34 AM.
Jump to content
Posted 21 December 2009 - 03:31 AM
Edited by pinyin753, 21 December 2009 - 03:34 AM.
Posted 23 December 2009 - 06:58 PM
Posted 26 December 2009 - 07:06 AM
Posted 26 December 2009 - 07:17 AM
Posted 27 December 2009 - 09:50 AM
Posted 27 December 2009 - 09:26 PM
Posted 28 December 2009 - 10:40 PM
Posted 29 December 2009 - 04:40 AM
Have anyone tried the palmistry and face reading beside picking dates?
Posted 30 December 2009 - 09:17 PM
Posted 20 September 2012 - 05:33 PM
Posted 20 September 2012 - 06:43 PM
Does anybody know his number so we can contact him??
Edited by nomad 822, 20 September 2012 - 06:48 PM.
Posted 20 September 2012 - 09:57 PM
Posted 13 January 2013 - 03:38 AM
Posted 07 February 2013 - 09:21 AM
Posted 07 February 2013 - 09:49 AM
Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:57 AM
Edited by teddyc, 07 February 2013 - 11:58 AM.
Posted 08 February 2013 - 01:04 AM
Feng shui, palmistry, face readings are kind of like statistics. It's been observed and recorded and has a confidence interval of 95%. Can it be wrong, sure. Has it been proven to be correct, yes. No need to dis this. If it makes you sleep better at night, then believe it. If you could careless about it, pretend it doesn't exist then.
Posted 08 February 2013 - 07:03 AM
I want to believe but skeptical hippo is skeptical. I've never heard of any kind of statistics used to predict marriage dates and their luck on said day or w/e (how does one even measure luck?). The idea of a 95% CI for that seems impossible to me. You'd have to have tonnes of data. Weather data, traffic patterns, stocks, all dat cht would have to be factored in to predict a lucky or unlucky day. Already that's not possible because weather predictions aren't 100% and if stock predictions were, the market would break. You can't prove something correct just cos one time the guy got lucky and predicted xyz would be a lucky day (a general term at that). In order to individualize palm readings etc you'd also have to have tonnes of data about the individual (clearly that doesn't exist).
Posted 08 February 2013 - 07:40 AM
2000 years of data passed on through experience. Sure there may have been stuff missing along the way and refound. I'm not trying to persuade you to believe in something that you current don't but just think of feng shui etc as an angle on interpreting some events. Another angle that helps explain things is an optical interpretation. Just more stuff to think about when considering something.
Edited by DrBroscientist, 08 February 2013 - 07:40 AM.
Posted 08 February 2013 - 11:05 PM
I'm a science type of guy. 2000 years of unrecorded data hardly qualifies as evidence to me. Hell, I don't even know where you got a 95% CI with no concrete data. In your opinion Feng shui etc is real. In my opinion (belief) it's a waste of time and cash. Unless you have qualifying evidence it's really along the lines of religion etc. It's based on faith and faith alone.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 01:31 AM
I'm a science guy as well. Today, there are still many things that can't be explained with science. Metaphysics tries, with varying accuracy, to explain some of things that we see happen but can't be explained by science.
Let's try this exercise. Face reading says that people have flat noses have low confidence. However, some of us on this forum hear preach that confidence is something that can be learned. Why don't you go and collect some data by observing and try to interact with people who have flat noses and see if they have low confidence. There's nothing for you to lose, and here's an opportunity to collect some first hand data.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 02:11 AM
How bout I not waste my time? In order to prove to some guy on the net that Feng shui is bs you expect me to spend my time on some report? Flat noses are subjective, and I'd also need to find a decent sample as well as choose a good number. I do not have the skills or motive required to conduct a scientific study like that. A better thing to do is how bout you provide proof that Feng shui etc works? And by proof I don't mean some biased website quote or a crappy study done by some 2nd rate website.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 03:22 AM
I'm not trying to convince you to believe in this stuff. I don't believe that much in this stuff, but it gives a different perspective to everything I see. Suit yourself, I don't gain anything if you believe in it. But you narrow your scope of vision down to too few perspectives if you out right rule out this subject.
I'm surprised that a scientist like yourself would have the galls to say "provide proof that something works". Even in the case with science, it's only a matter of time before a scientific conclusion gets debunked by another scientific conclusion. Science is not absolute. Try penicillin. It might save your life, but it'll kill me in seconds. Can we say that penicillin is a life saver....I sure hope you don't.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:45 AM
Well then why are we arguing in the first place? I don't mind narrowing my vision if what get's removed outside the scope is almost certainly false. I've never seen the world in its entirety but I completely rule out the possibility that it's flat, and I'm sure most people do to. There's a difference between scorning a probable possibility and an improbable possibility.
Granted, a lot of science as we know it will probably undergo refinement, but your analogy doesn't work. Sure, proof might come along and debunk a current scientific theory but at the least, existing theories have proof and/or evidence. Scientists don't just go "hey I got this new theory that the sun's alive and is called Bob" without some kinda supportive evidence. I can safely say that penicillin is a life saver. Sure, it might kill you specifically, but it also saves lives and has been PROVEN to cure certain ailments. What your analogy amounts to is essentially "Try water. It might save your life, but it'll kill me in seconds". In this analogy we're clearly skewing water's properties. In general it's required to live. In actuality it can kill via overconsumption and other means. Feng shui has no proof or evidence. It's pseudoscience at best.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 05:54 AM
Bold above is what I mean when you come across high handed with a narrow point of view. Metaphysics is not a science, never did I say it was. It's a point of view used to describe what we can't explain. We can think of it as statistics, it's been recorded on paper that certain characteristics leads to certain outcomes, but it's not absolute. You give the impression that science is absolute because it works on a majority of people or can provide an explanation that blankets the majority of plausible holes.
I just have one message for you, open your mind and you will see. Great minds need more information to come up with solutions and I use the plural for a reason. Being narrow minded and weeding out possibilities will only give you an answer but never a solution.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 11:29 AM
Bro it's hardly statistical if there's no data is it? You're telling me "XYZ the Feng shui dude can predict the future cos he's got 2000 years of experience handed down to him" based on nothing. Statistics is the analysis of data, which you have none of. Besides, Feng shui hardly preaches statistics. Practioners aren't going "Thursday will be a lucky day because my 2000 years of statistical data has shown that it will". Instead they're going "Thursday will be a lucky day because your ying and yang line are in unity" or some bs like that. I fail to see how statistics, if Feng shui were based on such things, could be used to predict the "luckiness" of a specific date possibly months ahead of time. You're not telling me 2000 years of Feng shui practioners managed to devise a way to predict the weather, traffic patterns, the migration patterns of birds (what if a bird wants to poop on your head?), and a hundred other factors to enable a genuine prediction are you? Because frankly without a super computer, it's likely not even possible to analyze all that at the same time in an integrated form. A thousand years ago they could not even have conceived of cars. You're telling me the "data" if it exists, collected from then can be used to accurately predict whether or not a car's gonna hit me on Thursday?
I never said you said metaphysics was a science. It was your analogy into science that I was addressing. Don't even know why you decided to think that. I never even said science was absolute. It seems to me like you ignored everything I said, found an "impression" and decided fuk it, let's argue about this new topic because I can't refute the old.
You're calling me narrow minded. I call you deluded. Great minds need to be open to possibilities but there is a difference between open minded and fantastical. I can't say for sure that I'm not a brain in a vat and this universe is real. Would people call me a crackpot if all of a sudden I tried to jump off a 20 storey building in order to free myself from this reality? Of course. There are no absolutes in this world. The only absolute is that you as an individual exist, and even that can be questioned so it's not really an absolute. Everything else could be a simulation. To live life based on the remote chance that this fantastical idea (brain in a vat) is real would be enough for most people to think you crazy. And don't tell me all the great minds (Darwin etc) were considered crackpots until proven right. What they pushed forward had a basis. This has none.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 11:38 AM
Relax my friend. Maybe we started on the wrong foot here, but why don't you define data as per your own understanding of use of it, and then we'll chat some more. But I got to say, some of the examples you pulled in your first paragraph were really bad examples. Predict the weather? When did metaphysics ever do that?
I like listening to ideas and perspectives. All ideas and all perspectives. Listen to everything and then run my numbers on them. I don't accept answers, but I accept explanations. If a scientists gives me an answer without the explanation, I'll just ignore him. Why? Because he thinks he's talking to me on his pedestal and I need to accept everything that he says. If a child tells me something with a thoroughly thought out explanation to back it up, I'm more than happy to think about it because he's giving me his perspective. I don't see a reason why you would want to purposely block out a well explained perspective if it can add depth to what you're thinking about.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 11:50 AM
Bro where exactly did I even mention metaphysics in my previous post? What you're saying is that Feng shui is statistical. That's not metaphysical. If you're saying Feng shui is simply a metaphysical concept then it's not even valid. It's not real. It's abstract and has no basis in practical application. You're saying that Feng shui uses 2000 years of past experience to statistically predict fortune.
I would not listen to a child. That's akin to listening to a guy who knows nothing about medicine talk to me about how to cure myself of hyperthyroidism. Your perspective so far has not been well explained at all. I would more than happily discuss philosophy such as morality but this ain't it. So far all you've done is told me it's based on statistics and done nothing to refute my rebuttals.
Edited by teddyc, 09 February 2013 - 11:54 AM.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 11:55 AM
Dude, you haven't answered any of my questions in this thread or any other thread. But let's stick to this here, define data.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 12:31 PM
lolwut. I've answered or refuted pretty much everything you've said in this thread (not gonna go back and see if I accidently missed any). I'll stick to the dictionary term. Data: Facts and statistics collected together for reference or analysis.
Edited by teddyc, 09 February 2013 - 12:33 PM.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 12:44 PM
Does the collection have to be written? It can be stored in your head. Why aren't facts recited from someone's memory considered as a collection of reference material? Because your narrow interpretation of data consists only of lists of numbers in a book sitting on a university library's shelf.
You have refuted nothing here today. The only thing you've done is continued with your narrow interpretation of the words data and science. You have also successfully convinced me that you believe a narrow vision of this world is better than a wider multiperspective one. You think it's wrong to look at things through different lenses. Thank you, you just made everyone that read this thread dumber.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 01:02 PM
The collection has to be recorded. Data can be recorded in your head, I didn't say they couldn't. Once again you're making baseless accusations here. You however, have shown me no proof of this recorded data. Get someone who has such data, and see if he's written it down. It's the modern world. Paper is cheaply available. Surely out of the thousands of Feng shui practitioner's at least one has physically recorded his data. And besides, this goes back to my previous post where I've made it clear it's not possible for ancient Chinese Feng shui practitioners to have recorded a LOT of things that would be relevant to the modern world. Climate has changed, cars exist, computers exist, thousands of species of plants and animals have gone extinct. Those would all factor into a prediction.
I've refuted everything here today. The only thing you've done is continued with your nonsensical ramblings about why Feng shui is real with absolutely ZERO supportive evidence. Your only rebuttal thus far is "herp derp the data is in their heads so sorry I can't prove it". You have also successfully convinced me that you believe a fantastical vision of this world is better than a wide and logical one. You think it's wrong to look at things through logic. Thank you, you just made everyone that read this thread dumber. Good luck with your lack of logic goals of 2013 and lol in the end you had to resort to insults cos you couldn't support your argument.
Edited by teddyc, 09 February 2013 - 01:12 PM.
Posted 09 February 2013 - 01:05 PM
That's it. Ignored.
Edited by DrBroscientist, 09 February 2013 - 01:07 PM.
Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:54 AM
You just contradicted yourself. You accept that it's in his head, but you need him to write it down now? Why? To suit your convenience of seeing the world more narrowly?
Did I ever in this thread say that? No. I said it adds perspective.
So other then plagiarizing me, you've done nothing.
Refute? So what did you gain by refuting everything that was said? I found that you're narrow minded and unlikely to succeed outside the protection of a university campus....oh and I also made some passive income from my business. How did you fare today?
Edited by DrBroscientist, 10 February 2013 - 03:56 AM.