Well, that's because no one has ever stepped up to the plate and proved him wrong. Until that happens, I'd say he's standing on pretty firm ground.
That's a bit like saying that no one has ever stepped up to the plate and proved Holocaust deniers wrong. The "reward" that Kelpersmek disingenuously referred to will never be collected because no proof is ever enough for fanatics.
People who make claims outside what is accepted have to prove their claims, if they don't or can't then [shrug].
Assuming that everyone is interested in proving them, especially to True Believers. It's usually a waste of time.
I didn't see it and don't know what homeopathy claims to do, so I can't comment on this. It's likely he was referring to one specific case. i.e. someone had a very specific claim that homeopathy could do something (generally not accepted by other practitioners) and he proved them incorrect.
Idid see it, so I can comment on this. There was no specific case. What his "panel of researchers" did was to take some of the ingredients homeopathy uses, dilute them to the strength normally used (we're talking extremely diluted solutions here), put them in test tubes and then waited to see if there were any changes in the distilled water used. Of course there wasn't, and Randi and his followers crowed that they had "proven homeopathy wrong."
Of course, they didn't bother to mention, or perhaps didn't care to find out (see
GW Bush, et. al) that the way homeopathy operates, it has to interact with the rest of the body. Their experiement was equivalent to taking out everything under the hood of a car other than the engine and then proclaiming the engine to be defective because the car won't start.
Well, other people - scientists and skeptics - laud his work, so apparently he's not so much 'manipulating' as doing a very good job of testing.
By that standard, Intelligent Design should be taught in every university on the planet. Not impressed.
Yes, he's a magician, so he puts on a really good show because he DOES know what people want to see. He knows what they expect and so he frames his tests around what a normal person would expect. That's called knowing your audience.
That's rather obvious.
Well, physical science is the only empirical science there is. That's what it's supposed to do. I don't see that as a limitation.
Right; it's the only empirical science there is. It's limited in terms of anything outside those boundaries.
We are all in agreement here.
Obviously, "we" are not as you're addressing another member of this forum who isn't in agreement.
Unless you can control your episodes and make them happen at will, there's no point. Your ability cannot be scientifically tested nor proven.
Actually, I never said I was interested. There's no reason I should be.