E-mail Exchange Round 3
Previous Round E-mail List Next Round
Robert Cioffi responded:
Subject: [...]
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 10:59:11 -0700
From: "Robert Cioffi" <[email protected]>
To: "John Blanton" <[email protected]>"Powers" again! "Beneath" is another derogatory term. Of course you get mail like that, you are coming across like an Osama video. Aditionally so is the the term "test". A "test" is by whose parameters? What "test"? What kind of "test"? How long a "test"? Performed by you or a neutral party? Who else do you "test"? Preists? Rabbis? Politicians? Why? What is your purpose? Reason for being? Don't you have anything better to do with you time & energy?
Finally, you are addressing me, not Elizabeth Joyce. I read your site. I responded to the misrepresentation which I believed was characterized by what I read. I was the one offended by the tone and the tenor of the article. I was actually annoyed by the entire site. The others misrepresented can defend themselves. But, I know Elizabeth, and from my own personal experience with her I realize and acknowlege her gifts through my own "tests" (a/k/a familiarlity) with her time and time again. No "testing" necessary with this boy! If you want to learn whether Elizabeth actually has a gift, talk to her. However just like determining whether a priest is an effective counselor to a parishioner, you would have to spend some time. Not administer some carnival like show piece Q & A. You have her e-mail link.
However, if you are so open minded, why don't you have a response link on your web site. Post my mail responses to your article. Or are you afraid that you will get too many alternative testimonials from individuals who can relay truthful accounts of their own. Or do you want to "test" my truthfulness.
In the meantime, I am sure that you and your collective will have enough to do debunking the host of predictive statements conerning your boy Dubaya.
Have fun.
Our response (along with the previous text):
Subject: [...]
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 17:15:04
From: John Blanton <[email protected]>
Organization: The North Texas Skeptics
To: Robert Cioffi <[email protected]>Robert Cioffi wrote:
> "Powers" again! "Beneath" is another derogatory term. Of course you get
> mail like that, you are coming across like an
> Osama video. Aditionally so is the the term "test". A "test" is by whose
> parameters? What "test"? What kind
> of "test"? How long a "test"? Performed by you or a neutral party? Who
> else do you "test"?
> Preists? Rabbis? Politicians? Why? What is your purpose? Reason for
> being? Don't
> you have anything better to do with you time & energy?Sorry of some of the terms (like "powers" and beneath") are objectionable. I am willing to use any terms you prefer. Just let me know. You use "gift." I can go along with that.
What kind of test? How long? Make me an offer. That's what the challenge protocol is all about. Performed by us. It's our money. Your money? You can perform the tests.
Priests and rabbis and politicians have not sent me an e-mail. I am still waiting.
Yes, I have other things to do with my time and energy. How about yourself?
> Finally, you are addressing me, not Elizabeth Joyce. I read your site. I
> responded to the misrepresentation
> which I believed was characterized by what I read. I was the one offended
> by the tone and the tenor
> of the article. I was actually annoyed by the entire site. The others
> misrepresented can defend themselves.
> But, I know Elizabeth, and from my own personal experience with her I
> realize and acknowlege her gifts through my own "tests" (a/k/a familiarlity)
> with her time and time again. No "testing" necessary with this boy! If you
> want to learn whether Elizabeth actually has a gift, talk to her. However
> just like determining whether a priest is an effective counselor to a
> parishioner, you would have to spend some time. Not administer some
> carnival like show piece Q & A.
> You have her e-mail link.Sorry you were offended by the tone and the tenor. Fact is Elizabeth Joyce is a fool if she actually believes the stuff she claims. How do you rate yourself? We have previously reviewed her Web site and rated her claims. What do you think of what we said? Go over it point by point with me. Good suggestion, though. It's about time to revisit the Joyce site and publish another evaluation. I will take up your suggestion and send her an e-mail. I will mention your recommendation.
> However, if you are so open minded, why don't you have a response link on
> your web site.
> Post my mail responses to your article. Or are you afraid that you will get
> too many alternative testimonials
> from individuals who can relay truthful accounts of their own. Or do you
> want to "test" my truthfulness.Good. Actually, I had already started preparations for a section on our Web site. I will have the first exchanges up later today. Would have been earlier, but we had our monthly Skeptics meeting this afternoon.
> In the meantime, I am sure that you and your collective will have enough to
> do debunking the host
> of predictive statements conerning your boy Dubaya.Don't fully understand the W reference. More, please.
> Have fun.
Thanks and best regards,
John Blanton
--
The North Texas Skeptics
http://www.ntskeptics.orgPrevious Round E-mail List Next Round