Prove the unprovable

[matgb]

Skeptico: How do you prove photography to a blind man?

I add no further comment. None is needed. Genius.

(via oltheros at apocalinks)

Comments

[miss-s-b.livejournal.com]

* yoink *

[bokuniwa.livejournal.com]

This is great

[doccy.livejournal.com]

Comments are closed? Dammit...

See, they're being far too complex about the whole thing. Simple way to prove really;

1) Take blind man/woman. Cover them completely in clothing.

2) Cut an L-shape in one arm. Get them to confirm it's been cut in an L-shape.

3) Leave to bake on a summer's day.

The searing pain from the L-shaped sunburn should convince them that sunlight can, indeed, burn a specific shape on a target substance - in this case, flesh. It's a tiny leap of logic to get from 'skin can be affected by light' to 'people can make something that's even more sensitive'.

Not that I'm recommending lightly roasting blind people - it just seems a lot simpler, and doesn't involve any pesky theories. Unless I'm not thinking straight ;)

[doccy.livejournal.com]

Oh... Wait... *actually reads the full thing* Ahhh... Well, what's the point of psychic powers if you can't burn blind people with them? :P

[matgb]

I was wondering when I got the first comment whether you'd missed the point. mean, your idea would work, but it's a bit less extensible.

[burkesworks.livejournal.com]

How do you prove photography to a blind man?

The corollaries to that being "how do you prove biometrics to a blind man" and "how much do you pay him (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,2042271,00.html)".

[matgb]

Ouch. Can't blame him for taking the job, nor for them for paying him, but it's still wrong you can make the jump like that.

[silentgreeneyes.livejournal.com]

this is fantastic :)

ION, not going to London this friday, but will be soon.

[the-mendicant.livejournal.com]

I like that blog site, well worth a deeper delving. However, I don't entirely agree with the writer's premis.

I know he's looking at psychic experiences from a skeptical and scientific angle, and by those standards, yes it is impossible to prove that these things exist. But lack of proof is not the same thing as proving that something doesn't exist. Remember John Selwyn Gummer feeding his daughter beef burgers whilst saying vehemently that there was no proof for BSE?

[matgb]

Oh, absolutely, it cannot be disproved, but there isn't enough evidence to support it. Same for God(s), I see no proof, rationalism demands I assume they don't exist. Give me proof, and I'll accept, in the meantime, I'll get on with my life.