I know you're just messing with me. I do have a sense of humor.
I question everything, all the time, not just claims of seemingly magical skills. I question whether the sky is really blue, whether water is really wet, whether money really is the root of all evil (some day, I'll get some real money together and actually test that theory, I hope!). It's just my nature.
I guess you can say I'm an "I'll believe it when I see it, smell it, touch it, taste it, feel it" kind of guy. Or when others whose opinions I trust have done so but even then I'm going to want to feel it first hand before I give it the final "yes" vote. Only then will I put my faith in something, not before.
Having seen these claimed abilities to be able to influence people and things with no physical contact for a long time now, with absolutely no reproducability (I hope that's a word, it's quite early and I haven't had any coffee yet) on the part of those making the claims, I have built up quite a bit of what I feel is healthy skepticism about them. I've never seen anyone who could actually do it, so how can I believe in it?
My real question here is:
How many times do you have to disprove something to yourself and others before you stop being accused of being "closed minded" about it?
If the answer is "never", which is what is being asserted here, then I will wear that badge with honor. Because I would rather be "closed minded" than "simple minded", any day of the week.
If you simply believe something that is claimed on the word or the side show presentation of the person making the claim, with no testing of your own to be able to prove it, then that is simple minded in my book. So if not believing after putting it to the test and it fails is "closed minded" than that is exactly what I am and I'm durned proud of it.
Question, test, be sure of anything you believe in, anything. Then when you are satisfied that this thing is true beyond a shadow of your doubt you can believe with whole hearted surety and not just with blind faith.
Wouldn't that be preferable?
I have stated, ad nauseum, that my disbelief is conditional, have I not? That if someone can show me the money and actually do this, I'll change my mind.
Is that being closed minded still?
If so, then that is what I am. Guilty as charged and happy to be that way.
I, of course, don't see it that way.