Skip to main content

Haiti "Magic is Real" Benefit

Ian Rowland (great magician - and the world's leading cold-reading expert) writes:

Dear Friends,

‘Magic Is Real: Haiti Benefit Evening’

It will happen this coming Wednesday!

It will only happen ONCE.

It will be a great, memorable and unique occasion!

Why would you miss this?


We’ve got the TIME.

We’ve got the PLACE.

We’ve got the ENTERTAINMENT.

We’ve got the MAGIC.

We’ve got some fantastic Charity Auction items that I promise YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE. Someone on Wednesday evening will pick up the BARGAIN OF A LIFETIME. I am not even close to kidding about this.

So… you have been wondering whether to come. NOW is the time for you and your friends to finally decide 'Yes', and to be part of this success story.

Magic Is Real, and we will all prove it on Wednesday evening. Come and see the proof for yourself.

We made it easy to get to. (If you can stumble sideways out of London Bridge stn, you can find this venue.)

We made it easy to get in. (£10 on the door or pay in advance: http://www.mycharitypage.com/IanRowland )

We made it easy to enjoy.

Now all we need is… YOU.

http://www.ianrowland.com/MagicIsRealForHaiti.html

With a simple mouse click, you can forward this email to everyone you know. Please DO.

Love,

- Ian

07939 047 464

ian@ianrowland.com

Comments

pascal said…
The link to Ian Rowland's site seems to have suffered serious adverse juju, but the link to the charity page works fine.

Which is good since otherwise we would not know that we should be at the Borough Bar, 8 London Bridge Street (right next to London Bridge Stn)from 7pm onwards tomorrow, which is Wednesday 10th February.

Now all that I have to do is work out the route from the Barbican...

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen...

The Evil God Challenge and the "classical" theist's response

On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se...

Sye show continues

I was sent a link to this , for those interested in the never ending saga of Sye TenBruggencate and his "proof" of the existence of God. Hit "sinner ministries' proof of the existence of god" link below or on side bar for 30+ earlier posts on this topic that I wrote during an extended interchange with him last summer (check the literally many hundreds of comments attached to these posts if you really want to get into how Sye thinks and argues). Sye's amazing intial "proof" is available here . PS. For those interested, my own "presuppositional" proof, parodying Sye's proof by his principle "the impossibility of the contrary" (which turns out to be the key to Sye's proof) is: My claim: Sye's mind is addled and his thinking unreliable because he was hit on the head by a rock. Prove this is false, Sye. Try to, and I will say - "But your "proof" presupposes your mind is not addled and you can recognise a pr...