Freethought & Rationalism Archive

usaaok · 02-25-2005, 07:51 AM

A challenge to atheists, skeptics, and materilists.(Not by me)

Quote:

An Australiain Lawyer, Victor Zammit, has come up with a challenge to anybody who can disprove the afterlife. This was because he saw that the challenge by James Zwinde Randi,who offered a million dollers to anybody who could demostrate the powers of the paranormal, was a succsess in disproving the existence of the paranormal. If anybody can disprove the his evidence of the afterlife, he will pay one million dollers to that indivdual.

Anybody fancy giving it a go? Lol. :rolling:

His website is:
http://www.victorzammit.com
And information on the challenge is:
http://www.victorzammit.com/skeptics/challenge.html

If any of you become rich, please imform me by PM.Lol. :thumbs: :funny:

IamMoose · 02-25-2005, 07:57 AM

Am gonna move this to GRD

.

IamMoose · 02-25-2005, 07:58 AM

In fact no I'm not *abruptly changes mind* I'm going to move it to EoG.

You see how tough it is being a mod? So many decisions

PoodleLovinPessimist · 02-25-2005, 08:35 AM

Quote:

An Australiain Lawyer, Victor Zammit, has come up with a challenge to anybody who can disprove the afterlife.

:snooze: The existence of an afterlife is metaphysically unfalsifiable. The failure to falsify an unfalsifiable assertion is not particularly interesting.

I'll give $1,000,000 to anyone who can disprove the existence of an invisible elephant in my living room.

exile · 02-25-2005, 08:39 AM

The only way I can think of to disprove the afterlife would be to die and then report back that the afterlife does not exist. Unfortunately in order to be able to do this, the afterlife would have to exist. His money would appear to be fairly safe then.

On the other hand it should be pretty easy to PROVE the afterlife, if it exists. Just give a secret message to someone who is about to die, and then ask him/her to transmit the message to a selected medium or by some sort of telekinesis. If nothing happens, the question is still open, as, of course, the existence of the afterlife is not dependent on mediums being genuine.

PoodleLovinPessimist · 02-25-2005, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamMoose

In fact no I'm not *abruptly changes mind* I'm going to move it to EoG.

How about S&S? Or Humor?

Ulrich · 02-25-2005, 09:03 AM

Seems like a fair challenge, after all they make the following statement, incdicating that this challenge pretty much mirrors Randi's challenge:

Quote:

Given the circumstances it is only reasonable, fair and equitable to match and to mirror as far as possible the skeptics' fundamental conditions one by one as the skeptics have had them on the Internet for a number of years now. It is reiterated that these conditions are based on the skeptics' own conditions.

Let's see how this challenge actually holds up in a comparison with Randi's challenge:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randi's Challenge

Applicant will declare agreement by signing this form where indicated on the reverse before a notary public, and returning the form to the James Randi Educational Foundation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Afterlife Challenge

Before the applicant makes a first submission (see paragraph 1 above) he/she must submit a document properly witnessed by a litigation lawyer that the litigation lawyer has explained to the applicant the preface and the conditions and that these have been understood and accepted by the applicant.

Randi requires that you fill out a web based form and have it notarized. Zammit requires you to hire a litigation lawyer and prepare a legal document! I think there is a bit of a difference here, let's see if I can quantify it:
Print out form and have notarized = $3.50 USD
Hire a litigation lawyer to prepare a legal document = several hours @ $100+ USD per hour

We are only talking about differences in time and money here, and either one is a drop in the bucket compared to the cool Million offered, so lets move on...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randi's Challenge

Applicant must state clearly in advance, and applicant and JREF will agree upon, what powers or abilities will be demonstrated, the limits of the proposed demonstration (so far as time, location and other variables are concerned) and what will constitute both a positive and a negative result.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Afterlife Challenge

The applicant has to rebut the substantive objective evidence presented in Victor Zammit's A Lawyer Presents the Case for the Afterlife (http://www.victorzammit.com/book/) (see chapters 3 to 24) which includes: Materialisation, Electronic Voice Phenomena, Instrumental Transcommunication, the Scole Experiments, Professor Gary Schwartz' Experiments, Mediumship - Mental, Physical and Direct Voice, Xenoglossy, the Cross-Correspondences, Proxy Sittings, Automatic Etheric Writing, Laboratory Experiments, Poltergeists, Apparitions together with the evidence provided by Near Death Experiences and Out of Body Experiences which psychics claim are supportive of and are directly linked with the afterlife.

Further, the applicant has to rebut the technical afterlife evidence presented by the following: Arthur Findlay's On the Edge of the Etheric, Sir William Crookes' On Human Personality and Researches in the Phenomena of Spiritualism; Sir Oliver Lodge's Raymond and Geraldine Cummins' Swan on a Black Sea and the evidence provided by the Inner Peace Movement.

In Randi's Challenge the applicant is simply required to state what powers they will demonstrate, and what will constitute positive and negative results. The challenge is open for the applicant to determine what they wish to prove, this should be easy for someone with psychic powers and should require very little preparation if the powers are gunuine.

With Zammit's Challenge the applicant must not only familiarize themselves with the information included in four books and the entire body of evidence presented by some looney supernatural movement, they must also directly refute all of this evidence. This amounts to the applicant having to write a book on the subject themselves, which would require months, if not years, of preparation.

But hey, isn't this worth it for a cool Million? Maybe, if you don't mind loosing your job and dedicating months of your life to this persuit, and as long as those reviewing the work are objective and impartial, so lets take a look:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randi's Challenge

Only an actual performance of the stated nature and scope, within the agreed-upon limits, will be accepted.

and

We consult competent statisticians when an evaluation of the results, or experiment design, is required.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Afterlife Challenge

The applicant agrees that the level of proof required to rebut the evidence will be the Cartesian test, "beyond any doubt". This means that there has to be absolutely no doubt at all in the minds of the Committee that the 'evidence' has been rebutted.

and

'The Committee' refers to a group of people expert in afterlife evidence.

With Randi's Challenge the test is empirical, the challenger sets the bar, and merely has to meet their own stated expectations. A statistician will be called in if the results need to be evaluated.

With Zammit's Challenge, the applicant must prove "beyond all doubt" to a panel of credulous loons, err, I mean 'committee of experts on the afterlife', that the afterlife does not exist.

Even if the applicant did make a case that would win over a nuetral observer, there is no way that 100% of this 'committee' would agree with applicant.

But wait, maybe someone with a lot of resources and time to dedicate to such an endevour could win the challenge. Maybe a professional author, or a skeptical entertainer like Penn Jilette, maybe even Randi himself, let's see...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Afterlife Challenge

The applicant agrees that in this challenge he or she is not a commercial consumer

WTF is this? The applicant cannot be a Commercial Consumer? What exactly is a Commercial Consumer in this context anyway? All I can think of is that this is included so that they can deny anyone like Randi from accepting the challenge.

As Penn would say, this Challenge is Bullshit!

Tuvar Ane Ingolenen · 02-25-2005, 10:06 AM

Yay Ulrich!:thumbs:!:thumbs:!:thumbs:!

maddog · 02-25-2005, 10:55 AM

What's an "expert in afterlife evidence"? How do you become one/gain this expertise?
#822

Jinto · 02-25-2005, 11:34 AM

Hmm.... it seems that the easiest way to prove to the committe that the afterlife does not exist would be to kill the committe - surely they would not object to this demonstration, as it's not like I'm threatening their existence, right?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-25-2005, 07:57 AM	#2
IamMoose Veteran Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: On the fringes of the Lake District, UK Posts: 9,528	Am gonna move this to GRD .

02-25-2005, 07:58 AM	#3
IamMoose Veteran Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: On the fringes of the Lake District, UK Posts: 9,528	In fact no I'm not abruptly changes mind I'm going to move it to EoG. You see how tough it is being a mod? So many decisions

02-25-2005, 08:39 AM	#5
exile Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: England Posts: 735	The only way I can think of to disprove the afterlife would be to die and then report back that the afterlife does not exist. Unfortunately in order to be able to do this, the afterlife would have to exist. His money would appear to be fairly safe then. On the other hand it should be pretty easy to PROVE the afterlife, if it exists. Just give a secret message to someone who is about to die, and then ask him/her to transmit the message to a selected medium or by some sort of telekinesis. If nothing happens, the question is still open, as, of course, the existence of the afterlife is not dependent on mediums being genuine.

02-25-2005, 10:06 AM	#8
Tuvar Ane Ingolenen Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: 52.35412N 4.90495E Posts: 1,253	Yay Ulrich!:thumbs:!:thumbs:!:thumbs:!

02-25-2005, 10:55 AM	#9
maddog Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: nm Posts: 2,826	What's an "expert in afterlife evidence"? How do you become one/gain this expertise? #822

02-25-2005, 11:34 AM	#10
Jinto Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: SLC, UT Posts: 957	Hmm.... it seems that the easiest way to prove to the committe that the afterlife does not exist would be to kill the committe - surely they would not object to this demonstration, as it's not like I'm threatening their existence, right?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.