Freethought & Rationalism Archive

03-13-2003, 09:45 PM

By echidna

That�s an innovative use of the word �shallow�. Let�s see �

Coming from a person who think he is intelligent ... I've take that as complement (Sarcasm).

Response #1 : Without question, your friend is utterly correct in his claims despite the lack of any evidence for their veracity or any precedent which cannot be explained by other means.

My reply : As I said before, I was there to confirm what he saw (in his dreams) thus I'm the proof. You can say I'm a liar and since I have no way proving to you that I didn't lie, I will accept your accusations. In the end, it is depends on whether you accept or not ... I don't lose anything because I had seen the proof several times.

Response #2 : I want to test & seek evidence for these claims in order to identify if they are true or not, because otherwise they can be explained in other ways.

Question 1 : You want to come to Malaysia? Fine ... come over.

Question 2 : Give me one good reason first before coming here on why I should entertain you by bring you to see my friend?

Seraphim, you appear to have mistaken S&S for the Blind Gullibility Forum.

Nope, I just mistaken for existence of intelligence species here.

For your suggestion to be true (and immune to scrutiny as you would prefer it to remain), so too must I accept every other nutjob claim without evidence. The greenhouse effect will cause the earth to explode, brightly coloured t-shirts will improve my health, Elvis lives in Tonga, the Earth is flat, my mother was a space alien, the sky will fall on my head tomorrow, yadda yadda.

Now, I daresay your logic can immediately accept these claims without evidence or wicked scepticism, but call me shallow, mine can�t.

Frankly speaking, I don't give a shit what you wish to accept. I don't gain or lose anything by your acceptance.
I know what I saw, I thought of the logical answer of what it could be and it fits with my idea of what I had seen ... thus I have a new perspective on the possibility of the mind. I gain a new level of understanding and use it to further define the world around me.

Maybe you�d care to try � http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/crackpot.htm

I�d rate yours as well over 200 points, but I�m not certain.

Maybe someday your kids will be born with such a gift but due to your "intelligence", they will turn into vegetable. Maybe when you watch them wither away because they cannot throw away what nature gave them, you will find your proof. That time, you can take the proof and that 200 point and still it where the sun don't shine.

echidna · 03-13-2003, 09:58 PM

Actually I encourage my kids while they are children to explore and enjoy their imaginations (much as you seem to do). But when the time comes for them to grow up and learn to be independent without a parent to constantly look out for them, they'll need to learn about judgement, & heaven help them if they grow up believing every goofball who walks up claiming they can read their minds.

03-13-2003, 11:40 PM

By echidna

Actually I encourage my kids while they are children to explore and enjoy their imaginations (much as you seem to do). But when the time comes for them to grow up and learn to be independent without a parent to constantly look out for them, they'll need to learn about judgement, & heaven help them if they grow up believing every goofball who walks up claiming they can read their minds.

My reply : Hmph ... as always, you didn't understand what I meant. (should I be surprised?)

What I meant was what will you do if your children have dreams where they see the future and it happens exactly like what they saw in the dream? What will you say then? "There is no such thing so shut up and take this drugs?"

What will you say to your children when they can "predict" what another person thinking before he could say it out and tell you about it? "You're lying so shut up and take this drugs?"

exile · 03-14-2003, 03:10 AM

I regularly have dreams that predict the future. I had a dream the other day in which I got up and drove to work. And, lo, the next morning I got up and drove to work (actually that was also a dream - I then REALLY woke up, got up and drove to work)! Hallelujah! Where's James Randi's million dollars?

I think the best we can say is that the human brain is a complex organ whose workings we are only just beginning to understand. However we will not understand it if we uncritically accept all paranormal claims - they must be tested.

Could someone with these so-called psychic powers do something useful with it, like destroy all weapons, or transmit "must sign peace treaty" messages to all warring factions in the world? No, they're too busy bending spoons.

Just · 03-14-2003, 05:42 AM

If you really do have an open mind try doing this..

Experimental Group
Materials/Participants:
2 willing people
25 Cards
A quiet space without distractions.
Means to record results.

Method:

Both Person A (sender) and B (reciever) concentrate their thoughts on nothing. Try simply meditating or similar to get into this relaxed state. They should be around 3-5m away from each other.
Person A holds the cards and selects one in no particular order.
Person A, while in a medatative state needs to think of the picture shown on the card only. There may be different 'methods' of how to do this, an example would be imagining the image travelling through a tunnel to Person B. This can be done with eyes closed - it is probably better this way.
Person B should also imagine such a tunnel or similar. Think hard about what is the answer could be. After pondering over the answer for a time, answer.
Person A should note the answer correct or false.
After an extensive period of this activity parts of the brain may become noticable or uncomfortable. Record the area.

The key to this is, in my opinion, is to become in a state of altered conciousness, it seems to work more effectively this way.

A control would be appreciated too:

Control Group
Materials/Participants:
2 willing people
25 Cards
A quiet space without distractions.
Means to record results.

Method:

Person A gets the cards chooses one in no particular order.
Person B guesses whatever they feel like. Person B should have their eyes closed.
Person A or B must not be in an altered state or be conciously thinking about telepathy
Person A records results.

This control should limit extraneous variables.
Note:

Do not use drugs which could effect conciousness prior to doing the experiment, this is almost all drugs. Such as caffine, alcohol, paracetemol, etc...
Results should be in the format of
#. x
##. o
Where x is a negative answer and o is a positve answer and # is the number of the trial. (ie, starting at 1.)
Age and gender of participants would be helpful.

Mageth · 03-14-2003, 07:54 AM

My reply : hmph ... that's a VERY ARROGANT remark.

And one, aside from the Tinkerbell part, that I've actually heard proponents of paranormal abilities make. So not arrogant on my part.

Skeptics seems to forget a few things when dealing with such tests, like :

1. the brain is also where emotions comes from SO emotions from others WOULD INDEED affect them as well.

You're making the very claim here that you just accused me of being "arrogant" in pointing out. "Yes, of course, the emotions of the testers do affect them."

And a bit strange that an inherent ability of the brain such as remote viewing would be affected by the emotions of someone else in the room (or, in the case of many controlled tests that have been performed, in another room, separate from the subject(s)).

2. In most cases (especially in non-lab environments), such ability did work.

"Of course, when these abilities are tested in uncontrolled environments and around people who aren't skeptical and think such abilities exist, they do work."

IF in a lab it doesn't work, it is either doesn't exists OR the lab environment isn't suitable for it to work.

It's the former.

I don't mind accepting it doesn't exist (for YOUR benefits) if you had already made sure that the lab environment IS in suitable condition for it to work.

It's not that difficult to set up an objective lab experiment, and many that have been performed were set up so as to minimize "interference" from "skeptics". And paranormal abilities have never been proved to work in such experiments.

Lobstrosity · 03-14-2003, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Seraphim
My reply : Bullshit ...

Skeptics is just another words for "those who are too lazy to think".

If a scientists cannot achieve something inside the lab which others claims can be done outside, he or she will find a way to make the experiment work outside the lab as well. THAT is the mark of a true scientists and one who seeks answers.

That's fine, you're free to have any opinion you wish. I just hope one day you'll learn how childish and uneducated you sound. You don't seem to actually have any understanding of what science is. The goal of science is not to prove something right no matter what the evidence says, it's to discover what is true. No good scientist would "make" an experiment work--that's rather stupid. You do the experiment in an unbiased way and you see what is true. The only way to get results out of an experiment is if you control for all other possible explanations. I could conduct an experiment by going to Vegas to watch a magician on stage. What would I see? Magic. Voila! I've now proven conclusively that magic exists! Oh, wait, you mean I was tricked? You mean it was all illusion? Damn. Because my experiment didn't control for anything, I got tricked just like you have been. You have proof of nothing Seraphim and it's sad you can't see that. I hope one day you stop taking the easy way out. Turn on your brain and use some critical thinking skills to actually assess what's going on.

Mad Kally · 03-14-2003, 08:19 AM

Quote:

posted by Seraphim:
What I meant was what will you do if your children have dreams where they see the future and it happens exactly like what they saw in the dream? What will you say then? "There is no such thing so shut up and take this drugs?"

What will you say to your children when they can "predict" what another person thinking before he could say it out and tell you about it? "You're lying so shut up and take this drugs?"

I would but not in your words. I would say "come on kids, it's time for your anti-psychotic medications."

You might want to look into some of those neuroleptic drugs yourself.

Try something original for a witty come back this time. Your making fun of me because my mom thought I was possessed by a demon is getting old.

Baloo · 03-14-2003, 09:18 AM

I have never seen or heard of any convincing (or even remotely appealing) evidence for the existence of people with psychic abilities, just like I've never seen or heard any convincing evidence for Leprechauns living at the end of rainbows. It would be silly for me to endlessly chase rainbows to prove to myself that their really aren't any leprechauns. Think of the wasted time - the nuisance of having to hop into your car and go for a drive after EVERY rainstorm, just to be sure that particular rainbow doesn't have a leprechaun. Anyone who did believe in leprechauns would be silly to get angry about my disbelief, lacking physical, tangible, and independently verifiable evidence to support their beliefs. Similarly, it would be silly for me to endlessly expend any effort to test a complete stranger (much less myself) for psychic abilities - [editted to add] and silly for anyone who believed people have psychic abilities to be angry at me for my disbelief, if they lacked physical, tangible, and independently verifiable evidence to support their belief.

And in the above sentence, I do mean endlessly. Honestly, if I actually did the above test, putting in my time and effort as well as that of a friend, and came out with a conclusive negative result, would that decide anything for you? Anything at all? Or (and be honest), wouldn't your natural reaction to a negative result be: we should test with a different person (because maybe my friend's EM brain waves were interfering), in a different place (maybe the power lines down the street were interfering), for a different power (maybe I can't read my friend's mind, but maybe I *can* remotely view the card itself), etc, etc, ad nauseum.

This is inherently different from close-mindedness. This is based entirely on the fact that there are only so many hours in a day. It is based on the fact that there are an infinite number of false, supernatural claims that could be tested - a million lifetimes could be spent trying to test all of them. Or, we can choose to test only those supported by compelling evidence, ignoring the rest pending compelling evidence in favor of them. Or we can just accept some of them, because they sound neat-o, and discard others, because they sound childish, and accept some, because we abhor the thought that we might be gullible, and reject others, because OTHER people ARE gullible, and accept some, because we love and/or truse a person who also accepts them, but reject others, because only complete strangers accept them, etc., etc.

An aside: for someone who presents as evidence their own eye-witness testimony, I ask the following:
1) Are your perceptions of events
(A) sometimes flawed, perhaps cast into a context where they coincide with what you believe
(B) never flawed - what you perceive is exactly what is happening, always

2) Is the manner in which you store your perceptions to short term memory
(A) susceptible to error
(B) perfect

3) Is the manner in which you transfer short term memories to long term memories
(A) susceptible to error
(B) perfect

4) Once a memory is placed into your long-term membory storage
(A) dynamic, possibly becoming different in several aspects from that memory which was originally stored
(B) perfectly static, like an old photograph - maybe fading a bit, but definitely not undergoing any changes in detail

5) When you recall memories, are they
(A) influenced by the context in which you are recalling them
(B) recalled exactly as you stored them, not remotely influenced by the context in which they are recalled.

If you answer B to any of the above, you are either mistaken, or you have a non-human brain (perhaps you are a cyborg, part human, part computer). Given that, if the answer to all of the above is A, then I'd hope you could understand why I'm not so moved by your eyewitness testimony (or eyewitness testimony in general).

Point being, if anyone wants me to think their belief in psychic abilities is credible, they'd best be ready to present tangible, physical, independently verifiable evidence in favor of it.

Just like you'd ask of the leprechaun believers.

***********************************
To get back to your post, I will take a second to comment on your test above, assuming you wish to find out for yourself wether you are psychic or not. I'd offer the criticisms: neither the tester or tested party should know whether any given answers are right or wrong until after all testing has commenced. In other words, rather than having person B say his/her guess aloud, he/she should make a note of it. This eliminates many possible sources of accidental cueing on the part of the tester to the tested party. Secondly, it cannot be emphasized enough: IF A NEGATIVE TEST OCCURS, NEVER DISCARD THE RESULTS - FACTOR THEM INTO ALL FUTURE TESTS. In other words, don't "tweak" the conditions and retest, again and again, until you find the "right" conditions for your psychic abilities. Otherwise, you are guaranteed with enough effort to get results like this:
Test conditions 1: 25% - negative
Test conditions 2: 26% - negative
Test conditions 3: 22% - negative
Test conditions 4: 23% - negative
...
Test conditions 68: 31% - POSITIVE!

However, summing tests 1 through 68 might only give a cumulative 25.1% => negative. If you honestly think the conditions of test #68 were those needed for success, you must repeat #68 enough times to make the CUMULATIVE case postive, not the isolated #68 trial. Then, and only then, have you a convincing case (otherwise it's a simple fallacy of selective reporting - the kind of mistake that can costs scientists' years of wasted effort).

But, with these slight modifications, I think it would be a great way for you to find out for yourself whether your beliefs in your psychic abilities are credible. If you find out they are, by all means, let us know (and I say, without any sarcasm whatsoever, I'll help you set up a official test with the JREF, and you will be a millionaire if you can do the exact same thing under his watchful eye).

03-14-2003, 04:19 PM

By Mageth

And one, aside from the Tinkerbell part, that I've actually heard proponents of paranormal abilities make. So not arrogant on my part.

Whatever else you wish to call it.

You're making the very claim here that you just accused me of being "arrogant" in pointing out. "Yes, of course, the emotions of the testers do affect them."

Fine.

And a bit strange that an inherent ability of the brain such as remote viewing would be affected by the emotions of someone else in the room (or, in the case of many controlled tests that have been performed, in another room, separate from the subject(s)).

Strange also how microwaves and magnetic fields affects radar ...

"Of course, when these abilities are tested in uncontrolled environments and around people who aren't skeptical and think such abilities exist, they do work."

If you say so ...

It's not that difficult to set up an objective lab experiment, and many that have been performed were set up so as to minimize "interference" from "skeptics". And paranormal abilities have never been proved to work in such experiments.

Fine. Tell that to Randi and his millions bucks as well.

By Lobstrosity

That's fine, you're free to have any opinion you wish. I just hope one day you'll learn how childish and uneducated you sound. ...

Shut up and show me how you can predict probabilities of outcome when dealing with human emotions like that coin flipping crap you like to use so much. The rest you wrote here is bullshit.

By Mad Kally

I would but not in your words. I would say "come on kids, it's time for your anti-psychotic medications."

Hmph ... might as well say "Come on kids, its time to turn your brain into vegetable like mummy!" because that what your kids' brain going to be.

You might want to look into some of those neuroleptic drugs yourself.

I'll face my shortcomings and weakness with my spirit and strength of my soul ... sorry ... forgot talking to bunch who don't believe in such things. Save your medicine for your children, I'm fine by myself.

Try something original for a witty come back this time. Your making fun of me because my mom thought I was possessed by a demon is getting old.

Yeah, I know ... but it is still funny.

To - macaskil, Just and Baloo, Thanks for the views, it's been noted.

03-14-2003, 05:42 AM	#55
Just Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Melbourne Posts: 22	Back on topic? If you really do have an open mind try doing this.. Experimental Group Materials/Participants: 2 willing people 25 Cards A quiet space without distractions. Means to record results. Method: Both Person A (sender) and B (reciever) concentrate their thoughts on nothing. Try simply meditating or similar to get into this relaxed state. They should be around 3-5m away from each other. Person A holds the cards and selects one in no particular order. Person A, while in a medatative state needs to think of the picture shown on the card only. There may be different 'methods' of how to do this, an example would be imagining the image travelling through a tunnel to Person B. This can be done with eyes closed - it is probably better this way. Person B should also imagine such a tunnel or similar. Think hard about what is the answer could be. After pondering over the answer for a time, answer. Person A should note the answer correct or false. After an extensive period of this activity parts of the brain may become noticable or uncomfortable. Record the area. The key to this is, in my opinion, is to become in a state of altered conciousness, it seems to work more effectively this way. A control would be appreciated too: Control Group Materials/Participants: 2 willing people 25 Cards A quiet space without distractions. Means to record results. Method: Person A gets the cards chooses one in no particular order. Person B guesses whatever they feel like. Person B should have their eyes closed. Person A or B must not be in an altered state or be conciously thinking about telepathy Person A records results. This control should limit extraneous variables. Note: Do not use drugs which could effect conciousness prior to doing the experiment, this is almost all drugs. Such as caffine, alcohol, paracetemol, etc... Results should be in the format of #. x ##. o Where x is a negative answer and o is a positve answer and # is the number of the trial. (ie, starting at 1.) Age and gender of participants would be helpful.

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

03-13-2003, 09:45 PM	#51
Seraphim Guest Posts: n/a	By echidna That�s an innovative use of the word �shallow�. Let�s see � Coming from a person who think he is intelligent ... I've take that as complement (Sarcasm). Response #1 : Without question, your friend is utterly correct in his claims despite the lack of any evidence for their veracity or any precedent which cannot be explained by other means. My reply : As I said before, I was there to confirm what he saw (in his dreams) thus I'm the proof. You can say I'm a liar and since I have no way proving to you that I didn't lie, I will accept your accusations. In the end, it is depends on whether you accept or not ... I don't lose anything because I had seen the proof several times. Response #2 : I want to test & seek evidence for these claims in order to identify if they are true or not, because otherwise they can be explained in other ways. Question 1 : You want to come to Malaysia? Fine ... come over. Question 2 : Give me one good reason first before coming here on why I should entertain you by bring you to see my friend? Seraphim, you appear to have mistaken S&S for the Blind Gullibility Forum. Nope, I just mistaken for existence of intelligence species here. For your suggestion to be true (and immune to scrutiny as you would prefer it to remain), so too must I accept every other nutjob claim without evidence. The greenhouse effect will cause the earth to explode, brightly coloured t-shirts will improve my health, Elvis lives in Tonga, the Earth is flat, my mother was a space alien, the sky will fall on my head tomorrow, yadda yadda. Now, I daresay your logic can immediately accept these claims without evidence or wicked scepticism, but call me shallow, mine can�t. Frankly speaking, I don't give a shit what you wish to accept. I don't gain or lose anything by your acceptance. I know what I saw, I thought of the logical answer of what it could be and it fits with my idea of what I had seen ... thus I have a new perspective on the possibility of the mind. I gain a new level of understanding and use it to further define the world around me. Maybe you�d care to try � http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/crackpot.htm I�d rate yours as well over 200 points, but I�m not certain. Maybe someday your kids will be born with such a gift but due to your "intelligence", they will turn into vegetable. Maybe when you watch them wither away because they cannot throw away what nature gave them, you will find your proof. That time, you can take the proof and that 200 point and still it where the sun don't shine.

03-13-2003, 09:58 PM	#52
echidna Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,832	Actually I encourage my kids while they are children to explore and enjoy their imaginations (much as you seem to do). But when the time comes for them to grow up and learn to be independent without a parent to constantly look out for them, they'll need to learn about judgement, & heaven help them if they grow up believing every goofball who walks up claiming they can read their minds.

03-13-2003, 11:40 PM	#53
Seraphim Guest Posts: n/a	By echidna Actually I encourage my kids while they are children to explore and enjoy their imaginations (much as you seem to do). But when the time comes for them to grow up and learn to be independent without a parent to constantly look out for them, they'll need to learn about judgement, & heaven help them if they grow up believing every goofball who walks up claiming they can read their minds. My reply : Hmph ... as always, you didn't understand what I meant. (should I be surprised?) What I meant was what will you do if your children have dreams where they see the future and it happens exactly like what they saw in the dream? What will you say then? "There is no such thing so shut up and take this drugs?" What will you say to your children when they can "predict" what another person thinking before he could say it out and tell you about it? "You're lying so shut up and take this drugs?"

03-14-2003, 03:10 AM	#54
exile Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: England Posts: 735	I regularly have dreams that predict the future. I had a dream the other day in which I got up and drove to work. And, lo, the next morning I got up and drove to work (actually that was also a dream - I then REALLY woke up, got up and drove to work)! Hallelujah! Where's James Randi's million dollars? I think the best we can say is that the human brain is a complex organ whose workings we are only just beginning to understand. However we will not understand it if we uncritically accept all paranormal claims - they must be tested. Could someone with these so-called psychic powers do something useful with it, like destroy all weapons, or transmit "must sign peace treaty" messages to all warring factions in the world? No, they're too busy bending spoons.

03-14-2003, 07:54 AM	#56
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	My reply : hmph ... that's a VERY ARROGANT remark. And one, aside from the Tinkerbell part, that I've actually heard proponents of paranormal abilities make. So not arrogant on my part. Skeptics seems to forget a few things when dealing with such tests, like : 1. the brain is also where emotions comes from SO emotions from others WOULD INDEED affect them as well. You're making the very claim here that you just accused me of being "arrogant" in pointing out. "Yes, of course, the emotions of the testers do affect them." And a bit strange that an inherent ability of the brain such as remote viewing would be affected by the emotions of someone else in the room (or, in the case of many controlled tests that have been performed, in another room, separate from the subject(s)). 2. In most cases (especially in non-lab environments), such ability did work. "Of course, when these abilities are tested in uncontrolled environments and around people who aren't skeptical and think such abilities exist, they do work." IF in a lab it doesn't work, it is either doesn't exists OR the lab environment isn't suitable for it to work. It's the former. I don't mind accepting it doesn't exist (for YOUR benefits) if you had already made sure that the lab environment IS in suitable condition for it to work. It's not that difficult to set up an objective lab experiment, and many that have been performed were set up so as to minimize "interference" from "skeptics". And paranormal abilities have never been proved to work in such experiments.

03-14-2003, 09:18 AM	#59
Baloo Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 417	I have never seen or heard of any convincing (or even remotely appealing) evidence for the existence of people with psychic abilities, just like I've never seen or heard any convincing evidence for Leprechauns living at the end of rainbows. It would be silly for me to endlessly chase rainbows to prove to myself that their really aren't any leprechauns. Think of the wasted time - the nuisance of having to hop into your car and go for a drive after EVERY rainstorm, just to be sure that particular rainbow doesn't have a leprechaun. Anyone who did believe in leprechauns would be silly to get angry about my disbelief, lacking physical, tangible, and independently verifiable evidence to support their beliefs. Similarly, it would be silly for me to endlessly expend any effort to test a complete stranger (much less myself) for psychic abilities - [editted to add] and silly for anyone who believed people have psychic abilities to be angry at me for my disbelief, if they lacked physical, tangible, and independently verifiable evidence to support their belief. And in the above sentence, I do mean endlessly. Honestly, if I actually did the above test, putting in my time and effort as well as that of a friend, and came out with a conclusive negative result, would that decide anything for you? Anything at all? Or (and be honest), wouldn't your natural reaction to a negative result be: we should test with a different person (because maybe my friend's EM brain waves were interfering), in a different place (maybe the power lines down the street were interfering), for a different power (maybe I can't read my friend's mind, but maybe I can remotely view the card itself), etc, etc, ad nauseum. This is inherently different from close-mindedness. This is based entirely on the fact that there are only so many hours in a day. It is based on the fact that there are an infinite number of false, supernatural claims that could be tested - a million lifetimes could be spent trying to test all of them. Or, we can choose to test only those supported by compelling evidence, ignoring the rest pending compelling evidence in favor of them. Or we can just accept some of them, because they sound neat-o, and discard others, because they sound childish, and accept some, because we abhor the thought that we might be gullible, and reject others, because OTHER people ARE gullible, and accept some, because we love and/or truse a person who also accepts them, but reject others, because only complete strangers accept them, etc., etc. An aside: for someone who presents as evidence their own eye-witness testimony, I ask the following: 1) Are your perceptions of events (A) sometimes flawed, perhaps cast into a context where they coincide with what you believe (B) never flawed - what you perceive is exactly what is happening, always 2) Is the manner in which you store your perceptions to short term memory (A) susceptible to error (B) perfect 3) Is the manner in which you transfer short term memories to long term memories (A) susceptible to error (B) perfect 4) Once a memory is placed into your long-term membory storage (A) dynamic, possibly becoming different in several aspects from that memory which was originally stored (B) perfectly static, like an old photograph - maybe fading a bit, but definitely not undergoing any changes in detail 5) When you recall memories, are they (A) influenced by the context in which you are recalling them (B) recalled exactly as you stored them, not remotely influenced by the context in which they are recalled. If you answer B to any of the above, you are either mistaken, or you have a non-human brain (perhaps you are a cyborg, part human, part computer). Given that, if the answer to all of the above is A, then I'd hope you could understand why I'm not so moved by your eyewitness testimony (or eyewitness testimony in general). Point being, if anyone wants me to think their belief in psychic abilities is credible, they'd best be ready to present tangible, physical, independently verifiable evidence in favor of it. Just like you'd ask of the leprechaun believers. *********************************** To get back to your post, I will take a second to comment on your test above, assuming you wish to find out for yourself wether you are psychic or not. I'd offer the criticisms: neither the tester or tested party should know whether any given answers are right or wrong until after all testing has commenced. In other words, rather than having person B say his/her guess aloud, he/she should make a note of it. This eliminates many possible sources of accidental cueing on the part of the tester to the tested party. Secondly, it cannot be emphasized enough: IF A NEGATIVE TEST OCCURS, NEVER DISCARD THE RESULTS - FACTOR THEM INTO ALL FUTURE TESTS. In other words, don't "tweak" the conditions and retest, again and again, until you find the "right" conditions for your psychic abilities. Otherwise, you are guaranteed with enough effort to get results like this: Test conditions 1: 25% - negative Test conditions 2: 26% - negative Test conditions 3: 22% - negative Test conditions 4: 23% - negative ... Test conditions 68: 31% - POSITIVE! However, summing tests 1 through 68 might only give a cumulative 25.1% => negative. If you honestly think the conditions of test #68 were those needed for success, you must repeat #68 enough times to make the CUMULATIVE case postive, not the isolated #68 trial. Then, and only then, have you a convincing case (otherwise it's a simple fallacy of selective reporting - the kind of mistake that can costs scientists' years of wasted effort). But, with these slight modifications, I think it would be a great way for you to find out for yourself whether your beliefs in your psychic abilities are credible. If you find out they are, by all means, let us know (and I say, without any sarcasm whatsoever, I'll help you set up a official test with the JREF, and you will be a millionaire if you can do the exact same thing under his watchful eye).

03-14-2003, 04:19 PM	#60
Seraphim Guest Posts: n/a	By Mageth And one, aside from the Tinkerbell part, that I've actually heard proponents of paranormal abilities make. So not arrogant on my part. Whatever else you wish to call it. You're making the very claim here that you just accused me of being "arrogant" in pointing out. "Yes, of course, the emotions of the testers do affect them." Fine. And a bit strange that an inherent ability of the brain such as remote viewing would be affected by the emotions of someone else in the room (or, in the case of many controlled tests that have been performed, in another room, separate from the subject(s)). Strange also how microwaves and magnetic fields affects radar ... "Of course, when these abilities are tested in uncontrolled environments and around people who aren't skeptical and think such abilities exist, they do work." If you say so ... It's not that difficult to set up an objective lab experiment, and many that have been performed were set up so as to minimize "interference" from "skeptics". And paranormal abilities have never been proved to work in such experiments. Fine. Tell that to Randi and his millions bucks as well. By Lobstrosity That's fine, you're free to have any opinion you wish. I just hope one day you'll learn how childish and uneducated you sound. ... Shut up and show me how you can predict probabilities of outcome when dealing with human emotions like that coin flipping crap you like to use so much. The rest you wrote here is bullshit. By Mad Kally I would but not in your words. I would say "come on kids, it's time for your anti-psychotic medications." Hmph ... might as well say "Come on kids, its time to turn your brain into vegetable like mummy!" because that what your kids' brain going to be. You might want to look into some of those neuroleptic drugs yourself. I'll face my shortcomings and weakness with my spirit and strength of my soul ... sorry ... forgot talking to bunch who don't believe in such things. Save your medicine for your children, I'm fine by myself. Try something original for a witty come back this time. Your making fun of me because my mom thought I was possessed by a demon is getting old. Yeah, I know ... but it is still funny. To - macaskil, Just and Baloo, Thanks for the views, it's been noted.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.