Interesting JE Hits....

[SteveGrenard]

Larsen: Well, then, have you alerted the psychic researchers about this fantastic, awesome, incredibly precise medium?

Yes.

 

[CFLarsen]

Steve,

Who among the psychic researchers have you alerted?

You "forgot" this one:

Who is qualified to design an entire experiment? And why?

Just say the word, if you need for this to slow down.

 

[SteveGrenard]

Larsen: Who among the psychic researchers have you alerted?

I have alerted everyone here who reads this forum. Thousands of people? I dont know. I have given the mediums name three or four times here. I have alerted the 35 members of the medium testing group, a multi-centered colloqium of parapsychological researchers including Robinson, Roy, Schwartz, Keen, Beischel, Waldron, Watson, and some two dozen others you don't know and never heard of.

Larsen: Who is qualified to design an entire experiment? And why?

No one person and certainly not the lab rat himself (JE) as you assert which is why I have asked for and gotten many good ideas for a design here and passed them along to the group.
There was nothing vital about JE's suggestion to include EEG in this demonstration but it was something that interested JE and Schwartz accomodated him. Some day I hope to look at all the tracings myself. If you wish to pay my salary for a few weeks and buy me a ticket to Tucson I could do that for you. In the meantime I suggest you don't make demands unless you intend to fund them. Maybe Randi would pay for my trip west since he didnt want to go himself when he had the chance and he didnt want his referees to go either. I would need a RT ticket, boarding for my dogs, hotel and meals and two weeks salary. The whole thing might cost him six or seven thousand.

I will tell you why EEG may be of some side interest to this work.
For me, in a mediumship demonstration in the lab it is only of interest since it will prove what stage of sleep or whether a medium is awake when they appear to be in a trance. I personally do not buy into the synchronicity between ECG and EEG between two persons or its lack thereof as evidence of anything but I could be wrong. This is what JE was seeking and it may have been his special request because it is a question which was nagging at him. That's it. In other experiments, spectral analysis and ERPs (event related potentials) may be revealed by EEG in highly structured experiments involving the testing of precognition with ERPs showing up in the EEG a few hundred milliseconds before the target stimulus is presented and not show up when the target is not presented.

 

[CFLarsen]

I have alerted everyone here who reads this forum. Thousands of people? I dont know. I have given the mediums name three or four times here. I have alerted the 35 members of the medium testing group, a multi-centered colloqium of parapsychological researchers including Robinson, Roy, Schwartz, Keen, Beischel, Waldron, Watson, and some two dozen others you don't know and never heard of.

Your standard answer, then. How can you be sure they read your post??? Do you really think you are that important?

No one person and certainly not the lab rat himself (JE) as you assert which is why I have asked for and gotten many good ideas for a design here and passed them along to the group.

No one person is qualified? Great, Steve!! So, Schwartz, Roy, even you are not qualified to do this kind of research. Nice to get that clarified!

There was nothing vital about JE's suggestion to include EEG in this demonstration but it was something that interested JE and Schwartz accomodated him. Some day I hope to look at all the tracings myself. If you wish to pay my salary for a few weeks and buy me a ticket to Tucson I could do that for you. In the meantime I suggest you don't make demands unless you intend to fund them.

Perhaps you shouldn't, either, then....

I will tell you why EEG may be of some side interest to this work.
For me, in a mediumship demonstration in the lab it is only of interest since it will prove what stage of sleep or whether a medium is awake when they appear to be in a trance. I personally do not buy into the synchronicity between ECG and EEG between two persons or its lack thereof as evidence of anything but I could be wrong. This is what JE was seeking and it may have been his special request because it is a question which was nagging at him. That's it. In other experiments, spectral analysis and ERPs (event related potentials) may be revealed by EEG in highly structured experiments involving the testing of precognition with ERPs showing up in the EEG a few hundred milliseconds before the target stimulus is presented and not show up when the target is not presented.

Was there any difference between JE doing readings and JE not doing readings, EEG-wise?

 

[SteveGrenard]

JE was not the only medium tested with this. The results across all the mediums for the ECG and EEG part of the study can be found in the following paper:

http://www.survivalscience.org/schwartz/frame1.htm

There is an indexed sidebar created by Pam Blizzard to help people navigate this paper. You can scroll down to and click on Appendix A for the ECG and EEG results. This paper was
published previously in the JSPR and was peer reviewed prior to that.

 

[SteveGrenard]

Davefoc:Thank you to SteveGrenard and Clancie for their responses.

You're welcome.

DF: It is interesting that you would reference these JE statements. From my view as a skeptic, the remarks seem of no significance, as I would have expected every charlatan to say something similar. I would have noted the inherent dishonesty of them, which possibly you didn't. On one hand he says he doesn't care what you or I think and the other hand he has a television show based on convincing people that he is successfully talking to the dead. He must care what somebody thinks.

reply: To be fair, JE said these things in response to accusations by Randi and Jaroff, who are joined at the hip as Jaroff used unsubstantiated information supplied by Randi to blast JE in a TIME opinion piece. He does not say this to all serious investigators and scientists. There was a highly speciifc circumstance that elicited this reaction from JE.


Davefoc: I wasn't aware of this. Are the reports publically available?

Reply: http://www.survivalscience.org/schwartz/frame1.htm

Davefoc: Here is an area where we disagree. I don't know what the basis of this statement is. But by almost any definition that I can imagine, JREF does scientific testing. Perhaps though your definition of scientific is different than mine and if I understood that we would find some common ground on this.

Reply: Randifans and Randi-type skeptics have repeatedly said that Randi is a magician and self-confessed charlatan and that it takes one to know one and this is how they justify the JREF challenge. Randi is not a scientist and his test is not scientific. It follows no scientific methods but his designed on a case by case basis by Randi. The only taker he had recently and apparently still has is some Russian child in Brooklyn who claims she can read blindfolded. This is certainly worthy of debunking if she is faking.
When the "claims" are more complex he becomes mired down
in these complexities and then, as he demonstrated in various
mediumship experiments, backs out.

He no longer allows results which need to be interpreted statistically or in light of the evidence. Randi is basically a debunker and when something is debunkable he does an admirable job. Everything is black and white with him but
science at this stage of the game doesn't work that way. If
it did, as stated elsewhere, astrophysicists and quantum
physicists would all be driving taxis and that would include,
if they were still with us, Einstein, Bohr, and others. And
don't think Einstein, Bohr et al didnt have their Randi's to contend with in their day either.

 

[BillHoyt]

JE was not the only medium tested with this. The results across all the mediums for the ECG and EEG part of the study can be found in the following paper:

http://www.survivalscience.org/schwartz/frame1.htm

See Wiseman & Okeefe's critique.

Cheers,

 

[CFLarsen]

JE was not the only medium tested with this. The results across all the mediums for the ECG and EEG part of the study can be found in the following paper:

http://www.survivalscience.org/schwartz/frame1.htm

Appendix A:

"The EEG findings can be summarized briefly. Only the medium's EEG was analyzed."

Then, why did the sitters wear EEG headgear? There is nothing in the paper that indicates that EEG is influenced during a reading.

Can we surmise that this is not a brain phenomenon, as claimed by neofight? If it was a brain phenomenon, shouldn't it show in the EEGs?

 

[BillHoyt]

Everything is black and white with him but
science at this stage of the game doesn't work that way. If
it did, as stated elsewhere, astrophysicists and quantum
physicists would all be driving taxis and that would include,
if they were still with us, Einstein, Bohr, and others. And
don't think Einstein, Bohr et al didnt have their Randi's to contend with in their day either.

R E A L L Y!

You are always so utterly fascinating and so utterly full of pap. Please provide us the evidence for this outlandish claim:
"science at this stage of the game doesn't work [in black and white]"

Fascinating! So falsifiability is out the door? Wow! I must have missed class that day. Do tell.

Please provide us evidence for this outlandish claim:
"Einstein [had his] Randi's to contend with in their day."
Please cite the attempts to debunk Einstein and what, specifically they were trying to debunk.

Please provide us evidence for this outlandish claim:
"Bohr [had his] Randi's to contend with in their day."
Please cite the attempts to debunk Bohr and what, specifically they were trying to debunk.

Careful where you go with your answers, Steve. There is really only one rational response to salvage this poppycock, but I warn you: if you are foolish enough to take the available avenue, it will bite you. Your best move is to back down from this nonsense.

Cheers,

 

[SteveGrenard]

Then, why did the sitters wear EEG headgear? There is nothing in the paper that indicates that EEG is influenced during a reading.

Can we surmise that this is not a brain phenomenon, as claimed by neofight? If it was a brain phenomenon, shouldn't it show in the EEGs?


Reply: Which is exactly why some day when I have the time and funds, I said I would like to examine all of these tracings myself. You impute I may not be qualified to do this. I have been reading EEGs for 35 years, and more intensely for the past 7 so I hope I have enough experience to do exactly that. I am also installing a NEW program on my own equipment which will enable me to receive these tracings data from Schwartz on CD and transfer it so I can read and analyze it locally using EDF and without having to have his specific program on my site. This upgrade will happen within the next month. If he will send me the tracings this way maybe I don't have to go to Arizona. We'll see. Think of all the money you will save.

 

[BillHoyt]

Appendix A:

"The EEG findings can be summarized briefly. Only the medium's EEG was analyzed."

Then, why did the sitters wear EEG headgear? There is nothing in the paper that indicates that EEG is influenced during a reading.

Can we surmise that this is not a brain phenomenon, as claimed by neofight? If it was a brain phenomenon, shouldn't it show in the EEGs?

Bad boy, Claus! Naughty. Do you actually think Steve would post a paper he either didn't read or didn't remember correctly? Bad boy.

Cheers,

 

[SteveGrenard]

Hoyt and this is the only answer I will give you since I already justified it with the same comments:

Consider the RANDI Challenge in the arena of astrophysics and quantum physics and then get back to me. Consider your answer very carefully yourself .........I might add. Think real hard about this. Clue: give me a means to falsify black holes?

 

[CFLarsen]

Reply: Which is exactly why some day when I have the time and funds, I said I would like to examine all of these tracings myself. You impute I may not be qualified to do this. I have been reading EEGs for 35 years, and more intensely for the past 7 so I hope I have enough experience to do exactly that.

But nothing came out of this, right? There is no connection between EEG and psychic ability.

That's pretty important, me thinks. Don't you???

I am also installing a NEW program on my own equipment which will enable me to received the data from Schwartz on CD and transfer it so I can read and analyze it locally using EDF and without having to have his specific program on my site. This upgrade will happen within the next month. If he will send me the tracings this way maybe I don't have to go to Arizona. We'll see.

Wait a second....how come you can have the data sent to you, but not Randi?? Can I get a copy, Steve??

 

[Darat]

Hoyt and this is the only answer I will give you since I already justified it with the same comments:

Consider the RANDI Challenge in the arena of astrophysics and quantum physics and then get back to me. Consider your answer very carefully yourself .........I might add. Think real hard about this. Clue: give me a means to falsify black holes?

Completly irrelevant and I can't find any reasonable explanation for why you would persue this line of debate when you are ignoring the comments by Claus & BillHoyt about the experiemnts you had been discussing.

Why not respond to the comments they have made about the expereiments etc.?

 

[SteveGrenard]

C:But nothing came out of this, right? There is no connection between EEG and psychic ability. That's pretty important, me thinks. Don't you???

Reply: Yes, I do. I think that the findings were very significant but I still would like to have the chance to review them myself. Its a credit to Schwartz as an honest reporter to set forth the objectives of this part of the experiment and the actual results and I did read the paper. I never said Schwartz found anything significant. But by doing so we have less speculation, don't we?
Schwartz had the equipment, JE saw this and suggested this to Schwartz without knowing what the results would be. It was something he was interested in.

I explained to you that I have a different take on using EEG. I am interested in using EEG to determine if a deep trance medium is alseep and if so in what stage of sleep? If they were awake, conscious and not in the relaxed meditative state they claim, I would have a serious problem with their veracity and the veracity of their claim. If they were asleep, in a depeer stage of sleep, and speaking coherently, it would help to validate their claim.



CL: Wait a second....how come you can have the data sent to you, but not Randi?? Can I get a copy, Steve??


Reply: I didn't say all the data. I said with my new program we can transfer ECG and EEG tracings between multiple sites using an improved, more error free version of the European Data Format
as the format used to export the data. This only was developed within a year or so and was beta tested only within the past few months. EDF prior to this caused many errors and somewhere along the line would corrupt whole chunks of tracings converted to digital signals. The data will be encoded on CD. You would need to take it to a lab with software that can read it. I will be getting such software as part of a major clinical upgrade. If you think you can find someone that is willing and capable of downloading the tracings and is qualified to look at them (which should be no problem really), I can easily make you a copy of that CD if and when I get it and I have permission to do that. I will let you know. I have no idea what Randi could do with this information. Since this was not a VITAL part of the study I do not know what purpose it would serve but I am always open to having more people render an opinion and would be grateful for such input if you can get it on this aspect alone.

Randi could not have gotten any wave form data before because it was not exportable in an error free format. He severed contact and dialogue with Schwartz before this was even discussed. He made a demand: pack up everything and send it to him im Florida. Reply: No, you come here and agree to some restrictions. And then there were subject names on the data as well which needed to be protected. He didn't want to discuss the details even though the devil is in those. Randi is the epitome of a black and white sort of guy and I understand that. This work cannot be reduced to that. If one of the sitter's EEG showed something amiss or the ECG showed a heart condition, there is a real problem allowing Randi or anyone having this information. What I would do with the new system is to omit sitter and hence medium names (linked to those sitters publicly already; also medical info re the mediums is similarly protected ) to mask this data from becoming public knowledge. Hence the data can never be pinned on one sitter or one particular medium and would have to be used in a general way.

I am bound by confidentiality laws already. Randi is not and, in fact, refused to be. I would need you and Randi to sign a confidentiality agreement, breech of which now makes you liable to 10 years in prison and a quarter of a million dollar fine if found guilty of violating it. If you or Randi are willing to sign that I have no problem sharing this wave form data with you and your researcher(s) who also need to sign if and when I get it and have permission to do so. I would have to investigate whether being overseas is an impediment as I dont have that kind of information and what your country's extradition laws are should a violation cause you to be charged.

 

[SteveGrenard]

Darat: Why not respond to the comments they have made about the expereiments etc.?

Side issue. The JREF challenge is NOT scientific and why. Thanks anyway for your input. In case you missed it i was brought up by Davefoc. Hoyt injected himself into it. I was answering Dave.
What else is new around here? You are doing the same thing.

 

[CFLarsen]

Reply: Yes, I do. I think that the findings were very significant but I still would like to have the chance to review them myself. Its a credit to Schwartz as an honest reporter to set forth the objectives of this part of the experiment and the actual results and I did read the paper. I never said Schwartz found anything significant. But by doing so we have less speculation, don't we?

I didn't claim you said that, Steve. Stop obfuscating.

Schwartz had the equipment, JE saw this and suggested this to Schwartz without knowing what the results would be. It was something he was interested in.

And it turned out to be nothing.

I explained to you that I have a different take on using EEG. I am interested in using EEG to determine if a deep trance medium is alseep and if so in what stage of sleep? If they were awake, conscious, then I would have serious dobut about them feigning a hypnotic or sleep state. You can't fake sleep if you are wired to an EEG. My hypothesis would be that if they were in Stage 2, 3 or 4 sleep and were speaking as coherently as they appear to be then there is evidence of a paranormal explanation.

What do you need Schwartz' data for, then? Neither medium was in a trance.

Reply: I didn't say all the data.

I didn't claim you said that, Steve! Stop this incessant game.

I said with my new program we can transfer ECG and EEG tracings between multiple sites using an improved, more error free version of the European Data Format as the format used to export the data. This only was developed within a year or so and was beta tested only within the past few months. EDF prior to this caused many errors and somewhere along the line would corrupt whole chunks of tracings converted to digital signals. The data will be encoded on CD. You would need to take it to a lab with software that can read it. I will be getting such software as part of a major clinical upgrade. If you think you can find someone that is willing and capable of downloading the tracings and is qualified to look at them (which should be no problem really), I can easily make you a copy of that CD if and when I get it and I have permission to do that. I will let you know. I have no idea what Randi could do with this information. Since this was not a VITAL part of the study I do not know what purpose it would serve but I am always open to having more people render an opinion and would be grateful for such input if you can get it on this aspect alone.

So, there is no reason for Schwartz not to start shipping the data to Randi, then. Excellent. Has Schwartz informed Randi of this, have you, or should I?

Randi could not have gotten any wave form data before because it was not exportable in an error free format.

Now you are fibbing, Steve. You and I went through your shifting explanations until we ended up with the legal ones: That the data couldn't leave the university. Now, it can.

He severed contact and dialogue with Schwartz before this was even discussed. He made a demand: pack up everything and send it to him im Florida. Reply: No, you come here and agree to some restrictions.

Yeah, let's hear those restrictions again.

And then there were subject names on the data as well which needed to be protected.

We know the identity of all the sitters who are commented on in Schwartz' book, except the "Pretty in Pink" one, which is - incidentally - odd, since this hit was described as "poignant" by Schwartz, as well as being one of his favorites.

He didn't want to discuss the details even though the devil is in those. Randi is the epitome of a black and white sort of guy and I understand that. This work cannot be reduced to that.

That's exactly what Schwartz is trying to do, Steve.

If one of the sitter's EEG showed something amiss or the ECG showed a heart condition, there is a real problem allowing Randi or anyone having this information.

But was there? Schwartz would have to know this, in order to read the data correctly. He mentions nothing of this sort. And don't forget that only the mediums' EEG were investigated.

What I would do with the new system is to omit sitter and hence medium names (linked to those sitters publicly already; also medical info re the mediums is similarly protected ) to mask this data from becoming public knowledge. Hence the data can never be pinned on one sitter or one particular medium and would have to be used in a general way.

Of course, published, too. When? "Soon"??

I am bound by confidentiality laws already. Randi is not and, in fact, refused to be. I would need you and Randi to sign a confidentiality agreement, breech of which now makes you liable to 10 years in prison and a quarter of a million dollar fine if found guilty of violating it. If you or Randi are willing to sign that I have no problem sharing this wave form data with you and your researcher(s) who also need to sign if and when I get it and have permission to do so. I would have to investigate whether being overseas is an impediment as I dont have that kind of information and what your country's extradition laws are should a violation cause you to be charged.

You don't scare me one little bit. Let's see the confidentiality agreement, Steve. You can start scanning the one you signed.

 

[davefoc]

I came late to this and was unaware of the Schwartz report until SteveGrenard posted the link. Thank you.

I understand, a little bit better how this has gone on so long. I am sure that most of the things I would like to say at this point have been said, so I will attempt to make my comments brief.

On the testing: This report goes right to the heart of the difference between a skeptics view of the world and a non-skeptics view of the world. This testing was of essentially no informative value at all to this skeptic at least.

The key question that one is trying to determine the answer to with regard to talk to the dead mediums is whether the medium can obtain information from the sitter or a dead person in a way that is unexplainable by standard natural laws. So a simple and obvious requirement of any such testing is to prevent information leaks between the sitter and the medium that have known natural law explanations. At a minimum this would suggest that the medium not be allowed to see the sitter and that there be no verbal communication between sitter and medium which can impart lots of difficult to exclude opportunities for information exchange, like the pitch, amplitude, steadiness and amplitude of the answer.

The fact that verbal communication wasn't excluded is a pretty damning suggestion that the people setting up these tests were not trying to scientifically prove anything or were not qualified to do so if they were trying. It is then followed up by the bogus technique of asking the control group reformulated and more difficult questions and using this as a basis to decide that the mediums were more successful than the control group. And then to cap it off no data is published. Nice.

On Einstein:
Great example, sort of. Yes Einstein's theories had and have their detractors. But what a difference. Einstein created theories to explain the Michelson-Morley results that suggested the constancy of the speed of light. The MM tests were well documented and have been repeated many times. Einstein went on as a result of those tests and his theorizing to make testable predictions about the world that he thought followed from the constancy of the speed of light.

Those theories were documented and could be scrutinized by anybody willing to put in the effort. There are many well documented and independently done tests of the predictions of the theory with published data. Never once, was anything that Einstein did based on anything as shaky as the "science" that supports the notion that the talk to the dead folks aren't just plain charlatans.

 

[renata]

I am bound by confidentiality laws already. Randi is not and, in fact, refused to be. I would need you and Randi to sign a confidentiality agreement, breech of which now makes you liable to 10 years in prison and a quarter of a million dollar fine if found guilty of violating it. If you or Randi are willing to sign that I have no problem sharing this wave form data with you and your researcher(s) who also need to sign if and when I get it and have permission to do so. I would have to investigate whether being overseas is an impediment as I dont have that kind of information and what your country's extradition laws are should a violation cause you to be charged.

Emphasis mine above.

Steve, I am not familiar with civil law in NY or Arizona. However, I highly doubt that breach of a confidentiality agreement that threatens 10 years in prison time could be enforceable. I strongly suggest you have a lawyer look at it.

 

[Clancie]

davefoc,

Schwartz (professor at University of Arizona) also wrote a book about his mediumship experiments, "The Afterlife Experiments". I actually have a second copy of it (don't ask!). If you'd like to have it and have a mailing address let me know and I'd be glad to send it to you. Its not doing me any good.

Even many believers feel Dr. Schwartz's experiments were flawed, while giving him credit for being a pioneer at this time for looking into it in the first place.

The point is: Schwartz is the only scientist we know of who has actually designed an experiment and asked for JE's participation.

And JE did participate in Schwartz's experiments (5 of them in all).

So the criticism that "JE doesn't let himself be scientifically tested" always annoys me a bit. The only scientist we know of who has actually asked him is Schwartz and JE did accept and let himself be tested on five different occasions, with five different test protocols.