Interesting JE Hits....

SG, you are nothing but a believer. You are one that would rather try to discredit the JREF challenge than have it beat. That's ok, the tactic you are using is neither original or unique. Many believers come up with excuses to avoid the challenge. That's all you have, though, SG.. excuses.

Your tall tales mean nothing. People don't have superpowers.

If you want information about applicants and so-on, feel free to e-mail Randi, or if you are ever in Jacksonville, walk in the front door and ask for it. As a non-profit organization, their records should be public access.
 
Posted by thaiboxerken

"The JREF test isn't scientific".

LOL.

They fail to understand that, while the JREF challenge isn't backed by the scientific community, it IS still a controlled and double-blind test. Yes.. it's scientific, just not funded by science foundations.
Click to expand...

TBK.

Do you consider the "Sylvia Challenge", the test that Randi has designed for Sylvia, to be scientific or not?

If you feel that "Yes, it is", could you explain how the protocol would yield results that would hold up scientifically? For example, do you feel it is adequately controlled? Is the Sylvia test double blind?

10 people, tbk, one of them is read and 9 aren't (and they all know it). All 10 are people known to Randi though not Sylvia. The scoring is conducted in comparison with statistics that are completely arbitrary.

If she passed (which isn't impossible to do from incredibly lucky guesswork) how can you possibly think the Sylvia test results would be considered proof of her psychic ability within the scientific community?
 
CFLarsen said:

What is your purpose of asking for this name?
Click to expand...

The purpose is so that when the name is refused, he can call the JREF challenge a fascade. That's his entire purpose, to discredit the tests that would show his beliefs to be false. He's making excuses for the fact that people don't have superpowers and can't win the prize.
 

Do you consider the "Sylvia Challenge", the test that Randi has designed for Sylvia, to be scientific or not?

If you feel that "Yes, it is", could you explain how the protocol would yield results that would hold up scientifically? For example, do you feel it is adequately controlled? Is the Sylvia test double blind?



No, this is just a preliminary test.


10 people, tbk, one of them is read and 9 aren't (and they all know it). All 10 are people known to Randi though not Sylvia. The scoring is conducted in comparison with statistics that are completely arbitrary.

Arbitrary, how so?


If she passed (which isn't impossible to do from incredibly lucky guesswork) how can you possibly think the Sylvia test results would be considered proof of her psychic ability within the scientific community?

It wouldn't, also.. that's not the actual JREF test Sylvia would be performing. It's just a preliminary test to see if there is something to be tested. An actual double-blind test would then be designed.

Oh, and the scientific community would certainly want to duplicate the test themselves. They'd want to see repeatable results. They wouldn't consider it proof, but evidence that something is there.. it might nudge the scientific community into testing Sylvia.
 
Very funny Claus. Do you know anything abut bonds? The name of the donor is not what I am interested in. Again, I will repeat it one more time and explain:

Bonds are ISSUED by such things as power companies, insurance companies, mortageg companies, corporations, cities, states and the Federal government. The name of the issuing authority appears on them. I would have to assume this is what is blacked out on this document, not the name of the donor. This document states Fixed Assets. This would denote bonds issued by some corporation or other issuing authority, not whomever donated them. They apparently pay dividends and interest as well.

If the blacked out portion is indeed the name of the donor does this mean the bonds are on loan to Randi for the purpose of his challenge and do not really belong to him? This would be the only reason GS is holding them with the original owners name still on them even if they are in the JREF account. This brings up new
concerns I didnt even think of before.

So I will repeat my question: what is the name of the issuing authority or coproration that issued these bonds and now I will also say: what is the big secret requiring that to be blacked out?

I have an idea why the name is not revealed but I will not speculate or say why until and if and when the name is ever revealed.
 
My purpose in asking for the name is that there is yet another kind of fixed asset in the form of a bond and it is issued by a surety company. It is a form of insurance. The premium appears on Randi's 501(3)c information tax return. This injects a third party into the decision to pay off: the surety company who could then litigate the matter as they usually reserve the right to do that. By having this blacked out line and by nor showing who owns and who issued the bonds, Randi is leaving himself open to speculation he does not have compete control over the principal amount.

If Randi would publicize the name of the issuing authority of the bond, if he would announce for example there is one million dollars in Rated A+ bonds issued by the Ohio Water Authority or Los Angeles Hospital Authority or the NYS Dormitory Authority or General Motors or whatever it would be a great way for JREF to settle the speculation and he could recruit more applicants who will be assauged by this information. I hve a perfectly positive and good reason to ask this question Claus.
 
tbk,

Why shouldn't the preliminary tests (which no one has ever passed, interestingly), be scientific as well? Why save the "science" for the final and use....what, exactly instead?...for the preliminary?

Preliminary or final...both tests should be scientifically credible and completely fair. However, how fair is this? .

....Participants known to Randi not Sylvia...selected by Randi...9 of them knowing they haven't been read, yet scoring the results "as if" they have...the "statistics" used to evaluate the scoring (totally arbitrary statistics, cited as if they are mathematically sound, when in reality they are based on nothing at all...just Randi's claim)....

Why would anyone want to participate in a scientifically flawed and statistically unsupportable preliminary test just in the hope that the obvious flaws of the design would not eliminate them and that they would somehow be able to get to take a "better" and more scientific "final test" in the future?
 
SteveGrenard said:
My purpose in asking for the name is that there is yet another kind of fixed asset in the form of a bond and it is issued by a surety company. It is a form of insurance. The premium appears on Randi's 501(3)c information tax return. This injects a third party into the decision to pay off: the surety company who could then litigate the matter as they usually reserve the right to do that.
Click to expand...

Well, what is your reason for saying that this could be the case here?

Do you have any evidence?
 
Clancie,

The JREF Challenge is only about testing whether people can do what they claim. Even if the principles might be scientific, all that is needed is for someone to show - not prove - that he/she can do his/her paranormal ability.

Without trickery, of course.

Both parties must agree to the design. So your question is moot.
 
Using the controls as means to eliminate the applicant is ridiculous but this is what Randi is doing. Browne would be rated on who she doesn't read rather than on who she does. She could give a 100% perfect reading to one person and still fail based on the reports given by the other nine who are known to Randi.
After seeing this protocol, no medium in their right mind would consider the JREF challenge and that would be my advice to Browne or any other medium if they ever asked me. So far I guess they are psychic enough to figure this out on their own.

So what would be the result: another medium bites the dust and doesn't pass the preliminary. But the preliminary was not scientific so its okay? I dunno. Tell that to Randi.
 
Larsen: Both parties must agree to the design. So your question is moot.


Yeah, Claus, and if you don't agree and don't sign what do you get? Your picture and your own clock on Randi's homepage
weekly for the rest of your life?
 
SteveGrenard said:
Yeah, Claus, and if you don't agree and don't sign what do you get? Your picture and your own clock on Randi's homepage
weekly for the rest of your life?
Click to expand...

No, not if you officially back down from the challenge. Sylvia hasn't done that. She has just evaded the whole issue.

Please answer the question: Do you have any evidence that such a third party exists and that what you describe is possible?
 
Steve,

I don't feel like looking it up, but do you know if the Russian girl passed the prelim she took? I thought she did, but that Randi wants to test her again.

If memory serves, he wants to give her another preliminary test, though. Seems by the rules of the Challenge as set out by Randi himself that, regardless of how she was able to pass, she should now advance to the final, not be re-tested at the preliminary stage.

Am I incorrect that she passed it?
 
tbk,

Why shouldn't the preliminary tests (which no one has ever passed, interestingly), be scientific as well? Why save the "science" for the final and use....what, exactly instead?...for the preliminary?

Costs and time. Again, you are trying to discredit the JREF test. I can see why, your beliefs are being challenged by it.


Preliminary or final...both tests should be scientifically credible and completely fair. Participants known to Randi not Sylvia...selected by Randi...9 of them knowing they haven't been read, yet scoring the results "as if" they have...the "statistics" used to evaluate the scoring (totally arbitrary statistics, cited as if they are mathematically sound, when in reality they are based on nothing at all...just Randi's claim)....

You grossly misrepresent the test. Again, you are making excuses for why people can't pass the test. The real reason is that people don't have superpowers. The criteria for passing the test was agreed upon by both Randi and Sylvia. The test was designed by both Randi and Sylvia. Why isn't Sylvia following through with a test that she helped to design?


Why would anyone want to participate in a scientifically flawed and statistically unsupportable preliminary test just in the hope that the obvious flaws of the design would not eliminate them and that they would somehow be able to get to take a "better" and more scientific "final test" in the future?

You don't like that particular test because of various reason. However, if you think you have superpowers or know someone who does.. you can customise one along with Randi and do it. Take the JREF money. The JREF preliminary test gives the testees many benefits of the doubt. You admitted that Sylvia could pass her test using luck alone. SHouldn't that mean she could easily do it using her superpowers?

You want to discredit the test and JREF, but you fail. The preliminary is there for costs and time reasons. If one can't pass the easily passable preliminary, why even bother with a costly and extensive test?
 
SteveGrenard said:
Using the controls as means to eliminate the applicant is ridiculous but this is what Randi is doing. Browne would be rated on who she doesn't read rather than on who she does. She could give a 100% perfect reading to one person and still fail based on the reports given by the other nine who are known to Randi.
After seeing this protocol, no medium in their right mind would consider the JREF challenge and that would be my advice to Browne or any other medium if they ever asked me. So far I guess they are psychic enough to figure this out on their own.

So what would be the result: another medium bites the dust and doesn't pass the preliminary. But the preliminary was not scientific so its okay? I dunno. Tell that to Randi.
Click to expand...

So now you imply deception and dishonesty on Randi's part. You imply that if Browne have a 100% accurate reading, Randi would somehow coach the others into saying it was accurate for them as well.

That's ok, these excuses will not work for the reasonable person. People don't have superpowers.

My advice to psychics and mediums is to avoid the JREF challenge, only so that their trickery will not be discovered.
 
Please answer the question: Do you have any evidence that such a third party exists and that what you describe is possible?


The evidence Claus is in the very document you pointed to. The blacked out lines. There are two possibilities:

1) The bonds remain in the name of the donor's account so this is why they are blacked out. I understand why they should be blacked out since the donor wants to remain anonymous. But
if that's the case, why is the original donor's name still on them. There is a mechanism to change the ownership of the bonds and JREF's name should be on them.


2) The blacked out lines are the issuing authority or corporation's name. This is the more likely of the two. What reason is there for JREF to suppress who issued the bonds? None that I can think of unless they are surety bonds and not corporate or public authority bonds.

With those lines blacked out I have no evidence of any of this but the existence of the blacked out lines adds fuel to the speculation. If Randi unequivocally states JREF owns those bonds and they were issued by so and so it will go a long way in helping to promote applicants for the challenge. I am sure you will agree this would be a very positive step.
 
Posted by thaiboxerkenAgain, you are trying to discredit the JREF test. I can see why, your beliefs are being challenged by it.
Click to expand...

The only belief that it challenges is my belief that the test should be (1) scientifically sound and (2) fair.
Posted by tbk

You grossly misrepresent the test.
Click to expand...

A big charge, tbk. Specifics, please? How have I -specifically- "misrepresented" anything about the Sylvia test? What did I say that is untrue? You can't just accuse me of that without providing specifics.


The test was designed by both Randi and Sylvia. Why isn't Sylvia following through with a test that she helped to design?
Click to expand...

Randi presented the terms of his test to Sylvia and she agreed. She did not, technically, "help to design it".

Sylvia's participation or not really is irrelevant. The test Randi designed for her to take is very flawed (for reasons I've given) and is not scientifically sound. We may disagree on why that is, but I haven't seen you contradict any specficis of my criticism or explain why, in fact, it is a very good test of paranormal ability.
 
Clancie,

Why don't you ever do some work of your own? All it takes is a simple search on Randi.org:

Our rule is that an applicant may re-apply in 12 months after failing the preliminary test. Come to think of it, "psychic" Natalia Lulova's new lawyer applied promptly at the end of her 12-month period, for a re-engagement, and we've been almost six months trying to clarify the meanings of words and other weighty lawyer-type matters. These folks do run on.
Swift, June 13th, 2003
Click to expand...

You don't "feel" like looking it up? "SloppyLazyKaffeeKlatchClancie". That should be your registered name. :rolleyes:
 
You know.. i've seen this same line of excuses many times.. and I've also heard them in conversation.

I guess the big reason many people won't go after the JREF million is that they don't think the JREF actually owns the million.. is this your assertion, SG?

LOL.

It's a lame excuse, SG. Very lame, since many of the "psychics" and "mediums" claim to do what they do for spiritual purposes and not monetary. In fact, several of these people claim that it's because of the money that they refuse the test.. that they don't need the money or that they aren't about money.

The refusal to take the test is more about belief and faith, these people are afraid to have their beliefs placed to the test.
 
THBK: So now you imply deception and dishonesty on Randi's part. You imply that if Browne have a 100% accurate reading, Randi would somehow coach the others into saying it was accurate for them as well.


Reply: I did not say or imply deception on Randi's part but since you now mention it, the thought will cross everyone's mind. He is, after all, a self-admitted liar, cheater, charlatan and trickster.

Randi doesnt have to coach the others actually and he knows it

What Browne has to do, even if she gets 100% accuracy for the person she reads, is make sure somehow that nothing she tells the person she reads is true of the people she doesn't read. Now that IS NOT her claim. It is Randi's demand. It is my understanding that Randi will not budge on this condition and she does not want to back down either and withdraw as someone suggested she could do in order to have her clock removed. I guess there is some clock policy, procedure and protocol somewhere that Claus checked.

They set a statistical cut off point which Randi claims to have consulted statisticians on but it is quite high as I recall (I havent read the offer in awhile). It is still absurd and I cannot blame Browne or anyone else from going on a fool's errand with this challenge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom