Just Another Magic Trick?

[Foolmewunz]

My point exactly. Randi isn't a scientist iether. Nothing qualifies him to conduct scientific studies. I love Randi, I really do. He is awsome, but the truth is he is also a genius. And a genius capable of making a challenge no one can win. I think it is his true genius that makes this the best trick he has ever done.

Don't misread me. I know Randi is a good skeptic. I know he is an honest person, and he means well taking bad psychics and such off the street, and we are all behind him. But at the end of the day, he is still a very smart magician.

Isn't this worth consideration?

Considering......


Okay, done! Doesn't work for me. You have your opinion, and that's all it is, and mine differs. I've looked into too many challenges to see anything fraudulent or even flim-flam about the MDC.

You cite the 5% (ultimate bottom line rate) as "proof" of the deception. While you're just asking questions, ask yourself if that's maybe because the vast majority discover during negotiations that their usual parlor tricks aren't going to be allowed.

You are also missing the underlying challenge of the challenge.
You (or a home-building soothsayer of your choosing) make a claim.
You set out what you will do in order to proove that claim.
The Challenge then proposes a protocol to judge (in your eyes, too) fairly whether or not you have achieved what you claimed you were going to do. They don't take someone who claims to be able to find water with a willow branch and then ask them to turn lead into gold. They work out how to test just what claim(s) the claimant(s) is(are) making.

The whole point of Randi being a magician is that many of the tricks being employed by bogus paranormalists are magicians' tricks. They are stock in the trade. Those that aren't basic conjuring even fall back on carney huckster and geek show stuff. Who better than a magician to to debunk other magicians?

If Hawkings or Feynman was running this, I have a feeling you'd object because "well, they're frakkin' geniuses.... they just outsmart people". If Steven Spielberg and George Lucas put their collective millions behind such a challenge, it'd be "oh, sure... hollywood... they just used special effects and computer graphics to trick the claimants into thinking they failed".

In short, you'd likely find fault with anyone running the MDC. It's a convenient dodge for hoaxsters and true believers, because there are still far too many people out there who interrupt many such woo-ish claims with, "Hey, have you heard about the Million Dolllars that magician guy is giving out? You should just apply."

 

[Senex]

are you sure it isn't an attempt by magicians to call themselves skeptics for the benefit of publicity and ultimately money from the books they sell to create "challenges" that cant' be won. Randi is not a scientist. How am I to believe he is capable of conducting a fair scientific test. He is a showman. A great showman, but not a scientist.

You're lucky my dispensation has yet to arrive. In the interval I will have to make do with calling you kind names such as disingenuous. You enjoy attention and you have succeeded. In the end, whenever you die and your death goes ungrieved all things will equal. (hyperbole is allowed you quick fingered mods )

Randi may not have a degree but he certainly could teach many people who do what a double blind test accomplishes. Randi has much to teach in the ways of being fooled, by fooling yourself as well as being fooled by others. I suspect Randi has taught more people how to think in a scientific method as anyone ever has.

There are many scientists, but there is only one Randi.

 

[dustbunny]

To me it boils down to one simple thing. Why would James Randi spend decades of years exposing these psychics, mediums and any other frauds just to try and fool everyone with a bogus challenge. What would happen to his own credibility in the sceptical field if he wasn't genuine and upfront with people.

I agree with other members that people don't win it because they can't do it. I watched a clip of him in the early 1980's where he debunked a young psychic on television. I watched how the psychic claimed he could move a pencil and flick pages of the yellow pages over just by a few cleverly placed movements of his hand. I sat and tried to figure out how it was done but couldn't. James Randi was introduced afterwards and he showed a $10,000 cheque he carried that he was willing to give to anyone who could show genuine psychic ability.

The solution to the young psychics self claimed powers was so simple. The pencil trick was nothing more than balance and slight handmovement. The page flicking was next, surprisingly it was a breathing trick incorporated between hand movements that turned them over. When asked to turn just one page under a simple controlled test the psychic couldn't do it.

I know one thing if I'd dedicated all these years into getting answers I wouldn't risk destroying it by setting someone up. He has no need to, the ones that profess to be gifted do the work for him.

 

[Rasmus]

My point exactly. Randi isn't a scientist iether. Nothing qualifies him to conduct scientific studies. I love Randi, I really do.

Yes, of course you do. How could you not? What other logical explanation could there be for your baseless and continued accusations of fraud against him? When's the wedding?

He is awsome, but the truth is he is also a genius. And a genius capable of making a challenge no one can win.

That might well be so. But see, the problem is you need to look at the challenge that he actually did set up. And then you need to explain how exactly that particular challenge has been created in a way that nobody could win it.

We're waiting.

I think it is his true genius that makes this the best trick he has ever done.

I think you still have no sound reason for that opinion.

Don't misread me. I know Randi is a good skeptic. I know he is an honest person, and he means well taking bad psychics and such off the street, and we are all behind him. But at the end of the day, he is still a very smart magician.

Yes, he's a good sceptic and an honest person but you are still accusing him of fraud ...

Isn't this worth consideration?

No. Not in the least. You have nothing to offer and what you give is logical inconsistent. What should we consider?

 

[AndyD]

I agree with other members that people don't win it because they can't do it. I watched a clip of him in the early 1980's where he debunked a young psychic on television. I watched how the psychic claimed he could move a pencil and flick pages of the yellow pages over just by a few cleverly placed movements of his hand. I sat and tried to figure out how it was done but couldn't. James Randi was introduced afterwards and he showed a $10,000 cheque he carried that he was willing to give to anyone who could show genuine psychic ability.

The James Hydrick debunking. I saw it on Youtube earlier this week. I believe Hydrick may now be hiding in a penitentiary somewhere (that's where you often end up if you spend your life cheating and lying about who you are) - I think he wished he'd had somewhere to hide when Randi challenged him.

Great viewing - for anyone who actually cares about the subject.

 

[Moochie]

A few times I've wanted to weigh in with a suitable refutation of what the OP implies, but I realize it's all been done before, ad nauseam.

Nothing of interest here.


M.

 

[dustbunny]

The James Hydrick debunking. I saw it on Youtube earlier this week. I believe Hydrick may now be hiding in a penitentiary somewhere (that's where you often end up if you spend your life cheating and lying about who you are) - I think he wished he'd had somewhere to hide when Randi challenged him.

Great viewing - for anyone who actually cares about the subject.

Thanks AndyD it was youtube where I saw it but couldn't remember the psychics name. When JR showed how the tricks were done I couldn't believe it, so simple, but to the untrained eye it wasn't obvious. Like I said in my earlier quote James Randi doesn't need to set anyone up. His and others work is too important for the challenge to be some kind of elaborate magic trick. If a psychic has nothing to hide take the test and prove us all wrong! I wait patiently.

 

[Terry]

I've asked a couple of times, and no one seems able to deny that the final arbiter as to whether the million is won/lost is Randi himself.

That isn't true. Read the challenge rules. Both parties agree before the test to a protocol and what constitutes success or failure. The success criterion must be self-evident and not require judging. So for a dowser, it might be something like "Identify the container with water in it correctly, from 10 choices, at least 8 times in 10 trials". (Note, statistics may vary, numbers here are just examples.) If you do it, you get the million, Randi doesn't "judge" whether you succeded or not, it is a mere matter of counting.

 

[AndyD]

Thanks AndyD it was youtube where I saw it but couldn't remember the psychics name. When JR showed how the tricks were done I couldn't believe it, so simple, but to the untrained eye it wasn't obvious.

Yep, the simplicity of both the trick and the the test were amazing. It's a shame that one side-effect of Randi's myth busting is that some good, simple magic tricks get revealed.

Like I said in my earlier quote James Randi doesn't need to set anyone up.

In the interests of skepticism, can I add that no one "needs" to set anyone up and, despite my "troll" call, I will concede that skepticism can be equally applied to Randi as it can to anyone. It benefits no one to hold heroes unaccountable. But the fact is, no one here has said Randi should not be held up to skeptical analysis if there's something to analyse.

The problem is the OP failed to present any reason for skepticism despite repeated calls for either evidence or a specific claim. It's difficult to play judge and jury on someone when there isn't even a charge.

At least the discussion might serve useful purpose to others who bother to follow the links to all the information they need to form a reasoned opinion on the issue.

I certainly learned something from it

 

[GzuzKryzt]

I respectfully disagree, the numbers say it all. Only 5% of potential testers make it to the test. I think it sounds rigged. You haven't proved to me it isn't.

If you allege the Challenge is rigged you have to bring the evidence.

I do not think the Challenge is rigged but I could be convinced otherwise - if you have some facts, data, evidence to back up your allegation.

The Challenge sounds rigged? Fine. Prove it.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

A few times I've wanted to weigh in with a suitable refutation of what the OP implies, but I realize it's all been done before, ad nauseam.

Nothing of interest here.


M.

Upon rereading, I agree. Classic trolling by tapman.

Next.

 

[fuelair]

cheap or not, they do seem like publicity stunts. Lets face it magicians love to fool people, and love an audience. I seems that when their careers are dwindling they all get on the skeptic band wagon. Penn, Chris Angel, and even Randi and Houdini. Let's face it, no one cared about Penn and teller on the national stage until they came up with the ******** show. Pretty good career boost if you ask me.

Don't get me wrong, I love all these guys, but it does make one a little skeptical that all the magicians become skeptics when they start hitting the skids.
gives them well needed publicity as well as a new audience.

Uh, not correct on P & T - or much of your other - The show was their second or third and they were quite well known even to non-magician people like me well before that. Honest magicians are pretty much always on the skeptic bandwagon because they know how the supernatural crap/fakery can be done - often by a number of methods - and they are normally good observers (or they would nopt be good magicians. The same goes on the evil/deluded side for psychics/ghost hunters and equivalent liars - they also (except the deluded) know they are faking and fear honest magicians like the plague.

 

[Olowkow]

Originally Posted by tapman
I respectfully disagree, the numbers say it all. Only 5% of potential testers make it to the test. I think it sounds rigged. You haven't proved to me it isn't.

It proves nothing of the sort, unless you are gullible enough to see a number and assume a particular cause for the percentage. It could just as well "prove" that 95% were so loony that they could not manage to find the JREF office to take the test. You need to actually read the applications, in the cases where an application was in fact submitted, and all the crazy negotiations. If you don't come away from that with an understanding of why the MDC is being phased out, or why so few actually are tested, then you are not a reasonable person.

 

[dustbunny]

Realistically an applicant for the challenge has to have some degree of notoriety or at least an acceptable amount of self professed abilities. Just allowing anyone to participate would hinder the main purpose of the test. It's a shame the MDC will be phased out, Sylvia Browne, John Edward and the rest will sigh with relief (in their own distasteful way). When that happens there'll be no need for excuses. I can't imagine any other test being fairer and more professional than the MDC, it's there to prove or disprove claims from applicants who are willing to take it.

If someone is willing to help the vulnerable, needy, naive, desperate and grieving "good on em" I say whether it's James Randi, Penn & Teller, Robert Lancaster or members like this discussing ideas and spreading the word. As bandwagons go this one's more honest, non profitable and fun.

 

[blutoski]

I agree, but how many people have not accepted the protocol. Being a skeptic, wouldn't you wonder if the protocol is unfair?

tapman, I think you're confusing us because we find it hard to believe you're so ignorant of the terms of the challenge. Judging by the timestamps on your posts, you've had enough time to do at least a casual examination of the terms.

There is no single 'protocol' to evaluate fairness. Each applicant is making a unique claim, and a protocol is designed to test this claim while minimizing the likelihood that the applicant obtains results through already established conventional means.

There is a section of this forum where the claims and protocols are discussed. Correspondence between applicants and the scientific teams are frequently published. We read them. It's not some sort of mysterious secret - we're not being asked to 'trust' James Randi.

To answer your question more specifically 99.9% of applicants are stalled at the application stage. Most appear to be mentally ill, and cannot describe their claim at all. A surprising number can't even provide correspondence details.

 

[jimtron]

Randi is not a scientist. How am I to believe he is capable of conducting a fair scientific test. He is a showman. A great showman, but not a scientist.

Who said Randi is a scientist? You don't have to count on him coming up with a fair test--it's up to JREF and the applicant to agree on mutually acceptable rules. If science is important to you, send someone with paranormal abilities to a scientist and tell us how it goes. People obsess about Randi being the judge of what's really paranormal, but I say if you're skeptical of Randi, then:

1) send someone with true paranormal abilities to apply for the challenge, and have that person very carefully document every step of the way. If Randi or JREF pulls any funny business, show us and the world the evidence. AFAIK Randi and JREF are on the up and up, but if not, let's see the evidence.

2) or, have a scientist or someone else, other than JREF, confirm the ability. If someone can really bend spoons with their mind, go to a university or media outlet or somewhere, and demonstrate it in a way that rules out deception, and then enjoy being the first person ever to show real paranormal ability. Then you can put us skeptics and JREF in our place. How come no one has been able to demonstrate supernatural abilities under proper conditions so far? It may be possible, I'm not ruling it out, but if people really can do this stuff, I wish they would put up or shut up (again, with or without Randi).

 

[steve s]

There's one aspect to this that Tapman is overlooking. I was reading about one of the tests in which a dowser claimed he could locate gold. The protocol that was agreed upon was to have ten upside-down coffee mugs with gold coins being hidden under one of them.

At the start of the test, the dowser was given a trial run in which he was told in advance which mug the coins were under (if I'm not mistaken, everyone is given such a trial run.) He waved his divining rod over the mugs and said that he could tell where the gold was. His powers were working. But as soon as the coins were relocated to an unknown mug his powers disappeared.

So Tapman, please explain how this is rigged? The guy agreed that the protocol was fair. He even claimed his powers were working. So what was rigged?

Steve S.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

I respectfully disagree, the numbers say it all. Only 5% of potential testers make it to the test. I think it sounds rigged. You haven't proved to me it isn't.

Have you considered the possibility that 95% of those wanting to win the prizesay to JREF, "Trust me, my ability works. Now write me a check." and the JREF responds "No way."? If this is the case, in what way is the JREF rigging anything?

I have more evidence to support my claim than you do of yours. I stated my opinion over and over. If you are too closed minded to get it that's not my problem.

Repeatedly restating your opinion does not constitute evidence.

My point exactly. Randi isn't a scientist iether. Nothing qualifies him to conduct scientific studies.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, Randi doesn't conduct the studies. In fact, so many people think his "dark vibes" ruin their abilities, he makes it a point that he does not need to be present. Third party testers are used all the time.

 

[maatorc]

The challengre does not need to be rigged so no one can win it.
No one can win it because the things they claim to be able to do are either lies or delusions.

The history of the MDC shows, and any future claims will confirm, that all the claimants cannot demonstrate their claim and those who can demonstrate what the MDC is seeking will not make a claim.

 

[Dancing David]

I've asked a couple of times, and no one seems able to deny that the final arbiter as to whether the million is won/lost is Randi himself.

that is not how the Challenge works, gosh, such misinformation Plumjam. You should be ashamed. have you ever reasd the Challenge application or protocol. The person who applies is part of the process.

Edited by chillzero: 

Edited for civility

If that is so, and the only judge happens to be a guy who has spent his life's work saying one thing, then the chances of him saying another... thus negating the position he has fought for all his life... well, to me at least, that is not a situation conducive to a fair and independent judgment.
The fact that 'skeptics' seem not to question this (on the contrary some of them take the fact that the million has never been won as proof positive that the paranormal does not exist) is comical.
These big money offers are, in the end, cheap publicity stunts.

Edited by chillzero: 

Edited for civility