New telepathy test, the sequel.

[Matthew Ellard]

As far as I am concerned, I am following this thread very carefully.

Why do you refuse to perform the simple Greyhound test? Set out your exact reasoning.

Currently there is not an iota of evidence that anything, you claim happens, actually happens. In fact, you seem to be going out of your way to avoid any basic objective test, on purpose.

 

[Michel H]

You think your really strange claim that we all hear your thoughts and then lie about it for no reason is not more extreme?

Really?

A statement like "Mr. X is telepathically broadcasting his thoughts to many human beings worldwide" does certainly have a very low a priori probability of being true, but there is (in my opinion) a lot of evidence which actually supports this statement ("X" being me), the statements by Daylightstar, "im" and deilorsux I have cited recently are examples of such evidence (there is more, however).

Regarding the lack of acceptance and recognition of this curious apparent phenomenon, I find it less surprising. It seems hard to accept to many people that I am "telepathic", while they are not. There may be some ego problems. It is curious that, when skeptics attack my work, they generally seem convinced that if "such a phenomenon were true", it would be easily accepted and recognized. But this shows a grave neglect of human psychology, in my opinion.

 

[Michel H]

Why do you refuse to perform the simple Greyhound test? Set out your exact reasoning.
...

I think that your Greyhound test is very bad and unrealistic. Dogs generally don't obey me (particularly, to do things that annoy them, and could cause them trouble), they react, which is very different. The same thing is true for me when I answer to your posts: I react, but I don't obey.

 

[Matthew Ellard]

"Easy to verify with dogs"

I have already tried to explain on this forum how I seem to be able to communicate telepathically with animals (cats, dogs, birds) near my building, And this phenomenon is very easy to verify: for example, when a dog is barking, I talk to him/her from inside my apartment with a weak voice (so he/she cannot hear me normally, sensorially), and I study whether there is a reaction, a change (often there is).

"Impossible to verify with dogs"

I think that your Greyhound test is very bad and unrealistic. Dogs generally don't obey me (particularly, to do things that annoy them, and could cause them trouble), they react, which is very different. The same thing is true for me when I answer to your posts: I react, but I don't obey.

You are now changing you mind, week to week and obviously, are changing your story to avoid any proper test at all.

I suggest you stop posting until you can work out what you are actually claiming.

 

[Michel H]

...
I suggest you stop posting until you can work out what you are actually claiming.

My claim is that I have a tendency to telepathically and involuntarily communicate my thoughts to other people and to animals. This phenomenon does not seem to be limited geographically (though I have no evidence for long-distance telepathy involving animals).

I am hearing Michel H's thoughts. ...

... I too am hearing Michel H's thoughts...

A five-year-old who can read would probably understand the meaning of the two quotes above.

 

[Michel H]

Results of the test

I recently wrote and circled one of the ten numbers: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 on my paper.

I ask you to write it here (if you think you might know it).

Thank you for participating.

Note: A SHA-512 hash of a complicated sentence containing the selected number is:
D612368B32B23789D99BCEB8A25406415D423092779B7219FA04B0B40BCF01A09A2CB38DF57C243F4DE009987A7FB73798ED896AEA87CFBC75BF6DF2F0121F1F

This hash was generated here:
http://www.convertstring.com/Hash/SHA512.

Thank you for your attention.

The number I wrote was a "2". And the complicated sentence I used to generate the SHA-512 hash posted above was:
The number is 2, two ... ç,xà!§é.

No number was given in this test. However, P.J. Denyer posted

... and and not helping you.

(notice the the two words "and")
Donn had posted:

Is there an echo in here?

It seems to me (though others will perhaps dispute this) that an echo is somewhat related to number two because, when an echo takes place, you have the incident wave, and then the reflected wave.
So, the correct number seems to have been suggested twice. Something similar happened on Yahoo Answers, for the same test (in French): https://fr.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20161216153219AAbdyoG .

 

[abaddon]

My claim is that I have a tendency to telepathically and involuntarily communicate my thoughts to other people and to animals. This phenomenon does not seem to be limited geographically (though I have no evidence for long-distance telepathy involving animals).

Is it easy or impossible? You have claimed both.

A five-year-old who can read would probably understand the meaning of the two quotes above.

Yes, because even five year olds understand sarcasm. You don't.

 

[abaddon]

Thank you for your attention.

The number I wrote was a "2". And the complicated sentence I used to generate the SHA-512 hash posted above was:
The number is 2, two ... ç,xà!§é.

No number was given in this test. However, P.J. Denyer posted
(notice the the two words "and")
Donn had posted:

It seems to me (though others will perhaps dispute this) that an echo is somewhat related to number two because, when an echo takes place, you have the incident wave, and then the reflected wave.
So, the correct number seems to have been suggested twice. Something similar happened on Yahoo Answers, for the same test (in French): https://fr.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20161216153219AAbdyoG .

Wow. Is there any straw so flimsy that you will not clutch at it?

 

[sackett]

Michel H, I can't hear your thoughts, but I'll lie about them if you want. Just give me the word.

 

[Marcus]

I recently wrote and circled one of the ten numbers: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 on my paper.

I ask you to write it here (if you think you might know it).

Thank you for participating.

Note: A SHA-512 hash of a complicated sentence containing the selected number is:
D612368B32B23789D99BCEB8A25406415D423092779B7219FA04B0B40BCF01A09A2CB38DF57C243F4DE009987A7FB73798ED896AEA87CFBC75BF6DF2F0121F1F

This hash was generated here:
http://www.convertstring.com/Hash/SHA512.

Surely you see the big problem with this test, other than us being unable to verify the results. You would need hundreds of responses to produce anything of statistical significance.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Thank you for your attention.

The number I wrote was a "2". And the complicated sentence I used to generate the SHA-512 hash posted above was:
The number is 2, two ... ç,xà!§é.

No number was given in this test. However, P.J. Denyer posted
(notice the the two words "and")
Donn had posted:

It seems to me (though others will perhaps dispute this) that an echo is somewhat related to number two because, when an echo takes place, you have the incident wave, and then the reflected wave.
So, the correct number seems to have been suggested twice. Something similar happened on Yahoo Answers, for the same test (in French): https://fr.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20161216153219AAbdyoG .

Good grief you write some utter rubbish. I did NOT choose the number two.

Perhaps you missed this bit-: "NO ONE HERE HEARS YOUR THOUGHTS".

 

[Donn]

Ha ha.

See, I laughed twice!





Ha. Ha. Ha. Haaa. Haaaaaa. Aaaaah!

 

[fromdownunder]

Actually, I can read Michel's thoughts. He is thinking right at the moment about his next ISF test. And it will be just as silly as all his previous failures.

I can also predict the future. Michel will post another test about the same time as Groundhog Day.

Norm

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Actually, I can read Michel's thoughts. He is thinking right at the moment about his next ISF test. And it will be just as silly as all his previous failures.

I can also predict the future. Michel will post another test about the same time as Groundhog Day.

Norm

Nice one. Seriously, have you not bothered reading the thread?

Expect to get quoted as unqualified support for Michel's ridiculous belief that everyone can read his thoughts. Congratulations on supporting his delusions.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I think that you should be a little more nuanced.

Your sentence: "If he was incorrect about your mother means he wasn't really hearing your thoughts." is grammatically incorrect, a more (grammatically) correct sentence would be: "If he was incorrect about your mother, this means he wasn't really hearing your thoughts."

Does this means you are necessarily completely wrong about any subject you might talk about? No, I don't think so, it sounds too extreme.

Oh, but look at this Michel. You made a small grammatical slip too. Does this indicate that your claims may also be discounted?

I put it to you that you seize upon such small things as spelling mistakes when you need a reason, however irrelevant or trivial, to overlook discomforting points that people make.

I know that you are fully convinced that you broadcast your thoughts but I'm also sure that you are intelligent enough to recognise that there is no logical reasoning which has led you to this belief. Rather it became a belief first and foremost, for which you have since sought confirmation.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Actually, I can read Michel's thoughts...

As P.J.Denyer already said, it's really not a good idea to express yourself in this form. Even if you think it obvious that you only mean that you think what Michel is thinking is easily predictable, he will quote you as if you meant this literally.

<edit to add> For the benefit of Michel, when P.J.Denyer said "Nice one", that was an example of sarcasm.

 

[Michel H]

Oh, but look at this Michel. You made a small grammatical slip too. ...

Yes, that's right, I should have written "Does this mean?" instead of "Does this means".

... Does this indicate that your claims may also be discounted? ...

No, not necessarily, that's the point I was making when I was replying to jond. You seem to have curiously reversed my reasoning, with your patronizing tone.

I'm increasingly eager to see Michel's analysis ... I'm sure it will be illuminating.

 

[fromdownunder]

Nice one. Seriously, have you not bothered reading the thread?

Expect to get quoted as unqualified support for Michel's ridiculous belief that everyone can read his thoughts. Congratulations on supporting his delusions.

To be perfectly honest, I don't give a damn any more. Michel will continue to think what he thinks and analyse any response in any way to support his belief.

I mean ANY response, as shown by his analysis of his latest "poll". For another example, your first sentence contained two words. Therefore he got to you and you heard the word "two" coming out of the ether.

Hell, he even claimed I heard his thoughts at one point because I named a completely different country that contained the letters an.

The best response is not to respond at all, and I stopped for a while, but many others did not, so who gives a ****, and if he does try to selectively quote me, as he has in the past, I will immediately follow with the full quote.

Norm

 

[p0lka]

I recently wrote and circled one of the ten numbers: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 on my paper.

I ask you to write it here (if you think you might know it).

Thank you for participating.

Note: A SHA-512 hash of a complicated sentence containing the selected number is:
D612368B32B23789D99BCEB8A25406415D423092779B7219FA04B0B40BCF01A09A2CB38DF57C243F4DE009987A7FB73798ED896AEA87CFBC75BF6DF2F0121F1F

This hash was generated here:
http://www.convertstring.com/Hash/SHA512.

I suggest you go with 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, instead,
the numbers you presented are not the same as each other as there is one number that has two digits whilst the rest have one digit.
Happy to help
Merry christmas.

 

[John Jones]

My claim is that I have a tendency to telepathically and involuntarily communicate my thoughts to other people and to animals. This phenomenon does not seem to be limited geographically (though I have no evidence for long-distance telepathy involving animals).


A five-year-old who can read would probably understand the meaning of the two quotes above.

And any mentally healthy adult would recognize the sarcasm.

:facepalm: