New telepathy test, the sequel.

Michel H said:
I suspect that one of the reasons why my credibility method has (in my opinion) generally worked so well (an example was given in this latest test) is simply the fact that people have, to some extent, cooperated, and decided to not make things too hard for me. But, if people are really intent on deceiving, and for example, give a wrong answer in a seemingly good text, there is really nothing I can do about this. But, like I said, it is rare. Perhaps they could do this when they feel angry for some reason (which reason?), this is uncommon though.
Click to expand...

The credibility works so well because you can cherry pick out the answers.

Anyone that gives you an answer that does not conform to your delusion is deemed as be deceiving and not credible.

But lets try a non perverse lie test, Same deal, Two truths and one lie.

1: I have spent an hour in a grave.

2: I got 15 stitches at a family reunion in England.

3: I have a collection of over 500 animal skulls.
 
Last edited:
Nay_Sayer said:
The credibility works so well because you can cherry pick out the answers.

Anyone that gives you an answer that does not conform to your delusion is deemed as be deceiving and not credible.

But lets try a non perverse lie test, Same deal, Two truths and one lie.

1: I have spent an hour in a grave.

2: I got 15 stitches at a family reunion in England.

3: I have a collection of over 500 animal skulls.
Click to expand...
Don't waste your time, Nay_Sayer
 
Michel H said:
I suspect that one of the reasons why my credibility method has (in my opinion) generally worked so well ...
Click to expand...


You have no reason to believe your 'credibility method' has worked well other than that it gives you answers you want to see. A circular argument. You are only fooling yourself.
 
Michel H said:
I suspect that one of the reasons why my credibility method has (in my opinion) generally worked so well (an example was given in this latest test) is simply the fact that people have, to some extent, cooperated, and decided to not make things too hard for me. But, if people are really intent on deceiving, and for example, give a wrong answer in a seemingly good text, there is really nothing I can do about this. But, like I said, it is rare. Perhaps they could do this when they feel angry for some reason (which reason?), this is uncommon though.
Click to expand...
And here yet again is an explicit admission of Michel's bias, and hence the pointlessness of this thread: the starting assumption is that everyone who gives the wrong answer is being deliberately deceptive. The possibility that everybody is just making a random guess is not one Michel will ever seriously consider, so his test protocol will always be flawed.
 
Pixel42 said:
And here yet again is an explicit admission of Michel's bias, and hence the pointlessness of this thread: the starting assumption is that everyone who gives the wrong answer is being deliberately deceptive. The possibility that everybody is just making a random guess is not one Michel will ever seriously consider, so his test protocol will always be flawed.
Click to expand...

He also admitted that he only gets pseudo-positve results if he stacks the method in his favour. Didn't want to play once th playing field was levelled...
 
A skeptic and a clairvoyant walk into a bar.

The skeptic orders a beer.

What does the clairvoyant order? :confused:

If you were clairvoyant, you wouldn't have clicked!
 
Let's try a third one.

I once roller-skated 26 miles for charity.
I have played a country & western gig with a Muppet.
While burning rubbish in my back garden, I was once asked the way to the beach by an Australian nun.

Michel, can you detect which of these is a lie?

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
Let's try a third one.

I once roller-skated 26 miles for charity.
I have played a country & western gig with a Muppet.
While burning rubbish in my back garden, I was once asked the way to the beach by an Australian nun.

Michel, can you detect which of these is a lie?

Dave
Click to expand...
Well, perhaps all three statements are lies, maybe because, as a smart man, you have understood very well the spirit of this forum, and you try to fit in ;).

By the way, I have now found out that the recent and (apparently) good post by cullennz:
Think it's pretty simple.

I'm psychic and chose to read Michael H's mind.

Took me a while as the signal was weak
Click to expand...
(he posted this after giving a correct and credible answer in my latest telepathy test. Congratulations, cullennz)
has now been relegated to the AAH section of the forum by the Censorship Team. I deplore this decision.
 
Michel H said:
Well, perhaps all three statements are lies, maybe because, as a smart man, you have understood very well the spirit of this forum, and you try to fit in ;).
Click to expand...

If that's your answer, then you're 0/3 so far. Since your results depend quite critically on your ability to detect lies, it's fairly clear that they're invalid, because your ability to detect lies is apparently worse than random chance.

Dave
 
Michel H said:
I suspect that one of the reasons why my credibility method has (in my opinion) generally worked so well (an example was given in this latest test) is simply the fact that people have, to some extent, cooperated, and decided to not make things too hard for me. But, if people are really intent on deceiving, and for example, give a wrong answer in a seemingly good text, there is really nothing I can do about this. But, like I said, it is rare. Perhaps they could do this when they feel angry for some reason (which reason?), this is uncommon though.
Click to expand...


No, Michel, that is not what you have said. You said:


Michel H said:
The reason is probably psychological, the goal of many posters here is probably to try to perpetuate the situation of collective lie with respect to my (apparent) telepathy, so learning there is a 25% probability to answer correctly (even when no telepathy is involved at all) already does make many people here very nervous.
Click to expand...

Michel H said:
Y. Because of a (in my opinion) general lack of honesty in telepathy matters, I always carefully examine credibilities of answers and statements (and I also try to investigate the credibilities of human beings who make these statements).
Click to expand...

Michel H said:
However, I am a little concerned about your motivation. Could it be that you are concerned about "not betraying Team Skepticism", something like that (perhaps a kind of patriotism, like when a citizen or a soldier decides to remain loyal to their country, even when they are actually convinced that it is dead wrong)?
Click to expand...

Michel H said:
Regarding substance, there just seems to be a great reluctance in the world, within society, to accept my apparent "telepathy", there seems to be a kind of "blackout" on this (apparent) phenomenon. I suppose it is an illusion to think you can change that overnight by just offering one thousand pounds or one thousand euros for a single strange phone call.
Click to expand...

Michel H said:
This is one thing that some "pseudo-skeptics" seem to have difficulty understanding. Even if some people know that you are intensely thinking (about) the word "Westminster" for example, they will not necessarily tell you so, and in the simple way that you would like. Basically, people say what they want to say, and they evaluate possible risks, what they perceive as advantages and disadvantages of possible responses.
Click to expand...

Michel H said:
It is important to understand that the participants' goal is not necessarily to make the life of the researcher easy.
Click to expand...


You are contradicting yourself.
 
Michel H said:
(he posted this after giving a correct and credible answer in my latest telepathy test. Congratulations, cullennz)
has now been relegated to the AAH section of the forum by the Censorship Team. I deplore this decision.
Click to expand...

No it has not. It is still in the General Skepticism and the Paranormal Section where it belongs. Did you actually read the final post in that thread, and do you understand what it meant?

The exact same thing happens to every thread which gets too long! You are apparently the only one here who does not understand that, so your "telepathy" must have let you down. Again, or is that Still?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=267306&page=82

Norm
 
Looks like we are back where the second thread should have ended.

Michel only considers answers that agree with delusions to be correct and credible.

Oh and he's 0/4 for detecting lies.
 
Michel H said:
By the way, I have now found out that the recent and (apparently) good post by cullennz:

(he posted this after giving a correct and credible answer in my latest telepathy test. Congratulations, cullennz)
has now been relegated to the AAH section of the forum by the Censorship Team. I deplore this decision.
Click to expand...

Good post? You didn't understand that he was insulting you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom