VFF: The Shoe Thread

[blue sock monkey]

Ashles, if the shoe fits...

 

[desertgal]

You two need to heel.

 

[Drs_Res]

Well of course no, there's no difference in reality. But we're not dealing with reality here, we're dealing with paranormal claims. She stated at some point that she needs to know the location. The tip of the shoe gives her that.

True on all counts.

Now we will have the problem that the shoes will have to be made of a hard/stiff enough material that any bump or motion of the foot or toes will not give away the location of the foot. We won't be able to use a thin material like a light cotton shirt or screen.

 

[desertgal]

True on all counts.

Now we will have the problem that the shoes will have to be made of a hard/stiff enough material that any bump or motion of the foot or toes will not give away the location of the foot. We won't be able to use a thin material like a light cotton shirt or screen.

Wellies, maybe? As shapeless as they are, and with a thick, good quality one, it would be difficult to perceive whether a foot was inside or not.

 

[Akhenaten]

True on all counts.

Now we will have the problem that the shoes will have to be made of a hard/stiff enough material that any bump or motion of the foot or toes will not give away the location of the foot. We won't be able to use a thin material like a light cotton shirt or screen.

Ski boots?

 

[Giggywig]

True on all counts.

Now we will have the problem that the shoes will have to be made of a hard/stiff enough material that any bump or motion of the foot or toes will not give away the location of the foot. We won't be able to use a thin material like a light cotton shirt or screen.

Which is why I suggested a rubber boot . It should be large enough as well than the subject could wriggle their toes some without being noticed.

 

[Kariboo]

I wonder when ms. Vff will join us in the discussion of this brilliant idea

 

[Gmonster2]

Little feet?

"Now we will have the problem that the shoes will have to be made of a hard/stiff enough material that any bump or motion of the foot or toes will not give away the location of the foot. We won't be able to use a thin material like a light cotton shirt or screen. "



A small size foot in a size 10 shoe perhaps?

 

[Ashles]

I predict that any materials firm enough to allow for a decent test will ironically be exactly the same materials that Anita's 'ability' is unable to see through.

 

[Kariboo]

http://images.google.com/imgres?img...US:official&sa=X&um=1&ei=inmJSue_KI2QNsTZpdwL

These should work.

 

[Drs_Res]

"Now we will have the problem that the shoes will have to be made of a hard/stiff enough material that any bump or motion of the foot or toes will not give away the location of the foot. We won't be able to use a thin material like a light cotton shirt or screen. "

A small size foot in a size 10 shoe perhaps?

Part of the problem here is that VfF said something about a distance of 1mm. We are now hiding the foot an unknown distance from the surface of the shoe.

Let me go find that quote.............

The setup of the test must be such that the perceptions can form. If such a setup can not be arranged to also be acceptable from the test point of view, then the claim is to be considered either untestable or automatically falsified. In the test setup where the perceptions still form, if I make inaccurate perceptions then the test is failed, and if the perceptions are accurate, we move on to better tests.

What I said was that the setup of the test must allow the perceptions to form. The claim is still falsifiable under those conditions.

The outline of the person could be seen against the sheet because the person was leaning against it. And I lost my sense of orientation in the body and had a hard time finding any kidneys because I ran into the heart and the spleen instead.

The person could be seen leaning against the screen. I will not do a remote viewing test because that is not consistent with my claim.

I would lose my exact sense of distance to the body. We are talking less than a millimeter here. That is, I believe, why I need to look at a person with my eyes before I can start forming perceptions. I will not do a remote viewing test.

 

[Akhenaten]

I believe that the foot/not foot being in contact with the material of the shoe will allow vibrational information to be downloaded easily, unlike a screen which is detached from the body/no body.

 

[Ashles]

I thought we had already ascertained that if the material was clothing, for some reason it allowed a circumvention of the millimetre rule.

Let me check...

Ah yes - it was this post:

As contradictory as it sounds, I do experience a difference between a full-body screen and clothing.

So, although it sounds bizarre, if it is clothing (which we can assume shoes should be defined as) then it should be fine.

 

[Drs_Res]

I believe that the foot/not foot being in contact with the material of the shoe will allow vibrational information to be downloaded easily, unlike a screen which is detached from the body/no body.

You may be correct, but we won't know until VfF shows up and the thread gets to be at least 5 pages in length.

 

[Akhenaten]

You may be correct, but we won't know until VfF shows up and the thread gets to be at least 5 pages in length.

The stage is set . . .

Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in her sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.​

 

[Gmonster2]

medical or there not there test?

Is this still a medical perceptions test or a is a foot in the shoe at all test?

I was thinking if she sees tissues fat blood etc throught the shoe then a test could be.

Roll a die from 1-4

1)left shoe has a foot
2) right shoe has a foot
3) both shoes have a foot
4)no shoes have a foot

Allowing less trials. 1-4 odds per guess?

The person could also be seated so the feet are more relaxed and not likely to move for a 10-15 min reading.

A few observers could also try to determine if they can see any movement of feet in the shoes. Not a perfect scenario but for a preliminary of a prelim maybe ok.....


I doubt this test will be a shoe-in I'm guessing it will be kicked to the kerb

 

[Ashles]

Maybe in the no-foot instances a fake foot could be inserted, so if Anita detects any slight movement it won't indicate anything useful.


Of course until Anita actually provides some suggestions herself around this protocol...

 

[Drs_Res]

Is this still a medical perceptions test or a is a foot in the shoe at all test?

I was thinking if she sees tissues fat blood etc throught the shoe then a test could be.

Roll a die from 1-4

1)left shoe has a foot
2) right shoe has a foot
3) both shoes have a foot
4)no shoes have a foot

Allowing less trials. 1-4 odds per guess?

The person could also be seated so the feet are more relaxed and not likely to move for a 10-15 min reading.

A few observers could also try to determine if they can see any movement of feet in the shoes. Not a perfect scenario but for a preliminary of a prelim maybe ok.....


I doubt this test will be a shoe-in I'm guessing it will be kicked to the kerb

It is VERY difficult to stand or sit and not have any motion in your feet, especially if your looking at a blank wall/screen. If you shift your position at all the shoes will move or flex. Change the amount of preasure you are applying to the ground, the shoe will move. Tap your toes, the shoe will flex.

This is why Giggywig made the suggestion:

What if you use a large rubber boot? You cut off the front so that it resembles a croc, you glue that firmly to the floor. The test subject would slip his/her foot into in. The screen would be glued to the boot as well.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

The biggest problem is: How do you lock down the shoe with the foot in it so that it does not move or flex?

All it takes is a slight change in pressure or someone adjusting their position and the one shoe with the foot in it WILL move or flex.

There is a large chance that there will be information leakage no matter how hard the test subject tries to keep the foot and shoe from moving.

I think that this will be very hard to set up properly.

Yep.

Now, substitute for a shoe something like a shoe-sized box protruding from a screen that may or may not be hiding a person. If the subject is there, he or she puts his naked foot in the shoe-sized box. . . .

But wait--why not just have her test whether or not a person is present behind a cloth screen? (See the main thread.)

 

[catbasket]

Maybe you can use both shoes, and attach them to each other with glue or a clamp of some sort.

Toying with this idea and expanding to, say, ten shoes attached to the screen. Behind the screen volunteers who will put either a genuine human foot into the shoe, or (drawn at random) a prosthetic foot. Aha! - animatronic feet could mimic any movement by a human foot ... but nine animatronic feet could be expensive.

D'oh! Switch it around - one animatronic foot and nine real human feet.

And as I think about this further, I don't really see the difference between this and the suggestion I made. After all, she is not detecting that the person is MISSING a foot.

Then VFF can detect which shoe is missing a foot.