Vision From Feeling

[Ashles]

I guess it's probably worth mentioning in case we have any new visitors to the site via this thread:

The opinions and views expressed in this thread are purely the posters' own and are not meant to reflect or represent the views of the JREF.

I guess that should be obvious but, hey, so should a lot of things.

 

[Uncayimmy]

My own addition is this: Anita also came here because she is just arrogant enough to think that she could persuade the scientific people here into formulating a protocol for her that would be easy to pass-carrying the extra bonus of fooling the skeptics and solidifying her belief in claims-but also to have the skeptics here point out the holes in those claims, so she could perfect her act for public consumption. Course, when we really started to focus on her contradictions, her redirections, and the delusional basis of her claims-which she didn't expect and wanted to avoid-she started to get uncomfortable and hostile. She didn't want us looking too closely at the woman behind the curtain.

I think the idea that we are looking at a budding Sylvia Browne, as someone suggested, isn't wide of the mark at all.

Done musing out loud now.

I'm going to vote against any deliberate attempt to refine her "act" so to speak.

There's an elaborate deception going here, but Anita is the target of her own deceptions, not us. Every time you encounter one of those "this can't be true" moments, ask yourself this: Who's more likely to believe it? A skeptic, a mark (subject of her readings) or a woman who believes her abilities are real and wants to protect that fantasy?

I keep coming back to #3.

She genuinely believes her abilities to be real. The ability stems from a strong desire for fame, fortune and attention along with a desire to make things right in the world. In our Facebook chats she has repeatedly told me that she is going to make a buttload of money once she gets her degree. She expects to be "the next Marie Curie." That fame and fortune is unrelated to fame and fortune from her abilities.

Her chemical identification tests are actually an excellent indicator of self-deception and a lousy indicator of her wanting to perfect her act. She genuinely had no idea how to create a decent protocol (she actually asked me why being told the answer after each guess was a bad thing). And when you look at her second round of testing, it was pathetic. She kept failing and making changes. But most importantly, she *told* us all about it knowing that it flew in the face of everything we had advised her.

Detecting chemicals is just her medical diagnose fantasy bleeding into her academic life. It's far too easy to control in a test, so no self-respecting psychic would touch it. Any idiot knows that. You only approach a test like that when you truly believe you can do it.

That whole ordeal was her protecting her fantasy.

She's not lying about the things she should be lying about in order to deceive us or potential marks. Her anecdotes are so bad they must be true to her. Her reasoning is terrible. Her explanations are sometimes just plain old silly. But they make perfect sense to someone who genuinely believes everything that is happening is real and wants you to believe it to.

Look at the whole vibrational algebra exchange. She seemed genuinely offended and flabbergasted that she was being accused of not presenting examples. She acted as if her explanation was as plain as the nose on your face. She really does believe her mind is combining vibrational information in some special way and that it should be called vibrational algebra.

She's consistently irrational. But that's just my opinion.

 

[desertgal]

I'm going to vote against any deliberate attempt to refine her "act" so to speak.

There's an elaborate deception going here, but Anita is the target of her own deceptions, not us. Every time you encounter one of those "this can't be true" moments, ask yourself this: Who's more likely to believe it? A skeptic, a mark (subject of her readings) or a woman who believes her abilities are real and wants to protect that fantasy?

I keep coming back to #3. <snipped for brevity>

I'm sorry-I wasn't very clear this morning, which will teach me to post before my morning cup of coffee.

I agree with you, Jim, about #3. I also don't believe that Anita is trying to perpetuate a deliberate hoax or fraud. I remarked in an earlier post a while back that I believe she is inherently more dangerous than someone like Sylvia Browne, because while I believe Browne knows her 'psychic ability' isn't real, I don't think Anita does, and people will buy into that.

What I am wondering, and said badly, is, given her remarks about "taking her show on the road", so to speak, if Anita isn't subconsciously using the skeptics here, in the local society, and in her paranormal society, as guinea pigs to see how far she can take this and/or gauging reactions to her claims. Hand in hand with an unconscious desire to "fool the skeptics", which would definitely help protect her fantasies. (Separate and apart from assistance in helping her develop protocols, which she openly admits she came here for.)

Granted, if she is testing her claims, she's doing a poor job of it, which is why I think the motivation might be subconscious.

I suppose my musing aloud comes from trying to understand her motivations. Like you, I believe attention seeking is a big part of it, but I'm also wondering what other (conscious or subconscious) motivations she might have.

(And, yes, these are purely my opinions, and not intended to represent the JREF.)

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Back at school

Hello Skeptics,
School has started and this JREF discussion and investigation have fallen a bit lower down on my list of priorities. I will continue working on the paperwork for the upcoming study, and once their preliminary drafts are prepared I will post them and invite everyone to critique on them in the way only you know how. That way they can be improved on until we all agree that they are ready to be named final drafts. And then I am ready to take the next steps toward the study. Please expend some more patience, I've got Physics and Chemistry to learn.

UncaYimmy, please understand the delay before I can answer your questions on the moderated thread. I will keep them in mind and they will be answered eventually.

 

[Jonquill]

If Anita can't convince the skeptics that she has any special talent and doesn't realise that her abilities are all her own imagination the only way that she is going to be able to keep this going is to turn to the woowoo crowd who seem to believe pretty well anything.

Especially if she gets into ghost hunting, she's inventive and persuasive I can imagine her becoming quite popular in those sort of groups as she investigates haunted houses with her EVP recorder while insisting that she is getting ghost's mind vibrations.

 

[Akhenaten]

Hello JREF Forum Members (hit)
My name is Anita Ikonen (probable hit)
and I am in the process of arranging with the IIG in Hollywood (exagggeration)
to test what seems to be either true extrasensory perception (miss)
or the case of something similar to synesthesia (miss)
which leads me to obtain accurate information (miss)
that is normally out of reach of ordinary perception. (hit)
I would like the opportunity to discuss my ability (exagggeration)
and the test of it with critical thinkers, science-minded persons, open-minded persons, (miss)
or anyone else who is curious about this or has any comments that they would like to share with me. (miss) *
Unlike many who are under the impression that they have a psychic ability, (miss)
I am very willing to discuss this openly (miss)
and to subject my ability to scrutiny. (miss)
There is no trick to it and I have nothing to hide. (miss)
I am a science-student (possible hit)
and interested in finding out the true nature of my ability. (miss)
I believe that there are elements of the paranormal that can be brought into science once properly understood and established. (hit)

You can find my webpage if you search the web on my user name. (hit)
On it I describe my ability and the information that I receive through it, (miss)
as well as the test I am having with the IIG. (miss)
I thought I would discuss this here (miss)
since it would probably attract a lot of attention anyway as I have the test later on. (miss)
I look forward to hearing from you. (inconclusive)

* meanies are excluded



A pattern emerges!

 

[Uncayimmy]

I'm sorry-I wasn't very clear this morning, which will teach me to post before my morning cup of coffee.

<snip>

Granted, if she is testing her claims, she's doing a poor job of it, which is why I think the motivation might be subconscious.

I suppose my musing aloud comes from trying to understand her motivations. Like you, I believe attention seeking is a big part of it, but I'm also wondering what other (conscious or subconscious) motivations she might have.

(And, yes, these are purely my opinions, and not intended to represent the JREF.)

Okay, I see what you're driving at now. It could be. But if you'll allow me to play pop psychologist again, the narcissistic personality disorder, which could easily accompany grandiose delusional disorder, lists as a possible symptom that a person will not want to consort with those less than her. So, whereas most psychics would take it to the masses, she wants to take it to the people who debunk the psychics. We're more her equals.

Do the following sound like anyone we know? Five are usually required for a diagnosis, but we're not diagnosing. It just seems apparently correct.

* Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements).

* Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.

* Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions).

* Requires excessive admiration.

* Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations.

* Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends.

* Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.

* Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her.

* Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.

Taken from:
http://www.psychnet-uk.com/clinical_psychology/criteria_personality_narcissistic.htm
and
http://www.psychologytoday.com/conditions/delusional.html

 

[Akhenaten]

Hello Skeptics, (hit)
School has started (hit)
and this JREF discussion and investigation have fallen a bit lower down on my list of priorities. (inconclusive)
I will continue working on the paperwork for the upcoming study, (probable hit)
and once their preliminary drafts are prepared I will post them (probable hit)
and invite everyone to critique on them (miss) *
in the way only you know how. (miss) **
That way they can be improved on (miss)
until we all agree (miss)
that they are ready to be named final drafts. (miss)
And then I am ready to take the next steps toward the study. (miss)
Please expend some more patience, (miss)
I've got Physics and Chemistry to learn. (giant hit)

<snip personal message>

* meanies excepted

** anyone who can think critically could do the same.



A plausible extrapolation? I'm testing my psychic abilities here.

 

[calebprime]

Okay, I see what you're driving at now. It could be. But if you'll allow me to play pop psychologist again, the narcissistic personality disorder, which could easily accompany grandiose delusional disorder, lists as a possible symptom that a person will not want to consort with those less than her. So, whereas most psychics would take it to the masses, she wants to take it to the people who debunk the psychics. We're more her equals.

Do the following sound like anyone we know? Five are usually required for a diagnosis, but we're not diagnosing. It just seems apparently correct.

* Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements).

* Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.

* Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions).

* Requires excessive admiration.

* Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations.

* Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends.

* Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.

* Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her.

* Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.

Taken from:
http://www.psychnet-uk.com/clinical_psychology/criteria_personality_narcissistic.htm
and
http://www.psychologytoday.com/conditions/delusional.html

I speculate too about posters' mental status, so I'm no saint.

I'd just caution that the narcissistic and sociopathic checklists have to be treated with a lot of caution.

A neurologist friend jokes that sociopaths are simply people you don't like.

But more seriously, all these traits are shared by everyone, it's a question of degree.

So with narcissists and sociopaths, these traits are extreme, and enduring, not situational.

(I group these two together because they share the traits of lack of empathy, sense of entitlement, etc.)

I speculated that the Santa murderer was a sociopath, based on flimsy anecdotes, but it wasn't to his face, and he frankly deserved all the insulting speculation that he got. He murdered people.

But, puffery in your 20's is not so unusual. People grow out of it.

What we should avoid is reading extra villainy into someone's character based not on what they do, but on some construct.

Robert Hare explicitly warns against people trying to peg others as sociopaths (or narcissists, or what-have-you).

The Sociopath Next Door is my best example of bad theorizing and sloppy research. It is typical of bad pop psychology. Makes a fun read, though, in a slapdash way. And hopefully, few people believe it or try to apply it. (Actually, probably thousands do.)

But, I must admit, when I saw desertgal's list of visionfromfeeling's claims, my jaw dropped.

 

[Jeff Corey]

". Luckily, there is a brilliant skeptic on the JREF Forum, who posts under the member name UncaYimmy. He is a rare combination of being both a brilliant skeptic who has put me through some very unyielding aggressive skeptical interrogations and put me in my place a few times, but at the same time being most polite, friendly, and just wonderful to work with throughout. He has a rare talent of staying on-topic in the JREF discussions thread and great problem-solving skills in this tricky paranormal claim. He has dedicated a great deal of time, work, and thought into this investigation and has brought to it plenty of progress. If we discover an ESP ability he will have to be remembered as one of the persons who made a great deal of invaluable contribution toward its discovery. UncaYimmy is the author of the study protocol which will be used shortly in an upcoming study of this paranormal claim. It is a brilliant protocol."
(from her site)
Unca Yimmy! Such a mensch. And with great taste for wacky women.
But seriously folk, I would have to talk to this one face on to make an educated guess as to whether she is a clever con artist or deluded wacko. I've had real experience with both. At mental hospitals and on the street. But maybe we shouldn't bother her any more with hard questions about her fanciful abilities. After all, she has to study hard at that anonymous university (USC) to keep up her 2.3 GPA and grab that NoBall prize.

 

[desertgal]

But more seriously, all these traits are shared by everyone, it's a question of degree.

Oh, absolutely. And I think that is the point we are trying to cautiously make to Anita - that, after reading thousands of her words, there are certain traits that have emerged as extreme.

For example, certain narcissistic ones that UncaYimmy listed above.

There are also others that she has displayed, such as Prof. Yaffle noted: "Grandiose delusion: An individual exaggerates his or her sense of self-importance and is convinced that he or she has special powers, talents, or abilities. Sometimes, the individual may actually believe that he or she is a famous person (for example, a rock star or Christ). More commonly, a person with this delusion believes he or she has accomplished some great achievement for which they have not received sufficient recognition."

As well as:

# Peculiar thinking, beliefs or behavior
# Belief in special powers, such as telepathy
# Perceptual alterations, in some cases bodily illusions, including phantom pains or other distortions in the sense of touch
# Idiosyncratic speech, such as loose or vague patterns of speaking or tendency to go off on tangents
# Suspicious or paranoid ideas
# Flat emotions or inappropriate emotional responses

No one here is attempting to diagnose her, simply point out to her traits and/or individual symptoms that we have observed to stand out in what she has presented of herself here. Anita came to us, unbidden, with these extraordinary claims. She claimed she wanted help in designing a protocol to test whether her ability was, in her words, "extrasensory perception or something akin to synesthesia" and the origin of her ability. I think it is fair to point out to her that the origin of her ability may be in these traits we have observed, as long as we are cautious not to diagnose her.

As well, Anita attempted to "self diagnose" herself, so I think we can safely objectively refute that, point by point, since she opened the door.

Of course, several of us have continually advised her to consult with a professional.

So with narcissists and sociopaths, these traits are extreme, and enduring, not situational.

I think it is fair to say that Anita has given an indication that many of these traits are enduring, since she claimed that her "ability" began when she was 15, and she is now 26. I also think it is fair to say that most of these traits appear to be "extreme" in her case.

But, puffery in your 20's is not so unusual. People grow out of it.

Very true, and she may yet do so. But, it is now that she has brought her claims here, so we can only observe the traits she currently exhibits.

But, I must admit, when I saw desertgal's list of visionfromfeeling's claims, my jaw dropped.

Which is a good example of what we are basing our observations on. It's not just one claim, it is many, and not just one statement, but thousands of words. As well, in UncaYimmy's case, several one on one, less guarded conversations with Anita, and with Sleepy Lioness, Professor Yaffle, and my own case, personal knowledge of personality disorders (either with ourselves or a loved one) which has made us sensitive to detecting similar traits in others.

As well, since she came here, on her own, under the pretext of having the skeptics here help her develop a protocol, and she has rejected advice and observations, as well as interjecting even more outlandish claims, and freely dispensing insults and condescension, I think it's fair to speculate about her motivations.

Given all that, I don't think our observations of Anita are unfounded. And we ARE cautious.

 

[Uncayimmy]

". Luckily, there is a brilliant skeptic on the JREF Forum, who posts under the member name UncaYimmy. He is a rare combination of being both a brilliant skeptic who has put me through some very unyielding aggressive skeptical interrogations and put me in my place a few times, but at the same time being most polite, friendly, and just wonderful to work with throughout. He has a rare talent of staying on-topic in the JREF discussions thread and great problem-solving skills in this tricky paranormal claim. He has dedicated a great deal of time, work, and thought into this investigation and has brought to it plenty of progress. If we discover an ESP ability he will have to be remembered as one of the persons who made a great deal of invaluable contribution toward its discovery. UncaYimmy is the author of the study protocol which will be used shortly in an upcoming study of this paranormal claim. It is a brilliant protocol."
(from her site)
Unca Yimmy! Such a mensch. And with great taste for wacky women.

It was pretty clear to me in our two Facebook chats that she was attempting to manipulate me with flattery (among other ways). What you copied from her website is another example. She's said similar things in this thread before.

What you quoted also appears to be an attempt at manipulating her readers. From the sound of it the average reader would not think that I have repeatedly told her that she has no ability, that testing is a waste of time, and that I think she should be checked out by a mental health professional.

Notice how she makes it out like you need a "brilliant" skeptic to resolve this "tricky" claim. She makes it sound like I came up with some protocol because I believe there's something there when in fact I slapped it together to make her crap or get off the pot.

That aside, I am brilliant. We're gonna call that a hit. And it wouldn't be through cold reading 'cause anybody reading me is gonna feel hot, baby, HOT!

 

[Jeff Corey]

Brights R Us!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5XfXECpU6w&feature=related

 

[Akhenaten]

It was pretty clear to me in our two Facebook chats that she was attempting to manipulate me with flattery (among other ways). What you copied from her website is another example. She's said similar things in this thread before.

What you quoted also appears to be an attempt at manipulating her readers. From the sound of it the average reader would not think that I have repeatedly told her that she has no ability, that testing is a waste of time, and that I think she should be checked out by a mental health professional.

That's what I was getting at when I pointed out to Anita that she was attempting to "back-channel" the thread. It seemed to me an obvious bit of chicanery to convince her audience here that she was receiving support and encouragement behind the scenes from some whom she deemed "senior sceptics".

I have to say that seemed a bit like calculated dishonesty, as is misquoting people in her replies. It's hard to put this behaviour down to simply suffering from delusions.

Notice how she makes it out like you need a "brilliant" skeptic to resolve this "tricky" claim. She makes it sound like I came up with some protocol because I believe there's something there when in fact I slapped it together to make her crap or get off the pot.

She really wants to be able to use references to the JREF (Forum) and the brilliant UncaYimmy to lend her website some credibility. Credit to her for choosing the best but I've got to wonder how she thinks this thread could ever be seen as supportive of her claims.

That aside, I am brilliant. We're gonna call that a hit. And it wouldn't be through cold reading 'cause anybody reading me is gonna feel hot, baby, HOT!

I'm not feeling the heat, strangely. You shall have to be satisfied with respect and admiration.


Cheers

 

[Uncayimmy]

I think DesertGal covered the issue of how much we have considered the issue before bringing up possible psychiatric disorders. We've read literally tens of thousands of words about essentially the same subject: her claims. We're not talking about things we've observed once but rather things we have seem repeatedly in terms of commission and omission.

There's one other factor we really haven't considered: Denial. I fully understand that denial is a tricky issue. After all, it's perfectly normal to deny things said about us when we don't believe them to be true. But speaking purely as a layman, I think that the manner and persistence of her denial is an area of concern.

Take for example how she treats me glowingly on her website. It's like she hasn't noticed that I have repeatedly told her that she does not have an ability and that she should, in fact, seek the help of a mental health professional.

She's rarely defended the notion that her claim is grandiose in the sense that she would be the first person in the world to have this ability. When she did, do you know what she said? She simply pointed out that she would be the first person to endure this "ordeal" to reveal these talents.

In other words she is even more special, and she's also being persecuted. Wow.

She's never actually addressed the simple issue that if she is actually sensing vibrational information from a person's body then there's no way she could have ever done it via photos or video. I brought it up very early on and have done so several times since. To concede that point would be to make everything unravel. Instead she tells us she just wants to concentrate on her "main claim" as if she is making several different claims instead of just one.

She has not had one person express a belief in her abilities or even suggest that it's remotely possible, yet she continues to try to convince us otherwise. Her proof? That *she* knows she's right despite a total lack of evidence. She acts like we're not serious.

As I write this it kind of dawns on me how a couple of the criteria manifest:

* Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations.

* Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.

If you think about, she behaves as if we're not really even here. She can't even identify with us and say, "I can see how you might see it that way, but I disagree." She simply tells us we are wrong and repeats herself.

She was downright disrespectful to DesertGal's personal revelations about her treated disorder and blew off my heartwarming story about taking the advice of friends who told me I might be suffering from depression. She even asked me if I "seriously" thought she might be having delusions.

Ashles told her did not want her PMs and that he would share the contents. Her response? That she would not "trust" him again with a PM. It's like he wasn't even there.

Like I said, I'm no expert. And I could be suffering from confirmation bias in that when I see a symptom described, I look for it. At the same, though, I am trying to find things that don't fit, but not having much luck. And I also know that I didn't go searching for descriptions of disorders until I noticed a lot of things that just didn't seem rational.

I doubt this is all a hoax. It's far too elaborate. Even her e-mail address, BrightStar, is a big clue. She picked that 18 months ago. What star is sometimes referred to as the Bright Star? You guessed. Arcturus.

 

[Uncayimmy]

I have to say that seemed a bit like calculated dishonesty, as is misquoting people in her replies. It's hard to put this behaviour down to simply suffering from delusions.

And I fully concede that this is a reasonable conclusion. But...

She really wants to be able to use references to the JREF (Forum) and the brilliant UncaYimmy to lend her website some credibility. Credit to her for choosing the best but I've got to wonder how she thinks this thread could ever be seen as supportive of her claims.

Exactly. This is what keeps me on the delusional track. She has a link to the Interview thread on her front page. In that thread I offer to take her posts to a mental health professional for evaluation. I accuse her of not being skeptical. I accuse her of not being reliable enough to justify the effort of taking a test. I say flat out that I do not believe she has any special abilities.

Is she incredibly stupid? I don't think so. She's definitely in college. Her command of English is pretty good. She gave a reasonable explanation about light and sound waves, though she didn't use conventional terms.

So I have to wonder why she would think it's a good idea to link back to these threads? If it were me, I'd just start over and join some woo-woo boards.

I'm not feeling the heat, strangely. You shall have to be satisfied with respect and admiration.

LOL! Well, we'll just have to ask Anita to "read" you to see if in fact you are feeling the heat or not.

 

[Hokulele]

...

What star is sometimes referred to as the Bright Star? You guessed. Arcturus.

Nah, that is Hokule'a^WP.

"Her name means "star of gladness" in Hawaiian, which refers to Arcturus, a guiding zenith star for Hawaiian navigators. In layman's terms, Arcturus passes directly overhead at Hawai'i's latitude so it helps sailors find Hawaiʻi."

 

[Ashles]

That's what I was getting at when I pointed out to Anita that she was attempting to "back-channel" the thread.

It makes me wonder how much back-channelling has been attempted by Anita.

It seems quite a few people here have been PMd.

I also only copied one paragraph from the PM I received. There were several more which would have given everyone even more to pick over.
She may not believe it but I didn't copy those across as a courtesy and because they weren't directly relevant to what we were discussing.
There were more attempts to use sciency sounding terms inappropriately which I dealt with via PM. But all of which would have been more useful on the thread.

It's not really sensible if there is more information regarding this claim, but it is distributed amongst multiple PMs and seperate discussions.

Anyway it looks like even the (pointless) study is being delayed indefinitely.

I find it amusing that we are barely even refering to proper independent testing any more as it has receded to such an unlikely proposition.

 

[Belz...]

Hello Skeptics,
School has started and this JREF discussion and investigation have fallen a bit lower down on my list of priorities.

Why doesn't that surprise me ?

 

[Locknar]

So I have to wonder why she would think it's a good idea to link back to these threads? If it were me, I'd just start over and join some woo-woo boards.

My take, and you've touched on it before ie. "she behaves as if we're not really even here".

Why not link back to the threads...she has summarily dismissed EVERYTHING anyone has brought up; she feels she is clearly in control and winning the battle (so to speak).