Vision From Feeling

[Uncayimmy]

What ever. No study then. I'll find some other skeptics group if I have to. Just don't tell me I'm avoiding to have the study. I've done all I can.

I'm trying to figure out how to write this without drawing the ire of the moderators...

You haven't done all you can. You have done only what YOU wanted to do. You have not taken anyone's advice. You have been manipulative. The exchange with FACT is a clear example.

Not a single person here would conclude that any meeting was scheduled for Sunday. Do you see a time? Location? Duration? Anybody saying, "Yes, I will be there for sure?" Anybody saying, "Sorry, can't make it!"

Your protocol sucks. Your study form sucks. Your analysis of the pain ratings sucks. I have repeatedly outlined why. I am pointing out that it sucks because Godofpie already said that if it's not up to snuff, he ain't doing it.

Sit back and think about this for a moment:
How many people have taken your side on the numerous occasions in which there has been a dispute over interpretation? Zero. Nada. Nil.

How many have spoken up against your position? A helluva lot more than zero, I'll tell you that.

How many people believe that your evidence to this date is worthy of further exploration because there might be something there? Zero. Nada. Nil.

How many people believe that the only reason to even indulge you in any type of study or testing is to prove to you that you do not have any abilities and that you are NOT special? A helluva lot more than zero, I'll tell you that.

How does "I conclude that I find no health problems. But I did sense his adam's apple." lead you to the conclusion that I detected a thyroid problem?

Godofpie didn't conclude that; Dr. Carlson believed you were indicating the thyroid. Had you used the form that was offered instead of LYING about its availability, we would not be having this discussion.

For those of you still debating delusion versus fraud, I suggest you rate the following four statements on a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 means "a delusional person irrationally protecting a fantasy" and 10 means "a fraud trying to maintain credibility in the face of contradiction."

a) I was really nervous and felt a lot of pressure being in front of skeptics and the well-respected Dr. Carlson. Even though what I sensed wasn't worth mentioning, I did anyway because I felt like I should say something.

b) I can see why you might consider what I said to be a miss. I probably shouldn't have mentioned the throat or the shoulder at all. I'm not sure why I did. Like I said, the perceptions were really weak. In the future I will be more careful about what I say. Maybe it was just nerves throwing me off my game.

c) That was not a miss and this wasn't a test anyway. I said it was a slight discomfort and probably just his Adam's apple. There's no way that could be a miss or prove anything.

d) How does "I conclude that I find no health problems. But I did sense his adam's apple." lead you to the conclusion that I detected a thyroid problem?

You make the call.

 

[Farencue]

Anita its too late too trade mark this "Vibrational Information"

Brent atwater im sure u know her , she didn't win the Nobel either.

http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/...agnosis_or_a_Medical_Intuitive_Body_Scan.html

Is this where u got your story from?

Big bucks in this field Gmonster - Cost is $1999 for a full body scan but allow 2-6hours. For existing clients a mini scan is only $695 and a full scan only $820.
Interesting that this lady claims the Rhine Research Center studied her ability when she was only 5 years old - I guess she must be ridgydidge.
I couldnt find any published papers on this research though, so my google skills must be really bad or you just dont need to have any scientific evidence to back up your ability and make money.

I dont think it will ultimately matter if Anita has a study, she should be right too.

 

[Chimera]

What ever. No study then. I'll find some other skeptics group if I have to. Just don't tell me I'm avoiding to have the study. I've done all I can. Now, I've got to focus on my Upcoming Exams^TM.

from Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, 1994, commonly referred to as DSM-IV, of the American Psychiatric Association:

Narcissistic Personality Disorder: A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy.

The disorder begins by early adulthood and is indicated by at least five of the following:

1. An exaggerated sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
2. Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. Believes he is "special" and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
4. Requires excessive admiration
5. Has a sense of entitlement
6. Selfishly takes advantage of others to achieve his own ends
7. Lacks empathy
8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him
9. Shows arrogant, haughty, patronizing, or contemptuous behaviors or attitudes

website

 

[Miss_Kitt]

Ashles--Happy Birthday!!! May you get no more gray hairs from this thread...

 

[Pup]

Why feel the left shoulder if there is nothing wrong with it, why not the right shoulder or both of them?

That's what I wondered also, in a post upthread that I'm not going to search for.

Was Wayne ever told or asked about the difference in his shoulders? What was his reaction?

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

Jim (godofpie):
Thanks for all your work with the FACT Skeptics, and I do appreciate the huge resource that you all are in my paranormal investigation.
What I meant by success was that I failed to falsify the paranormal claim since I did not make any incorrect perceptions. That is what I was happy about, although I realize that I should try to remain more neutral and unaffected emotionally regardless of what results reveal. The viewing with Wayne was not successful since I did not make any accurate medical perceptions. But the viewing with Wayne was also not unsuccessful since I did not make any inaccurate medical perceptions. All I concluded from this experience was that I had yet again failed to falsify the claim, which is exactly what I concluded to Dr. Carlson after the viewing when he came to ask about the outcome.

I think we are both right.

Roughly I know that I can look at a person and detect health problems that are structural or perceived in nature. However I am required by testing organizations such as the IIG West and by Dr. Carlson before he would prepare a test of my claim, to form a more specific claim. The study will help me form a more specific claim.

By looking at people.

I lack the experience to make claims about the efficiency. It does not mean that the efficiency would necessarily be high or low. I just don't know the efficiency that's all. It's because I don't run around offering psychic medical readings to people to find out. And, that is what the study is for.

Nope. Was part of my study, not a test. A test is able to pass or fail a hypothesis. What I did with Wayne was by no means capable of passing the hypothesis since some cold reading was still available since I am taking a gradual approach from the everyday experience with the perceptions and change by change by implementing test conditions toward a real test procedure which would be a test.

I said that I had felt something in the front of the throat but that it involved a bony structure, but I realize that it could have been dense cartilage. I knew it was not associated with the thyroid or other soft tissue nor embedded tissue. I also knew that the extent of what I perceived was very low and that it was not a health problem, ie. not an ailment. I also found out that it was the adam's apple I was perceiving. And I did not state it as any kind of answer as to what ailments I might have detected. My conclusion was that I detected no health problems in Wayne. My confidence was high that it was a perception of something that occurs to an insignificant extent.

He said he has no throat ailment and I said I sense no throat ailment. I said I sensed his adam's apple. I'm pretty sure he has an adam's apple.

I asked if he could write down his ailment in a list of four ailments, three of which he does not have. And I was unable to find the ailment even when it was on a list.


Of course I respect Dr. Carlson. But what I have designed is a study not a test. A study whose objectives are to find out more about the claim. A test would be designed not to find out more about the claim but to pass or falsify a claim. Why can't I have a test study? If FACT does not want to participate in the study I'll just have to find some other skeptics who will.

The study is designed as a study for me to gain a general idea of how closely my perceptions correlate with the perceptions that a person has of their health. It is not a test.

>>>The viewing with Wayne was not successful since I did not make any accurate medical perceptions. But the viewing with Wayne was also not unsuccessful since I did not make any inaccurate medical perceptions. All I concluded from this experience was that I had yet again failed to falsify the claim, which is exactly what I concluded to Dr. Carlson after the viewing when he came to ask about the outcome.

Now theres a classic. Trying to turn chicken ◊◊◊◊ into chicken salad and make it "unsuccessfully successful".


>>>Of course I respect Dr. Carlson. But what I have designed is a study not a test. A study whose objectives are to find out more about the claim. A test would be designed not to find out more about the claim but to pass or falsify a claim. Why can't I have a test study?

Thats the key to your scam right there. You want it "assumed" and taken for granted that you have "the gift" which allows you to perpetuate your hoax because you hide behind the "pretense" of "studying" it when the FIRST task of any LEGITIMATE study is to factually ascertain if you in fact have the "gift" in the first place.

Iimagine you next claim will be that you are half Betazoid and thats how you can "sense" things.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

For those of you still debating delusion versus fraud, I suggest you rate the following four statements on a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 means "a delusional person irrationally protecting a fantasy" and 10 means "a fraud trying to maintain credibility in the face of contradiction."

a) I was really nervous and felt a lot of pressure being in front of skeptics and the well-respected Dr. Carlson. Even though what I sensed wasn't worth mentioning, I did anyway because I felt like I should say something.

b) I can see why you might consider what I said to be a miss. I probably shouldn't have mentioned the throat or the shoulder at all. I'm not sure why I did. Like I said, the perceptions were really weak. In the future I will be more careful about what I say. Maybe it was just nerves throwing me off my game.

c) That was not a miss and this wasn't a test anyway. I said it was a slight discomfort and probably just his Adam's apple. There's no way that could be a miss or prove anything.

d) How does "I conclude that I find no health problems. But I did sense his adam's apple." lead you to the conclusion that I detected a thyroid problem?

You make the call.

>>>a) I was really nervous and felt a lot of pressure being in front of skeptics and the well-respected Dr. Carlson. Even though what I sensed wasn't worth mentioning, I did anyway because I felt like I should say something.

Solid 10. Cons never give direct answers or speak in finite terms. This is called playing the "pressure" card. "I knew I felt something (legitimizing the initial claim) but jumped the gun because ( playing the innocent error card)"

>>>b) I can see why you might consider what I said to be a miss. I probably shouldn't have mentioned the throat or the shoulder at all. I'm not sure why I did. Like I said, the perceptions were really weak. In the future I will be more careful about what I say. Maybe it was just nerves throwing me off my game.

Solid 10. The "apologetic" scam. The old "yeah you're right" but heres probably why I failed. It wasnt "me" but .............

>>>c) That was not a miss and this wasn't a test anyway. I said it was a slight discomfort and probably just his Adam's apple. There's no way that could be a miss or prove anything.

solid 10- Blaming the test and forming a basis for denying. ( thats like the con saying "what do those nasty realtors know, thats why they are all rich- let me tell you what the "real" truth is)

>>>d) How does "I conclude that I find no health problems. But I did sense his adam's apple." lead you to the conclusion that I detected a thyroid problem?

when all else fails, throw up the smokescreen and turn it back on them ( keeps them busy and the con doesnt have to answer and knows they will expend energy "explaining" why the con was wrong which will boil down to nothing since the con already knew he was lying. This is a wear down strategy)

 

[Belz...]

Oh, you guys... just stay with the truth of things. Don't misinterpret all the time.

You're asking someone not to misinterpret ? You DO know what the word means, right ?

No, I detect plenty of things.

No, Vision, you can't. It's been shown conclusively, here. See a doctor.

 

[Locknar]

What ever. No study then. I'll find some other skeptics group if I have to. Just don't tell me I'm avoiding to have the study.

You are avoiding having the study.

I've done all I can.

No, you haven't

How does "I conclude that I find no health problems. But I did sense his adam's apple." lead you to the conclusion that I detected a thyroid problem?

Read the note from Dr Carlson

 

[desertgal]

from Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, 1994, commonly referred to as DSM-IV, of the American Psychiatric Association:

Narcissistic Personality Disorder: A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy.

The disorder begins by early adulthood and is indicated by at least five of the following:

1. An exaggerated sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
2. Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. Believes he is "special" and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
4. Requires excessive admiration
5. Has a sense of entitlement
6. Selfishly takes advantage of others to achieve his own ends
7. Lacks empathy
8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him
9. Shows arrogant, haughty, patronizing, or contemptuous behaviors or attitudes

website

Yes, and she also displays, in her writings here, symptoms of schizotypal disorder:

* Incorrect interpretation of events, including feeling that external events have personal meaning
* 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

Website

And, as Dr. Yaffle pointed out some pages ago, she also appears to suffer from grandiose delusions, which is a symptom of numerous delusional disorders.

Of course, if Anita is delusional, none of us can say what the source is, or if she suffers from one or more personality disorders. Nor can we say the above are accurate in her 'real' life. A great portion of psychiatric evaluation comes from evaluating body language and personal habits, and shouldn't be done by anyone but a qualified mental health professional.

In any case, pointing out DSM-IV supported symptoms to Anita just means that 'we' are misinterpreting the data.

Anita, if you ever get the chance, while you are on the Internet, take a moment to look up biographical information on John Forbes Nash, Jr. He not only faced the fact that he had a personality disorder, he went on to become a Nobel Laureate. Right up your alley.

 

[Ashles]

What ever. No study then. I'll find some other skeptics group if I have to. Just don't tell me I'm avoiding to have the study.

Anyone remember when I posted this?

Then the list of people and organisations who are delaying or hampering you will include:
The Independent Investigations Group
The FACT Noisy skeptics
The owners of a Shopping Mall
The Charlotte Park and Recreation Department

Who's next I wonder? The Illuminati? Big Pharma? The CIA?

Looks like it is the WHOLE of the FACT skeptics now, not just the noisy ones.

I love the increasing frequency of 'what ever' as though she is a rather childish participant on Jerry Springer who cannot actually formulate a decent response to a question so just responds with an incoherent 'what ever'.

 

[desertgal]

For those of you still debating delusion versus fraud, I suggest you rate the following four statements on a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 means "a delusional person irrationally protecting a fantasy" and 10 means "a fraud trying to maintain credibility in the face of contradiction."

I'll bite. I think motivation is a worthy debate.

a) I was really nervous and felt a lot of pressure being in front of skeptics and the well-respected Dr. Carlson. Even though what I sensed wasn't worth mentioning, I did anyway because I felt like I should say something.

b) I can see why you might consider what I said to be a miss. I probably shouldn't have mentioned the throat or the shoulder at all. I'm not sure why I did. Like I said, the perceptions were really weak. In the future I will be more careful about what I say. Maybe it was just nerves throwing me off my game.

c) That was not a miss and this wasn't a test anyway. I said it was a slight discomfort and probably just his Adam's apple. There's no way that could be a miss or prove anything.

Rate: 1. "I was really nervous because my delusion was being put to the test in the presence of those that aren't so easy to fool, instead of on the Internet. Fictional anecdotes were no longer going to suffice as evidence of my ability. They know all what I have claimed, so I had to come up with something." Desperate maneuvering to perpetuate her delusional reality.

d) How does "I conclude that I find no health problems. But I did sense his adam's apple." lead you to the conclusion that I detected a thyroid problem?

Rate: 1. Dr. Carlson may have made a mistake. She will latch onto that, in the same way that she latched onto the misunderstanding about her university education, and use it to divert attention away from her own errors. Desperate maneuvering to perpetuate her delusional reality.

Course, as Longtabber has pointed out, the jury is still out on delusional vs. scam. Course, it could be both-a delusional person running a scam.

 

[Jeff Corey]

If Anita has a 4.0 average, shouldn't she be on the NCC's Dean's List? Check it out.http://www.registrar.uncc.edu/students/dean.asp?term=20081

 

[Moochie]

<snip>


>>>b) I can see why you might consider what I said to be a miss. I probably shouldn't have mentioned the throat or the shoulder at all. I'm not sure why I did. Like I said, the perceptions were really weak. In the future I will be more careful about what I say. Maybe it was just nerves throwing me off my game.

<snip>

Ahem.



M.

 

[Old man]

I said that I had felt something in the front of the throat but that it involved a bony structure, but I realize that it could have been dense cartilage. I knew it was not associated with the thyroid or other soft tissue nor embedded tissue. I also knew that the extent of what I perceived was very low and that it was not a health problem, ie. not an ailment. I also found out that it was the adam's apple I was perceiving. And I did not state it as any kind of answer as to what ailments I might have detected. My conclusion was that I detected no health problems in Wayne. My confidence was high that it was a perception of something that occurs to an insignificant extent.

The bolded portion above is an out and out LIE, and you know it, Anita. Your ‘visions’ are better than X-ray, remember? You’re making up rationalizations after the fact, and you know it.

IF YOU DON’T WRITE DOWN AN OBSERVATION DURING YOUR READING, YOU CANNOT CLAIM TO HAVE MADE IT.

IF YOU DO WRITE DOWN AN OBSERVATION DURING YOUR READING, YOU CANNOT CLAIM TO HAVE NOT MADE IT.

Originally Posted by Dr. Carlson
He then made a list of four ailments, asking if she could tell which of the four he had. She was unable to do so."

I asked if he could write down his ailment in a list of four ailments, three of which he does not have. And I was unable to find the ailment even when it was on a list.

You can write thousands and thousands of words that convey almost no information, Anita. Why won’t you CLEARLY write what you did and observed during the Wayne test? Why do you force us to pry and drag the pertinent facts out of you?

You WANT to make it look like we’re picking on ‘poor little Anita”, don’t you?

Standards in college have certainly changed. I didn’t maintain a 4.0, and none of my science professors would have let me get away with writing crap like you do!

I mean, I can even perceive what a person feels that are subtle and healthy things. Like... when a person eats ice-cream, or when they swallow, or their heartbeat, or breathing. If I said that I felt someone's breathing, you would all jump at me and say that I made an incorrect perception since I supposedly claimed to sense lung cancer. No. If I say I felt someone's breathing, I felt someone's breathing. If I say I sensed someone's adam's apple, or left shoulder, then those were what I sensed…

“If you say you sensed that someone's adam's apple is a bony structure, then that is what you sensed.”

And, you’re WRONG.

Oh, you guys... just stay with the truth of things. Don't misinterpret all the time.

Pot, met Kettle.

There exists no ability to study.

You’re right about the other meaning of this sentence, too.

This link will take you to our groups mail archive. Does anyone else, besides Anita, feel like I had agreed to a meeting this Sunday the 8th?

I don’t need to look at that to believe you. If Anita says the sun is shining, take your umbrella along. Virtually everything she’s said in the last few posts has been lies.

 

[skeen]

Anita has a severe case of ferjicity methinks.

 

[desertgal]

If Anita has a 4.0 average, shouldn't she be on the NCC's Dean's List? Check it out.http://www.registrar.uncc.edu/students/dean.asp?term=20081

Yeah, I noticed that, too. Mind you, she 'maintains a 4.0 in a double major', but, maybe, the academics office 'misinterprets' her grades, and that's why she isn't on the list.

 

[desertgal]

Was Wayne ever told or asked about the difference in his shoulders? What was his reaction?

Dunno. Anita offered to ask Wayne to come here and present his viewpoint of what took place, but, of course, you can imagine that that offer went the way of the dodo.

Presenting corroborating statements to substantiate her claims is not Anita's strong point. It's so weak as to be nonexistent.

It's because I don't run around offering psychic medical readings to people to find out.

Except for, you know, 100 or so friends and relatives.

 

[nathan]

If Anita has a 4.0 average, shouldn't she be on the NCC's Dean's List? Check it out.http://www.registrar.uncc.edu/students/dean.asp?term=20081

For those of us not from the USA what does a 4.0 average really mean? Beyond 'good' I don't know. Also what's the significance of The Dean's List?

Yeah, I noticed that, too. Mind you, she 'maintains a 4.0 in a double major', but, maybe, the academics office 'misinterprets' her grades, and that's why she isn't on the list.

Curious, UNCC doesn't think she's doing a double major. It lists Chemistry as the Major.

 

[Jeff Corey]

For those of us not from the USA what does a 4.0 average really mean? Beyond 'good' I don't know. Also what's the significance of The Dean's List?...

4.0 is a straight A average. The rules for the Dean's list are."The Dean's List recognizes undergraduate students with outstanding records of academic performance. To qualify for the Dean's List during the fall or spring semester, a full-time student must earn a grade point average between 3.40 and 3.75 in 12 or more semester hours of credit graded A, B, or C, with no grade less than C. A part-time student must earn a combined fall and spring grade point average between 3.40 and 3.79 in 12 or more semester hours of credit graded A, B, or C, with no grade less than C."

Actually, a 4.0 average would qualify her for the Chancellor's List, because she claims to have earned more than a 3.75 average. Is she on the Chancellor's List for the Fall of 2008?
http://www.registrar.uncc.edu/students/chanc.asp?term=20061
Nope.