VisionFromFeeling - General discussion thread

Maia said:
Not a happy look. But because she kept backtracking afterwards, this clearly was not a come-to-Jesus moment for her (this is not a phrase with any religious significance, btw.) It's the same old question: is she actually continuing to fool herself into thinking that she's right even when she keeps failing the tests?

Now, what makes this an intriguing question, I think, is that it's the same thing you could ask about psychics who charge lots of money. Do they continue believe what they say, even when there's undeniable proof they've failed?
Click to expand...

What incentive, financial or emotional, does she have to embrace the truth? Right now she's a controversy-embroiled diva with photographers and investigators chasing after her, as she travels from one locale to the next to take tests. She even gets her fashion noticed.

Doesn't sound like a terribly bad headspace to be in if your value system hasn't been torqued around as hard as most skeptics have had. Most people just like feeling wanted, regardless of the reasons behind it.
 
bookitty said:
...

It's very exciting to get a live one, to plot out the challenge, consult the statisticians, figure out the flaws, loopholes and possibility for cheating. It's why the group was formed. Setting an obstacle in the way, especially one that is related to the personality of the claimant and not the actual claim, wouldn't be worth it.
Click to expand...

I still see no reason for offering a claimant which is a habitual llier plenty of weasel room after a test.
If the only reason a sleptical organisation would have is to also get a shot at testing, that would not equal critical thinking.
It sounds more like reinventing the wheel.
 
sgf8 said:
... NOT THAT IT MATTERS ABOUT THE NOTES (just from a testing point of view it was a major flaw)
Click to expand...

In fact, she should not even have an opportunity to make any notes at all. Just the relevant answers, nothing else.
 
Daylightstar said:
I still see no reason for offering a claimant which is a habitual llier plenty of weasel room after a test.
If the only reason a sleptical organisation would have is to also get a shot at testing, that would not equal critical thinking.
It sounds more like reinventing the wheel.
Click to expand...

There is always the (very slight) possibility that a test will uncover some new magical power so it is impossible to say that every claimant is deluded, a liar, or a con-artist but it is very probable. If you refuse to test people that fall into those categories, there wouldn't be anyone left.
 
bookitty said:
There is always the (very slight) possibility that a test will uncover some new magical power so it is impossible to say that every claimant is deluded, a liar, or a con-artist but it is very probable. If you refuse to test people that fall into those categories, there wouldn't be anyone left.
Click to expand...

Still no reason to offer weasel room for the claimant.
Closing off weasel room would not limit any real ability to be demonstrated.

Also, I am not talking about any other claimant than Ikonen here. Ikonen has a negative trackrecord that should be taken into consideration.
 
KirinDave said:
I'm the photographer that took those photos she is linking I don't think Anita has powers (or “experiences” or whatever she wants to call them). I don't even think she experiences synesthesia. But I do not think she altered her notes.

She was not in possession of them while sitting discussing her performance:
[qimg]http://idisk.me.com/dfayram/Public/Pictures/Skitch/NoNotes1-20100721-104917.jpg[/qimg]

She was not in possession of them after submitting her results to the podium, she placed them unaltered on the table at the sitting area. She returned her pen to the table where she got it from. I won't bore you with pictures of limited photographic value (although I have many). She retrieved her notes and pen as she left the stage:
[qimg]http://idisk.me.com/dfayram/Public/Pictures/Skitch/notesasleaving-20100721-105311.jpg[/qimg]

She was immediately surrounded by Joe Nickel, several videographers, and I. That's when I took a few photos (previously posted in this thread). The time between my shots of her leaving the stage (where she was covered and couldn't alter the notes) and when the subject of her notes came up in conversation was approximately 7 minutes and 18 seconds. If she did alter them, it's almost certain that I, Joe, or the videographers caught it. She was under a LOT of observation.

Is it possible she found a way to quickly make the scribbles? Maybe. But I think there is a far simpler explanation: her notes are total gibberish. I don't see any rhyme or reason to how they're laid out, and I doubt anyone else can really get meaning from them. Anita could say anything she wanted about these notes and her notation and we really can't say she's telling us the truth; especially if we take her claim of synesthesia at face value.

Anita can make all the complaints she wants but the fact is: she was wrong. She was wrong and she said she was very certain she was right. She even laughed out loud when she inspected #3.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the off-topic comment, but I keep hearing how beautiful Anita is supposed to be. She's attractive, but based on these photos, she's got nothing on Alison.
 
bookitty said:
There is always the (very slight) possibility that a test will uncover some new magical power so it is impossible to say that every claimant is deluded, a liar, or a con-artist but it is very probable. If you refuse to test people that fall into those categories, there wouldn't be anyone left.
Click to expand...


Daylightstar said:
Still no reason to offer weasel room for the claimant. Closing off weasel room would not limit any real ability to be demonstrated.

Also, I am not talking about any other claimant than Ikonen here. Ikonen has a negative track record that should be taken into consideration.
Click to expand...


In general terms you're right, bookitty, but in this particular case Daylightstar is 100% on the money. In this thread we are talking about a person who says things like this:


Vision from Failing said:
I work not to claim nor to verify some truly magical psychic skill, yet I do experience feeling and seeing these health impressions in great detail, that are not the case of guesses or assumptions derived logically, but ones which strongly occupy my internal and subjective senses of feeling and vision.

I still find the record of achievement by this claim to be interesting enough, to further allow some more investigation.

I wish to learn more about this experience, and in the process, I hope to illuminate the cultural place of skeptics and paranormal claimants, the way in which claims are dealt with, and what can be learned of one such a claim.

The social aspect of skeptic-woo interaction is also part of my study. I have learned more about my claim in this TAM demonstration, yet I sadly conclude that my claim and this investigation requires further attention.
Click to expand...
my bolding

Source


It is most definitely possible to say that this claimant is deluded, a liar and/or a con-artist.



The text in red is worth a second look.

The social aspect of skeptic-woo interaction is also part of my study.​

That says a great deal about the entire performance.
 
Akhenaten said:
It is most definitely possible to say that this claimant is deluded, a liar and/or a con-artist.



The text in red is worth a second look.

The social aspect of skeptic-woo interaction is also part of my study.​

That says a great deal about the entire performance.
Click to expand...

It does. But I think there' s something else going here, and it would help to explain how and why she can keep going with this when she's kept failing ALL of the tests for these weird abilities,whether formal or informal.My personal opinion is that what she does is something you could call a con artist act if she hadn't so thoroughly fooled herself about why she keeps doing it.

Here's what I mean. I think that before each test, she's convinced that her strong convictions about possessing these abilities are what matters. The actual results she ends up with aren't important to her, because she's always sure that the next test will be the one where she gets the results she wants. This would be why she always convinces herself that she's succeeded-- she still ends up with the same conviction that she has the ability, so as far as she is concerned, she has passed whatever the test was. The fact that she didn't get a positive result is an unimportant detail. She'll get it next time. Under this theory, making up a story about why she didn't get it is something that she doesn't consider to be a lie, even though she knows perfectly well what actually happened.
 
Last edited:
Rougarou said:
Sorry for the off-topic comment, but I keep hearing how beautiful Anita is supposed to be. She's attractive, but based on these photos, she's got nothing on Alison.
Click to expand...
my bolding
That would be quite an understatement. In my opinion ofcourse.
 
Akhenaten said:
In general terms you're right, bookitty, but in this particular case Daylightstar is 100% on the money. In this thread we are talking about a person who says things like this:



my bolding

Source


It is most definitely possible to say that this claimant is deluded, a liar and/or a con-artist.





The text in red is worth a second look.

The social aspect of skeptic-woo interaction is also part of my study.​

That says a great deal about the entire performance.
Click to expand...

If she was a social sciences student, I'd be inclined to suspect she was researching for a book on such a topic.
 
Maia said:
<polite snippy of at least as good a theory as I have myself>

Under this theory, making up a story about why she didn't get it is something that she doesn't consider to be a lie, even though she knows perfectly well what actually happened.
Click to expand...


For years (aren't I sad?) I've been undecided between delusion and conscious scamming, and I remain firmly committed to not having a clue which it is. Is a mix of the two feasible?

I can certainly see the sense in your theory, and I know that you have more expertise in these things than I could hope to have, so no argument with that.

However, there are other aspects of Ikonen's behaviour that appear to me to be blatantly dishonest. First and foremost among these are her constant efforts to pass herself off as one of the sceptical community's newest and brightest stars. Despite anything she might choose to do in order to rationalise her 'claim', as she calls it, to herself, she must know that nobody else believes her, and the constant spinning of stories for the sake of her perceived audience seems to be very deceitful.


Daylightstar said:
That would be quite an understatement. In my opinion of course.
Click to expand...


I'm afraid you don't get to have that opinion all to yourself. Not even close.

;)


Sideroxylon said:
If she was a social sciences student, I'd be inclined to suspect she was researching for a book on such a topic.
Click to expand...


If I was a social sciences student the first 7 volumes would already be out in paperback.
 
Akhenaten said:
If I was a social sciences student the first 7 volumes would already be out in paperback.
Click to expand...

I'd be holding out for signed first hardcover editions :D

There's plenty of material on the forums but being able to write from the perspective of a test subject would bring something different. If Anita ever wanted to dump all this baggage of foolishness, it could make for a face-saving out to say it was an elaborate hoax for research purposes.
 
Akhenaten said:
For years (aren't I sad?) I've been undecided between delusion and conscious scamming, and I remain firmly committed to not having a clue which it is. Is a mix of the two feasible?

I can certainly see the sense in your theory, and I know that you have more expertise in these things than I could hope to have, so no argument with that.
Click to expand...
Oh... this isn't something you should ever HOPE to have. I don't want it. I would give it away if I could! I agree that there seem to be some dishonest aspects of her behavior, and I don't think you can really call it anything else. But I do think that she justifies it to herself by constantly believing that the proof really, really will show up soon.

One thing I can't understand is why anyone would do this for a skeptical audience. It's one thing to put on the entire act for the benefit of true believers who will be supportive no matter what happens, but to expose yourself over and over to people who think you're lying/delusional/a con artist/setting up for a future scam... this would just be the seventh circle of hell for me. Actually, that's a big part of why I do think that she has to keep believing the Day of Proof will ultimately come for her.


Now, that entire original thing about Anita being ready to don the mantle of Aphrodite... are y'all KIDDING me??

(meow meow meow meow, meow meow meow meow...)

Cattiness is so unattractive, don't you think? (pets actual cat, now eating cat food.)
 
Last edited:
Maia said:
One thing I can't understand is why anyone would do this for a skeptical audience. It's one thing to put on the entire act for the benefit of true believers who will be supportive no matter what happens, but to expose yourself over and over to people who think you're lying/delusional/a con artist/setting up for a future scam... this would just be the seventh circle of hell for me. Actually, that's a big part of why I do think that she has to keep believing the Day of Proof will ultimately come for her.
Click to expand...


I have theories (thrills and shocks - supersonic body blocks!)

In order of increasing cynicism:

1. If she's rationalising this stuff to herself, then maybe the better the audience, the easier it is to do. She might be thinking "These sceptics must secretly believe there's a result just around the corner or they wouldn't keep testing me."

2. If she's being driven by narcissism then attracting and holding the attention of sceptics might be a better fix. She's been known to show a fair degree of contempt for starry-eyed sheeple and their willing ways, especially those she attracted during her breatharian phase.

3. If she's planning on making a quid out of this at some stage, the skeptical community is a good place to do her training. 'If she can make it here, she'll make it anywhere' kind of thing.​


Maia said:
Now, that entire original thing about Anita being ready to don the mantle of Aphrodite... are y'all KIDDING me??

(meow meow meow meow, meow meow meow meow...)

Cattiness is so unattractive, don't you think? (pets actual cat, now eating cat food.)
Click to expand...


Don't look at me! I'm firmly in the Medusa camp, and so are my cats. They asked me to pass on that cattiness is just fine.


 
Akhenaten said:
In general terms you're right, bookitty, but in this particular case Daylightstar is 100% on the money. In this thread we are talking about a person who says things like this:

my bolding

Source

It is most definitely possible to say that this claimant is deluded, a liar and/or a con-artist.

The text in red is worth a second look.

The social aspect of skeptic-woo interaction is also part of my study.​

That says a great deal about the entire performance.
Click to expand...

Oh trust me, I am well aware of all that. I've watched the language change, I've watched the story change. I've also followed the stories of other claimants. They are all spinning as fast as they can. It's what they do.

Her case is fascinating, everybody loves the story of a grifter. So she gets discussed. Which makes for a very, very strange dynamic. She takes this to mean that her claim is important or that she's somehow special and acts on that. The skeptics get annoyed because she is, once again, totally missing the point.

The brouhaha over Anita started because she was here and on StopVFF, where she would respond to skepticism with mile-long diatribes filled with all those logical errors that are so fun to nit-pick apart. Poor impulse control and overweening arrogance led to her dismissal from both places. She was reduced to talking to herself on her blog, responding to herself in her own forum, desperately.

Then the TAM invite. Skeptics who weren't there decide that the demo is about her. They freak out. Huzzah! She is relevant again. She has about a week of posting in blog comments, updating her site and scrambling for a new test. Now that's starting to fade. Once again she is talking to herself, trying to find the angle. Desperate.

Maybe there will be a new test. It will follow the same pattern. She'll lose, she'll spin, the group that tests her will have their every move examined for flaws. For a week she'll be queen of the woos, it'll quiet down and then she'll go back to making increasingly wild claims on Facebook or her blog. Fishing for just one more nibble.

There are many groups that test, all of them wanting just one damn applicant that will actually go through with it. Anita to the rescue! Yes, it's frustrating. No, nothing will ever be good enough to change her mind.

The only sliver of silver lining is that she is learning the wrong things for a career in woo. The language she uses to discuss her magic with skeptics won't work on the believers. For obvious reasons, I won't go into detail but having seen energy healers and psychics in action I can tell you this, her gimmick sucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom