I would like to take this moment to say I do not like this new editing feature.
Compare it to this challenge as set by Randi : James Randi's Swift - June 9, 2006
This guy sells a product that supposedly uses magnets to break down the tannins in wine and improve the flavour. Note that he doesn’t claim that it’s paranormal. He says it works on scientific principles. Randi is the one saying this product is paranormal, not the seller
That’s what happened to Lintgen. HE didn’t say that his ability is paranormal - but Randi did. And you can bet that before the test Randi was hurling all kind of nasty comments at him. He always does. He’s incapable of doing anything else.
And if the wine magnet guy takes Randi’s challenge, proves that his device works as advertised, Randi will just say it’s not paranormal, like he did with Lintgen.
This in my view is a serious problem with the challenge. The new rules don’t help. How can the challenge rules be revised to overcome it? Your suggestions, please.
Cite?
So if Randi is proven wrong, he will simply admit that he was wrong? What’s wrong with that? And isn’t that exactly what you keep saying he would never do [admit he was wrong]?
Because he would say that it’s not paranormal, and refuse to award the prize.
How can the rules be altered to prevent this?
But if it’s not paranormal, then it shouldn’t get the prize. How did you get the mistaken notion that this is the “Prove Randi Wrong” challenge? It’s not.
Gee, do you think it’s because Randi himself defined it that way?
No, I think it’s because you want to weasel past the spirit of the challenge, and attempt to use the letter of challenge to slime your way to a million bucks. It won’t work, and the loopholes that you created in your mind are entirely fictional, but you asked me what I think and that’s what I think.
It’s obvious that you don’t understand the spirit of the challenge.
It’s obviously that you have a childish penchant for picking nits. Would you like to add something substantial, such as why you think your claim is consistent with the spirit of the challenge? How about answering one of the many unanswered questions posed to you in this thread? Or shall you continue to follow your predictable MO of drive-by and snipe-posting, only partially and dishonestly answering questions as you see fit?
I’m with Cisco on this… cite? Of any of it?
Did Randi say it was paranormal, or just hokum? I’m curious.
Well, the problem seems to be your still-unproven claims against Randi himself, so it’s unclear that that it needs to be overcome.
Ah yes, the usual personal attack.
Moderator?
Well, on closer read I see Randi did use the word “paranormal” to describe the wine magnets. I tried to edit my earlier statement but the server hung and I missed the five-minute window. Oh, well…
I am well aware that, although the Challenge clearly states that it is a test of the paranormal, Randi has allowed it to encompass a wider range of doubful claims, some of which might be classified as merely weird, misguided, fraudulent or fanciful rather than mainstream paranormal. Unless the wine magnet guy says he is getting his power from the Planet Hoova, perhaps his claim falls in that broader category. Paranormal or not, it’s something that should be challenged, and Randi is just the person to do it (Og knows the FTC, which should be protecting consumer interests, isn’t).
I think there are two things you have chosen to ignore.[ol][li]The spirit of the Challenge is to fight fraud and ignorance (not unlike the Straight Dope, eh?). It is an offer to win a lot of money made voluntarily by one organization. They have every right to make the rules BEFORE a test is agreed upon. It’s their money.[/ol]If you claim that Randi “refused to award the prize” AFTER a test was taken and won by the applicant, please provide a cite, because I interpret your statement in this manner. If a test is not done because both sides cannot agree on the details, that is an entirely different matter. It would be fraud only if an agreement was broken.[/li]
The rules do not need to be altered to prevent “this”, whatever that is.
I can provide cites for everything I said. Can you provide a cite for when you called me a liar upthread?
Musicat, excellent summation.
In the link concerning the wine magnets, I believe the manufacturer does refer to “orgone energy,” which should put it into paranormal territory.
Also, a general comment for **Peter **-- The guy who reads phonograph records was not applying for the JREF challenge, was he? If not, what is your point?
At long last you understand. That is the point I’ve been making for months. Yes, the challenge includes things that are weird or misguided. Exactly.
And James Randi has been saying for 25 years that underground rivers are a delusion. That puts them into the category weird/ misguided/ fanciful ratrher than mainstream paranormal.
yes
No.
The spirit of the challenge is a mean minded attack on people that disagree with Randi. It is there so that Randi can boast that he’s right in his opinion. “Prove me wrong and win a million dollars” he says, and if nobody takes him up on it, he claims it proves him right.
It is not, and never has been a sincere offer of a reward for a new discovery.
Moderator’s Warning: Cisco, tone it down or take it to the Pit.
Actually I am wondering at this point if this thread still serves any useful purpose as far as having an actual debate.
It might, if Peter would stop hijacking it about his obsession.
For example, the music issue is interesting. There’s a lot of hokum in both the audiophile field and the patent medicine field. (And the oenophile field) Do you think the revised challenge is stronger or weaker at addressing it?
There exists a chip which, when placed on a CD player, somehow is supposed to make CDs sound better. It’s been written up in magazines, and it claims some kind of support, via the ‘we’re all quantum’ bullhooey, for example. Does it qualify as a target?
MEBuckner, can we get a one-off rule for Peter, like we had for handy? Something about ‘don’t talk about your challenge for Randi’? It’s really doing bad things to any Randi debate, to the point where Pit discussions actually handle the issue better.
The rules do not need to be changed to prevent the JREF stating that something wasn’t paranormal after a test and using that to wriggle out of awarding the prize. Once a claim has been accepted for the challenge, there is a binding contract under which the prize will be awarded once the claimant has done what they say they will do. There is quite simply no term of the rules that says (or says anything like) “the JREF may declare the application invalid even after a successful test because the claimed ability is not paranormal”
It is at the acceptance stage that JREF make their decision on whether to accept the claim.
The question of what will happen regarding pseudo-scientific claims in the audio and patent medicine etc fields (raised by E-Sabbath) is an interesting one. I don’t think that anything much need change, must it? Randi has in the past regularly called out the purveyors of such stuff: I expect he will continue to do so. After all, the new rules seem to be more a way of filtering out those he can’t be bothered with, rather than a fetter preventing him “calling to the mat” those he wants to.
This thread should be moved to GQ since we’re not being allowed to engage in much of a debate with the one guy who disagrees with everybody else.
The answer is: Randi made the changes so he could quit wasting his time with insane nobodies and focus on the original intent of the challenge. That Cletus T. Dowser was ever allowed to test for the challenge should be what is surprising here; not that he is no longer allowed to (without building some credentials first.)
Asked and answered.