# James Randi and Dry Spots
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926
**Category:** The BBQ Pit
**Created:** [October 13, 2004, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926 "2004-10-13T01:46:53Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/1 "2004-10-13T01:46:53Z")
I was originally going to post the following in [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=278533&page=6&pp=50), but Czarcasm warned against continuing the hijack. He suggested it continue in the Pit. I have no intention of abusing anyone, but since a mod suggested it…
Unfortunately this is going to mean that this is a little disjointed unless you refer to the original thread. The basic issue is statements by Randi over the years to the effect that because water is most everywhere underground, it would be a better challenge to dowsers for them to find a dry spot.
> [@Peter Morris](#):
>
> People who encounter him are unable to believe that he is either willing or capable of conducting a test fairly and properly. And with good reason.
What, all people? There are as I understand it numerous people who do trust Randi and think his tests are fair. I think you’re exaggerating and using overblown rhetoric and a figure of speech. But that’s OK, isn’t it Peter? I mean, it’d be quite inappropriate for us to engage in some silly exercise of castigating you high and low over a comment you have made for a rhetorical purpose as if you were speaking utterly literally, wouldn’t it?
> [@](#):
>
> Randi is an infant, who uses words like ‘woo-woo’ and ‘grubby’ to attack anyone that happens to disagree with him. How is it possible to take him seriously?
>
> Really, I mean it. His fans consist of people that thinl ‘woo-woo’ is a big, clever word.
> [@Peter Morris](#):
>
> On the one side, you have the woo-woos, who totally believe in the paranormal. On the other side, equal and opposite, you have the oww-owws such as James Randi, guru of hypocritical thinking.
It seems that you are quite capable of using the term yourself. And that you call Randi comparable names when it suits you. Do you think you should be taken seriously?
> [@SnakeSpirit](#):
>
> Would you believe anyone who called anyone a “woo-woo” as being capable of administering the award of a million dollars?
You’d be of the opinion that Peter isn’t a person capable of administering a million dollar award then I take it?
To listen to Peter you would think that the geologists he has checked with are of one mind. In fact they have told him various things, some of which agree with his point of view, and some of which don’t. Here is an example of a comment from his cite which Peter is unlikely to mention (in response to whether Randi’s 90% figure is correct):
> [@](#):
>
> Who knows? True, you can find _some_ water most anywhere, if you drill
> deep enough and don’t need much water. Does a gallon per minute count?
I don’t think a gallon of water a minute would fit any rational definition of “dry”. So actually some geologists agree with Randi.
> [@Peter Morris](#):
>
> From the same website
> [General Facts and Concepts about Ground Water](http://water.usgs.gov/pubs/circ/circ1186/html/gen_facts.html)
>
> “Water beneath the land surface occurs in two principal zones, the unsaturated zone and the saturated zone. In the unsaturated zone, the spaces between particle grains and the cracks in rocks contain both air and water. Although a considerable amount of water can be present in the unsaturated zone,\*\* this water cannot be pumped by wells \*\* because capillary forces hold it too tightly.”
>
> You get the point here? If you sink a well into such a location, NO WATER COMES OUT.
If you look at the page in question, you will see that the diagram shows that the unsaturated zone lies immediately above the saturated zone, from which you can get water. The USGS site is quite clear. You just don’t want to hear.
> [@](#):
>
> The idea that you can drill anywhere and expect to find vast quantities of water is certainly wrong.
Sorry, is anyone arguing to the contrary?
---
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/2 "2004-10-13T02:07:19Z")
Randi is a fucker!
---
### Author:  [@Dog80](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dog80)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/3 "2004-10-13T02:17:16Z")
I don’t agree with **Peter Morris** , but on the other hand I do not particularly like Randi. He (Randi) has a certain degree of sleaziness that I dislike.
---
### Author:  [@photopat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/photopat)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/4 "2004-10-13T02:39:14Z")
> [@Aeschines](#):
>
> Randi is a fucker!
Really? Do you have pictures of him in the act? If so, please don’t post them here. I don’t care what he does in private, but I have no wish to see it.
---
### Author:  [@photopat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/photopat)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/5 "2004-10-13T02:41:46Z")
> [@Dog80](#):
>
> I don’t agree with **Peter Morris** , but on the other hand I do not particularly like Randi. He (Randi) has a certain degree of sleaziness that I dislike.
I couldn’t disagree more. Having read one of his books and his commentary, I will allow that he’s not always the most socially graceful, but I suspect that anybody who has had to put up with as many kooks and cons as he has will have become less than patient and may have lost some tact, but I don’t think he’s “sleazy” at all.
---
### Author:  [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/6 "2004-10-13T02:43:05Z")
> [@Aeschines](#):
>
> Randi is a fucker!
You been holding that in for how long? Tell us how you _really_ feel.
---
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/7 "2004-10-13T02:47:33Z")
> [@Musicat](#):
>
> You been holding that in for how long? Tell us how you _really_ feel.
Hey, it’s the Pit. Gotta blurt when and while I can.
---
### Author:  [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/8 "2004-10-13T03:02:21Z")
Thanks for moving this to the Pit, **Princhester.** Now we can let it _all_ hang out. :eek:
I was personally present in 1992, at Caltech, when James Randi gave a [moving, eloquent and impassioned speech for reason.](http://www.skeptic.com/01.1.randi-paranormal.html)
When he finished, there wasn’t a dry spot in the house. 😃
---
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/9 "2004-10-13T03:14:47Z")
> [@Musicat](#):
>
> When he finished, there wasn’t a dry spot in the house. 😃
People had pissed their pants laughing?
---
### Author:  [@vanilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vanilla)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/10 "2004-10-13T03:16:29Z")
:wally
---
### Author:  [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/11 "2004-10-13T04:02:50Z")
> [@Musicat](#):
>
> moving, eloquent and impassioned speech for reason.
>
> When he finished, there wasn’t a dry spot in the house. 😃
OOps, scuse me, gotta go clean up! (Glad my puter chair is plastic!)
---
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/12 "2004-10-13T04:57:44Z")
> [@SnakeSpirit](#):
>
> OOps, scuse me, gotta go clean up! (Glad my puter chair is plastic!)
He really set that one up, dint he?
---
### Author:  [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/13 "2004-10-13T05:30:30Z")
> [@vanilla](#):
>
> :wally
Hairlip!
---
### Author:  [@SnakeSpirit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakeSpirit)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 7:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/14 "2004-10-13T07:38:45Z")
> [@Aeschines](#):
>
> He really set that one up, dint he?
Worse! It’s spreading to [other threads!](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5361567&postcount=17)
Oh, make it stop, make them stop!
---
### Author:  [@Dog80](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dog80)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 8:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/15 "2004-10-13T08:20:32Z")
> [@photopat](#):
>
> I couldn’t disagree more. Having read one of his books and his commentary, **I will allow that he’s not always the most socially graceful** ,
That’s what I am talking about. Probably the word sleazy was to much.
> [@photopat](#):
>
> but I suspect that anybody who has had to put up with as many kooks and cons as he has will have become less than patient and may have lost some tact, but I don’t think he’s “sleazy” at all.
Nobody has forced him to deal with the kooks and cons. It is his own choice. And a profitable choice. So don’t try to make up excuses for him.
---
### Author:  [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/16 "2004-10-13T08:54:17Z")
Christ on a limestone substrate, what a mole-engineered mountain _this_ is.
For clarity, **Peter** is conflating this sentence of Randi’s: “Since 94 percent of the Earth’s surface has water within drillable distance my challenge is to find a dry spot!”, from [this essay](http://www.skeptic.com/01.1.randi-paranormal.html), with the $1M challenge to demonstrate genuine dowsing ability in a cheat-proof, luck-proof test . I strongly advise everyone to read the _whole_ essay, and ask themselves whether they _really think_ he is issuing the $1M challenge in that sentence, or whether he simply used sloppy syntax in his hyperbole.
The $1M challenge is **not to prove that James Randi is somehow in error** (which he _may well be_ in this instance, for all I know). It is to **demonstrate some effect or ability which any reasonable person would call “paranormal” in a test which eradicated luck or cheating**.
In this case, a fair test would be to put soil in 10 containers, pour water in one (or _nine_), and cover the top of the soil with cloth/dry soil/whatever. Dowsing ability would show a better-than-chance succes rate in identifying the odd one out. Is there any way in which this test is **unfair**? If you can think of one, we can modify it further until everyone agrees what a fair test **of dowsing ability** is.
I’ll admit _again_ that Randi might well be _wrong_ in his numbers, even to the extent that **Peter** is _right_. But that is **irrelevant**. Randi is not some perfect, humble Nebuchadnezzar: he is a _showman_, and his hyperbole and rhetoric reflect this. To paint him as a fraud comparable to Uri Gellar or Miss Cleo for this single sentence is absurd.
I have better things to do than contribute any more here, unless something more interesting happens.
---
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 9:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/17 "2004-10-13T09:14:54Z")
Let’s compare and contrast. There are lots of atheists I respect and admire. Richard Dawkins is a genius and a great writer; I quoted a recent piece by him in another thread today.
James Z. Randi is, in both the social and intellectual realms, a piece of shit. He is a baiter that feeds on negativity. He sees “believers” as incorrigible idiots who deserve to have their faces rubbed vigorously in the feces of their own beliefs. He is the very worst person to symbolize the skeptic cause, yet, unfortunately (if this board is to serve as evidence) skeptics dig his schtick and take the same tone in their trouncing of the ignorant believers.
Sure, Randi is a showman. His gig is making an ass of people at every opportunity, and, barring that, making an ass of himself. He has purposely planted people in paranormal experiments who cheated in order to discredit paranormal research. Guess what? If you plant cheaters in experiments you _do_ prove that the experimenters couldn’t catch cheating well but you’re still a damned cheater and liar yourself. Recently he appeared before a studio audience on TV and was going to play the same game: pretend to be a medium a la John Edward and do cold and hot readings. But the audience recognized him and basically told him to fuck off.
Randi is also a slob. I visited his website and his message boards (a pathetic shadow of SDMB) to find out more about applicants to his “Challenge.” Good luck if you’re interested. They don’t have much in the way of records on-line.
Randi is just plain good at attracting hate, because he’s been so hateful to others over the years. He’s just plain nasty. He’s been involved in numerous CSICOP fuckups and farces. He’s a walking disaster.
The skeptics really–seriously–need a better hero. Someone who can talk to the public about their cause without alienating just about everyone he comes in contact with.
---
### Author:  [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 9:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/18 "2004-10-13T09:53:20Z")
You forgot to add that he has proven every single person that has actually applied, rather than boast and back off like most, _wrong_. They make the claim, they agree on the parameters of the test, they agree on the people judging the test, _and they fail, every single time, without exception_. The JREF isn’t yet another organization where people make fantastic claims that are, at best, scientifically dubious, and people respond with,“Oooh! How wonderful! Let me tell you about _my_ magical powers!”
---
### Author:  [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 10:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/19 "2004-10-13T10:01:45Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> You forgot to add that he has proven every single person that has actually applied, rather than boast and back off like most, _wrong_. They make the claim, they agree on the parameters of the test, they agree on the people judging the test, _and they fail, every single time, without exception_. The JREF isn’t yet another organization where people make fantastic claims that are, at best, scientifically dubious, and people respond with,“Oooh! How wonderful! Let me tell you about _my_ magical powers!”
Oh man, talk about someone who has total faith in Randi–amazing indeed!
You haven’t been able to peruse Randi’s file cabinets, so whence the confidence? His website doesn’t offer much at all.
Skepticism, please: show me the records and I’ll decide how fair the man’s test is.
---
### Author:  [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2004, 10:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926/20 "2004-10-13T10:02:16Z")
> [@](#):
>
> **Aeschines** : They don’t have much in the way of records on-line.
I believe this has now been remedied to some extent: each prospective candidate now has a dedicated thread on the Message Board which holds all significant correspondance.
As for “cheater and liar”: he said he _was_ doing “cold reading” _without_ psychic powers. Would you not say that this was _honesty_?
> [@](#):
>
> **Czarcasm** :every single person that has actually applied
Careful, **Peter** will say _he_ “applied”. You should specify “applied **for the $1M challenge to demonstrate paranormal ability** ” to avoid such picayune nitpicks.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/james-randi-and-dry-spots/268926.md?page=2)