I would suggest Chris Hansen To Catch a Predator style sting operations. Lets face it these people are predators. This only applies to Bayards category three folks. The lekatts of the world won’t care if everyone of the celeb psychics are exposed, they have their no true scottsman defense ready and aren’t afraid to use it. But at least we can put the frauds behind bars.
Focusing on the failure to test the big names seems inapt to me. It’s like saying that it’s pointless for the police to openly carry guns in a dangerous area because they never actually shoot anyone. IMHO a major benefit (perhaps even the major benefit) of the Challenge is its mere existence and what the failure to take the challenge means.
Harmless Uncles (dowsers in particular) have often taken the test and failed, and that’s valuable. Sure, they go on believing, but a goodly number of their nephews and nieces don’t anymore. Carriers are True Believers and there’s nothing you can do about them at all. The Evil Ones will never take the test but the fact that they won’t speaks volumes.
The big group we are not taking into account are comparatively neutral bystanders, who form the vast majority. It’s easy to forget that while a number of us are interested enough in this topic to post on the subject, and read up on it, and have time and emotional capital invested, most people don’t give a damn and don’t feel very strongly one way or the other.
I’ve had discussions with groups of friends and colleagues and acquantances in which there has been me and perhaps a woo or two and the balance ordinary disinterested fencesitters. And the subject will be astrology or dowsing or something and I will mention the Challenge. On average I’d say 60% of those in the room will be genuinely influenced by the knowledge that there’s a million bucks worth of “put up or shut up” out there which woos can’t or won’t claim.
Of course, any woo in the room will drivel on about bad vibes or about it not being about money or whatever, but anyone who’s thought about the challenge for long knows how to counter that crap, and most neutral people can recognise a pathetic excuse when they see it.
Forget the woos. Forget the failure to debunk the big names. It’s about the challenge that the Challenge represents, and the influence that can have on ordinary punters who are otherwise undecided.
I think the loss of the Challenge is a shame. Randi can no doubt (subject to his obligations to the donor, if any) do what he wants with the money and it’s hardly my place to criticise, but I think that spending it on day to day anti-woo ventures will have little impact and then only for a limited time. Keeping the money indefinitely as the prize for the Challenge would be a monument forever.
The JREF only has two significant sceptical assets that take it above and beyond other unheard of sceptical organisations. The first is Randi’s celebrity, which gives him access to talk shows etc, but sadly Randi is old and will soon be gone. The second is the Challenge. Soon the JREF will be nothing.
I dont think its hostility in the sense you think.
e.g. my stepbrother claims to be the best driver ever, he is FUCKING AMAZING, he is the BEST MOTHER FUCKER EVER behind the wheel…2 weeks after this claim dumbshit totals a parked fully restored classic mustang with a value of over 20k while driving at 80+ in a residential area with a posted speed limit of 25.
see my open hostility to his claim of being the best driver ever has nothing to do with driving or drivers, just the fact that hes a self deluded fuckhead with a license.
its pretty much the same with psychics since there has never ever even one time been a case where a psychic did what they claimed they could do under controlled conditions its not unreasonable to think they are all deluded at best and flat out thieves at worst.
Okay, I know we’re back on topic now… but I think that everybody’s who’s been slogging through this thread could enjoy some humor. Parts one, two and three
Just surf through related vids in the archive for tons more fun with anti-woo.
Sorry, back to the main topic. 
Let’s assume you are right about what you say. OK. Set up a test with a level playing field that will be judged by some third party who has little or no interest in psychic phenomenon. Set up the rules and video tape the whole thing in front of an audience. The psychics will come and destroy you.
What I suggest will never happen, just like doing a study or scientific research on cold reading has never happened.
Penn and Teller are fun, but just nonsense, the only ones listening to them are the true beliver skeptics. Psychics draw bigger crowds every year and skeptics think all those people that go to psychics are as ignorant as they are, in fact skeptics think everyone who doesn’t agree with them is ignorant and deserves their belittlement. In history there has been a lot of groups who felt they were the only intelligent ones, or the master race, or should rule others by divine right. They have disappeared and all those they thought so ignorant are still doing their thing.
Excellent point. I’d stupidly forgotten about the need to win over fencesitters and younger people who are just starting to learn about science and “psychics”. What about askeptic’s Hansen-style strategy? Do you think that that would be more or less valuable than the standing Challenge in terms of convincing the Fencesitters?
Even though I’d like to see a fairly major media figure spend a lot of time and effort exposing woo-woo, I don’t know how to get said media figure on board. If that’s outside the power of skeptics (and apparently it is), is the Challenge the next-bet thing we can do with a million bucks?
Can this third party be brought up to speed on various known hoax methods first? Not that these particular psychics will be using them for certain, but at least the observer will be aware of potential pitfalls.
Whether psychic abilities exist or not isn’t something that is decided by applause meters, so an audience is not necessary, and I’m sure the psychics would love to be tested by people that have no idea about how to fool people into believing absurd things.
The test, as it now stands, is absolutely fair to both sides, because both sides agree to the terms berforehand. The psychic makes a specific claim, both sides decide on the best way to test the specific claim, then the psychic either fulfills the claim or not. No opinions. No voting. No interpretation. No excuses. The psychic has plenty of time beforehand to work out any complications that might show up. As many times as you’ve been given the link to the terms of the test, I am very disappointed that you continue to misrepresent what they are. BTW, comparing skeptics to a supposed “master race” who think they “should rule others by devine right” is far over the top, and deserves an apology.
Since we are not in The BBQ Pit, I can only call this statement willfull ignorance. If you truly didn’t know, it would be ignorance, but I know for a fact that you’ve been given links to studies before, so I can only assume you have never bothered to go to them.
No, this third party must not have any prejudices on either side. Not coached by the psychics or the skeptics in any way. I said a level playing field. There could be more than one person, like a jury if you want. If there are readings to be done then the persons read could be picked at the last possible moment from the audience by the third parties and interviewed by the third party only before the readings.
Psychics seldom hear words, more likely they see pictures from the spirit world about the subject, they have to interpret what those pictures mean to the physical world. Not as easy task. How do I know? I see those pictures also when I close my eyes. Most spiritual people do.
Good psychic tests have been done on television many times. Might want to look for them. In one test five psychics were taken to a motel. One at a time they were shown inside and told of the twenty-odd rooms there is one room with a man sitting on a bed. All the other rooms are empty. The psychics had never been in the motel and didn’t even know what the test would be until they arrived.
The first psychic went straight to the room with the man in it.
The second psychic went to the room on the left of where the man was, then corrected himself to go to the room with the man in it.
The third psychic went to the room on the right of were the man was, then corrected himself to to to the room with the man in it.
The forth psychic went to the room to the left of the man, and then corrected himself in another wrong room.
The fifth psychic had no idea where the man was and went to a room on the other side of the hall.
They were scored points for how well they performed and given 4 or 5 more tasks, it was an interesting show. Look for them, they are not that infrequent.
I can remember being given a link to a study done by one man, who didn’t want to reveal his name. Please give the links to these elusive studies you are talking about. Oh, pitting is for children with no control of their emotions, not for adults.
The audience is necessary for honesty. You think the test is fair when the person who puts up the money grades the test. Yeah, right.
So to avoid “prejudices”, one must strive to remain ignorant of how people can be fooled and how tests can be biased? A level playing field exists when one side has all four limbs tied up and the referee is on the other side’s payroll?
Pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain!
But the person wouldn’t grade the test. The result would be obvious and agreed by both parties prior to the test.
In your motel room example there would have been some pre-arranged ‘pass-mark’. I’d imagine it’d involve one psychic being able to repeat the test a pass a certain percentage of the time.
This percentage would have been agreed beforehand, not ‘judged’ afterwards.
Also, in your example, no one with the psychic can know where the man is – if they did (and I’m sure they did in the show) then they could subconsciously give clues to the location. You’d also need to ensure that there were no other clues as to the location of the man.
Props to Czarcasm for attempting to get this thread back on track.
lekatt, taking your test as a starting point do you think psychics could pass this test.
There are six identical boxes, sitting in stands, and a single gold coin, let’s say they’re on a stage in a theater.
The psychic under test is in the audience, along with an audience if you like. The same test is repeated ten times, the psychic must pass six times to prove the existence of his or her powers.
The test is as follows. First the curtains and a screen come down over the stage completely obscuring the boxes and the coin from the audience. Behind the screen a someone (or perhaps several people) rolls a dice and puts the coin in the appropriately numbered box. All the boxes are closed and sealed. All the people then retire to a room somewhere where they cannot communicate with the stage, they wait there until they are fetched by an audience member. No one remains backstage.
The curtain comes up and the psychic has as long as they like to choose the box with the coin in it. They may do anything as long as they don’t touch the box. When they’ve picked a box they stand behind it and announce ‘this one’.
Then audience members open all the boxes, if they coin is in the box the psychic picked that run is a pass. If the coin is in a different box then that test is a fail, no do overs, no count for being ‘close’, just a fail.
Everyone returns to their seats, the people are fetched from the room the curtains come down and the next run beings.
Get six out of ten passes and the psychic is, well, psychic.
If you like the whole thing can be recorded but only using cameras in fixed positions (no cameramen) recording to videotape, i.e. no one can be watching live who could pass information. The cameras can be behind the curtain to ensure that the dice roll / coin placing is fair.
Can anyone see an issue with that test, the psychic and the audience may have to be far enough away that they can’t hear any audio clues, or maybe we can pump music into the theater during the coin placing.
lekatt, do you think a psychic could pass that test?
The world is not black or white, some pianists are better than others, some psychics are better than others. The task is to establish whether or not there is such a thing as psychic ablility. The TV test showed yes, there is such a thing as psychic ability. The percentage of points given for hits were decided in advance. Psychics like everyone else are better on some days than others. If you have a pass-fail mark it would only separate the psychics into their performance for the day. I don’t know how to explain that the world is not scientific any more than it is religious. The world is as it is. We observe it, we can’t change it.
Then set the test up for a repeat or random test time period. Say 5 days. Every other Tuesday, or random days. If pyschics are better on some days then others, this test would alleviate that issue. Overall if there is such a thing as psychic ability over 5 random days this ability should manifest itself–and if they couldn’t, then it would show that this ability doesn’t exist. My understanding of the prize is that “YOU” as the pyschic can outline what you are going to do. So say you will show you can pick the room the guy is in 3 out of the 5 days. If you can do that, you have gone a long way to proving that the ability exists.
Do psychics consistently perform to at least some degree? Then we can construct a test that’s tests for that ability, however slight. As long as a psychic performs better than someone who’s just guessing.
Or are there days when a psychics power isn’t working at all? Then they can reschedule the test, but only before they’re started. They must know that their psychic power isn’t working in advance, they’re free to perform whatever test or preparation in advance to ensure their power is up to speed.
Or are you saying that there are times when a psychic loses their power completely whilst being unaware of that fact. If that’s the case then isn’t it a little dodgy to be charging money for psychic insight if there’s a chance that – at that particular moment – it’s not psychic at all.
Let’s change it to five boxes, easier to do the math.
We could expect someone to pick the correct box one time out of five, and two times out of ten. So you are asking the psychic to better the average by 3 times.
The psychic should pick 6 out of 10, right.
I would say no, on the average. You might find one that could do twice the expected average. When these tests were being conducted at a University there was a score in the three times average range, but only one. These kinds of tests should be run many times with the same psychic to reveal any real results.
Psychics are better at seeing and talking to the “dead.”
Convenient since there is no way to objectively verify that.