You said scientists couldn’t detect it though, not that they detected it but refused to change thier minds.
And skeptics change their minds about a lot of things.
I took the test, it says I’m not psychic. But presuming that’s just a random number generator, if someone was able to consistantly score better then chance on it, I would give the whole psychic thing another look. I don’t think I’m incapable of changing my mind despite being a skeptic, despite what you claim.
Not sure if this satisfies what you’re asking for, but nonetheless, this article’s an interesting read:
He’s not condescending perse. He just hates to see people taken advantage of by frauds, which is what most(not all) of these psychics are, frauds. He has backed his belief by putting up a million bucks, now all someone needs to do is back their belief and win it.
Before I respond to this, I just want you to confirm that you not only want to put up Uri Geller as an example of an authentic psychic, but that actually want to use Targ and Puthoff tests as a cite.
Again, as I stated before, there are many of us who are willing to be disproved.
Furthermore I, for example, am a fencesitter. While I have never seen demonstrable evidence of psychic powers or the paranormal, I don’t rule out such a thing as a possibility, and am open to those who can prove it. I repeat my question in my previous post, originally made by another: you have made a claim that you worked on a (presumably successful) criminal case as a psychic. We asked for verifiable information that psychic gifts were successful, accurate, and critical to the conclusion of the case, including an independant cite. Presumably, some documentation exists of this.
Secondarily, you keep repeating that the “gift” isn’t supposed to be used in certain ways, or in fact won’t respond at all in certain circumstances. Why, exactly, would disproving a skeptic, and proving your position, be outside of these rules, money or no. In fact, as pointed out above, why would winning the money in order to fund a charity be something the “spirit guide” wouldn’t like?
I’m confused at to the rules. Not in a snarky way, like I expect you to produce “a manual to your new spirit guide! (batteries not included, Made in China)” but how, exactly, do you determine what the spirit guide responds to? Can’t you at least explain how it works in a reasoned way, even if you can’t call it up on demand to show us that it works, so that we can evaluate those rules?
enig: It saddens me to think about your inevitable evolution from reasoned and curteous seeker of knowledge to eye rolling jaded sarcastic full blown skeptic. But trust me, a few threads with the ever elusive lekatt and your transformation will be complete. Nobody can stay on the fence for long in the presence of the king of ball hiding and red herring non-sequiturs…
That’s exactly why the Randi challenge is a good test.
If psychic powers exist as a real skill, then surely someone – sooner or later – would have decided to demonstrate their skill for a million dollars.
If psychic powers don’t exist, no claimed psychic who is making any money as such would take the risk, because they (on some level) know they cannot pass.
The latter is exactly what we have seen. A lot of nobodies have tried, with complete lack of success, but the big names haven’t. Why? They know they will fail. If psychic abilities really did exist, why not take the opportunity to become the first proven psychic? I sure would jump at the opportunity to win a million dollars from using a skill I have. I don’t think any of them would turn down a free million dollars, so what’s the problem?
Of course, some argue that the test is unpassable, and what have you. Okay, then, why not set up your own test and prove that you can demonstrate psychic abilities? Why not prove Randi wrong? Again, nobody has managed to do this. Why not, if psychic abilities exist?
The fact of the matter is that high-profile psychics will never submit to testing whatever the criteria. You’re exactly right, they have too much to lose – and, as they know, also nothing to gain because they cannot pass any such test.
Any effect that is not detectable cannot have a demonstrable effect on the events of the real world. If the information can’t be detected, it can’t be used, because we don’t know it. You can’t claim on the one hand that psychics solve crimes but on the other that proof is undetectable; the two statements contradict each other.
If psychics can make meaningful predictions, then those predictions can be studied and confirmed or refuted. If they can’t be confirmed or refuted because there’s no way to determine a good prediction (based on changing skill level, various events, the alignment of Jupiter and Mars, or whatever) then psychic predictions are meaningless and can’t signify anything. That’s just simple logic.
It makes plenty of sense. Randi is not going to agree to anything but a hugely rigorous test. He and his organization are very very very very skeptical of any psychic claims. This is a good thing from the standpoint of agreeing with extraordinary claims but what is in it for the big name psychic with a good following. Psychics are not know for their understanding of science and how it works. If they agree to things that do not accurately reflect their ability is then they could be fucked and thought of a frauds. But if instead they blow Randi off they are still big name psychics with a following. The following does not give a shit about Randi so the fact that they don’t prove things to Randi and his organization does not say all that much. Agreeing to the test has big a big downside and not a whole lot of upside if you really have psychic abilities.
The main point is only skeptics give a shit or even know about Randi and his challenge. There are a few people like lekatt who are believers and for some masochistic reasons hang out here at the SD that know about the challenge but they are few and far between.
Again I ask you, can you give even one such example? And define “hugely rigorous” while you are at it?
Bear in mind, the claimant asserts the psychic ability. The test is not possible until a claim is made. What can he do? Under what conditions? How do the results vary from chance?
Why don’t you give an example of a specific psychic claim, and the hugely rigorous demands required by the JREF? Really. Just one example for starters.
Hell, even *imagine *such a scenario. What kind of claim do you *suppose *a psychic might make, and what kind of hoops would Randi allegedly make him jump through?
My site is my cite! 
Are you saying he is agreeing to a half assed test and letting the psychics dictate how things go?
I am not saying Randi is setting things up badly from a gaining of knowledge standpoint. I am saying he is demanding extraordinary proof of extraordinary claims. I am saying that genuine psychics (should such things exists) can get ready followings and widespread acclaim without Randi’s support. Why would they submit to his rigorous protocol? One million dollars is chump change to someone that has real abilities. Should they win Randi’s challenge they might gain the support of the entire Skeptical Enquirere’s readership plus the GD reading subset of the SDMB readership. This is truly insignificant in face of polls that show the majority of Americans believe in angles despite absolutely fuck all of scientific support for angles. Nobody but dweebs like me and the SDMB GD readership give a shit about or even know about Randi.
Not at all. I’m asking for you to provide anything other than your speculation to support your claim.
What claims? Be specific. As far as I know, no one could apply for the Prize by claiming to be psychic. A specific power/talent/ability must be claimed. When has someone made a specific claim and been confronted by hugely rigorous protocols? (This is not the first time I have asked this of you.)
Your reasoning is circular. You can’t prove that he has a rigorous protocol by asserting he has a rigorous protocol. Prove he has a rigorous protocol. Please. For the (at least) third time.
Should they win the Challenge they would likely stand modern physics on it’s head. Don’t make the mistake of underestimating what the repercussions of such a revelation would be. They would be worldwide superstars, and most likely free from the drudgeries of cruise ship engagements forever.
I’m not presenting anything except a third-party cite which matches what you requested. Naturally, you are welcome to respond in any manner you like.
I’d also be interested in your opinions about the Targ/Puthoff research concerning remote viewing and The Universal Matrix, should you care to indulge.
Heh, “masochistic.” I kinda like that.
Really this is dumb. This is not about proof. This is about what a genuine psychic (should such things exist) stands to gain by submitting to Randi. I really think that this is not a whole lot. As we can see from past history you can get a huge following by spouting useless drivel without submitting to Randi’s rigorous tests. Surely someone with real psychic ability and the talent to speak to a crowd above 5 strangers without drooling could do at least as well what would Randi give them but the risk of failure?
If nobody believed in psychics and Randi was the gate keeper to acceptance he would be relevant. But he is one of a few voices in the wilderness crying out that the psychic are spouting bullshit. Few people are listening to Randi and huge droves believe in the bullshit. If I were a genuine psychic I would only submit to Randi out of ego. If I were happy in what I did, I would just do what I do and ignore the skeptics because they are few and far between and the skeptics could go be bitter amongst themselves and I would not really give a shit .
Sorry, I wasn’t clear. Personally I think the challenge was perfectly fair and I wouldn’t necessarily change anything about it. My problem was entirely with Randi and the attitude he takes on his site and on TV. I have no argument that his motives are in the right place but you can’t deny he’s a little … abrasive. I can understand why, but it gives the other side something to complain about. I think this might be a chance to remove that objection.
Given the treatment and ridicule that he dishes out on his site can you not see how that gives application ammunition to argue about things. If the challenge was run by someone who simply documented the process and published the results, without taking the piss, don’t you think more people would take the challenge. Or if more people didn’t do you think that it might make their reasons look less legitimate?
The challenge is seen as hostile but Randi assumes that everyone will fail. I know that has nothing to do with how the challenge is run but it’s clear that it’s a ‘Challenge: Prove you can do X’ rather than a ‘Test: Lets see if you can do X’. Because of that it’s easy for people to refuse to do it.
If it was done more like a test then I think we’d see the same number of applicants – damn few – but they’d have less wiggle room to use when trying to convince that they’ve good reasons for not taking the test.
Mangetout: Regarding Penn, I’ve not seen any of Bullshit! (does it get shown over here?) so I’m basing my opinion on his live shows and his, now defunct, radio show. He can be a bit of a prick, but he’s a prick to everyone.
Chris Angel is a bit of a dick, and I’m pretty sure that’s not all an act, but he has a very broad appeal so I’m glad he’s getting into the anti-psychic stuff. Plus I’m not going to slag off someone who can levitate above the Luxor pyramid.
Or you know you could not do the eye rolling jaded sarcastic thing, or do it quietly take a deep breath and try and post something sensible. If you really think that it’s not worth it then don’t post, or go to the Pit. Doing the sarcastic thing, particularly in GD, is just a way of going “let’s all point and laugh at the believer” to the other skeptics on the board, it doesn’t further the debate at all. It’s pretty much my objection to Randi (and Dawkins and their ilk). I don’t disagree with their point, I’m just turned off by the tone.
You’re going to come back and say lekatt is always like this, and there’s no point in arguing. Then don’t. But if you go back and look at the early threads that lekatt participated in there was already a fair degree of snark in there. I just don’t see the need for the sarcasm outside of the Pit.
lekatt seems to honestly believe the psychics would line up round the block to do a test. That seems to be a starting point we can work from.
Last night, I dreamed that I was in an old house with some people I used to work with. How can I prove that to you to your satisfaction?
I think Randi’s approach made it too easy for an out to be claimed. An out was always going to be claimed of course, but by being abrasive, its too easy for sympathy to go towards the claimants.
I hope they find other ways to keep fighting these issues. While their approach might be critiqued I think Randi has done a lot to challenge a heck of a lot of con men and make life a bit harder for them.
Otara
I’m sorry, you have mistaken me for someone who gives a shit about your dreams.