# Pulling of "Designing a test for Psychic Urination" in Great Debates **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 12, 2008, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319 "2008-01-12T19:24:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/21 "2008-01-13T01:25:50Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb] So, if I understand your complaint, when I note that an attempt at humor has failed miserably, I should do it in some sort of cutesy prose? [/QUOTE] Why do you feel the need to say anything at all? Your opinion on whether someone’s joke is funny or not is entirely irrelevant to your moderation. You are, of course, entitled to express your opinions just like anyone else, but perhaps you should consider doing so in a separate post from one in which you’re performing a moderator action. ---
**Author:** ![KGS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/90ced4/32.png) [@KGS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KGS)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/22 "2008-01-13T01:41:09Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb] I’ll pass. [/QUOTE] _snerk_ So you’re volunteering for the test after all? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Cluricaun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bb73d2/32.png) [@Cluricaun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cluricaun)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/23 "2008-01-13T01:45:01Z")
[QUOTE=richnz] Gene’s are being swapped around to make exotic organisms - the latest marvels of modern science. [/QUOTE] They are? I’d like to see a Simmons-Roddenberry or even a Wilder-Hackman. Just imagine. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/24 "2008-01-13T02:00:13Z")
[QUOTE=richnz] you are NOT the moderator [/quote] Hey, you got one right! Was the clue that I don’t have a moderator title beneath my username? > [@richnz](#): > > and pretty lousy on wit and sarcasm – can we agree on that? I was being sarcastic? Huh. Who knew? > [@richnz](#): > > What a lovely character you are mate. Awwww. . . . thanks. . . . more people should say that about me. But I don’t mate much around here, so I guess there’s not much opportunity. > [@richnz](#): > > I can assure you I can give as good as I get. Yeah, yeah. . . that’s what they all say. > [@richnz](#): > > You would like to see examples of some actual great questions? It’s not really worth it in this forum. Jesus Christ he say - cast not your pearl before swine lest they turn around and rend you. I wouldn’t stake my life on it, but probably the same thing applies to Pitt Bulls. So you’re saving your great questions for Jesus? Great plan. > [@richnz](#): > > You see people in the pits when given a more than one sentence CRCITL – (that’s Cant Read 'Cause Its Too Long) and BCWE – (that’s - Besides Cant Write Either). TDSATWHITP (that’s That Despite Spending All Their Waking Hours In The Pits) and STTW (Struggling Through The Words), BTTTHRHWTTHFTFBBOMD (that’s – By The Time They Have Read Half Way Through, They Have Forgotten The First Bit Because Of Mild Dementia) and VSAS (Very Short Attention Span). At least this is getting kinda funny. Will you be breaking into leet speak next? > [@richnz](#): > > However I will take pity on you and give you one example of an actual great question of our age. Oooh goody. > [@richnz](#): > > Ours is an age of genetic engineering. Gene’s are being swapped around to make exotic organisms - the latest marvels of modern science. > > So here’s a question for you to ponder over – What would be the worst case scenario of a cross between an Elephant and Pitt Bull? > > Hint - when Einstein was crossed with a Beauty Queen the offspring had Einstein’s looks and the Beauty Queen’s brains. > > Now ponder over this, Ohm! > [@richnz](#): > > don’t forget to breathe, and I’ll be back in ten years to check your answers. If you haven’t breathed your last that is. > > PS No cheating mate! And consulting snow white’s magic mirror! OK. . . . ~waving bye~ No cheating and coming back before 10 years!\* \*just kidding. . . . you’ve been a slightly entertaining troll ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/25 "2008-01-13T03:49:28Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb] So, if I understand your complaint, when I note that an attempt at humor has failed miserably, I should do it in some sort of cutesy prose? [/quote] No, actually; you shouldn’t do it when moderating. It’s obnoxious. If it were at least clever, it’d have the virtue of being entertaining; but you don’t even do it cleverly. You should knock it off. > [@](#): > > I generally refrain from pointing out that various posters have demonstrated the intelligence of _Saccharomyces cerevisiae_ and I never tell a poster that they have no right to express a belief. Given much of the drek I have to wade through each day to keep you people from eviscerating each others’ psyches, I reserve the right to note when a poster’s sense of humor displays a serious failure in its execution. Whatever; you can be obnoxious if you’d like. Edit: I have no interest whatsoever in a defense of the behavior. I only hope you’ll reconsider it. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/26 "2008-01-13T04:56:40Z")
Huh. This thread is turning into a pissing match. Who’d’a thunk it? ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/27 "2008-01-13T05:09:00Z")
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers] Huh. This thread is turning into a pissing match. Who’d’a thunk it? [/QUOTE] You mean you weren’t the one using your psychic powers to create it? 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/28 "2008-01-13T05:13:31Z")
[QUOTE=Heffalump and Roo] You mean you weren’t the one using your psychic powers to create it? 😛 [/QUOTE] Not knowingly, but since everyone’s a little bit psychic… maybe. ---
**Author:** ![richnz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9de0a6/32.png) [@richnz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/richnz)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/29 "2008-01-13T06:09:39Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb] Great Debates is a Forum for debates. The “Great” in the title is a bit ironic: _in its original incarnation before the Cafe Society and IMHO Forums were created, an example given for a topic was “Kirk vs. Picard.”_ However, there should be an actual **debate** (or some religious witnessing) somewhere in the OP. [/QUOTE] Thank you for clarifying that. In which case my thread qualifies as it is. [QUOTE=tomndebb] The dowsing thread seeks a method to test an actual series of claims that have been repeated ad infinitum et ad nauseam by proponents of claims for the paranormal. [/QUOTE] Well my thread seeks a method (a fool-proof method at that, I have clearly stated) to test an actual claim, while not a series admittedly because of its unusual nature (I mean how many people claim that they can make you urinate uncontrollably just by using their mental power? beats Uri Geller, and his spoon bending gang hollow, dont you think? heh heh - O pardon me - (excuse my rather putrid humour, but I understand how you feel about that - no need to comment - keeps me amused though), none-the-less an actual claim as you have subsequently verified. The ad infinitum, ad nauseam surely must be an exaggeration? Infinity is a very large number. Did you know that there were 3 grades of infinity though, each larger than the other? A little known mathematical fact I thought I’d share with you. Oh I get it. It was a joke! Ha Ha … that was really good! pardon me I’m a little slow in the intake (though faster on the uptake). I like your sense of humour - once I get it. Anyway my original statement stands. My thread is debatable and in fact, a debate had actually started, when shortly afterwards you so abruptly closed it. **namelss** had actually suggested a fairly reasonable test, to test the claim. Though I thought it suffered from some flaws. It would work fine if n were an infinite number (getting back to infinity), but might very well be skewed, if there were a limited number of people willing to be tested, as seems more probable. For example, some of the people may be suffering from urinary incontinence, due to disease or a medical disorder. When subjected to the steely psychic eye of Ms Hunter, they may very well urinate uncontrollably, which they may also do if suggested by someone else, not so psychic. There are many other things I can think of - but then thats a whole debate. [QUOTE=tomndebb] Based on the basic incoherence of the OP, (which you, yourself admit had no point to debate), I decided to close the thread rather than letting it attract a lot of untoward comments throughout the day, before another GD Moderator could review it, that would require Moderator intervention. It seemed the most merciful tack to take. I am willing to reverse that decision if the thread is going to have an understandable position that can be debated. (It does not have to be profound, but it needs to be understandable and debatable.) [/QUOTE] Now when I said I kind of agreed with you, I was being humble(false modesty?/sarcasm?). Dont hold me down to it. It was also because I thought that the actual point to debate had to be “great”, but that, you have clarified perfectly, is not so. I have clearly shown above, that, it is debatable, and you have graciously said it doesnt have to be profound. Designing a fool-proof Test for Psychic Urination seems pretty coherent to me. I look forward thus to you re-opening the thread. Sincerely - richnz ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 6:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/30 "2008-01-13T06:19:50Z")
[QUOTE=richnz] Designing a fool-proof Test for Psychic Urination seems pretty coherent to me. [/QUOTE] And you should be congratulated for this noble contribution to the scientific community, but isn’t the test design pretty straightforward? Just ask the person claiming the ability to commit to a few measurable benchmarks (i.e. given a group of ten random individuals, the psychic can have three of them headed for the restroom within ten minutes) and go from there. ---
**Author:** ![richnz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9de0a6/32.png) [@richnz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/richnz)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/31 "2008-01-13T06:20:02Z")
[QUOTE=Heffalump and Roo] Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah … [/QUOTE] shush - 10 years remember? - the less you talked , the more you heard, try to be more like that wise ole bird. ---
**Author:** ![richnz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9de0a6/32.png) [@richnz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/richnz)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/32 "2008-01-13T06:30:05Z")
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers] And you should be congratulated for this noble contribution to the scientific community, but isn’t the test design pretty straightforward? Just ask the person claiming the ability to commit to a few measurable benchmarks (i.e. given a group of ten random individuals, the psychic can have three of them headed for the restroom within ten minutes) and go from there. [/QUOTE] Very honourable suggestion. But given, in the unlikely event, the person claiming the ability intends to commit fraud, safeguards must be put in place to guard against it. Remember how Uri Geller fooled many? The operative words in your suggestion are “Random Individuals”. Do you see there maybe trouble if you went into a crowd and said “hey I want to test if you can be made to urinate uncontrollably”. The people putting up their hands could be plants, or could be wanting to go to the loo and look on this as a heaven-sent opportunity… there are so many things… ---
**Author:** ![9thFloor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/9/b487fb/32.png) [@9thFloor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/9thFloor)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/33 "2008-01-13T06:49:25Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] You can moderate without acting like a fifth grader. [/QUOTE] In my experience (and that of about half a dozen others), he can’t. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/34 "2008-01-13T07:19:24Z")
[QUOTE=richnz] [Quote=Heffalump and Roo] Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah … [/quote] [/QUOTE] In the interest of making your stay a the SDMB more enjoyable, (and longer), I will call your attention to the fact that no one is to tamper with other posters’ quotes: from the [Rules for posting](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=7697048#post7697048): [quote] Text inside [QUOTE] tags is sacrosanct. Normal editorial rules apply: that is, you may indicate omitted portions of a quote by the use of ellipses “…” and you may add text to clarify a word using square brackets (e.g., “her [the sister’s] friend”), but you may not add editorial comments or edit a quote so as to change the substantive meaning; nor may you substitute text such as “some blather” or “more nonsense” inside the > [@](#): > > tags. ---
**Author:** ![richnz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9de0a6/32.png) [@richnz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/richnz)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 9:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/35 "2008-01-13T09:22:24Z")
[QUOTE=Heffalump and Roo] … OK. . . . ~waving bye~ No cheating and coming back before 10 years!\* \*just kidding. . . . you’ve been a slightly entertaining troll [/QUOTE] **Heffalump** - my apologies for being rude. I do not need to apologise to tomndebb? or whatever, he is rude enough as it is - thus accounting for his obvious unpopularity here. YAAAAY I won! My thread is back! go have a look - can I charge for pay per view here? (jus kidding) I dont intend to hang around long. I have made my point. Cheers - Rich ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 11:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/36 "2008-01-13T11:09:09Z")
[QUOTE=richnz] there are so many things… [/QUOTE] Possibly, but none of them are so difficult to grasp that they require debate or analysis with _us_. Go find someone who claims to have this ability and show _them_ your list of conditions. Let us know how it turned out or post it on a blog or something. What do you want from us, anyway, help in weeding out fraudulent psychic urination claims? I wasn’t aware of any great amount of ongoing psychic-urination fraud that needed to be stopped. Are kidney patients putting themselves at risk by paying urination-psychics instead of undergoing dialysis? I can’t say I’ve ever heard of such a case, but by all means, enlighten us. Dowsing, by comparison, is big business. _Huge_ business. ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/37 "2008-01-13T14:43:11Z")
[QUOTE=richnz] I dont intend to hang around long. I have made my point. [/QUOTE] **richnz** , if you’re here to simply garner responses (trolling) and promote a single agenda (one-trick pony), don’t bother posting again. We have no tolerance for this here and you will be banned. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/38 "2008-01-13T15:44:36Z")
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers] Huh. This thread is turning into a pissing match. Who’d’a thunk it? [/QUOTE] Q.E.D. Beat _that_! ---
**Author:** ![richnz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9de0a6/32.png) [@richnz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/richnz)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/39 "2008-01-13T19:07:43Z")
[QUOTE=fluiddruid] **richnz** , if you’re here to simply garner responses (trolling) and promote a single agenda (one-trick pony), don’t bother posting again. We have no tolerance for this here and you will be banned. [/QUOTE] **fluiddruid** I am not here to garner responses (trolling) or or promote a single agenda. (I had to look up trolling/troll - someone who posts controversial messages in an online community, with the intention of bating others into an emotional response - nope not me). But I am sick of getting warnings from the likes of you, which I suspect, has more to do with the lack of respect I have shown to the moderators than anything else. I wandered onto your board by accident and the words “Great Debates” attracted me. In that I saw “Should western democracies self-censor to suit Islamic militancy?” a subject that I think is very relevant in today’s world, as I feel western democracies are under threat from Islamic militancy. I have contributed to that thread without being accused of “trolling”. The other thing that interests me is rationality vs mumbo-jumbo and thus was mildly interested in the psychic dowsing thread. I quickly realised however that there was nothing much to it. I think the important questions here are why people believe in this, or any other psychic phenomena, despite being continuously debunked without fail. James Randi himself says that most dowsers believe in their ability and are quite surprised when they invariably fail their tests. Many people similarly believe in astrology. The reason is perhaps because people are not familiar with mathematical probability and getting things right by random chance. Many are fraudsters too. Here magicians, who deal with fooling people as part of their trade, but do so honestly, are the most qualified people to catch them. Houdini bebunked a lot psychics, and in-fact never came across a single genuine one, despite a life-time of searching. Why am I not going to hang around long? 1. \*\*Tomndebb \*\* - "Great Debates is a Forum for debates. The “Great” in the title is a bit ironic: in its original incarnation before the Cafe Society and IMHO Forums were created, an example given for a topic was “Kirk vs. Picard.” " The moderator admits that the quality of the debates is pretty poor, thus vindicating others here, who have expressed the same opinion. 1. People are pretty rude here, lack a sense of humour and have hugely inflated ego’s about themselves. **Bryan Ekers** - “What do you want from us, anyway, help in weeding out fraudulent psychic urination claims?” No Ekers. I want NOTHING from you. And the thought that you can provide help in weeding out anything is about as delusional as as the pyschics themselves. Incidentally she genuinely believes in her powers and is not a trickster, if you would care to investigate. “Dowsing, by comparison, is big business. Huge business.” - so what? what can you do about it? Talk about inflated ego’s. It is already being most aptly handled by Randi’s organisation - Go out and save the world - dowsing is too small an issue for you. 1. My holidays have finished and I’m off for work. Good luck to you all. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2008, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319/40 "2008-01-13T19:52:49Z")
FOBTSP, troll. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pulling-of-designing-a-test-for-psychic-urination-in-great-debates/433319.md?page=3)