Thing is, we have many reliable sources for the meaning of the word. Just like “paranormal”. Let me post again the meanings since some still insist and imply that I am somehow making up my own definition. Paranormal
From Encarta: impossible to explain scientifically: unable to be explained or understood in terms of scientific knowledge
From Oxford: • adjective supposedly beyond the scope of normal scientific understanding.
From Webster: not scientifically explainable
From Cambridge: impossible to explain by known natural forces or by science
From American Heritage: Beyond the range of normal experience or scientific explanation
From Ultrlingua: Not in accordance with scientific laws
Here we have six different sources that define the word. They all seem to be in agreement and are all standard sources. I am not defining this word. JREF seems to be ignorant of the meaning. They could quite easily state what they are looking for, instead, they mislead us by using a word that simply describes that which science can not explain. Many things exist which science can not explain. It is not, therefore, a paranormal challenge, using the generally accepted meaning of the word. It is bogus. Bogus being dishonest and deceitful.
So what? I will never, no matter how gluttonously I persevere, be able to taste every kind of food on earth in my lifetime. Should I simply give up now, and allow myself to starve to death? Should I believe my neighbor’s claim of a 40-foot invisible cheesecake in his backyard that whispers apocalyptic prophecies into his ear on moonless nights? Do you envision the scientific community of the world conceding, en masse, that figuring things out is a fool’s game— snapping their briefcases shut and driving home to sullenly wait out their lives on the sofa watching reruns of “Reba?”
If you’re not just engaging in some extended chain-jerking here (a fact of which I’m not fully convinced), I’d say you have a depressingly defeatist attitude toward the human ability to learn. And if you’re really dragging out the “man will never know everything, therefore <highly dubious claim> has equal merit!” argument, you may want to wash thoroughly afterward… it’s been in some pretty unsavory hands in the past.
The challenge is dishonest and deceitful. Dishonest being meaning or meant to deceive, defraud, or trick people. Deceitful being intentionally misleading or fraudulent
I wouldn’t want you to have any misunderstanding due to the use of the word “bogus”. So we’ll just go with dishonest and deceitful. Do you have reason to be confused or ignorant of the meanings of those words ?
Y’know, in 1422 there was a fiery debate on these very words. One scholar maintained “dishonest” means “overly hairy” and another claimed “deceitful” meant “prone to overtip in restaurants.”
It’s in scrolls, I tells ya.
Again, your argument stands exactly to reason of why the challenge is bogus. We have exhausted the debate that anything that exist, by it’s mere existence, can not unequivicoally be called paranormal, according to science. Just as you say, science continually examines any and everything it can observe. Being of your position, you should understand that offering a prize under such circumstances, circumstances that you not only believe not to exist but circumstances which we can statiscally show to have 0 probablity or success, is a dishonest, disingenuos and deceitful endeavor. I do not question the motives. I do not question science. I simply assert that it is designed to deceive people into believing there is a prize to be won. There is none. There is no demonstrable way to win. There are no odds to win. There is no possibilty to win except the unknown probablity and in order to win, you must make the unknown, known. By making the unknown, known, it is no longer beyond the realm of science, by Randi’s own admission. There is no prize. It is bogus. Bogus being dishonest and deceitful.
OK. I’m a winner. Thanks for the promise of a prize that I expect to recieve just about as much as I expect the bogus “Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge” to be legit.
Iknewit, I haven’t read all of this thread, so forgive me if you answered this question or one like it already, but do you think Randi will not pay up to someone who can move objects with his mind, read thoughts, tell which playing cards are red or black a majority of the time while they’re face down, etc?
If you think he will pay up in those situations, isn’t the challenge not bogus?
The prize is just unwinnable. It’s not a prize at all. Of course, we are down to some speculation here, which is never a good thing, but most agree that Randi will not pay someone for simply being conscious. Consciousness and “why are we here” being the greatest scientifically unexplainable questions of our time. They are however, scientifically unexplainable. Also, we have numerous events and occurances that are also beyond the realm of science. The horizon problem, tetraneutrons, etc. The argument for Randi and the challenge being that “unexplained does not mean unexplainable”. I imagine this to be an expected response if anyone present these phenomenon to the challenge, althought they fit the definition of paranormal.
The second thing we have exposed are the odds of winning the challenge. They are 0. There are no known winners and no probabilty of a winner among the human race. The only probabilty of a winner rest with the expression of probability, >0. Greater than zero. That is the expression of the tiniest amount of something that stands between something and nothing. A good idea is to take a pencil, make a decimal point, start adding zeros and just before you reach infintiy, mark a one. In other words, in all practical terms, in scientific terms even, there is no possibilty of a winner . The only calculation of probability of a winner is the expression of >0. In the laws of probablity, that simply means, the unknown.
A prize is something that is awarded. If you affer a prize, there is an expectation of it being given. If you simply advertise that you have some money and then invite people to make an ass of themselves, with the knowledge that the prize, is in fact, not winnable, that’s not a prize. It may be an exercise, a demonstration, etc. but it’s not a prize. They succeed in making a lot of uneducated, even some here that seem otherwise educated, people think there is a prize. But they are being dishonest. They are smart enough, and indeed have said that they have 0 confidence that the prize will ever be awarded.
We have quotes from Randi where he claims that if someone did show some ability that it would open new doors of science. Think about that. In a search for something that is suppose to be “beyond science” Randi admits that he would immediately consider it new science. How can you offer a prize for something “paranormal” when you admit that even if it were displayed before your very eyes, you would still not accept it as paranormal. You would immediately consider it a new science project,
His intent is to expose fakes and frauds. In doing so, he has offered a bogus prize.