If there was a community of people who claimed that, on a regular basis, they could sprout wings and fly to the sun (“Look, I’ll even prove it by selling you a piece of Sun Crystal!”) - but that they generally just did it when nobody was watching, then I think a challenge offering ten million dollars for a demonstration, presented as a transparently obvious way of saying “put up, or shut up” isn’t dishonest.
He knows they are frauds because he knows the supernatural is bullshit. Anyone espousing anything supernatural can be called a fraud to one degree or another. So anyone who would be qualified to take the test is a fraud. Randi does this as a public service. He’s not trying to help himself, he’s trying to help people who put stock in these frauds.
And you wanna cite that quote? Sounds an awful lot like you’re taking it out of context.
Are you just making stuff up as you go along? Of course the placebo effect isn’t admissable, it’s not supernatural. It’s understood (kind of) to be a purely physical phenomenon, and doesn’t involve spirits or physic powers or anything else like that. Is it really that hard to understand that when testing the supernatural, the non-supernatural is not on the list?
Please, cold fusion has so much more to worry about than Randi’s challenge. People dealing with science aren’t worried a paranormal debunker, they’re more concerned with actual science. There’s no reason for anyone to bother with Randi when they can just publish results. I can’t even see why you brought this up.
Things that are beyond the realm of science? This means something different than ‘we don’t know it right now’. Just because we don’t know something right now doesn’t mean it’s beyond the realm of science.
What are you talking about? He tests things people claim are ‘beyond the realm of science’ all the time. Dowsing, mind reading, talking to the dead, faith healing, etc. He most assuredly will touch them, and your blindly asserting that he won’t doesn’t make it true.
Now what are you talking about? Randi’s challenge isn’t puprely scientific. Why would you assume otherwise? He isn’t interested in peer review of his studies, or publishing in scientific journals. He’s offering to test someone’s paranormal claims and give them money if they succeed. Why does this have to be scientific all of a sudden? This claim is absurd.
So things we know all about and aren’t supernatural don’t qualify for the a test of the supernatural? Yup, sounds right to me. You should mabye concentrate on the supernatural, rather than just making stuff up.
That’s the problem though - the OP is clinging to a dictionary definition of ‘paranormal’ that is argued to encompass nearly everything, rather than the obvious everyday meaning of the word (that the Wiki article makes a good job of describing) - the definition that happens to be in popular use.
Yeah, I know. I decline to participate in his hallucination.
You’re ignoring a point I made (among about 15 others) several times. Randi HAS allowed people to demonstrate their powers before him. If they had demonstrated their claim successfully, he would have paid the prize!
If someone claims they could can heal warts with a month of positive thought, Randi will ignore the claim. Claims such as bringing sight back to the blind, eradicating cancer, healing wounds (or even warts) instantly and the ability to grow back limbs is another matter. If he agrees to let them demonstrate their claims, then he has agreed to pay up if the demonstration is successful. This is a great demonstration of why his challenge is NOT a hoax
I like this definition too. Here is the opening of the Wiki article:
"Paranormal is an umbrella term used to describe a wide variety of reported anomalous phenomena. According to the Journal of Parapsychology, the term paranormal describes “any phenomenon that in one or more respects exceeds the limits of what is deemed physically possible according to current scientific assumptions”
An “umbrella term”, very nice, very broad, and we further have "**any ** phenomenon that in **one or more ** respects exceeds ".
The article does go on talk about pshchics and telapathy but I have said that those things weren’t under that umbrella term, paranormal.
Sure, you can find your way around what I** mean** by taking me at what I say . Have at it. Good thing we’re dealing with Randi here though cause what we would have here, is another case of a poster supporting exactly what I calim about the Challenge: It does not mean what it says. You can litterally satisfy the Challenge, like propoase to do mine, but your claim won’t be accepted or paid.
Un huh. The honesty of my claim doesn;t depend on my honesty , it rest with what a bunch of other people are saying. Nice logic.
That’s not what Mangetout said or implied, but I think you know that and have resorted to twisting others words as to frustrate posters from continuing to reply so you can raise your arms in victory.
The honesty of the claim doesn’t rely on the honesty of “what a bunch of other people are saying”.
Whether or not those people are lying about their ability to sprout wings and fly is not the issue. Maybe they can. Maybe they are deluded. Maybe they are lying. So what? The point is that issuing a challenge which includes a reward is NOT DISHONEST! It is an HONEST challenge to, as Mangetout put it, “put up, or shut up”.
Thank you for helping demonstrate the Challenge is bogus. He knows they are frauds. He knows it is bullshit. Anyone that would be allowed to take the test, like you say, is already deemed a loser before taking the test. This is exactly what makes the prize bogus. It’s not a prize. It’s idiot bait. It’s money. It will never be, and there was never an intention to, award it. That is not a prize.
Also, as much as you see it as a public service, and as much you think he’s trying to help, I have to ask again: How many otherwise honest people have been tempted into actually becoming either believers or frauds by the proposition of a million dollars ? I’d bet he’s created as much or more of this bullshit than he has ended.
It’s not supernatrural ?
Super Natural: relating to or attributed to phenomena that cannot be explained by natural laws.
Of course we “kind of” understood. It’s understood only to the extent that we know it exist. The rest is speculation. If you can show the natural law that explains the placebo effect, please do.
I’ve already stated that anyone researching cold fusion doesn’t have time to deal with Randi. They need hundreds of millions for their work. Cold fusion is, however, contrary to the accepted laws of science. And why do I bring it up ? Maybe because Randi says it’s garbage. Put your money where your mouth is Randi.
Again, you support that the challenge is actually bogus. It is designed to test only failures and frauds. Anything, anything at all, that can be demonstrated, is assumed to have an explanation. You have faith. You have faith that someday science will explain the placebo effect.
But he won’t touch just anything beyond the realm of science. If it stands a chance of being real, and without explanation, he won’t touch it.
Not at all what I claim. Things that are beyond scientific explanation don’t qualify at Randi’s whim. He hand picks what he wants to test. If he stands a chance to lose, he has every avenue to weasel away. He has provided, in his own words, “an out” for anyone that might actually have a chance to win the challenge.
I think he can answer for himself.
He said IF …then it would be honest.
You understand the proposition of an “if, hen” statement ? That the “if” must be met for the “then” to be true ?
So? I’m responding to the dishonesty of your post; it’s irrelevant that it was a response to someone else’s.
That’s how many hypothetical situations are started- with an if. His hypothetical situation happens to parallel a real one. There ARE people making claims that they can read minds, remote view, etc. There is no IF in those situations. The ‘if’ has been met in the real life situation since there are people making those claims. By your own admission, the “then” as in “then it would be honest” has been met. Good to see that you finally conceded.
Mr. Kolodzey:
Don’t treat us like children. We only respond to responsible claims.
Are you actually claiming that you have not consumed any food products except water, since the end of 1998? If this is what you are saying, did you think for one moment that we would believe it?
If this is actually your claim, you’re a liar and a fraud. We are not interested in pursuing this further, nor will we exchange correspondence with you on the matter.
Signed, James Randi.
(A hard-copy of this letter will be sent by post to you, today.)
James Randi Educational Foundation
201 S.E. 12th Street (Davie Blvd.)
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316-1815
What we have here is a letter from James Randi, refusing to expose this man as a fraud.
Now you all come on and rationalize why.
Why doesn’t Randi just send this letter to everyone that he is so sure is a fraud ?
Not at all. I stand by the original claim.
You are rely on someone else to verify if the challenge is honest. YOu are still in the position that becuase there are liars, Randi is not dishonest. Absent the liars and frauds, is the offer still honest ? Honesty stands on it’s own merits.
What paranormal ability is being claimed? How would you design a test?
Yet, the cheese stands alone.
Yes I am. I haven’t the inclination to take on yet another poster who, in essence , says: Take it back ! Randi’s challenge is fair !
Don’t know. Randi refuses to even consider it. (Didn’t you notice ?)
That’s not, in essence, what I said. I raised several counterpoints and asked questions which were ignored. Nice try though.
"Randi has been quoted as saying, “I always have an out” with regard to his $10,000 challenge (Rawlins, 1981, p. 89). Puthoff and Targ (1977) documented a number of mistakes. In a published, handwritten, signed letter, Randi replied offering $1,000 if any claimed error could be demonstrated (see Fuller, 1979). Fuller proved Randi wrong. In a rejoinder to Puthoff and Targ (1977), Randi reversed himself (for a clear example, see point number 15 in Randi, 1982, p. 223). Randi should have paid the $1,000, but he never did.”
Wow. Randi didn’t pay an offer he made. Amazing.
Not only do we have evidence that the challenge is bogus on it’s merits, we have evidence that the man has a history of backing out of offers to pay money.
Doesn’t Randi have some stipulation that he won’t run a test that has the potential of causing physical harm? So if you claimed to be able to stop bullets fired at your head, Matrix-style, but only if James Randi pulls the trigger, he would not be obligated to test your claim. Likewise, if you claim to be able to live on only air and water, Randi doesn’t have to let you starve yourself to death on his behalf.