what IF someone won Randi's challenge

[Psibeliever]

The claimant and the JREF have to devise a method of distinguishing hits from misses that does not involve third-party judging.

Why not? There should be an impartial third-party judging. Furthermore, if the claimant and JREF cannot agree, then nothing goes to the first stage, so the JREF can't prove or disprove anything. By the way, you refer to statistical analysis - such analysis is NOT self-evident.

I'm sure that most well-known scientists would be allowed to apply.

No, they cannot. Rule 12 states

12. This offer is not open to any and all persons. Before being considered as an applicant, the person applying must satisfy two conditions: First, he/she must have a “media presence,” which means having been published, written about, or known to the media in regard to his/her claimed abilities or powers. This can be established by producing articles, videos, books, or other published material that specifically addresses the person’s abilities. Second, he/she must produce at least one signed document from an academic who has witnessed the powers or abilities of the person, and will validate that these powers or abilities have been verified.

Scientists who test and who do not claim to have that power, but who says others have it, cannot apply. Diane Powell, MD, who is a noted researcher, has written a book, "The ESP Enigma: The Scientific Case for Psychic Phenomena" and says psychic powers are genetic - ie, they're passed from generation to generation. Dr Powell, who has worked at Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and the Salk Institute, would not qualify if she said she didn't have the genetic ability, even though she would be well qualified to conduct such a test.

Can't anyone who claims to have paranormal powers actually demonstrate them?

They have been demonstrated to the satisfaction of many scientists. I can use the version of the JREF challenge and apply it to evolution. If nobody can make the claim or pass the preliminary test, then they must agree that evolution doesn't exist and the world was created in seven days. Oh, and don't say the rules don't apply to them - the rules are set, and, if they don't like it, then that is grounds for saying evolution doesn't exist.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Psibeliever

Why not? There should be an impartial third-party judging. Furthermore, if the claimant and JREF cannot agree, then nothing goes to the first stage, so the JREF can't prove or disprove anything. By the way, you refer to statistical analysis - such analysis is NOT self-evident.

I already said that I think the word self-evident is not a good choice.

What is a claim that you think requires third-party judging? It's often used in psychic readings. Why? Just have the sitters select from among all the readings.

Scientists who test and who do not claim to have that power, but who says others have it, cannot apply. Diane Powell, MD, who is a noted researcher, has written a book, "The ESP Enigma: The Scientific Case for Psychic Phenomena" and says psychic powers are genetic - ie, they're passed from generation to generation. Dr Powell, who has worked at Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and the Salk Institute, would not qualify if she said she didn't have the genetic ability, even though she would be well qualified to conduct such a test.

Huh? If she doesn't have the ability, why would she want to apply for the challenge?

They have been demonstrated to the satisfaction of many scientists.

So who is a person who can actually demonstrate them in a way that is obvious?

I can use the version of the JREF challenge and apply it to evolution. If nobody can make the claim or pass the preliminary test, then they must agree that evolution doesn't exist and the world was created in seven days.

What would be the preliminary test for evolution? Why are you setting up a false dichotomy?

~~ Paul

[Psibeliever]

What is a claim that you think requires third-party judging? It's often used in psychic readings. Why? Just have the sitters select from among all the readings.

Ganzfield experiments, selecting the right photo from a total of five (Stargate), and all sorts of experiments.

Huh? If she doesn't have the ability, why would she want to apply for the challenge?

She can have test subjects and apply for the million. Trouble is, such testing is not self-evident.

So who is a person who can actually demonstrate them in a way that is obvious?

No one. Evolution is not obvious, radio astronomy is not obvious. Many scientific phenomena is not obvious and is in fact counter-intuitive. But if something is not obvious, it can still be true.

What would be the preliminary test for evolution? Why are you setting up a false dichotomy?

Now you see why Randi's challenge is silly.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Psibeliever

Ganzfield experiments, selecting the right photo from a total of five (Stargate), and all sorts of experiments.

Give me some details so I can understand why you think third-party judging is necessary.

She can have test subjects and apply for the million. Trouble is, such testing is not self-evident.

The JREF might accept applications from her subjects given that she is well-known. I don't know. But since she's a scientist, she could just run the experiments herself.

No one. Evolution is not obvious, radio astronomy is not obvious. Many scientific phenomena is not obvious and is in fact counter-intuitive. But if something is not obvious, it can still be true.

I can show evidence for evolution on demand. I can show you the result of radio astronomy experiments on demand. What can you show me about psi on demand? None of this has anything to do with obviousness.

Now you see why Randi's challenge is silly.

What? You're saying that bending a spoon with my mind would be tested like evolution would be tested? And you do understand that the no one has ever said that because someone doesn't pass the preliminary test, it means absolutely that their claimed ability doesn't exist.

Claimants for the prize are claiming that they have a specific ability. They are not applying to prove a theory of psi. It's just like an athlete saying he can high jump 10 feet. Just do it.

~~ Paul

[Psibeliever]

Give me some details so I can understand why you think third-party judging is necessary.

Impartial observers.

The JREF might accept applications from her subjects given that she is well-known. I don't know. But since she's a scientist, she could just run the experiments herself.

The issue is not if she can run the experiments herself; the issue is if she can apply for the challenge, and she cannot. The rules state that clearly. Stick to the topic.

I can show evidence for evolution on demand. I can show you the result of radio astronomy experiments on demand.

Showing something on demand is one thing; showing something that is obvious is another. For evolution, I will demand that you show me dinosaurs can evolve from clumps of molecules, and, no I won't wait a billion years. If you don't pass the preliminary test, well, you see why Randi's challenge is silly. For the record, I believe in evolution.

What? You're saying that bending a spoon with my mind would be tested like evolution would be tested?

Yes. And, even if no, the point is that Randi's rules are unfair. If you don't like them as applied to evolution, you should not apply them to psi.

Claimants for the prize are claiming that they have a specific ability. They are not applying to prove a theory of psi. It's just like an athlete saying he can high jump 10 feet. Just do it.

They did. Ganzfield experiments and all that. The issue is not if they're proving their ability; the issue is if Randi's challenge means anything.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Psibeliever

Impartial observers.

So you think that a third party would be better at matching psychic readings than the sitters themselves? Why?

The issue is not if she can run the experiments herself; the issue is if she can apply for the challenge, and she cannot. The rules state that clearly. Stick to the topic.

The challenge has always been for people to demonstrate abilities, not scientists to run experiments. But I still don't understand why you think a well-known scientist cannot apply.

Showing something on demand is one thing; showing something that is obvious is another. For evolution, I will demand that you show me dinosaurs can evolve from clumps of molecules, and, no I won't wait a billion years. If you don't pass the preliminary test, well, you see why Randi's challenge is silly.

You're comparing apples and oranges. No one is making any paranormal claims that require something to evolve from molecules over billions of years. Therefore, it is irrelevant that the Challenge can't accommodate such a claim. Many applicants claim to be able to dowse for water. What does that have to do with some slow, complex natural process like evolution?

Anyway, you don't do the demanding; I do the claiming. I would be rather foolish to apply for the million with a claim that would take billions of years to demonstrate.

Yes. And, even if no, the point is that Randi's rules are unfair. If you don't like them as applied to evolution, you should not apply them to psi.

Why not?

They did. Ganzfield experiments and all that. The issue is not if they're proving their ability; the issue is if Randi's challenge means anything.

I agree that in the grand scheme of things, the Challenge means nothing. Unless, of course, someone comes forward who can actually do what they claim. Now that would be amazing.

~~ Paul

[Psibeliever]

So you think that a third party would be better at matching psychic readings than the sitters themselves? Why?

I told you - impartial observers.

The challenge has always been for people to demonstrate abilities, not scientists to run experiments. But I still don't understand why you think a well-known scientist cannot apply.

Read the fine print. Rule 12 says

First, he/she must have a “media presence,” which means having been published, written about, or known to the media in regard to his/her claimed abilities or powers.

IOW, that person must have BEEN the object of media PR, not someone who has done investigations into the phenomena. So Putoff and Targ, who examined Uri Geller, cannot apply. Furthermore, what about a non-well-known scientist?

I would be rather foolish to apply for the million with a claim that would take billions of years to demonstrate.

Now you see why many scientists wouldn't waste their time with Randi's Challenge. Of course, then many Creationists can say that, because no one has applied for my hypothetical challenge, evolution doesn't exist.

Why not?

Why apply them to psi and not evolution? Because what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Psibeliever

I told you - impartial observers.

If you say so. Seems to me that the best person to select his reading is the sitter himself. Otherwise how would the judges know which readings fit which sitters? Only by some kind of coaching procedure, which is just perfect for leaks.

IOW, that person must have BEEN the object of media PR, not someone who has done investigations into the phenomena. So Putoff and Targ, who examined Uri Geller, cannot apply. Furthermore, what about a non-well-known scientist?

I think you may be taking the wording too literally. But anyway, it doesn't matter. It's the JREF's money, so they get to make the rules. Nowhere does it say that they think they can test all possible paranormal claims. In particular, there is a list of certain types of claims they will not test.

I'll ask the JREF about this.

Now you see why many scientists wouldn't waste their time with Randi's Challenge. Of course, then many Creationists can say that, because no one has applied for my hypothetical challenge, evolution doesn't exist.

Of course many scientists wouldn't waste their time. Who said it makes sense for everyone to apply? The JREF makes no blanket statement about the nonexistence of all paranormal claims. And who said no one has applied? Many people have applied and gone through a preliminary test.

Why apply them to psi and not evolution? Because what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Except you're comparing geese to salamanders.


~~ Paul

[Psibeliever]

I'll ask the JREF about this.

Keep us posted.

The JREF makes no blanket statement about the nonexistence of all paranormal claims.

Randi has written a book, Flim-flam, which apparently ridicules all claims about the paranormal, and refers to Putoff and Targ as Laurel and Hardy - of course, Putoff and Targ are renowned physicists. I haven't read the book, but I don't think anyone would dispute Randi's position about the paranormal, and he does run the JREF. So let's be honest about JREF's positon.

It's the JREF's money, so they get to make the rules.

Agreed. But if people don't accept the challenge, then Randi cannot say that they are frauds or that their powers don't exist, because they don't have to play on his terms to prove their case. I know of one die-hard skeptic who has confronted me with this, asking why no one has won the challenge if psi exists, and, when I tried to explain my position, he interrupted me and wouldn't let me explain my position. What I'm saying is that, yes, JREF gets to make any rule. But then, if no one accepts or wins the challenge, then that does not disprove psi.

To carry on this logic, for my hypothetical challenge, I get to make the rules regarding the truth of evolution. If nobody accepts, then I cannot say evolution doesn't exist. Of course, if Randi and many skeptics claim that their Challenge proves psi doesn't exist, I will do the same for my hypothetical challenge.

Except you're comparing geese to salamanders.

Different standards for different beliefs, right?

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Psibeliever

Randi has written a book, Flim-flam, which apparently ridicules all claims about the paranormal, and refers to Putoff and Targ as Laurel and Hardy - of course, Putoff and Targ are renowned physicists. I haven't read the book, but I don't think anyone would dispute Randi's position about the paranormal, and he does run the JREF. So let's be honest about JREF's positon.

Gee, I don't remember a blanket ridicule about the paranormal in Flim-Flam. Anyway, it doesn't matter. The JREF's official position is not equal to Randi's personal position.

Agreed. But if people don't accept the challenge, then Randi cannot say that they are frauds or that their powers don't exist, because they don't have to play on his terms to prove their case. I know of one die-hard skeptic who has confronted me with this, asking why no one has won the challenge if psi exists, and, when I tried to explain my position, he interrupted me and wouldn't let me explain my position. What I'm saying is that, yes, JREF gets to make any rule. But then, if no one accepts or wins the challenge, then that does not disprove psi.

Correct, Randi cannot say they are frauds only on the basis of not taking the challenge. Did he do that somewhere?

To carry on this logic, for my hypothetical challenge, I get to make the rules regarding the truth of evolution. If nobody accepts, then I cannot say evolution doesn't exist. Of course, if Randi and many skeptics claim that their Challenge proves psi doesn't exist, I will do the same for my hypothetical challenge.[

You can't mean that you get to make the rules regarding the truth of evolution. You must mean you get to make the rules regarding testing it. Agreed. But make sure you construct the rules so that people actually do apply and actually do take the preliminary test, because that is what has happened. You don't get to make the rules arbitrarily absurd just to prove your point.

Different standards for different beliefs, right?

Different methods of experimentation for different sciences.

Other than your annoyance at the rule that disallows absolutely anyone from applying, what is your point?

~~ Paul