JREF Challenge to come to an end

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Holoverse

Its exactly the same with these abilities.
Its a gift, and theres different levels of talent, as with any other talent/gift.

And some of the musical talent can play on stage and make a fortune at it. Could one of those psychics please come forward?

Maybe they should go live with Natasha for like 3 months video taping all her USUAL DIAGNOSING, in her comfortable home. because these abiliteis function on love, peace and comfort. You do NOT find any of that in a probing scientific setting full of debunkers....OR a television show. She NEEDS to be at home with her mom, in HER comfort zone. Understand this skeptiks!! And you will be in for a ride, a ride that will destroy your current view of materilism FOREVER!!

Then she should not have agreed to be tested, Or, more accurately, her parents should not have agreed to have her tested.

~~ Paul

[David Bailey]

Paul,

The testing of the Russian girl was extremely unfair. First the bar was set extremely high, but then one of the 'illnesses' that she was asked to diagnose was that a man had a metal plate in his head - he was not, in fact ill.

Brian Josephson's site contains more details about this.

Unfortunately, TV/radio programs are not always designed to get at the truth. Rupert Sheldrake reports how he pulled out of a program with Richard Dawkins when it became clear that there was not going to be any debate, the program was designed simply to present Dawkins' views!

I would also agree with Holoverse in that people like this are put under fantastic stress, and if they decline to be tested, that is always taken as proof positive that they are fakes. Imagine when you were 14 - would you have performed well (say in a science test) on TV with several extremely skeptical adults testing you?

If this test was worth doing, why could they not have used enough (genuine) patients to avoid statistical noise, and tried to minimise the stress of the occasion?

David

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by David

The testing of the Russian girl was extremely unfair. First the bar was set extremely high, but then one of the 'illnesses' that she was asked to diagnose was that a man had a metal plate in his head - he was not, in fact ill.

I believe she claimed to be able to "see inside" a person's body. The metal plate should therefore be trivial.

Unfortunately, TV/radio programs are not always designed to get at the truth. Rupert Sheldrake reports how he pulled out of a program with Richard Dawkins when it became clear that there was not going to be any debate, the program was designed simply to present Dawkins' views!

Perhaps. And the reverse has happened, too.

I would also agree with Holoverse in that people like this are put under fantastic stress, and if they decline to be tested, that is always taken as proof positive that they are fakes. Imagine when you were 14 - would you have performed well (say in a science test) on TV with several extremely skeptical adults testing you?

No, probably not. And I'd expect people to mumble "child abuse."

If this test was worth doing, why could they not have used enough (genuine) patients to avoid statistical noise, and tried to minimise the stress of the occasion?

Why did Demkina's handlers agree to protocol they did not like? Are you sure you know what was done to minimise the stress?

I think the JREF should have refused to test her.

~~ Paul

[David Bailey]

Paul,

We probably agree pretty much on this - yes I think it was child abuse too. Children have been known to commit suicide after less provocation than that.

I do think that any claim like that needs to be filtered carefully. If, for example, the 'seeing inside' seems to manifest itself as diagnosing serious illness, then that is what should be tested.

If some people really are psychic, that does not necessarily mean that they are scientifically knowledgeable. I remember a TV program about alternative medicine in which Richard Dawkins sampled various treatments. One female healer explained to him on camera that his DNA was the wrong shape and that she would perform a ceremony to fix the problem. My first reaction was to wince and react much like you or Chris might have done, but then I thought again. Suppose that woman really did have some healing ability (but absolutely no knowledge of science), and had endlessly heard the refrain "what is the scientific explanation" maybe she naively thought her explanation would make scientists accept her healing more!

It is important to test the effectiveness of the healing - not the 'theory' that may get proposed.

David

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by David

I do think that any claim like that needs to be filtered carefully. If, for example, the 'seeing inside' seems to manifest itself as diagnosing serious illness, then that is what should be tested.

An illness somehow being distinguished from physical damage? I believe they asked Demkina whether a metal plate is something she should be able to see.

If some people really are psychic, that does not necessarily mean that they are scientifically knowledgeable. I remember a TV program about alternative medicine in which Richard Dawkins sampled various treatments. One female healer explained to him on camera that his DNA was the wrong shape and that she would perform a ceremony to fix the problem. My first reaction was to wince and react much like you or Chris might have done, but then I thought again. Suppose that woman really did have some healing ability (but absolutely no knowledge of science), and had endlessly heard the refrain "what is the scientific explanation" maybe she naively thought her explanation would make scientists accept her healing more!

She should do some homework or shut the hell up.

It is important to test the effectiveness of the healing - not the 'theory' that may get proposed.

I think just the opposite. Testing the effectiveness is a statistical gambit. I realize that we don't have much choice at this stage of the game.

~~ Paul

[David Bailey]

Paul,

The point is that nobody knows how Ψ-related things work - it is just silly to ask a random healer and say well that is her theory!

I think there are vast communication problems between scientists and 'psychics'. Foe example, they talk of 'energy'. Clearly they don't mean what science means by that term, but science itself took an ordinary word and gave it a specialised meaning which is narrower than its normal meaning. For example, in normal parlance, a lean fit person might be said to have more energy than a seriously obese individual - but in strict scientific terms the reverse is true!

David

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by David

I think there are vast communication problems between scientists and 'psychics'. Foe example, they talk of 'energy'. Clearly they don't mean what science means by that term, but science itself took an ordinary word and gave it a specialised meaning which is narrower than its normal meaning. For example, in normal parlance, a lean fit person might be said to have more energy than a seriously obese individual - but in strict scientific terms the reverse is true!

But the energy mongers do mean something tangible when they use the word. They are futzing with my qi. They are realigning my chakras. They are waving their hands over my meridians. They are detecting my aura.

I'm certainly willing to grant that they are not talking about one of the four fundamental forces. But they are talking about something tangible. Where the hell is it?

~~ Paul

[David Bailey]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

But the energy mongers do mean something tangible when they use the word. They are futzing with my qi. They are realigning my chakras. They are waving their hands over my meridians. They are detecting my aura.

I'm certainly willing to grant that they are not talking about one of the four fundamental forces. But they are talking about something tangible. Where the hell is it?

~~ Paul

I am sure a fair amount of such talk is meaningless, and conceivable all of it is. However, if there is something real here, it is obviously understood in a very rudimentary way - analogous to chemistry in the days of alchemy. But think about it - it wasn't a-priori obvious that you could not turn lead into gold - people had to try and fail in order to gradually tease out the rules that govern chemistry. Along the way, people inevitably came up with wrong theories, suffered self delusions, and invented get rich quick schemes - just as they still do!

I used to take Chris' approach to all such things, but I have come to realise that discussing things that are really poorly understood is very difficult (this forum illustrates that!). It is hard to separate concepts, and there is a tendency to generate too much terminology for concepts that probably overlap each other - as in the list you gave. There is also the problem that the terminology comes from more than one tradition.

This problem is not unique to Ψ - try reading certain reviews of classical music recordings - or wine. The reviewers probably mean something, but sometimes you are left wondering!

I am prepared to accept the possibility that some people have a healing gift, but that they don't know how it works, and they find what they do almost impossible to describe.

David

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by David

I am sure a fair amount of such talk is meaningless, and conceivable all of it is. However, if there is something real here, it is obviously understood in a very rudimentary way - analogous to chemistry in the days of alchemy. But think about it - it wasn't a-priori obvious that you could not turn lead into gold - people had to try and fail in order to gradually tease out the rules that govern chemistry. Along the way, people inevitably came up with wrong theories, suffered self delusions, and invented get rich quick schemes - just as they still do!

Yes, but at least they did not say they were holding actual transmuted gold in their hands. At least, not unless they were con artists. These energy mongers claim to feel my energy.

I am prepared to accept the possibility that some people have a healing gift, but that they don't know how it works, and they find what they do almost impossible to describe.

As long as my doctor doesn't prescribe therapeutic touch, I'm good.

~~ Paul

[David Bailey]

I have a little arthritis of one knee cap - I can control it adequately with pain killers, but I have wondered about exploring alternative solutions.

David