Merged New telepathy test: which number did I write ?

[Agatha]

Michel, every single one of those answers were sarcastic rather than supportive.

 

[Michel H]

These threads are boring so I doubt I'll watch but Michel... you stating you're in Belgium, I presume English is not your first language and that sarcasm in English text is more difficult for you to recognize.

Please, please tell us that is the truth.

I have actually taught in a large US university (at the modest level of a Teaching Assistant ) about 30 years ago. I think I generally understand "sarcasm" in English when I see some. I also recognize excellence, but also mediocrity You may think a few things about me (and I know that I am not perfect), but I may myself think a few things about you too.

 

[Michel H]

Michel, every single one of those answers were sarcastic rather than supportive.

I see no objective element or reason which may lead to such a conclusion.

 

[John Jones]

[snipped the tedious repetition]

Like a bad penny . . . .

 

[Giordano]

I see no objective element or reason which may lead to such a conclusion.

Honest, it was sarcasm and the people responsible have told you so. But I understand that you do not believe this and that you do not believe that you propose are not accurate tests of your telepathy.

I am saying this not to make fun of you in any way, but just hoping that even for a tiny moment you might question your views on these subjects and involve other people who you trust. Beyond that, I think I can only wish you good luck in your life, and hope that you will be able to happily resolve any difficulties that you encounter.

 

[fromdownunder]

I see no objective element or reason which may lead to such a conclusion.

Which is evidence that you do not understand sarcasm.

ETA: I think objective evidence would be that the person posting actually told you further into the thread that he/she was being sarcastic.

Norm

 

[fromdownunder]

I am saying this not to make fun of you in any way, but just hoping that even for a tiny moment you might question your views on these subjects and involve other people who you trust.

He has said before in this very thread that he does not trust anybody, even the people responding here to his post-a-number competition. We are lying if we post an incorrect number, because he cannot possibly conceive that he is not projecting whatever number he thought of and that he genuinely believes that 7 Billion people are receiving that number.

Norm

 

[abaddon]

"I know for a fact that you will derive will nothing from this."
Are we talking here about high-class, open-minded and generous skepticism?
If you look at some of the answers or posts quoted at the end of my opening post, it's not at all obvious that "I got nothing out of this".

Nope. We are talking about observable fact. Despite all of the constructive criticism you recieved about your previous one in four selection being insufficient to the task, and the need to have a much bigger range of selections available, you have done the opposite and increased your chance of a random hit.

This can be nothing else than an attempt to intentionally skew the results in your favour.

I will say again, I recommend that nobody engage with this borked "test".

 

[abaddon]

I see no objective element or reason which may lead to such a conclusion.

How about I tell you straight out? Would you notice?

 

[Michel H]

Honest, it was sarcasm ...

It is clear, and immediately obvious to me that these posts:

... I do indeed have ESP, and know for a fact that he wrote 2!

4

I know it. I'm absolutely sure. I feel it inside of me ...

I am seeing a 4 very clearly. It's almost as though I had written it myself.

Well this is certainly one of the most robustly controlled experiments I have encountered.

I am hearing Michel H's thoughts. All of them.
...

are not sarcastic at all. What makes them so remarkable is precisely their seriousness, and the total absence of "sarcasm" in them.
Here, I am talking about a certain number of posts, written by some human beings, members of this forum, in a certain "state of mind", at a given point of time. I am not talking about what they may have said later.
By the way, I would like to insist that I don't blame these members for having made these posts, I believe they were good posts, and even excellent in some cases, and I respect these members for having said that.

Now, if you look at what these members have said later, they did not massively say they were just kidding me. If I remember correctly, only one member, Loss Leader (a Moderator on this forum) claimed later that he had been "lying and kidding":

... I was kidding. I wasn't serious. I was lying about seeing any number very clearly. I was making fun of you. I saw no number. I heard no thought. ...

He also later said:

...

All of my responses to any of your tests have been lies.

If I were you, I would discard all my responses as not being credible.

Now, the question is: If a moderator of a paranormal forum has no credibility, let alone special credibility, how can any person's credibility be assessed?

However, I believe that Loss Leader was actually largely sincere in his original post, where he also gave the correct number (he gave only one numerical answer, and it was correct). You may note that his later posts have been fairly strange, and an objective investigator may ask oneself what may have lead hem to behave in such a bizarre and erratic way. I suppose the correct answer to this question is simply the reality of the "Michel H" alleged telepathic phenomenon, whose recognition is facing enormous resistance within Society. Lying all the time is unnatural (especially on an educational forum whose stated goal is to "moralize" Society), so sometimes the truth comes out, before sometimes being also rejected because this truth is too "inconvenient", and Michel H is perceived as weak and isolated, so so so.... I would like to emphasize, based on my long experience, that, even if Loss Leader (or some other member) said himself that he "was joking", this does not, by any means, means that he really was joking. In order to find out what Loss Leader's state of mind was when he said:

I am seeing a 4 very clearly. It's almost as though I had written it myself.

, you must examine that very post, and not another post he made months later, when his state of mind was very different.
I believe that the remarkable posts below:

... I do indeed have ESP, and know for a fact that he wrote 2!

4

I know it. I'm absolutely sure. I feel it inside of me ...

I am seeing a 4 very clearly. It's almost as though I had written it myself.

I am hearing Michel H's thoughts. All of them.
...

(and I thank again all their authors) do actually provide some "proof" of my telepathy, simply because it is hard to imagine that four different authors could have written such serious, totally devoid of sarcasm posts if there was not some real ESP phenomenon in connection with said Michel H.

 

[abaddon]

It is clear, and immediately obvious to me that these posts:






are not sarcastic at all. What makes them so remarkable is precisely their seriousness, and the total absence of "sarcasm" in them.
Here, I am talking about a certain number of posts, written by some human beings, members of this forum, in a certain "state of mind", at a given point of time. I am not talking about what they may have said later.
By the way, I would like to insist that I don't blame these members for having made these posts, I believe they were good posts, and even excellent in some cases, and I respect these members for having said that.

Now, if you look at what these members have said later, they did not massively say they were just kidding me. If I remember correctly, only one member, Loss Leader (a Moderator on this forum) claimed later that he had been "lying and kidding":

He also later said:

However, I believe that Loss Leader was actually largely sincere in his original post, where he also gave the correct number (he gave only one numerical answer, and it was correct). You may note that his later posts have been fairly strange, and an objective investigator may ask oneself what may have lead hem to behave in such a bizarre and erratic way. I suppose the correct answer to this question is simply the reality of the "Michel H" alleged telepathic phenomenon, whose recognition is facing enormous resistance within Society. Lying all the time is unnatural (especially on an educational forum whose stated goal is to "moralize" Society), so sometimes the truth comes out, before sometimes being also rejected because this truth is too "inconvenient", and Michel H is perceived as weak and isolated, so so so.... I would like to emphasize, based on my long experience, that, even if Loss Leader (or some other member) said himself that he "was joking", this does not, by any means, means that he really was joking. In order to find out what Loss Leader's state of mind was when he said:

, you must examine that very post, and not another post he made months later, when his state of mind was very different.
I believe that the remarkable posts below:






(and I thank again all their authors) do actually provide some "proof" of my telepathy, simply because it is hard to imagine that four different authors could have written such serious, totally devoid of sarcasm posts if there was not some real ESP phenomenon in connection with said Michel H.

Every single one of those was mocking the whole notion. What is wrong with you?

 

[Michel H]

Every single one of those was mocking the whole notion. What is wrong with you?

You cannot find or point out any sarcastic element in these exceptional posts:

... I do indeed have ESP, and know for a fact that he wrote 2!

4

I know it. I'm absolutely sure. I feel it inside of me ...

I am seeing a 4 very clearly. It's almost as though I had written it myself.

I am hearing Michel H's thoughts. All of them.
...

And the fact that these posts were published on a forum with a "skeptical" and scientific orientation makes them even more remarkable. Simply declaring or decreeing that these posts were sarcastic jokes, just because they possibly don't go well with some of your skeptical prejudices is a very "woo" kind of behavior, beware of that.

 

[Nonpareil]

What is wrong with you?

Unless I am much mistaken, Michel H has admitted to suffering from schizophrenia. He is genuinely mentally ill, not stupid.

Which is why I have refrained from posting in this thread.

 

[Michel H]

... Despite all of the constructive criticism you recieved about your previous one in four selection being insufficient to the task, and the need to have a much bigger range of selections available, you have done the opposite and increased your chance of a random hit.
...

Asking you, on this forum, for advice on the proper way to conduct a telepathy test, is somewhat like asking Osama bin Laden (if he were still alive) if aircraft carriers are still important for the US military in the 21st century. Frankly, I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

 

[abaddon]

Asking you, on this forum, for advice on the proper way to conduct a telepathy test, is somewhat like asking Osama bin Laden (if he were still alive) if aircraft carriers are still important for the US military in the 21st century. Frankly, I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

Try not ignoring the advice you were given

 

[fromdownunder]

Asking you, on this forum, for advice on the proper way to conduct a telepathy test, is somewhat like asking Osama bin Laden (if he were still alive) if aircraft carriers are still important for the US military in the 21st century. Frankly, I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

Well, no. You have been given excellent advice in this thread, and your earlier threads, how to conduct a double blinded telepathy test using the scientific method, and you have ignored the advice and just gone your own way. Your protocols have become sillier each time you post, and everybody is so bored with you that you might get one number poster, and you might get none.

And even if you get none you will claim victory, because you will claim that we all heard the number, but were afraid to post it.

If I started a thread that said "pick an integer between one and one" I would get 100% success from serious posters. Would that prove telepathy? Why don't you post "pick an integer between 1 and 2? Why do you even think that picking one of three options is even significant, especially since not one person is going to give you a serious answer.

Here is an idea. Find friends (actually one will do) whom you learn to trust. Test your "power" out on them, and analyse the results. As you have clearly stated on this thread that you do not trust anybody, so I suspect that the issue has nothing to do with the other 7 Billion people on the planet, that there is no telepathy, and that the whole issue lies inside you.

ETA I used to have a useless trick that I would perform when waiting at a bus stop. I would ask people to pick an odd number over 50 consisting of only odd numbers with the second number higher than the first.and I had the answer in my pocket. Nine out of 10 chose 57.

Norm.

 

[jsfisher]

Nine out of 10 chose 57.

My psychic abilities tell me you meant to type 37.

 

[fromdownunder]

My psychic abilities tell me you meant to type 37.

Except 37 is not over 50.

It is a nice trick. The only possibilities are 57, 59 or 79, and if you have three pockets, keep one of the numbers in each pocket and pull the right one out after you get the answer. You can never be wrong.

ETA: It's is even better with even numbers as the only possible answer is 68.

Norm

 

[Ladewig]

Asking you, on this forum, for advice on the proper way to conduct a telepathy test, is somewhat like asking Osama bin Laden (if he were still alive) if aircraft carriers are still important for the US military in the 21st century. Frankly, I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

If, on every single page of this thread, you feel a need to create a post that decries the ignorance, foolishness, or closed-mindedness of this entire board, then why do you try to run tests here?

It is an old story, but I'll tell it anyway.
In a small town, there is a guy who plays poker in a bar and every single night he loses. One night he gets up from the table, approaches a friend, and says, " I lost again." The friend says, "I am pretty sure that those guys are cheating." The gambler replies, "Yes. I know they cheat every time we play. The friend asks, "well, why do you play poker with them?" The gambler exasperatedly say "it's the only poker game in town!"

Message: the gambler is a fool and a complete jackass for playing with people who do not play in a fair and honest manner.

..............

One last thing I want to check.
Is it accurate to say that there is nothing in this entire world that will make you doubt your power? No test result, no fact, no protocol, no advice, no analogy will convince you to reconsider. Is that right?
It is impossible for anyone, anywhere to ever, ever, ever make you consider the possibility that you cannot transmit information from your head into other people's head. Is that accurate?

.........
If you are unhappy with your current life, then there are people that can help.


".............
ETA I am a complete idiot. I know that there is no analogy that can help, yet I wasted time typing out an analogy in an effort to help. At times it appears that I and others in this thread have an addiction.

"I just need one more post. Just let me post one more time and I swear I will quit. I'll give it up forever if you let me make one more post in this thread. I know I have said it before, but this time I mean it."

 

[jsfisher]

Except 37 is not over 50.

It is a nice trick. The only possibilities are 57, 59 or 79, and if you have three pockets, keep one of the numbers in each pocket and pull the right one out after you get the answer. You can never be wrong.

ETA: It's is even better with even numbers as the only possible answer is 68.

Norm

Crap!! I skimmed over the end of your post and took it as the standard under 50 version.

Since my psychic powers are infallible, you must have really meant the under 50 version. That is the only rational explanation.