I certainly agree that, based on a superficial analysis, fromdownunder appeared to support your point of view. However, if you read carefully several of his posts (for example his posts #2934, #2839 or #2692), there seems to be "something else", another message, that you seem to have chosen to ignore. I think you need to dig a little more into his posts. That's how you do a serious investigation into a delicate issue and a delicate psychological phenomenon.
Merged New telepathy test: which number did I write ?
- Thread starter Michel H
- Start date
-
- Tags
- telepathy telepathy test
- Status
fromdownunder
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2006
- Messages
- 6,721
Let me guess:
You walked the length of Hovell's Creek? or
You applied for a job as a check out operator in a Supermarket? or
You climbed Uluru? or
You personally interviewed every visitor to Geelong's 6 story high Christmas Tree?: or
You went to an AFL match and supported a team that was not even playing? or
You drank Yarra River water? or
You watched Sunday Too Far Away on Television? or
You drank a bottle of Fosters?
Norm
Last edited:
These are interesting possibilities, Norm (especially the second one perhaps).
However, none of them is unfortunately correct.
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist., Moderator
I didn't choose to ignore anything. I was following your direction:
I looked at the latest one. It said I was 100% correct. That's the highest score a correct answer can have.
No, Michel, it's not. As many, many people have told you over and over again, that is how you introduce enough uncertainty to allow oneself to continue believing one's preconceptions.
Confirmation bias is very real. It has plagued the most serious of researchers in all fields including psychology. Necessary steps in banishing it include: identifying the exact conditions that indicate a successful test beforehand; and making sure that all judgment and interpretation is removed from discovering whether the data constitutes a hit or a miss.
You refuse to do this.
You said you looked at the latest post by fromdownunder, which was:
and I believe you.
However, it seems that, while trying to lecture me on proper scientific method, and confirmation bias, you fell badly victim of confirmation bias yourself.
Wikipedia explains:
... People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively ... (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias)
The problem seems to be that, when you read fromdownunder's post, you only paid attention to the last part, which is the one that you liked, and you paid no attention at all to the first part of the post (so, you read it selectively). fromdownunder actually actually sent a mixed message in his post. The last part , with cannons and trumpets, is clear and that's the part that attracted your attention. The first part
"Well, no, I was just making fun of you, as I have on every post I have made on your ... idea that you project thoughts, and everybody on the planet somehow hears "42" every day. I do actually think of "42" quite often ..."
is somewhat enigmatic, and perhaps I should try to clarify it a little.
42, in popular culture, is the "Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything". I also suspect this number was constructed, based on my birth date, 22 February (1958). From the day and the month, you get 22 and 2.
And this is closely related to 42, as shown below:
22, 2 → 2*2, 2 → 4, 2 → 42 .
It seems that, in fromdownunder's post, "42" means "my telepathic message, the thoughts I am broadcasting everyday" (in a somewhat ironic way), and he seems to be confirming that he is receiving this message, because he said "I do actually think of "42" quite often" (almost contradicting his earlier statement, from the sentence before). The assumption that you seem to generally favor, that I am just an ordinary schizophrenic, cannot explain why fromdownunder "oddly" is (almost) contradicting himself in very strange sentences.
Last edited:
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist., Moderator
No, it's not enigmatic. It's just another case of you not being able to properly communicate. Fromdownunder didn't say that he thinks of the number quite often. He didn't say that at all. He said he thinks of the number quite often when he is asked a specific question, namely, "What is 6 x 9 in base 13?" He is even more likely to think of it if the question is asked while he's doing math.
He said I was 100% correct. Why would you ignore the plain text to go digging around for some vague way to ignore it? I think it's because you cannot admit to yourself any doubt about whether you actually are telepathic.
Why did you multiply two numbers to get another? Why did you make that number the tens digit in a two digit number? Why did you then switch to adding the last number instead of multiplying it with the other two? What rules are you following to discern this number? Was the rule set before this idea came to you?
You frequently choose to interpret the meaning of sentences based on your belief that there is some subtle subtext buried in the words. There is no subtext in numbers. 2 doesn't have subtext whether you multiply, divide, add or subtract it.
2 + 2 + 2 = 6. 2*2*2 = 8. 222 = 222.
None of these are 42.
In fact, the highest number I can get to by performing math operations on three 2s is 2 to the 2nd power to the second power. And that's only 16.
fromdownunder
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2006
- Messages
- 6,721
Are you seriously suggesting the late Douglas Adams used 42 because of you?
Well I am not receiving any messages from you, and never have. Learn to live with it.
Norm
AdMan
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Messages
- 10,293
I really don't think a reminder should be necessary, but for those still responding to Michel in this thread:
Sadly, it is useless to try to reason with him.
Sadly, it is useless to try to reason with him.
fromdownunder
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2006
- Messages
- 6,721
Well since he has stated outright that he does not trust anyone on the entire planet, we already know that. I resumed posting on this thread for my own amusement, because the Judge Judy marathon was getting boring, and I ran out of episodes of Continuum. (Buying Season 3 next week)
It is fun to see him post "yes I was thinking of that as well" type responses to just about anything other people say, so it would not surprise me if he claims that he was thinking of these shows and that is why I selected these two.
Norm
Sorry, but I disagree with you here, because fromdownunder posted:
and not
(note the presence of a comma between the words "often" and "when").
Also, please note I have edited my post #2945 to clarify it a little (I was still in time to do it, it is the relationship between 22, 2 and 42 that I have sought to clarify)
I believe this is quite possible (though I wouldn't say I am 100% sure of this).
However, the fairly obvious relationship between my birth date and "42" may have been noticed by others. Or this idea may have been easily perceived telepathically after I thought about it myself.
What??? Judge Judy???
But this is precisely what ...
Huh, well, no...
I think these two words might perhaps be (somewhat) considered as a further hint for my question:
So I list here all the hints so far:
Please try to guess
One of the highest paid chicks in America old Judge Judy
Yes, she's a little old (73), but still good looking. She's still thin, that's an important point.
Do you have any idea about the method I used to study telepathy with Australia, cullennz?
Nope
I'm just sitting here wondering if I can seduce Judy via email. Not for her cash obviously
How did it go
Very good, I found the results excellent. Although I know, of course, that evidence that I find myself to be of good quality, will not necessarily be admitted as so on this forum.
I can perhaps give an additional hint: people who seemed to react telepathically during the experiments were not necessarily all in Australia.
devnull
Philosopher
If it's telepathic, why the hints?
The hints are for you (members of this forum), they are not for the people who took part in my recent telepathy experiments with Australia.
The question I am asking the members of this forum is:
Which method, or which technique, which technology did I use in my recent telepathy experiments with Australia ("the opposite side of the world" for me, although the Earth is spherical of course)
Hints: cam, I have some pictures, Judge Judy, people who seemed to react telepathically during the experiments were not necessarily all in Australia.
Last edited:
- Status