New telepathy test, the sequel.

[Michel H]

Perhaps I'm going about this the wrong way, These tests are designed to be way too fair.
What is needed is a totally lopsided test for Michel.

OK Michel I am think of one of these TWO numbers, Try to guess which one I have picked.


Is it:

A: 1


or

B: >>2<<

It is tempting to answer "2". However, you could have set up a trap. And you provided no MD5 hash (or other kind of hash) about your actual choice.

 

[MikeG]

Michel, could you answer this directly, please. Why won't you run the test that Kid Eager has set up for you?

 

[xjx388]

What I don't get is why someone who could either detect lies or project thoughts is wasting time on a forum. If I could do either one of these things I would keep my mouth shut and move to Vegas where I would make a fortune at poker. I would almost never make the wrong move.

 

[Ladewig]

Michel, your reasoning is muddled.
In fact, it is so muddled that you are unable to see that it is muddled.

 

[Michel H]

Michel, could you answer this directly, please. Why won't you run the test that Kid Eager has set up for you?

Kid Eager did send me a word. However, I don't think his method

Here is my Telepathy Test:

Below are 100 words. I will randomly select a word and tell Michel what that word is via PM. He will circle that word 4 times and stare at it. I will invite responses.

Here are the 100 words, in groups of 5x2:
...

is, in any way, an improvement over mine (instead of lecturing me about the so-called right way of conducting a test, I would rather see him participating in one of my tests, because he did provide a quality answer in my second test here). In his test, people are supposed to select one word out of 100 (the one I "circled four times and stared at"), but I think (based on a experience of several years in telepathy testing) it is simply very unlikely that anyone is going to do that accurately and seriously, it is too difficult (it is easier, both technically and psychologically, to select out of 4 than to select out of 100, because more information is provided to you. With such a large pool of possible responses, the test is almost a free response test.).

In addition, there is a blatant lack of security, from my point of view, because he could send the target word to a dozen of his friends. Because he knows the word, he cannot participate. And he said "I will invite responses.", that too doesn't make much sense to me. If I am supposed to circle the word four times, I am the one who should be able to say:"All right, I am done, please start posting your responses" (btw, he didn't say I had to write his word, so was I supposed to circle it using Microsoft Paint or some other image editor? Not clear.)

 

[Dave Rogers]

[...] I think (based on a experience of several years in telepathy testing) it is simply very unlikely that anyone is going to do that accurately and seriously, it is too difficult [...]

That's the point. It's too difficult to guess, so the only way anyone will get the right answer is if you successfully broadcast it to them by telepathy. If you don't believe you can do that, then you should definitely avoid Kid Eager's test.

Dave

 

[Kid Eager]

Kid Eager did send me a word. However, I don't think his method

is, in any way, an improvement over mine (instead of lecturing me about the so-called right way of conducting a test, I would rather see him participating in one of my tests, because he did provide a quality answer in my second test here). In his test, people are supposed to select one word out of 100 (the one I "circled four times and stared at"), but I think (based on a experience of several years in telepathy testing) it is simply very unlikely that anyone is going to do that accurately and seriously, it is too difficult (it is easier, both technically and psychologically, to select out of 4 than to select out of 100, because more information is provided to you. With such a large pool of possible responses, the test is almost a free response test.).

In addition, there is a blatant lack of security, from my point of view, because he could send the target word to a dozen of his friends. Because he knows the word, he cannot participate. And he said "I will invite responses.", that too doesn't make much sense to me. If I am supposed to circle the word four times, I am the one who should be able to say:"All right, I am done, please start posting your responses" (btw, he didn't say I had to write his word, so was I supposed to circle it using Microsoft Paint or some other image editor? Not clear.)

Pathetic evasion. If these were truly your concerns, all you had to do was ask.
I refuse to have anything further to do with such blatant dishonesty.

Goodbye.

 

[stanfr]

Kid Eager did send me a word. However, I don't think his method

is, in any way, an improvement over mine (instead of lecturing me about the so-called right way of conducting a test, I would rather see him participating in one of my tests, because he did provide a quality answer in my second test here). In his test, people are supposed to select one word out of 100 (the one I "circled four times and stared at"), but I think (based on a experience of several years in telepathy testing) it is simply very unlikely that anyone is going to do that accurately and seriously, it is too difficult (it is easier, both technically and psychologically, to select out of 4 than to select out of 100, because more information is provided to you. With such a large pool of possible responses, the test is almost a free response test.).

In addition, there is a blatant lack of security, from my point of view, because he could send the target word to a dozen of his friends. Because he knows the word, he cannot participate. And he said "I will invite responses.", that too doesn't make much sense to me. If I am supposed to circle the word four times, I am the one who should be able to say:"All right, I am done, please start posting your responses" (btw, he didn't say I had to write his word, so was I supposed to circle it using Microsoft Paint or some other image editor? Not clear.)

If you were to come to the sudden realization that you have no telepathic ability--that you've been deluding yourself with the idea--how would this affect your life? Would you be better or worse off with this understanding??

 

[Michel H]

If you were to come to the sudden realization that you have no telepathic ability--that you've been deluding yourself with the idea--how would this affect your life? Would you be better or worse off with this understanding??

This is very unlikely to happen. Several people have told me I am a telepathic broadcaster (including even a psychiatrist, and on this forum), so I would have to consider the fact I have been deluded, not only by myself, but also by others. But I don't think I have.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Several people have told me I am a telepathic broadcaster (including even a psychiatrist, and on this forum), so I would have to consider the fact I have been deluded, not only by myself, but also by others.

And yet you've frequently claimed that large numbers of people lie to you regularly by denying that they can receive telepathic messages from you, so you're quite certain you've been deluded by others; in fact, since the broader consensus is that you aren't a telepathic transmitter, your belief requires that more people are lying to you. Since people are lying to you either way, that only leaves self-delusion as a hurdle.

Dave

 

[abaddon]

This is very unlikely to happen. Several people have told me I am a telepathic broadcaster (including even a psychiatrist, and on this forum), so I would have to consider the fact I have been deluded, not only by myself, but also by others. But I don't think I have.

Name the several people on this forum who have agreed that you are telepathic.

I am willing to bet that if we check, we will find that it is almost exclusively due to your inability to detect sarcasm.

 

[stanfr]

This is very unlikely to happen. Several people have told me I am a telepathic broadcaster (including even a psychiatrist, and on this forum), so I would have to consider the fact I have been deluded, not only by myself, but also by others. But I don't think I have.

Humor me--would you be better or worse off, and why?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

This is very unlikely to happen. Several people have told me I am a telepathic broadcaster (including even a psychiatrist, and on this forum), so I would have to consider the fact I have been deluded, not only by myself, but also by others. But I don't think I have.

As has already been said, you probably misunderstood the intention of the people who you believe told you you were telepathic.

But you still have the problem of approximately seven billion other people who in your worldview appear to be conspiring to pretend they don't hear your thought broadcasts.

Do you have any sense of the relative likelihood of these two scenarios;
1) A man has a condition which makes him imagine he broadcasts his thoughts.
2) Seven billion people conspire to lie to the man and pretend they can't hear him.

On scenario 2, have you considered the logistics of how you might go about organising such a thing?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Michel, has anyone ever explicity told you they hear your thoughts, unprompted?

I'm not asking if you got the impression someone seemed to be reacting to something you thought. I'm asking if anyone has come right out and told you that they hear what you are thinking without their first being told that you believe you do.

 

[Michel H]

Michel, has anyone ever explicity told you they hear your thoughts, unprompted?

I'm not asking if you got the impression someone seemed to be reacting to something you thought. I'm asking if anyone has come right out and told you that they hear what you are thinking without their first being told that you believe you do.

Yes, see for example the end of the opening post of my latest test: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11482370#post11482370
I didn't know im (the member of Yahoo Answers), I didn't tell him I believed I was telepathic beforehand, I just asked my question, with total freedom for people to answer what they thought was the most correct.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Yes, see for example the end of the opening post of my latest test: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11482370#post11482370
I didn't know im (the member of Yahoo Answers), I didn't tell him I believed I was telepathic beforehand, I just asked my question, with total freedom for people to answer what they thought was the most correct.

Michel you can't possibly claim that response was unprompted.

The person who claimed to "nearly always know what you are thinking" had just been asked by you "Do you sometimes have the odd impression of "knowing what I think" because of an unusual telepathy phenomenon?".

Now, seriously, has anyone ever told you without prompting that they can hear what you are thinking?

<edit> On reading back my own question I see that I made it slightly ambiguous when I tried to clarify it, by adding the notion of your expressing belief in thought broadcasting rather than merely raising it as a possibility, for which I apologise.

My question as originally stated is was what I intended to ask: Has anyone told you without prompting that they hear your thoughts?

 

[stanfr]

Yes, see for example the end of the opening post of my latest test: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11482370#post11482370
I didn't know im (the member of Yahoo Answers), I didn't tell him I believed I was telepathic beforehand, I just asked my question, with total freedom for people to answer what they thought was the most correct.

He answered:

Well, I nearly always know what you think, but then I'm an excellent observer and smart as a whip Which to everyone, except you, clearly means that he is talking about his ability to cold read people (in general, not just you) which is why he also adds:

On the other hand, a "cold read" of someone in the same room (particularly someone who's a bit, hmm, credulous) is a very easy trick to master.
His ignorance about the relevance of Ganzfeld notwithstanding, he is clearly telling you that telepathy is not a real phenomena.

Now, can you please answer my very straightforward hypothetical question?

 

[JesseCuster]

In his test, people are supposed to select one word out of 100 (the one I "circled four times and stared at"), but I think (based on a experience of several years in telepathy testing) it is simply very unlikely that anyone is going to do that accurately and seriously, it is too difficult (it is easier, both technically and psychologically, to select out of 4 than to select out of 100, because more information is provided to you.

It's even easier to select from 1 option. Perhaps you should only offer a single word. You don't need to figure out who's lying or not, you just need to discard any answers that don't agree with the single choice offered.

I think this test would have a 100% success rate and prove your psychic powers beyond a shadow of a doubt. Go for it.

 

[BTMR444]

Hypothetically, what would have to happen in order to change your mind and convince you that you are not telepathic? Have you sufficiently ruled out Schizophrenia as an explanation (given that you show many signs of this), if so how? Do you agree these are important questions to answer before proceeding with any more tests?

 

[Donn]

It's even easier to select from 1 option. Perhaps you should only offer a single word. You don't need to figure out who's lying or not, you just need to discard any answers that don't agree with the single choice offered.

I think this test would have a 100% success rate and prove your psychic powers beyond a shadow of a doubt. Go for it.

This is the best suggestion of all! Assured outcome. Simplicity. How can it fail?