New telepathy test, the sequel.

Loss Leader said:
This thread has somehow gotten even weirder. When Michel explained how he watches camgirls and kisses his computer screen, did you expect him to be reading Simone de Beauvoir on the side?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I kind of avoided that bit of the thread as much as possible. Too creepy for me.
 
Michel H said:
This is an impressive CV, Hokulele. Interesting also is the fact that the highlighted number you quoted (27) is equal to 27 = 33. Now, the correct answer of this test:

is "real", the third (3rd) one in the list of options.
Click to expand...
No, whe wrote -27 That is, NEGATIVE 27.
She also wrote 25

Both numbers have 2 in it, so therefore she must be subconciously receiving
"2", which is incorrect. So, you lose.
 
The Sparrow said:
No, whe wrote -27 That is, NEGATIVE 27.
Click to expand...

The cube root of which, of course, is -3, which means her choice would have to be "the" (the word three before the first choice in the test). Unless we're including zero, in which case it's "of". I don't think either of those is a hit.

Then again, given Michel's repeated re-interpretation of negatives as positives, I can understand the mistake.

Dave
 
The Sparrow said:
No, whe wrote -27 That is, NEGATIVE 27.
Click to expand...
Which is NEGATIVE 3 cubed.

The Sparrow said:
She also wrote 25
Click to expand...
Nope. She didn't.

I am not in any way endorsing the lunatic idea that everyone hears anyone else's...brain. The fact remains that -3x -3x -3 = -27. To that extent Michel H is correct. The attempt to purloin that into telepathy is at best dishonest.

Michel H is reduced from his claim that all of us hear his thoughts clearly to the claim that somebody somewhere vaguely gets an impression of his thoughts, maybe, perhaps on planet X, to perhaps any numerical answer can be bodged into agreement is, IMHO, a tactical error. It matters not one whit what one might reply. If said reply contains in any way any form of numerical reference, then clearly, Michel H will warp it by any means possible into support for his obvious crankery about the very concept of telepathy.

Do not forget that the claim at hand is that all of us hear his thoughts clear as a bell, yet somehow conspire to lie about it. All 7 billion of us. Somehow, in a vague test of no meaning, we reveal our true intent by answering in any way that contains a number of any sort.

It is no different to Drosnin and his crackpot bible codes. At base, it is outright numerology nonsense.

The Sparrow said:
Both numbers have 2 in it, so therefore she must be subconciously receiving
"2", which is incorrect. So, you lose.
Click to expand...
Ah, this is how Michel bends any response as support for his useless contention. This is also why I am careful to put nothing in my replies anymore that can possibly be misconstrued as support in any way for Michel H's contentions.
 
abaddon said:
Which is NEGATIVE 3 cubed.

Nope. She didn't.

I am not in any way endorsing the lunatic idea that everyone hears anyone else's...brain. The fact remains that -3x -3x -3 = -27. To that extent Michel H is correct. The attempt to purloin that into telepathy is at best dishonest.

Michel H is reduced from his claim that all of us hear his thoughts clearly to the claim that somebody somewhere vaguely gets an impression of his thoughts, maybe, perhaps on planet X, to perhaps any numerical answer can be bodged into agreement is, IMHO, a tactical error. It matters not one whit what one might reply. If said reply contains in any way any form of numerical reference, then clearly, Michel H will warp it by any means possible into support for his obvious crankery about the very concept of telepathy.

Do not forget that the claim at hand is that all of us hear his thoughts clear as a bell, yet somehow conspire to lie about it. All 7 billion of us. Somehow, in a vague test of no meaning, we reveal our true intent by answering in any way that contains a number of any sort.

It is no different to Drosnin and his crackpot bible codes. At base, it is outright numerology nonsense.

Ah, this is how Michel bends any response as support for his useless contention. This is also why I am careful to put nothing in my replies anymore that can possibly be misconstrued as support in any way for Michel H's contentions.
Click to expand...

But look at all the three letter words that your Post contained. You even had three in a row at one point in your post. That makes it obvious (to Michel) that you heard his third word, and are just in denial mode. Responding at all can be confirmation that you heard his thoughts in his mind.

I could post 42 as a response and Michel would not even understand the reference. (ETA Actually I think that I and several others have already done this in past tests)

Norm
 
Last edited:
fromdownunder said:
I could post 42 as a response and Michel would not even understand the reference. (ETA Actually I think that I and several others have already done this in past tests)

Norm
Click to expand...
Yup. And 42 is divisible by 3 and is therefore a hit in Michel H world.

Can I explain that? Nope. Can Michel H explain that? Nope.

Where does that leave us?
 
abaddon said:
Ah, this is how Michel bends any response as support for his useless contention. This is also why I am careful to put nothing in my replies anymore that can possibly be misconstrued as support in any way for Michel H's contentions.
Click to expand...

Having had one of my own posts twisted in this way (which incidentally annoyed the hell out of me), I don't think there is a post that can be written that Michel H can't twist to support whichever answer he wants it to support. When you're not constrained by anything remotely approaching reality, no mental leap is too far.
 
A new telepathy test: which word did I write?

I recently wrote and circled one of the seven words: "gas", "illegal", "bombs", "two", "sides", "same", and "coin" on my paper.

I ask you to write it here (if you think you might know it).

Thank you for participating.
 
Michel H said:
I recently wrote and circled one of the seven words: "gas", "illegal", "bombs", "two", "sides", "same", and "coin" on my paper.

I ask you to write it here (if you think you might know it).

Thank you for participating.
Click to expand...

Instead of this, why don't you try doing one of the better tests that have been suggested to you many times?
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Instead of this, why don't you try doing one of the better tests that have been suggested to you many times?
Click to expand...
Squeegee Beckenheim, I don't want to offend any one, but I really don't think that most of the criticism that was made about my tests on this forum was of great value. Psychological aspects are important here, and it is important to realize that most people who take part in these telepathy tests are not necessarily fully cooperative.
 
Michel H said:
Psychological aspects are important here, and it is important to realize that most people who take part in these telepathy tests are not necessarily fully cooperative.
Click to expand...

We already know from many of your earlier tests that you think that people who give correct answers are "hearing" you, and that people who give incorrect answers are lying (according to you).

Oh, third category - people who give ambiguous answers are either telling the truth or lying, depending on the answer they give based solely on your subjective interpretation of the answer.

So, do you actually have a point?

Norm
 
fromdownunder said:
We already know from many of your earlier tests that you think that people who give correct answers are "hearing" you, and that people who give incorrect answers are lying (according to you).

Oh, third category - people who give ambiguous answers are either telling the truth or lying, depending on the answer they give based solely on your subjective interpretation of the answer.

So, do you actually have a point?

Norm
Click to expand...
fromdownunder, nobody is forced to believe me. When people give an answer which (to me) seems related to the correct choice, I feel I have an obligation to mention this in the conclusion of the test.
Cooperation is there, or cooperation is not there, both in the (possibly ambiguous) answers during the test, and in the reactions from members after I have presented my personal conclusions.
I am now trying to make my tests evolve towards something a little bit more "social", with the hope of maintaining (hopefully) some level of interest, on the various forums.
 
Michel H said:
I really don't think that most of the criticism that was made about my tests on this forum was of great value. .
Click to expand...

Your "experiment" is worthless. A scientist would eliminate all variables.

You have not sought psychiatric consultation to remove mental illness as a variable. Until you do this you are wasting everyone's time.

Additionally you have made a conflicting hypothesis. Sometimes you claim you can make animals do things, other times you say you hear voices in your head telling you to kill people. That's not a testable hypothesis is it?

Either do this scientifically or go waste people's time on the David Icke forum where science is not a concern.
 
Michel H said:
Squeegee Beckenheim, I don't want to offend any one, but I really don't think that most of the criticism that was made about my tests on this forum was of great value.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but you've been at this for years with no satisfying results. Why not give a different methodology a try?

Psychological aspects are important here, and it is important to realize that most people who take part in these telepathy tests are not necessarily fully cooperative.
Click to expand...

Then you should definitely give one of the methods that ensures all participants are necessarily fully cooperative a go, rather than repeating the same flawed test over and over again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom