Is possible that Magician guesses zodiac birth sign ?

[Pixel42]

Dozens, if not hundreds, of scientific studies have already been done to test the claims made by astrologers, Bubba. No more are needed.

http://www.astrology-and-science.com

 

[Cat Not Included]

While its something that a lot of people have a hard time accepting, the longer ago it is the greater the chance that you aren't remembering it very well. Our memories are highly unreliable in many ways.

What do you remember about how this went? Did the person just literally walk up to people, look at your face and say "Hmm, you're a Libra"? Or was there communication, back and forth. How did he verify that he was correct?

 

[Bubba]

...What do you remember about how this went? Did the person just literally walk up to people, look at your face and say "Hmm, you're a Libra"? Or was there communication, back and forth. How did he verify that he was correct?

Verification was a person saying something affirmative like yes that's my sign

I met the guy, a stranger, when he helped assist someone that fainted at a hot summer concert, Boston, c 1976. Nice guy. So I invited him to a dinner party, next day.

He arrived and joined us already at table in my apartment. About a dozen people. He named all or most birth signs, crediting the feat to some kind of astrology. Impressed me, so I never forgot it.

I think I have heard all the explanations like cold reading, checking purses for ID, specific questioning, and other techniques etc.

Instead, this is about how science would devise a study to examine feasibility of his specific claim of naming birth sign by observing facial features.

Science apparently has devised means to satisfactorily examine other astrology claims. Why not this one?

 

[Bubba]

Dozens, if not hundreds, of scientific studies have already been done to test the claims made by astrologers, Bubba. No more are needed.

http://www.astrology-and-science.com

Thanks, I see nothing in there addressing the claim of signs and facial recognition. Which is why applying science seems worth discussing. Kudos for posting a reply on topic. AFAIK so far you're the one acknowledging this is about science and a study. (sorry if I missed others replying on topic)

So I will ask:

First, regarding (before designing) such a study, would studying people or their pics even be useful for examining such a claim? (seems like it would) Could such a study rule in or rule out merit in further study, or not?

I ask because the guy's claim re facial features seems more palpable, vs assertions re personality traits etc because it is about physical features, seemingly testable by examining people or their photographs.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Verification was a person saying something affirmative like yes that's my sign

I met the guy, a stranger, when he helped assist someone that fainted at a hot summer concert, Boston, c 1976. Nice guy. So I invited him to a dinner party, next day.

He arrived and joined us already at table in my apartment. About a dozen people. He named all or most birth signs, crediting the feat to some kind of astrology. Impressed me, so I never forgot it.

I think I have heard all the explanations like cold reading, checking purses for ID, specific questioning, and other techniques etc.

Instead, this is about how science would devise a study to examine feasibility of his specific claim of naming birth sign by observing facial features.

Science apparently has devised means to satisfactorily examine other astrology claims. Why not this one?

He helped someone who fainted, so you invited him to dinner? That's weird.

You really need to get into some Derren Brown, he can be annoying, but this kind of stuff is child's play to him, and to most decent magicians. Penn and Teller may literally blow your mind out of your arse.

Obviously, the act of naming a person's birth-sign based on their facial features is as nonsensical an act as feeling a person's head and claiming to be able to correctly describe that person's character, or reading their palms and being able to predict their future.

The thing is, the crux of the trick is the same, but the act varies... Palm reading, tarot reading, phrenology, astrology...blah blah blah.

I don't get how or why you were fooled by it.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Derren Brown - cold-reading techniques:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13YaVfpjGL4

 

[Bubba]

He helped someone who fainted, so you invited him to dinner? That's weird.

Not at all. I said "Nice guy". We talked afterward, I got to know him enough to invite him to dinner. Nothing out of the ordinary.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Not at all. I said "Nice guy". We talked afterward, I got to know him enough to invite him to dinner. Nothing out of the ordinary.

So why did this particular trick leave you gobsmacked? It's basically the same techniques that we see in the other tricks I mentioned. So why was this one trick more interesting than any other trick that uses the same methods?

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

I mentioned to another poster in another thread that I'd been to a "reading" evening a while ago, for a laugh and a pint, and this was the guy who was doing the show, Joe Power, this was obviously before he was outed by Derren Brown:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qgtEJWiO9A

 

[MRC_Hans]

(A stranger once guessed birth signs of people at dinner party including me.)


Magician guesses zodiac birth sign?

Google that, or go to FB video link below which supposedly shows a guy on street successfully guessing strangers signs.

Dont ask me.

The quote at bottom is from themagiccafe com/forums. It came up searching Magician guesses zodiac birth sign

https://www.facebook.com/uniladmag/videos/2899623346727372/

.



.Dont ask me.

(so of course you will)

.

Basically, no. Astrology is one alt. belief that can be tested retrospectively.
And that has been done, and the result is that there is no correlation between personal traits or life events and birth sign.

Astrology is simply bunk.

Hans

 

[Sideroxylon]

You joke, but I've met people who believe that David Copperfield uses supernatural powers to perform his tricks, and at least one preacher has declared him to be the Antichrist.

I know people who think illusionists use the assistance of jinn.

 

[Hellbound]

I know people who think illusionists use the assistance of jinn.

I know several nightclubs with acts that use the assistance of gin. And whiskey, vodka, and so on...

 

[Pixel42]

First, regarding (before designing) such a study, would studying people or their pics even be useful for examining such a claim? (seems like it would) Could such a study rule in or rule out merit in further study, or not?

Sure, JREF tested dozens of such claims. A simple blind test, with success criteria set at a hit rate significantly better than chance, is all that's required.

So have say 60 photographs of people of various ages, ethnicities etc, none of whom is known to the claimant, each identified only by a unique number. An invigilator has the list showing which sign the person in each numbered photo is in a sealed envelope. The claimant looks at each photograph and sorts them into 12 piles, one pile for each sign. The envelope is then unsealed and the number of photos the claimant has put in the correct pile is noted. There's a 1 in 12 chance of guessing each person's sign correctly, so the expected chance hit rate is 5. If the claimant manages to identify at least 20, say, of the signs correctly they would be deemed to have passed the test. Repeat the feat, and the claimant would have won the million.

 

[Bubba]

I mentioned to another poster in another thread that I'd been to a "reading" evening a while ago, for a laugh and a pint, and this was the guy who was doing the show, Joe Power, this was obviously before he was outed by Derren Brown:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qgtEJWiO9A

So 'Joe' in the video knew something about the person he was 'reading' but he had lied, saying he didnt have any foreknowledge.

In the case at hand I can confirm the guy was a stranger to me and my dinner guests.

It does not matter who or how anyone may have claimed to name birthsigns according to facial features. Fraud ? OK. No matter because my interest is not about exposing fraud.

This is about.....See post #65

See post 93 for example of staying on topic.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

So 'Joe' in the video knew something about the person he was 'reading' but he had lied, saying he didnt have any foreknowledge.

In the case at hand I can confirm the guy was a stranger to me and my dinner guests.

It does not matter who or how anyone may have claimed to name birthsigns according to facial features. Fraud ? OK. No matter because my interest is not about exposing fraud.

This is about.....See post #65

See post 93 for example of staying on topic.

Did you watch the video? He knew nothing about any of the people, and likewise, Derren knew nothing about any of the people in that first video I sent you, did you watch that?

Again, this comes to a simple technique which you seem to find exceptional. Your friend was doing nothing that hasn't been done before by other people pulling the wool over the eyes of people who want to be fooled.

Basically, as Brown says, the techniques for cold reading have been displayed many times, yet there are people who claim to be able to "read" people for real. It's up to you to decide whether they're legit or not, but when you've seen this common technique being used by magicians, are you honestly still going to believe that there really are psychics in the world?

Why would you ever possibly think such a thing?

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

It does not matter who or how anyone may have claimed to name birthsigns according to facial features. Fraud ? OK. No matter because my interest is not about exposing fraud.

This is about.....See post #65

See post 93 for example of staying on topic.

I'm very much on-topic, Bubba. This is just a really odd thread where you've asked whether a person could "guess" at your birth-sign by looking at your facial features, now ignoring how utterly silly such a thread and question is, how are you so taken in by this to the point where you had to ask other people whether it could be done or not?

It can obviously be done, and obviously was done, unless you truly think this man was magical in the most realistic sense of the word.

 

[Bubba]

I'm very much on-topic, Bubba. This is just a really odd thread where you've asked whether a person could "guess" at your birth-sign by looking at your facial features,

That was the former thread.
The latter thread was different and was merged with the former one.

by Darat
Thread merged with original thread about this topic. Bubba do not create new threads when you have already started a recent and active thread about the same topic.

I am now addressing the topic of the latter thread, not the former thread.
Post #65 is the OP explaining topic of the latter thread.

Did you watch the video? He knew nothing about any of the people, and likewise, Derren knew nothing about any of the people in that first video I sent you, did you watch that?

In the video in post #89 Derren said he discovered that the 'psychic's sister lived next door to the subject woman, therefore making the psychic dishonest about (not) having prior info. I stopped watching then. That is what I meant by the psychic having 'foreknowledge'.

I'm interested less in what you are on about, and more interested in the current topic.

In my next post I will further clarify the topic I am now addressing.

 

[Bubba]

Sure, JREF tested dozens of such claims. A simple blind test, with success criteria set at a hit rate significantly better than chance, is all that's required.

So have say 60 photographs of people of various ages, ethnicities etc, none of whom is known to the claimant, each identified only by a unique number. An invigilator has the list showing which sign the person in each numbered photo is in a sealed envelope. The claimant looks at each photograph and sorts them into 12 piles, one pile for each sign. The envelope is then unsealed and the number of photos the claimant has put in the correct pile is noted. There's a 1 in 12 chance of guessing each person's sign correctly, so the expected chance hit rate is 5. If the claimant manages to identify at least 20, say, of the signs correctly they would be deemed to have passed the test. Repeat the feat, and the claimant would have won the million.

Thanks. Its not about guessing. Its not even about someone claiming to read.

Its about how science would determine whether or not correlations exist.

Say a panel of people qualified in observing detail. Maybe they are doctors or engineers. Or machinists or cosmetologists. They will observe. Maybe they note sizes, angles, or ratios seen in the facial images. Whatever. Science knows what to do. The observers are not guessing or "reading". They are merely cataloguing a preferably predetermined set of observable features. Maybe the pics are then categorized by features into groups. Then the birthdates can be applied to determine whether or not there are correlations.

Sorry if it wasnt explained as well earlier.

Is that anything like how science would be applied if asked to determine whether or not there are correlations ?

Forget "birth signs" for now. Instead, use "birth dates" as they can be converted to birth signs later.

Set aside astrology for now.....say it is about like applying science to the question of whether correlations exist in your birthdate and your favorite color at age 17....whatever....

To avoid pre-conception bias, the instructions for observers would not mention birth dates, astrology, or birth signs. Observers would be tasked only with identifying certain features in the face pics. The pics would then be grouped in sets. Afterwards, the birthdates would be applied.

Do you know of a study that has already looked into this question of correlations in birth dates and facial features?

A simple blind test, with success criteria set at a hit rate significantly better than chance, is all that's required.

 

[abaddon]

Thanks. Its not about guessing. Its not even about someone claiming to read.

Its about how science would determine whether or not correlations exist.

Say a panel of people qualified in observing detail. Maybe they are doctors or engineers. Or machinists or cosmetologists. They will observe. Maybe they note sizes, angles, or ratios seen in the facial images. Whatever. Science knows what to do. The observers are not guessing or "reading". They are merely cataloguing a preferably predetermined set of observable features. Maybe the pics are then categorized by features into groups. Then the birthdates can be applied to determine whether or not there are correlations.

Sorry if it wasnt explained as well earlier.

Is that anything like how science would be applied if asked to determine whether or not there are correlations ?

Forget "birth signs" for now. Instead, use "birth dates" as they can be converted to birth signs later.

Set aside astrology for now.....say it is about like applying science to the question of whether correlations exist in your birthdate and your favorite color at age 17....whatever....

To avoid pre-conception bias, the instructions for observers would not mention birth dates, astrology, or birth signs. Observers would be tasked only with identifying certain features in the face pics. The pics would then be grouped in sets. Afterwards, the birthdates would be applied.

Do you know of a study that has already looked into this question of correlations in birth dates and facial features?

Sure. Why are you not aware of those studies? Could it be that all of them have found astrology to be utter bollocks?

 

[Bubba]

Got a link for such a study ? Specifically on the facial features as he claimed.

Sound science is what I meant in my description.

How would it be done, and more professionally so than what I sketched above.