NICOLE SPIESE & the New Challenge Rules

So, is there a point to Ms. Spiese's rambling or is she just venting for its own sake?
 
I am very happy to take on your $1,000,00 challenge. However, I have a new set of rules,

I stopped reading there. I can win the Indy 500 if we race to my rules.
 
I see no challange in her letter.

I also see no new rules either. Just a bunch of ideas without much form.
 
I note there was no elaboration on the new "rules" proposed, and no explanation of how Randi was set up never to give the money away. None of the challenges seem specific enough to test, either. Nice.

Also, I don't remember the part of 1984 where everyone is doped up... have I forgotten some part of it?
 
Until I came to JREF five years ago, I had no idea how difficult it is for some people to understand "Make a claim and demonstrate that you can do it".
 
gnome said:
I note there was no elaboration on the new "rules" proposed, and no explanation of how Randi was set up never to give the money away. None of the challenges seem specific enough to test, either. Nice.

Also, I don't remember the part of 1984 where everyone is doped up... have I forgotten some part of it?
Click to expand...

Well, I was pretty doped up in 1984, but that's a different story altogether.
 
I can't help but wonder: Does anyone of those "applicants" do some research on the history of the challenge, past claims and results?

Probably not, as the apparent lack of understanding the challenge rules suggests.

The mods should invent a device which automatically collects $1 (or the equivalent) from the account of those who use sentences like: "The challenge is a hoax.", "Randy (sic!) doesn't have the million." or who writes diatribes :) of nonsense without making a specific claim. The collected cash of course goes directly to the challenge sum - or gets included to a fund providing pain medicine to the JREF staff, especially KRAMER.

Alternatively, these people receive a slight electric shock through their keyboard.
Simple rule: The charge is directly proportional to the amount of nonsense entered.

Slogan: "The JREF. Get more bzzz for your buck."
 
Lisa Simpson said:
Well. She sure showed us a thing or two, huh?
Click to expand...

When you get put down by Nicole, you stay put.

Whew! She's one smart lady. I particularly like her ideas on the placebo effect. Apparently, it can be explained by science, only we won't admit it. A real eye-opener.
 
Beth said:
You're thinking of "Brave New World" by Huxley. I don't remember people being drugging in "1984" but it's been a long time since I read it.
Click to expand...

Oopsies! Yep, thanks. It's been a while for me, too. :)

And I just read Kramer's response.

:clap:
 
Last edited:
tkingdoll said:
When you get put down by Nicole, you stay put.

Whew! She's one smart lady. I particularly like her ideas on the placebo effect. Apparently, it can be explained by science, only we won't admit it. A real eye-opener.
Click to expand...

She may be smart, but she can't bend spoons.:(
 
It just boggles my mind that somebody who has such a scientific education can believe such things. In fact, she believes in so many things, she felt it necessary to list the two things she doesn't believe in.

Having said that, she sounds like an intelligent person. Hopefully she signs onto the message board to discuss.
 
Ripley Twenty-Nine said:
It just boggles my mind that somebody who has such a scientific education can believe such things. In fact, she believes in so many things, she felt it necessary to list the two things she doesn't believe in.

Having said that, she sounds like an intelligent person. Hopefully she signs onto the message board to discuss.
Click to expand...

After reading her letter, I don't believe for a second that she holds the credentials she claims to hold.
 
I do believe in coincidence. I don't see meaning in coincidences. But some are just too delicious. I googled Nicole Spiese and got one hit. This is as it showed on the page:

Thomas Jefferson University - Farber Institute for Neurosciences
Nicole Spiese, 2004 to 2005 3. Luis Wanja Mathoga 2004 to 2005 4. Gregory Davenport 2003 to 2004 5. Jigneshkumar Patel 2002 to 2003 ...
Click to expand...

Kumar? Patel? I expect a beatle to fly in the window any minute.

I found this from Nicole's letter to Kramer interesting in a psycho sort of way...

I am very happy to take on your $1,000,00 challenge. However, I have a new set of rules, because I believe your contest is mostly a hoax.
Click to expand...

Could this application be a hoax inspired by the increased use of the 3 affidavits for some applications. If I recall correctly, some folks have referred to that as new rules.

Whatever ... this is all too deliciously coincidential and thoroughly enjoyable.


Signed: Jung at Heart
 
Blackwell said:
After reading her letter, I don't believe for a second that she holds the credentials she claims to hold.
Click to expand...

Well, there is apparently a Nicole Spiese who obtained an MS in Neuroscience earlier this year from the Thomas Jefferson University. If anyone really cares, they can write her thesis advisor to confirm the rest of her credentials.

Frankly, I don't think this is a productive line of inquiry, or even line of hypothesizing. Just because someone has an MS doesn't make them God.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom