• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Autistic genius novelist woos the literary world with novel composed using "Facilitated Communication"

And you got this from wiki, which clearly defines it as someone having their arm or hand pushed.

Please explain how someone simply deciding what their son is pointing at (even when it clear that is not what he is pointing at) functionally differs from someone moving their son's arm to point at something.

There are many varieties of facilitated communication. The fact that the author of the wiki article chose to concentrate on one particular variety does not prevent you from exercising your brain sufficiently to see that what Woody's mother is doing is functionally indistinguishable. So what is preventing you from doing that?

Yet you blindly believe this is what Woody's mother forces him to do which is NOT what you see in the 10 -sec clip.

What we see in the clip is Woody's mother appearing to pay no attention to what her son is actually doing whilst confidently describing what he means. Which is a far more blatantly bogus type of facilitated communication than the one described in the wiki article. I mean, she isn't even pretending that what she is doing could be a valid method of interpreting her son.
 
And you got this from wiki, which clearly defines it as someone having their arm or hand pushed. Yet you blindly believe this is what Woody's mother forces him to do which is NOT what you see in the 10 -sec clip. It is telling that people prefer to believe the worst in people without even investigating further.
Again this simply not true.
I am done with this thread. Keep fooling yourself that sticking to a dogma written by someone else (whose terms of reference in that particular case was someone who had cerebral palsy - something else all together - and one who really couldn't move). That is not being 'sceptical'. I won't be so unkind as to say that it is blind prejudice, but likely more a case of not understanding disability issues and how reasonable adjustment works.
:rolleyes:
You are flouncing because you cannot deal with the issues put to you.
Pathetic.
 
Last edited:
Rather like the 'Angry puzzled youtuber' after seeing the 10-sec clip?

View attachment 70297


She is so outraged, she might need to check her blood pressure!

You ought to be outraged as well; since you seem to believe that Woody is capable of communicating, you should be utterly outraged that his mother hasn't made it possible to do so with anyone but her.
 
Please explain how someone simply deciding what their son is pointing at (even when it clear that is not what he is pointing at) functionally differs from someone moving their son's arm to point at something.

There are many varieties of facilitated communication. The fact that the author of the wiki article chose to concentrate on one particular variety does not prevent you from exercising your brain sufficiently to see that what Woody's mother is doing is functionally indistinguishable. So what is preventing you from doing that?



What we see in the clip is Woody's mother appearing to pay no attention to what her son is actually doing whilst confidently describing what he means. Which is a far more blatantly bogus type of facilitated communication than the one described in the wiki article. I mean, she isn't even pretending that what she is doing could be a valid method of interpreting her son.
Just to answer your question: when ppl go on a chat show - in this case, a one- or two- minute slot to promote a book (not anything else) - you are told the questions in advance (when I was in the audience for QUESTION TIME, the guy picked to ask a question knew in advance he was going to be asked and had his question ready (we all met up pre-show). Woody's mother has previously said elsewhere it takes ONE HOUR to transcribe just one paragraph with Woody. In addition, anodyne platitudinous questions about how pleased are you to bring out a book, hardly needs a mastermind to throw an obvious response right backatcha. Sheesh. How do you know the producer highlighting the keys wasn't just trolling in a similar cruel vein as Woody's outraged YouTubers who know nothing about disability or neurodivergence.
 
The evidence clearly demonstrates you lied.

Just to answer your question: when ppl go on a chat show - in this case, a one- or two- minute slot to promote a book (not anything else) - you are told the questions in advance (when I was in the audience for QUESTION TIME, the guy picked to ask a question knew in advance he was going to be asked and had his question ready (we all met up pre-show). Woody's mother has previously said elsewhere it takes ONE HOUR to transcribe just one paragraph with Woody. In addition, anodyne platitudinous questions about how pleased are you to bring out a book, hardly needs a mastermind to throw an obvious response right backatcha. Sheesh. How do you know the producer highlighting the keys wasn't just trolling in a similar cruel vein as Woody's outraged YouTubers who know nothing about disability or neurodivergence.

As I said, I am willing to wait until I have ALL the information.

Further evidence that you lied.
 
And you got this from wiki
I did not. I haven't even glanced at the wiki.

I got this from 15-20 years of skeptically examining pseudosciece, fraud, and scams. You appear to be under the impression that Woody's case is the only case of Facilitated Communication that has ever been critically examined - it isn't. The procedure is over 40 years old, and it has been critically and scientifically examined many, many times in a variety of use cases and situations over those decades. It is well-established that FC is not by any means actually doing what is claimed. In every case that has been tested, it has failed to establish that the information is coming from anybody but the facilitator.

Several test methods have already been mentioned in the thread - the primary one is giving information to the subject but not their facilitator. In no case has the facilitator been able to use their method to allow the subject to communicate the information to the observer. In every case that has been tested - and there have been many - the facilitator has been shown to be the one originating the information.

You are ignorant of this history, and that's okay. What's not okay is persisting in ignorance in defiance of facts. All of this information is easily Googleable, if you have the curiosity and intellectual honesty to search for the truth.

Do you?
I am done with this thread.
I guess not.
 
hmmmm....
Not only are you not done" with this thread, you have posted probably around 50% of the entirety of it and now claim you are waiting to have ALL the information. What were you doing before?
Well let's recall that Vixen has access to information none of us have, such as his medical diagnosis, I mean surely Vixen would not make up medical diagnosis for him based on incomplete information...
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom