• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Application Proposal - Mental Telepathy

Thanks for that, jmontecillo01.

The FAQs also address the possibility that the applicant might suffer from some form of mental illness--genuine delusion. I think it's something that can be addressed somewhat more gently in the forum.

Drago, assuming you're not a cheat or a con-artist, it's a real good idea to do some rigorous self-testing first, speak with your doctor about this, get some disinterested 3rd party to observe what you and your friend can do, and so on.

Seriously, don't just gloss over the advice given in the application. Don't assume that that's only for other applicants. Try to be open to the possibility that you may be mistaken about something. You might save yourself lots of hassles in the long run.

Best wishes! I for one would love to see someone actually demonstrate what you claim.
 
Gulliver said:
The answer is simple words. If the two of you can send and receive any 10 reasonably randomly selected words accurately, you'll win my respect. Please understand that JREF will provide the words and only under seal to the transmitter once the controlled test begins. The word list cannot be part of the written protocol. Below you’ll find how I’d phrase the word selection (in Test One).

That answered, it's time though to face the test more realistically. Let's set up two tests to convince some of us here in the forum that you indeed have abilities that JREF should test. Let's agree to
-Simple controls.
-Clear results.
-Very limited expenses.

Here's the concept. I'll produce a numbered list of 10 simple words. These words will be in common usage. I will cull the words carefully to prevent confusion. Words that have one or more homonyms (for example, “eye” and "I") will not be used. Words whose pronunciations vary such as "aluminum" will not be used.

In Test One, I’ll call both of you at a pre-arranged time on separate lines. I’ll ask each of you permission to record the calls. I’ll then ask both of you a couple of questions, including verifying that you believe that your special communications are currently working. I’ll the receiving person’s line on hold and read the list one word at a time, one every 10 seconds. I’ll ask the transmitting person to read back the list. If correct, then the test will proceed. If incorrect, the test restarts with a new list. (I’ll have ten lists at hand at the start of the call.) Next, I will place the transmitter’s line on mute and pick up the receiver’s line from hold. I will tell the receiver that I’m ready to hear the list. If I hear the same ten words in the correct order within two minutes, Test One will be considered successful.

The purpose of Test One is to convince the two of you that you should continue to Test Two.

In test two, we’ll introduce some controls to convince others. At least one of you will have to travel to a secure location. I’ll do my best to keep the expense and inconvenience to a minimum. I anticipate a travel distance of less than 20 kilometers. Otherwise, Test Two will use the same protocol.

Let’s agree that any of the following conditions constitute a failure: failure to answer the call, unexplained disconnections, failure to respond, and unintelligible responses.

I also will post the recorded audio here.

I invite your (and indeed every forum member’s) critique.

I look forward to your participation.

Encouragingly,
Gulliver
Click to expand...

Problem - Instant Messenger.

You need this to be personally witnessed at both sides.
 
Another problem--cell phones. If you're calling from a different hemisphere, you have no way of knowing that the two involved in the test are or are not in the same room, though you're calling them on separate lines. A test of this kind with no controls at all is too inherently weak even to justify further testing, in my opinion.
 
I'm waiting the time when discussion and debunking is what telepathy is or not is....(but mostly very annoying and stressfull)

not as nowadays...."it must be proved first"
 
Last edited:
Needed Controls for Gulliver Test One

Spektator said:
Another problem--cell phones. If you're calling from a different hemisphere, you have no way of knowing that the two involved in the test are or are not in the same room, though you're calling them on separate lines. A test of this kind with no controls at all is too inherently weak even to justify further testing, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I, of course, agree with your concern (and that of chillzero's too). I thank you for the posts. I believe though that the purpose of Test One can still be accomplished regardless of these concerns.

I'd like to emphasize that Test One is to convince the potential applicant, not outsiders, of the pair's powers. The goal here is to educate the applicant. This test would be very useful to an applicant who is moderately self-deluded or moderately mentally ill. Test One does nothing for the extreme cases or for the cases involving deceipt or fraud.

I agree that before anyone beyond the applicants would be interested in the results that proper controls would be needed to observe at least one of the pair to reduce the concern that deceipt or fraud is involved. That's the reason behind the additional controls to which I alluded in describing Test Two.

I suggest that an entire team, such as Gr8wight's referenced test protocol involved, would be required in the formal preliminary test.

My philosophy is action over words. Push the applicants to small, quick tests, often with small monetary incentives, to educate them about testing and their powers. I offer that a more active and more involved effort does a better job of educating than words alone. Of course, a successful applicant would garner additional benefits, including experience and some limited validation.

Gratefully,
Gulliver
 
Dargo said:
We talk continually via thought. A protocol for a preliminary test is very easy to come up with. The question is, do I make the choice of how we find the words we'll be transmitting difficult or easy. It seems from previous post, making it difficult makes the testing worthwhile.
Click to expand...

No test for the paranormal can ever be difficult. They are either extremely easy or impossible. If you have the power you claim, then you will pass without even trying. If you do not, you will fail.
 
Always Easy or Impossible?

Cuddles said:
No test for the paranormal can ever be difficult. They are either extremely easy or impossible. If you have the power you claim, then you will pass without even trying. If you do not, you will fail.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I have to doubt the statements in your post, as a good skeptic of course. Could the power be difficult to control, akin to playing a difficult etude on the piano? Could the background noise be often overwhelming as to hamper accurate reception of the signal? Given that we don't know the nature of any heretofore paranormal power, I suggest that we can't accept your broad generalization, at least not yet.

Skeptically,
Gulliver
 
Gulliver said:
Sorry, but I have to doubt the statements in your post, as a good skeptic of course. Could the power be difficult to control, akin to playing a difficult etude on the piano? Could the background noise be often overwhelming as to hamper accurate reception of the signal? Given that we don't know the nature of any heretofore paranormal power, I suggest that we can't accept your broad generalization, at least not yet.

Skeptically,
Gulliver
Click to expand...

OK, none of the claims I have ever seen have been difficult to test, and this one is no different. If someone claims to talk telepathically with 100% accuracy over 50km, then they should be able to do so in a test. If noise, control and so on have never been a problem before, then they should not be a problem in a test. I have never seen a claim that said there were these problems in advance, they always crop up as excuses after faliure. It may be an unfair generalisation, but I'll stick with my statement until I see evidence to the contrary.
 
Evidence to the Contrary

Cuddles said:
OK, none of the claims I have ever seen have been difficult to test, and this one is no different. If someone claims to talk telepathically with 100% accuracy over 50km, then they should be able to do so in a test. If noise, control and so on have never been a problem before, then they should not be a problem in a test. I have never seen a claim that said there were these problems in advance, they always crop up as excuses after faliure. It may be an unfair generalisation, but I'll stick with my statement until I see evidence to the contrary.
Click to expand...

I believe that your position is not acceptable. You made the generalization without proof. As a skeptic, I reject such unsupported claims out of hand and without further comment. However, our of respect for your previous useful postings I went a little further.

Without much effort I found: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=752737#post752737.

Clearly even before applying, the applicant claimed great effort was required in using her powers effectively. Quoting: It turns out telekinesis - for even a minuscule effect - is quite exhausting and that participants will need time to recover from each test and prepare for the next.

I trust that this is a sufficient counter-example for you.

Respectfully,
Gulliver
 
Dargo said:
Yes I have. Had a doctor witness the telepathy and he's signed on the dotted line with the words, "Telepathy seems to be very real with this couple".
Click to expand...

Dargo,

I work with people who have major mental illnesses and disabilities. I read several psychological evaluation reports every week. The quote above is quite like things I have read and encountered several times over the years. It would not be uncommon to read a sentence like that within psych evals. Does the sentence you have quoted reside within a psychological evaluation written by a psychiatrist or clinical psychologist?

Just because the phenomenon seems real to you (the couple) does not necessarily mean it would seem real to the rest of us or even to the reporting doctor. Is this the case? In what type of document does the above quote appear in? What kind of doctor wrote this? Is it a medical doctor? Doctor of Philosophy? Please elaborate.
 
Last edited:
Gulliver said:
I believe that your position is not acceptable. You made the generalization without proof. As a skeptic, I reject such unsupported claims out of hand and without further comment. However, our of respect for your previous useful postings I went a little further.

Without much effort I found: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=752737#post752737.

Clearly even before applying, the applicant claimed great effort was required in using her powers effectively. Quoting: It turns out telekinesis - for even a minuscule effect - is quite exhausting and that participants will need time to recover from each test and prepare for the next.

I trust that this is a sufficient counter-example for you.

Respectfully,
Gulliver
Click to expand...

Of course it's not, it has nothing to do with my point. The applicant never claimed that the flame would sometimes not move, they just claimed it was an effort to move it. Just becaues it tires them out and they need resting does not mean they cannot produce a measureable effect every time they try. If the applicant really could move the flame telekinetically, it would have been demonstrated in an easy test, if they couldn't it would be impossible (or at least close enough) for them to pass.

Possibly you misunderstood. I did not say that psychic powers are nessercarily easy to use, I said they are easy to test. No matter how difficult it is to communicate telepathically, if you claim to do it then it doesn't matter what words are chosen to send, difficult or otherwise, either you can send them or not.
 
It has been two days since Dargo has posted. He now only lurks here. He has made no serious effort ever in answering our questions. What I wrote in post 51 is still true.

Can we show Dargo pictures of the sort of animals that will not attack him?
 
rjh01 said:
How do you know that what you receive from your friend is what he sends? Also this thread is very similar to this one Sent in my application today.
Click to expand...

Nucular said:
Just in case Dargo does return, I wonder if he's aware of this rather similar, but fruitless, discussion from a while ago: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56185

Eery feeling of deja vu.
Click to expand...

Flange Desire said:
I am certain you just said that.
Click to expand...

I quoted that thread before. I think that is where Dargo got the idea from. That is assuming they are not the same person.
 
Different. No that isn't where I got the idea. The idea came from personal experience with telepathy, nothing more.
 
Dargo, would you please stand front-and-centre, and to attention.

We have a nice shiny troll-badge to pin on you!
 
Dargo said:
Different. No that isn't where I got the idea. The idea came from personal experience with telepathy, nothing more.
Click to expand...

Dargo, did you abandon your plans to take the JREF Challenge?

If not, have you considered posting the affidavit from your doctor?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom