Carina Landin in test at this moment

As suspected, Carina Landin's followers in the Swedish "believer" community are exploiting the discussed loophole to the fullest. One poster on the www.soultravel.nu forum sums it up:

"As we said before, if the test is properly designed you will pass. But the test wasn't conducted according to the protocol (the age of the books), so if you are able and allowed to, Carina... Do it again!"

Landin is also getting credit for having performed "way over chance". Go figure...
 
Chateaubriand, has it been acknowledged that the diaries were too old? Or are we still relying on Carina's claim?

She wouldn't be the first person to fail the test and then declare that something she specificially said would be acceptable was not in fact acceptable.
 
ChristineR said:
Chateaubriand, has it been acknowledged that the diaries were too old? Or are we still relying on Carina's claim?
Click to expand...

We're still relying on Landin's claims. However, she has been shown the details of the books and no statement has been issued from the experimenters, or the JREF. As the test is currently under JREF review, I think it is safe to conclude that something about the test proceedings is causing doubt -- but that is just an unqualified guess.
 
ChristineR said:
Strictly speaking this is not correct because certain cases were excluded from the 2^20 possible choices...namely the cases where there were 20 males, the cases where there were 19, 18, 17, 16, 4, 3, 2, 1 or 0 males.

But the fact is that Carina was not flipping coins, not even mentally. If you give a human being 12 diaries and ask her to label them M and F she will almost always show a great deal of non randomness in her choice.
Click to expand...

I didn't know those situations, were excluded. But even if Carina doesn't choose randomly, the fact that the diaries are chosen randomly ensures that all choosing strategies which don't know the correct answers will end up giving random results.
 
Did she miss all of the old diaries? Did she hit all the old diaries? Did she only hit half of them?

WTF was the JREF thinking, violating the protocol like that?! This is the type of thing people will repeat for years if she doesn't retest!
 
Alkatran said:
WTF was the JREF thinking, violating the protocol like that?! This is the type of thing people will repeat for years if she doesn't retest!
Click to expand...

"The JREF" wasn't doing the thinking. That's part of the problem -- the skeptics group in Sweden that ran this test kind of blind-sided the JREF.
 
Zep said:
I suspect he wants to show that he is not a vindictive old fart, like the woos like to paint him as, but a fair-minded investigator. What would be the objection to a retrial if the applicant thought the protocol was not being adhered to?
Click to expand...

I think if she had passed the test, then surely she would not have demanded a retrial because of the age of the diaries.

So by finding this protocol violation (if that is what it is), she is (approximately) doubling her chances of passing.

Nevertheless, if there really is a protocol violation then it seems like JREF doesn't have much of a choice but to offer a retrial. This story just reemphasizes the need for an extremely tight protocol and adhering to it very strictly.
 
I also hope that they are not providing the results until all diaries have been sorted, rather than verifying with each guess. That could mess up the randomness immensely.
 
drkitten said:
"The JREF" wasn't doing the thinking. That's part of the problem -- the skeptics group in Sweden that ran this test kind of blind-sided the JREF.
Click to expand...

Except Randi had to sign off on the protocol in order for this to be an official test. I suspect the fact that the Swedish group had kept Carina waiting for two years to be tested caused the test to be pushed ahead faster than might have been prudent.
 
Jeff Wagg said:
OK, the challenge results are officially "UNDER REVIEW."

We're awaiting data on the books. If they were in fact too old, the results of this challenge will be null and void, and the challenge will need to be re-run with a completely different set of diaries.

I'll keep you updated.
Click to expand...

I suppose if she takes enough tests, she's bound to get 16 or more right eventually . . . ;-)

edit: oops sorry for the redundancy, I didn't see f97tosc's post.
 
Last edited:
Protocols

The scanned test protocols and a preliminary report in Swedish can be found on
VoF's homepage now, but I'm not allowed to submit urls here.
The address is: www dot vof dot se slash landin slash index dot html.
 
Last edited:
Surely if the diaries were too old to properly "sense" the sex of the original diarist, she would have known that upon her attempt, if she is really doing what she says she is doing? She would have come up with no answer at all, rather than a wrong one?

Of course, this does not change the fact that there should be a retest if the protocol was in fact not followed. However, I would be interested to know if she objected to any of the diaries during the test itself.
 
Zep said:
I suspect he wants to show that he is not a vindictive old fart, like the woos like to paint him as, but a fair-minded investigator. What would be the objection to a retrial if the applicant thought the protocol was not being adhered to?
Click to expand...

I think because the rules say so. If the age of the diaries was specified in the protocol, and the protocol wasn't followed, you re-test (as long as it's still possible).

That's why it's set up this way--Randi's personality (either way, vindictive or fair-minded) has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
 
Back to the issue of why 16 is a "magic number":

Remember, she's the one making an extraordinary claim. IMHO it would be entirely appropriate to insist on 100% accuracy. (Many of these claimants start out by saying just that, by the way.) This was just a preliminary test to see if more rigorous testing is even warranted.

15 of 20 (if the protocol were followed) means no further testing is called for.

It means her claim of being able to detect the sex of a diarist in a supernatural manner is not proven.
 
My swedish is not the best but this is my attempt at translating a key paragraph or two from the report. Maybe Triper can check..

“Landin gave as an explanation for her lack of success that some of the diaries were too old (the earliest was from 1794 and the next eldest from 1855).

In discussions after the test Landin said that only diaries younger than 100 years should be in the test. This is a rule that I had not heard about before the test. Landin had approved the test protocol that I sent to Randi and that he approved. There it is explicit that diaries older than 100 years can be included.”

From the protocol (which is translated into english already):

“A few days before the test the archives and SOH select 15 diaries written by men and 15 written by women. As far as possible, diaries without handwriting on the outside are chosen. (If this cannot be avoided, the handwriting will be covered by SOH with some method approved by A.) Furthermore (in accordance with Landin’s wish) diaries older than the late 19th century are avoided as far as possible.”

Final words from the report:

“It is to be expected that Landin and I give different interpretations of the test results. I interpret it as simply unsucessful and that we have not found sufficient grounds to proceed with further testing. At the same time I can understand she is concerned about the method by which she was tested, and naturally seeks factors in the test setup that can explain the result.

It should not burden her that she did not go further to the next stage of Randi’s challenge... It is a positive that she took part in the test and that she constructively worked together to develop a test that is clearly decisive.”

Did I miss something? It reads as though the protocol wasn't tight enough to eliminate her excusing the test failure based on the diary age. Although she did agree to the protocol, so she should have no complaint.
 
Pipirr said:
Did I miss something? It reads as though the protocol wasn't tight enough to eliminate her excusing the test failure based on the diary age. Although she did agree to the protocol, so she should have no complaint.
Click to expand...

I think you got the vital paragraphs. And you point out where the design is flawed. If I understand the JREF intentions correctly, a test protocol should be tight enough to eliminate excuses of this kind. It is, of course, impossible to avoid many of the common excuses used by claimants in, or after, these or other tests of alleged paranormal abilities. But in this case, the excuse is derived from the protocol as such and, further more, it is a flaw recognized not only by the claimant and her followers, but also some of her supposed critics.

The issue, as I see it, is not whether complying with Landin's request would have altered the result -- let's face it, she is simply not able to do what she claims. The issue is that the test should be flawless and provide no opportunity for a claimant to blame poor results on test procedure. And regardless what happens in this case, it should set an example for future test designs supervised by the JREF. The Challenge is a too important symbol to be blemished by this kind of sloppiness.
 
Last edited:
Jon. said:
Surely if the diaries were too old to properly "sense" the sex of the original diarist, she would have known that upon her attempt, if she is really doing what she says she is doing? She would have come up with no answer at all, rather than a wrong one?

Of course, this does not change the fact that there should be a retest if the protocol was in fact not followed. However, I would be interested to know if she objected to any of the diaries during the test itself.
Click to expand...

Finally! This is the real point, not all the legalistic nitpicking. Let her pick those that she can "sense" and ask for 100% accuracy!
 
Pipirr said:
My swedish is not the best but this is my attempt at translating a key paragraph or two from the report. Maybe Triper can check..
Click to expand...
I think you did a good job!
I small remark
“[...] some of the diaries were too old (the earliest was from 1794 and the next eldest from 1855).
Click to expand...
"rätt" is better translated to "rather". "[...]some of the diaries were rather old [...]"

Edit : I see now that Chateubriand already has approved the translation.
 
I would like to add something that was omitted in the translation above:

"Before we parted, Landin gave as an explanation for her lack of success that some of the diaries were too old (the earliest was from 1794 and the next eldest from 1855)"

It may otherwise be understood as if Landin has launched her excuse in the discussions after the test, when she in fact brought it up before leaving the archives of the Nordic Museum.

(Edit: corrected where the test took place.)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom