Carina Landin in test at this moment

CFLarsen said:
"If possible" is an invitation for excuses. I still think she doesn't have a case, though. She saw it, and ran with it.
Click to expand...

I fully agree. But my point is that a JREF test protocol should not invite such excuses, and I think that James Randi stresses this point over and over again whenever he can.
 
Last edited:
I also get 1 in 169.234, assuming "by chance" means coin-flipping.

2^20 ways to label the diaries "right" or "wrong" = 1048576

20!/(20! * 0!) ways to get 20 right = 1
20!/(19! * 1!) ways to get 19 right = 20
20!/(18! * 2!) ways to get 18 right = 190
20!/(17! * 3!) ways to get 17 right = 1140
20!/(16! * 4!) ways to get 20 right = 4845

1048576 / (1+20+190+1140+4845) = 169.2

If Carina takes into account the fact that there are at least 5 male and at least 5 female diaries her odds are even better.
 
Chateaubriand said:
I fully agree. But my point is that a JREF test protocol should not invite such excuses, and I think that James Randi stresses this point over and over again whenever he can.
Click to expand...

There's always room for improvement, that's true.
 
Chateaubriand said:
I fully agree. But my point is that a JREF test protocol should not invite such excuses, and I think that James Randi stresses this point over and over again whenever he can.
Click to expand...
But now we are aware of the fact! Just for the future :?
 
ChristineR said:
I also get 1 in 169.234, assuming "by chance" means coin-flipping.

2^20 ways to label the diaries "right" or "wrong" = 1048576

20!/(20! * 0!) ways to get 20 right = 1
20!/(19! * 1!) ways to get 19 right = 20
20!/(18! * 2!) ways to get 18 right = 190
20!/(17! * 3!) ways to get 17 right = 1140
20!/(16! * 4!) ways to get 20 right = 4845

1048576 / (1+20+190+1140+4845) = 169.2
Click to expand...


You've got it upside down. It should be (1+20+190+1140+4845) / 1048576 = .0059

Or you can do it like I did in Excel: =1-BINOMDIST(15, 20, 0.5, 1) will give the probability of getting 16 or more correct which also gives .0059

ETA: I did make a computational error in my earlier post. I had the .0059 as the probability of getting 15 or more correct. It's not, it's 16 or more correct and 0.0013 is the probability of getting 17 or more correct [Excel formula 1-BINOMDIST(16, 20, 0.5, 1)]. Since JREF tests typically ask for p-values of .001, I suspect the person who arrived at 16 as the necessary number to succeed may have made the same computation error I did in my earlier post.
If Carina takes into account the fact that there are at least 5 male and at least 5 female diaries her odds are even better.
Click to expand...

True.
 
Last edited:
Landin has made a comment on her website. This is en excerpt:

"After the test:

The test leader (SOH) came in and opened every envelope, marked the protocol and produced the correct answers. When it was done, my answers were compared to the correct ones and the result was 12 out of 20.

I requested to look at the eight books I missed. Unfortunately, I didn't check them that carefully and didn't personally take note of the years when they were written, who wrote them or their content.

In my view, a diary is a book in which someone has made daily notes regarding that someone's life. From a quick read-through of the eight books I missed, I remember that

1 book was a collection of recipes
1 book was a documentation regarding the mating of animals

I don't call that diaries! Afterwards, I have been given access to the archive registration numbers of the used diaries, which gives me an opportunity to check both the content and age if I want, but at the moment, I don't have the opportunity to go through them. Just before I write this, I have learned that I'm going to get the age of all the books.

I have on several occasions, verbally and by e-mail, notified SOH (I have kept the correspondence) that I don't want diaries that are older than 100 years. In spite of me explicitly expressing this, I authorized the protocol with the following text:
"Furthermore (in accordance with Landin’s wish) diaries older than the late 19th century are avoided as far as possible."
In retrospect, I shouldn't have authorized the protocol with that fuzzy writing, but since I am unsuspecting by nature, I thought that the late 19th century is only some yeras older than 100 years. A book written in 1906 is 100 years. A book written in 1896 is 110 years. The reason why I didn't want older book is that the traces disappears. An older book, that may have been handled by many, can, in my view, loose its origin.

A checking of the years of the eight books I missed showed that 5 of them were written in the following years:

1794, 1855, 1857, 1879, and 1888

In a conversation with SOH a couple of weeks ago, I asked via e-mail if SOH had found diaries from the 20th century. SOH replied:

"Yes, but some (singular in Swedish, C:s note) is from the end of the 19th century."

Question: 12th October 2005 -- Carina (Landin, C:s note) wrote

"I would appreciate if the diaries were primarily from the 20th century."

Reply from SOH 16th October 2005:

"I have spoken to the archive official. They don't want really old diaries to be unnecessary handled. A first guess is that it's easiest to get hold of books from the 19th and 20th century. I'll get back to you when I know more."

/... /

(Some paragraphs accounting for the communication between Landin, Randi and the experimenters. I have omitted them pending the result of the JREF review.)

/... /

All this is new to me and most of all strange and something that I never pursued or believed in my wildest imagination would happen, in spite of being warned by my mentor. (Sorry, this is a bit messy even in Swedish -- C)"

I would appreciate any proof reading by Swedish forum members.
 
Thanks for the info. if possible, I'd aslo like to know the ages of all the diaries, both those missed and those correct.
 
Again, the protocol should be a yes/no sort of thing. It doesn't matter whether the ones she missed were among the older diaries. Nor does it matter that she didn't complain during the test (whether or not she knew they were too old).

What matters is that the older diaries should not have been used if it was possible to run the test with newer ones. So the only question is, was it possible? If so, the protocol was not followed, the test should be re-run (if it's possible to find a new set of acceptable diaries to use).

If these were the only ones that would otherwise work (similar outsides, no scent, no handwriting evident, etc.), then the protocol was in fact followed and she failed the test.

I think her complaint is not a post-hoc explanation of her failure, because the issue is in the protocol. The only question that needs to be answered is, "Was the protocol followed?" If the answer is no, the next question is, is a re-test even possible?

I am still amazed that you were able to find a supply of diaries that fit the other requirements.
 
Thanks to all you guys who keep us posted with translations. Nice work.




Chateaubriand, your nick always gives me a craving for a big steak - even when I just ate. I wonder why that is. Could you change your avatar to some kind of potato product? Alternatively: Red wine or herb butter? Teek, are you reading this?
 
Chateaubriand said:
In a conversation with SOH a couple of weeks ago, I asked via e-mail if SOH had found diaries from the 20th century. SOH replied:
Click to expand...

In fact she asked if he had diaries from the 1900's (1900-talet). Had she confused the 19th century with the years beginning 19xx?

Just a question about the subtleties of the swedish language...
 
GzuzKryzt said:
Chateaubriand, your nick always gives me a craving for a big steak - even when I just ate. I wonder why that is. Could you change your avatar to some kind of potato product? Alternatively: Red wine or herb butter? Teek, are you reading this?
Click to expand...

Na, it should prompt you to endulge in French Romanticism! ;o) But the avatar has nothing to do with my nickname here. I use it with another nick on a Swedish forum and kind of like the grin... It's "me"... ;o)
 
Pipirr said:
In fact she asked if he had diaries from the 1900's (1900-talet). Had she confused the 19th century with the years beginning 19xx?

Just a question about the subtleties of the swedish language...
Click to expand...

I would be amazed if Landin and SOH corresponded in English... I don't see how the Swedish equivalents are confusing, since we don't use the anglo-american 19th, 20th, etc. system...
 
Chateaubriand said:
I would be amazed if Landin and SOH corresponded in English... I don't see how the Swedish equivalents are confusing, since we don't use the anglo-american 19th, 20th, etc. system...
Click to expand...

I am not sure they speak the same "language". Remember they are very different people, one male, one female, one with a lot of education and one with very little. And add to that very different belief systems. ;)
 
case sensitive said:
I am not sure they speak the same "language". Remember they are very different people, one male, one female, one with a lot of education and one with very little. And add to that very different belief systems. ;)
Click to expand...

I'm not sure either -- but I am sure that they share the same understanding of the concept, definition and meaning of "century" and "100 years old".
 
Mojo said:
Was she told of the age of the diaries before or after the test? If before, did she raise the objection before the test, or only afterwards?
Click to expand...


My question as well. Did she realise somehow during the test that "this diary doesn't feel right", or looking for excuses after?

And another thing. She can either do it or she can't. 20 out of 20 sounds fine to me otherwise whenever she advises her "clients", she should be made to tell them up front that she is only x'ty percent right at any given time and that may or may not be your dead auntie we are talking to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom