Supernatural can never be "proved" to exist (Split from Hypothetical Million...)

[arthwollipot]

So no chance of accepting and devloping a hypothetical to see where it goes? Not even to disprove said hypothetical?

 

[Complexity]

So no chance of accepting and devloping a hypothetical to see where it goes? Not even to disprove said hypothetical?

Sorry, not with much of this crowd.

Too many people engage in this stuff lacking sincerity, capability, or the desire to understand.

 

[arthwollipot]

So you don't like the crowd. Why chip in at all then?

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Surely the noumen is the thing in itself, not as it is observed. So even if you are talking about some observation that takes place independently of the sensory realm you are not talking about the noumen, you are just positing an alternate phenomenal realm.

And then positing that the alternate phenomenal realm can provide inputs to the usual phenomenal realm so that the person receiving the message can remember it and discuss it. Therefore, the usual phenomenal realm is sensing the message, even if indirectly, and the message is not purely noumenal.

~~ Paul

 

[Complexity]

So you don't like the crowd. Why chip in at all then?

Because I enjoy interacting with many of the people here.

 

[arthwollipot]

OK, just curious why you'd post in a thread just to trash it. I'll stop bugging you now.

 

[maatorc]

...What do you think about remote viewing and the MDC?

If it is true that 'remote viewing', elsewhere called 'psychic projection', is not but an as yet unexplainable material phenomena, and is in fact a strictly mental extra-phenomenal conscious reality, called by the JREF-MDC ..."...any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event.", then any protocol acceptable effect observed in any 'demonstration' would necessarily be at least once-removed from the actual conscious realization of anyone participating in the event itself, if such an event occurs, and thus non-measurable.

Therefore, in certain instances it will be reasonable to infer, without being able to prove, the truth or falsity of a seemingly very convincing demonstration by the claimant, and the JREF may even choose to pay the $1M.

 

[jimtron]

If it is true that 'remote viewing', elsewhere called 'psychic projection', is not but an as yet unexplainable material phenomena, and is in fact a strictly mental extra-phenomenal conscious reality, called by the JREF-MDC ..."...any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event.", then any protocol acceptable effect observed in any 'demonstration' would necessarily be at least once-removed from the actual conscious realization of anyone participating in the event itself, if such an event occurs, and thus non-measurable.

Therefore, in certain instances it will be reasonable to infer, without being able to prove, the truth or falsity of a seemingly very convincing demonstration by the claimant, and the JREF may even choose to pay the $1M.

Hmm, I don't exactly see why this wouldn't be appropriate for the MDC. Maatorc, do you believe in remote viewing? If so, what do you think remote viewers can do exactly? Let me know, and I could suggest how it might be able to be tested.

ETA:

...and is in fact a strictly mental extra-phenomenal conscious reality...

Are you saying remote viewing is something that is only imagined? What is remote viewing? If I write a number on a blackboard, can a remote viewer see it from the next room?

 

[maatorc]

1... What is remote viewing?
2... If I write a number on a blackboard, can a remote viewer see it from the next room?

1... A straight forward description is seeing with other than normal physical eye-vision without any space-time limitation.

2... Assuming the principle of R-V / P-P is true, Yes.

 

[jimtron]

2... Assuming the principle of R-V / P-P is true, Yes.

So wouldn't that be a relatively simple matter to test? The remote viewer is in one room, and things are written in the next room. Of course, JREF would have to make sure that there was no cheating. If the remote viewer could consistently identify what was written in the next room, that would mean a success. Simple, no?

What's "p-p" mean (or shouldn't I ask)?

 

[maatorc]

So wouldn't that be a relatively simple matter to test? The remote viewer is in one room, and things are written in the next room. Of course, JREF would have to make sure that there was no cheating. If the remote viewer could consistently identify what was written in the next room, that would mean a success. Simple, no?
What's "p-p" mean (or shouldn't I ask)?

This does not actually 'test' the process of remote viewing or psychic projection, but could infer it is true and convince many people, on the basis of which the JREF may decide to pay the prize.

 

[jimtron]

This does not actually 'test' the process of remote viewing or psychic projection, but could infer it is true and convince many people, on the basis of which the JREF may decide to pay the prize.

Well, in a sense you can't absolutely "prove" anything. In any case, I'd be willing to bet that this test would be eligible for the MDC, and by the way, the JREF doesn't have to "decide to pay the prize" exactly--before a challenge begins, JREF and the applicant must both agree on a very clear and distinct delineation between a success and a failure. There is no "judging" involved. IOW, JREF wouldn't have to "infer it is true" or "prove" that remote viewing was the cause of the successful identification of numbers on a board from another room. ETA: They would have to set out rules that couldn't be broken to avoid cheating/tricks/etc. of course.

Maatorc, do you know of anyone that can really remote view?

 

[steenkh]

If the test was 'passed', how would the MDC 'prove' it was done by remote viewing?

Why would they need that?

 

[steenkh]

Therefore, in certain instances it will be reasonable to infer, without being able to prove, the truth or falsity of a seemingly very convincing demonstration by the claimant, and the JREF may even choose to pay the $1M.

After all the debates I have seen with you, I realise that this is a huge admission. Kudos!

 

[Cuddles]

This does not actually 'test' the process of remote viewing or psychic projection, but could infer it is true and convince many people, on the basis of which the JREF may decide to pay the prize.

No, that is not the basis on which the JREF pays the prize. The JREF pays the prize based on what has been agreed before the test. If the protocol says that correctly getting 9 words out of ten written in the next room is a win, then that is what they will pay the prize for. Whether anything can be proven, infered or anything else from the result is utterly irrelevant. All that matters is that the applicant does what they have claimed they can do. As you well know, since it has been explained in every single thread I've seen you post in.

 

[Gr8wight]

If the test was 'passed', how would the MDC 'prove' it was done by remote viewing?

Oh, for the love of all that's small, cute and cuddly! This has been discussed with you over and over again, maatroll. The answer is, under the clearly published terms of the Million Dollar Challenge, the JREF wouldn't care if it was really done by remote viewing, or not. They only care that the test was passed fairly, and following the criteria and controls as set out in the agreement between the JREF and the challenger. But you knew that, because we've told you a hundred times. Go troll somewhere else.

 

[maatorc]

Oh, for the love of all that's small, cute and cuddly! This has been discussed with you over and over again, maatroll. The answer is, under the clearly published terms of the Million Dollar Challenge, the JREF wouldn't care if it was really done by remote viewing, or not. They only care that the test was passed fairly, and following the criteria and controls as set out in the agreement between the JREF and the challenger. But you knew that, because we've told you a hundred times. Go troll somewhere else.

Then why, you trollop, do the rules say -

At JREF, we offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event.

?

 

[GzuzKryzt]

...
?

For the n-th time, maatorc:
If the applicant performs - twice - along the mutually agreed upon success criteria he wins the JREF Prize.

Your semantic games are irrelevant.

 

[jimtron]

Maatorc:

There are a great many people claiming paranormal abilities. No one has been able to demonstrate them under test conditions. So we're skeptical. We hear so many excuses here--"Randi doesn't have the money...what does paranormal mean?...how would we know it was really remote viewing...etc."

We're waiting for a fair demonstration. Instead of excuses, I'd like for one of the very many people making claims to show us their talents are real.

 

[maatorc]

For the n-th time, maatorc:
If the applicant performs - twice - along the mutually agreed upon success criteria he wins the JREF Prize....[/QUOTE

I know.