Psychic Samurai applies for MDC...apparently...

[yairhol]

Suggestion to TP (copied from post 336):

The Professor, can your said entity record its answers on a blank electronic media (will be checked before hand) without this media being connected to any electronic device? For example, if you bring a blank electronic media of your choice (will have to be agreed in advance) but this media will be sitting on a rock beside you. You will not be touching it and neither will anybody else. Then, after all your questions have been asked, this media will be played back by an electronic device. If somehow magically the media is full with clear contents that have answers to your questions in the correct order (the questions should be asked in a random order as to avoid more trickery possibilities such as somehow the media having been encoded with answers on beforehand) then you pass. If not then you didn't pass.

TP, can a protocol of this sort be acceptable to you?
The main issues here: no recording device, a blank (brand new) electronic media (VCR tape for example), no one touching the blank media, you ask the entity questions that are in random order (questions that you have no previous knowledge of), at the end of the test the electronic media is played back. In order to pass the test the media should now contain a voice answering the questions in the order that have been read.

Is something like this acceptable to you?
What do you other JREFers think of this?

 

[Azrael 5]

Well Alison, I guess the old saying about The Pot Calling the Kettle Black seems to fit here!

On August 20th I asked several questions of you. I asked for you to respond.You didn't respond for TWO WEEKS!!!!!!
Here's the proof!
(I've edited it to show the dates and no personal information)

David Koenig to Alison
show details Aug 20

Reply

Sorry Allison
I have not said that I have made such arrangements. Where was that said? I would appreciate a link. Thanks.
I have applied to be tested. You said yourself that you haven't seen the application so I guess you must be in the dark about all of this too. Why do you say I haven't applied. I sent the application via Certified letter to the address printed on the application itself. I also Called the JREF and left a message to please contact me if the address had changed . No contact was made . So I mailed the letter as instructed. Your forum started a Thread about me with almost 30 posts before I was made aware, by YOUR membership, that they were interested about the test. I've provided information even though the membership seems to be rather closed minded and of a ridiculing nature. Is this some way to get people to QUIT The Challenge perpetuated by the JREF or are you really interested in providing an honest and scientific test?
Thank you for your time
David Koenig

If you need more contact information I will be glad to provide it.
- Show quoted text -
Reply
Forward
Alison Smith to me
show details Sep 3 (13 days ago)

Reply

Mr. Koenig,

Thank you for your continued patience and interest.

I have reviewed your Challenge application and, from what I am seeing, your claim would not qualify for the Challenge as yet. I'd like to ask a few questions in order to verify whether or not this is the case.

Your claim is the ability to record EVPs. However, you are giving the demonstration in a completely uncontrolled environment that you will have access to prior to the demonstration. What is there to stop either you or us from rigging the setup?

How will we verify that you do not simply have an audio player on your person?

Let me put this in a clearer manner -

There is a mentalist/magician named Mark Edward. (You can see his site at themarkedward.com, if you wish). As part of his show, Mr. Edward performs seances wherein he "contacts the dead" in an audible and visible manner. However, Mr. Edward is a magician. The seances are part of an act. They would not be testable for the Challenge. Yet they would appear, if one were watching both, to be identical to the claim you are making.

So what stops yours from being a simple magic trick?

Additionally, we do not allow anyone to skip the preliminary Challenge test. Your request that we do so is denied.

Thank you again for your continued interest,
- Show quoted text -

Many have said that you only responded at this time because Jim Callahan had released his DragonCon video in which Randi said I had not applied and you said that I did.
You emailed this within two hours of the video release after two weeks of silence.
Just for the record.

As I predicted more subtle jibes at the JREF organisation and mention of the boring YouTube video which proves nothing.As you have been told numerous times.
Yeah teh JREF was a scared into action by a crap video by some friend of Callahan.Not likely.

Once again you fail to do what is asked both by RemieV and by forum members.You are officially a waste of time I think.

 

[steenkh]

I still think that my suggestions of a language test was pretty good and in the spirit of what TP has told us so far, but since he is studiously ignoring it, I take it that he cannot make his tricks work like that!

 

[e-sabbath]

Professor, you promised me an answer several days ago. I am still waiting.

 

[RemieV]

Mr. Koenig,

I believe you have failed to realize that our full e-mail exchange, in context, is in the Challenge Applications subforum. This means that the visitors to this subforum are fully aware that the gap in time was due to me not physically being at the JREF, and therefore not having access to your application until the first e-mail of mine you have so kindly posted - again.

In reality, the e-mails went as such.

You wrote on the 19th, I responded on the 19th. You wrote again on the 19th, I responded again on the 19th. In the first e-mail, you asked if I had received your application. I said that no, in fact I was not on-site at the JREF and had not received it, and that it would be forwarded to me. In your second e-mail, you informed me that the academic affidavit had not been sent by you, but by another party and would arrive both later and separately from your Challenge application. In my response to your second e-mail, I stated that I could not begin protocol negotiations until your application and academic affidavit had been received by me.

On September 3rd, your academic affidavit and application were received by me, which is why you were contacted at that time.

I do not understand your complaint. Protocol negotiations simply *cannot* begin until I, personally, have received all the necessary elements for your file.

And since I have, our e-mail exchanges have gone as such:

I wrote on the 3rd, you wrote on the 3rd. You wrote on the 4th, I wrote on the 4th. You wrote again on the 4th, the 5th, and the 8th, I wrote on the 8th. You wrote again on the 8th, I wrote again on the 8th. You wrote on the 9th - twice, I wrote on the 11th.

In all of that correspondence, you have yet to give a testable claim. That means, since our protocol negotiations have begun, it has been 14 days. Fourteen days without a claim.

I am asking you to give a claim for your benefit. If you fail to do so, then protocol negotiations cannot take place. If we do not complete protocol negotiations, you will not make your deadline of October 31st.

And again, there are more open Challenge files than yours alone. I have reviewed yours as a priority because of the deadline. Had you applied with a claim that could take place at any time, you would have several people in front of you in line for review.

You continually claim that the JREF is treating you unfairly, and yet you have been unable to show any evidence of such. Your failure to listen to, comprehend, or even care about the Challenge process or the workings of this forum indicates that you have no interest in the Challenge at all. Should this happen to not be the case, feel free to contact me via e-mail with an actual testable claim. If this is not possible, then the JREF will not accept your Challenge. This will be through no fault of anyone but yourself, as you have been given both priority and ample opportunity to negotiate your claim.

As to the Youtube video, that is incorrect. As for "many people saying so," well, Mr. Koenig, I believe the one who said so was you. I have open in front of me an e-mail I wrote immediately after watching the video (I wanted to pass on the link, as I found it rather amusing) dated September 4th. In case you are getting confused on the dates, that would be the day AFTER I contacted you to negotiate your claim. I believe I said this before, but I will go ahead and say it again. So far as I can tell, your attempt to rally other persons against the JREF over your claim and your Youtube video and your publicity has utterly failed.

Not a single individual has written to the Challenge e-mail to complain about your treatment. Not a single individual has written with an angry comment about Dragon*Con, or a link to the Youtube video. In fact, the only reason I saw the video at all was by browsing through this thread. And when I did see it, I remember being distinctly unimpressed by the number of views (which I believe, at the time, was somewhere around thirty-five).

~Remie

 

[Azrael 5]

Mr. Koenig,

I believe you have failed to realize that our full e-mail exchange, in context, is in the Challenge Applications subforum. This means that the visitors to this subforum are fully aware that the gap in time was due to me not physically being at the JREF, and therefore not having access to your application until the first e-mail of mine you have so kindly posted - again.

In reality, the e-mails went as such.

You wrote on the 19th, I responded on the 19th. You wrote again on the 19th, I responded again on the 19th. In the first e-mail, you asked if I had received your application. I said that no, in fact I was not on-site at the JREF and had not received it, and that it would be forwarded to me. In your second e-mail, you informed me that the academic affidavit had not been sent by you, but by another party and would arrive both later and separately from your Challenge application. In my response to your second e-mail, I stated that I could not begin protocol negotiations until your application and academic affidavit had been received by me.

On September 3rd, your academic affidavit and application were received by me, which is why you were contacted at that time.

I do not understand your complaint. Protocol negotiations simply *cannot* begin until I, personally, have received all the necessary elements for your file.

And since I have, our e-mail exchanges have gone as such:

I wrote on the 3rd, you wrote on the 3rd. You wrote on the 4th, I wrote on the 4th. You wrote again on the 4th, the 5th, and the 8th, I wrote on the 8th. You wrote again on the 8th, I wrote again on the 8th. You wrote on the 9th - twice, I wrote on the 11th.

In all of that correspondence, you have yet to give a testable claim. That means, since our protocol negotiations have begun, it has been 14 days. Fourteen days without a claim.

I am asking you to give a claim for your benefit. If you fail to do so, then protocol negotiations cannot take place. If we do not complete protocol negotiations, you will not make your deadline of October 31st.

And again, there are more open Challenge files than yours alone. I have reviewed yours as a priority because of the deadline. Had you applied with a claim that could take place at any time, you would have several people in front of you in line for review.

You continually claim that the JREF is treating you unfairly, and yet you have been unable to show any evidence of such. Your failure to listen to, comprehend, or even care about the Challenge process or the workings of this forum indicates that you have no interest in the Challenge at all. Should this happen to not be the case, feel free to contact me via e-mail with an actual testable claim. If this is not possible, then the JREF will not accept your Challenge. This will be through no fault of anyone but yourself, as you have been given both priority and ample opportunity to negotiate your claim.

As to the Youtube video, that is incorrect. As for "many people saying so," well, Mr. Koenig, I believe the one who said so was you. I have open in front of me an e-mail I wrote immediately after watching the video (I wanted to pass on the link, as I found it rather amusing) dated September 4th. In case you are getting confused on the dates, that would be the day AFTER I contacted you to negotiate your claim. I believe I said this before, but I will go ahead and say it again. So far as I can tell, your attempt to rally other persons against the JREF over your claim and your Youtube video and your publicity has utterly failed.

Not a single individual has written to the Challenge e-mail to complain about your treatment. Not a single individual has written with an angry comment about Dragon*Con, or a link to the Youtube video. In fact, the only reason I saw the video at all was by browsing through this thread. And when I did see it, I remember being distinctly unimpressed by the number of views (which I believe, at the time, was somewhere around thirty-five).

~Remie

Alison you are my new hero!

Professor where is your kettle and pot now?Everytime you try to disrepute JREF staff you get busted.It's hialrious.
I put this in caps:WHERE IS YOUR PROTOCOL?

 

[Pogo]

Since the title of the thread is, "Psychic Samurai applies for MDC...apparently...", I'm wondering; if one sends in a completed application but never submits an acceptable (to both sides) protocol, has one, technically applied for the MDC? It's semantics, perhaps, but since I'm beginning to suspect that The Professor may be planning on promoting his Halloween show by ballyhooing his application for the MDC, the distinction may be a valid one in the near future.

Pogo

 

[Loss Leader]

Since the title of the thread is, "Psychic Samurai applies for MDC...apparently...", I'm wondering; if one sends in a completed application but never submits an acceptable (to both sides) protocol, has one, technically applied for the MDC?

It doesn't really matter, does it? Entertainers frequently engage in quite a bit of puffery regarding their resumes; magicians even more so.

Anyone can claim anything about the challenge. The most the JREF can do is say, "No, that's not true." And that is not much.

 

[jimtron]

Dave:

Don't give up! It will make you look like all the others that made claims but weren't able to back them up. I want to see you proceed. I see no reason to continue quibbling--it's been made clear what you need to do from here to move forward. Just state your testable claim and explain how the voice is paranormal.

And by the way, in case you get the idea that the JREF never approves of any protocols, see this sub-forum for examples where JREF did approve protocols. You seem to be having trouble stating how your claim is a testable paranormal one (if I'm wrong, then go ahead and specify how it is so). So maybe there's an easier way. Like if you can remote view, the JREF or an independent party could write a long number on a whiteboard in a nearby (or far away) room, and all you have to do is identify it correctly--maybe a few times. Maybe that would be easier than explaining how the voice is paranormal in a testable way? Or maybe you can come up with something else.

 

[Thabiguy]

Since the title of the thread is, "Psychic Samurai applies for MDC...apparently...", I'm wondering; if one sends in a completed application but never submits an acceptable (to both sides) protocol, has one, technically applied for the MDC?

The official rules use the term "applicant" rather freely (unlike "claimant", which is reserved only for applicants who successfully pass the preliminary test), and in the Challenge Application subforum, several people are referred to as applicants without having agreed to a protocol.

My personal interpretation is that when you meet the formal requirements for your application (notarized, affidavits, etc. etc.), you do apply. On the other hand, your application is only formally accepted by JREF (and signed by Randi) after a protocol is agreed to.

If I'm wrong, go ahead and correct me.

 

[Piggy]

Excuse me for being blunt, but I don't think we're going to get a testable claim because the applicant is not thinking in terms of any real paranormal ability, but rather of a performance he intends to put on.

It seems to me that this has been amply demonstrated by now.

His concern seems to be how to get this performance presented in such a way as to fit with the regulations so the show can go on, or to get it rejected so the show can go on anyway and be billed as the paranormal event Randi was afraid to challenge.

Personally, I don't see any hope here. Because none has been offered.

This case is different from, say, Astroman, who genuinely believed in astrology. Or from dowsers who genuinely believe they can dowse.

All indications are that this applicant knows its a show.

The reason I mention this is to point out that we can only co-operate with those who are willing to work with us -- that's what cooperation means. We can only meet folks halfway if they're willing to do the same.

That's not happening here.

 

[IMST]

And by the way, in case you get the idea that the JREF never approves of any protocols, see this sub-forum for examples where JREF did approve protocols. You seem to be having trouble stating how your claim is a testable paranormal one (if I'm wrong, then go ahead and specify how it is so). So maybe there's an easier way. Like if you can remote view, the JREF or an independent party could write a long number on a whiteboard in a nearby (or far away) room, and all you have to do is identify it correctly--maybe a few times. Maybe that would be easier than explaining how the voice is paranormal in a testable way? Or maybe you can come up with something else.

Actually, this could really simplify everything. Do you know if the voices can see things in plain view? If that were the case, it would be simple to follow a protocol based on something in view, but that you don't have access to. Then you could do whatever you needed to do with the audio to come up with the right numbers. Paranormal claim, self evident results, no hassle, no mess.

 

[Jackalgirl]

Hi, Dave --

Any thought towards submitting the rephrased claim I suggested? I can't guarantee that Allison will accept it, but it stands a better chance than any other claim you've suggested so far. I'll repost it here:

"I, David Walter Koenig, will demonstrate the appearance of vocal responses on multiple recording media, the appearance of which cannot be explained through any normal means. These responses will be simple, in English, and in response to simple English* questions I ask. The demonstration will take place at x pm on October 31, 2008, at 'the Devil's Chair' in Lake Helen, Florida." (where "x", of course, is the time at which your demo will start.)

As I have mentioned on the other two occasions upon which I posted this suggestion, the primary function of this reworded claim is to get rid of the mention of "paranormal entities", since that is such a problematic part of the claim.

*I had suggested English only to keep things simple. You'd mentioned to me in other correspondence that Spanish and German might be more successful. Since you haven't actually done this at the Devil's Chair, though, remember that I also suggested that you forego actually trying for the MDC this year and use October 31st as an opportunity to try to find out what the parameters (and limitations) of the demonstration would be. If you've never done it and don't actually know what will happen, it makes designing a protocol extremely difficult. So it would be a good idea to go find out first, and then come back with a solid plan.

 

[jenski]

I have stated and restated the claim MANY TIMES ... Is this how you prolong this situation? Or don't you read what has already been written? Writing fake protocols?
How does that assist in these protocols? Just more Smoke!
Some here are actually trying to help while the rest seem to be on some mission to confuse all of the issues.
Then I have people telling me that Randi himself has been say I didn't apply at all.

At 2:50. I don't want to believe that people are purposely refusing to tell the truth about my application and my claim, but several here have also denied that I would apply and they have predicted that no matter what I do the JREF will NEVER allow me to take the Challenge.

I have stated my claim and my protocol.
I am willing to rephrase my claim if it doesn't seem Paranormal enough.
I've already said I will remove all trickery!

TP,

I do not claim to be as educated on the MDC process as many others here. You can see I rarely post and am in lurk-mode most of the time.

I have followed your application since it's inception. I have read and re-read your claim, such as it is. I have read and re-read your guarantee to 'remove all trickery.' You have not, however, said how. I once worked in collections. While there I spoke to many people who insisted up and down that they would make sure my employer would get their money. When asked how and when, the answer would be (and oft repeated), "I said you'll get it, didn't I?"

You appear to be doing the same. Multiple posts have suggested methods to avoid cheating/trickery yet you seem to be avoiding them. Loss Leader's fake protocol was meant to show how easily we can avoid all this back and forth discussion by giving clear cut direction. You wonder how it helps? Do you not see how LL's protocol gives specific methods to avoid trickery. There is no phrase saying it simply will be done - it says how it will be done.

I sincerely hope you are intent on taking the challenge but I don't see you putting a great deal of effort into finalizing your claim.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

Suggestion to TP (copied from post 336):



TP, can a protocol of this sort be acceptable to you?
The main issues here: no recording device, a blank (brand new) electronic media (VCR tape for example), no one touching the blank media, you ask the entity questions that are in random order (questions that you have no previous knowledge of), at the end of the test the electronic media is played back. In order to pass the test the media should now contain a voice answering the questions in the order that have been read.

Is something like this acceptable to you?
What do you other JREFers think of this?

In addition, you would need third party members who don't know the questions to listen to the tapes. Unfortunately, when listening to tapes, there is a certain amount of judgement involved, namely in terms of clarity. The problem is that the Challenge does not allow for any judgement calls at all.

Listening to EVPs, I really don't se a way around this. At some point, someone has to say, "Yes, that's a real voice I hear, and it said 'apple'."

 

[Azrael 5]

I wonder how long the JREF/RemieV will allow this charade to continue before pulling the plug? Isn't it evident now TP isn't serious?
It's been a month almost now since his application was recieved.No progress has been made,and like Piggy(more so as I frequent Magic cafe)I have no doubt TP is playing a childish game.Hell I even bet money on it over at MC!

Just wondered when enough is enough.

 

[Kimpatsu]

Actually, this could really simplify everything. Do you know if the voices can see things in plain view? If that were the case, it would be simple to follow a protocol based on something in view, but that you don't have access to. Then you could do whatever you needed to do with the audio to come up with the right numbers. Paranormal claim, self evident results, no hassle, no mess.

I'm not sure of that. What about ventriloquism? The applicant might throw his voice or similar and claim it's a disembodied spirit.
Now, if these EVP wallahs can remotely view what's concealed in a box at the JREF... But even then, ew still need to overcome the problem of the a priori assumption that ghosts or whatnot exist.

 

[jimtron]

Hi, Dave --

Any thought towards submitting the rephrased claim I suggested? I can't guarantee that Allison will accept it, but it stands a better chance than any other claim you've suggested so far. I'll repost it here:

"I, David Walter Koenig, will demonstrate the appearance of vocal responses on multiple recording media, the appearance of which cannot be explained through any normal means. These responses will be simple, in English, and in response to simple English* questions I ask. The demonstration will take place at x pm on October 31, 2008, at 'the Devil's Chair' in Lake Helen, Florida." (where "x", of course, is the time at which your demo will start.)

As I have mentioned on the other two occasions upon which I posted this suggestion, the primary function of this reworded claim is to get rid of the mention of "paranormal entities", since that is such a problematic part of the claim.

"Paranormal entities" is a problem because Dave hasn't defined what that means in regard to his application, and he hasn't explained how he will show they exist in a testable, objective fashion. If you take out the paranormal angle, you don't have a paranormal claim though, which is the whole point of the challenge. Saying "appearance of vocal responses which can not be explained by normal means" isn't good enough. There are really good magicians who can do things that are not "explained by normal means," but that doesn't prove they're paranormal. There is very sophisticated, amazing technology available now with sound transmission--stuff that most people don't know about. A voice with no apparent source is not a paranormal claim. If Dave can read a number in another room, or have his paranormal friend read it to him--maybe we'll have something.

I like the idea that was mentioned a few posts back, about having the paranormal entity read something (a long number, say?) that it can see but is not in Dave's view. Of course you'd have to rule out having a stooge present who could see the number and communicate it to Dave.

If Dave would tell us more about what this entity is, it would be easier to make suggestions.

 

[IMST]

I'm not sure of that. What about ventriloquism? The applicant might throw his voice or similar and claim it's a disembodied spirit.
Now, if these EVP wallahs can remotely view what's concealed in a box at the JREF... But even then, ew still need to overcome the problem of the a priori assumption that ghosts or whatnot exist.

I'd disagree with you here. I think a simple testable protocol would be as such: 1. TP sit in the Devils Chair, doing whatever he wants to with recording equipment or whatever else that does not give him the ability to see around corners.
2. No person will be within view or hearing of TP except a volunteer who will state when the test is to begin.
3. A neutral party out of the sight and hearing of TP will open an envelope containing a 10 digit number for the spirits or disembodied voices or whatever to look at.
4. TP will use his equipment to have the voices tell him what the number is within 5 minutes of the opening of the envelope.
5. Producing the number precisely with the digits in order would constitute a success, missing any number in the string of 10 would constitute a failure.
5(alt). Test would be repeated 10 times. Getting the number exactly right at least 4 times would constitute a success, any fewer would constitute a failure.

This way it takes the nature of the spirits out of it entirely. If they can tell him what the number is without it being in his view, nor having any way to have someone tell it to him, something paranormal has occurred regardless of the paranormal means. Results would be self evident, right or wrong, and there would be no need to control for prerecording or any such methods of cheating if the voices themselves are what would be tested. The question would simply be "what number is that person holding?"

I proposed two methods for denoting success in case the ability is not perfect. I'm pretty sure they qualify based on the getting it right by chance standards, but a mathematician would be better qualified than me to say so.

 

[Crispy Duck]

2. No person will be within view or hearing of TP except a volunteer who will state when the test is to begin.

I like this idea generally, but another related problem may occur which hasn't been addressed yet - TP has stated a couple of times that he has any number of radio, TV and film crews interested in recording this performance, and indeed he has said that they will be the source of funding. I suspect that JREF will not allow any such crews anywhere near the event, for the same reason that you stipulate point 2 above.

3. A neutral party out of the sight and hearing of TP will open an envelope containing a 10 digit number for the spirits or disembodied voices or whatever to look at.

Any TV or film crew would want to have a camera on the envelope as it was opened, so that the audience will know in advance whether the voices are giving a correct response, hence building drama. That would completely ruin the security of the protocol and won't be allowed by JREF*.

Remember that it's not TP that must be kept blind to the number, as he will just be asking the questions, and doesn't claim that the answers will be spoken by or through him - any trickery will come from some third party transmitting the answer via a radio / infra-red / infra-sound / other comms link to the ITC/EVP equipment.


* IDSFJREF (standard disclaimer: I don't speak for JREF).