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

[Jackalgirl]

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.

My point in using that phrasing is to mean "normal" as opposed to "paranormal". The technology and trickery of which you write is perfectly normal -- completely uncommon and unusual, maybe, and definitely outside of most people's experience -- but it is "normal" (in the sense of "not Paranormal").

However, we could rephrase it to say "cannot be explained except by paranormal means" or "the only explanation of which would be that the occurrence is paranormal."

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

I think it's fairly clear that he feels that the entity (or entities) would be the spirit(s) of dead people. However, he has said that he has never actually done this in this location, and has also already said that he does not know what it (or they) can actually do. In fact, in other communications with me, he has said that when he has done this in the past (in other locations, I presume), the "spirits" have been distinctly hostile. So I think it's clear that he isn't really even sure if they'll be cooperative (and which, of course, is a highly convenient "out"). That's why I suggested that he simply do his thing this year -- separate from the MDC -- to "make contact" (or whatever) and find out what the possibilities and parameters /are/ before actually trying to write a protocol.

 

[steenkh]

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*.

These objections can be overcome at a certain loss of video quality. The cameras could be stationary, remote-controlled, or even operated by the neutral person opening the envelope. Everybody seeing the live video must be out of sight and hearing of Dave.

 

[chran]

Let me try:

Everybody keeps saying that what The Professor has written in his protocol-suggestion "I've already said I will remove all trickery!" is not enough, but as far as I can see, nobody has said this:

The Professor: You need to write down, in a clear fashion, HOW you will remove any trickery. Point by point - A, B, C, etc.

Do that and you've got yourself a protocol, BECAUSE, when you remove all trickery in this fashion, everything left (voices, etc) is, by definition, paranormal.

Can you just do this, please?

(OK, Loss Leader actually wrote it down too: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4043675#post4043675)

 

[The Professor]

Jackalgirl, I hope I haven't mislead you. I have had GREAT success making contact at the Devil's Chair. I have chosen 10/31 because many deceased personalities, the most famous being Houdini himself, have Requesed that day. It is also historically claimed to be the perfect day to make contact.

Do the rest of you feel that Jackalgirl's claim would be accepted by Alison Smith?

 

[The Professor]

In order to insure fairness and meet with the strict requirements of the JREF MDC and Alison Smith, I have agreed to hire a professional writer to construct the challenge claim to meet everyones criteria. This would seem to be the most logical way to proceed. A third neutral party that can take the suggestions here and formulate them with my experiences would bring this issue to a mutual and agreed upon position of understanding.
This would make my claim understandable to all and remove any legal loopholes.
I am looking forward to taking the Challenge that Randi has promised.

 

[Czarcasm]

Jackalgirl, I hope I haven't mislead you. I have had GREAT success making contact at the Devil's Chair.

Now we're getting somewhere!
When did this prior success happen, were there any witnesses that could support this, and what was the protcol involved?

 

[Czarcasm]

In order to insure fairness and meet with the strict requirements of the JREF MDC and Alison Smith, I have agreed to hire a professional writer to construct the challenge claim to meet everyones criteria. This would seem to be the most logical way to proceed. A third neutral party that can take the suggestions here and formulate them with my experiences would bring this issue to a mutual and agreed upon position of understanding.
This would make my claim understandable to all and remove any legal loopholes.
I am looking forward to taking the Challenge that Randi has promised.

And we are looking forward to a proper protocol that follows all the rules of the MDC.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

In order to insure fairness and meet with the strict requirements of the JREF MDC and Alison Smith, I have agreed to hire a professional writer to construct the challenge claim to meet everyones criteria. This would seem to be the most logical way to proceed. A third neutral party that can take the suggestions here and formulate them with my experiences would bring this issue to a mutual and agreed upon position of understanding.
This would make my claim understandable to all and remove any legal loopholes.
I am looking forward to taking the Challenge that Randi has promised.

May I suggest that the writer join this thread, so as to see the suggestions made hear firsthand, ask questions, and be able to have the answers clarified?

 

[chran]

In order to insure fairness and meet with the strict requirements of the JREF MDC and Alison Smith, I have agreed to hire a professional writer to construct the challenge claim to meet everyones criteria. This would seem to be the most logical way to proceed. A third neutral party that can take the suggestions here and formulate them with my experiences would bring this issue to a mutual and agreed upon position of understanding.
This would make my claim understandable to all and remove any legal loopholes.
I am looking forward to taking the Challenge that Randi has promised.

What? No. That is certainly not necessary.

Loss Leader had a suggestion for a protocol that eliminates trickery. If you could adapt that to your requirements, I think it would be accepted.

It's at least a step in the right direction.

 

[Piggy]

Now we're getting somewhere!
When did this prior success happen, were there any witnesses that could support this, and what was the protcol involved?

And Professor, please don't forget to explain why a recording device will be used for this demonstration, especially if voices were heard out loud or in your head during the previous instances.

Thanks.

 

[jimtron]

...I have agreed to hire a professional writer to construct the challenge claim to meet everyones criteria.

Please keep in mind that the official JREF MDC criteria is the most important. There have been excellent suggestions here but most of us here don't speak for the JREF. Make sure the writer understands the rules and what has been asked of you. Don't forget, you need to get specific about what the paranormal entity is and how exactly it will be objectively, testably, paranormal.

It should help to carefully read the rules and read past protocol discussions, which can be fouond in this MDC subforum.

 

[Loss Leader]

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'."

I think I know a way to get around this.

1. The recorders will be played back at 50% volume

2. Ask TP exactly what the voice said. He writes down the voice's statement word for word.

3. Run the audio through Dragon NaturallySpeaking or some other voice recognition software.

4. The software must translate the voice's words with 80% agreement with TP at the same volume level.

4(a) To simplify things further, the voices could be asked questions that only can be answered with a "yes" or "no." That makes it more likely the computer will understand them.

Note - this only solves the questions of whether there was a voice and what it said. This does nothing to solve the question of whether the voice was produced by trickery.

To my mind, a voice that has no source is unquestionably paranormal. However, in this day and age, the technological options for making a voice appear are varied and vast. Thus, I believe ruling out all normal explanations to be practically impossible. I do not think sufficient safeguards could ever be put in place so that merely hearing a voice could be considered to be paranormal.

But even then, ew still need to overcome the problem of the a priori assumption that ghosts or whatnot exist.

Not really. It doesn't matter what the explanation for the phenomenon is; only that the phenomenon occurred under controlled conditions.

 

[steenkh]

In order to insure fairness and meet with the strict requirements of the JREF MDC and Alison Smith, I have agreed to hire a professional writer to construct the challenge claim to meet everyones criteria. This would seem to be the most logical way to proceed. A third neutral party that can take the suggestions here and formulate them with my experiences would bring this issue to a mutual and agreed upon position of understanding.
This would make my claim understandable to all and remove any legal loopholes.
I am looking forward to taking the Challenge that Randi has promised.

While I applaud your efforts to make progress in this case, I cannot help wondering what qualifications a "professional writer" is bringing along. Is s/he acquainted with protocol formulating?

Why do you think it would be better if a neutral party writes the protocol? I cannot see any objection if the protocol writer is firmly on your side.

And you have already been given lots and lots of help here on this forum, ranging from useful tips, critique of your present protocol to complete protocols that would be easy to adapt. Hiring a new person will in my opinion just slow the writing down.

But it is your call. If you do not feel comfortable formulating the protocol yourself, it might be a good idea to bring a new person to do the job.

 

[Azrael 5]

I call BS on TP doing this prior at Devil's Chair.I asked him on Cafe to provide evidence of this,he didn't.There is no evidence anywhere to suggest he did.
Jackagirl why do you encourage him?
Common sense tells us all it's just smoke and mirrors.There is no proof of any paranormal happenings at Devil's chair or at Halloween any time ever.
Today we get " a writer" now! It's more delaying tactics.

 

[Cuddles]

In order to insure fairness and meet with the strict requirements of the JREF MDC and Alison Smith, I have agreed to hire a professional writer to construct the challenge claim to meet everyones criteria. This would seem to be the most logical way to proceed. A third neutral party that can take the suggestions here and formulate them with my experiences would bring this issue to a mutual and agreed upon position of understanding.
This would make my claim understandable to all and remove any legal loopholes.
I am looking forward to taking the Challenge that Randi has promised.

1. What makes you think a professional writer is at all relevant? You're writing abilities are not the issue here - you are certainly one of the more coherent applicants. If you want any professional involved it should be a scientist or someone else with experience and training in scientific testing. If it's legal issues you are worried about, again, I really don't see how a writer is at all relevant.

2. Apart from you and RemieV, everyone posting in this thread is a neutral third party.

3. All this is irrelevant. As has been stated by the JREF's official challenge representative, you have not made a claim which is eligible for the challenge. Until you do so, there is really no point worrying about a protocol at all, let alone paying people to get involved with it.

 

[The Professor]

What? No. That is certainly not necessary.

Loss Leader had a suggestion for a protocol that eliminates trickery. If you could adapt that to your requirements, I think it would be accepted.

It's at least a step in the right direction.

I have the right to hire a professional to help me through all of this Red Tape, and I've done so. Why would you say I shouldn't do this? I just want to keep everything on an even and neutral playing field. Something wrong with that?

I want to make sure this is a fair test as I'm sure all of you do too
I have also contacted Jim Callahan, who is in contact with Uri Geller, for their input, since I know that both of them are reading this thread and seeing if I get a fair shake at the Challenge.

Uncle Walter and his Hollywood buddies are also watching with interest.

Not to hide anything, I was flown to Hollywood last year while involved with the production of Uri Geller's TV show on NBC (I was there for several days on Their Dime ). I also Currently work for NBC. Hope you don't hold that against me too

 

[The Professor]

1. What makes you think a professional writer is at all relevant? You're writing abilities are not the issue here - you are certainly one of the more coherent applicants. If you want any professional involved it should be a scientist or someone else with experience and training in scientific testing. If it's legal issues you are worried about, again, I really don't see how a writer is at all relevant.

2. Apart from you and RemieV, everyone posting in this thread is a neutral third party.

3. All this is irrelevant. As has been stated by the JREF's official challenge representative, you have not made a claim which is eligible for the challenge. Until you do so, there is really no point worrying about a protocol at all, let alone paying people to get involved with it.

Please read what I've said again. The writer is to help with the CHALLENGE CLAIM! Not the protocol. Why do you misquote me?
If Alison does not like the way I phrase my Claim then a professional Writer is needed to help me "Jump through This Hoop".
Why are you afraid that I've hired one?
I just want some basic Fairness here.

 

[The Professor]

I think I know a way to get around this.

1. The recorders will be played back at 50% volume

2. Ask TP exactly what the voice said. He writes down the voice's statement word for word.

3. Run the audio through Dragon NaturallySpeaking or some other voice recognition software.

4. The software must translate the voice's words with 80% agreement with TP at the same volume level.

4(a) To simplify things further, the voices could be asked questions that only can be answered with a "yes" or "no." That makes it more likely the computer will understand them.

Note - this only solves the questions of whether there was a voice and what it said. This does nothing to solve the question of whether the voice was produced by trickery.

To my mind, a voice that has no source is unquestionably paranormal. However, in this day and age, the technological options for making a voice appear are varied and vast. Thus, I believe ruling out all normal explanations to be practically impossible. I do not think sufficient safeguards could ever be put in place so that merely hearing a voice could be considered to be paranormal.





Not really. It doesn't matter what the explanation for the phenomenon is; only that the phenomenon occurred under controlled conditions.

I like your thinking here!!!!
For others who are having a problem with the definition of Paranormal..
Here it is!


2.2 What is the definition of “paranormal” in regards to the Challenge?

Webster’s Online Dictionary defines “paranormal” as “not scientifically explainable; supernatural.”

Within the Challenge, this means that at the time your application is submitted and approved, your claim will be considered paranormal for the duration. If, after testing, it is decided that your ability is either scientifically explainable or will be someday, you needn’t worry. If the JREF has agreed to test you, then your claim is paranormal.

NOT SCIENTIFICALLY EXPLAINABLE

 

[The Professor]

May I suggest that the writer join this thread, so as to see the suggestions made hear firsthand, ask questions, and be able to have the answers clarified?

Great idea!!!!!
I, have asked him to do just that. In addition there are several other Sci-Fi writers who are interested in this procedure. They are following the thread and perhaps they'll join in. I'm not sure they are members so the choice will be theirs of course and I do ask they be treated with respect if the decide to comment. I'm sure that the majority here will do that.

 

[The Professor]

Please keep in mind that the official JREF MDC criteria is the most important. There have been excellent suggestions here but most of us here don't speak for the JREF. Make sure the writer understands the rules and what has been asked of you. Don't forget, you need to get specific about what the paranormal entity is and how exactly it will be objectively, testably, paranormal.

It should help to carefully read the rules and read past protocol discussions, which can be fouond in this MDC subforum.

Thanks Jimtron, you are totally correct. I will take your advice!