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

Status
Not open for further replies.
RoboTimbo said:
Is there any way that this could ever be self-evident and not subject to judging?
Click to expand...
Whether there are words or not could be determined by having a number of people listening to the sounds. If they all make out the same words, then it would be regarded as being those words.

The question about whether this would be paranormal is more tricky, and should be solved by having proper controls that rule out any other source than a paranormal source.
 
steenkh said:
Whether there are words or not could be determined by having a number of people listening to the sounds. If they all make out the same words, then it would be regarded as being those words.

The question about whether this would be paranormal is more tricky, and should be solved by having proper controls that rule out any other source than a paranormal source.
Click to expand...


The sources are white and pink noise generators and a hacked radio receiver that scans a frequency range. What The Professor wants is someone to listen to the playback of that being recorded and pick out distinguishable words. Look at the link in post #1370 above, that's one piece of gadgetry that The Professor wants to use. Call me skeptical but I'm thinking it isn't all that paranormal.
 
There are many that are using audio pareidolia as evidence of the paranormal, but the subjects always have to be told what they are listening for. If the listeners in this case are not told what should listen for, they will likely not come up with words, and certainly not the same words.

Whether white and pink noise can contain paranormal voices is just what this test would be all about.
 
steenkh said:
There are many that are using audio pareidolia as evidence of the paranormal, but the subjects always have to be told what they are listening for. If the listeners in this case are not told what should listen for, they will likely not come up with words, and certainly not the same words.
Click to expand...


I just tried that over at the EVP website: http://www.aaevp.com/examples/

It's difficult to do because, when you click on an example, the audio download box appears with the words that one is supposed to hear highlighted in blue.

However, with a lot of blinking, covering the screen and darting glances, you can download something without seeing what it's supposed to be.

When I knew the words, it was amazing how easy it was to hear them. When I didn't know what I was supposed to listen for, it was impossible to decipher.
 
Cuddles said:
No it isn't.

It doesn't matter whether The Professor can do anything himself or not, if he can show something paranormal happening during his test, he wins the million. Of course, this still relies rather heavily on him actually demonstrating something paranormal. At this point, just something would be a good start, paranormal or not.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am aware of that, but because this thread is moderated I did not have the opportunity to correct myself by editing.

I admit that the demonstration of a paranormal event does not require that the demonstrator has paranormal abilities. I am in error and I admit it.

Yet the inclusion of an invocation in the protocol suggests that the claimant has some control over the outcome.

So what is the claim: That the claimant can instigate a paranormal event, or that the claimant can provide evidence of a paranormal event?
 
steenkh said:
There are many that are using audio pareidolia as evidence of the paranormal, but the subjects always have to be told what they are listening for. If the listeners in this case are not told what should listen for, they will likely not come up with words, and certainly not the same words.

Whether white and pink noise can contain paranormal voices is just what this test would be all about.
Click to expand...


Merely getting sounds that are recognisable as words to appear on a tape is not necessarily paranormal, especially if (as has been suggested) a device that scans radio frequencies is used.
 
Mojo said:
Merely getting sounds that are recognisable as words to appear on a tape is not necessarily paranormal, especially if (as has been suggested) a device that scans radio frequencies is used.
Click to expand...
I agree that a radio receiver would invalidate any claim to paranormal words in the sounds, but pure noise would be paranormal - although suspect.
 
leonAzul said:
So what is the claim: That the claimant can instigate a paranormal event, or that the claimant can provide evidence of a paranormal event?
Click to expand...

Well that's the big question. Almost 1400 posts in this thread alone, and plenty more elsewhere, and still no-one has any idea what The Professor actually thinks will happen, or how it will be paranormal.

However, it doesn't really matter if The Professor causes it or not. Say he actually comes up with a protocol including his pointless rambling invocation, and whatever paranormal occurence is supposed to occur actually does. It doesn't matter in the slightest whether it was actually caused by the invocation or not. All that matters is that the paranormal thingy happened in the way defined by the protocol. It would certainly be interesting to know how and why it happened, and whether the invocation and any other actions by The Professor were relevant, but for the purpose of winning the challenge, none of that actually matters.
 
steenkh said:
I agree that a radio receiver would invalidate any claim to paranormal words in the sounds, but pure noise would be paranormal - although suspect.
Click to expand...

No, the noise itself is created by a generator which is part of the equipment used. TP's belief seems to be that when given white noise, spirits gently nudge the sound to become voices.
 
steenkh said:
I agree that a radio receiver would invalidate any claim to paranormal words in the sounds, but pure noise would be paranormal - although suspect.
Click to expand...


There is no mention of words in The Professor's claim. No pareidolia is necessary. His claim is that he can make sound paranormally appear on previously blank tape. Then in the protocol proceeds to describe the devices that will put the sound on the tape. His claim paints him into a corner. His protocol will have to describe a process without anything putting sound onto the tape.

It would be like me saying that I can make a yo-yo parnormally move up and down and in my protocol I specify that the string between the yo-yo and my finger has to be blue. And a scientist has to judge the results and Randi has to be there personally with the million in cash.
 
Is there any way that this could ever be self-evident and not subject to judging?
Click to expand...
Whether there are words or not could be determined by having a number of people listening to the sounds. If they all make out the same words, then it would be regarded as being those words.

The question about whether this would be paranormal is more tricky, and should be solved by having proper controls that rule out any other source than a paranormal source.
Click to expand...

You could also use control tapes, recorded under similar - or even different - conditions at a different time and place, and require consensus on the words and which tape is "abnormal". If there is no consensus then, by definition, the results must be "normal" and not something requiring the specifics of time and place dictated by TP.
 
AndyD said:
You could also use control tapes, recorded under similar - or even different - conditions at a different time and place, and require consensus on the words and which tape is "abnormal". If there is no consensus then, by definition, the results must be "normal" and not something requiring the specifics of time and place dictated by TP.
Click to expand...


Having to get a consensus equates to judging. Results should be self-evident to anyone observing them.

Here's the thing: The Professor's claim is that he can make sound appear paranormally on blank tape. Anyone who has played back a blank tape on just about any kind of machine will hear pops and tape hiss if you turn the volume up loud enough. That falls under the definition of sound. The Professor could (and would) claim that the sound was of paranormal origin. Ridiculous, yes. Is anyone interested in seeing months and months worth of rants posts from him bemoaning his fate at JREF's hands after that?
 
RoboTimbo said:
Having to get a consensus equates to judging. Results should be self-evident to anyone observing them.
Click to expand...
Oh yes, but if the claim is changed from "a voice" to "a voice that can be recognised by 9 out of 10 persons", it would be obvious to anyone if 9 out of ten persons could recognise the voice.
 
steenkh said:
Oh yes, but if the claim is changed from "a voice" to "a voice that can be recognised by 9 out of 10 persons", it would be obvious to anyone if 9 out of ten persons could recognise the voice.
Click to expand...


If a number of people are exercising judgment, then judgment is being used.
 
But steenkh - in your example, one other person using their judgement disagreed. Why is that not a problem?
 
I have a question concerning this thread:
If The Professorrefuses to participate in this thread, cuts off any serious discussion about the protocol, and spends his time here and elsewhere attacking the MDC, why is this thread still open?
 
chillzero said:
But steenkh - in your example, one other person using their judgement disagreed. Why is that not a problem?
Click to expand...
That was just an example to keep it in the normal protocol spirit. There may always be a person who is hard of hearing. If you play a clear tape recording to a number of people you will always find one who did not catch what was said ...

In any case, if this is regarded as judging, it would not matter if all test persons agreed. The result needs to be self-evident, and is it self-evident if 10 people find that they heard the same words, or is it self-evident only if 100 people find they heard the same words?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom