Paranormal detection

[Moochie]

The two biggest challenges are:

1) Reason1 must not have any normal means of identifying that he is being stared at. That means eliminating sight, sound, smell, and touch. Preferably, the Starer could see Reason1, but Reason1 could not see the Starer (even if Reason were looking right at the Starer. I think the best option would be to blindfold Reason1 and have the Starer at a remote location--perhaps in a dark room in another building far away peeking through a curtain, or perhaps using two way mirrors.

2) People must stare at Reason1. If Reason1 can tell when someone is staring at him, but not just looking at him, this becomes very tricky. The best I can think of is to have a group of volunteers who are unaware of the actual test and are given instructions that would involve staring at Reason1. For example: Reason1 sits on a chair with his back to the window, volunteers are told, "You will look out the window at the man sitting on the chair for 15 seconds and you must report how many times he looks at you." Of course Reason1 would not look back at any of them, but the volunteers would have to "actively" stare at Reason1. Or perhaps Reason1 would wear a shirt with words on the back and volunteers would be told to memorize the words and only those who can repeat the words are counted (because they were actively staring in order to read the words).

Of course to me this just sounds like a natural phenomenon that everyone experiences where they pick up subtle cues or catch something in their periphery vision and look to see if someone is there looking at them. And sometimes someone is there looking at them.

I have this ability! I wrote elsewhere in the forum about my kitty's penchant for just quietly materializing and sitting there, sending thought beams at either me or Mrs. M. while our backs are turned. More often than not, when I check to see if he's there, he is. Uncanny!


M.

 

[Gr8wight]

Thanks everyone,
Regarding your protocol arthwollipot:
How do I guarantee that the staring did actually occur, people could easily cheat!.
Maybe no one stared at all, pretended to stare while looking just beside me or looked at me but not see me. We all know that we can look at a thing while we are not seeing it, for example while we are intensively thinking about something else.
This is uncontrolled test that will also allow cheating on part of the individuals who are chosen to stare.

Actually this doesn't even count as staring, this is acting staring:
Staring is when you look at something for a while because you desire to,
If you are looking at a beautiful girl for a while, it's staring.
If you are looking at a new car for a while, it's staring.
The telepathy happens between the unconscious mind of the staring person and mine and if we get some people to look at me from behind, it will be acting staring that will not involve any unconscious telepathy and I'm not sure that I'll be able to detect anything

Translation: "Let me attempt to justify my confirmation bias."

Sorry, people, but you are wasting your time on this one. He will resist, kicking, scratching and biting, any attempt to impose controls that will eliminate his ability to rationalize any and all events surrounding him as being about him. This will never be tested. In fact, he'll never even apply. I'd put money on it.

 

[Denver]

Thanks everyone,
Regarding your protocol arthwollipot:
How do I guarantee that the staring did actually occur, people could easily cheat!.
Maybe no one stared at all, pretended to stare while looking just beside me or looked at me but not see me. We all know that we can look at a thing while we are not seeing it, for example while we are intensively thinking about something else.
This is uncontrolled test that will also allow cheating on part of the individuals who are chosen to stare.

Actually this doesn't even count as staring, this is acting staring:
Staring is when you look at something for a while because you desire to,
If you are looking at a beautiful girl for a while, it's staring.
If you are looking at a new car for a while, it's staring.
The telepathy happens between the unconscious mind of the staring person and mine and if we get some people to look at me from behind, it will be acting staring that will not involve any unconscious telepathy and I'm not sure that I'll be able to detect anything

How about if there is some reward for the staring person if you pick the right person? Would that provide enough motivation for their unconscious mind to be sincere, rather than acting?

 

[jojonete]

Actually this doesn't even count as staring, this is acting staring:

reason1: I'm afraid we need more information about what is "properly staring" and not just "acting staring". I've been thinking for a while about how to unambiguously word the question I have in mind. While I admit the final version of the question is..... um... "unusually worded", I'm sure you'll understand what I'm trying to ask.

The question is: which of the following two options is correct?

Option 1

People can stare on command. If someone wants to stare, he or she can do so voluntarily. Of course, they can also pretend to stare (i.e. cheat) when in fact they're only acting. However, if they have no intention of pretending or cheating, they can stare in a way that it's not only acting, but it also counts as staring and will be detected as staring.​

Option 2

People can't stare on command. The only way for someone to properly stare is to be staring without noticing it, i.e. to be caught off guard while staring. Every time someone tries to stare voluntarily or on command, they're only acting staring and that does not count and is not detected as staring, even if they think they're staring.​

If option 1 is correct, it can be tested in a closed room with some friends of yours as starers. You know they won't cheat because they're your friends and you trust them. They're on your side, they wouldn't cheat against you.

If option 2 is correct, your claim is untestable as several people have pointed out. There's no way of knowing whether someone (in a public place or otherwise) is truly staring or just acting staring, so there's no way of knowing whether you should detect them as starers or not.

 

[Foolmewunz]

I'm with H3LL....

This should've been slam-dunk simple, but now we're talking about acting staring and interested staring. More like hair-splitting staring.

 

[Moochie]

Lame attempt to diddle the MDC or awe-inspiring telepathic prowess? Tune in again next time for the jaw-dropping answer!


M.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Lame attempt to diddle the MDC or awe-inspiring telepathic prowess? Tune in again next time for the jaw-dropping answer!


M.

Hey! I caught your avatar staring at me, as soon as I looked. And... Whoa! I just looked above that post at my own avatar and IT'S STARING AT ME, TOO!

 

[IMST]

Hey! I caught your avatar staring at me, as soon as I looked. And... Whoa! I just looked above that post at my own avatar and IT'S STARING AT ME, TOO!

Holy crap! I think you're on to something! Mine is too!!

 

[GzuzKryzt]

Guys, you're not helping.

 

[Kariboo]

The telepathy happens between the unconscious mind of the staring person and mine and if we get some people to look at me from behind, it will be acting staring that will not involve any unconscious telepathy and I'm not sure that I'll be able to detect anything

The staring one will be caught off guard and will try to avoid being caught staring, by suddenly turning his/her head away which proves that he/she was staring at me.
It will be a sudden move from my side followed instantly by a sudden move form the staring one.
.

How do you know that there is a difference between intentional and unintentional staring ?

You assume that if you catch someone staring at you that they are doing so with intent. Which is not a fact but your interpretation. Have you asked everyone that you caught if they were staring at you on on purpose?

Alternatively if you don't think anyone is staring at you you assume that 1) either no one is staring or 2)that they are staring without intent. Have you checked this. Or better yet how can you check this?

Also you assume that if you make a sudden move and you startle someone that means that they were staring at you and are now feeling caught. They could have also been staring in the distance in your general direction and are now startled by your sudden move. How can you tell the difference

What happens if you sit in a park and you make random sudden moves? Do you then catch people staring at you even though you didn't feel they were doing so before?

In your scenario how can we distinguish between

1. Someone is staring with intent and you say they are
2. Someone is staring with intent and you don't notice it
3. Someone is staring without intent (acting) and you say they are staring at you with intent
4. Someone is staring without intent (acting) and you interpret that correctly
5. Someone is staring without intent (acting) and you don't notice anything
6. Someone is not staring and you think they are staring at you
7. Someone is not staring and you and you think they aren't staring at you

Which would be hits and misses and how can you make sure they are??

Kariboo

 

[Uncayimmy]

With due respect to Reason1 and the kind folks who have offered suggestions for a protocol, I would suggest that we take a step back. It seems that the difficulty in designing the protocol really stems from an inadequately defined claim, an all too frequent occurrence. So let's try to figure out exactly what the claim is and determine if, in fact, there is something paranormal afoot.

Reason1, I'm sure you didn't wake up one morning suddenly thinking, "I can detect people staring at me." Surely there have been numerous events which led you to this conclusion. What exactly has transpired that makes you believe you have a paranormal ability? We all understand the events are not evidence of an ability. However, a description of these events will help us all understand what it is you are experiencing and hopefully get us moving forward.

Can you please describe a few anecdotes that represent what you experience? Please be as specific as possible.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

...
Can you please describe a few anecdotes that represent what you experience? Please be as specific as possible.

Anecdotes might be entertaining to some folks, but they do not really have a place in this subforum. If you are indeed interested in reason1's anecdotes, UncaYimmy, perhaps you could open a thread in GS or Community.

I suggest we keep it focused on reason1's claim he can detect people staring at him from behind.

Reason1 claimed it is telepathy involved - which certainly qualifies for the JREF Challenge - and the simple self-tests provided should get him closer to a conclusion, if he chooses to do one of them.

 

[steve s]

I haven't read every post, but I agree with Petre that care needs to be taken so that subtle noises won't give things away. I'm sitting here in my chair and turned my head to the side. My neck made snap, crackle, and pop noises as I turned. (Okay, I'm getting old.) Also the sound of my neck moving against my collar made a slight noise.

The person(s) doing the staring should be in another room with a window between them and reason1, such as a recording studio.

Steve S.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

I haven't read every post, but I agree with Petre that care needs to be taken so that subtle noises won't give things away. I'm sitting here in my chair and turned my head to the side. My neck made snap, crackle, and pop noises as I turned. (Okay, I'm getting old.) Also the sound of my neck moving against my collar made a slight noise.

The person(s) doing the staring should be in another room with a window between them and reason1, such as a recording studio.

Steve S.

If the person doing the staring would simply close the eyes when not staring, we would have that problem eliminated, wouldn't we? But we are getting ahead of ourselves.

 

[Robert Oz]

Regarding your protocol arthwollipot:
How do I guarantee that the staring did actually occur, people could easily cheat!

reason1, no matter what test protocol you come up with, it is impossible for the above problem to go away. If you honestly believe someone can actually stare and pretend stare, there is absolutely no way to control for this. Further, if you make a hit, you can argue the person was actually staring, and if you make a miss, you can argue the person was pretend staring.

If you cannot detect a person merely looking directly at you for an extended period of time without emotional content (to quote Bruce Lee), your claim is untestable and all we can do is try to get you to better understand confirmation bias. It's as simple as that.

My protocol:
I'll be sitting in the chosen public place (maybe pretending that I'm reading a book)

Again, there are too many people involved. This cannot be a controlled test.

When someone stares at me (whether from behind, above, right or left) I'll detect that and I'll suddenly look back exactly at that person.
The staring one will be caught off guard and will try to avoid being caught staring, by suddenly turning his/her head away which proves that he/she was staring at me.
It will be a sudden move from my side followed instantly by a sudden move form the staring one.

So, in effect, you aren't even catching people staring at you. You are catching people suddenly turning their head.

reason1, what do you think of the following explanations for your experiences:

1. You are catching people staring from your peripheral vision.
2. You are catching people who suddenly look at you as you are turning around.
3. You are catching people who weren't looking at you, but have made a sudden jerk of the head for some other reason.
4. You are catching people who aren't staring at you, but staring through you or at something next to you, and get startled by your movement.
5. You are suddenly turning around and unconsciously zeroing in on anyone in a crowd of people who is looking in your general direction.
6. You are forgetting all the times you turn around and see nothing and remembering all the times you turn around and catch someone staring.

It's self-evident protocol that proves that I have scientifically unexplainable ability to detect people who stare at me.

This is not self-evident at all. It requires judging to determine whether someone was actually staring or pretend staring, whether they were looking at you or just in your direction, etc. For the test results to be self evident, there must be no judging required. In the protocols suggested so far by others, we know who is staring and we know who you choose. The answer then is either right or wrong.

Also this experience happened with me thousands of times before. I'll give examples later.

CONFIRMATION BIAS!! Please, please, please research confirmation bias.

I'll say it again, reason1, if you honestly believe someone can actually stare and pretend stare, there is absolutely no way to control for this.

If you cannot detect a person merely looking directly at you for an extended period of time without emotional content, your claim is untestable!

 

[reason1]

i must say i'm a little overwhelmed

to H3LL:
the reason that i may delay my answer is to think carefully about how i'm going to present it. i have a really bad answer because i didn't do that.your quotes are attempt from me to be engaging unlike some other claimants. and i admit i'm not good comunicator

to all of you who are interested:
I recall detecting when people stared at me from above while waring a cap three times,one from the second floor and 2 from fifth floor

 

[Robert Oz]

to all of you who are interested:
I recall detecting when people stared at me from above while waring a cap three times,one from the second floor and 2 from fifth floor

Okay, reason1.

You need to consider the following:

1. How do you know looking up didn't attract the attention of someone who saw you turn around, and that is the only reason he or she was looking at you?

2. How many times do you look around and not see anyone staring at you? This may have happened hundreds of times, but because it isn't anything out of the ordinary, people tend to forget these non-experiences.

And, I think, most importantly in the experiences you have described:

3. Many, many, many people like to look over the edges of balconies, buildings, cliffs, etc. I myself always look over edges when I'm up high. If someone is directly above you and looks over the edge, they are bound to be looking in your direction. Catching people doing this can be expected to happen from time to time.

As an experiment, try getting friends to start looking up at balconies whenever they are beneath one (especially in crowded areas) and see how many times they catch people looking over the edge just by chance.

 

[reason1]

to GzuzKryzt:
the self test will not eliminate staring because acting staring (or if i may say passive staring) can easily become active staring,what if for example the staring person noticed something about my hair

 

[Robert Oz]

the self test will not eliminate staring because acting staring (or if i may say passive staring) can easily become active staring,what if for example the staring person noticed something about my hair

Again, reason1:

If you are arguing that there is real staring and passive staring, there is no way to test your claim.

Please answer this question. When you catch people staring, how do you know it is real staring and not passive staring? How do you know it isn't passive staring that you are feeling when you turn around?

Based on what you are claiming, I don't think you will be able to apply for the MDC. To test for the MDC, the claim has to be unambiguous.

Further, what did you think of my suggestion that:

Many, many, many people like to look over the edges of balconies, buildings, cliffs, etc. I myself always look over edges when I'm up high. If someone is directly above you and looks over the edge, they are bound to be looking in your direction. Catching people doing this can be expected to happen from time to time.

As an experiment, try getting friends to start looking up at balconies whenever they are beneath one (especially in crowded areas) and see how many times they catch people looking over the edge just by chance.

 

[Kariboo]

the reason that i may delay my answer is to think carefully about how i'm going to present it.

Great, what I would suggest, instead of you posting short replies that just give some general/vague statement about what you are able to do, is that you take all the questions that have been asked of you and answer them one by one.

Just go through this thread and number the questions. Then in your reply give an answer to them. If you don't know the answer to a question just say so and people can help you clarify or direct you to finding out the answer.

I understand that English is not an easy language for you but this should be fairly straightforward to do. Also if you don't understand a question just ask the poster for a clarification. i guarantee this thread would move along a lot faster if you would directly address the questions in here

Kariboo