CONNIE SONNE, Dowser

[laca]

Why not? Even the statistical odds of 1:1000 of winning the $1M prize are better than playing the lottery.

Even in case she got all 3 cards right, she wouldn't have won the $1M. This was just the preliminary test. A much more formal test would have followed, with odds that would make even a terminally-deluded person like Connie cry.

BTW. Welcome to the forum.

 

[remirol]

They were in silence.
Nor did Connie Sonne look at him, as far as I could tell.
It's a puzzle.

Not that much of one. There's always "He didn't trick Connie at all, she just failed", for the obvious answer.

 

[pakeha]

well, I was holding out for an accusation that B had hypnotised her or her pendulum, remirol.
Still
'failed' would have been my supposition.
I'm not totally convinced the poster Connie Sonne is actually the claimant Connie Sonne. Just a niggling doubt.

 

[SkepticScott]

He did not say that until the envelope was cut open, I was there, and he only said that once he saw it.

I was watching carefully too, and I recall Banachek saying that Ms. Sonne had cut open the inner envelope and after he had bowed the sides out a bit in order to reach his fingers inside the envelope. At that point I'd suppose he could clearly see the value of the card inside since it was facing him.

As Alison Smith said, before the test, she did have a 1 in 1000 chance of "getting it right" by chance alone. What struck me about the test was the easy way it could translate into a decent math lesson in probability. Using examples of
: 'guessing' the card number in a regular deck: 4 in 52, or 1 in 13
: 'guessing' first number in protocol: 1 in 10
: 'guessing' only one in protocol: 1 in 10 -*- 9 in 10 -*- 9 in 10
: 'guessing' only two in protocol: 1 in 10 -*- 1 in 10 -*- 9 in 10.
..... other examples.

Actually, there's a "times 3" in the last two: you could get one right as rww, wrw, or wwr.

0 correct by guessing: .9*.9*.9 =    0.729
1 correct by guessing: .1*.9*.9*3 =  0.243
2 correct by guessing: .1*.1*.9*3  = 0.027
3 correct by guessing: .1*.1*.1 =    0.001

Total                                1.000

 

[Cleon]

I know that Banachek is an accomplished magician- but is he that good? Could he have (in theory) tricked Connie into selecting whatever card he chose?

Not being a magician of any skill myself, I don't know if it's theoretically possible with that the protocol and methodology. Personally, I doubt it, as the people designing the test know what they're doing.

However, I will say that with the entire episode being recorded as closely as it was, the chances of his being able to manipulate the test and get away with it are practically zero.

 

[Cuddles]

I know that Banachek is an accomplished magician- but is he that good? Could he have (in theory) tricked Connie into selecting whatever card he chose?

I rather hope not. The whole point of a good protocol is to avoid any possibility of cheating by either side. While I have no doubt that there wasn't any cheating attempted, it would still be quite worrying if it could have been possible.

 

[jetkins]

However, I will say that with the entire episode being recorded as closely as it was, the chances of his being able to manipulate the test and get away with it are practically zero.

I have to say, as a first-time observer, that I was a little surprised by what seemed to me to be poor camera angles. I would have expected an overhead shot or at least a clear close-up of the table and everything on it, and at least one uninterrupted shot with no cutaways or wipes, so that there could be no accusations of anything happening out of shot. Perhaps such a shot was taken and recorded but not shown to the viewing audience.

As has already been pointed out to me, this was only a preliminary test, but I would have expected more precautions to avoid even the suggestion that everything wasn't on the up-and-up.

 

[wackyvorlon]

I find with sleight of hand, a view from the top is not the best for detection. There are certain angles that are better, and the JREF is amply equipped with experts in prestidigitation who can identify said angles.

I am disappointed in Ms. Sonne, I had at first been impressed with her decorum under what surely must be disappointing circumstances for her. I regret that she has revealed herself as lacking the humility to accept the outcome.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Hi out there...now I know why Banacheck was "the card handler". I have been cheated. I did find the right cards. And there is one more thing. At the stage, Banacheck said to me BEFORE he even looked in the envelope I had cut...and here is spade ace, the one you looked for!!!! I first hit me now about that ....but maybe you can see it yourself if someone get the video. I don`t care about the money, that wasn`t the reason why I came. So no matter what you think out there......I was CHEATED!!!!!

Connie

Has the possibility that you actually failed a legitimate test and therefore do not possess psychic powers ever occurred to you?

 

[MattusMaximus]

I find with sleight of hand, a view from the top is not the best for detection. There are certain angles that are better, and the JREF is amply equipped with experts in prestidigitation who can identify said angles.

I am disappointed in Ms. Sonne, I had at first been impressed with her decorum under what surely must be disappointing circumstances for her. I regret that she has revealed herself as lacking the humility to accept the outcome.

Cognitive dissonance is a powerful thing. I am not surprised by her behavior post-test in the least. Well, let me say that I'm not surprised by her special pleading... I am a bit surprised that she jumped straight to accusing Banachek & the JREF of cheating. That's pretty low.

 

[MattusMaximus]

I have to say, as a first-time observer, that I was a little surprised by what seemed to me to be poor camera angles. I would have expected an overhead shot or at least a clear close-up of the table and everything on it, and at least one uninterrupted shot with no cutaways or wipes, so that there could be no accusations of anything happening out of shot. Perhaps such a shot was taken and recorded but not shown to the viewing audience.

As has already been pointed out to me, this was only a preliminary test, but I would have expected more precautions to avoid even the suggestion that everything wasn't on the up-and-up.

The JREF could have taken every precaution in the world, and someone who failed the test could still resort to all manner of special pleading & insinuation that the JREF cheated.

As I said above, cognitive dissonance is very powerful, and Ms. Sonne would rather believe that she was cheated than consider the possibility that she does not possess the powers that she claims.

 

[MattusMaximus]

She agreed to the protocol. If she'd wanted someone she knew and trusted to be the one handling the envelopes, her father say, I doubt JREF would have objected provided they had someone like Banachek also sitting at the table watching. But she didn't ask for that, and it's too late now.

Exactly, all this pissing after the test is just that... pissing. She knew how things were going to go concerning the setup of the protocol, but waited until after she failed the test to start objecting. Her accusations of cheating are, as someone said earlier, the bottom of the special pleading barrel.

 

[Olowkow]

Banacheck was being overly careful, and one could hear Ms. Sonne say more than once, something like "I trust you", indicating his precautions were not necessary. I can now see why JREF wanted to get out of the MDC business. It just isn't any fun for either side.
What is worrying to me is how did her woo impinge on her job as a constable?

 

[Christian Klippel]

BTW, are there recordings of the streams available somewhere? In this case, of course, especially from the test?

Since i'm on sometimes slow, sometimes fast UMTS/3G for the moment, i couldn't really watch the live stream. Would be super-cool if the TAM video(s) would appear on YouTube some day soon.

Also, if there was more footage shot of the test, like from different cameras, i think it would be a good idea to make these available, so everyone who wants can verify that the test was fair and that nobody cheated (which i'm pretty sure of).

Greetings,

Chris

 

[kylaBC]

Why not? Even the statistical odds of 1:1000 of winning the $1M prize are better than playing the lottery.

However, the "debunking" of her powers would eventually harm her in the long run if she were to try and make money off of someone who was unaware of this test.

A potential client paying her for her dowsing powers need only search her name and find out that she failed the preliminary test for the JREF.

Had she never encountered the JREF or been tested, she could potentially go on claiming her powers at dowsing and potentially make money off of some believer, who, even though they may be misinformed and non-skeptical, doesn't deserve to be conned out of their money.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Also, can we please stop acting like anyone who doesn't go hysterical on us is somehow worthy of our deep respect and congratulations for a failed test. You don't congratulate someone on failing a test, and failing the test in such a speculatar manner and then claiming its because the mystical powers don't want your power to be known is not respectable. Respectable would be to admit one does not have powers and move on with life.

The two premises are not mutually exclusive. I can consider her claim to be ridiculous and still praise her conduct during the process. Had Connie not sprung that cheating thing on us, she would have done what few applicants have done: negotiated a protocol, taken the test, and acted professionally throughout. As it is she has already done what very few claimants have done: followed the rules and got to the testing stage. Most flame out long before then.

I see no problem with praising her conduct on one hand while still contending that she's deluded on the other hand.

 

[LightinDarkness]

Nobody was congratulating her on failing the test. They were congratulating her for taking it in the first place and being nice about it, something that we see no shortage of self-deluded people refuse to even attempt -- either the former or latter. I believe as many people as possible who claim paranormal powers should be encouraged to take the test (or any test!), and to that extent, I'm willing to be as nice as possible to people who actually seem to be willing to take the test.

Yes, her "cheating" outburst has deservedly lowered her in many members' regard. But that doesn't mean the congratulations wouldn't have been deserved if she hadn't made the outburst.

This is wrong. Taking a test is not something you congratulate someone on when they fail it. Failure to act hysterical is not something you congratulate someone on. Encouraging people to take the test is fine, because they will all fail, but when they fail and still believe they have paranormal powers they have not done anything respectable. Being nice does not equal coddling people.

Congratulations - since Connie has stated that she still believes she has powers but that the Mystical Gods decided not to reveal how powerful she is - is certainly NOT in order.

"Oh you failed it like we knew you would...but hey its OK..CONGRATULATIONS on taking it and not acting insane on us!"

When the claimant learns from their failure and acknowledges that they now see evidence that they do not have supernatural powers, then certainly congratulations and respect are warranted. Didn't happen in this case.

 

[LightinDarkness]

Nobody was congratulating her on failing the test. They were congratulating her for taking it in the first place and being nice about it, something that we see no shortage of self-deluded people refuse to even attempt -- either the former or latter. I believe as many people as possible who claim paranormal powers should be encouraged to take the test (or any test!), and to that extent, I'm willing to be as nice as possible to people who actually seem to be willing to take the test.

Yes, her "cheating" outburst has deservedly lowered her in many members' regard. But that doesn't mean the congratulations wouldn't have been deserved if she hadn't made the outburst.

This is wrong. Taking a test is not something you congratulate someone on when they fail it. And since when is not acting hysterical praise worthy instead of normal expected behavior? Encouraging people to take the test is fine, because they will all fail, but when they fail and still believe they have paranormal powers they have not done anything respectable. Frankly this reminds me of how parents praise their toddlers for being toilet trained. There is a reason why once you are no longer a toddler they don't clap for you and cheer you on when you go to the restroom: because it should be expected behavior.

Congratulations - since Connie has stated that she still believes she has powers but that the Mystical Gods decided not to reveal how powerful she is - is certainly NOT in order. That is the last thing Im going to say about it. You treat people like toddlers if you want, I'll treat them like adults.

 

[remirol]

This is wrong. Taking a test is not something you congratulate someone on when they fail it. Failure to act hysterical is not something you congratulate someone on.

It is when such a significant majority of other potential applicants not only find themselves "unable" to take the test in the first place, but the majority of those who do then act hysterical and immediately proceed to blame everything but themselves post-test.

You seem to be conflating the MDC (which is entirely voluntary and requires the applicant to put their reputation and self-image on the line) with the more common garden-variety test such as a third-period pop quiz in high school. One does not congratulate someone for stepping up to take the latter, because it's the kind of thing one expects people to do. However, experience indicates that it is entirely a different matter to _expect_ people claiming psychic abilities to take the MDC.

Encouraging people to take the test is fine, because they will all fail,

Careful, there -- you cannot prove the statement you just made, nor can you show any evidence to support it other than past performance as a reasonably-reliable indicator of future results.

Dogmatism and absolutism are not critical thinking.

but when they fail and still believe they have paranormal powers they have not done anything respectable. Being nice does not equal coddling people.

Nor is congratulating someone for being willing to put forth the effort and take the MDC without resorting to hysterical denials at the end 'coddling people'. Unfortunately, such congratulations appear to have been premature in Connie's case (her "cheating" accusations), but that doesn't mean it's wrong to do so in other cases, your ill-thought-out opinions aside.

 

[El_Spectre]

Anyone but me wonder if the whole challenge at TAM thing was a put on to generate tix sales, etc. Could the whole thing be a hoax? I'm skeptical. I mean c'mon. Twirling a pendant over some cards and the deep concentration and guessing. The bad 80's hair of Banacek, the cards and envelopes etc.... that was lame from the minute Randi's sheeple (myself included) began pouring into the auditorium. We all knew she'd fail yet there we were.

I didn't. I thought it pretty likely, but I was ready to be wrong. Skepticism is a method, not a conclusion.