VFF Preliminary Kidney Detection Test

[GeeMack]

Either accept that my claim is detecting which of persons has had a kidney removed or get out of this thread and stop posting things that are thus regarded as off-topic and are getting in the way of working out a test protocol and having the preliminary testing take place.

Oh, wahhhhh. There is only one person here who is intent on disrupting the process of developing a scientifically legitimate testing protocol for your delusional claim, Anita. And that person is you. Until you're actually willing to cooperate with clearly more capable, more intelligent, more rational people, you should just shut the hell up about other people getting in the way. Blaming anyone else for your own intentional stalling doesn't boost your nearly nonexistent credibility.

So where were we? Oh, yeah. You haven't acknowledged that your currently suggested protocol is completely useless and abandoned it completely, yet. That's the next step. When you do that, we can develop one that works.

 

[Akhenaten]

I'm ready tell me what it is

useit!

An english learning and teaching website, plus information treasury

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

UncaYimmy, what on earth is wrong with you? I contacted the IIG two years ago about testing my medical perceptions. The problems we ran into was that I had to pick a specific ailment but I had very little experience to know which one I would like to pick, and that I did not have experience with having medical perceptions under test conditions, for instance people aren't often wrapped around in screens when they are out walking. Then when I met with the FACT Skeptics they helped me realize that I need to study my claim to learn more about what exactly it is that I can and can not do. So I begun the study.

In the study I had three successful reading with FACT Skeptics and was able to determine that I claim to be able to detect which of persons is missing a kidney. I was going to have a second study to learn more and to have more experience with the medical perceptions, but setting up a study is a lot of work so I decided to take the best of what I had so far - the kidney perceptions - and end the study. I then submitted the specific claim of kidney detection to the IIG.

I am not doing this for attention, in fact, I hate the attention this is giving me. Meanwhile I am perfectly convinced that I did detect that a kidney was missing and I will arrange to have a proper test to find out whether I can do that or not.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

So where were we? Oh, yeah. You haven't acknowledged that your currently suggested protocol is completely useless and abandoned it completely, yet. That's the next step. When you do that, we can develop one that works.

Dear GeeMack,

" I acknowledge that my currently suggested protocol is completely useless and I have abandoned it completely. "

*Eager to see GeeMack's suggested test protocol.*

 

[GeeMack]

You guys are nothing but negative, angry, hostile, bickering pretend-Skeptics, insisting that I agree to testing things that are not my claim and insisting that I involve test details that block my claimed ability. Meanwhile I have presented a testable claim and it is fully possible to design an acceptable protocol around it.

Not until you abandon all of your own loony suggestions about a protocol, it isn't. And you know it. And you don't have the guts to do a real test because you'd find out you've got no super powers. Then your glory days of, "Look at me, I'm special, I have x-ray super vision," will be over. Well, I've got new for you, kid. You're slitting your own throat here by refusing to abandon your crappy protocol and letting these fine, honest, intelligent people work up a good one.

Anytime you're ready to begin...

 

[Ashles]

Ashles, ok no audience. And that means that the preliminary testing takes place in North Carolina because that is the only way I can fund it.

Uh, the test taking place in North Carolina was never an issue.

So now we know I need to ask the FACT Skeptics if they would participate and I now know where to search for volunteers. What else?

Let the FACT skeptics find the volunteers. You should have NOTHING to do with finding volunteers.

Invite them to get in touch with us - we will help them find volunteers.

And to confirm - you can view somebody from 3 feet away with their entire body hiddden from view except for their back (including obviously the kidney area) with that section of their back covered with a thin shirt?

 

[Akhenaten]

No. I just thought some people might like to see.

In what way is it unreasonable not to see this as attention seeking?

It is not often a paranormal claimant puts themselves to a test.

If the real, objective reason why this is the case ever penetrates your purely subjective POV, I'll buy the devil some new ice skates.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Not until you abandon all of your own loony suggestions about a protocol, it isn't. And you know it. And you don't have the guts to do a real test because you'd find out you've got no super powers. Then your glory days of, "Look at me, I'm special, I have x-ray super vision," will be over. Well, I've got new for you, kid. You're slitting your own throat here by refusing to abandon your crappy protocol and letting these fine, honest, intelligent people work up a good one.

Anytime you're ready to begin...

GeeMack, "I abandon all of my own loony suggestions about a protocol." I want the test to be falsifiable, yes. And if I fail the test I would be proud to have falsified a paranormal claim. I am a science student and future scientist and this would set such a valuable example into the woo community! I encourage anyone who claims to have medical perceptions to put their claims to the test!

Let the FACT skeptics find the volunteers. You should have NOTHING to do with finding volunteers.

Invite them to get in touch with us - we will help them find volunteers.

And to confirm - you can view somebody from 3 feet away with their entire body hiddden from view except for their back (including obviously the kidney area) with that section of their back covered with a thin shirt?

Alright. And yes, 3 feet away or more, with their entire body hidden from view except for their back with that section of their back covered with a thin shirt. Finally, we are getting somewhere.

ETA:

 

[desertgal]

When Anita tried to "see through" a sweater, she figured it would make her confused, so that's what happened. When she tried to see through a screen, it took longer because that's what she expected. I don't think she's lying - I think she cannot separate reality from fantasy.

Nor, in fact, is she willing to even try. Why would she be? In her fantasy world, she gets to be extraordinary, unique, a 'star person'...far above and beyond the characteristics and limitations of average mortals.

Look at her claims collectively. IF Anita had all the abilities, or even just a few, that she claims to have, she would be the most extraordinary being in the history of mankind. So, that fuels her narcissism, which fuels her claims, which fuel her narcissism. It's an endless circle.

Promoting the testing of her abilities fuels her need for attention. So it goes on and on and on...

(BTW, I'm not a "pretend skeptic". My skepticism about the authenticity of her claims is completely genuine. I really do believe Anita is a delusional, narcissistic attention seeker.)

{{{Thread drift over. Back to lurking.}}}

 

[Akhenaten]

UncaYimmy, what on earth is wrong with you?

Unca Yimmy has the same problem as most people who take an interest in your activities. This is it:

I contacted the IIG two years ago about testing my medical perceptions.

And yet all we have so far is Protocol Ver. 0.0.0


Not actually our problem though, is it?

 

[Ashles]

Alright. And yes, 3 feet away or more, with their entire body hidden from view except for their back with that section of their back covered with a thin shirt. Finally, we are getting somewhere.

Wow, you suddenly sound actually annoyed simply because I am clarifying a small aspect of a very vague and badly designed protocol.

Or is it that we have denied you an audience?

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Those were happy tears, and not literally speaking. I'm just glad we're getting somewhere.

ETA: I'm not annoyed, Ashles! I'm happy that we're working out a simpler test protocol, and I don't need an audience!

 

[Paul2]

The problem with a screen is not the material of the screen being in front and in the way of the kidney, since clothing of the same material as a screen still allows the perceptions. The problem with a screen is that my sense of orientation in the body is thrown off, and I would require far more time and be more likely to experience fatigue than if we were to arrange for a test that does not use a screen that covers the kidney area of a person.

What does "sense of orientation in the body" mean in terms of seeing a kidney? Are you saying you might mistake a thigh bone for a kidney, or even a lung for a kidney? What orientation do you need if you know that the person is standing up? Or are you saying you'd miss the kidney altogether?

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

What does "sense of orientation in the body" mean in terms of seeing a kidney? Are you saying you might mistake a thigh bone for a kidney, or even a lung for a kidney? What orientation do you need if you know that the person is standing up? Or are you saying you'd miss the kidney altogether?

When a screen is not used, I can locate the region of the back where the kidneys should be, by looking at the person with eyesight. Then I look into that area and find the kidneys. When a full-body screen is used, I do not know where the kidneys are in relation to the screen. In other words, I do not look through the entire body all at once, but a small region at a time, and I have lost my sense of orientation in the body. Therefore it is possible that I might find one kidney but not the other even though both would be there.

 

[Apology]

Actually, the plan now is to take samples from a removed kidney, dry it, crush it, add some dye, and then mail it to Anita so she can tell us the owner's eye color.

No, No, it's four people behind a screen, one eats corn, one eats lima beans, one eats carrots, and one eats peas, and we see if Anita tastes succotash.

 

[Akhenaten]

VFF, you've just responded to the most recent post and completely ignored about a hundred others.

What's the deal with that?

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Well we're starting all over.

 

[Ashles]

Those were happy tears, and not literally speaking. I'm just glad we're getting somewhere.

'We' will get somewhere a lot more quickly if you listen to the advice you are given by the majority of people here.

'We' have been 'somewhere' since day one - 'we' are just waiting for you to exhibit the tiniest amount of scientific rigour and protocol and apply it to your supposed claim without us having to do all the work for you.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Are you suggesting that I can not have a test unless it involves a full-body screen? Is that what this is all about? What else is a problem with the protocols so far? Ashles, please post a complete protocol. I know you could conjure up one just like that. Let me see what you suggest, rather than criticizing me when I'm not quite sure at this point what specificly I'm doing wrong.

 

[Akhenaten]

Well we're starting all over.

That's exactly what you keep trying to do every time one of your schemes falls apart.

That's exactly what you were trying to do when you started this thread.

How dare you now suggest that we ignore all that has been posted?

Dare away, in any case. Choosing a different starting point to everyone else has never held you back before.