• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The VFF Test is On!

wardenclyffe said:
I think IIG is assuming that if she wins their $50K, she'd have plenty of media presence and academic attention, and that she'd easily qualify for the MDC.
Click to expand...
Good point.

Was she turned down by JREF because she lacked these?

At any rate, I'd still like to hear if SezMe thinks the protocol is up to MDC standards.
 
Hokulele said:
As I understood the press release, this is just a preliminary test, so the $50K isn't on the line just yet.
Click to expand...

From the way I read it, it sounds like if she passes the preliminary, she moves immediately to the final. (Or at least "immediately" enough not to require her going home and getting another non-refundable airline ticket to come back at a later time.) In other words, if she can do what she says, she'll go home $50,000 (less expenses) richer.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
From the way I read it, it sounds like if she passes the preliminary, she moves immediately to the final. (Or at least "immediately" enough not to require her going home and getting another non-refundable airline ticket to come back at a later time.) In other words, if she can do what she says, she'll go home $50,000 (less expenses) richer.
Click to expand...


I think it could be read either way. It is pretty vague. Regardless, if she can do what she says, $50K is peanuts.
 
Hokulele said:
I think it could be read either way. It is pretty vague. Regardless, if she can do what she says, $50K is peanuts.
Click to expand...

True! For that matter so is $1 million!

But, of course, she can't.

Anita, have you ever gotten around to doing a home-version of any of these tests as I (and others doubtless) suggested? You could easily work out a way to test yourself with maybe two volunteers. (Not a way that would eliminate actual cheating, but in a self-test, that's not really the issue.)
 
What's with you people? The IIG thinks it's a good idea to not publish the protocol, and so if I choose to agree with them I am criticized? Is your curiosity greater than your respect to protect the double blindness of the preliminary demonstration? Are you Skeptics, or nosy people? :)

Akhenaten said:
1. We aren't the general public
Click to expand...
I know you are not the general public, Akhenaten, but the general public has access to what we write here.

SezMe said:
ETAA: By way of full disclosure, the IIG has sent me a copy of protocol but I will not make it public. That the IIG or Anita don't want it public baffles me but I am NOT going to do ANYTHING to give either party an out prior to the test. Period. If it becomes public, it will NOT be by my hand.
Click to expand...
And that is how I feel too. I feel that since the IIG chooses to not make the protocol public, neither will I. If there is any damage to the integrity of the preliminary demonstration because I shared the protocol, that would be unhappy, especially since I am spending in excess of $1,000 of my own money on the test. I have every incentive to ensure that the Preliminary is as reliable as it can be, and if that means having you wait less than a month before disclosure then so be it. But trust me, it is the best protocol ever and I would so love to share it with you if I could!
 
Last edited:
To address some of your comments and questions,

It is probably better for the sake of my Preliminary demonstration that I say as little as I can before the test. As eager as I am to discuss the test with you all, especially now that we finally have something to talk about, I have reached a point where it is no longer necessary for us to talk in order to advance my investigation, and instead my main objective now is to protect the credibility of the test. Of course if I pass the Preliminary, its integrity and design will be highly questioned regardless, and I want to minimize that critique by ensuring that I do what I can to protect the quality of the test today. I think the main strength of the Preliminary is that it allows ample opportunity for a non-ability to be falsified, and the only consequence of passing the Preliminary would be that I could proceed to a formal test.

I will not be awarded a prize if I pass this Preliminary.

Take it from me, the test protocol for the Preliminary would definitely not be good enough for a formal JREF test. Both me and the IIG have identified issues with it, and so for a formal IIG test it would need to be improved on. However, for a Preliminary, it is quite sufficient.

I have not applied for the JREF Challenge since I am aware that I do not meet their requirements, ie. media presence and academic affidavits.

If I pass the Preliminary, I expect there to be another protocol negotiations stage to design the protocol for a formal test, and that the formal test would take place at least a month after the Preliminary. I would of course go home and have to return to California later.

I would love to set up practice tests at home before the Preliminary, but the difficulty is in finding one-kidney persons and having them disguised well enough to not be recognizable in repeated trials, but not well enough so to enable the perceptions.

I have so much to tell you about the IIG test, but I think we can wait a month!
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
Of course if I pass the Preliminary, its integrity and design will be highly questioned regardless, and I want to minimize that critique by ensuring that I do what I can to protect the quality of the test today.
Click to expand...

Actually the way to do that is with a very honest and open procedure. If the protocol is solid and doesn't allow information leakage by mundane means, then the integrity and design will not be called into question no matter what the results. The point is to settle all those issues ahead of time and then have everyone agree on the outcome--no second-guessing the result is allowed.

I trust that the IIG has negotiated a solid protocol. I can't understand why it is being kept secret. That does nothing to help conduct a test whose results we can all agree shouldn't be second guessed.

I predict that the opposite (of your comment above) will be true--if (or rather "when") you fail, you will be the one questioning the design and integrity of the test and coming up with some post hoc excuse or other as to why it didn't work, even though you will still insist that you have this magic ability to see people's insides.
 
Last edited:
VisionFromFeeling said:
Take it from me, the test protocol for the Preliminary would definitely not be good enough for a formal JREF test.
Click to expand...
As I've said before, a poorly controlled test is not better than nothing. If it leaves room for either side to question the results, it is worse than useless.

If I pass the Preliminary, I expect there to be another protocol negotiations stage to design the protocol for a formal test, and that the formal test would take place at least a month after the Preliminary. I would of course go home and have to return to California later.
Click to expand...

Really? That seems like a strange way of doing this.

So the IIG is not risking $50,000 on this test at all. You have no chance of winning at all this trip, right?

But kudos to you Anita for buying the plane ticket when you know you've got nothing to win.

Again, my opinion is that this is worse than useless. It will do nothing to change anyone's opinion of Anita's powers.

At least I have a guess as to why the protocol is being kept secret: apparently the subjects will not be told the actual nature of the test, and it's important to keep them in the dark to avoid information leakage. It sounds like it will be some sort of attempt at cold reading, but that the IIG is trying to control what information the subjects are able to divulge.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
I predict that the opposite (of your comment above) will be true--if (or rather "when") you fail, you will be the one questioning the design and integrity of the test and coming up with some post hoc excuse or other as to why it didn't work, even though you will still insist that you have this magic ability to see people's insides.
Click to expand...


I agree. She has demonstrated a propensity for dishonesty time and again. All of her "successes" to date have been in perceiving things only after she was told they were true. Not a single genuine extrasensory perception to be found. And her typical method of dealing with failure is to contort the clear and obvious failure into some convoluted excuse for success, then convince herself over time that it's true. (The failed course at school being a glaring example.)

From a posting at www.stopvisionfromfeeling.com...

Anita at stopvisionfromfeeling.com... said:
I am tremendously pleased with the test protocol. From my perspective it is absolutely perfect, and it contains no elements that I worry could reduce my performance. I have confidence in my single past experience of detecting that a left kidney was missing, and am willing to let this specific claim represent the entirety of the medical perceptions claim. And so if I fail this Preliminary test with the IIG, I will be happy to announce my paranormal claim as falsified.
Click to expand...


Yeah, like that'll happen. When she fails to demonstrate any magical powers for the IIG, she will not admit, much less announce, that her paranormal claim has been falsified. (Note the irony in how the repeated lie about perceiving a missing kidney leads directly into her claim to be willing to announce her prospective failure. :rolleyes:)
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
What's with you people? The IIG thinks it's a good idea to not publish the protocol, and so if I choose to agree with them I am criticized? Is your curiosity greater than your respect to protect the double blindness of the preliminary demonstration? Are you Skeptics, or nosy people?
Click to expand...
I'm suspicious of a protocol that can be ruined merely by revealing the protocol.

~~ Paul
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
What's with you people? The IIG thinks it's a good idea to not publish the protocol, and so if I choose to agree with them I am criticized?
Click to expand...

Good point.
A skeptics organisation makes a decision they would like respected, a "woo" respects that decision. Some skeptics don't like that decision, so it's the "woo" who gets the blame. Why on Earth would that happen?
Oh yeah, how could I forget, it's cos VFF is the current favourite whipping-girl-du-jour, and old habits die hard.
Good luck in keeping this thread unmoderated.
 
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos said:
I'm suspicious of a protocol that can be ruined merely by revealing the protocol.

~~ Paul
Click to expand...
Would the results of the Milgram experiment change if the protocol was released? (hint: yes)

The missing organ folks may very well be misdirected as to the nature of the test to minimize their transmitting 'tells' to Anita.
 
Hmmmf. I'm glad she's being tested, but I still say that the chemical tests would have been a thousand times easier and cheaper to administer.
 
roger said:
Would the results of the Milgram experiment change if the protocol was released? (hint: yes)
Click to expand...
Hmm. Yup, you're right. From Wiki:

Due to increasingly widespread knowledge of the experiment, recent replications of Milgram's procedure had to ensure that the participants were not previously aware of it.

The missing organ folks may very well be misdirected as to the nature of the test to minimize their transmitting 'tells' to Anita.
Click to expand...
If that's the issue, doesn't this thread and lots of other information around the Net screw it up? I'm still feeling uneasy.

~~ Paul
 
Last edited:
roger said:
Would the results of the Milgram experiment change if the protocol was released? (hint: yes)

The missing organ folks may very well be misdirected as to the nature of the test to minimize their transmitting 'tells' to Anita.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm guessing too. If that's so, it means the test protocol is something that allows cold reading techniques.

But it doesn't matter, no protocol for a test for the $50K has been negotiated yet anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom