• 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!

Remember that guy, reason1, from a few months ago? He's the guy who claimed that he could make ususpecting people turn around and make eye contact with him just by staring at the back of their necks.

A number of sound protocols were suggested, but most of them included (or were enhanced by) the suggestion that none of the test subjects would know that they were being stared at. He rejected every decent protocol and then vanished.

The reason1 protocols, I think, are other examples where holding the protocol back from the general public improves the test conditions and therefore the test.

There are some (and I think we can expect to hear from them) who disagree, I'm sure.

VfF has made many easy to test claims. She refuses to be tested on any of them. Perhaps she came up with something that she thought was so outlandish that no one would ever call her bluff. It now appears as though someone has. It sounds as though conditions will not be perfect, but unless IIG is completely stupid, conditions should be good enough.

Completely OT: What happened to UncaYimmy? I know he's got his own site, but that never stopped him from posting in JREF. Did I miss an indignant "Well I'm leaving!" message?

Ward
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
Milgram's experiment wasn't about a claim of a paranormal ability to get information that the subject already possesses. If the design of the test is such that it depends on the subjects not knowing the protocol in order to avoid information through ordinary means (like cold reading techniques), then it's a poorly designed test.
Click to expand...
I agree that it's a bit dicey.

~~ Paul
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
I will be arriving in Los Angeles for my IIG Preliminary demonstration on November 20th 2009. If there is a Skeptic in that area who suffers from migraines I would be very interested in meeting with you to give you an attempted migraine treatment.

The reason I am investigating this is based on a past experience I had where I gave an attempted migraine treatment to someone and he claims dramatic improvement that coincided with the time of receiving the att. treatment. This experience as well as a description of what is involved in an att. treatment is available at www.visionfromfeeling.com/migraines.html.

This claim is not made by me. This claim is made by the man who received an attempted treatment from me. That is why I am interested in trying again but this time with a Skeptic. As a Skeptic, your experience of any changes to your migraine condition would be less likely to be influenced by your expectations, and your accounts would be more reliable as well as more valuable.

Preferably you would already have documentation of the frequency and severity of your migraines at least a few months back before receiving the att. treatment and you would continue to document your migraines at least a few months after receiving the att. treatment.

If the att. treatment does not coincide with improvement in your migraine condition this claim is very likely to be falsified. And if the att. treatment does coincide with significant improvement in your migraine condition, it does not verify the claim but only warrants further investigation into the claim.

This way, perhaps I could falsify two claims in one weekend!

This discussion is held in the Migraine Thread.
att. = attempted
Click to expand...

I am a skeptic who suffers migraines and lives in L.A. I plan on attending the test and would welcome being a subject of your "attempted treatment" after and only after the IIG test, be it a few hours later or the next day as I'm not sure if you need to "recharge" as it were.
 
For everybody wondering what the protocol involves:

Simply go to UncaYimmy's stopvisionfromfeeling website and check the blog entitled "It's like I'm not even there".
Anita gave UY quite a bit of info on the protocol because she thought she could use it as a hook.
After you read the blog, go to the IIG site and check the original protocol.

Enjoy!
 
Last edited:
LightinDarkness said:
Anita will minimize the failure that this test will bring about. We will be told that, even though she failed, the test does not provide evidence against her paranormal claims. Excuses will be made of varying degrees to explain the failure and paint the picture that, even though she failed, she still has supernatural powers.

I sincerely hope I am wrong. I hope that - contrary to all evidence we have - that Anita proves she has supernatural powers OR that, when she fails (much more likely), that she sees she is a normal human being and lives a normal life without the woo. But the chance of either of these things happening - given Anita's conduct here - seems EXTREMELY low.
Click to expand...
Why don't you find out by allowing me to give you an attempted migraine treatment and observing the actual outcome that follows in the case that the attempted treatment does not coincide with any significant improvement in your migraine condition, rather than just speculating based on your own worst expectations? At least if I then were to respond dishonestly, you could tell everyone that and say that your suspicions were right. I am actually very eager to falsify this claim.
 
SezMe said:
Hang on Joe. I didn't say the test was poorly controlled. I would caution to not extrapolate my concerns too far. It's a decent protocol. Not perfect but not poor either.
Click to expand...
Yay. I think so too. I've wanted to PM you and ask how you feel about the protocol, but then I decided that it is probably best for the integrity of the Preliminary demonstration that you and I have no contact before the Preliminary. So I'm glad you answered my question without me having to ask you.
 
LightinDarkness said:
As someone that Anita has previously targeted: If any skeptics are seriously considering this - DO NOT DO IT. Anita has no respect for privacy or your well being and will plaster any communications you have with her on her website. Unless you want your personal information on VFF's website permanently, do NOT submit to her woo healings. As we all know, a 1 on 1 migraine "healing" isn't anywhere close of a good test of VFF's claimed healing powers to begin with.
Click to expand...
Actually, LightinDarkness and me were corresponding in private messages since the discussion thread was then temporarily closed. LightinDarkness wanted us to make our conversations public afterwards, also I asked him/her to object in case he/she did not want me to publish the content and received no objection. Also I subsequently removed the content from my website as requested.
 
Last edited:
JoeTheJuggler said:
I disagree with the notion that an inconclusive test is OK as long as the claimaint fails. (Which is pretty much the reasoning behind using a poorly-controlled test for a preliminary.) Again, that approach is anathema to skepticism.
Click to expand...
If I can't pass the Preliminary, there is no hope that I could pass a more elaborately and more strictly designed formal test, and I would be happy to conclude on the claim as falsified if I fail the Preliminary.
 
wardenclyffe said:
Completely OT: What happened to UncaYimmy? I know he's got his own site, but that never stopped him from posting in JREF. Did I miss an indignant "Well I'm leaving!" message?
Click to expand...
Now that there is finally tangible progress, perhaps he abides by,

"If you don't have anything bad to say, don't say anything at all."​
 
LostAngeles said:
I am a skeptic who suffers migraines and lives in L.A. I plan on attending the test and would welcome being a subject of your "attempted treatment" after and only after the IIG test, be it a few hours later or the next day as I'm not sure if you need to "recharge" as it were.
Click to expand...
GeeMack was kind enough to bring something to our attention, #237 Migraine Thread,

GeeMack said:
Of course that would be attempting to perform a medical treatment without a license, a felony in California. Fact is, even your solicitation for it here is a violation of the law. Interstate commerce laws might add another layer of complication to the matter. A conviction would likely involve prison time.

This legislation applies anyone who is not otherwise licensed as a health care provider under California law and "who practices or attempts to practice, or who advertises or holds himself or herself out as practicing, any system or mode of treating the sick or afflicted in this state, or who diagnoses, treats, operates for, or prescribes for any ailment, blemish, deformity, disease, disfigurement, disorder, injury, or other physical or mental condition of any person..." [California's Business and Professions Code Section 2052].
Click to expand...

My reply to GeeMack was that my intention is not to practice treatment, but to investigate it, but that these might not be distinguishable by law. I am of course very interested in investigating the migraine claim, however as always I will take great caution to follow all laws and regulations.

Note that I have only given an attempted migraine treatment to one person before and that this person was close enough of an acquaintance to be defined as a friend, and by North Carolina law I did nothing impermissible then. But this would be different, not only are California laws obviously different, but you are also not an acquaintance and that actually changes things.

Thank you for volunteering, however let me first carefully look into what applies in California law.

And how come everybody thinks they are going to attend the test? UncaYimmy is saying that he's gonna be there, SezMe of course will, and now a third person. I thought the IIG only allows members of the IIG, UCLA scientists, and the press to attend. But don't get me wrong, I wish everybody could be there. I hope to see you there.

Thank you GeeMack. And LostAngeles.
 
Farencue said:
For everybody wondering what the protocol involves:

Simply go to UncaYimmy's stopvisionfromfeeling website and check the blog entitled "It's like I'm not even there".
Anita gave UY quite a bit of info on the protocol because she thought she could use it as a hook.
After you read the blog, go to the IIG site and check the original protocol.

Enjoy!
Click to expand...
I strongly object to all of what you said. I was not revealing information about the protocol to try to manipulate UncaYimmy, it was just that I was so tremendously eager to talk to him. In spite of the strange dynamics between me and Jim Carr, I have known him since I first came here and he used to be quite nice, and I choose to still think of him that way.

Did you guys know that once Jim Carr told me that he was drinking because his wife was upset at him because she thought that he had been flirting with me, and that all of this was a lie to gain sympathy from me because he was trying to find out the test date? He did get sympathy from me until I found out he was lying, but he did not get the test date from me.

Please tell us where on the IIG website the protocol is posted.

I do agree with the "enjoy" part though, I love that protocol.
 
Last edited:
VisionFromFeeling said:
<snip> UncaYimmy is saying that he's gonna be there... <snip>
Click to expand...

No, he isn't saying that. He mentioned, one time, that he hoped he might make it. That is not the same as repeatedly stating that he has concrete plans to attend. You are twisting words, as usual.
 
You guys, the final protocol is actually very different from what is posted on UncaYimmy's blog! That was discussing an earlier draft! Truth is, you guys have no clue about the final protocol!
 
visionfromfeeling said:
i strongly object to all of what you said. I was not revealing information about the protocol to try to manipulate uncayimmy, it was just that i was so tremendously eager to talk to him. In spite of the strange dynamics between me and jim carr, i have known him since i first came here and he used to be quite nice, and i choose to still think of him that way.

Did you guys know that once jim carr told me that he was drinking because his wife was upset at him because she thought that he had been flirting with me, and that all of this was a lie to gain sympathy from me because he was trying to find out the test date? He did get sympathy from me until i found out he was lying, but he did not get the test date from me.
...
Click to expand...

Evidence?
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
Did you guys know that once Jim Carr told me that he was drinking because his wife was upset at him because she thought that he had been flirting with me, and that all of this was a lie to gain sympathy from me because he was trying to find out the test date? He did get sympathy from me until I found out he was lying, but he did not get the test date from me.
Click to expand...

Not true.

And what does it have to do with the thread topic?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom