The VFF Test is On!

volatile said:
Given two glass jars, one containing hydrogen gas and one containing oxygen, could you tell which was which just by looking at them?

If so, why are we bothering with the kidneys?
Click to expand...


paperskater said:
I suspect it's the same reason why she won't bother with the pill test. ;)
Click to expand...


This whole thing is becoming like a common fairytale that we all grew up with.

I'm impressed with the fidelity with which the whole story keeps being reassembled every now and then.
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
...You know perfectly well that the only reason I am interested in attempting another migraine treatment with a Skeptic is to falsify the claim that a man makes that I induced a significant improvement in his migraine condition. It is funny how you all think I am the typical woo, when I am not! I am in fact trying to falsify a claim, but you can't see that because you have your mind set up about anyone who makes a paranormal claim. ....
Click to expand...

Strange that VisionFromFeeling thinks that doing an att. treatment on the West Coast could possibly falsify the 'claim' of improving a migraine condition.
Why not tell us about the Revolutionary Army 'ghosts'?
Almost as believable, really.
 
Yeah, press releases exist with the hope that lazy journalists will reprint them word for word with no editorializing. It makes it seem like a legitimate media source wrote it instead of the organization that released it.

The UncaYimmy quotes seem to come from his website rather than from an interview (I could be wrong) and VfF claims that no one tried to contact her. That seems particularly bad since she's right on campus.

She can now write a letter to the editor. We know she likes to write.

Ward
 
Anita is beginning to get what she is really after, here is a article about her in UNCG's student newspaper:
http://www.nineronline.com/viewpoint/unc-charlotte-s-student-inner-sight-1.2056167

Interestingly there is a comment by "James Randi" - no way to know if its really him (I doubt it), but the sentiment is that expressed by a majority of JREF users anyways.

Sorry if someone already posted this, I just can't bring myself to read through the pages of Anita's prose to see if someone has already posted this.
 
Yes, it's been posted up, LightInDarkness.
Anyway, thanks for the headsup about the comment, the only one up as of writing.
Here it is:
Comments
1 comments
James Randi Sun Nov 8 2009 15:39 The item on Anita Ikonen says that her webpage -- www.visionfromfeeling.com -- has details about her claims. None appear there. These vapid "medical" claims are made all over the world, and we've tested many of them over the years. They all fail, yet the victims continue to believe, and suffer financial and emotional loss as results. Ikonen will fail, too, but it will make no difference. The suckers will go in in their delusions, and she'll laugh all the way to the bank...
Click to expand...
 
Comments
1 comments
James Randi Sun Nov 8 2009 15:39 The item on Anita Ikonen says that her webpage -- www.visionfromfeeling.com -- has details about her claims. None appear there. These vapid "medical" claims are made all over the world, and we've tested many of them over the years. They all fail, yet the victims continue to believe, and suffer financial and emotional loss as results. Ikonen will fail, too, but it will make no difference. The suckers will go in in their delusions, and she'll laugh all the way to the bank...
Click to expand...

Typical Randi style, to be sure. But could be anybody. Certainly not a comment in the true skeptical spirit. We all expect VFF to fail, but to state it as a certainty, before the test, is not true skepticism.

Let us wait and see.....

I agree this could be a mere publicity stunt. For selling stuff, especially to believers, bad publicity is far better than no publicity. We will have to live with the fact that in the process of testing paranormal claims, we give the claimants publicity.

Hans
 
More and more Anita is displaying Schizotypal Personality, as discussed in this article.

I have little doubt in my mind now that this is the disorder that she suffers from.
 
Thanks for the update, Sezme.
I see there are other claimants in the tube as well.
I'm crossing me fingers (oops) for the live streaming for the 21 November event.
 
GeeMack said:
Is your definition of failure like most of us consider failure, like when you aren't able to demonstrate that you actually have magical x-ray vision, or will it be like that class you failed and still claimed to have a 4.0 GPA? Maybe it will be like when you failed to see a guy's missing kidney with your magical x-ray vision, then claimed that you actually had seen it, but only after he told you about it later? What exactly will you accept as failure in this demonstration? How much waffling are you going to allow yourself, or expect us to allow, so you can claim you didn't fail (by your definition) after you actually do fail (by everyone else's definition)?

You see, if we don't know what definition of "failure" you're going to use until after the IIG show, you'll pretty much be able to warp the results into any sort of dishonest position you like, won't you?
Click to expand...
Dear GeeMack, if members of the IIG hit me over the head with papers, yell at me or insult me during the time I am trying to take their test, then I will do the same as I did in that one course for which I received an F: I will walk out and not bother with mean people.

However, I do expect the IIG to behave. Besides, if they wouldn't, it would be on camera. Don't worry, I will accept a failure when a failure isn't because of someone else.
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
Dear GeeMack, if members of the IIG hit me over the head with papers, yell at me or insult me during the time I am trying to take their test, then I will do the same as I did in that one course for which I received an F: I will walk out and not bother with mean people.

However, I do expect the IIG to behave. Besides, if they wouldn't, it would be on camera. Don't worry, I will accept a failure when a failure isn't because of someone else.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:
 
From http://www.nineronline.com/viewpoint/unc-charlotte-s-student-inner-sight-1.2056167
James Randi Sun Nov 8 2009 15:39 The item on Anita Ikonen says that her webpage -- www.visionfromfeeling.com -- has details about her claims. None appear there. These vapid "medical" claims are made all over the world, and we've tested many of them over the years. They all fail, yet the victims continue to believe, and suffer financial and emotional loss as results. Ikonen will fail, too, but it will make no difference. The suckers will go in in their delusions, and she'll laugh all the way to the bank...
Click to expand...
No claims on my website? That is because I only have one, and that one claim is well-covered on my website. The medical perceptions are my only paranormal claim. The claim is that I would have experienced accuracy and real-world correlation with health perceptions in cases where it shouldn't be possible to know the information that I did. The other things are just descriptions of what else is involved in my experience of colors and vibrational information, but I do not claim the other things to have any interesting accuracy and they are not paranormal claims.

And how dare you talk about financial and emotional loss? Who on earth have I scammed with my paranormal claim? The only one undergoing financial and emotional loss is me! I've spent well in excess of $1,000 on my IIG Preliminary, and I am constantly the target of personal attack from internet Skeptics! For the sake of science, I will endure.

What do you mean I'll laugh my way to the bank? Only if I win the Challenge, you dope.*

*If this comment was indeed posted by ours James Randi, I do apologize since you are entitled to make some comments, I'll love you anyway for the awesome work you've done all these years. :blush:
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
From http://www.nineronline.com/viewpoint/unc-charlotte-s-student-inner-sight-1.2056167
No claims on my website? That is because I only have one, and that one claim is well-covered on my website. The medical perceptions are my only paranormal claim. The claim is that I would have experienced accuracy and real-world correlation with health perceptions in cases where it shouldn't be possible to know the information that I did. The other things are just descriptions of what else is involved in my experience of colors and vibrational information, but I do not claim the other things to have any interesting accuracy and they are not paranormal claims.

And how dare you talk about financial and emotional loss? Who on earth have I scammed with my paranormal claim? The only one undergoing financial and emotional loss is me! I've spent well in excess of $1,000 on my IIG Preliminary, and I am constantly the target of personal attack from internet Skeptics! For the sake of science, I will endure.

What do you mean I'll laugh my way to the bank? Only if I win the Challenge, you dope.*

*If this comment was indeed posted by ours James Randi, I do apologize since you are entitled to make some comments, I'll love you anyway for the awesome work you've done all these years. :blush:
Click to expand...

Why are you responding to this here? Have the guts, at least, to respond to it where it was originally posted. You know, where the person has a better chance of reading your response.
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
From http://www.nineronline.com/viewpoint/unc-charlotte-s-student-inner-sight-1.2056167
No claims on my website? That is because I only have one, and that one claim is well-covered on my website. The medical perceptions are my only paranormal claim. The claim is that I would have experienced accuracy and real-world correlation with health perceptions in cases where it shouldn't be possible to know the information that I did. The other things are just descriptions of what else is involved in my experience of colors and vibrational information, but I do not claim the other things to have any interesting accuracy and they are not paranormal claims.
Click to expand...

You actually believe that this paragraph is true, don't you?!

By the way: have you read the literature on memory yet? Yes or no?
 
volatile said:
Given two glass jars, one containing hydrogen gas and one containing oxygen, could you tell which was which just by looking at them?

If so, why are we bothering with the kidneys?
Click to expand...

volatile said:
Your perceptions are a paranormal claim. Don't you get that?
Click to expand...

volatile said:
OK. And if you fail the IIG test, do you accept that your failure will suggest rather strongly that your previous perception is falsely imagined? You need to seriously re-think the use of the world "again" - the IIG test is not testing if you can do it "again", it's testing if you can do it at all.

That is very, very important and something you need to face up to if you're serious and honest about "falsification".

Have you read the literature on hindisght bias / confabulation / false memory? I've asked on numerous occasions but you've never answered. Yes or no.
Click to expand...

Let's not let these slide, eh Anita? A response would be greatly appreciated!
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
*massive snippity*

I've spent well in excess of $1,000 on my IIG Preliminary, and I am constantly the target of personal attack from internet Skeptics! For the sake of science, I will endure.
Click to expand...

You're a paragon of constancy and fortitude, Anita, and a inspiration to us all.
 
Last edited:
Actually, Empress, I rather think it's the mods who have shown constancy and fortitude. :)

From VFF:
The claim is that I would have experienced accuracy and real-world correlation with health perceptions in cases where it shouldn't be possible to know the information that I did. The other things are just descriptions of what else is involved in my experience of colors and vibrational information, but I do not claim the other things to have any interesting accuracy and they are not paranormal claims.
Click to expand...

My bolding.
A fascinating choice of language, indeed.
Obviously, a claim based on unverified events in the past is difficult, if not impossible to verify or falsify.
I daresay this could always be an 'out' for our claimant, whatever the results of the demonstration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom