The VFF Test is On!

[Uncayimmy]

It was great fun. The hard part was knowing for a month and staying away from the threads.

Now that it's over, it's amusing to think of what might have happened if I had dropped a false hint or two about that organ donation I might have made a few years back...

Wow. I had no clue whatsoever. I noticed you were around less and less on the Stop Vision From Feeling site and wondered why, but it didn't even occur to me that you were involved. Excellent work!

 

[Uncayimmy]

Oh, when I watched it, she had all these papers with places to put her guesses on each of the 36 possible locations of kidneys, and she handed them to Jim. How many trials is that?

Three, because she gave three answers during the test, and the IIG only confirmed as right/wrong those three answers. We have no definitive data about anything else. I find it interesting that you will be a pedant about cold vs warm reading yet want to insist that notes are the same as answers, especially when we haven't seen her full notes.

 

[laca]

Prove it or shut up.

Why don't you prove me a liar or false memory or shut up?

Nope. It's your claim, you have to prove it, not the other way around. So, I guess, it's time to ask you to shut up.

Riiiight, just like you said that if you failed the test, your claim would be falsified. You had your chance to prove you're honest, and you blew it. From now on, Liar is your middle name.

I wasn't expecting to do as good as I did.

Liar. You said your ability works 100% of the time. You expected to get 100%. You fell miserably short of that number.

No, you don't. You had 6 people, not thousands. Pick one at random. "Feel" that you're wrong. Move on to the next one, until you "feel" you're right. Choose that as your final answer. 100% success rate. Guaranteed. Unless of course, you don't actually know whether you're right or wrong beforehand.

Read carefully next time. What I said was that in Dr. Carlson there was a one in thousands chance of guessing correctly that the left kidney was missing. One person, but thousands of various possible health information. It seems I do know when I'm right or wrong beforehand.

What? How does that relate to what I said? Please comment on why you did not use your newly found ability (knowing you're right or wrong beforehand) to ace the test? Could it be because it's bull?

Make that a psychological test, one that can pinpoint the exact mental illness you have. We've long passed the point where it wasn't sure you had one.

Synesthesia is not a mental illness. Nor is it a mental illness to know when you know that a kidney is missing.

I did not say synesthesia is a mental illness. I said take a test which would tell you what mental illness you have, because some of us are pretty certain that is the case.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Why don't you prove me a liar or false memory or shut up?

I refer you again, to post number 935.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Personally, I'm still on the fence about her. I can't decide if she knows she's a fraud or she's truly convinced herself. (Although I'm leaning towards fraud...)

I've said this plenty of times before: The fraud thing doesn't make any sense while self-delusion and mental illness explains everything.

Sure, we skeptics know that many if not most practicing psychics are outright frauds. They deliberately scam people. But I challenge people to show me an example where any of them have taken a path even remotely similar to what Anita has done.

Why does she spend all her time trying to convince skeptics and skeptic groups and virtually no time going after woos, which is the total opposite of 99.99% of psychics?

Someone with Narcissistic Personality Disorder "believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)." She often refers to other woos with contempt or condescension while constantly calling herself a scientist, skeptic and "role model" for woos.

If you cherry pick a few elements, she looks like a fraud. But when you step back and look at the big picture, the only thing that explains everything, including the "lies", is a delusional disorder. I put lies in quotes because she doesn't believe they are lies. If a fraud takes a misstep and gets caught in a lie, she backs off. Anita instead hammers us trying to get us to believe her. She is truly baffled as to why we don't believe her.

And most importantly, frauds don't submit to tests they don't think they can scam. Anita has done a number of tests and failed. Miserably. She has even administered self-tests where should could like about the results, but she reports data that shows she has no powers, and then tries to spin it in such a way as to show there is something really there. That just makes no sense if she's a fraud and complete sense if she's caught in a delusion.

Fortunately, the IIG test was a big stage and everyone can see her delusions at work. Everyone, that is, except her. And what does she want to do now? Do more "tests" so she can prove to skeptics and herself that there really is something there.

 

[Sean84]

Are we not, at this point, only reinforcing her delusions by playing the part of the envious detractors? She needs a professional, that's all there is to it.

The test however was extremely meaningful, I watched a live psychological experiment with a severely deluded person and how she reacted to the truth... It was quite sad. I wish her the best and hope she seeks treatment.

 

[jhunter1163]

Folks, the best thing we can do for Anita at this point is just to drop the whole thing. Sean's right-we're just feeding her attention cravings. Negative attention is still attention, and as long as she's getting it she's going to persist with her delusions and not seek the help she so obviously needs.

I know it's hard to resist the temptation when she says something particularly outrageous, but please, let's make the effort.

 

[Maia]

So you claim. For those who may not be familiar with this claim, Anita took an on-line synesthesia screening test. It's designed not as a diagnosis, but to see if you might have something worth looking into. There are a number of forms of synesthesia, so you take just the tests that apply to you.

.

Hey, UY, where's that test? Do you have a link? It sounds fun.

I agree that it would be best to ignore Anita's continued claims at this point, but it's true that it's difficult to do. People have a natural desire to try to figure out what's going on in a situation like this, and then there's the weird train-wreck fascination of it all... well, not to mention that I don't think ignoring her is going to make it any more likely that she'll seek help anyway.

 

[Drs_Res]

I do believe you can find the test here: http://www.synesthete.org/

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Which means she did not know the results. Then at the end of each test, she expresses some vague sense of how she did. After the test is over, she then claims to "know" how she did in each test. Finally, and utterly amazingly, she claims (#1539) "And I knew the accuracy of each trial beforehand" and "All it is, is I feel kidneys when I look at people, and I know the accuracy beforehand." My bold.

Not vague, SezMe. Quite clear.

Here, in slow motion we see how Anita comes to her justifications of her "powers". It also perfectly explains the "knowing" of Carlson's condition. She rewrites history in her own brain as time goes on, each progressive step becoming very, very real to her. NO WONDER she claims she doesn't have false memories. With her approach to reality, it is actually true.

You may certainly suspect that, but unfortunately in your case I did detect Dr. Carlson missing a kidney before he told us about it. Sorry if that confuses you.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

She ignored me completely. When we were asked to stand up, I was looking for her. She had her back turned to us and was looking at her notes. Poor thing seemed small and slightly embarrassed.

I've watched the video of the demonstration and the interview. All the words are there but you really can not see just how lost and ridiculous Anita looked. That horrible outfit, you could almost see the script that went with it in her head. When she was starting the spin, I felt so bad for her that I actually teared up. Simultaneously I wanted to shake her until she could think straight.

It's very frustrating to watch someone with so much potential flush it all away over nothing.

What ever. I felt happy after the test. And, I'm still happy about the test. Sorry that your delusions aren't correct.

 

[desertgal]

Folks, the best thing we can do for Anita at this point is just to drop the whole thing. Sean's right-we're just feeding her attention cravings. Negative attention is still attention, and as long as she's getting it she's going to persist with her delusions and not seek the help she so obviously needs.

I know it's hard to resist the temptation when she says something particularly outrageous, but please, let's make the effort.

Agreed, and mea culpa. I let myself get sucked back into Anita's delusional vortex again last night. Never again.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

I did detect that Dr. Carlson is missing a left kidney before he told us. And I had no prior way of knowing, no clues, no visual symptoms. And logically even and using my best attempts at cold reading I was convinced that it could not be true. But the perception was very clear and turns out it was right.

And I knew the accuracy of each trial beforehand. Not vaguely. I talked about the fact that trial 1 and 3 were incorrect for the whole time during the breaks and about how trial 2 was right. The sound was turned off for most part of the breaks but that is all I talked about. Karen, James Underdown, and Mark Edwards heard all about it and can attest that it was not some vague comments. I was quite sure. And I was right. So I will have another test.

 

[wardenclyffe]

Someone, not one of the Subjects, has a weak heart and knows it and feels it too. No pain or heart attack, just weak contractions and possibly poor stroke volume (the amount of blood that the heart can pump out). Nothing to panic about. Just some exercise and healthy lifestyle would do it.

So, VfF either told this person about her diagnosis and this person agreed with her (I suppose we could find that out from the IIG membership), or she read this person's mind to find out what he or she knows. Which answer makes VfF look good?

Ward

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Well, to that, I have to think it is both.

When you are 'inside' a delusional disorder, you DO know the truth. You just don't acknowledge it. You do everything you can to keep from acknowledging it, in order to sustain your delusional reality.

Is Anita scamming? Yes. Is it intentional? Yes. But not for the purpose of hoodwinking other people, rather for the purpose of hoodwinking herself.

Look at it this way: inside her delusional reality, Anita gets to be extraordinary. The most extraordinary being, really, in the history of mankind. An elite 'star person', a 'being of light' or whatever-ultra intelligent, compassionate, empathetic, etc, etc, etc. It's a perspective that requires constant 'adjustment' - but the alternative is to acknowledge that she isn't extraordinary.

I would agree with this assessment.

That's partly why I've been pointing out that she's nothing special or new or unique at all. (I think this business of being "special" is not really different from what people have been saying for months: she's doing it for the attention.)

A person with a fantasy prone personality making outrageous claims and then lying about them for the attention she gets is nothing new at all.

It's just sad and embarrassing.

 

[Jonquill]

Well spotted Ward.
You could try and get VFF to say who it was but I think whatever answer she gave would just earn her more criticism so maybe best not to.

 

[Akhenaten]

I did detect that Dr. Carlson is missing a left kidney before he told us. And I had no prior way of knowing, no clues, no visual symptoms. And logically even and using my best attempts at cold reading I was convinced that it could not be true. But the perception was very clear and turns out it was right.

And I knew the accuracy of each trial beforehand. Not vaguely. I talked about the fact that trial 1 and 3 were incorrect for the whole time during the breaks and about how trial 2 was right. The sound was turned off for most part of the breaks but that is all I talked about. Karen, James Underdown, and Mark Edwards heard all about it and can attest that it was not some vague comments. I was quite sure. And I was right. So I will have another test.

You failed. Your claim is falsified. All of your claims are falsified.

All of your claim are belong to us. Wi nøt trei a høliday in Sweden this yër?

 

[wardenclyffe]

She would never tell, but I'm certain the IIG member would tell if VfF spoke to him/her. If there was no conversation, then we can only conclude that UncaYimmy needs to add another claim of "mind reading" to his website, www.stopvisionfromfeeling.com.

Ward

ETA: Response to #1640

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

And I knew the accuracy of each trial beforehand. Not vaguely. I talked about the fact that trial 1 and 3 were incorrect for the whole time during the breaks and about how trial 2 was right.

Liar.

And anyway, since you were wrong about the original claim, why should anyone care about your new claim?

And you still don't seem to realize that your new claim is a contradiction of your original claim. (You know--the one that says when you look at a person you can see their internal organs and you're never wrong about it?)

So your refusal to admit that the original claim is false contradicts your new claim. They can't possibly both be true (though they can be and almost certainly are both false). You can't have it both ways. If you want to go with your new claim, you've got to admit your original claim is false.

One thing we do know for sure is that you're a person who makes false claims of paranormal powers.

Your credibility is completely shot. Everyone now knows you're a liar, so you won't generate any interest in testing your new claim.

 

[desertgal]

So, VfF either told this person about her diagnosis and this person agreed with her (I suppose we could find that out from the IIG membership), or she read this person's mind to find out what he or she knows. Which answer makes VfF look good?

Ward

There are likely a few members of the IIG team who are over 40, and have some level of the arteriosclerosis that develops with age. They are likely aware of it, too-either from their doctor, or because they have one or more of the risk factors that often accompany AS, or simply because most of us who are over 40 have the common sense to know that aging is accompanied by some hardening of the arteries. Common sense also tells us that a healthy diet and exercise are preventatives.

What it boils down to is that Anita looked at some person and determined that he/she was over 40, and that this person is aware of their own age.

Quick. Someone alert the media.