VFF to Appear on Rational Alchemy

[desertgal]

ETA: Never mind. I wouldn't have gotten an answer, anyway.

The important thing, apparently is that Anita continue to explore and promote her beliefs, without being asked to provide any evidence to support them, or to consider alternative, rational explanations for them. Of course, she should also practice her guessing game, so she can pass the next test she manages to line up.

And, well, if someone gets hurt in the meantime, by believing her misinformation, at least she won't have been written off as untouchable.

Good luck with that, folks.

 

[Uncayimmy]

LiD: It would please me to beyond words if nobody responded to VFF. However, in my 20 years of experience in on-line discussions, I've never seen it work. Even in newsgroups with fewer than a dozen regulars, somebody still responds.

My purpose in starting this thread was twofold. First, I wanted there to be a record of reactions from JREF Forum members about the announcement on Anita's site. Second, I thought the interview was a huge mistake and a poor reflection on the JREF.

 

[bookitty]

really Bookitty?
Then why did Anita say this to Jeff Wagg:

"I recently had an experience where I tried to heal a man who is having devastating migraines, and he thinks it worked so now I'm having to investigate whether I'm a healer"

Faith (believe without proof) is basically irrational but part of the human tradition. Those who have veered away from a long-held faith do so in different ways. Some people wake up one morning and go "What was I thinking!?" Others might chip away at it a little bit at a time. "Well, x doesn't make sense but there is still y..."

A person raised as a Christian might start to question a few things in the Bible, then leave his specific church, then start reading the apologetics, followed by Dawkins until finally, years later, they end up with whatever form of agnosticism or atheism suits. At any time in between they might still self-identify as a Christian.

If they were to come across an atheist during this time of exploration, they might discuss their concerns or discoveries. If the atheist only hears that they still call themselves Christian, there will be no discussion.

 

[Uncayimmy]

[a bit off topic]With this, and the endless IM messages she seems to send you, this seems to be leaning towards stalker/obsessive territory. If you feel it is in that sort of realm, I would strongly recommend that you disengage from her entirely - including not participating in threads about her here, maybe handing over your STOP site to someone else. I say this purely out of concern - my sister dealt with someone displaying very similar behaviour, and it really is the best course of action.[/a bit off topic].

The sentiment is appreciated and something I've heard before. Actually, I was told of this possibility in my Secret Forum long before the obvious signs were out there. I agree with your assessment but not necessarily with the steps I should take to deal with it. Believe me, though, I take it seriously and have considered your recommendations before and again this time.

I agree that this is a bit off-topic, so I hope this slight derail doesn't go any further. I'll be happy to entertain PMs or discuss it over at StopVFF in more detail.

 

[Pup]

Here's my take on the topic, not that anybody cares, LOL.

If a skeptic runs into someone who claims paranormal abilities, a true skeptic (like a true Scotsman) is going to be open-minded initially, give them a chance to explain their abilities, and make sure that anything unusual or even close to paranormal is ruled out before dismissing them.

That's what I did when I first read Anita's posts and sent her the pills to analyze. When she failed such a simple test of her claimed abilities, I switched from skeptic to cynic and disbelieved anything else.

If a skeptic who'd known Anita for years saw me offering her the test with an open mind, he'd be rolling his eyes and saying, "oh no, not more attention! Don't take her seriously! She's already failed every test put to her! She'll go on forever, constantly changing her claims." I would have seemed to him like yet another patsy.

But apparently no one in the JREF circle knew all that then, so at that time, no one criticized the open-minded JREF members who helped her.

The problem seems to be that Jeff came to the interview as I came to Anita with the pills. Yet many of us assume (rightly, I think) that Jeff's interaction with Anita should have included the context that's been discovered in the JREF forum. Those who've fought long in the Anita wars here are rolling our eyes and saying, "oh no!" because now we do know the background.

 

[remirol]

You are using the argument from ignorance. You do not understand how someone can get a benefit from this, so you assume that they cannot.

You are wrong. I am challenging you to support your handwaving with actual examples of precisely how it is supposed to help her. I understand quite well how marketing works and am far more experienced in it than you realize; I also understand exactly how "skeptics" both are and aren't being taken for a ride here.

Consider this: Rational Alchemy decided to interview Anita about her IIG test. They asked Jeff to also be a guest. Should he have declined or accepted? If so, why?

Agents don't provide anything " concrete" they work with variables

Sounds like woo to me.

It seems to come down to the fact that you don't believe that i have the appropriate experience in promotion to be able to make the claims that i do.

I think that marketeers of all flavors simultaneously vastly overestimate and misunderstand the actual effects they have. For example, since UncaYimmy put his website up, is Anita more or less well-known?

Precisely my point.

 

[remirol]

The problem seems to be that Jeff came to the interview as I came to Anita with the pills. Yet many of us assume (rightly, I think) that Jeff's interaction with Anita should have included the context that's been discovered in the JREF forum. Those who've fought long in the Anita wars here are rolling our eyes and saying, "oh no!" because now we do know the background.

Precisely. I think Jeff was completely correct in his approach, because he was a guest at a non-JREF-sponsored interview. The audience for Rational Alchemy may or may not consist of people who are even members of the JREF, much less those who followed the drama-filled threads here in GenSkep. It doesn't reflect well on the JREF to come across frothing at the mouth and being obviously "out to get" someone.

 

[TheSkepticCanuck]

I want to state for the record that I think Anita has all the paranormal abilities of an eggplant. I agree with many of the posters here that her claims of paranormal abilities need to stop, one way or another. However, I have to wonder if we are going about it in the best way. Maybe we need to go back to the calm, rational, and conversational methods that were used initially. Yes, I know how well they worked (they didn't) back then, but maybe it is time to try again. She "seems" to be more willing to look at things a bit differently. Maybe if we engage her in calm and rational conversation, keeping the acrimony and accusations out of it, perhaps there is a slight chance we can help move her a bit further towards our ways of critical thinking, and away from the woo state of mind. It may not work, and may even give her more attention than she may deserve, but shouldn't we at least make the attempt. Maybe the woo veneer is starting to crack a bit. Maybe this is a crossroad, where she will either cross over to the light of rationality, or forever be lost in the void of woo-ness. I may be being naive and overly optimistic, but what do we really have to lose, other than some time, which we seem willing to spend criticizing her every statement anyway. I might be completely out to lunch on this, and I freely admit to the likeliness of it, but it may at least be worth discussing. I don't know one way or the other if this would be a good idea. I am merely putting it out there for discussion.

I have the tar on boil, and the chicken feathers bagged and ready, should you all decide I need to be tarred and feathered for making the suggestion.

 

[remirol]

I want to state for the record that I think Anita has all the paranormal abilities of an eggplant. I agree with many of the posters here that her claims of paranormal abilities need to stop, one way or another.

You cannot change someone else's behavior. :/

However, I have to wonder if we are going about it in the best way.

It is my opinion that you (collective "you") are not.

Maybe we need to go back to the calm, rational, and conversational methods that were used initially. Yes, I know how well they worked (they didn't) back then, but maybe it is time to try again. She "seems" to be more willing to look at things a bit differently. Maybe if we engage her in calm and rational conversation, keeping the acrimony and accusations out of it, perhaps there is a slight chance we can help move her a bit further towards our ways of critical thinking, and away from the woo state of mind.

Not bloody likely, IMO, but you (collective again) certainly need to go back to the calm, rational, and conversational methods, frankly. The way it's being done right now is atrocious and has done nothing more than make VFF more determined than ever. Look at RSL's website for the right way. Note how it is calm and rational, and doesn't spend a great deal of time trying to force Sylvia to admit she's wrong. Sylvia never will; she's a con artist through and through. RSL's approach has always been to educate others that Sylvia is wrong; it is completely irrelevant what Sylvia says except where it provides more fuel for the fire (incorrect predictions by Sylvia).

 

[Uncayimmy]

Consider this: Rational Alchemy decided to interview Anita about her IIG test. They asked Jeff to also be a guest.

He was not a guest. He is part of the regular cast as is Alison, another JREF staff member. If you're unaware of the basic facts, it would be better if you took a less active role in this discussion.

Precisely my point.

You keep using that phrase in this discussion after other people have made their points. How about saving us all the trouble and make your precise if uninformed points at the outset rather than using this post-hoc, "what you said is my point" technique that so far seems rather ineffective at either being precise or making a point? I really have no idea what you're arguing, but I'm pretty confident you lack the depth of knowledge about VFF to be making any sweeping claims about her popularity or ability to spin bad press.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Faith (believe without proof) is basically irrational but part of the human tradition. Those who have veered away from a long-held faith do so in different ways. Some people wake up one morning and go "What was I thinking!?" Others might chip away at it a little bit at a time. "Well, x doesn't make sense but there is still y..."

A person raised as a Christian might start to question a few things in the Bible, then leave his specific church, then start reading the apologetics, followed by Dawkins until finally, years later, they end up with whatever form of agnosticism or atheism suits. At any time in between they might still self-identify as a Christian.

If they were to come across an atheist during this time of exploration, they might discuss their concerns or discoveries. If the atheist only hears that they still call themselves Christian, there will be no discussion.

I've read the above three times, and I still don't get what you're driving at other than to say that sometimes people come around slowly while for others there's a pivotal event. In what way is Anita doing either?

Let's go back to her very first posts here:

It is only recently that I have found the courage to share this [her claims] openly.

We found out that this was a lie, didn't we? She was making the claims as Alenara years before she ever came here. The same claims.

I am not looking to verify this so that I could start to use it publicly.

We've learned otherwise, haven't we.

I am quite humble to the fact that many things that seem real, are not what they seem, so I do not claim to actually have this ability even though it seems so.

That's far from the truth. She was claiming to have this ability for years before making that statement.

Thank you for suggesting some good ways to test my ability. I will try some of them when I find the time. They are easy to arrange, and I agree that they can not prove an ability but could indicate if I do not seem to have extrasensory perception after all.

After 18 months she still hasn't found the time. In the few tests she has done, she has failed miserably, yet we know she hasn't backed away from her claims.

What would convince me that I am misinterpreting what I observe is if when checked against facts I would find out that my observation are consistently incorrect. I am quite open to finding out that this is not ESP at all, and I think that a test might be able to let us find out.

That's a funny one knowing what has transpired since November 7, 2008.

My point, Bookitty, is that if you read Anita's opening post on the JREF Forums and follow the thread for just a couple of pages, you will see the same false humility and willingness to falsify her claims. What she is doing now is no different than what she has done before. It's a pattern that she has repeated on this board.

So, the ball's in your court. What is she saying or doing now that is substantially (or even slightly) different than what she has done for the last 18 months? What am I missing in her words and behaviors to indicate that this is simply not more of the same?

I could tick off a dozen things she could do to indicate she has begun to change, but I won't because I don't trust her not to use them insincerely.

BTW, do you think it's a coincidence that since she can no longer post on my board, will have been unable to post on this board for five of the last six weeks due to being suspended, and the IIG talk has worn off that suddenly she has an interest in posting audio interviews with the most prominent people from all three organizations on her website? That doesn't strike you as a bit suspicious in terms of her motivations? It's not like there are thousands of posts explaining why she's wrong about her claims that she could be reading. No. She needs personal interviews to put on her website in order to start coming around, right?

 

[likelystory]

Jeff Wagg beleives he can let his woo-shield down when having discussions outside of the JREF..... Looks like the wheels of ''rational reasoning'' are falling off.

 

[Tumblehome]

I'm puzzled over the amount and severity of the reaction to VFF here. When I finally checked out one of the many threads aimed at her to see what the fuss was about, I was taken aback by the level of hate towards her which, I noticed, she handled calmly and very well.

Sure she's deluded and might have some degree of mental health issues (or not, I don't know), but there have been several people like that who've come here who haven't received nearly the attention and hate that VFF has. If she is merely an attention seeker, as some of you say, then you've given her a good home at JREF forums, even to the extent of having a StopVFF website dedicated to her!

Sorry, but VFF is no Sylvia Browne. Doesn't come close. So why make such a big deal?

 

[Uncayimmy]

I'm puzzled over the amount and severity of the reaction to VFF here. When I finally checked out one of the many threads aimed at her to see what the fuss was about, I was taken aback by the level of hate towards her which, I noticed, she handled calmly and very well.

Sure she's deluded and might have some degree of mental health issues (or not, I don't know), but there have been several people like that who've come here who haven't received nearly the attention and hate that VFF has. If she is merely an attention seeker, as some of you say, then you've given her a good home at JREF forums, even to the extent of having a StopVFF website dedicated to her!

If you see "no reason" for this type of "hate" and think that she has handled things "calmly and very well," then I think it's safe to say you haven't even read this thread in its entirety, much less the whole saga. Let's look at the latter first - calmly and well. VFF is on her fourth suspension.

November 30, 2009 - Visionfromfeeling has been suspended for 1 day for breaching a previous mod warning about the use of threats.

December 11, 2009 - VisionFromFeeling has been suspended for 7 days for repeated breaches of her Membership Agreement.

March 7, 2010 - VisionFromFeeling has been suspended for 7 days for attempting to circumvent a warning regard her signature, her ability to have a signature has also been removed. ETA 9th March: Following on from ignoring a warning to stop spamming me via PMs VisionFromFeeling's suspension has been extended.

March 27, 2010 - Visionfromfeeling has been suspended for 3 weeks for repeated breaches of her Membership Agreement.

This violations included personal attacks. Around the holidays she received 5 infractions for personal attacks, but no members were suspended because the admins said they were unable to deal with the situation promptly.

She has threatened me with lawsuits and police action on more than one occasion. She has harassed me by phone. She has publicly accused me of adultery and sexual harassment. She has repeatedly lied to people here. Check out the Harassment thread on my website for more details including how she attempted to get a member here fired from her job.

If that's handling things "calmly and well" then we'll just have to disagree.

As for the level of hate, to whom are you referring? That's a strong accusation to level at people. People here have been mistreated by her after giving her more than a warm welcome (the link to her first thread is above). After time there comes a certain level of understandable frustration and impatience. I think it's unfair to call it hate.

ETA (oops)

Sorry, but VFF is no Sylvia Browne. Doesn't come close. So why make such a big deal?

Hopefully she will never come close as long as www.StopVisionFromFeeling.com and the Bad Psychics website make her antics known. Maybe if skeptics had taken steps like this several years ago she wouldn't have gone on a tour of Poland as Alenara the Breatharian giving lectures telling people they could live on air and prana. Maybe when she told people she could use her special abilities to see prana they might have looked around the web and found out just how unreliable she is.

The idea is stop people like this before they get in Montel. It's much harder once they're on the bestseller lists and talk show circuit.

 

[Tumblehome]

Okay, I have to admit I wasn't aware of all the personal stuff. If what you say is true, then I have to offer my apologies.

I also have to admit I haven't read much of the threads about her, but for a reason: for me, who isn't involved, they're just endless, tiresome rounds of bickering. Even if your anger at her is justified, it's not what I come here for. Your perspective is obviously different, so again, my apologies for shooting from the hip.

 

[lionking]

Okay, I have to admit I wasn't aware of all the personal stuff. If what you say is true, then I have to offer my apologies.

I also have to admit I haven't read much of the threads about her, but for a reason: for me, who isn't involved, they're just endless, tiresome rounds of bickering. Even if your anger at her is justified, it's not what I come here for. Your perspective is obviously different, so again, my apologies for shooting from the hip.

I actually agree with your sentiments. The emotional investment of many here in someone who is essentially a harmless woo is a sight to behold.

 

[wardenclyffe]

OK, I don't know how the quote within a quote dealy works, but here's the discussion:

Originally Posted by wardenclyffe
Well, she now has three "prominent skeptics" (and we know how much she likes those) saying that the results of the earlier test warrant another test. While Mr. Wagg might not represent JREF on the podcast, he certainly revealed that discussions about testing her have happened at JREF.

To which Jeff replied:

No, I didn't. I know of no such discussions.

I went back and re-listened and this is what I was talking about (found at 39:15):

Jeff Wagg (referring to groups that might test her other than IIG): "There's the JREF, um you know, we've talked about that a little bit."

I interpreted that to mean that the JREF had talked a little bit about testing VfF. After re-listening, I realize that other interpretations are possible. I have no idea how VfF or the audience interpreted it.

But no matter the meaning of that particular phrase, I think there's a problem Jeff Wagg's contention that, "There are many groups that would be willing to test you, so that's not really a big issue." I think that is a big issue.

Perhaps there are groups that would be willing to test her. Maybe they have the wherewithal to haul an ultrasound machine out to verify the results. Maybe they can find a bunch of people who are missing kidneys. Maybe. I'm surprised the IIG was able to do it, so others might be able to as well. But I'm guessing that the test will have to be conducted by the JREF or it won't happen at all. I don't know who she could convince to do it.

Ward

 

[Ashles]

I'm curious as to why Jeff Wagg agreed to the interview with Anita specifically.

There are any number of people around who claim paranormal abilities and are unable to demonstrate them.
I am wondering why Jeff decided to pick Anita in particular. Especially as her claims actually have been debunked (as opposed to someone with paranormal claims who hadn't yet been tested).

 

[Locknar]

I actually agree with your sentiments. The emotional investment of many here in someone who is essentially a harmless woo is a sight to behold.

Agreed.

I'm curious as to why Jeff Wagg agreed to the interview with Anita specifically.

There are any number of people around who claim paranormal abilities and are unable to demonstrate them.
I am wondering why Jeff decided to pick Anita in particular. Especially as her claims actually have been debunked (as opposed to someone with paranormal claims who hadn't yet been tested).

That is a excellent question.

 

[zooterkin]

I'm curious as to who this Nigel Aves is, who seemed very keen to credit Anita with 2 successes out of 3 tests. If success was defined in a certain way by the protocol, there was probably a good reason for it, and going back to redefine 'success', without, apparently, knowing the ins and outs, doesn't seem like a good way to proceed to me.