Put a Fork in her she's done! VfF

[Robo Sapien]

Hug then?

Abso-freakin-lutely.

 

[Trent Wray]

Sorry if you feel insulted that I have the audacity to criticize the obvious USELESSNESS of these tactics, but the proof is in the pudding. You can take it into consideration and offer a civil rebuttal, or act like a scorned little girl, your choice. So far, Trent is the only one here who has responded with a modicum of tact. Thanks, Trent.

Hey thanx dude! I appreciate that

 

[Uncayimmy]

Skepticism is not about debunking, it is about learning and exploration. The more you argue with Anita, the more you compound the shame she will inevitably have to face, and thus you push her deeper into the recluse of this fantasy she has. That is counterproductive to the prime directive of skepticism. You have already debunked her, there is no point in continuing this circus.

Let me reiterate this since you obviously missed it the first time. As skeptics we will not allow these ridiculous and misleading statements to go unchallenged on a forum dedicated to examining paranormal claims. As evidenced by the numerous uninformed opinions we regularly see in VFF threads, it's obvious that if anything, we are not correcting her statements enough.

To be true skeptics, we should be trying to help her change her ways.

That's nonsense. Skepticism is a way of thinking. What you are describing is evangelism, which is something else entirely. We're not therapists. We examine ideas critically. If others learn from that, great. Who are you to try to change people or demand that others follow your lead?

I realize that this is a tall order, but I enjoy a challenge and I know I am not the only one. If you are not up to it, then unsubscribe from this thread and save your energy for other topics where you can be of use. You are accomplishing precisely squat in here.

Tell you what you what: When you have read all of both of her websites (VFF and Alenara), www.StopVisionFromFeeling.com, every single thread on this forum about VFF, watched the IIG tests from start to finish, listened to the RA interview and other podcasts, seen her posts on other forums, and read blogs written about her, then you'll be in a position to lecture others about what they should and shouldn't do. Right now you're just a latecomer to the party who has very little idea what he's talking about, and it shows.

 

[Ethan Thane Athen]

...Why at the end when Mark is asking her to take the napkin off his hand does she squeal "no I can't look, I just know I got it wrong!" What? Why did she say two fingers then if she knew it was wrong?
....

Because she can't lose then. If she's right, it's a hit, if she's wrong it doesn't count as falsifying her claims 'cos she said she was wrong. She gets to keep her illusions and gets to still feel special.

 

[Moochie]

Well, what we have here is a failure to commiserate. And why should we feel shame in that? Whenever I can, I take the low road -- at my age and state of debauchery I simply can't take the high road, even if I wanted to.

Ms. Ikonen came here well over a year ago and has generated millions of words, both her own and those from interested others. That alone is worth something -- to me, anyway. Being neither Scottish, Chinese, nor Jewish, I nevertheless like my entertainment to be cheap and relatively pain free. Ms. Ikonen satisfies on both counts.

At this stage of proceedings I really don't care what she claims or believes. Most sensible folk will figure out what truth is to be gleaned from the saga by themselves. I suspect that many, whether posting or merely looking in every day to see the latest installment, are happy to have some cheap entertainment that is relatively pain free. And in this world of Simon Cowells, erupting volcanoes, outstanding credit card debts and Domino's pizzas, that's something to be treasured, even if only a little bit.



M.

 

[bookitty]

I will concede that I come across as standoff-ish, but the point I'm making is that all this debunking and discrediting isn't just ineffective where Anita is concerned, but actually damaging to the results that we all seek. Your logic is superb, but Anita is not a logical person. Throwing reason at her is having an opposite effect, it just makes her behave more unreasonably. I liken it to the big doomsday planet from The Fifth Element, where the military fired missiles at it, and that just made it swell up even bigger and angrier.

I agree. Do you have any specific ideas?

 

[Robo Sapien]

Let me reiterate this since you obviously missed it the first time. As skeptics we will not allow these ridiculous and misleading statements to go unchallenged on a forum dedicated to examining paranormal claims. As evidenced by the numerous uninformed opinions we regularly see in VFF threads, it's obvious that if anything, we are not correcting her statements enough.

You are right, go ahead and keep beating your head against the wall. I'm such a fool for being results-oriented, who am I to point out that you've made no progress whatsoever? Jeez I feel dumb.

That's nonsense. Skepticism is a way of thinking. What you are describing is evangelism, which is something else entirely. We're not therapists. We examine ideas critically. If others learn from that, great. Who are you to try to change people or demand that others follow your lead?

You actually have a point there, so I will recant.

Tell you what you what: When you have read all of both of her websites (VFF and Alenara), www.StopVisionFromFeeling.com, every single thread on this forum about VFF, watched the IIG tests from start to finish, listened to the RA interview and other podcasts, seen her posts on other forums, and read blogs written about her, then you'll be in a position to lecture others about what they should and shouldn't do. Right now you're just a latecomer to the party who has very little idea what he's talking about, and it shows.

You are the 2nd person to make the ridiculous suggestion that I STFU until I've read every word of every thread and every page on every web site ever associated with this drama. Otherwise, I am completely unqualified to say a word about it. Argument from authority much?

 

[Uncayimmy]

You are right, go ahead and keep beating your head against the wall. I'm such a fool for being results-oriented, who am I to point out that you've made no progress whatsoever? Jeez I feel dumb.

You should feel dumb because you don't even know what my goal is yet you're trying to tell me I am failing. My goal is not to change VFF's beliefs. What's intersting is that if you believe she is sincere in her latest claims of wanting to be a "real" skeptic, then I have succeeded in this fantasy goal you have for me, and I'm actually arguing against my own success by pointing out that her transformation is insincere. So, yeh, that is pretty dumb.

Just so you know, one of my goals is to correct her lies and misleading statements. There have been countless responses from members who, when given proper context and background information, have seen VFF for the liar and fraud that she is. Had her statements not been challenged, they would think she's a science student examining "apparent accuracy" in her perceptions rather than a life-long believer in woo (who thinks she's not human and can talk to ghosts) who has repeatedly demonstrated that she has no abilities.

Another goal is to keep her from harming others with this stuff. When she contacted a migraine sufferers Meetup group to offer to "heal" them (even though they expressly stated no practitioners were allowed), it was my website the organizer looked at. She thanked me and took her Meetup group private. I've also received e-mails from other people thanking me for the site.

You are the 2nd person to make the ridiculous suggestion that I STFU until I've read every word of every thread and every page on every web site ever associated with this drama. Otherwise, I am completely unqualified to say a word about it. Argument from authority much?

I will also suggest that you read up on what Argument From Authority really means because what you describe, while inaccurate, would not be an Argument From Authority even if true.

Nobody said you are unqualified to say anything. What we're suggesting is that you, like many before you in the VFF saga, are telling people what they should be doing without having done your due diligence. You don't know the whole story or even half of it. You don't know who we are dealing with, and you know very little about we have and haven't done. But here you are telling us we should unsubscribe from the thread.

The VFF saga encompasses millions of words (literally) and hours of video and interviews. There have been threats of lawsuits and police action. Threats of getting people fired from jobs. Accusations of harassment and adultery. Harassing phone calls. Accusations of stalking. Talk of suicide. Blatant lies. E-mails of "I think I'm dying, so if you don't hear from me, know I LOVE YOU!" Failed tests. Uncompleted tests. Ignored results. Spun results. Ever-evolving claims. Post-diction. Misleading statements.

You are the one telling other skeptics what course of action they should take with VFF. All I and others are telling you to do is do your research before making such bold statements. Your response is that you seem confident that you don't need to know what others know in order to boss them around. Pardon me if I look upon that with scorn.

As for me personally, I have examined and re-examined my position numerous times. I have had my tactics questioned repeatedly, and I have defended them with buttloads of data. So, when some newbie comes along spouting the same rhetoric I've heard before and claiming he doesn't need to learn the whole story before ordering people around, he's not going to get warm reception. I'm also not going to rehash the same arguments and explanations I've made countless times before. I don't owe you that.

If you want to call yourself a skeptic, understand that skepticism is not just about applying critical thinking to some of the information. It means looking at all of the information. Deliberate ignorance is not skepticism, and expecting people to repeat their arguments just for you is selfish and lazy.

And before you question my character, understand that I have over 100,000 words in private Skype chats and e-mails from VFF that the public hasn't seen and probably never will. A handful of people have seen various parts of it, and to a man those people are my staunchest defenders and the ones your are criticizing most heavily. While I'm not saying that you must accept us as absolute authorities, it is only proper to acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, there are things you don't know and will never know and tone down your arrogance just a wee bit.

If you would like to address our tactics in more detail and in a less restrained manner, visit www.StopVisionFromFeeling.com, register, and start your own thread. We welcome criticism, but only if it's supported by evidence.

 

[Uncayimmy]

I appreciate it, but I think I just figured that one out on my own, LOL. I do like his StopVisionFromFeeling site though, it is good work. In his defense, he's done a lot more with that site than anyone else who has criticized my comments.

The people who have criticized your comments are all part of a small group of people who have been invaluable in creating that website. Without them there would be no website.

 

[bookitty]

<Traditional wall o' text snip>

And before you question my character, understand that I have over 100,000 words in private Skype chats and e-mails from VFF that the public hasn't seen and probably never will. A handful of people have seen various parts of it, and to a man those people are my staunchest defenders and the ones your are criticizing most heavily. While I'm not saying that you must accept us as absolute authorities, it is only proper to acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, there are things you don't know and will never know and tone down your arrogance just a wee bit.

If you would like to address our tactics in more detail and in a less restrained manner, visit www.StopVisionFromFeeling.com, register, and start your own thread. We welcome criticism, but only if it's supported by evidence.

Why do you need defenders? All you have is an opinion - that the best way to deal with VFF is through interminable dissection.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Why do you need defenders? All you have is an opinion - that the best way to deal with VFF is through interminable dissection.

Did I say that I need defenders? Hint: No. People have defended me for my actions because my actions have been attacked repeatedly. I have also been attacked personally because of it. And, of course, people have defended my opinions as they have been attacked.

I do find myself in a catch-22 type of situation. If I make a simple assertion, I'm accused making unfounded attacks. When I present the backing information, which is usually quite extensive, I am accused of obsession. What's fascinating is that you, Robo Sapien, and others seem to spend a lot of time talking about what other skeptics are doing or not doing rather than focusing on Anita and her claims. This thread is not about me or my actions, so I hope this derail ends quickly.

 

[kerikiwi]

Why do you need defenders? All you have is an opinion - that the best way to deal with VFF is through interminable dissection.

What, then, is the best way to deal with VFF?
And where was it said that the best way is through 'interminable dissection'?
Or is that just your opinion?

 

[GeeMack]

Did I say that I need defenders? Hint: No. People have defended me for my actions because my actions have been attacked repeatedly. I have also been attacked personally because of it. And, of course, people have defended my opinions as they have been attacked.

I do find myself in a catch-22 type of situation. If I make a simple assertion, I'm accused making unfounded attacks. When I present the backing information, which is usually quite extensive, I am accused of obsession. What's fascinating is that you, Robo Sapien, and others seem to spend a lot of time talking about what other skeptics are doing or not doing rather than focusing on Anita and her claims. This thread is not about me or my actions, so I hope this derail ends quickly.

It seems a few folks mistakenly see this whole to-do as an attack against Anita the person, when in reality it is about the potential damage that can spill out of situations like this if they go unchecked. Unfortunately the situation can't be totally separated from the person, so it will necessarily appear that the person is the issue when it really isn't so much. Anita is just the container. If you could pour the problem, the situation, out of the container, the person, she wouldn't even be relevant.

Add to that the fact that some of us have long ago lost our sympathy for the person, in no small part from being treated like crap by the person when we did try to help her. So when we target the situation we're very unlikely to pat her on the head and coo a few oh-poor-baby's along the way. Those who sympathize with Anita the person, bless 'em for their compassion and patience, don't seem to understand that we're trying to focus on the situation. Hell, even some of the forum moderators here hand out warnings and infractions like candy because they don't get it.

Some of us just want to keep the information straight, quell the lies as they come up, do some damage control before the situation becomes a dangerous part of the woo economy, and for our efforts, we catch hell for being Meanies.

 

[Robo Sapien]

You should feel dumb because you don't even know what my goal is yet you're trying to tell me I am failing. My goal is not to change VFF's beliefs. What's intersting is that if you believe she is sincere in her latest claims of wanting to be a "real" skeptic, then I have succeeded in this fantasy goal you have for me, and I'm actually arguing against my own success by pointing out that her transformation is insincere. So, yeh, that is pretty dumb.

Yes, I was incredibly presumptuous in thinking that your goal is to "StopVisionFromFeeling," I guess it was the .com that gave it away. Let's evaluate that.. have you stopped her? That'll be a big negative, over.

It is great what you did for the migraine sufferers, but watch out for that carpal tunnel. In your own words, the fact that "they expressly stated no practitioners were allowed" leads me to believe that they would have never allowed her in to begin with.

The VFF saga encompasses millions of words (literally) and hours of video and interviews.

Right. And you expect people to read up on all that? All you're doing is asserting that you have more authority to speak on the matter, and pretend like Anita would have everyone fooled if you weren't the ever-present force responsible for shutting her down. Sorry to burst your bubble, but her foolery is obvious from the beginning, so pardon me if I don't readily accept you as the messiah of the anti-Anita movement.

I thank you for your web site, I have read it thoroughly (with enjoyment) and it has been my primary source of information on this matter. So if you consider me ignorant then you can blame yourself for that, since you've admittedly been selective about what you put up there.

 

[Robo Sapien]

It seems a few folks mistakenly see this whole to-do as an attack against Anita the person, when in reality it is about the potential damage that can spill out of situations like this if they go unchecked. Unfortunately the situation can't be totally separated from the person, so it will necessarily appear that the person is the issue when it really isn't so much. Anita is just the container. If you could pour the problem, the situation, out of the container, the person, she wouldn't even be relevant.

Add to that the fact that some of us have long ago lost our sympathy for the person, in no small part from being treated like crap by the person when we did try to help her. So when we target the situation we're very unlikely to pat her on the head and coo a few oh-poor-baby's along the way. Those who sympathize with Anita the person, bless 'em for their compassion and patience, don't seem to understand that we're trying to focus on the situation. Hell, even some of the forum the moderators here hand out warnings and infractions like candy because they don't get it.

Some of us just want to keep the information straight, quell the lies as they come up, do some damage control before the situation becomes a dangerous part of the woo economy, and for our efforts, we catch hell for being Meanies.

Let me be real clear about this: I have no compassion for Anita, UncaYimmy, or you. VFF's BS is a problem, and one that is within the purview of skepticism, but continuing to do what doesn't work is irrational. I am not being critical of past works, I never stated that you shouldn't have done this to begin with. I am critical of the continued use of the same method, which is proven ineffective. I don't claim to know the solution, but my head is clear enough to know futility when I see it.

This has become an intensely personal war for UY and others, understandably so, considering all the uncouth things she has done. If you guys didn't try to rip me a new one because I stepped on your sensitive toes, I might be a little more receptive to your point of view. You could have easily set me straight with some tact, but instead you are deliberately vicious about it.

I extended an olive branch before, and Ashles accepted it. Why don't you two do the same? I will readily concede to being wrong, as long as you're not an ass about it. Otherwise, take a flying leap for all I care.

 

[bookitty]

It's also helpful to remember that all this really isn't a big deal. VFF hasn't done anything at this point. She's not taking money, she's not treating anyone. (Although she has made attempts, they have come to naught.)

She might in the future. That would be extremely sad. StopVFF is already in place to address that and might be helpful. Or might not. Woos get a lot of mileage out of persecution. It could go either way.

In the meantime, there's just a girl who hasn't quite figured it all out yet. Really not worth dividing into teams over.

 

[Moochie]

What some folks appear to ignore is that VfF doesn't have to prove anything. All she has to do is give the appearance of having some magical ability -- and look! Here she is hobnobbing with genuine "skeptics," so there must be something to what she says, right?

Where do I buy her books/DVDs/Magical Bracelets, or tickets to her forthcoming tour of Podunk?


M.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Yes, I was incredibly presumptuous in thinking that your goal is to "StopVisionFromFeeling," I guess it was the .com that gave it away. Let's evaluate that.. have you stopped her? That'll be a big negative, over.

So, the sum of your knowledge of my goals is the first word of the domain name? Your deliberate and willful ignorance is astounding. I already told you a couple of my goals. I have given an example of where she has been stopped as a direct result of my website.

If you read the FAQ, it says, "I and others would like to see Anita stop spouting her pseudo-scientific fantasies and actually approach her claims in a scientific manner. We want her to stop playing games and actually submit to scientific testing." The most extensive testing she did came after the website was up and running. I cannot claim cause and effect, but the correlation is still there.

In the FAQ I also state that she needs to stop doing this medical diagnosis crap on unsuspecting people. Just recently she said she's only going to do it on skeptics now. I cannot claim cause and effect, but the correlation is still there.

I could go on, but I have no desire to continue an argument with somebody so deliberately and willfully ignorant of the facts needed to discuss the subject sensibly.

It is great what you did for the migraine sufferers, but watch out for that carpal tunnel. In your own words, the fact that "they expressly stated no practitioners were allowed" leads me to believe that they would have never allowed her in to begin with.

And never in a million years would I have dreamed that Anita Ikonen (VisionFromFeeling, Alenara), an avowed life-long woo, would begin dating Spencer Marks, one of the three people offering the $50K Challenge by the IIG and the only person who knew the targets in Anita's test.

I never would have imagined that Jeff Wagg, Communications and Outreach Manager of the JREF (and manager of these forums) would invite Anita to a skeptical podcast and give her free reign to spout her views without questioning them. I would never have dreamed that he would say her test results were "interesting" and that she deserved more testing.

That Anita could have talked her way into the Meetup group is not just possible but actually likely. People who have done their homework know this.

Right. And you expect people to read up on all that?

No. What I expect is that before people tell me I don't know WTF I'm doing and should unsubscribe from this thread, they do some basic research first. Is that too much too ask? Is it unreasonable?

All you're doing is asserting that you have more authority to speak on the matter, and pretend like Anita would have everyone fooled if you weren't the ever-present force responsible for shutting her down. Sorry to burst your bubble, but her foolery is obvious from the beginning, so pardon me if I don't readily accept you as the messiah of the anti-Anita movement.

Your personalization is noted. Please attack my arguments and refrain from name calling.

I thank you for your web site, I have read it thoroughly (with enjoyment) and it has been my primary source of information on this matter. So if you consider me ignorant then you can blame yourself for that, since you've admittedly been selective about what you put up there.

I do not believe you because you have twice now misstated my goals, which are clearly written in the FAQ. You have also stated that people are not fooled by her when the reality is that many people have been fooled. This is documented on my website.

There are about 2,000 posts in my discussion forum. Let's consider the average to be 300 words. That's about 600,000 words. There are about 30 blog entries conservatively averaging about 1,500 words with comments. Call it another 50,000 words. The chat log from her IIG test is 35,000 words. So, we're talking about 700,000 words to read. At an average reading speed of 250 to 300 words per minute, we're talking about 40 hours worth of reading.

So, based on your apparently lack of knowledge and the enormous amount of time required to read it thoroughly, I have concluded that you are not being truthful.

 

[Robo Sapien]

What some folks appear to ignore is that VfF doesn't have to prove anything. All she has to do is give the appearance of having some magical ability -- and look! Here she is hobnobbing with genuine "skeptics," so there must be something to what she says, right?

Where do I buy her books/DVDs/Magical Bracelets, or tickets to her forthcoming tour of Podunk?

That is sort of akin to what I've been saying, they are enabling her rather than stopping her. Actually, seeing how easy it is for her, I'm considering taking up a job as her talent agent. I see $$$ there, I bet I could sell a TV pilot to Discovery Channel. They'd probably slot her right in between Mythbusters and Dirty Jobs.

 

[Moochie]

That is sort of akin to what I've been saying, they are enabling her rather than stopping her. Actually, seeing how easy it is for her, I'm considering taking up a job as her talent agent. I see $$$ there, I bet I could sell a TV pilot to Discovery Channel. They'd probably slot her right in between Mythbusters and Dirty Jobs.

It's only a problem if we make it one. Jim may be closer to the case than some, but plenty of others have weighed in as well. So long as people who regard themselves as skeptics don't start playing violins for VfF all should be well.


M.