• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Split Thread Prahlad Jani - Breatharian

Most of us here also understand that the rules state no one will be tested when there is a possibility of harm.

However, we also understand two other things: that Randi has tested breatharians in the past, and that Randi has the ability to extend the challenge to anyone he wants to. We see the video, and his post here as evidence of both - that he will indeed test a breatharian again, given the opportunity.

Past or present, it is a big indicator that someone is being a bit of a prat when they take it on themself to make the claim that Randi is wrong about what he can and cannot do with his own challenge (as I have pointed out a few times, it is not the JREF's challenge - they merely administer it for Randi). Those of us with sufficient understanding of, and respect for, Randi's position find it hilarious that anyone would try to contradict him. Trying to have him come to their defense, then practically bragging about the resulting fail when Randi demonstrates his complete disinterest in the matter (of this thread) only adds icing to the top.

Two things
1. Yes that one post where I said Randi was wrong was not a good post and I was wrong in making it.

2. For so many members to see evidence where none existed for so long, even when told by me it was wrong and then again by Randi is just amazing.
 
2. For so many members to see evidence where none existed for so long, even when told by me it was wrong and then again by Randi is just amazing.

Show me where Randi says that neither he nor the JREF will ever test this man?
 
Oh Please Chillzero. Why do you not admit it yourself, you are wrong? The man needs to apply for the MDC. You and others others have been going on about him not needing to do so and Randi willing to expose him to danger. Randi has said otherwise in this thread. I will not address any other issue in this thread until you have addressed that issue.

Also how can you test a person like him within the rules? You cannot deny him food or water in order to do the test.
 
Let us look at the facts.
1. We have not received an application. Despite what has been said in this thread, an application will be required. Since it is very unlikely JREF will ever get an application from the man then no test can happen.

2. The application must contain a test of the man's abilities that is acceptable to JREF and to Mr Randi. Yes there will be negotiations on this to make it acceptable to both parties. That is OK.

3. There is no credible evidence that Mr Randi is willing to amend the rules for this test. Any claims otherwise in this thread are wrong.

4. It is not important what has happened or not happened in other tests

Do you agree Chillzero?

Does everyone else agree?

I made a similar post above (posts 43 and 54) , which no one has disputed.
 
Show me where Randi says that neither he nor the JREF will ever test this man?

I do not maintain that Mr Randi has said he will be unwilling to test this man under any conditions. It all depends on what his claim is. That Mr Randi says is unknown. First off he needs to apply.

You have read this post?

I only get in here to settle the brouhahas that are periodically invented. Sigh. First, on the matter of the current Breatharian, we didn’t receive an application – the FIRST requirement! -- so we didn’t receive a claim, and we’ve no idea what he SPECIFICALLY says he’s able to do. This man is only one of HUNDREDS of others all over the world who make this ridiculous claim. Are we expected to court him, to select him out of all those other liars, as if he were special in some way? Years ago, we tested a few of them. They were caught cheating. End of matter. Why do I have to spend my time arguing these things…? IF THIS MAN WANTS A MILLION DOLLARS, HE CAN APPLY. IF HE’S NOT SMART ENOUGH TO WANT THE MILLION, GOODBYE! I’m sure we could arrange a protocol in which he would be monitored to remove all possibilities of harm of any sort, don’t you think…? The JREF challenge is open to ANYONE, regardless of body weight, nationality, age, religion, skin color, gender, number of ears, attitude, sense of humor, political inclinations, or degree of woo-woo acceptance. Got that? Now I’m busy setting up my European tour. Call me when this guy applies.



Please Chillzero, how about you give your current position + an analysis of this thread? I would love it if you and I can say something we could agree. How about my posts above?
 
It is black and white. In this thread they were trying to convince me that Randi had "challanged" Prahlad Jani and as a result Prahlad Jani neither had to complete an application nor as a result meet this requirement.


You can't even spell it, let alone argue about it.

In any case, convincing you of anything is pretty much secondary to what people are discussing.

It's not all about you, you know, and your acting as though it is seems to be the main problem.


Both statements are obvious junk (hence me saying I have been fed ****) and it took a post by Randi to say otherwise.


What are you on about? Nobody is feeding you asterisks. You really do feel the need to be a key player here, don't you?

As for annoying Randi with your pettiness: you ought to be ashamed, and for you to think he was needed to explain anything to us that we didn't already know is nothing short of ludicrous.


Steam is still coming out of my ears about this.


Sounds like a paranormal ability to me. Have you considered submitting an application for the MDC?


Two things
1. Yes that one post where I said Randi was wrong was not a good post and I was wrong in making it.


Indeed. First post you've made that I can agree with. Well done!


2. For so many members to see evidence where none existed for so long, even when told by me it was wrong and then again by Randi is just amazing.


What's amazing is your belief that you are some kind of 'final authority'.

Also amazing is that you've just admitted in the previous paragraph that you were wrong, and yet are still insisting that we should have agreed with you.

Even more amazing is that you believe Randi has somehow vindicated your position.

Most amazing of all is Randi, but that's beside the point.


Oh Please Chillzero. Why do you not admit it yourself, you are wrong?


Physician rjh01, heal thyself.

See this?


1. Yes that one post where I said Randi was wrong was not a good post and I was wrong in making it.

Please note that nobody is arguing.


The man needs to apply for the MDC.


No, he doesn't. He needs to have something to eat. The poor fellow looks anorexic.


You and others others have been going on about him not needing to do so and Randi willing to expose him to danger.


Interesting conflation of the points under discussion, rjh01. Wrong, but interesting.


Randi has said otherwise in this thread. I will not address any other issue in this thread until you have addressed that issue.


There's a blessing. Silence is golden, they say, and I look forward to finding out.


Also how can you test a person like him within the rules? You cannot deny him food or water in order to do the test.


So you say. You're wrong, of course. If a person wants to have a claim of not having to eat or drink tested, then not eating or drinking is certainly going to be a part of it.

The fact that you are still unable to see how such a test might be conducted within the rules which Randi himself can make up as he chooses is your problem, and yours alone.


Let us look at the facts.


I will not address any other issue in this thread until you have addressed that issue.


Oops. Sorry. I guess that wasn't a fact.


1. We have not received an application.


What do you mean 'we'? Are you part of the JREF now? Congratulations.


Despite what has been said in this thread, an application will be required.


I don't think anyone here is having trouble understanding that the JREF isn't just going to post this bloke a cheque on the basis of the media articles that have appeared.

Well, maybe one person is having trouble with it.


Since it is very unlikely JREF will ever get an application from the man then no test can happen.


Nobody is disputing that.

What's largely being disputed is your claim that it's impossible to test this man's claims should an application be made.

You're wrong.


2. The application must contain a test of the man's abilities that is acceptable to JREF and to Mr Randi. Yes there will be negotiations on this to make it acceptable to both parties. That is OK.


Applications don't contain tests, although protocols may be said to.

Apart from that, thank you, Captain Obvious.


3. There is no credible evidence that Mr Randi is willing to amend the rules for this test. Any claims otherwise in this thread are wrong.


Here we go again.

Mr Randi makes the rules, rjh01. He can do what he likes, unencumbered by any requirement to provide you with evidence of his ability to do so, your indignant assertions notwithstanding.


4. It is not important what has happened or not happened in other tests


What's important about other tests, rjh01, is your claim that it's impossible for them to have happened.


Do you agree Chillzero?


I doubt it, but the Lady can speak for herself.


Does everyone else agree?


Nup. You're wrong.

Personally, I liked monoman's take on things.


I made a similar post above (posts 43 and 54) , which no one has disputed.


Yes, you're repeating yourself endlessly in some kind of frantic effort to prove . . . something. It's getting really boring, and it's kind of pathetic.
 
Last edited:
Oh Please Chillzero. Why do you not admit it yourself, you are wrong?
I am not wrong. Let me take you through it nice and slowly. You seem to haev become hysterical in your attemtps to drag yourself out fo the mess you created for yourself and have stated things to my creidt that I have not said.

The man needs to apply for the MDC.
I never said otherwise.

You and others others have been going on about him not needing to do so
In your excitment you have lost track of my part in this discussion. My posts have been in response to two stupid things you said. First you said that Randi was wrong. We've already cleared that one up, and I should give credit for your acceptance of that.

Secondly, and related to that, you claimed that the JREF would never test this man. Essentially what you are now suggesting is that Randi would make a podcast declaring this man to be eligible for the Challenge, and then turn around when the man eventually applies to tell him, "no - you don't qualify". Seriously - get a grip. This is why we have repeatedly pointed out to you that not only can Randi issue the challenge to anyone, but that he deomonstrably has done in the past. He has also previously tested breatharians - why would he not do so again?

and Randi willing to expose him to danger.
I have made no comment about this at all. You seem to be trying to paint me and a few others here as 'baddies' for no apparent reason.
In fact, the only comments that approach protocol or testing that I have made have been to correct you on some blatent assertions you made about testing him for weight loss and other things - with no confirmation of exactly what the man claims to be able to do and how it affects his body.

Randi has said otherwise in this thread. I will not address any other issue in this thread until you have addressed that issue.
Perhaps you missed it:
Years ago, we tested a few of them. They were caught cheating.
<snip>
I’m sure we could arrange a protocol in which he would be monitored to remove all possibilities of harm of any sort, don’t you think…? The JREF challenge is open to ANYONE, regardless of body weight, nationality, age, religion, skin color, gender, number of ears, attitude, sense of humor, political inclinations, or degree of woo-woo acceptance. Got that?



Also how can you test a person like him within the rules? You cannot deny him food or water in order to do the test.
I'll wait to find out exactly what it is that the man claims, and will probably also wait for Randi to define a protocol. As he said himself he has tested people like this before.

Just in case you missed it in your own quoted post:

IF THIS MAN WANTS A MILLION DOLLARS, HE CAN APPLY. IF HE’S NOT SMART ENOUGH TO WANT THE MILLION, GOODBYE! I’m sure we could arrange a protocol in which he would be monitored to remove all possibilities of harm of any sort, don’t you think…?
<snip>
Call me when this guy applies.


I'm really intrigued about your email to Randi, that would elicit a resposne like this:
I only get in here to settle the brouhahas that are periodically invented. Sigh.
<Snip>
I’m sure we could arrange a protocol in which he would be monitored to remove all possibilities of harm of any sort, don’t you think…?
<snip>
Got that? Now I’m busy setting up my European tour. Call me when this guy applies.
and yet not only does it cause you to brag about clearly irritating and disturbing a busy man with trivia, it still has you insisting that you are right.
"Mr Randi,
I know you said on record that this man could win a million dollars but I know you are wrong so can you come and tell all these nasty anonymous people on the internet that you don't intend to watch this man starve to death? And please make it soon because they are all giving me *** over it."
 
Last edited:
Well, I said he didn't need to apply, and I stand by that. Had this guy issued a press release saying that he accepted Randi's challenge, I highly doubt that Randi would make him fill out a form. He has tested people without any forms, and he's engaged in negotiations without a formal application in the past.

Randi issued his challenge, and there was no response, so the guy should be ignored. Randi's comment about the application is not unexpected at this point. It's the equivalent of, "Well, if he wants to accept the challenge, he knows where to find me. He can follow the process like all the other knuckleheads with their ridiculous claims."

It's like challenging a guy to a fight in the street and having him back down. If people keep bugging you about it, you dismiss it with, "I'm at the gym every evening. He knows where to find me." You don't go back out in the street because that gives the other guy credit he doesn't deserve.
 
Allow me to interject for a moment.

Enough.

Randi has the right to test whomever he chooses. It's his challenge, his money. I think this joker is a fool for even attempting this, but, whatever. You pays your dollar, you takes your chances. At some point, someone pushes this kind of nonsense just far enough, and the challenge must be accepted. My only hope is this buffoon doesn't do himself any harm with this silly attempt.

The argument is counterproductive. Say what you will, examine what's taking place here, and ask yourself how much this is helping.

Again, enough.
 
Allow me to interject for a moment.

Enough.


Everyone is allowed to join in the discussion.

Joining in for the purpose of telling others that you've had enough seems a bit pointless though. If you've had enough, stop reading.


Randi has the right to test whomever he chooses. It's his challenge, his money.


Yep.


I think this joker is a fool for even attempting this, but, whatever. You pays your dollar, you takes your chances.


Attempting what? According to the media reports, he's been doing it for 70 years.


At some point, someone pushes this kind of nonsense just far enough, and the challenge must be accepted.


That's actually the whole idea of the MDC, isn't it? Put up or shut up?


My only hope is this buffoon doesn't do himself any harm with this silly attempt.


What silly attempt are you referring to?


The argument is counterproductive. Say what you will, examine what's taking place here, and ask yourself how much this is helping.


Counterproductive to what? People are indeed saying what they will and what's taking place here is a discussion.

How much it's 'helping' is up to the participants and if any of them find it to be unhelpful, they can simply drop out.


Again, enough.


Yes, sir!

Not.
 
Yes, sir!

Not.
All bickering on the interweb shall stop immediately! Right. :p

One useful rule of thumb: If you want to know if a person can do something, check if his middle name is "Amazing". If it is, he can probably do it in some more or less amazing way.

Signed
Captain Ririon "Danger" Obvious
 
You actually emailed Randi to come address this?
I wonder where he got the notion to do that?
Query Randi, not us.


While I agree that it's obvious that Randi can waive any rules regarding who or what can be accepted for the challenge, I'm baffled as to the disagreements over whether the guy must apply to be tested even after Randi posted and made that pretty clear.

The man does not have to apply for the MDC.
Akhenaten, could you clarify this? Randi seems to say that he does indeed have to apply (to be tested, if that's what you meant). In fact he points out that that's "the FIRST requirement!"

First, on the matter of the current Breatharian, we didn’t receive an application – the FIRST requirement! -- so we didn’t receive a claim, and we’ve no idea what he SPECIFICALLY says he’s able to do. <snip> IF THIS MAN WANTS A MILLION DOLLARS, HE CAN APPLY. <snip> Call me when this guy applies.
(bolding mine, caps Randi's) Seems pretty clear to me that Randi is saying (three times, no less) that if the guy wants to be tested, he has to apply.

Well, I said he didn't need to apply, and I stand by that. Had this guy issued a press release saying that he accepted Randi's challenge, I highly doubt that Randi would make him fill out a form. He has tested people without any forms, and he's engaged in negotiations without a formal application in the past.
Randi's words seem to contradict your statements here.

Also, it seems to me that there is only one way to test a breatharian. They are denied food until they give up or die. If they are forced to quit against their will, they always have an excuse as that the test was ended prematurely. They can claim that the appearance of starvation was a transformation or some nonsense. I think somewhere in the range of six months to a year would be proof enough that they are in fact living on nothing.
 
The man does not have to apply for the MDC.


Akhenaten, could you clarify this?


This whole discussion was a circular mess, but I guess the upshot is that he doesn't have to go through the normal media presence and signed affadavit process, I think.

I can't even remember exactly what the rest of the silly argument was about, to tell the truth, but I recall enough to know that I don't want to have it again.

FYI, Unca Yimmy has left the field for the time being, and very likely won't respond to this enquiry.
 
Last edited:
... it seems to me that there is only one way to test a breatharian. They are denied food until they give up or die. If they are forced to quit against their will, they always have an excuse as that the test was ended prematurely.


I disagree. I can think of at least one way to test a breatharian which would not involve a fast to the death.

As with all testing JREF does, this testing needs to be tailored to the specific things which a particular claimant claims to be able to do. But there's an essential element to the claim of being able to survive indefinitely without consuming anything but air which it should generally be possible to do testing for in a clearly-specified (rather than open-ended) period of time. A week to 10 days should be sufficient.

The aspect of breatharianism which I think is ideal for testing is the matter of weight change. Either a breatharian (a) stays at a constant weight, or (b) loses and/or gains weight. My guess is that most breatharians would say their weight fluctuates rather than stays constant -- but we need to know which of these two possibilities our particular breatharian claims is the case for them.

I'd need the answers to 2 questions to work out the protocol.

Question 1: Are they claiming to be able to exist solely on air, or do they also drink water? (While strictly speaking breatharians are supposed to be able to live without taking in any food or water, in practice it seems like a number of breatharians say they do drink water.)

Question 2: Are they claiming their weight stays constant when they are not eating anything? Or do they claim their weight fluctuates?

1. No-water / constant weight. Let's take the no-water case first.* If they claim their weight stays constant, that's a fairly easy claim to test. If they are taking in nothing, then all we need to do is keep them in a controlled setting (room with bed, chair, locked window, radio and tv and computer, reading material, no sink or toilet; a pair of video cameras installed in the room and running constantly; volunteer observers to accompany breatharian any time they leave room) for, say, 10 days, and weigh them twice a day.

Let's suppose the breatharian starts at a weight of exactly 100 pounds. If, at the end of 10 days, all of the recorded weights have been right on the 100-pounds mark -- and there is no evidence they have consumed any substances -- they win.

2. No-water / fluctuating weight. More likely the breatharian will claim their weight fluctuates. But if they only lost weight while going without food, then obviously breatharianism is not sustaining them; a person who constantly loses weight becomes lighter and lighter and eventually fades away. That's not consistent with a claim that a person can live indefinitely on a breatharian diet; either they are claiming that at some point their weight loss becomes negligible (which takes us back to the claim they can be on a breatharian diet without losing weight) or they are claiming to be able to gain weight while consuming nothing. That's the claim I would test.

I have no idea when they think they gain weight, how quickly they think can gain weight, or under what conditions they think they can gain weight. But for breatharians who say they can live indefinitely on a breatharian diet, and who claim their weight fluctuates, the ability to gain weight on a breatharian diet is an essential element of their claim.

Let them specify under what conditions they can gain weight. Let them pick a time when they feel they are able to gain weight while not eating. Let them say what things would interfere with their ability to gain weight while not eating, so those things can be removed from the test site. And then let them then demonstrate this ability.

If during an agreed length of time, during which they are weighed twice a day, they can demonstrate a steady gain of weight -- not a one-time spike, which could be the result of trickery, but something which graphs into a fairly smooth line going upward which ends up at a higher point than it began -- then they win.

3. Water / fluctuating weight. If they say they need to drink water, that complicates the protocol. A person might think they could gain weight by drinking water and then not urinating it out -- and that would be a very dangerous thing for them to do, so any test needs to be designed in a way that would not encourage them to attempt that.

Here's a suggested protocol for a breatharian who claims they are able to gain weight while not eating (but while drinking water):

The claimant is provided with a measured container of water, from which they may drink as much or little as they want -- and the quantity is recorded, as well as the times that water is consumed. No flush toilet is provided (since flush toilets contain water, which might be surreptitiously consumed), but containers are provided for urinating and for defecating. (Yes, people on prolonged fasts can and sometimes do defecate.) Any time that waste material is produced, the container into which it was produced is promptly taken away and weighed, and the weight is recorded.

The person is weighed four times a day, and the exact weight is recorded as well as the time of weighing. An adjusted weight is recorded as well: the weight of liquid consumed since the last weighing is subtracted from the recorded weight, and the weight of waste products is added to the recorded weight. In order to win, both their actual weight and their adjusted weight must show a steady increase from the weight recorded on the first day to the weight recorded on the last day.

If they start at 100 pounds, drink 10 pounds of water over the course of the test, and wind up weighing 110 pounds, that would count as no weight gain. But if they start at 100 pounds, drink 10 pounds of water, let out 5 pounds of urine, and end up weighing 110 pounds, that would count as a 5 pound gain. (The more urine they produce, the better for them as far as their chances of proving their claim go; that removes the incentive to try to hold in waste products.)

4. Water / constant weight. A suggested protocol for a breatharian who drinks water and claims their weight stays constant is much harder. I'm going to refrain from trying to write down a suggested protocol for that, so as not to make this post overly-long or overly-complicated. (If a breatharian ever comes forward who makes this specific claim, it can be addressed then.)

But my basic point is that there are ways of testing breatharians other than denying them food until they give up or die. The test procedure I've outlined above is one such method; I expect there are others.


__________________________________________________________________________________
* NOTE: I would have very serious qualms about testing a breatharian who said they did not drink water. Going without food for prolonged periods can be relatively safe; going without water for prolonged periods is not. So I hope any breatharian who applies for the MDC says they actually live on water and air, and sets up a protocol involving the drinking of water. But the no-water case is easier to explain, so I've run through that first in the hope it makes the with-water case easier to follow.
 
The claimant is provided with a measured container of water, from which they may drink as much or little as they want -- and the quantity is recorded, as well as the times that water is consumed. No flush toilet is provided (since flush toilets contain water, which might be surreptitiously consumed), but containers are provided for urinating and for defecating.

Whack a Catheter on them. That way, intake and output can both be measured quite easily.

Norm
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom