Assistance required for telepathy proof

golfy said:
OK,

An 80% accuracy poly - it make mistakes 20% of the time i.e. it only gets 4 out of 5 tests correct. Surely a poly is better than this. If so then we can assume the worst case scenario of 80% accuracy.
Click to expand...
No.
 
golfy said:
OK,

An 80% accuracy poly - it make mistakes 20% of the time i.e. it only gets 4 out of 5 tests correct. Surely a poly is better than this. If so then we can assume the worst case scenario of 80% accuracy.
Click to expand...


You can make up as many of these percentages as you like, and then assign whatever level of credibilty takes your fancy to them, but you don't get to determine what WE can assume as the result of your musings.

The fact is, the worst case scenario for your little light show thingy is actually 0% although I suppose random chance might up that a little bit for you.


golfy said:
If the poly got 8 out of a sequence of 10 "cat ship tests" correct when predicting cat or ship (80% accuracy), then statistically that would be 99.9996% certainty that the receiver can hear me telepathically.
Click to expand...


I can't wait to see how you worked that out.


golfy said:
And Akenaten - if you read the posts, you will see that I do have a poly.
Click to expand...


I have, and you don't.

You may or may not have the GSR component of a polygraph, and I have every reason to question the reliabilty/accuracy of that simple function.

How are you measuring heart rate? Respiratory activity?
 
golfy said:
If the poly got 8 out of a sequence of 10 "cat ship tests" correct when predicting cat or ship (80% accuracy), then statistically that would be 99.9996% certainty that the receiver can hear me telepathically.
Click to expand...

Akhenaten said:
I can't wait to see how you worked that out.
Click to expand...
Whiskas-Ad2.jpg
 
Akhenaten said:
You may or may not have the GSR component of a polygraph, and I have every reason to question the reliabilty/accuracy of that simple function.

How are you measuring heart rate? Respiratory activity?
Click to expand...
Even enthusiastic supporters of the polygraph acknowledge you need a trained and experienced operator to get useful results.

Serious evaluations, such as this: Scientific Validity of Polygraph Testing don't think much of it:
OTA recognizes that NSA and CIA believe that the polygraph is a useful screening tool. However, OTA concluded that the available research evidence does not establish the scientific validity of the polygraph for this purpose.
...
the cumulative research evidence suggests that when used in criminal investigations, the polygraph test detects deception better than chance, but with error rates that could be considered significant.
...
relevant research evidence does not establish polygraph testing validity [for 'dragnet' screening]
Click to expand...
etc.
 
dlorde said:
Even enthusiastic supporters of the polygraph acknowledge you need a trained and experienced operator to get useful results.
Click to expand...


I'm guessing that a trained and experienced operator would be unlikely to say things like:

golfy said:
What needs to be worked out is the potential error rate of a single channel of a poly (the GSR channel) giving the same result as I obtained. i.e. a 3 reading on one answer and a 18 reading on the other answer. The GSR was off the scale as it only goes to 18 and took a while to come down again meaning that it went significantly above 18 – perhaps to 25 or 30.
Click to expand...
 
golfy said:
OK,

An 80% accuracy poly - it make mistakes 20% of the time i.e. it only gets 4 out of 5 tests correct. Surely a poly is better than this. If so then we can assume the worst case scenario of 80% accuracy.

If the poly got 8 out of a sequence of 10 "cat ship tests" correct when predicting cat or ship (80% accuracy), then statistically that would be 99.9996% certainty that the receiver can hear me telepathically.

And Akenaten - if you read the posts, you will see that I do have a poly.

golfy
Click to expand...

I call nonsense on you. Show some evidence of any kind of accuracy, or you have nothing.
 
All of you making sensible arguments in this thread--given that, based on what's been posted, the most likely explanation is no. 3...

Pixel42 said:
golfy, let me spell out where we are.

There are three possible explanations for your belief that you are telepathic and other people can hear your thoughts.

1. You really are telepathic and other people really can hear your thoughts

2. Confirmation bias is leading you to mistake coincidence for a paranormal ability

3. You are schizophrenic

<snip>
Click to expand...


It's very unlikely that any rational argument is going to make any difference.

As I and others have said, it's probably best not to encourage.

My $0.02.
 
golfy said:
I have been doing some thinking forum and Pixel42.

...
What needs to be worked out is the potential error rate of a single channel of a poly (the GSR channel) giving the same result as I obtained. i.e. a 3 reading on one answer and a 18 reading on the other answer. The GSR was off the scale as it only goes to 18 and took a while to come down again meaning that it went significantly above 18 – perhaps to 25 or 30.

golfy
Click to expand...

A polygraph is not a spectrometer or a chromatograph. Even if it were, you couldn't report meaningful readings from 'off-the-scale" numbers. You'd have to establish an upper and lower limit of accuracy/precision, and a correlation between these limits.

Show some.
 
golfy said:
This not an uneducated knee jerk reaction statement born from lack of understanding from Pixel42.
Click to expand...
It's certainly not a reaction of any kind to anything I've said, as I've never said anything at all about the accuracy of polygraphs. So why you picked me to address this particular post to is a mystery.

Even if polygraphs are 100% accurate, all you currently have are the results of a single test which had a 50% chance of producing a hit even if you have no telepathic ability. So until you have repeated this test many many times with the same result AND proved that polygraphs are sufficiently accurate for the results of your current protocol to be meaningful (or used the alternative protocol I gave you that doesn't require such proof, again with positive results), the default assumption that you have no telepathic ability stands.
 
Last edited:
Pixel42 said:
It's certainly not a reaction of any kind to anything I've said, as I've never said anything at all about the accuracy of polygraphs. So why you picked me to address this particular post to is a mystery.
Click to expand...
Using his/her telepathic powers, golfy knew you would be saying it sometime in the future... 's true dat... a polygraph will prove it. :)
 
Expected: 0.25 (25% error rate – 75% accuracy)
Observed: 8
Sample Size: 10

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If .25 is a significance:

Binomial mean= 0.75259
as a fraction of n: = 7.53
(15 iterations)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Expected: 2.5 (=0.25*10)

BINOMIAL PROBABILITIES
single; cumulative

p(=4): 0.145998; p(>4): 0.078127 86% Certainty
p(=5): 0.058399; p(>5): 0.019728 94% Certainty
p(=6): 0.016222; p(>6): 0.003506 98.4% Certainty
p(=7): 0.00309; p(>7): 0.000416 99.7% Certainty
p(=8): 0.000386; p(>8): 3.0E-5 99.96% Certainty


Above numbers represent the required number of correct guesses out of ten using a cat ship test and a polygraph which is conservatively estimated at 75% accurate. i.e. the polygraph produces an incorrect answer one in four attempts on average in normal use. Polygraph operators quote much higher reliability that this, around 1 in 20 to 1 in 50 errors. This is dependent on the polygraph operators expertise more than the unreliability of the polygraph itself.

Landsburg has put the likelihood that a defendant committed a crime sufficient to overcome reasonable doubt at 98%.

This means that the test has reached 98% certainty, beyond reasonable doubt, that the RX can hear my thoughts telepathically if the polygraph predicts the correct answer 6 out of ten times in a cat ship test. A 75% accurate polygraph will get the correct answer 7 or 8 times in 10 questions on average. Explanation - Out of 10 test sets (100 questions) 5 tests would be 7 out of ten – total 35 and 5 tests would be 8 out of ten – total 40. 35 + 40 is 75 times out of 100 correct – 75% accurate.

As a polygraph is conservatively estimated as 75% accurate, the actual number of correct predictions would be 7 or 8 out of 10 correctly predicted answers in a cat ship test. This would then produce a 99.96% certainty at 7 correct predictions and a 99.997% certainty at 8 out of ten correct predictions that the RX can hear the TX telepathically in a cat ship test.

The American Polygraph Association has a compendium of research studies available on the validity and reliability of polygraph testing. The 80 research projects listed, published since 1980, involved 6,380 polygraph examinations or sets of charts from examinations. Researchers conducted 12 studies of the validity of field examinations, following 2, 174 field examinations, providing an average accuracy of 98%. Researchers conducted 11 studies involving the reliability of independent analyses of 1,609 sets of charts from field examinations confirmed by independent evidence, providing an average accuracy of 92%. Researchers conducted 41 studies involving the accuracy of 1,787 laboratory simulations of polygraph examinations, producing an average accuracy of 80%. Researchers conducted 16 studies involving the reliability of independent analyses of 810 sets of charts from laboratory simulations producing an average accuracy of 81%. Tables list the authors and years of the research projects, which are identified fully in the References Cited. Surveys and novel methods of testing are also mentioned.

I have used a worst case accuracy level of 75% - below anything research has shown - to make it easier for the defendant to beat the test. Above info shows the likelihood of me proving a person can hear me telepathically is very high if they can actually hear me if I use a polygraph of only 75% accuracy (makes an error 1 time in 4).

golfy
 
Last edited:
golfy said:
I have used the worst case accuracy level of 75% to make it easier for the defendant to beat the test. Above info shows the likelihood of me proving a person can hear me telepathically is very high if they can actually hear me if I use a polygraph of only 75% accuracy (makes an error 1 time in 4).

golfy
Click to expand...
Sorry if this has been covered already, but why do you need a polygraph?
If the person can hear your thoughts, why can he not just prove it by writing them down?
Why can't a random test of you sending thoughts (maybe by choosing playing cards and transmitting that thought to the receiver) be set up instead of using dubious technology and statistics?
 
Last edited:
Because people lie - people can't be trusted to be honest can they? I would not be stuck in this if people were honest.

golfy
 
Stray Cat said:
Sorry if this has been covered already, but why do you need a polygraph?
If the person can hear your thoughts, why can he not just prove it by writing them down?
Why can't a random test of you sending thoughts (maybe by choosing playing cards and transmitting that thought to the receiver) be set up instead of using dubious technology and statistics?
Click to expand...

Because the majority of the world can hear this thoughts, but they all lie about it to make him look crazy. I'ts a world-wide conspiracy.

A polygraph would prove that they are all liars, and can indeed hear his telepathic thoughts.


I'm outta here. Good luck, golfy.
 
golfy said:
Because people lie - people can't be trusted to be honest can they? I would not be stuck in this if people were honest.

golfy
Click to expand...
If everyone lies, how do you even know other people can hear your thoughts?
You must have at least one person who has said they can hear your thoughts for you to even believe it possible?

Maybe they were lying and the rest of the world is telling the truth.
 
Stray Cat said:
If everyone lies, how do you even know other people can hear your thoughts?
You must have at least one person who has said they can hear your thoughts for you to even believe it possible?

Maybe they were lying and the rest of the world is telling the truth.
Click to expand...

That's a lie!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom