Why the challenge is illogical.

[Crossbow]

I think the challenge for paranormal abilities is illogical. For one thing, the paranormal is akin to dark matter, in that it is obviously something, but it is not explainable yet. In this way it could be said that the people who discovered dark matter, dark energy, black holes and singularities should get the money.

... the rest is snipped since this is the only part of the post that I wish to address ...

Sorry, but I think that you are terribly confused about the Challenge.

First of all, the Challenge is not about finding explanations of the paranormal. In fact, one does not have to provide any sort of explanation for how their paranormal powers work.

Just read the terms of the Challenge requirements yourself and you see that there is nothing in there about how the Applicant has to explain how his paranormal power actually works.

Second of all, the Challenge requires that the Applicant state just what his paranormal power is. And sorry, but if someone knows that they have a paranormal power, then that person should be able to describe just what that paranormal power is.

Again, providing a description of just what paranormal power that the Appicant has is not the same thing as having the Applicant actually explain just how his paranormal power works.

And third of all, the Challenge requires that the Applicant actually demonstrates his paranormal power. Likewise, if someone says that they can do a certian thing, then it is not asking very much (especially when $ 1,000,000 is on the line) for that person to demonstrate that certian thing.

And once again, I would like to point out the obvious fact that the Applicant simply has to demonstrate his paranormal power, but he does not have to explain how his paranormal power works.

Therefore, I suggest that you stop fretting about how the Applicant needs to explain how his paranormal power works since that is clearly a non-issue.

 

[Bigfooter]

I'll echo what others have said - nowhere in the challenge does it say one has to "explain" their abilities.

To cite an example, if you claim to be a dowser, all you have to do is find water under a controlled testing structure and you're $1 million richer.

Pretty simple.

 

[dafydd]

deleted

 

[dafydd]

I think the challenge for paranormal abilities is illogical. For one thing, the paranormal is akin to dark matter, in that it is obviously something, but it is not explainable yet. In this way it could be said that the people who discovered dark matter, dark energy, black holes and singularities should get the money.

Another reason I think the challenge is illogical is that it defeats its own purpose in its solicitation with the use of a term which I would consider pseudo-scientific, with which it attracts quacks and whackos specifically. I would consider this to be an anti-scientific pursuit, as it challenges people with a requirement that people approach in an unscientific way, for if they had scientifically proved the existence of their supposedly paranormal ability, it would cease to be paranormal.

In conclusion, I find that the challenge is a form of propaganda which creates a social stigma against paranormal phenomena, and in so doing, stifles the scientific freedom to study and be recognized for the study of such phenomena.

Through my own personal experiences, I have come to the conclusion that anything and everything will eventually be explained scientifically, and the pursuit of the paranormal is simply a way to cheat the currently knowable means of finding success or dominance. Thus, I do not believe in the existence of the paranormal, but I do believe that the million dollar challenge is attainable because of its aforementioned flaws. Some of the people who deserve the prize money are featured on a recent episode of "Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman" in which they detail the ability to sense and control phenomena in ways that are currently not considered to be possible, by using scientific testing. At the very least, it has some entertainment value.

My view of skepticism, at least in its common and mundane form, is a group of people who have been fooled by something, and now they are mad and want to lash out against anything resembling the trickery that fooled them. This is a perception I have built up from personal experience, and I hope that nobody here is this kind of skeptic. I commend people who keep their heads in attempting to debunk tricksters and are capable of accepting true instances of unexplainable phenomena.


Thank You to the people at JREF for this great resource. I look forward to your comments regarding this issue.

PS. I am not good at tags, so if anyone wants to help, please do.

It is logical. Demonstrate a paranormal power and you get the cash. Skeptics are not fooled,we just ask for evidence.I have never been fooled,woo has no effect on me. The believers in the paranormal are the ones being fooled,especially when they shell out good money to 'mediums' and other charlatans.

 

[roger]

We have people making claims for paranormal abilities which do not stand up to scrutiny. Among them:

I can bend spoons with my mind
I can contact your dead relative
I can remote view
I can dowse for water/gold/whatever
I can move things with my mind
I can levitate

It is *easy* to prove that you can do these, if in fact you can do them. Yet, no one has ever proven they can do what they claim. Yet, they go around collecting fees, trying to get famous, show up on TV, etc.

The challenge is just what it is called - a challenge. Put up or shut up. You say you can dowse for gold? Great. We'll put gold under 1 of ten buckets, and you use your dowsing to find that gold. Easy peasy. Yet everyone has failed, or bowed out.

The intent is to expose tricksters and, to a lesser extent, the deluded. It's not meant to do scientific research or discover new forms of the paranormal. It's a challenge to the dishonest and mistaken. And it has worked marvelously at doing that.

 

[Halfcentaur]

The intent is to expose tricksters and, to a lesser extent, the deluded. It's not meant to do scientific research or discover new forms of the paranormal. It's a challenge to the dishonest and mistaken. And it has worked marvelously at doing that.

Well said.

 

[Maeria]

For one thing, the paranormal is akin to dark matter, in that it is obviously something, but it is not explainable yet. In this way it could be said that the people who discovered dark matter, dark energy, black holes and singularities should get the money.

The paranormal is not akin to these things. In many cases, there IS an explanation for it. What gives it the epithet 'paranormal' is that believers insist that there is something behind it, a something that cannot be explained by science, causing the phenomena.

(snip) it attracts quacks and whackos specifically. (snip) it challenges people with a requirement that people approach in an unscientific way, for if they had scientifically proved the existence of their supposedly paranormal ability, it would cease to be paranormal.

The purpose of the challenge is to expose these quacks and whackos, who often do a lot of harm to people. There used to be no bar on who could apply to the challenge

I don't understand second phrase: is it therefore bad that something cease to be paranormal? Wiki tells us that the paranormal is something beyond "the range of normal experience or scientific explanation". Of course they're 'paranormal' until they're proven, or at least appear paranormal.

What has consistently happened until now is that, once tested, it becomes apparent that there was nothing paranormal in the first place.

In conclusion, I find that the challenge is a form of propaganda which creates a social stigma against paranormal phenomena, and in so doing, stifles the scientific freedom to study and be recognized for the study of such phenomena.

The challenge itself was created to study paranormal phenomena, simultaneously exposing the hoaxes, lies, and general ignorance that surround them. There are stigmatizations done, but can you really fault, for instance, when hoards of decieved people publicly cry out against a pretender who's cheated them?

If anything, I wish there werehoards crying out. Lots of your "quacks and whackos" *coughsylviabrownecough* still walk around, as calmly as you please, taking money from vulnerable people and lengthening their agony.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

I agree with the OP, You guys are just unreasonable to expect people to actually prove what they claim.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

but I find it a bit of a hassle to follow the instructions in the FAQ to find the precise outline of what is paranormal.

No need. Even in conventional usage of the word "paranormal", dark matter and dark energy are not considered paranormal.

Randi has allowed some claims that are purported not to be paranormal (but just merely in the currently not yet explained category), but that would be a generous broadening of the term rather than anything restricting it. That is, any specialized meaning of "paranormal" used by the MDC is a superset of the conventional usage of the term.

But there is no proper usage where dark matter and dark energy would fall into the category of "paranormal".

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

In conclusion, I find that the challenge is a form of propaganda which creates a social stigma against paranormal phenomena, and in so doing, stifles the scientific freedom to study and be recognized for the study of such phenomena.

How does it do that?

If someone could actually demonstrate paranormal phenomena, the MDC would provide a chunk of money and a great deal of prestige and a sort of stamp of endorsement.

The only thing it stigmatizes are failed claims--frauds and the self-deluded. And that's a good thing, isn't it? Or do you somehow equate "scientific freedom to study" with tolerating sloppy methodology that allows for frauds and delusion to pass as legitimate?

ETA: BTW, welcome to the forum. Sorry you're getting a general stomp down. At least recognize that no one's attacking you personally or defending the MDC dogmatically.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Maybe the point you're going after is something along the lines of what Randi has said? I'm just paraphrasing, but he said that no failed demonstration can ever prove a paranormal claim is false. We can only say that they failed to prove their claim. That's the problem with claims of the paranormal compared to scientific claims: they don't have to be reproducible. People who believe in ghosts, for example, don't claim that whatever the paranormal phenomenon is can be summoned under controlled conditions. And any PSI power can be "shy" and fail to work for no reason at all at any given moment.

Claims related to dark matter and dark energy, however, aren't that way. If you want to test a hypothesis about them, we expect the laws of physics to be consistent and reproducible.

 

[Brattus]

No. It isn't. Except in those cases where it is obviously delusion and/or fraud. When you eliminate error, delusion and hoax, you're not left with something, you're left with nothing.

Now tap my cards three times and ask your question.

 

[dafydd]

Now tap my cards three times and ask your question.

We have to cross your palm with silver first.

 

[kedo1981]

“I find that the challenge is a form of propaganda which creates a social stigma against paranormal phenomena, and in so doing, stifles the scientific freedom to study and be recognized for the study of such phenomena.”

Really, I can count around ten tv shows that are completely pro paranormal on my cable alone, social stigma my butt.

If there is any social stigma it could be that for millennium the belief in the supernatural, the paranormal and those who claim the powers of such have used it to steal, enslave and murder (you do realize that every single person executed as a witch was innocent, right), if there is a stigma, it’s well deserved.

 

[USEagle13]

I think the challenge for paranormal abilities is illogical. For one thing, the paranormal is akin to dark matter, in that it is obviously something, but it is not explainable yet. In this way it could be said that the people who discovered dark matter, dark energy, black holes and singularities should get the money.

Another reason I think the challenge is illogical is that it defeats its own purpose in its solicitation with the use of a term which I would consider pseudo-scientific, with which it attracts quacks and whackos specifically. I would consider this to be an anti-scientific pursuit, as it challenges people with a requirement that people approach in an unscientific way, for if they had scientifically proved the existence of their supposedly paranormal ability, it would cease to be paranormal.

In conclusion, I find that the challenge is a form of propaganda which creates a social stigma against paranormal phenomena, and in so doing, stifles the scientific freedom to study and be recognized for the study of such phenomena.

Through my own personal experiences, I have come to the conclusion that anything and everything will eventually be explained scientifically, and the pursuit of the paranormal is simply a way to cheat the currently knowable means of finding success or dominance. Thus, I do not believe in the existence of the paranormal, but I do believe that the million dollar challenge is attainable because of its aforementioned flaws. Some of the people who deserve the prize money are featured on a recent episode of "Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman" in which they detail the ability to sense and control phenomena in ways that are currently not considered to be possible, by using scientific testing. At the very least, it has some entertainment value.

My view of skepticism, at least in its common and mundane form, is a group of people who have been fooled by something, and now they are mad and want to lash out against anything resembling the trickery that fooled them. This is a perception I have built up from personal experience, and I hope that nobody here is this kind of skeptic. I commend people who keep their heads in attempting to debunk tricksters and are capable of accepting true instances of unexplainable phenomena.


Thank You to the people at JREF for this great resource. I look forward to your comments regarding this issue.

PS. I am not good at tags, so if anyone wants to help, please do.

Holy Wall of Text Batman!!!

 

[kerikiwi]

OnlyTellsTruths, I'm sorry but I am incapable of accepting your definition of unexplainable because of my belief that such a thing doesn't exist.

Are you agreeing that unexplainable things don't exist, that is: everything is explainable?

 

[MRC_Hans]

Are you agreeing that unexplainable things don't exist, that is: everything is explainable?

With the the reservation that 'explainable' does not necessarily equal 'explanation will be found', then yes, this is the skeptic's position.

Hans

 

[Mojo]

I think the challenge for paranormal abilities is illogical. For one thing, the paranormal is akin to dark matter, in that it is obviously something, but it is not explainable yet.

No, it is not detectable. That is what the Challenge is about.

 

[Js1981]

I think actually that both challenes aren't right:

Randi eliminates spontanious effects and minimal effects, anomalies etc
Zammit' challenge is purely idiotic, everything can exist based on empirical proof.

I am interested in the middle of the argument.
Strange things happen, taking away charlatans, conman and mentaly ill people we still have lots of unexplained things. To Randi' test obsessive followers things unexplained don't exist. To followers of the likes of Zammit even undectable becomes unexplained - 2 different things.

 

[Anakritis]

... For one thing, the paranormal is akin to dark matter, in that it is obviously something, but it is not explainable yet. ...

I stopped reading here.

You defeat yourself by demonstrating your own ignorance before offering a sound argument...

I suggest you do some reading, maybe watch a video or two... At least get the most basic of understanding before you demonstrate your sciolistic argument here again.