Looking for Skeptics

Status
Not open for further replies.
flaccon said:
[snip]

Unprocessed records, still express a turbulence within, but is better quality than processed. I could still continue to upload certain files to be heard, there are clearer ones, but more distant, I don't see the point to that. [snip]
Click to expand...


I don't usually appeal to authority, but in this case I am an authority. My initial professional work was in the study of the acoustic qualities of speech and hearing. In that capacity, I listened to, and looked at representations of, hundreds of recordings of speech. It was for this reason that I suggested to flaccon that Audacity would be a reasonably good program to use.*

After Stray Cat posted the audio files to SoundCloud, I downloaded all three and played them through Audacity, carefully inspecting the waveforms. None of the waveforms show characteristics of speech. None of them.

Furthermore, the three "dog barks" are not all the same. The first one has initial energy higher in the frequency spectrum than the other two. If these were successive barks, I would expect all of them to have much more similar frequency envelopes. They do not. They look like mechanical (i.e., non-animate) transients with slightly-sustained initial onsets. I can't pin down an identification of them; there are too many possibilties.


*There are better programs, but not freeware, and not so easy to use.
 
flaccon said:
I doubt I shall continue to justify myself here, that was not my intention.

I stepped from a delusion, not created one. Good luck and thank u for the chat.
Click to expand...

I can't help but notice, Flaccon, that you deliberately chose to answer all the tangential comments and were quick to take offense at criticism while ignoring a lot of the posts that asked direct questions and tried to move the thread forward. This is evasive behavior.

But despite all of that, you actually managed to send a file for the skeptics to analyze, which is a huge step and shows your sincerity and wish to investigate it. Now that we found nothing on the recording but noise and possibly some fodder for pareidolia, all of us probably agree that the voices, if real, actually aren't recorded on the sound files. Why not stick around and think of a way to actually get the voices on a tape for anyone to hear?

You do understand that a lot of people don't believe in spirits/spirit world, and if you could manage to get some definite proof it exists, it'd literally be life-changing for everyone on the planet? A discovery of that magnitude shouldn't be sabotaged by personal feelings or whatever offense is taken or given in this forum thread. Wouldn't you agree?

The alternative, of course, is that there's nothing supernatural going on and it's the mind that's playing tricks on you. If you want to be honest, you need to keep that possibility open, same as we are willing to keep the possibility of spirits open by offering you tests that rule out other explanations. That is why you came here in the first place, isn't it?
 
Interesting discussion, but part of me wonders why flaccon was "Looking for Sketpics" in the first place. She completely dismissed everything we said and refused to even consider the possibility that she might have been mistaken. Why seek the advice of skeptics when you're just going to dismiss it all?
 
I’m not sure if this is the thread for the following thoughts, but here goes.


In this thread, I have been confronted with a strange dilemma I hadn’t seriously considered before.
On the one hand, woomasters like John Edward should certainly be encouraged to apply for the Million Dollar Challenge. This is what it’s all about. So a potential applicant should be given every opportunity and any helping hand they need. I’m thinking of chiropractors , homeopaths, etc.

On the other hand there are many people in this world who hear voices and build intricate imaginary realities around what the voices say. These people should not be encouraged to believe their delusions.

The problem here for me is that it’s not on me to assess and diagnose such people. Do I have a responsibility to give everyone the benefit of the doubt and put them all in the previous category, with the dowsers? Maybe for some, but it doesn’t feel right. In this thread I tried to speak my own mind while keeping an eye on the general direction in which other skeptics were going.

What does it look like when the skeptics crush another claim?

If a cocky dowser or an obvious fraud is debunked, it’s a victory. Another small step for the good guys. Looks awesome on the skeptics. Can make for good TV.

If you prove that the voices in someone’s head are nothing but voices in someone’s head, it’s no victory. It’s picking on the weak. Doesn’t feel like a win. Doesn’t make for good TV.



[If this is off topic, or actually worth discussing, I can post it in a brand new thread.]
 
flaccon said:
Yes, terribly distorted and nothing like the original. The test wasn't really a failure, it confirms "transference" badly distorts. Important thing is, it should have been a silent recording, and it isn't (The screeches are not present in the original) I'm just asking a friend to listen to Straycats upload to Audacity. He hears nothing at all, but he has no external speakers to his laptop.
Click to expand...

Yet somehow you will not post a correct sample. Why not? All I heard on that recording were feedback effects. If you have something better, post it.
 
Maurice,
I don't know that it belongs in another thread so much as it belongs in many threads. I agree with you, in part. That's why I referred everyone to her narrative. I think a proper reading of that narrative is very important to realizing what we're dealing with, here.
But - and it's a big "but" - your seeming one-man crusade to get her to remove the base lies from her site is equally important. Yes, I think Flaccon has some problems to come to grips with and no, I'm not a doctor. But sometimes saying "Hands Off" allows these people free rein and lurkers and potential True Believer converts read them and say, "Wow! This one really must have something - these tough skeptics aren't tearing her apart like they do others."
Think of the lurkers. We have about three-fold the readers that we do posters on these boards. Many are like a Robin1, looking for The One and checking out skeptic sites as the best way to figure out which of the whole bunch of psychics is the best one.
 
Last edited:
Foolmewunz said:
Maurice,
I don't know that it belongs in another thread so much as it belongs in many threads. I agree with you, in part. That's why I referred everyone to her narrative. I think a proper reading of that narrative is very important to realizing what we're dealing with, here.
But - and it's a big "but" - your seeming one-man crusade to get her to remove the base lies from her site is equally important. Yes, I think Flaccon has some problems to come to grips with and no, I'm not a doctor. But sometimes saying "Hands Off" allows these people free rein and lurkers and potential True Believer converts read them and say, "Wow! This one really must have something - these tough skeptics aren't tearing her apart like they do others."
Think of the lurkers. We have about three-fold the readers that we do posters on these boards. Many are like a Robin1, looking for The One and checking out skeptic sites as the best way to figure out which of the whole bunch of psychics is the best one.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the kind words. I wish we had more exciting evidence to look at. Debunking weak EVP evidence has that "Kramer kicking kids' butts at karate class" feeling to it. ☻☺☻
 
Maurice Ledifficile said:
If you prove that the voices in someone’s head are nothing but voices in someone’s head, it’s no victory. It’s picking on the weak. Doesn’t feel like a win. Doesn’t make for good TV.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, it's a victory for self-improvement.

See Daniel Dennett's number 1 tool for thinking - "learn from your mistakes":
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/may/19/daniel-dennett-intuition-pumps-thinking-extract

Assuming, of course, the person hearing voices admits the voices are just in their head. ;)
 
Maurice Ledifficile said:
I wish we had more exciting evidence to look at. Debunking weak EVP evidence has that "Kramer kicking kids' butts at karate class" feeling to it. ☻☺☻
Click to expand...


It might, but we have no control over who comes here making wooish claims. It would be terrific to spar with Sylvia Browne or John Edward, but you know they will never apply for the MDC or come to the forums. On here we'll primarily deal with people, like flaccon, who are probably genuinely deluded, so convinced that what they are experiencing is real that they think will be incredibly easy to convince a skeptical crowd (whom they probably have never encountered before).
 
Foolmewunz said:
Maurice,
I don't know that it belongs in another thread so much as it belongs in many threads. I agree with you, in part. That's why I referred everyone to her narrative. I think a proper reading of that narrative is very important to realizing what we're dealing with, here.
Click to expand...
I agree totally. Which is why I was reluctant to share any personal contact info with her. And also why I didn't do my usual level of ridicule (there were many opportunities but it didn't feel right in this case to exploit a delicately balanced person for the sake of cheap laughs).
There was always a hope that something could be done to gently persuade her to accept at least some level of objectivity. Sadly, as is usually the case, it looks now like she'll simply brush aside the help she has been offered and leave with her misinterpretations of what we said.

It will be interesting to read the next chapter of her website to see exactly what she learned (or misunderstood) if she writes up this part of her story. It will certainly give us something to compare against what is written here which will provide some sort of measuring stick for the other chapters (which I'm fairly sure are full of misunderstanding and misinterpretation caused by her delicate state of mind).

I do hope Flaccon finds some peace and eventually realises that the only way to the truth in any physical phenomena is to objectively examine the evidence and accept where it leads regardless of any subjective belief or emotional investment in it.
 
flaccon,

I urge you not to leave this thread. If you feel that some posters are being unkind, you can place them on ignore. Even if you do not return, I hope that you will continue to correspond with Alderbank and Pixel42. I think they are your best bet for getting to the bottom of this and getting the truth out.

Ward
 
flaccon said:
and again, no site will be advertised until it is shaped up, through listening to opinion. Coming here has given me idea's for alteration's, but one thing I can't do, is alter the claims, or play down the story. By doing so, I would not be telling the whole truth
Click to expand...
and once again, your website is an advertisement. Anyone who stumbled across it with a google search or followed the link to it from this thread could legitimately submit a complaint about it to the Advertising Standards Authority who can investigate based on a single complaint, and take action up to and including prosecution.

Here's the ASA's website:

http://www.asa.org.uk/About-ASA/About-regulation.aspx

Here's the Committee of Advertising Practice's interpretation of the rules for advertising spiritual and psychic services (pdf document):

http://www.cap.org.uk/~/media/Files...keting of spiritual and psychic services.ashx

Note that documentary evidence is required of any claim which can be objectively substantiated. You have no such evidence, all you have are textbook examples of pareidolia. You have been given much helpful advice about how you could obtain such objective evidence (if your claims are true), and offers of help in doing so, which you have willfully ignored.
 
Last edited:
Mojo said:
An interesting claim, given that there are only seven to choose from.
Click to expand...

Well, I wonder if that's the same sister who is going to give birth to a girl (or was going to give birth to a girl - the timeline isn't clear) who is going to be the reincarnation of a famous man. Sir Bobby Peel, anyone?
 
flaccon said:
Yet they haven't failed a single demonstration to prove their presence yet.
Click to expand...

They certainly failed the opportunity I gave them to demonstrate and prove their presence. In fact they failed all three opportunities I gave them.

You failed to answer the questions that arose as a result of me giving your spirits these opportunities (which they failed). I suspect that this is because a bit of scrutiny is something you're not too comfortable with.

When I think about it, you never as much as acknowledged the fact that I took the time to conduct these tests in order to perhaps help further your aims. I consider this to be very rude.
 
Last edited:
And flacon, you said that you were going to write about the Curse of Cassandra. I'm very interested in what you have to say about that.

Ward
 
bluesjnr said:
They certainly failed the opportunity I gave them to demonstrate and prove their presence. In fact they failed all three opportunities I gave them.

You failed to answer the questions that arose as a result of me giving your spirits these opportunities (which they failed). I suspect that this is because a bit of scrutiny is something you're not too comfortable with.

When I think about it, you never as much as acknowledged the fact that I took the time to conduct these tests in order to perhaps help further your aims. I consider this to be very rude.[/QUOTE

Scrutiny is what I am looking for, but without the stonings. If you call that a demo, online, a failure etc, that is your prerogative. We tried a couple of online activities, and Alderbank will hopefully confirm the rest. I thanked everyone Blue, don't discount yourself. I've been helped penty thanks.
Click to expand...
 
wardenclyffe said:
And flacon, you said that you were going to write about the Curse of Cassandra. I'm very interested in what you have to say about that.

Ward
Click to expand...

Naw, I needed to read up on what she was about. It was a link on here for me to ponder. Really sad case, it appears although Cassandra had been given the gift of foresight, no one would believe her, Troy was destroyed as she predicted. (Wikipedia for reference)

The beauty of these days, Cassandra, Da Vinci, and many others I'm sure, did not have the technology we have today, to confirm their receivership of suchlike spiritual gifts. Their idea's/gift had to have come from a higher intelligence.

I don't really know if I have a gift at all, felt cursed plenty of times, but one of my greatest relieves are, I found Reg (Father) and a bunch of other Langton's I don't know of, being guided by a hierarchical sounding spirit (The protective spirit that came in 2000)

I get a feeling (and don't take it for anything more than just a bit of a hunch) that it was no coincidence that the Bible, or that Mayan Calendar, predicted the year 2000 was a turning point in our life-cycle. Maybe this time-scale was carefully worked to out how long it would take for man to discover technology, for spirits to be discovered? I dno, but it's plausible somewhere.
 
Last edited:
flaccon said:
Scrutiny is what I am looking for, but without the stonings. If you call that a demo, online, a failure etc, that is your prerogative. We tried a couple of online activities, and Alderbank will hopefully confirm the rest. I thanked everyone Blue, don't discount yourself. I've been helped penty thanks.
Click to expand...

Flacon, what would you call my failure to hear anything resembling a human voice on three different speaker systems?

What would you call my partners failure to hear (without any prior knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the recordings) anything other than noise when she listened to the recordings?

The fact that I am not alone and your recordings have been listened to on a variety of low, mid and high end systems without producing anything like a positive hit should have you preparing for the worst.

Nobody is "stoning" you, what you are experiencing is people who are not so ready to agree with your version of what is happening, people who have no good reason to appease you. It's not personal.

Please also note that I'm not asking you to thank me, I'm asking you to acknowledge my contribution by answering the simple questions imposed. These questions were seeking to clarify your set-up whilst recording. You ignored them.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom