Looking for Skeptics

Status
Not open for further replies.
scrappy said:
Are you serious? No this could end her tears, either way. It is by invitation only and she'll have a mixture of people attending including sceptics. She's not out to demonstrate magic or make a few bob. There will be organised tests done , I'm sure much will be up for discussion once their computers actually alter.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that she's out to demonstrate magic or make a few bob, I said that she's in danger of making an utter fool of herself in public. This thread has been going on for months now yet neither of you seem to grasp how sad and ridiculous your pareidolia-based claims are to people who can see them for what they are. There is no communication from the dead; there is no great spiritual revelation for humankind. There are just two people faffing about with technology they don't understand and feeding one another's fantasies.

May I ask where you found the sceptics who'll be attending this event? Are you sure they aren't 'sceptics' in the sense all too familiar to JREF regulars, namely the sort of people who claim to be sceptics yet have never heard of pareidolia, confirmation bias or anything else a true sceptic should be aware of? And who is 'organising' these tests?

I have the greatest sympathy for the staff of the shop to which flaccon keeps returning her perfectly good computers.
 
Last edited:
abaddon said:
Sure. You record noise in total silence, then flaccon tells you what you are supposed to hear, and you hear it. Classic paredolia.
Click to expand...

Correction, I record in silence. My room is silent. The noise and the voices are coming from somewhere. How can she tell me what to hear if I have the recordings here first?
 
scrappy said:
Sure. You record noise in total silence, then flaccon tells you what you are supposed to hear, and you hear it. Classic paredolia.
Click to expand...
Correction, I record in silence. My room is silent.
Click to expand...


Even a 'silent' room will have ambient noise that can be picked up by the recording. If you want a completely silent recording, all you need to do is to switch off or disconnect the microphone. Unfortunately, completely silent recordings were found by flaccon not to be acceptable.
 
scrappy said:
She's putting the idea together. Plans, tests, etc. Digging out some old teacher friends from Psychology + Parapsychology.
Click to expand...
Can I ask that you and flaccon arrange for the entire event to be recorded? Video preferably, but audio will do. At least we'll have a record of who agreed that they'd seen/heard what, which will avoid the kind of disputes we saw following Alderbank's visit to flaccon's home.

scrappy said:
I have to go work for now but yes it would be good to try this out tonight.
Click to expand...
Any testing is better than none, but bear in mind that you and flaccon have already posted clips in which you claim to hear words that nobody else can hear. No amount of changes you think you can hear will prove anything if nobody else can hear them. That's why this sort of test - relying entirely on subjective interpretation - is ultimately of little value, and objective test protocols need to be designed.
 
Oh, what the heck. Feel free to try to hear anything going on in these two:

In this recording, I set the built-in mic input volume to the center -- neither loud nor soft. This is recorded in a "quiet" room*, however, so almost all the ambient noise is coming from the computer's fans. (A Macintosh):
called: built-in mic input med vol.aiff
https://app.box.com/s/gxaw9lhcoo5z9tmrt3mo


Same recording, but, using SoundTrack Pro, I boosted the volume so that it would peak at -20db. So there's now some audible white/pink noise:
called: b-in mic inp Hijk.2 -20
https://app.box.com/s/j1mu259u007sjodjhjlp


Because I have the originals of these files on my computer, I can always do a
"negative phase" cancellation test to see if anything has been altered.

I also experimented with boosting the volume all the way to 0db, and then using noise reduction -- just to see what it would sound like. I'm not going to post this, because there are vaguely-defined artifacts that could inflame the imagination of impressionable souls.

* My "quiet" room is nearly soundproof, but not totally. And also nearly anechoic, but not totally. It's very quiet, and very dead, but not up to pro standards of same.
 
I have read this thread from the start (so help me :jaw-dropp ) and can I just say how much I admire the patience everyone has.

You all politely ask for testing, method of 'calibration' (no I don't know either) only to be ignored, yet on you all plod.

I lurk a lot, so know the MA, and that prevents me from saying what I really think of the OP and her sidekick-but just wanted to give kudos where they're due to the patient ones.

If the OP is a wind up-that's sad. If the OP is NOT a wind up, then I suggest some further medical intervention.
 
scrappy said:
Correction, I record in silence. My room is silent. The noise and the voices are coming from somewhere. How can she tell me what to hear if I have the recordings here first?
Click to expand...

Nope, you have not specified if you have a live mic. In fact you have failed to specify what exactly your setup is.

So how about you start there. Do you have a live mic or not when you make such recordings?

If yes, how do you account for ambient noise? If no, how do you account for crosstalk?
 
calebprime said:
Oh, what the heck. Feel free to try to hear anything going on in these two:

In this recording, I set the built-in mic input volume to the center -- neither loud nor soft. This is recorded in a "quiet" room*, however, so almost all the ambient noise is coming from the computer's fans. (A Macintosh):
called: built-in mic input med vol.aiff
https://app.box.com/s/gxaw9lhcoo5z9tmrt3mo


Same recording, but, using SoundTrack Pro, I boosted the volume so that it would peak at -20db. So there's now some audible white/pink noise:
called: b-in mic inp Hijk.2 -20
https://app.box.com/s/j1mu259u007sjodjhjlp


Because I have the originals of these files on my computer, I can always do a
"negative phase" cancellation test to see if anything has been altered.

I also experimented with boosting the volume all the way to 0db, and then using noise reduction -- just to see what it would sound like. I'm not going to post this, because there are vaguely-defined artifacts that could inflame the imagination of impressionable souls.

* My "quiet" room is nearly soundproof, but not totally. And also nearly anechoic, but not totally. It's very quiet, and very dead, but not up to pro standards of same.
Click to expand...
What can I tell you? Not going to happen. Both flaccon and scrappy will not accept any "silent" recordings made on any equipment not in their control. Nor will they specify their setup, nor their "calibration" procedure.

That said, I appreciate your uploading a baseline, TYVM.
 
calebprime said:
Oh, what the heck. Feel free to try to hear anything going on in these two:

In this recording, I set the built-in mic input volume to the center -- neither loud nor soft. This is recorded in a "quiet" room*, however, so almost all the ambient noise is coming from the computer's fans. (A Macintosh):
called: built-in mic input med vol.aiff
https://app.box.com/s/gxaw9lhcoo5z9tmrt3mo


Same recording, but, using SoundTrack Pro, I boosted the volume so that it would peak at -20db. So there's now some audible white/pink noise:
called: b-in mic inp Hijk.2 -20
https://app.box.com/s/j1mu259u007sjodjhjlp
Click to expand...

FWIW, I played both tracks with the volume on maximum. The first was dead silent, the second had...well, white/pink noise. No voices, no mysterious bangs or clonks and a total absence of budgies. Of course, for this very reason flaccon and scrappy won't be interested as you can't make a sandcastle without sand.

I then forgot I had the speakers on maximum and started to play Strauss' Elektra, the first bars of which nearly blew my head off and caused a woman passing by in front of my house to turn around.
 
Last edited:
scrappy said:
The internal mic works fine. No external mic required no.
Click to expand...

No, no microphone. A microphone will inevitably pick up external noise. That's it's function. I am offering to send silent files and files of faint hiss with no microphone involved at any level.

The claim is that the recording itself is altered, and also that this is done by the manipulation of wires. There not being a microphone involved should make no difference, unless what's being heard is sounds picked up by the microphone. And if that's the case, then there's nothing paranormal going on at all.
 
zelda19678 said:
I have read this thread from the start (so help me :jaw-dropp )
Click to expand...

Congratulations on passing this baptism of fire! You have demonstrated your worthiness to embark on the epic Shroud of Turin thread*.

*We strongly advise the use of protective clothing and a tinfoil hat
 
Alice Shortcake said:
FWIW, I played both tracks with the volume on maximum. The first was dead silent, the second had...well, white/pink noise. No voices, no mysterious bangs or clonks and a total absence of budgies. Of course, for this very reason flaccon and scrappy won't be interested as you can't make a sandcastle without sand.

I then forgot I had the speakers on maximum and started to play Strauss' Elektra, the first bars of which nearly blew my head off and caused a woman passing by in front of my house to turn around.
Click to expand...

LOL. I did the very same. Nearly removed my head with the volume.
 
Alice Shortcake said:
Congratulations on passing this baptism of fire! You have demonstrated your worthiness to embark on the epic Shroud of Turin thread*.

*We strongly advise the use of protective clothing and a tinfoil hat
Click to expand...

And once you've slogged through that you need to read all of the Did Jesus Really Exist threads.
It's been at least a week since someone started a new one.
 
scrappy said:
Correction, I record in silence. My room is silent. The noise and the voices are coming from somewhere.
Click to expand...

What I've gathered from this thread is that any moderately advanced technology is indeed indistinguishable from magic. In this case, the peculiarities of audio recording, and that 'silent' room is actually filled with ambient noise. If I remember correctly, this has been the issue from the beginning of the thread.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
No, no microphone. A microphone will inevitably pick up external noise. That's it's function. I am offering to send silent files and files of faint hiss with no microphone involved at any level.

The claim is that the recording itself is altered, and also that this is done by the manipulation of wires. There not being a microphone involved should make no difference, unless what's being heard is sounds picked up by the microphone. And if that's the case, then there's nothing paranormal going on at all.
Click to expand...

Squeegee, you're wasting your time as this was already done (by Cableprime I think, sorry if I've got that wrong) and rejected for reasons that should be glaringly obvious.
 
bluesjnr said:
Squeegee, you're wasting your time as this was already done (by Cableprime I think, sorry if I've got that wrong) and rejected for reasons that should be glaringly obvious.
Click to expand...

I'm saying I can create noise. scrappy has said that files which were nothing but a quiet hiss have been altered to now contain voices. I can do that without a microphone. If a microphone is necessary, then that's evidence that it's the microphone that is the cause of the noise. Especially as that's what a microphone's function is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom