Merged New telepathy test: which number did I write ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dan O. said:
What I have consistently chastized is the refusal to allow the claim to be tested and the claims that certain parts of the protocol are invalid.
Click to expand...


There are a few mistakes in the above assertion, not the least of which is that it's only '"certain parts" of the protocol that are being claimed as invalid.

Fact is, the whole thing is a joke.
 
Indeed. It hardly seems fair to complain that the claim is not allowed to be tested at the same time as complaining that flawed methodology has been pointed out.

The vast majority of this thread, including calls for professional medical aid to discount more plausible explanations, for more effective methodology, to account for "credibility" etc, have been there precisely so the OP knows what test would convince us sceptics.
 
This thread seems to have become much more confused than it ought to be. There are several different things being discussed as if they were the same thing. So far as I can see, they are;

1) Telepathy: might there be anything in it?
2) Michel believes everyone in the world hears what he is thinking.
3) Michel also believes he can discern whether someone is telling the truth or not about 2.

Dan O. seems to be annoyed at posters failing to cooperate in proving point 1, but Michel is not attempting to demonstrate point 1 generally. He's trying to prove point 2 specifically, and his method of doing that requires him also to be correct about point 3.

Dan O. has not yet confirmed whether he thinks point 2 can be true (i.e. can he hear Michel's thoughts) nor has Michel mentioned whether he can hear the thoughts of any other psychic anywhere on the planet.

<ETA> I already know point 2 cannot be true, since I cannot hear Michel's thoughts. Unfortunately I cannot think of a way to prove that I am telling you the truth about that.
 
Last edited:
Dan O. said:
Ah yes, those repeated calls to seek medical help by the ignorant masses that didn't read the history.
Click to expand...

Were you not the one who protested nobody here is a doctor? Odd then that you consider those who ask the OP to seek the advice of a medical professional to be the ignorant ones. Does this mean you are in fact a medical professional able discount mundane psychological causes via the internet or state such causes require no further attention?

When you posted the article up thread did you assume that because the majority of people who hear voices need no clinical treatment you are for some reason better placed than a medical professional to make that choice for the OP?

Even if the answer to the above question can be proven as "yes", do you also assume that just because a mundane psychological explanation for the claims do not need treatment they for some reason do not need to be discounted as plausible explanations for the claimed experiences?

If on the other hand you can both discount this as a cause of the climed experiences and can diagnose a malady by internet forum, please explain to us on which authority you are able to do so. Just so we can understand why you should be treated to a differing standard to that which you hold sceptics to.

Dan O. said:
The contradictory claims that the OP didn't listen to suggestions for improving the test and that the OP kept making changes to the test.
Click to expand...
Contradictory? It is entirely possible for somebody to change their methodology with out listening to critics. You will notice none of the changes have addressed the issues raised by critics, or accepted suggestions by the critics. Please do not fall foul of the "no middle ground" fallacy. The OP has changed his methods but has not used any alternative method, or addressed specific flaws noted by his critics.
 
How many psychic thought-broadcasters do you think there are in the world? Very approximately;

a) One
b) More than one
c) Fewer than one

Since I can hear zero psychic broadcasts, I'm going with c).
 
Jack by the hedge said:
How many psychic thought-broadcasters do you think there are in the world? Very approximately;

a) One
b) More than one
c) Fewer than one

Since I can hear zero psychic broadcasts, I'm going with c).
Click to expand...

I agree and am willing to treat that as the null until evidence is provided to change my mind.

I do however believe more than one person who has claimed to hear the thoughts of others has been shown to have a psychological condition that explained their experiences.

It is a very good job that Dan.O. is here to tell off any "bully" who dares to suggest that the OP should have a medical professional eliminate this possibility from the equation.
 
Dan O. said:
Perhaps you should start by asking why so many of the posters in this thread failed to follow the protocol in the OP and many even delibrately tried to disrupt the test. Such behavior would not be necessary if there were no telepathy any you knew it.
Click to expand...

So skeptics know telepathy exists but are determined to cover it up?
 
tsig said:
So skeptics know telepathy exists but are determined to cover it up?
Click to expand...

I wonder if we all came up with this idea at once... Or if just one of us did and somehow made all the others think of it too...

You know, a good methodology would expect people to choose numbers other than the target and would consider many reasons why they might. It would have a control.
 
tsig said:
So skeptics know telepathy exists but are determined to cover it up?
Click to expand...




If Michel were right, then everyone on Earth could hear his thoughts, therefore every single person would already know telepathy exists. It would be like trying to cover up the elephant in the room with a handkerchief.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
If Michel were right, then everyone on Earth could hear his thoughts, therefore every single person would already know telepathy exists. It would be like trying to cover up the elephant in the room with a handkerchief.
Click to expand...

What if the elephant is very, very small, and the handkerchief is very big?
 
Jack by the hedge said:
If Michel were right, then everyone on Earth could hear his thoughts, therefore every single person would already know telepathy exists. It would be like trying to cover up the elephant in the room with a handkerchief.
Click to expand...


Is that what passes for logic around here? You are asserting a causal relation with no supporting basis.
 
I should note all the posters here that simply suck at math. I posted a simple math problem up thread to see if there was even one other poster that was capable of doing the statistical analysis for the protocol of the OP. There were simply no takers. The only attempt at analysis in this thread came from Michel who correctly noted that of the 6 proper responses to the test, 3 were given a 0 CR (Michel saying the they did not hear the answer and are just guessing). The other three were given a negative CR (Michel saying that they did hear the answer but were lying consciously or unconsciously). Michel correctly assessed that 2 out of those three were lying. Hitting 66% on the first try scared the hell out of the so called skeptics here and they immediately took to attacking the CR of the protocol in the OP rather than accept that the OP was demonstrating an ability that they don't understand.
 
Last edited:
Dan O. said:
I should note all the posters here that simply suck at math. I posted a simple math problem up thread to see if there was even one other poster that was capable of doing the statistacle analysis for the protocol of the OP. There were simply no takers. The only attempt at analysis in this thread came from Michel who correctly noted that of the 6 proper responses to the test, 3 were given a 0 CR (Michel saying the they did not hear the answer and are just guessing). The other three were given a negative CR (Michel saying that they did hear the answer but were lying consciously or unconsciously). Michel correctly assessed that 2 out of those three werer lying. Hitting 66% on the first try scared the hell out of the so called skeptics here and they immediately took to attacking the CR of the protocol in the OP rather than accept that the OP OS demonstrating an ability that they don't understand.
Click to expand...

6+3+2 = 11

6+6 =12

11+12= 23

2+3 = 5
....I was Projecting the #5, I knew I had this ability, Put that in your pipe ya snooty skeptics!
 
Dan O. said:
I should note all the posters here that simply suck at math. I posted a simple math problem up thread to see if there was even one other poster that was capable of doing the statistical analysis for the protocol of the OP. There were simply no takers. The only attempt at analysis in this thread came from Michel who correctly noted that of the 6 proper responses to the test, 3 were given a 0 CR (Michel saying the they did not hear the answer and are just guessing). The other three were given a negative CR (Michel saying that they did hear the answer but were lying consciously or unconsciously). Michel correctly assessed that 2 out of those three were lying. Hitting 66% on the first try scared the hell out of the so called skeptics here and they immediately took to attacking the CR of the protocol in the OP rather than accept that the OP was demonstrating an ability that they don't understand.
Click to expand...

People ignore your trolling. You conclude from this that people suck at math. Your logic is worse that your reading comprehension, and that is saying something.
 
Dan O. said:
I should note all the posters here that simply suck at math. I posted a simple math problem up thread to see if there was even one other poster that was capable of doing the statistical analysis for the protocol of the OP. There were simply no takers. The only attempt at analysis in this thread came from Michel who correctly noted that of the 6 proper responses to the test, 3 were given a 0 CR (Michel saying the they did not hear the answer and are just guessing). The other three were given a negative CR (Michel saying that they did hear the answer but were lying consciously or unconsciously). Michel correctly assessed that 2 out of those three were lying. Hitting 66% on the first try scared the hell out of the so called skeptics here and they immediately took to attacking the CR of the protocol in the OP rather than accept that the OP was demonstrating an ability that they don't understand.
Click to expand...

Your premise is entirely predicated on the validity of Michel's credibility rating, a rating which is demonstrably shown to be based on the answers that Michel likes. Fail.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom