Merged New telepathy test: which number did I write ?

[Michel H]

Have you considered the possibility that all of you may be deluding yourselves due to perhaps related medical conditions that may be treatable?

I have received a fairly large of testimonies indicating that I am a telepath, including from my own mother, a psychiatrist, on this forum, on Yahoo Answers, on the phone... The "copycats" probably have not.


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.

 

[Michel H]

Why?

Well, the tests, with their high hit rates among credible answers (especially on this forum so far, sometimes on others too) seem to point towards a very strong telepathic phenomenon, with at the same time, a very strong tendency to try to reject it, to refuse to accept it.


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.

 

[AdMan]

Well, the tests, with their high hit rates among credible answers (especially on this forum, sometimes on others too) seem to point towards a very strong telepathic phenomenon, with at the same time, a very strong tendency to try to reject it, to refuse to accept it.

Similar to a very strong tendency to reject and refuse to accept the possibility that your sense of "telepathy" may be caused by a medical condition?

Michel, while you may think that you've achieved high rates "especially on this forum," to any objective observer in reality you have not. You are deluding yourself if you think you have.

In addition, you have told us that you hear voices telling you to hurt yourself. Whether or not this is related to your "telepathic" abilities, this is something that you seriously need to talk about with your doctor so that you can deal with it. I suggest you focus on that before you go on trying to convince all these skeptics that you have telepathic powers.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

I have received a fairly large of testimonies indicating that I am a telepath, including from my own mother, a psychiatrist, on this forum, on Yahoo Answers, on the phone... The "copycats" probably have not.


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.

I'm going to call bully on that, No psychiatrist would facilitate a delusion

 

[jmontecillo01]

I have received a fairly large of testimonies indicating that I am a telepath, including from my own mother, a psychiatrist, on this forum, on Yahoo Answers, on the phone...

Have you really talked to them and they actually said they can hear your thoughts or is it that you are convinced without a doubt that they know what you are thinking because you can read their minds.

The trick is asking them if they can read your mind. You don't have to do it directly if specially, you are convinced that they might lie to you as they envy your power. The trick I use when ever I feel that I am having a relapse and doing thought broadcasting is to ask a question. For example, "isn't humans a disappointing specie?". If they say "huh?" then you can be sure that they don't have a clue what you are talking about.

 

[Michel H]

...

Michel, while you may think that you've achieved high rates "especially on this forum," to any objective observer in reality you have not. You are deluding yourself if you think you have.

In addition, you have told us that you hear voices telling you to hurt yourself. Whether or not this is related to your "telepathic" abilities, this is something that you seriously need to talk about with your doctor so that you can deal with it. I suggest you focus on that before you go on trying to convince all these skeptics that you have telepathic powers.

Deluding myself? I read English:

... I do indeed have ESP, and know for a fact that he wrote 2!

This is perhaps an example of testimony that you would prefer to forget. Now, perhaps you should talk to your psychiatrist, and ask yourselves together if the "copycats" have also received such testimonies.


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.

 

[AdMan]

Deluding myself? I read English:

This is perhaps an example of testimony that you would prefer to forget. Now, perhaps you should talk to your psychiatrist, and ask yourselves together if the "copycats" have also received such testimonies.

You won't accept this, but calwaterbear was being sarcastic and making fun of your test. He was not serious. Did you ever consider that? Why don't you PM him and ask him, if you don't believe me?

 

[Michel H]

You won't accept this, but calwaterbear was being sarcastic and making fun of your test. He was not serious. Did you ever consider that? Why don't you PM him and ask him, if you don't believe me?

So, people who seem to disagree with your worldview are all declared jokers, and the Randi forum is an entertaining site, as we all know.


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.

 

[AdMan]

So, people who seem to disagree with your worldview are all declared jokers, and the Randi forum is an entertaining site, as we all know.

Did you ask calwaterbear if he was serious or just making fun of your thread?

Michel, you're reading what you want to read and hearing what you want to hear.

 

[Michel H]

Did you ask calwaterbear if he was serious or just making fun of your thread?

Frankly, I think it was quite clear he was serious, from the tone he was using. Now, in these telepathy matters, I think it is always better to be tactful, and not harass people who were generous enough to tell once briefly the (assumed) truth.


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.

 

[AdMan]

Frankly, I think it was quite clear he was serious, from the tone he was using. Now, in these telepathy matters, I think it is always better to be tactful, and not harass people who were generous enough to tell once briefly the (assumed) truth.

Are you afraid to ask him if he was serious? Because to me he was clearly not serious and just making fun of your test.

Does that give you an idea of how subjective assessments can sometimes be completely different? And yet a subjective assessment is a key part of your test.

Why don't you ask him if he was serious, Michel?

ETA: Since you won't ask him, I've PM'd calwaterbear to ask him to comment on his post.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Keep in mind, Tom, that, in a normal unmerged test thread, several (more than just one) give numerical answers. Then, there are tools of statistical analysis available to assess the significance of the results.

Trust me, the quality of that analysis is very much in mind when I say you have NOT addressed the major issues with your methodology.

 

[Tomtomkent]

I have been doing online telepathy tests for several years, and I generally found a hit rate close to 25% (when there are four possible answers), when I retain all answers (even though I was hoping, and am still hoping for a higher hit rate). Then, I asked myself (roughly): "What happens if I look only at the answers of the guys which seem friendlier in their answers (regardless of the number)". And then, it seemed that I began to see an apparent telepathy effect (i.e., more than 25%). It seems that this idea of credibility is very important in these online telepathy tests (at least, in "my case").

So when you look at the results you get 25% the same effect as random chance.

When you bias your results you get better results.

So you want to bias your results.

So why should anybody be convinced by results you openly and blatantly filter for effect?

 

[Tomtomkent]

Frankly, I think it was quite clear he was serious, from the tone he was using. Now, in these telepathy matters, I think it is always better to be tactful, and not harass people who were generous enough to tell once briefly the (assumed) truth.

This does not bode well for your attempts to declare which posts are credible.

It should at the very least point out why it is a purely subjective opinion you wish to apply and not an objective score.

 

[Michel H]

So when you look at the results you get 25% the same effect as random chance.

When you bias your results you get better results.

So you want to bias your results.

So why should anybody be convinced by results you openly and blatantly filter for effect?

I think that most people can probably understand when an answer is aggressive, and when it is friendly. This is, in my opinion, mostly an objective thing, something on which many people can agree. Of course, this does require some honesty, from you...


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test.

 

[Tomtomkent]

I think that most people can probably understand when an answer is aggressive, and when it is friendly. This is, in my opinion, mostly an objective thing, something on which many people can agree. Of course, this does require some honesty, from you...

Many people agreeing is not the definition of objective. Many people can share a subjective opinion.

Your "credibility" rating is you subjective opinion. Neither are aggressive or friendly the only two tones that can be adopted, nor are they mutually exclusive or even all or nothing traits.

Your opinion of results is in no way relevant to their statistical significance. Your credibility rating is a laughable ploy to bias your results and make them look more significant. It is a measure of how desperate you are to confirm your telepathy rather than test if it exists.

All the while you use this method, your results are meaningless and will convince nobody who does not already want to believe.

 

[Ladewig]

I have seen no valid objection against the current protocol, and I see therefore no reason to revise it. I am sorry if this test seems a little complicated but you have to realize that, if you want a rigorous procedure, there is a (little) price to pay, in terms of complexity. I thought it would be appropriate to do a rigorous test on the forum of the Randi Foundation, which tends to emphasize possible errors, the risk of erroneous beliefs, and critical thinking. A rigorous test which, I should say, is partly based on suggestions you have made yourself, on this very forum (regarding "blinding" and MD5 hashes). It is then a little strange to see so many of you attack a test that you have contributed yourself to create.

A rigorous test cannot involve you evaluating the answers.

 

[Pixel42]

Here's calwaterbear's post in context:

As I DO have ESP, the answer is unequivocably 3.

wrong oh! I do indeed have ESP, and know for a fact that he wrote 2!

Two equally and obviously sarcastic responses, only one of which the OP is choosing to take seriously. This is why subjective judgements have no part to play in a scientific test protocol.

 

[Iamme]

If you are telepathic, that has to mean you are a chosen one by God, and are above the avg Joe.
Telepathy with 4 numbers could be construed with luck.
Just tell me what my main entree` for supper tonight was.

 

[SezMe]

I think that most people can probably understand when an answer is aggressive, and when it is friendly. This is, in my opinion, mostly an objective thing, something on which many people can agree. Of course, this does require some honesty, from you...

Michel, I support your efforts to prove that you have telepathic skills and I think the test you have proposed is an excellent one. The many naysayers in this thread just don't have an open mind to accept the evidence that you have provided that your telepathic skills are real and demonstrable.

I wish to participate in the current test. The telepathic message I have received from you says the number is ##. The Hash code is 994a63de.