Merged New telepathy test: which number did I write ?

[Akhenaten]

Try to look at this objectively. You think other people can hear your thoughts. Everyone you've talked to about this denies they can hear your thoughts. What is the most likely explanation - that your perception is incorrect, that everyone else's perception is incorrect, or that everyone else is lying?

I have received a number of testimonies, apparently confirming the existence of such a strange phenomenon (note however that I am not claiming that people are hearing all my thoughts). See for example:

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

,

or

I am seeing a 4 very clearly. It's almost as though I had written it myself.

.

(these numbers were correct, and verified by MD5 hashes. Loss Leader is a moderator on this forum)

Oh, for pity's sake.

Please read this a few times, would you?

To me one of the major issues is that Michel H does not even comprehend that even if a poster sounds "nice" that 99% of the people on his threads are simply taking the pith, and do not give a flying **** about his failed claim. If a poster sounds "nice" as already shown several times on this latest iteration of the BIG TEST Michel assumes sincerity, and honesty, which shows that Michel simply not only cannot read emotions from the written word (well, who can?) and negates his assumption that he can conclude who is genuine and who is not.

(Subtle) sarcasm and facetious commentary are simply beyond his comprehension. Which places further errors into an already failed protocol.

Norm

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Another thought occurs to me: I was checking to see if my thoughts could be heard (and it seems they can't) although I had no reason at all to believe they could be. I don't have any sensation or apprehension hinting to me that anyone might be able to hear me, but what if I did? Why would the one imply the other?

If one's thoughts actually were being heard, would you expect to be aware of it? If so, why?

If you have the sensation that your thoughts are being overheard, should you assume the cause of that sensation is that you thoughts actually are being heard? If so, why?

 

[Akhenaten]

It may be noted that this answer (with "brightly lit") was rather friendly sounding. If you are an ideal participant, the only reason why you answer something else than "I don't know" in a telepathy experiment, is the fact you did perceive something telepathically.

 

[Ladewig]

This argument has already been tried by Adman (about another answer), but I think it is incorrect, because you had a possibility of answering "I don't know", and yet you chose to answer:

It may be noted that this answer (with "brightly lit") was rather friendly sounding. If you are an ideal participant, the only reason why you answer something else than "I don't know" in a telepathy experiment, is the fact you did perceive something telepathically.

No, Michel, I was just curious to see how the credibility rating thing worked, so I wrote down the friendliest answer I could think of. I received no telepathic communication. In fact, I lied when I said that I received your message. No number was received.

ETA:
As I said waaaay back in post #114

I am guessing for the ****** and grins.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

...the only reason why you answer something else than "I don't know" in a telepathy experiment, is the fact you did perceive something telepathically.

This is not correct.

I have responded to your requests for replies in previous tests but I have never received anything telepathically.

There are any number of reasons people might answer other than with "I don't know". The first that occur to me are; to make some facetious remark if they don't take the test seriously or to guess at a random answer to help demonstrate that the test produces random results or to state the first answer that comes into their head just in case they were subconsciously receiving some message they were not aware of.

 

[Ladewig]

This statement from you surprises me, Ladewig, in view of the fact that your own hit rate is equal to 100% in this thread!! (one answer given, with a testimony, and it was correct

Why are you bragging about my success rate when the answer I provided was thrown out because of a poor credibility rating!

Post #127

2) Ladewig said:

This answer suggests more (an active) "remote viewing", than telepathy.
CR=-5

If you stopped pulling credibility ratings from your ass, then the test would be done.

.......................................
Really, see a medical doctor. Even if everyone advising you to see a doctor is completely wrong, what harm or inconvenience can come from seeing a doctor?

,

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Michel, I asked this before but I don't think you responded:

Can you hear the thoughts of other telepathic people all over the world?

 

[Giordano]

Okay, Michel H, you didn't like my other ideas? Try this. Select only the people in the current test who text you that they are receiving your number clearly (assuming you believe them). They are the telepathic recipients, right. Then you can ignore the number they guessed, or only pick those who correctly chose your target number. Then send a second target number to these successes and find out if they score better than chance on the second number (without asking for or judging any new text message). Shouldn't that work and avoid post-hoc bias?

 

[Loss Leader]

I am seeing a 4 very clearly. It's almost as though I had written it myself.

(these numbers were correct, and verified by MD5 hashes. Loss Leader is a moderator on this forum)

I can't believe I have to spell this out. I was kidding. I wasn't serious. I was lying about seeing any number very clearly. I was making fun of you. I saw no number. I heard no thought. I gave an answer only to highlight how silly I thought your methodology was.

Also, what the heck does me being a moderator have to do with it? My status as a moderator means I am fit to judge whether someone has used a curse word or hotlinked to a picture.

Everything you are doing right now is a creation of your mind to shield itself from the reality that you are as ordinary as the next person. You've shown a willingness to misinterpret intentions when it suits your needs. You've shown a startling deafness to satire even though you claim to be correcting for it. And you've refused to lower the odds of a correct guess below something that you can artificially manipulate. If you really wanted to test telepathy, you would design a proper test.

 

[fromdownunder]

Really? So, your numerical answer was a "42". Can you prove it?

I provided the #hash. Check it out.

But I don't have to "prove" anything. You are the one making a claim about the sincerity and honesty of posts and claim that you can tell from the written word whether a poster is sincere or not, so you should be able to tell me when I was being sincere or not.

When was I being honest and sincere, and when was I not being honest and sincere?

In which post was I a liar, and in which one was I telling the truth? It is your call, because it is your claim that you can tell the difference. If you cannot say which is which, then your whole protocol fails even more badly than it did in the first place.

I rest my case. Thank you for providing evidence for my point.

Norm

 

[Michel H]

I provided the #hash. Check it out.

But I don't have to "prove" anything. You are the one making a claim about the sincerity and honesty of posts and claim that you can tell from the written word whether a poster is sincere or not, so you should be able to tell me when I was being sincere or not.

When was I being honest and sincere, and when was I not being honest and sincere?

In which post was I a liar, and in which one was I telling the truth? It is your call, because it is your claim that you can tell the difference. If you cannot say which is which, then your whole protocol fails even more badly than it did in the first place.

I rest my case. Thank you for providing evidence for my point.

Norm

OK, it worked. a1d0c6e83f027327d8461063f4ac58a6 is the MD5 hash of 42.

 

[AdMan]

OK, it worked. a1d0c6e83f027327d8461063f4ac58a6 is the MD5 hash of 42.

Therefore, you were fooled by an insincere answer. Therefore your "credibility rating" is crap.

 

[Akhenaten]

Gosh, I never saw that coming.

Oh, wait . . . yes I did. I must be telepathic.

 

[Michel H]

Therefore, you were fooled by an insincere answer. Therefore your "credibility rating" is crap.

I didn't give a credibility rating to fromdownunder's answer (neither negative, nor positive). Remember, however, that this test is about telepathy, not about credibility ratings.

 

[AdMan]

I didn't give a credibility rating to fromdownunder's answer (neither negative, nor positive). Remember, however, that this test is about telepathy, not about credibility ratings.

Then get rid of your useless and totally subjective (and most often provably incorrect) "credibility ratings".

You have demonstrated you have little ability to judge a poster's sincerity, more often guessing wrong than right. You can't see when posters are being sarcastic, or even when they're just quoting a childhood rhyme.

 

[Tomtomkent]

I didn't give a credibility rating to fromdownunder's answer (neither negative, nor positive). Remember, however, that this test is about telepathy, not about credibility ratings.

They are part of the test, therefore they are open to critique.
If we should concentrate on something else, why do they need to be part of the test?

 

[fromdownunder]

I didn't give a credibility rating to fromdownunder's answer (neither negative, nor positive). Remember, however, that this test is about telepathy, not about credibility ratings.

Except you have just shown that you are going to check the #hash before you accept or reject any answers. What a joke!

Go directly to Go. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.

Norm

 

[AdMan]

Except you have just shown that you are going to check the #hash before you accept or reject any answers. What a joke!

Go directly to go. Do not collect $200.

Norm

Yes, good catch. He checks the answer before he evaluates his version of the "credibility". In the past, he's also changed his "CR" once he knows what the answer was.

It's a nonsensical test, as its always been. He's just trying to manipulate it so that he gets the results he's looking for.

Utter garbage.

 

[fromdownunder]

I didn't give a credibility rating to fromdownunder's answer (neither negative, nor positive). Remember, however, that this test is about telepathy, not about credibility ratings.

But you thanked me for my answer initially, then included me in your list of credible answers in several subsequent posts. It does show that your ability to understand, well, pretty much anything relating to what people say on a public BB, is pretty useless and that you have zero capacity to interpret what people are really saying.

Norm

 

[Tomtomkent]

But you thanked me for my answer initially, then included me in your list of credible answers in several subsequent posts. It does show that your ability to understand, well, pretty much anything relating to what people say on a public BB, is pretty useless and that you have zero capacity to interpret what people are really saying.

Norm

It also shows your answer was accepted BEFORE credibility is assigned. Where as the accuracy was meant to be judged AFTER credibility to prevent bias.

Whoops.