• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

[Merged]Does Randi Needs to Apologize or What?

So now you threaten lawsuit ...a good way to avoid the question :)
Where is the proof that Randi has acknowledged the Claim?
Is he still confused?

Show me where you have been threatened with a law suit.

Your previous question has been answered.

Why is it necessary that Randi acknowledge you claim? Your claim has been accepted by the JREF. There is no requirment anywhere in the rules for Randi to state that he personally accepts your claim.

All else is irrelevant as is your latest question. I await your latest hand waving.
 
If Randi says i HAVEN"T APPLIED and I HAVE then what is that? :)

If he is corrected and then does it AGAIN ... What is that?

Then he does it AGAIN on a Magic Podacast .... What is that?

Honestly, you guys look more and more like the OPPOSITE of Critical Thinkers and more like mindless followers every day.
 
If Randi says I HAVEN"T APPLIED and I HAVE then what is that? :)

If he is corrected and then does it AGAIN ... What is that?

Then he does it AGAIN on a Magic Podacast .... What is that?

If he continues on .... What is that?

Honestly, you guys look more and more like the OPPOSITE of Critical Thinkers and more like mindless followers every day.
 
Honestly, you guys look more and more like the OPPOSITE of Critical Thinkers and more like mindless followers every day.

Hey, that hurts my feelings! :cry1

I give up. Randi owes you a big fat apology and a basket of flowers. Just don't call me a "mindless follower" again. I couldn't bear it!
 
If Randi says i HAVEN"T APPLIED and I HAVE then what is that? :)

If he is corrected and then does it AGAIN ... What is that?

Then he does it AGAIN on a Magic Podacast .... What is that?

I would say it's a sign of a person who, owing to delegation of authority, is unaware of every last miniscule detail of their organization. I would say it's a sign of an organization whose procedures, owing to limitations in the laws of physics, do not permit real-time dissemination of every last scrap of data to all corners of the enterprise. I would say these points are completely reasonable and entirely consistent with the conventions of the business world.
 
If Randi says I HAVEN"T APPLIED and I HAVE then what is that? :)

If he is corrected and then does it AGAIN ... What is that?

Then he does it AGAIN on a Magic Podacast .... What is that?

If he continues on .... What is that?

Honestly, you guys look more and more like the OPPOSITE of Critical Thinkers and more like mindless followers every day.

You haven't provided protocols for the challenge. Period.

It's been explained to you: Until protocols have been provided, and accepted, you have accomplished nothing, and Randi has not been informed. You have been told this. Failure to accept this is not Randi's fault. It's yours.

No lawsuit has been threatened. An example was cited from past experience. However, should you continue to attempt to smear James Randi, if you're really grooving on being sued, I'm sure at some point, someone will indulge you.
 
No lawsuit has been threatened. An example was cited from past experience. However, should you continue to attempt to smear James Randi, if you're really grooving on being sued, I'm sure at some point, someone will indulge you.
Let the professor say what he wants. It all gets recorded. No evidence better then the written word
 
Dave F Koenig could it be Randi knows all about you and Callahan and your smear campaign on YouTube(laughs)and is giving you two the Rope you so love to talk about? Or maybe he doesn't give a rat's ass about your application,as judging on posts here and Magic Cafe he sees right through you?

James Randi has been in the trickery business a good 60 years or more,is rightly considered a legend.You have been on a tin pot internet radio show.

Bitter much? :D
 
If Randi says I HAVEN"T APPLIED and I HAVE then what is that? :)

If he is corrected and then does it AGAIN ... What is that?

Then he does it AGAIN on a Magic Podacast .... What is that?

If he continues on .... What is that?
What is that? That is you not understanding the answer you've been given; you are not considered to have "applied" until your claim & protocols have been agreed to by ALCON. The JREF has acknowledged they received your initial application...but you already knew all of this.

Randi's statement's have exactly ZERO, NADA, NOTHING to do with your claim...but you already knew this as well.

So "What is that?" It is you trying to deflect attention from you and your inability to complete the application process.

In other words, it is you being intellectually dishonest.

Honestly, you guys look more and more like the OPPOSITE of Critical Thinkers and more like mindless followers every day.
Taunting...always the mark of a truly honest person.
 
You blindly follow.
Is Randi still saying I didn't apply when even Jeff says he's probably confused (And there are over a thousand posts on the JREF Forum about it) ???? :)) Alison corrected him in front of 800 people! Itricks new I'd applied BEFORE they even spoke with him :) He'd received phone calls from fellow mentalists :)
Follow onward critical thinkers :)
 
Last edited:
You blindly follow.
Is Randi still saying I didn't apply when even Jeff says he's probably confused (And there are over a thousand posts on the JREF Forum about it) ???? :)) Alison corrected him in front of 800 people! Itricks new I'd applied BEFORE they even spoke with him :) He'd received phone calls from fellow mentalists :)
Follow onward critical thinkers :)

Have you any evidence that he is currently denying your application?
 
Okay, one more time:

First, it needs to be understood that you are entering an adversarial relationship with the James Randi Educational Foundation. You are coming before JREF, and attempting to take from the organization One Million Dollars. Even today, that is a chunk of change. That is money which was donated specifically for the challenge, to provide an incentive for those who claim to have paranormal powers to attempt to prove the same.

The money exists, contrary to the claims of people like Sylvia Browne. It is held by the firm of Goldman Sachs, and is available to the claimant once there is proof of the paranormal power. The Internal Revenue Service says the money is there. Further claims by anyone that the prize does not exist are slanderous. Rather than making James Randi look bad, it makes those who deny the existence of the money look like fools.

Since this is the case, in order for someone to lay claim to the One Million Dollars, there must be a test of the abilities claimed. I'm sure it would be great fun if I could say, "I can see through a sheetrock wall," and be able to walk away with a million bucks. That'll buy a lot of beer. I know this, James Randi knows this. It's actually pretty basic.

Therefore, in order to prevent that from happening, and in order for James Randi to continue to hang onto his million, a test must be taken and evidence provided that the powers claimed do exist. In order for this to work, there must be protocols established which make it possible for the claimant to be able to declare he's proved his assertions, or for James Randi to say said powers as claimed do not exist, at least as far as the claimant is concerned.

To further illustrate, I'll use the example cited above:

If I claim I can see through a sheetrock wall, I have to propose a means of testing that. I have to state in my proposal to JREF:

In order to test my claimed ability of being able to see through a sheetrock wall, I will ask someone to place fifteen photographs of well known individuals from the 20th Century. These photographs will be randomly selected from multiple sources, chosen by the James Randi Educational Foundation. They will be limited to individuals who were alive between 1900 and 2000. I will then identify each individual by name, or, failing that, at least be able to provide a specific description of each individual in the appropriate photographs.

In other words, I've now provided a description of the test, how it will be carried out, and a basic idea of source material.

But as the man on TV says: But wait! There's MORE!

My claim shall be determined to be successful if I can identify or describe at least 10 of those individuals pictured in the photographs. If I cannot do so, the test shall be declared a failure, and I will forfeit any claim to the One Million Dollar prize.

In short, not only does there need to be a means of testing to determine if I have the Ability, but there needs to be some means of assessing if I have won. It's not enough to say, "I can do this," but there needs to be some means of providing evidence which is incontrovertible. I can't just say I can do it. I have to DO it.

Keep in mind: A twelve year old figured this out.

JREF may not be a large organization in terms of manpower, but they do have a broad reach. James Randi is busy, as an author, as a skeptic, as a lecturer. No, he may not perform regularly as a magician these days, but I'm sure he gets a number of requests for him to do so in his daily mail. As such, the staff of JREF, such as it is, handles the requests for him. As it has been explained to you by Remie V, once you have provided to James Randi your proposal, and declared a set of protocols which make it possible to support your claim of being in contact with the dead, he will be advised. Until such time as you do, any information he has on this is incidental. His knowledge of it is limited. This is, in part, for your protection, and his. It means that neither one of you can pull a fast one.

Like I said: A twelve year old figured this out.

Once your protocols have been approved, and you both agree on what counts as a hit, then there's a preliminary test. It's unlikely that James Randi will administer that test; in the past, it's sometimes been handled by others. But, the upshot is that if you can make it past the preliminaries, all you have to do is perform the test one more time, and do so successfully. At that point, you've got your million.

Remember: A twelve year old figured this out.

To date, no one has ever made it past the preliminary test. But, there have been people who have tried. A record exists on the Forum which is available for your perusal. If you're having trouble figuring out how to write up your protocols, take a look at how it has been done before. Perhaps a science teacher at your local Community College can help you with this. There are any number of ways to work this out. However, the failure to come up with protocols which can provide evidence of your claimed ability is not James Randi's. It is yours. The resources are out there, at your local public library, at your local schools, in bookstores, and no doubt among your neighbors and friends.

If I haven't said so before, I'll repeat it here: A twelve year old figured this out.

What this comes down to is that if you want to take a shot and win a million dollars, you have to play by the rules, just like everyone else. You have to figure out how JREF will know if you can actually hear the dead. You must provide a means for JREF and others to see the evidence of your claimed ability. If you cannot do this, even with the resources available to you, it is not James Randi's fault. Others have not had the difficulties you're claiming, nor have others tried to smear James Randi. They made their proposals, made their attempts, and when they failed, they accepted their limitations, or simply shut up. They didn't, for the most part, slander anyone. They acted like the adults they were. Including the 12 year old.

And just so you know: The twelve year old didn't make it past the preliminaries, either.
 
Does Randi Needs to Apologize or What?
1. What.

In order that my reply is understood, I used "what" in the same sense one uses it when one exclaims, in an interrogative sense, "WTF" (What The F{rule something}) is going on here?"

(The correct response for this thread, to that interrogative, is troll kicking.)

DR
 
I am waiting for the apology!

For someone to call my application a PACK OF LIES as Randi did on Itricks is totally unfounded.

I know that Jeff Wagg thinks and has stated on this thread that Randi may be confused, and I think that Jeff is correct on this one, but why doesn't Randi own up to the confusion and apologize?

It is also on video that Alison Smith TOLD HIM that I'd applied!

Why would Randi perpetuate the notion that I haven't applied and I'm just Lying to everyone about my accepted claim?

If it's to discourage me from coming for the Million (If that's what's left) then that just isn't Fair is it now?

That would suggest that he protects the Million by this type of behavior.

You'll love the protocol!!!!!
 
Last edited:
You know, Prof, I feel sorry for you.

You obviously have no life.

You clearly have no perspective on this.

You keep talking about a protocol, but you've yet to produce it.

Such a sense of self-importance smacks of someone who's not completely connected upstairs. A couple of tacos short of a combination plate.

Therapy. If you aren't already in it, consider starting.

Oh, and don't quit those meds.
 
You'll love the protocol!!!!!

I'm going to make a paranormal prediction!! :cool:. I want to state in advance that this is completely paranormal and in no way influenced by logical deduction nor past history. Any replies to the contrary will be flat-out ignored on this forum and relentlessly mocked by myself and my paranormal peers upon message boards that your shoddy not-so-critically-thinking minds have never heard of, providing a relentless source of amusement for us at your expense. This mockery will be extreme. I will also continue to support my good friend Him in his endeavors to enlighten you forumites and the YouTube masses as to the truly paranormal nature of the world and the illegitimate nature of the Million-Dollar Challenge by posting unrelated manifestations of thought laced with my trademark emoticon (I am sure your skeptical minds know which one I refer to! :cool:).

HERE'S THE PREDICTION!!! The same bickering and debate will continue about this new protocol, whenever it may be presented. It will do very little to change this forum's opinion of Mr. Koenig, and several forum members will come forward with serious objections. I myself will probably chip in with a comment or two about the language employed by the protocol. Mr. Wagg will most certainly have his objections to the proposed protocol, I'm getting that impression from the spirits quite strongly.

I look forward to being proven right!! :cool::cool:

~ Matt :cool::cool:

(EDIT: I highly encourage others in communication with spirits who have information about this protocol to reply with their own paranormal predictions about this matter. :cool:)
 
Last edited:
I am waiting for the apology!

You seem to have missed my earlier question:
Have you any evidence that he is currently denying your application?

As for the end of your post, and the other posts since,
[as mod]
any further avoidance of the moderated status on the existing protocol thread will see this thread closed.


The final warning on this was given already on the previous page.
 
Last edited:
For someone to call my application a PACK OF LIES as Randi did on Itricks is totally unfounded.
This is the FOURTH TIME* I have corrected you on this point! Please PAY ATTENTION!
At no time during the Itricks interview is the name "David Koenig" (or any of your pseudonyms) uttered. The term "pack of lies" was about people claiming to be rejected for the MDC when they have never filed an application.

I know that Jeff Wagg thinks and has stated on this thread that Randi may be confused, and I think that Jeff is correct on this one, but why doesn't Randi own up to the confusion and apologize?

It is also on video that Alison Smith TOLD HIM that I'd applied!
... And moments after she told him, he corrected himself. (transcript)

Why would Randi perpetuate the notion that I haven't applied and I'm just Lying to everyone about my accepted claim?
You are making yet another baseless claim. The only time James Randi has mentioned your MDC claim was at DragonCon, and once he was made aware of it, he even stated that your application is, "...free to be seen anytime you want to see it." [1]

You'll love the protocol!!!!!
What we (participants on this forum) think about the protocol is irrelevant. If you do not submit a protocol directly to Jeff Wagg then you are just playing a game.


* See [1], [2], [3]
 
You've hit it, Pantaz. The Prof is playing a game.

Edited by jmercer: 
Removed for off-topic, but allowing the rest of the post


Randi did not lie. Claiming he did is ultimately going to bring legal action. It will also bring an end to this silly charade on the Professor's part, and will probably result in his being banned. All of the information provided will remain, as will his bogus claims. It will remain on the Internet forever, and the world will see what a silly, childish individual the Professor is.

And they will tell him to go to his room. :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He said that my application was a PACK OF LIES !!!!
Is this some way of trying to get me to QUIT?

If so, then the integrity of the JREF is in question here.

Please show me where James has come to his senses and admitted the mistake!

Even Jeff Wagg thinks he is confused.
 
He said that my application was a PACK OF LIES !!!!
Is this some way of trying to get me to QUIT?

If so, then the integrity of the JREF is in question here.

Please show me where James has come to his senses and admitted the mistake!

Even Jeff Wagg thinks he is confused.

Just to remind you Dave,it seems maybe you didn't notice this post:

Pantaz said:
As I have pointed out before [1], [2], when Mr. Randi used the phrase, "pack of lies", he was not talking about you, or any specific person. In context, he was talking in general terms about people claiming to be rejected for the MDC when they have never filed an application.

If this is untrue please provide proof.Nothing else,just proof.
 
Since JR has hung up on me when questioned about this over the phone, I've taken this to Youtube !!!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQzXglzmMkE&feature=channel_page

Which is it?
Ignorant or Lying?
:cool::cool:

Neither.

Now maybe if you did not use so many aliases, you would not have such problems.

But then, you don't really care anyway. Time to get a new act. Your current efforts at getting some publicity are a miserable failure.

Now you could try to go back and talk about your former claim, but you already reveled here that you never believed in it. So I guess this is all that you have left. And it still won't make you famous or make you any money.

Time for some new ideas. Let's start with coming up with an act somebody wants to watch. You know what I mean. Learn to do a few good tricks with proficiency and then start performing them in public. Beats making a lot of noise and not doing anything but talking. Even David Blaine has more of an act.
 
Last edited:
My goodness. Why don't you just show us the evidence yourself?
 
Not only do I have a claim but also I've submitted TWO VERIFIABLE PROTOCOLS (Which the JREF has Refused to agree to)
/
... for certain values of the terms "protocol" and "claim".

Both "protocols" amounted to "I will spout some mumbo-jumbo, and something neat will happen. I don't know what, but it'll be neat. Really really neat. But it can only happen at one time and place. Okay, another time, but the same place. But the only way I can get permission to the place is to lie about what I'm going to be doing -- so no one tell, okay? And we'll have all these recorders, see? They're to record the really neat stuff I can't actually say will be there. I promise they won't be rigged or anything, and you can trust me, right? Ummmm, did I mention the mumbo jumbo? It was written by a whole team of writers but they all walked away from a paying gig because I told them it was all a scam. But it'll be really really spooky and neat."

Which is why you no longer even have an active application, let alone a claim.

/
/
 
Last edited:
Since JR has hung up on me when questioned about this over the phone, I've taken this to Youtube !!!!!!!
Which is it?
Ignorant or Lying?
:cool::cool:

If you had any evidence for your stupid claims, you would just present them and let the evidence speak for you. Attacking James Randi might make you feel better, and make your victims believe your nonsense, but the rest of us would be convinced if you actually had anything to convince people with.

You want to "take it to YouTube"? Why not go further, and show everyone your evidence?
 
Randi has stated that such things are a matter of public record and they are free for anyone to see.
Perhaps you should ask him?
Or just READ :)

Not only do I have a claim but also I've submitted TWO VERIFIABLE PROTOCOLS (Which the JREF has Refused to agree to)


Haven't had our attention whore fixes lately, have we?

Just post your two "verifiable" protocols here. What does "verifiable protocol" even supposed to mean?

Never mind, I know the source. If you cannot, or do not, post your supposed protocols then you are a liar. Simple really - just do it and post them.

The truth shall set you free.

Norm
 
Last edited:
So, if there are more videos starring Randi, then he must be more legitimate than each individual critic?


You know, there once was a guy who claimed that you could establish the validity of one claim vs another by comparing the number of Google hits. That is, if you had two opposing ideas, the one with more hits had to be the true one. For the life of me, I couldn't remember who it was. It was such an outrageously stupid claim, though, that it took the Forum body a page or two to understand that this was, in fact, what the person was claiming.

TP, your attempts to smear Randi are just getting sad. They're such pathetic attempts to stretch and twist and redefine what's going on to fit your agenda, and they're so obvious. Why are you so desperate to go after Randi? What on earth do you hope to achieve? Do you honestly think that behaving this way will bring you any kind of real recognition?* If you were to spend half as much energy on simple, honest, self-promotion, you'd probably be a lot farther along the road you're seeking to travel. This quest of yours against Randi is just concrete around your feet.

*Right now, your efforts in trying to smear Randi make you look like an idiot. I know that you do not intend, by any stretch of the imagination, to come off like an idiot. But your arguments are just so plain stupid that it's getting harder and harder, with every succeeding post, to not come to the conclusion that you, too, are simply stupid. What's even more stupid is the fact that any person with the ability to read can go read through your previous correspondence here, see very quickly that you came to the MDC in bad faith to begin with, and probably draw the conclusion that you are acting like an idiot.

Why don't you just start over, forget Randi, and re-imagine yourself as a whatever-it-is-you-want-to-be from the ground up? It worked for Peter Popoff; surely you can pull it off?
 
You know, there once was a guy who claimed that you could establish the validity of one claim vs another by comparing the number of Google hits. That is, if you had two opposing ideas, the one with more hits had to be the true one. For the life of me, I couldn't remember who it was. It was such an outrageously stupid claim, though, that it took the Forum body a page or two to understand that this was, in fact, what the person was claiming.

TP, your attempts to smear Randi are just getting sad. They're such pathetic attempts to stretch and twist and redefine what's going on to fit your agenda, and they're so obvious. Why are you so desperate to go after Randi? What on earth do you hope to achieve? Do you honestly think that behaving this way will bring you any kind of real recognition?* If you were to spend half as much energy on simple, honest, self-promotion, you'd probably be a lot farther along the road you're seeking to travel. This quest of yours against Randi is just concrete around your feet.

*Right now, your efforts in trying to smear Randi make you look like an idiot. I know that you do not intend, by any stretch of the imagination, to come off like an idiot. But your arguments are just so plain stupid that it's getting harder and harder, with every succeeding post, to not come to the conclusion that you, too, are simply stupid. What's even more stupid is the fact that any person with the ability to read can go read through your previous correspondence here, see very quickly that you came to the MDC in bad faith to begin with, and probably draw the conclusion that you are acting like an idiot.

Why don't you just start over, forget Randi, and re-imagine yourself as a whatever-it-is-you-want-to-be from the ground up? It worked for Peter Popoff; surely you can pull it off?
I can imagine a half-dozen famous stupid/dishonest/fraudulent people off of the top of my head. In all of those cases, I can disprove what they say with the facts behind their lies, without mentioning them at all. It is true that some of those people are sexual predators, or have covered up for sexual predators. Some of them are Neo-Nazis, or apologists for Hitler.

None of that matters. Their claims either hold up, or they don't. If the guy who invented a vaccine to save my life was a terrible husband or father, it doesn't change that his vaccine worked. Someone who is trying to bolster their claim here by attacking Randi falls into the same fallacy. Smear Randi all you want... you still have to present your evidence. Proving that James Randi is a bad person doesn't mean that your claim has any merit.
 
I can imagine a half-dozen famous stupid/dishonest/fraudulent people off of the top of my head. In all of those cases, I can disprove what they say with the facts behind their lies, without mentioning them at all. It is true that some of those people are sexual predators, or have covered up for sexual predators. Some of them are Neo-Nazis, or apologists for Hitler.

None of that matters. Their claims either hold up, or they don't. If the guy who invented a vaccine to save my life was a terrible husband or father, it doesn't change that his vaccine worked. Someone who is trying to bolster their claim here by attacking Randi falls into the same fallacy. Smear Randi all you want... you still have to present your evidence. Proving that James Randi is a bad person doesn't mean that your claim has any merit.

At this point, I don't think that TP is doing it to bolster support for his claim. I think he just wants fame as "the guy who brought down James Randi". It doesn't matter to him that demonstrating that Randi was wrong about one thing doesn't make him wrong about all things. He just wants the attention. But James Randi is relatively unknown except among certain circles. I mean, it's not as if you say "James Randi" and every person in America goes "wow, James Randi!". Honestly, exactly how much fame would it bring someone, assuming that that someone actually had arguments that didn't appear to be so patently idiotic?
 
If the professor had made a good claim as per rule 16

16. This notarized form must be accompanied by a brief, two-paragraph description of what will constitute the demonstration. Upon a protocol being developed, that description may be extended.
then he would have posted it on the thread that was created for him. He did not do so. His abilities were clearly demonstrated, in that thread, as being nothing but a figment of his imagination. Everything else is irrelevant and not worth discussing.
 
Just to remind you Dave,it seems maybe you didn't notice this post:



If this is untrue please provide proof.Nothing else,just proof.

Maybe scroll up Dave and answer that question which you conviently forgot about.
And
Since JR has hung up on me when questioned about this over the phone, I've taken this to Youtube !!!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQzXglzmMkE&feature=channel_page

Which is it?
Ignorant or Lying?
:cool::cool:
Yes you also "took it to" the Magic Cafe where upon the thread was deleted.

121 views! Oh boy you really stuck it to Randi there! :D

Edited by chillzero: 
Edited for moderated thread
 
Last edited:
If the professor had made a good claim as per rule 16


then he would have posted it on the thread that was created for him. He did not do so. His abilities were clearly demonstrated, in that thread, as being nothing but a figment of his imagination. Everything else is irrelevant and not worth discussing.
You are 100% WRONG!!!!
The Claim WAS posted.
You need to do some reading before you spout off in ignorance.
The claim was accepted AND TWO PROTOCOLS were also submitted!
 
Back
Top Bottom