Anyone heard about this dude? (pavelprorok on youtube)

[pavel_do]

Just made a phone call... they will pass the message to Alison.. and promised to get back to me within 2 day.. So we shell see..

 

[Crundy]

rockin'

 

[pavel_do]

But back to the original topic:
Pavel, you would do well to choose one simple, unambiguous, clear procedure. A simple statement of what you know you can do and how you will demonstrate it.

Robert

I think I did it.. by sending my last proposal.. just that if I would at least know if it is good enough for them.. that would help.. cause for 3 weeks of waiting I would “invent” some new tests.. but I am waiting for reply and practice the one I proposed the last..

 

[Startz]

Crundy,
The "overstaffed" part actually made sense to me. I've found that if you have more people than you need in an office they try to find something to do with their time. Discussions break out, more and more people get drawn into them, soon everybody is talking instead of working.

But back to the original topic:
Pavel, you would do well to choose one simple, unambiguous, clear procedure. A simple statement of what you know you can do and how you will demonstrate it.

Robert

Pavel has already given such a statement in his July 5th posting. His proposal may not be perfect, but it's certainly good enough to serve as a basis for working out the details with JREF.

 

[pavel_do]

Finaly I got an email from JREF


"My apologies for not getting back to you sooner.

I am having difficulty understanding some parts of your protocol, due to language barriers. Have you asked any of the members of the Forum to write it for you in full? That might make understanding it easier.

I have checked with other JREF staff members regarding this protocol, and at this point, the protocol is extremely complicated. I know I have made suggestions to simplify it before, and I must state those concerns again and ask you once more to please simplify your protocol.

Can you find twenty photos that are different enough from one another to use in this test? This test can be as simple as asking you to identify merely six out of the twenty photos, and would give much clearer results. If we stick with this protocol, it is likely that the sheer number of envelopes is going to make keeping the experiment straight extraordinarily difficult and expensive - please keep in mind that the cost of the experiment falls to the applicant and not the JREF.

Please address these issues and let me know.

Thanks again for your interest,

Alison Smith
Research Assistant
James Randi Educational Foundation
"

I have already replyed...

 

[Startz]

Finaly I got an email from JREF


"My apologies for not getting back to you sooner.

I am having difficulty understanding some parts of your protocol, due to language barriers. Have you asked any of the members of the Forum to write it for you in full? That might make understanding it easier.

I have checked with other JREF staff members regarding this protocol, and at this point, the protocol is extremely complicated. I know I have made suggestions to simplify it before, and I must state those concerns again and ask you once more to please simplify your protocol.

Can you find twenty photos that are different enough from one another to use in this test? This test can be as simple as asking you to identify merely six out of the twenty photos, and would give much clearer results. If we stick with this protocol, it is likely that the sheer number of envelopes is going to make keeping the experiment straight extraordinarily difficult and expensive - please keep in mind that the cost of the experiment falls to the applicant and not the JREF.

Please address these issues and let me know.

Thanks again for your interest,

Alison Smith
Research Assistant
James Randi Educational Foundation
"

I have already replyed...

Pavel:

If you're willing, would you share your reply with us? Perhaps folks here could help with the language on the drafting of the proposal, if you think that would be helpful.

 

[pavel_do]

Pavel:

If you're willing, would you share your reply with us? Perhaps folks here could help with the language on the drafting of the proposal, if you think that would be helpful.

Re to your questions..
I wrote the proposals my self no one write it for me… what parts of it you cant really understand?? I will try to rephrase and explain it..

What exactly extremely complicated?? Conditions? We can drop it all.. or the fact that I need 30 runs with 5 photos in each?

Re to the question whether we coudl use 20 and I have to identefy 6 out of them...
I wrote it before and I think you did not read it probably.. cause it is explain about photos that I don’t see it exact way.. and it is hard to find different photos cause in one or the other way they resemble.. with shapes, structure or colors.. please read my explanation it should make it more clear. Though it refers to other proposition but it still explain… cause it is impossible to find completely different photos even 10.. and u offered 20.. Beside you say I would need to identify 6 out of 20.. even if I would find the way.. the chance to identify 6 out of 20 it over 20 millions to one.. But I thought u need 1.000 odds to be beaten for preliminary test.. even to identify them in any order but to be right is over 30.000 to one..

Never the less.. I think it is a bit complicated and I am saying basing on my practice before..

Any way here is some explanations of how I see..

I do not see things in exact way and the same as we all see in a physical way with our eyes. What I do see it is shapes, colors, sometimes-exact things but all of it related in some way to the photo that I hold. It is all the time different, I can’t order my self to see a color or let say what shape it is… I see what I see. For that reason it is really hard to make big set with different pictures as most of them in one or the other way have similar shapes texture colors etc.. I tried and worked on it that how I know it…

So if we take en example with pair of the photos, Pyramid and an Apple. If I hold one of the photo, and I see something ROUND or no shapes but RAD color etc.. So when I told that the pair contains Pyramid and the Apple, I will know there is an apple that I held in my hands, be cause pyramids has no red color on photo and it is not in a round shape. But I said above, every time I see different thing.. like with example of photo with Statue of liberty and let say dogs… many times I sew a SHIP or the OCEAN when I held statue of liberty. So I know the photo I hold is related to the water, so out of two options ( Liberty and dogs) Liberty facing ships and surrounded by water so that is the photo.. That is how I see usually.

Recent example… I held photo (random) and I sew a BOW (weapon) with the arrow in side… the pair from the list was Clock black and white and the African elephant, so I know it was CLOCK as it is in a round shape and the BOW with arrow look like in some way a like a half of the clock that is showing 3 o’clock. And it was a clock! Or like I hold envelope and I see MOUNTAINS… I know there is no mountains on the photos. So when the pair was announced one of two photo was Pyramids so I know it is Pyramids as the shape I sew resembles Pyramids and I was right…

I hope it is clear in some way, if you have any question I am happy to answer them.

Another things…

Why cant it be let say only 2 photos say APPLE and CROSS… say 25 each that would make 50 in all.. seem easy I need to separate them in each pile… Yes that is not a problem.. BUT in this case, though I am psychic but I am a human the brain and mind still work in normal way and it is not always help. Example, we use set of 50 photos with 25 each. 25 of Apples and 25 of Crosses, that was shuffled in order to bring them to a random. I hold first two photos and sew round thing.. OK great that the Apple.. and I am right... But when I will hold 3dh or forth envelope and If I will still keep seeing round thing that would signify apple, my brain will get involved in doubting me… Like “saying” it CANT BE an apple 4 times in a row it just mix up, u sew it last time...

Though I know it can be possible that all 25 in row will happen to be APPLES… but I cant switch off brain and that the case. For that reason It is not that simple as it seem from first look and can not be used in testing of my ability as it will not allow me to perform it with best results.

IF you looked at the list of the pairs each pair has different photo in different colors and shapes and structure… It is almost impossible have all completely different photos.. If I would see always exact colors when I hold it that would be easy I would make 40 different colors photos and would see them all exact. But as I said… I see all the time different, sometimes shapes sometimes colors some time exact thing or something that relates to the picture.

From my last practices I realize that I can perform better IF I don’t know current pair that I hold, so I hold first the photo I see what I see, I can describe what I see and make drawings… than when I know what are the options I can make my answer based ON WHAT I SAW… that helps, to remove some destructions like: I don’t know what I hold (as pairs will be mixed and will be handled to me in random) So I am more relax and my brain not interferes in a sense that, If say it is run number 2 (with the same photos), I have to hold 4th pair and it is say Cross and the Elephant…

If the last time I held it, it was Cross and this time I will see cross sign or something in shape of cross or even just black and white lines… so that would all resemble the cross photo.. so again I will be doubting if it is a cross again or just “memory game” and doubts never helps as I said before… Same thing with the shapes and colors… so by holding the pair in any order and describing it first helps to be more “independent” from mind games..

The test protocol that I proposed above, is based on the results of my experiments with pairs, zenner cards, 3 out of 10 or 20 and many others and paying attentions to the results and what can affect it in one or the other way.

I am willing and ready to work and negotiate with JREF, and I am sure we can and will work out the best and most suitable protocol that will satisfy both sides. As long as both sides are willing and ready to listen to each other and explain to each other why one or the other thing can or can’t be in protocol. And the points and opinions of the other side, is taken to consideration.

If there any other ways the JREF would offer for test I would be glad to know.. so we could find the beast suitable.. mean while I will try to come up with some other ways.. that possible could be less complicated in your consideration.. though I don’t see my recent proposal as complicated one I do realize I have to pay for photos and envelopes etc.. but I would be comfortable with that test as my results good with it. Never the less will try to come up with more options and would appreciate your proposals if you have any..

Also would appreciate if you could reply to my proposals.. with your opinion whether it suitable or not.. cause that would save time.. as I said before if I would know your points for my last proposal some weeks a go.. by now we could have find new and best option.

Regards,

Pavel

 

[Startz]

Pavel:

Thank you for posting your reply to JREF. I don't really understand they're objections, but I'm not experienced in this sort of thing. The cost of envelopes is negligible. The cost of the 150 photos is presumably less than $100, and since you are paying for it I do not see why they should be concerned.

How long would all three runs take you?

 

[pavel_do]

Pavel:

Thank you for posting your reply to JREF. I don't really understand they're objections, but I'm not experienced in this sort of thing. The cost of envelopes is negligible. The cost of the 150 photos is presumably less than $100, and since you are paying for it I do not see why they should be concerned.

How long would all three runs take you?

3 runs.. take about 2 or two and a half hours.. I am sure it will take not more than 2..cause the envelopes will be ready before.. in my case every time I replace them back to envelopes and it take some time if we calculate that I do it 30 times.

 

[Startz]

3 runs.. take about 2 or two and a half hours.. I am sure it will take not more than 2..cause the envelopes will be ready before.. in my case every time I replace them back to envelopes and it take some time if we calculate that I do it 30 times.

Would you like some of us here to try to draft a proposal for your approval?

 

[pavel_do]

Would you like some of us here to try to draft a proposal for your approval?

YES please. I would appreciate. and if some one has any more test proposals.

 

[Czarcasm]

YES please. I would appreciate. and if some one has any more test proposals.

We already have many pages of proposals. I think you should just concentrate on fixing the one you've got, starting with finding someone who can translate for you. You really need to have someone who understands what you are trying to say and can write it down using standard English spelling and grammar. Also, there is no need to talk about the origins and/or explanations of your abilities in your proposal. Just make ONE claim, then tell how you will go about testing that ONE claim.
1. Get it translated properly.
2. No explanations for what it is or how it works-just say what you can do.
3. No tales of past accomplishments.

 

[pavel_do]

We already have many pages of proposals. I think you should just concentrate on fixing the one you've got, starting with finding someone who can translate for you. You really need to have someone who understands what you are trying to say and can write it down using standard English spelling and grammar. Also, there is no need to talk about the origins and/or explanations of your abilities in your proposal. Just make ONE claim, then tell how you will go about testing that ONE claim.
1. Get it translated properly.
2. No explanations for what it is or how it works-just say what you can do.
3. No tales of past accomplishments.

The person will give me the envelopes of the current set of 5, with no words or any other sound signs that would in any way suggest or define the order of the envelopes of the set that will be handed to me.

I will hold each of the five sealed manila envelopes in turn, and choose the two that I get the strongest image on. (Each envelope I might hold up to 2 minutes).

I will take the mask off and offer my answer for the two photos that will be chosen by me.
I will offer my answer by writing the name of the image on each of these two envelopes or draw the image on top of each envelope and name it a laud.

After the writing/ drawings will be finished and the answers was announced, I will hand the envelopes back to the third party. The third party will open the envelopes in front of everyone including me* and will reveal the photo that was inside. Then the result will be recorded as either correct or incorrect by the JREF or any other party who will be in the room. ( Or I will open the envelopes my self and reveal the photos).

After the two photos was revealed, matched to my answers and the results as either correct or incorrect have been made, all of the envelopes from current set, shell be removed from the table and the new set should be placed on the table.

The same procedure will be done with all 30 sets of photos in every trial, until the last envelope will be identified by me and my answer will be announced.

I would need 5 minutes brake between each 5 photo sets.
I would need 10 minutes brake between every 10 sets.
I would need 15 minutes brake between first and second trial.

After two trials by 30 runs will be complete, the JREF representative will announce the results for the Preliminary Test as either Positive or Negative.

 

[Startz]

Draft proposal

Here is my draft proposal. Everyone should feel free to chime in, although what really counts is whether it is acceptable to Pavel.

Draft Pavel Ziborov Proposal:
[This draft by Dick Startz, July 17, 2008.]

Claim: The ability to identify photos in sealed envelopes just by holding the envelope in Pavel’s hand.

Materials:

62 sets of 5 photographs chosen by Pavel. Each set of five to be identical. Each copy to be numbered on back 1-5 to identify the photo.

305 small opaque envelopes large enough to contain one photo. 300 slightly larger opaque envelopes large enough to contain the smaller envelope.

60 clips of a size to clip together one set of five envelopes.
All materials to be delivered to tester at least one week before test.

Preparation:
Tester will have 3rd party who will not be present at test prepare 60 test sets each with one copy of the five photos, each photo sealed in a small envelope and small envelope inside a large envelope. 30 sets to be marked on the outside A1 through A30. 30 sets to be marked on the outside B1 through B30. One set of five pictures left open. (Note that the supplies allow for five extra pictures and envelopes for wastage. These are to be discarded once the sets are prepared and not delivered to the test.)

Test Procedure:
The test will consist of two trials (A & B) each of 30 attempts at identification. The open, numbered set of five pictures will be visible to all participants.

For each set:
1. Tester will hand Pavel one sealed set of photographs.
2. After handling the sealed envelopes, Pavel will select two envelopes and clearly write the photo number contained inside on each envelope. The other three envelopes will be set aside. The two marked envelopes will be opened. If one photo is correctly identified the tester will record “1-correct.” If both photos are correctly identified the tester will record “2-correct.” Otherwise the tester will record “None correct.”
3. After the score is recorded Pavel may open the other three envelopes.
4. All materials from the set will be discarded.

At the end of 30 sets the tester will announce the score. Pavel succeeds at the trial if he receives 7 or more scores of “2-correct” or receives 20 or more scores of “2-correct” and “1-correct” combined.

Pavel succeeds at the preliminary challenge if he succeeds at either trial A or trial B.

Notes:
1. There will be a 10 minute break between trials.
2. If a trial takes more than one-and-one half hours it will be considered a failure without regard to the scores.

3. No talking or any kind of distraction with light or sound or any other interruption during the test. Observers are permitted to quietly leave the room, but should then not return until the trial underway is complete. No photography during the test except that both parties are permitted to videotape. No phones or other communications devices will be permitted in the test room.

4. No trickery, or cheating from either Pavel or JREF or other parties present in room during the test.

Environmental conditions:

1. No substance with a strong odor will be allowed in the room same, including no strong perfumes.

2. In the room where the test will be held, there will be no photos or pictures visible, except for those provided for the test.

3. After the time agreed upon to start the challenge, Pavel will indicate that the environmental conditions have been met. He will then have 15 minutes to prepare himself. Pavel may use a blindfold and earplugs as he wishes, provided that these items have been supplied to the tester one week before the test and are brought to the test along with the other materials.

The test will be commence at a time agreed upon by the parties, but between 1 pm and 2 pm local time unless waived by both parties.

Pavel may bring up to three people of his choice to observe the test.

 

[pavel_do]

Here is my draft proposal. Everyone should feel free to chime in, although what really counts is whether it is acceptable to Pavel.

Draft Pavel Ziborov Proposal:
[.

thank you Dick. Nice one and almost same as last proposal just in better language but the problem is that JREF not really happy with this type of test.. as u read there reply..

 

[Startz]

thank you Dick. Nice one and almost same as last proposal just in better language but the problem is that JREF not really happy with this type of test.. as u read there reply..

Pavel:

I tried to keep it as close to your proposal as I could, just trying to simplify.

It seems to me that this proposal is a straightforward test that can be concluded in an afternoon. Although I imagine JREF might be concerned about some controls I haven't thought of. The proposal doesn't quite meet the 1 in 1,000 standard, but it's quite close.

If this proposal were acceptable to JREF, would you agree to it without further changes?

 

[Thabiguy]

At the end of 30 sets the tester will announce the score. Pavel succeeds at the trial if he receives 7 or more scores of “2-correct” or receives 20 or more scores of “2-correct” and “1-correct” combined.

Pavel succeeds at the preliminary challenge if he succeeds at either trial A or trial B.

Startz, the proposal is good, but I must point out a problem: the odds of accomplishing this do not seem to be less than 1 in 1000.

In the following paragraph I summarize the odds for various combinations of the feats described in your draft.

1. 7 or more scores of "2-correct", in 1 trial (A): 1 in 1744 (calculated)
2. 20 or more scores of "2-correct" and "1-correct", in 1 trial (A): 1 in 2451 (calculated)
3. 7 or more scores of "2-correct", in 2 trials (A,B): 1 in 872 (calculated)
4. 20 or more scores of "2-correct" and "1-correct", in 2 trials (A,B): 1 in 1226 (calculated)
5. 7 or more scores of "2-correct" or 20 or more scores of "2-correct" and "1-correct", in 1 trial (A): 1 in 1019 (estimated)
6. 7 or more scores of "2-correct" or 20 or more scores of "2-correct" and "1-correct", in 2 trials (A,B): 1 in 510 (estimated)

The draft currently proposes case 6, which does not seem to have sufficient odds. There are several ways to remedy this:

1. Drop one of the two trials (case 5)
2. Drop one of the two feats (case 4)
3. Increase the required scores up from 7 and 20 (case not listed above; 8 and 20 will do, with estimated combined odds in 2 trials about 1 in 1015)

 

[petre]

I'll chime in that I believe it was mentioned before that the JREF would likely generate all copies of the photographs used in the test. This will prevent any criticism of the protocol that the applicant could cheat by marking the photos in some clandestine manner. As such, the protocol should state any requirements Pavel may have in how such copies will be generated (will any reasonably clear print from a printer do?). My apologies if I have missed any discussion related to my point.

 

[Startz]

I'll chime in that I believe it was mentioned before that the JREF would likely generate all copies of the photographs used in the test. This will prevent any criticism of the protocol that the applicant could cheat by marking the photos in some clandestine manner. As such, the protocol should state any requirements Pavel may have in how such copies will be generated (will any reasonably clear print from a printer do?). My apologies if I have missed any discussion related to my point.

Startz, the proposal is good, but I must point out a problem: the odds of accomplishing this do not seem to be less than 1 in 1000.

In the following paragraph I summarize the odds for various combinations of the feats described in your draft.

1. 7 or more scores of "2-correct", in 1 trial (A): 1 in 1744 (calculated)
2. 20 or more scores of "2-correct" and "1-correct", in 1 trial (A): 1 in 2451 (calculated)
3. 7 or more scores of "2-correct", in 2 trials (A,B): 1 in 872 (calculated)
4. 20 or more scores of "2-correct" and "1-correct", in 2 trials (A,B): 1 in 1226 (calculated)
5. 7 or more scores of "2-correct" or 20 or more scores of "2-correct" and "1-correct", in 1 trial (A): 1 in 1019 (estimated)
6. 7 or more scores of "2-correct" or 20 or more scores of "2-correct" and "1-correct", in 2 trials (A,B): 1 in 510 (estimated)

The draft currently proposes case 6, which does not seem to have sufficient odds. There are several ways to remedy this:

1. Drop one of the two trials (case 5)
2. Drop one of the two feats (case 4)
3. Increase the required scores up from 7 and 20 (case not listed above; 8 and 20 will do, with estimated combined odds in 2 trials about 1 in 1015)

These are both good points. The proposal could be modified, or these could be subjects of negotiation between Pavel and JREF.

Pavel:

Would you like to

(1) Have me modify the proposal in line with the suggestions above so that you can then submit it?

(2) Submit the proposal as already posted and negotiate any needed changes with JREF?

(3) Neither (1) nor (2)?

 

[GzuzKryzt]

Here is my draft proposal. Everyone should feel free to chime in, although what really counts is whether it is acceptable to Pavel.

Draft Pavel Ziborov Proposal:
[This draft by Dick Startz, July 17, 2008.]

Claim: The ability to identify photos in sealed envelopes just by holding the envelope in Pavel’s hand.

Materials:

62 sets of 5 photographs chosen by Pavel. Each set of five to be identical. Each copy to be numbered on back 1-5 to identify the photo.

305 small opaque envelopes large enough to contain one photo. 300 slightly larger opaque envelopes large enough to contain the smaller envelope.

60 clips of a size to clip together one set of five envelopes.
All materials to be delivered to tester at least one week before test.
...

All right, I will play the turd in the punchbowl: Pavel, Startz, Crundy, Akhenaten, anyone, this proposal will complicate matters unnecessarily. And I do understand that the protocol has to be tailored to your claim, Pavel.

Alison clearly restated the JREF's suggestions to simplify. In short: Simplify the protocol or no test will happen. Believe me.