Anyone heard about this dude? (pavelprorok on youtube)

[GzuzKryzt]

Just to make it absolutely clear: I always want a test to happen. Especially when it comes to "telepathy". I have nothing against you ersonally, Pavel, because I only know from your online personality.

I do think that you are deliberately complicating the protocol. That ticked me off a while back.

 

[EHocking]

Just to make it absolutely clear: I always want a test to happen. Especially when it comes to "telepathy". I have nothing against you ersonally, Pavel, because I only know from your online personality.

I do think that you are deliberately complicating the protocol. That ticked me off a while back.

I don't feel that he is doing it deliberately necessarily. I think it may have more to do with the fact that many (most?) people do not understand what a double-blind test is.

Having both lurked by and participated in attempts to help potential candidates in these threads I really do get the sense that this is (one of) the roots of the problems with most of the potential candidates. Some, admittedly are just bloody-minded about the whole thing and WILL not see the explanation of db control, rather CAN not see it.

Either way, when flaws are pointed out to them, quoting db experimental controls, they tend to unnecessarily complicate matters but adding more and more "controls", merely because of their ignorance (OK, sometimes willful ignorance) of what a db control really requires.

Not having a go at anyone or any post - just a passing observation.

 

[pavel_do]

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?

Thanks Dick, I am fine with it.. as long as I am allowed to choose 2 photos out of 5 that I am most sure off, as long as I have 2 trials and as long as the envelopes opened immediately after I offered my answer. Just one thing is, I don’t want remaining 3 envelopes to be open in front of me.. that can influence the results.. ( it can be done after the test over or by some one elts in different room) as I am trying foresee what will I see when envelopes will be opened…
RE TO THABIGUY

It should not be a problem.. as each trial of two will be considered as independent.. and the result of two trials will not be summed up..

or we can make it 8 and 21.. I dont think it will make big difference..

Re to photos.. they can be printed by who ever.. I will pay the bill of it.. but it has to be photos not photocopy...

RE to DB test misunderstanding.. well that as simple as that.. NO ONE explains it at first place..
RE to complicating by me the test etc with conditions.. OK we drop all conditions.. I don’t care
What is important for me..
1. I have 2 trials
2. I choose 2 photos out of 5 that I am sure most of.
3. The envelopes opened immediately after I named them
4. NO strong odor and photos in the test room.
That it.


so that simple enough?

 

[pavel_do]

Just to make it absolutely clear: I always want a test to happen. Especially when it comes to "telepathy". I have nothing against you ersonally, Pavel, because I only know from your online personality.

I do think that you are deliberately complicating the protocol. That ticked me off a while back.

OK we drop all conditions.. I don’t care
What is important for me..
1. I have 2 trials
2. I choose 2 photos out of 5 that I am sure most of.
3. The envelopes opened immediately after I named them
4. NO strong odor and photos in the test room.
That it. Simple??
How can it be more simple?? Yes there is simple ways that people think there are.. But I have to fit it to my ability to see.. for some one would be simple to fond 6 out of 20 ( as Remiev asked..) but It is not simple for me and I have explained my self..
I am not trying to complicate anything.. if there is any other proposition I am good to try them.. But I cant not to take in account my powers and the way it works.

 

[Thabiguy]

All right, I will play the turd in the punchbowl: Pavel, Startz, Crundy, Akhenaten, anyone, this proposal will complicate matters unnecessarily.

I agree with you, and I think many others do as well. The problem is that we can't simplify the protocol, only Pavel can. Quite a few, including you, have already pointed out problems and sore points with the proposed protocol(s), and even suggested specific ways to simplify and clarify. Alas, many of the important points were answered with "Yes, I know, but I have my reasons". Well, what more can we do then?

I think at this point Startz only tried to help Pavel put his proposal into a more comprehensible form. I don't expect the protocol to be accepted as is; I doubt anybody does. It's just the initial step of the negotiation process. Negotiations usually start with proposals that are unacceptable by at least one side; that's pretty much expected. The real question is whether Pavel and JREF will be able to come to a viable compromise that both will agree on, and that remains to be seen.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

...f.
3. The envelopes opened immediately after I named them
...

Pavel, a Double Blind Test will not allow for said condition. This has been explained to you before. Several times.

From the link: "...The key that identifies the subjects and which group they belonged to is kept by a third party and not given to the researchers until the study is over. ..."

 

[pavel_do]

I agree with you, and I think many others do as well. The problem is that we can't simplify the protocol, only Pavel can. Quite a few, including you, have already pointed out problems and sore points with the proposed protocol(s), and even suggested specific ways to simplify and clarify. Alas, many of the important points were answered with "Yes, I know, but I have my reasons". Well, what more can we do then?

I think at this point Startz only tried to help Pavel put his proposal into a more comprehensible form. I don't expect the protocol to be accepted as is; I doubt anybody does. It's just the initial step of the negotiation process. Negotiations usually start with proposals that are unacceptable by at least one side; that's pretty much expected. The real question is whether Pavel and JREF will be able to come to a viable compromise that both will agree on, and that remains to be seen.

I have made it simple I dropped all conditions just , left the ones that is important for me.. what is the problem?? That I want to open envelopes immediately? That is not problem, I have asked professor who perfectly know DB test and said it is not contradict anything as long as both side don’t know the range of the envelopes at the time when they passed to me. The problem that I need 2 trials? Or cause I need 30 sets per trial? I pay for it so there is no problem. Time? 5 hours for 1.000.000 dollars not much.. I don’t think to have 10 minutes test worth all this hustle and time etc.. The problem that I chouse 2 out of 5 and not 6 out of 20? Well is some one can do it with 2 out of 5 simple and it is not “unusual” than good luck to him.. Some one can do 6 out of 20? Good luck to him I don’t claim it either ( though I can try it) because I will get tiered to go through 20 photos.. plus.. as I don’t se them exact way it is impossible to get 20 completely different photos and I have explained it many time.. I can try to go thorough 20 photos and chouse 6.. I have over 90 so to say different photos.. but out of this 90 only 5 I can say most independent.. as the rest can resemble.. we don’t have much shapes beside round square or triangles.. same colors.. and texture.. and because I don’t see exact image it make it hard other wise I would not care how many photos as I explained many times.. I see shapes colors or relaited things to the photo etc and always different but why 6?? The chance for that is one to over 20 millions ..in exact order and over 30.000 in any order.. We was talking about 1.000 odds to one.. now it not satisfying and evident enough. As I said before if I can lift 20 lb. Why do I have to be pushed to lift 100? To make sure I am failed.. JREF says I am complicated it? Well I can say they complicate there proposal.. in order to make it for me impossible to pass? No?? ( though they propose nothing so far.. except to find the photo among photos that I took in consideration and it appeared in my test.. and this one 6 put of 20.. I cant do that. And to identify photos based on Lindl`s protocol.. and I have explained it as well.

 

[pavel_do]

Pavel, a Double Blind Test will not allow for said condition. This has been explained to you before. Several times.

From the link: "...The key that identifies the subjects and which group they belonged to is kept by a third party and not given to the researchers until the study is over. ..."

DB scientific test.. is JREF scientist? And the test to test clairvoyance is scientific?
Ok we make it simple.. I have spoken to professor Richard Wiseman ( from UK) not the cleaning guy as u know..( we tried long distance test..) and I specifically asked him.. in his opinion (if it counts by you or JREF in any way ).. he said there is no problem with opening envelopes immediately as long as BOTH sides don’t know the photos or the range of them during the test.


P.s.
Any way.. we forget the DB etc.. DOES ENY ONE CAN BEAT 1.000 ODD WHEN HE KNOW THE RESULTS IMMIDATLY? NO! if so.. that where is the prove? Than I will admit.. sort of it is normal and just like I try to convince that it is “paranormal; but every one can do that..

 

[Ravenwood]

How is this for a simple protocol. There are 5 photos. 2 of the 5 are selected and placed in envelopes the other 3 contain blank sheets identical in size & weight of the photos. Pavel has to pick the two envelopes that contain the Photos. If things work like Pavel says, he should either see 1.)something or2.) Nothing. How many trials would that take? (Disclaimer: I am willing to bet that if this protocol is used, Pavel will find his accuracy drops by a great amount)

 

[GzuzKryzt]

DB scientific test.. is JREF scientist? And the test to test clairvoyance is scientific?
Ok we make it simple.. I have spoken to professor Richard Wiseman ( from UK) not the cleaning guy as u know..( we tried long distance test..) and I specifically asked him.. in his opinion if it counts in any way.. he said there is no problem with opening envelopes immediately as long as BOTH sides don’t know the photos or the range of them during the test.


P.s.
Any way.. we forget the DB etc.. DOES ENY ONE CAN BEAT 1.000 ODD WHEN HE KNOW THE RESULTS IMMIDATLY? NO! if so.. that where is the prove? Than I will admit.. sort of it is normal and just like I try to convince that it is “paranormal; but every one can do that..

Semantics, anecdotes. Utterly irrelevant.

Your test will very likely run along the lines of a double blind test. Demand confirmation: [email protected]

 

[pavel_do]

How is this for a simple protocol. There are 5 photos. 2 of the 5 are selected and placed in envelopes the other 3 contain blank sheets identical in size & weight of the photos. Pavel has to pick the two envelopes that contain the Photos. If things work like Pavel says, he should either see 1.)something or2.) Nothing. How many trials would that take? (Disclaimer: I am willing to bet that if this protocol is used, Pavel will find his accuracy drops by a great amount)

It does not make any difference at all.. as in both case I need to identify 2 correct or 1 out of 2.. and name them certain times out of 30.

 

[Startz]

Thanks Dick, I am fine with it.. as long as I am allowed to choose 2 photos out of 5 that I am most sure off, as long as I have 2 trials and as long as the envelopes opened immediately after I offered my answer. Just one thing is, I don’t want remaining 3 envelopes to be open in front of me.. that can influence the results.. ( it can be done after the test over or by some one elts in different room) as I am trying foresee what will I see when envelopes will be opened…
RE TO THABIGUY

It should not be a problem.. as each trial of two will be considered as independent.. and the result of two trials will not be summed up..

or we can make it 8 and 21.. I dont think it will make big difference..

Re to photos.. they can be printed by who ever.. I will pay the bill of it.. but it has to be photos not photocopy...

RE to DB test misunderstanding.. well that as simple as that.. NO ONE explains it at first place..
RE to complicating by me the test etc with conditions.. OK we drop all conditions.. I don’t care
What is important for me..
1. I have 2 trials
2. I choose 2 photos out of 5 that I am sure most of.
3. The envelopes opened immediately after I named them
4. NO strong odor and photos in the test room.
That it.


so that simple enough?

Here is a revised draft:

Draft Pavel Ziborov Proposal:
[This draft by Dick Startz, July 18, 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.

At JREF's choice either:

(1) Pavel will arrange for all materials to be delivered to tester at least one week before test.

(2) Pavel will provide 1 set of five pictures. Tester will obtain copies and other materials at Pavel's expense.

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. The remaining three envelopes will not be opened until the conclusion of the second trial.
4. All materials from the set will be set aside.

At the end of 30 sets the tester will announce the score. Pavel succeeds at the trial if he receives 8 or more scores of “2-correct” or receives 21 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: My suggestion is that if this is acceptable to you that you send it in to JREF, acknowledging that you are open to discussing details.

I am not suggesting this proposal is perfect, but I do think it clear and specific.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

Here is a revised draft:

Draft Pavel Ziborov Proposal:
[This draft by Dick Startz, July 18, 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.

At JREF's choice either:

(1) Pavel will arrange for all materials to be delivered to tester at least one week before test.

(2) Pavel will provide 1 set of five pictures. Tester will obtain copies and other materials at Pavel's expense.

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.”

...

I am not suggesting this proposal is perfect, but I do think it clear and specific.

This does neither qualify as a double blind test nor does it meet the request for simplicity. Try again keeping said requirements in mind.

 

[Startz]

I agree with you, and I think many others do as well. The problem is that we can't simplify the protocol, only Pavel can. Quite a few, including you, have already pointed out problems and sore points with the proposed protocol(s), and even suggested specific ways to simplify and clarify. Alas, many of the important points were answered with "Yes, I know, but I have my reasons". Well, what more can we do then?

I think at this point Startz only tried to help Pavel put his proposal into a more comprehensible form. I don't expect the protocol to be accepted as is; I doubt anybody does. It's just the initial step of the negotiation process. Negotiations usually start with proposals that are unacceptable by at least one side; that's pretty much expected. The real question is whether Pavel and JREF will be able to come to a viable compromise that both will agree on, and that remains to be seen.

Thanks Thabiguy, well put.

Readers can see that I have posted a modified protocol. I believe it is close enough to allow serious discussion between Pavel and JREF. My suggestion is that Pavel send it in as is in order to move the discussion along.

The modification takes into account two objections raised here in the forum. The bar for success is raised to get it above 1 in 1,000 and an option is provided for the tester to produce the photos. It should be noted that Pavel was immediately amenable to both changes.

There are two other points raised in the forum that I don't understand. Since they were raised by people with a lot more experience than I have, I would appreciate any insights. (Although I hope Pavel will proceed with the draft proposal as is while taking notes of suggestions that might help in later negotiations.)

(1) What's "complicated" about the proposal? It takes a couple of hours of the tester's time to prepare and an afternoon to execute. No special skills are involved. This seems in line with previous challenges. While there might be an easier way to test, there's nothing in the MDC that requires the easiest test be the one used.

(2) Why shouldn't the envelopes be opened after Pavel has marked them? Perhaps this violates the usual "double-blind" procedure, but I do not see how it could be used to cheat consciously or subconsciously. Secondarily, the Challenge rules do not require a pure double-blind test.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

...
(2) Why shouldn't the envelopes be opened after Pavel has marked them? Perhaps this violates the usual "double-blind" procedure, but I do not see how it could be used to cheat consciously or subconsciously. Secondarily, the Challenge rules do not require a pure double-blind test.

Because obtaining results before the end of the trial could negate the use and effect of a DBT.

No, the MDC rules do not require a DBT per se. However, a DBT usually forms the basis of a protocol. Should one claim to summon a UFO, how would you double blind that?

 

[GzuzKryzt]

DBT in MDC.

DBT in MDC. See #11.

DBT in MDC. See #19.

DBT in MDC. See third paragraph.

And a very obvious example of a DBT being unsuitable and unnecessary:

Rosemary Hunter.

 

[Moochie]

I have made it simple I dropped all conditions just , left the ones that is important for me.. what is the problem?? That I want to open envelopes immediately? That is not problem, I have asked professor who perfectly know DB test and said it is not contradict anything as long as both side don’t know the range of the envelopes at the time when they passed to me. The problem that I need 2 trials? Or cause I need 30 sets per trial? I pay for it so there is no problem. Time? 5 hours for 1.000.000 dollars not much.. I don’t think to have 10 minutes test worth all this hustle and time etc.. The problem that I chouse 2 out of 5 and not 6 out of 20? Well is some one can do it with 2 out of 5 simple and it is not “unusual” than good luck to him.. Some one can do 6 out of 20? Good luck to him I don’t claim it either ( though I can try it) because I will get tiered to go through 20 photos.. plus.. as I don’t se them exact way it is impossible to get 20 completely different photos and I have explained it many time.. I can try to go thorough 20 photos and chouse 6.. I have over 90 so to say different photos.. but out of this 90 only 5 I can say most independent.. as the rest can resemble.. we don’t have much shapes beside round square or triangles.. same colors.. and texture.. and because I don’t see exact image it make it hard other wise I would not care how many photos as I explained many times.. I see shapes colors or relaited things to the photo etc and always different but why 6?? The chance for that is one to over 20 millions ..in exact order and over 30.000 in any order.. We was talking about 1.000 odds to one.. now it not satisfying and evident enough. As I said before if I can lift 20 lb. Why do I have to be pushed to lift 100? To make sure I am failed.. JREF says I am complicated it? Well I can say they complicate there proposal.. in order to make it for me impossible to pass? No?? ( though they propose nothing so far.. except to find the photo among photos that I took in consideration and it appeared in my test.. and this one 6 put of 20.. I cant do that. And to identify photos based on Lindl`s protocol.. and I have explained it as well.

From what you have said, it sounds like you're doing a Zener-card experiment.

I don't know if you've stated it yet, but do you have to know the photos before they are used? I mean, do you have to see them? If all you're going on is basic shapes then how is that anything special?

It would seem to me that if you have any ability then you would be able to say what a photograph is a picture of using clear and concise language. For instance, if it's a picture of a horse and rider then you ought to be able to state precisely that -- without having seen the picture prior to the test.

To me, at least, what you have thus far described as your "ability" seems like a guessing game using Zener-like shapes.


M.

ETA: On rereading post #1 I see the Zener idea's already been suggested.

 

[Moochie]

How is this for a simple protocol. There are 5 photos. 2 of the 5 are selected and placed in envelopes the other 3 contain blank sheets identical in size & weight of the photos. Pavel has to pick the two envelopes that contain the Photos. If things work like Pavel says, he should either see 1.)something or2.) Nothing. How many trials would that take? (Disclaimer: I am willing to bet that if this protocol is used, Pavel will find his accuracy drops by a great amount)

I'd be willing to stake a good amount of money on it.


M.

 

[Ravenwood]

Well Pavel, can you tell the difference between a photo (i.e. you see "something") or a blank (you see nothing)?

 

[Startz]

How is this for a simple protocol. There are 5 photos. 2 of the 5 are selected and placed in envelopes the other 3 contain blank sheets identical in size & weight of the photos. Pavel has to pick the two envelopes that contain the Photos. If things work like Pavel says, he should either see 1.)something or2.) Nothing. How many trials would that take? (Disclaimer: I am willing to bet that if this protocol is used, Pavel will find his accuracy drops by a great amount)

I believe this requires more trials. Think of it this way, under Pavel's design random chance of correctly identifying the first one is 1/5. This design increases it to 2/5.