Assistance required for telepathy proof

So if we can objectively verify what the result was, why are we messing around with polygraphs? Your claim is supposed to be that you can transmit thoughts to other people, not that you can read polygraphs.
 
Perhaps he could use a family member as his partner. Unless his family members have some reservations about his abilities or condition?

golfy?
 
golfy said:
For thought.

If with repeated testing, the GSR always gives clear accurate results in the first and second test but then human adaption occurs and the GSR results become less reliable from then onwards but are always 100% accurate before that point.

After adaption in ten tests, only 20% or 30% reliabiluty i.e. gets the last 7 or 8 questions wrong, but always the first and second question right.

What would the validity of my cat ship test be with the Doctor?

Would it be the same as your statement (from memory) “Clearly golfy has no telepathic ability” or words to that effect Pixel42?
Click to expand...
I don't know enough about polygraphs to be able to evaluate any of your claims about them.

I do, though, know enough about human nature to know that the chances of every single person you ever met being able to hear your thoughts and lie to you about it are zero.

Sceptics like the regular posters here are a minority, most people are only too willing to believe in the existence of paranormal abilities. Add the incentive of a share in a million dollar prize and you would be fighting off eager volunteers with a stick if they really could hear your thoughts. The use of polygraphs would not be required in the test protocol which demonstrated your ability.
 
golfy said:
As long as there is no cheating (the JREF will make sure there is not) then the results of tea leaf reading, poly interpretation etc is valid if the correct results are obtained.
Click to expand...


You claim that poly interpretations are valid "if the correct results are obtained", and you are proposing using the poly interpretations to decide whether the results are correct. Do you see the problem with this?
 
With the test as it is at the moment there are these possibilities to consider:
Golfy is telepathic
Golfy is not telepathic
The receiver is lying
The receiver is telling the truth
The GSR is accurate
The GSR is inaccurate

As each opposing possibility relies on the other opposing possibilities in order to determine which possibility is the correct one. It seems to me to be overly problematic.
 
RoboTimbo said:
Perhaps he could use a family member as his partner. Unless his family members have some reservations about his abilities or condition?

golfy?
Click to expand...

That's just it. There's a universal global conspiracy to deny his powers. No one in the world will be honest about being able to hear his thoughts, so he needs the device to determine the truth of what they heard. But the problem is not with him. It's every single other person on the planet.
 
I do, though, know enough about human nature to know that the chances of every single person you ever met being able to hear your thoughts and lie to you about it are zero.
Click to expand...


Hi Pixel42. Out of interest if I in future proved I was telepathic, which I assume I will, would you be willing (as you are in England just over 100 miles away according to your details) to take a telepathy test with me to see if you can hear my thoughts as you are one of the people claiming that you cannot. Any distance if fine by me but a standard cat ship (or whatever is working best for me if I work out a better protocol) in the same room to start with and then at the distance that we are apart at the moment?

Any tests taken would obviously be verified as accurate by independent, knowledgeable (not you Sledge) judges/scientists.

I would bet £1000 that you would fail both tests. Once proven to be telepathic if I have more money such as JREF winnings I would bet £10000 against £1000 of yours that you can hear my thoughts.

If you are honest then you will gain a guaranteed £10000 for being involved in a few tests. I am sure my money is safe though.

golfy
 
Last edited:
golfy said:
The human adaption is the problem, not the GSR or poly. This is what has to be solved to obtain reliable results.
Click to expand...
Sounds like pure speculation to me. But even if not, physiological adaptation of this type is known as 'habituation', and generally depends on the typical habituation profile of the neurons handling the process. Habituation is the decreased response with repeated application of stimulus. It is quite simple in principle, but complex in practice. Habituation depends on many things, including the particular stimulus involved. It can build up slowly or quickly, and can disappear almost instantaneously (dishabituation) with a given stimulus. The amount of dishabituation habituates with repeated application, and habituation profiles vary widely between individuals, etc., etc. A simple principle, but giving rise to complex implications. You can't expect to just 'solve' habituation.

Another point - a GSR != a polygraph. If anyone (bar Scientologists) had thought GSR was any useful indication of a subject's mental processes, let alone a lie detector, they wouldn't have needed to invent the polygraph (poly=many graph=write/record), including heart rate, and respiration. Or, indeed the EEG. Using a GSR to indicate lying is like using a barometer to tell if it will rain tomorrow afternoon.
 
Thanks for the information dlorde.

I have not quoted that a poly is a GSR or the other way around. A poly has multiple channels for redundancy. If a person tries to control one of their measured parameters such as breathing, the poly operator should still be able to detect whether the subject is lying or not by interpreting the other measured parameters such as GSR or heart rate/blood pressure.

If no tricks are played by the subject, then the GSR should be and has been accurate in my experiments – 4 out of 5 correct predictions in the last experiment, untill the subject was no longer stressed by lying. No stress, no GSR indications.

The lack of stress as the tests progress is likely to be due to the subject understanding that lying is accepted and not punished as after every test we simply tried again. This starts to become less fun and simply repetitive, hence the lack of stress as the number of tests increased.

Stretch it out a bit – if you had completed 100 heads/tails tests already, would you care whether the tester caught you lying or not YET AGAIN for the 101th time? You would not care either way and would simply say flippantly “No” to every question asked with little or no care as there is no punishment involved in the testing, just the same old repetitive questions and answers. The GSR (or poly) would read nothing on the truth and lie answers.

If you had your career at stake, say like with the Dr., then each test that is predicted correctly is adding up to a realisation by the judges that the Dr. is lying and part of a cover up. Each successive accurate prediction would then become more stressing than the last, not less, as you would care greatly about successive tests being correct. Would the Dr. after 3 correct predictions out of 3 now become less stressed as the test progresses, or more stressed. I think more and would be trying harder to conceal her lies that ever, so the GSR indications would be unlikely to be reducing to zero because the subject no longer cared about correct predictions or not as in the heads/tails trial.

Like I have said before, once the subject realises they can lie with no consequences attached to that lie, the stress present when lying drops to almost zero.

For a poly to work correctly, there must be a punishment attached to the discovery that you are lying. This is probably why the poly is more accurate in real situations than in the lab as there is little punishment in the lab that can be taken seriously by the subject which reduces a poly’s effectiveness.

I will do more tests and try and add an effective “punishment if you lie” factor into the tests to see if it make the GSR reliable for longer.

golfy

I
 
Last edited:
I think rather than continue to point out that you don't have a polygraph (although this remains true) I might stick to the much more easily demonstrable point that even if you did it would be no use since you don't have the faintest idea how they work anyway.
 
golfy, why are you now trying to get people to bet that they are telepathic? And why are you not proving that you are telepathic? Transmit to me right now.
 
golfy,

No punishment is necessary. Use a subject for a few trials and then get a new subject. I think any testing organisation (like the two local ones I mentioned in post #772) would have no trouble finding many test subjects. I think they could supply enough that even if each subject participated in only one trial, you'd be exhausted long before the supply of test subjects dried up.

Ward
 
I think rather than continue to point out that you don't have a polygraph (although this remains true) I might stick to the much more easily demonstrable point that even if you did it would be no use since you don't have the faintest idea how they work anyway.
Click to expand...


So I have bought the training video as previously stated.

golfy
 
golfy said:
So I have bought the training video as previously stated.

golfy
Click to expand...


golfy, I asked you this before.

Do you have a link with information on the specific type of equipment that you are using?
 
golfy said:
Thanks for the information dlorde.

I have not quoted that a poly is a GSR or the other way around. A poly has multiple channels for redundancy. If a person tries to control one of their measured parameters such as breathing, the poly operator should still be able to detect whether the subject is lying or not by interpreting the other measured parameters such as GSR or heart rate/blood pressure.

If no tricks are played by the subject, then the GSR should be and has been accurate in my experiments – 4 out of 5 correct predictions in the last experiment, untill the subject was no longer stressed by lying. No stress, no GSR indications.

The lack of stress as the tests progress is likely to be due to the subject understanding that lying is accepted and not punished as after every test we simply tried again. This starts to become less fun and simply repetitive, hence the lack of stress as the number of tests increased.

Stretch it out a bit – if you had completed 100 heads/tails tests already, would you care whether the tester caught you lying or not YET AGAIN for the 101th time? You would not care either way and would simply say flippantly “No” to every question asked with little or no care as there is no punishment involved in the testing, just the same old repetitive questions and answers. The GSR (or poly) would read nothing on the truth and lie answers.

If you had your career at stake, say like with the Dr., then each test that is predicted correctly is adding up to a realisation by the judges that the Dr. is lying and part of a cover up. Each successive accurate prediction would then become more stressing than the last, not less, as you would care greatly about successive tests being correct. Would the Dr. after 3 correct predictions out of 3 now become less stressed as the test progresses, or more stressed. I think more and would be trying harder to conceal her lies that ever, so the GSR indications would be unlikely to be reducing to zero because the subject no longer cared about correct predictions or not as in the heads/tails trial.

Like I have said before, once the subject realises they can lie with no consequences attached to that lie, the stress present when lying drops to almost zero.

For a poly to work correctly, there must be a punishment attached to the discovery that you are lying. This is probably why the poly is more accurate in real situations than in the lab as there is little punishment in the lab that can be taken seriously by the subject which reduces a poly’s effectiveness.

I will do more tests and try and add an effective “punishment if you lie” factor into the tests to see if it make the GSR reliable for longer.

golfy

I
Click to expand...

You can't punish people in experiments. It breeches all ethics protocols.

What I find perplexing is that you keep thinking people are lying.

Why would they?

You could have several subjects you transmit to, including a trusted family member, for example, 5-10 subjects, each with ten questions.

If any one of the sets of questions stands out, there are statistical formula to determine outliers and eliminate them.
 
golfy said:
Hi Pixel42. Out of interest if I in future proved I was telepathic, which I assume I will, would you be willing (as you are in England just over 100 miles away according to your details) to take a telepathy test with me to see if you can hear my thoughts as you are one of the people claiming that you cannot. Any distance if fine by me but a standard cat ship (or whatever is working best for me if I work out a better protocol) in the same room to start with and then at the distance that we are apart at the moment?

Any tests taken would obviously be verified as accurate by independent, knowledgeable (not you Sledge) judges/scientists.

I would bet £1000 that you would fail both tests. Once proven to be telepathic if I have more money such as JREF winnings I would bet £10000 against £1000 of yours that you can hear my thoughts.

If you are honest then you will gain a guaranteed £10000 for being involved in a few tests. I am sure my money is safe though.

golfy
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you're asking me here.

If you ever prove that you are telepathic by passing a scientifically rigorous test (e.g. a protocol agreed with JREF which you pass, thus winning the $1 million) then I would of course accept that proof. I would not need to personally do a test with you before doing so.

If you get as far as agreeing a test protocol with JREF and want to do a dry run beforehand (a vital step, but one which no MDC claimant ever seems to see the need for) and require volunteer receivers and/or someone to help you set up the agreed test conditions I would be happy to assist. I would not require payment.

At this time I see no realistic prospect of you ever agreeing a suitable test protocol, let alone successfully passing it.
 
He has no trusted family member. Even his sister lies about being able to hear him telepathically. Everyone lies about it. Even people who would stand to gain lots of money by telling the truth lie about it. I know it makes no sense, but we can only deal with what we're given.

Ward
 
golfy said:
If no tricks are played by the subject, then the GSR should be and has been accurate in my experiments – 4 out of 5 correct predictions in the last experiment, untill the subject was no longer stressed by lying. No stress, no GSR indications.
Click to expand...
You think someone who's lying isn't going to be playing tricks? If you could trust them not to play tricks, you wouldn't be trying to catch them lying!

Can you really trust them to lie 'honestly'?

If you had your career at stake, say like with the Dr., then each test that is predicted correctly is adding up to a realisation by the judges that the Dr. is lying and part of a cover up.
Click to expand...
The doctor has no worries about her career whatever she answers, and she knows it. In what way would her career be at stake? If there is a conspiracy, she'll be OK, and if there isn't, most people will think she acted very professionally - I certainly think she did. She could well have been worried about you doing something unpredictable during the consultation though.

For a poly to work correctly, there must be a punishment attached to the discovery that you are lying.
Click to expand...
Says who? I'd like to see some references.

This is probably why the poly is more accurate in real situations than in the lab as there is little punishment in the lab that can be taken seriously by the subject which reduces a poly’s effectiveness.
Click to expand...
Evidence? The meta-study I referenced earlier came to the opposite conclusion.

I will do more tests and try and add an effective “punishment if you lie” factor into the tests to see if it make the GSR reliable for longer
Click to expand...
If GSR or polygraphs were at all useful in the way you intend, they would be used by researchers investigating game theory and the like, and save a lot of very tedious and expensive experimental protocols. They're not, because they haven't been shown to be reliable enough for scientific purposes (if at all). If what you intend is supposed to be a scientific test of your ability, a polygraph or GSR is not acceptable.

It seems to me you're making two separate claims, one concerning telepathy, and one concerning the accuracy of a GSR as a lie detector. I suggest you definitively establish the second one before using it to establish the first.

If you can demonstrate (by a well-controlled series of blinded tests) that you can reliably use the GSR to detect lies, and you'll be famous for that alone, never mind telepathic powers.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom