Assistance required for telepathy proof

wardenclyffe said:
That must be a very confusing and depressing life to know that everybody on the planet is lying to you all the time and having no idea why it's happening. I do not envy you.

You must recognise the futility of your quest. No matter what your machines say, everyone will still lie about the results. You will have proved nothing. You already know you are telepathic. You don't need confirmation of that. You can try to show proof of your telepathy using your machines, but you know everyone will just lie and say that they do not see the proof.

That must be frustrating. If I could think of a way out for you, I would.

Ward
Click to expand...


So telling the truth has never occured to you?

golfy
 
FG10 said:
But that's not true, is it? You want results that are positive in your favour. You are closed-minded to the possibility that you do not have any telepathic ability so you cannot seriously want objective results unless you were willing to be objective about the outcome yourself.
Click to expand...


You are totally wrong.

If you could provide access to a 100% truth machine then I would jump at the chance to use it as it would be the most objective device available and there would be no arguments as to the results.

I am in the process of trying to gain access to a machine which has been proven to be 100% accurate as it measures the brain itself.

golfy
 
Last edited:
That's a non-sequitur given nothing is accurate to 100%. Nothing, I suspect, would convince you that you have no telepathic ability. If this is the case then you can not claim objectivity. Objectivity, after all, does not require 100% accuracy.

I suspect you will continue to contrive excuse after excuse, and that can not surely be healthy for the mind.
 
golfy said:
I am in the process of trying to gain access to a machine which has been proven to be 100% accurate as it measures the brain itself.
Click to expand...


There is no such thing. If someone tells you such a machine exists, or tries to sell you one of them or the use of one, it's a scam.
 
The machine has never produced an incorrect indication in its trials. The inventor describes it as 99% accurate but claims that no mistakes have ever been produced by it in trials with the FBI and other tests and has been in service since 2004. It has released previously convicted criminals by proving them innocent and is admissible in court due to its accuracy.

If I could have access to it then that is the machine I would like access to as it would solve this problem in days.

golfy
 
FG10 said:
That's a non-sequitur given nothing is accurate to 100%. Nothing, I suspect, would convince you that you have no telepathic ability. If this is the case then you can not claim objectivity. Objectivity, after all, does not require 100% accuracy.

I suspect you will continue to contrive excuse after excuse, and that can not surely be healthy for the mind.
Click to expand...


But 99% accuracy or better does make it a fare more reliable way of proving telepathy and solves the conjecture over a poly or GSR test unless they prove to work at a high accuracy level in a cat ship test.

golfy
 
Funny how they are can do telepathy, right up the the time they do a double-blind test.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
golfy said:
But 99% accuracy or better does make it a fare more reliable way of proving telepathy and solves the conjecture over a poly or GSR test unless they prove to work at a high accuracy level in a cat ship test.

golfy
Click to expand...

The more extravagant the testing, the more complete the failure - yes, I see where that would be beneficial.

So, when all of this 'testing' is done, and no telepathic ability is proven, will you concede that you do not have any telepathic ability?
 
FG10 said:
The more extravagant the testing, the more complete the failure - yes, I see where that would be beneficial.

So, when all of this 'testing' is done, and no telepathic ability is proven, will you concede that you do not have any telepathic ability?
Click to expand...


No one said extravagant, just accurate. How can you conclude that no telepathic ability will be proven?

I see a getting near to perfect test as less extravagant, it removes conjecture. DNA testing maybe “extravagant” but its results are more accurate than almost any other form of proof and therefore solve the elements of doubt issue.

If the tests prove inconclusive then I may have to concede that I cannot prove it. I can’t see that happening though if the test is accurate.

If you think it is extravagant, can you describe a simpler but yet equally reliable method of testing for telepathy assuming that the person being tested may be lying or not? Or are you not clever enough to do that, you just have enough brain power to make negative comments?

golfy
 
Paulhoff said:
Funny how they are can do telepathy, right up the the time they do a double-blind test.

Paul

:) :) :)
Click to expand...


You show me the most infallible telepathy test that cannot make mistakes statistically and would prove to beyond 100000 to 1 or more (double blind etc) that telepathy exists then I would be there first in the queue.

I am not one of these who claim to be something and then shy away from being tested. I am the opposite.

golfy
 
Last edited:
golfy said:
The machine has never produced an incorrect indication in its trials. The inventor describes it as 99% accurate but claims that no mistakes have ever been produced by it in trials with the FBI and other tests and has been in service since 2004. It has released previously convicted criminals by proving them innocent and is admissible in court due to its accuracy.

If I could have access to it then that is the machine I would like access to as it would solve this problem in days.

golfy
Click to expand...

Have you checked these claims made about this machine? Can you give us the name of this machine so that we can check it out for ourselves? Because to me it sounds like the claims being made for it cannot possibly be true.
 
golfy said:
If you think it is extravagant, can you describe a simpler but yet equally reliable method of testing for telepathy assuming that the person being tested may be lying or not? Or are you not clever enough to do that, you just have enough brain power to make negative comments?

golfy
Click to expand...

Yes: Someone unknown to you or the examiner writes down 10 words on 10 separate pieces of paper, seals them in an envelope (this is done in a sealed room with no one else present so only that person knows the words) and hands them to the test controller. The person who wrote the words is escorted from the building without meeting the sitter, tester or testee.

A receiver is chosen at random, they are not told the nature of the experiment other than they have to write down 10 words that come in to their head during a given period of time (not telling them the nature of the experiment will rule out any kind of malicious attempt to skew the results).

The receiver is sitting in a separate room, protected against information leakage without any forms of communication. A clock, desk, chair, pen and 10 pieces of paper are the only objects in the room.

At a given time you open the envelope and transmit the words for a given period of time that coincides with the time that the receiver has been told to write whatever comes into their head.

The receiver is then escorted from the room, having written down 10 words on the 10 pieces of paper and is not introduced to anyone else until the results have been checked.

This is repeated a number of times.

There is no need for electronic devices that require subjective analysis and you get objective results. There is no question of the receiver lying because they have no understanding of the nature of the experiment. Words that match are a hit words that don't are a miss.

You have to admit - far more elegant than your extravagant, NASA derived testing!

By the way, you didn't answer my question. When tests do not give proof of telepathic ability will you concede that you do not have telepathic ability?
 
Last edited:
FG10 said:
By the way, you didn't answer my question. When tests do not give proof of telepathic ability will you concede that you do not have telepathic ability?
Click to expand...


I think he did answer it, in the negative:

golfy said:
If the tests prove inconclusive then I may have to concede that I cannot prove it. I can’t see that happening though if the test is accurate.
Click to expand...


If the tests don't prove he's telepathic, then golfy's conclusion would be that the tests aren't working, not that he's not telepathic.
 
golfy said:
How can you conclude that no telepathic ability will be proven?
Click to expand...
It's a reasonable null hypothesis, based on telepathy's 100% track record of turning out not to work.
golfy said:
You show me the most infallible telepathy test that cannot make mistakes statistically and would prove to beyond 100000 to 1 or more (double blind etc) that telepathy exists then I would be there first in the queue.
Click to expand...
Such a test is trivial with a trusted receiver, but next to impossible if you trust nobody in the world.
I am not one of these who claim to be something and then shy away from being tested. I am the opposite.
Click to expand...
I fully believe that you are sincere, but please be aware that you are far from being the first entirely sincere, utterly certain psychic to consider the MDC. When their abilities are tested in a way that precludes fooling themselves or others, those abilities disappear.
 
There is no need for electronic devices that require subjective analysis and you get objective results. There is no question of the receiver lying because they have no understanding of the nature of the experiment. Words that match are a hit words that don't are a miss.
Click to expand...


They understand the nature of the experiment because I am telepathic, Duh!

Useless protocol.

By the way, you didn't answer my question. When tests do not give proof of telepathic ability will you concede that you do not have telepathic ability?
Click to expand...


If the test was infallible, then yes. That will not happen though as I am telepathic.

golfy
 
Last edited:
Sceptic Tank said:
Thanks, that's interesting.

Given, though, that it's not a lie detector and is instead a method of ascertaining whether someone is in possession of certain knowledge, I can't see how it could help you in your testing.
Click to expand...

Well, if you had an accurate way of telling whether a person possessed certain knowledge, then you could test whether they had some knowledge which they could only have received telepathically. It is, however, an absurdly complicated and expensive way to find out just because you won't trust anyone to answer truthfully.
 
AdMan said:
I think he did answer it, in the negative:




If the tests don't prove he's telepathic, then golfy's conclusion would be that the tests aren't working, not that he's not telepathic.
Click to expand...

Ah yes - but I'd like him to concede that he is not telepathic under such circumstances, not that he could not prove it. Playing semantics, I grant you, but I think it would be useful for his own sanity to realise that he had no paranormal ability, rather than conceding that he couldn't prove that he had none.
 
golfy said:
They understand the nature of the experiment because I am telepathic, Duh!
Click to expand...


LOL You have to admit he got you there, FG10. :)

golfy, to be fair you should have phrased it as:

"They understand the nature of the experiment because if I am telepathic."

Remember who has the burden of proof here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom