Assistance required for telepathy proof

Incidentally, golfy, has it occurred to you that we all know who you are and where you live? And your bank details, as you must have thought them at some point?

As we all know all that information anyway, you probably won't mind posting it here.
 
golfy, can I ask you a question?

Why do you think so many people are willing to help you with your testing? Why are you succeeding in getting people, including your doctor, to volunteer to be your receiver?

If you're right that everybody can hear your thoughts and is lying to you about it then no-one would dare to volunteer, because they would know that you will eventually be able to prove it. They would be coming up with all sorts of excuses not to help. Yet you seem to have no shortage of volunteers.

The only good reason I can think of why anybody would go out of their way to help you is that they're hoping it will finally convince you of what they already know and have been trying to tell you all along - that they cannot hear your thoughts.

Unfortunately you always twist whatever happens to fit your preconceived belief, rendering their generous efforts pointless.
 
Beaver Hateman said:
Incidentally, golfy, has it occurred to you that we all know who you are and where you live? And your bank details, as you must have thought them at some point?

As we all know all that information anyway, you probably won't mind posting it here.
Click to expand...

It's probably worth bearing in mind that there are real people on the other side of your screen. I'm reminded of a young girl who was studying at Oxford when she found out about Gene Ray, the Time Cube guy. She thought it was hilarious, so made YouTube videos and joined Time Cube message boards, playing along. The message board she was a member of was Richard Janczarski's Australian Time Cube message board, and she had lots of fun conversations with him. One day, after Gene Ray said some harsh words to him, Janczarski threw himself under a train. The girl has always regretted the fact that she indulged him in his delusion.

I know you think you're being funny and cool and edgy and that you'll probably come up with some pseudo-witty reply to this (maybe even a hilarious "tl;dr") but, honestly, you're not. I just hope that you get bored of being so "edgy", rather than have a cause to regret it.

jsfisher said:
Yes. It's been obvious for a while. Please try to keep up.



;)
Click to expand...

I think it's obvious we're not.
 
The bank details thing is an interesting point, though. Golfy, do you have some kind of coping strategy for things like this? Since so much security in our modern world revolves around secret passwords and PIN codes, how do you conceal yours?

At a more trivial level, how do you get on with playing games? Do people conspire to let you win sometimes? Do they just pretend they don't know what cards you have or what move you're about to make?

PS If you hadn't thought about the security thing before, don't worry: you're not psychic. There is no such thing. You are merely ill. You should get treated, for your own peace of mind.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I know you think you're being funny and cool and edgy and that you'll probably come up with some pseudo-witty reply to this (maybe even a hilarious "tl;dr") but, honestly, you're not. I just hope that you get bored of being so "edgy", rather than have a cause to regret it.
Click to expand...

If anyone is 'indulging him in his delusion' it's those that are talking to him as though there's any point in him 'establishing proper protocols for the testing', certainly not me.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
The bank details thing is an interesting point, though. Golfy, do you have some kind of coping strategy for things like this? Since so much security in our modern world revolves around secret passwords and PIN codes, how do you conceal yours?

At a more trivial level, how do you get on with playing games? Do people conspire to let you win sometimes? Do they just pretend they don't know what cards you have or what move you're about to make?

PS If you hadn't thought about the security thing before, don't worry: you're not psychic. There is no such thing. You are merely ill. You should get treated, for your own peace of mind.
Click to expand...

Of course as we all know his login details for this site, we could all just be logging in as him and posting this stuff.
 
Hitch said:
... Getting the answer wrong half the time on a 50-50 test because your blinky-lights machine fails to produce any meaningful information renders any occasional string of hits statistically irrelevant. You can't just guess and guess and guess and cherry pick a few results that you like and throw out all of your misses.
Click to expand...

The results he got were exactly what you'd expect from random chance. Sequential runs appear in random results more often than most people would expect. In fact, if you ask someone to try to simulate a random sequence, it will typically be clearly identifiable from a truly random sequence because of its lack of runs, groups, clusters, etc. See Random Thoughts.
 
Beaver Hateman said:
If anyone is 'indulging him in his delusion' it's those that are talking to him as though there's any point in him 'establishing proper protocols for the testing', certainly not me.
Click to expand...
As one of the posters doing I just that I freely admit that I hold out very little hope that helping golfy refine his test protocol will ever lead to him disproving his claim to his own satisfaction, and hence accepting that others cannot hear his thoughts. However "very little" is still more than zero, which is the likely effectiveness of your own strategy.
 
Pixel42 said:
As one of the posters doing I just that I freely admit that I hold out very little hope that helping golfy refine his test protocol will ever lead to him disproving his claim to his own satisfaction, and hence accepting that others cannot hear his thoughts. However "very little" is still more than zero, which is the likely effectiveness of your own strategy.
Click to expand...

What qualifications do you have that lead you to make this assumption?
 
Beaver Hateman said:
What qualifications do you have that lead you to make this assumption?
Click to expand...

I think the chances of golfy seeing through his delusions are remote, so Pixel42's stategy may come to nothing. Hateman, forgive me if I've got the wrong end of the stick, but your stategy is gleefully bullying the mentally ill? Being generally attracted to the positive things in life rather than those which make me want to despair, I know which thread I'd rather read but hey, that's just me.
 
wardenclyffe said:
No, I don't think F1 drivers will read this board ahead of time. I don't think they know this board exists. I'm guessing that if any of us were cool enough to hang around with F1 drivers, we wouldn't be posting on these boards either.

Ward
Click to expand...

They would hear it telepathically Ward, that is what this is about. Please keep up.

How do you conclude that if I can create a false start by telepathy that they can't hear me planning another false start when they can hear me telepathically. You guys are really, really slow.

golfy
 
Hi golfy. Do you have a view on the question of whether you are the only psychic or are there lots of 'em? And if there are more, can you hear any?

(Sorry if you think you answered this question already, but I can't hear any of them, including you. That's why I have to wait for a written reply.)
 
For the short sighted and lacking of insight and analysis.

If I did 6 cat ship tests then I would conclude that the tests are indicating that I am telepathic as it is unlikely that I would get six correct predictions in a row.

If I got six predictions in a row wrong, it is statistically equally unlikely that that would happen so it also has an equal amount of meaning that the first test had.

If I had 2 and 4 right and wrong or the reverse of that or 3 and 3 right and wrong then that would prove inconclusive or show no signs of telepathy.

In the test I did there was a small run of correct answers and then a run of incorrect answers. I could of course give up on my understanding that I am telepathic based on one test, but why would I change my mind after 16 years of understanding on one experimentary test.

You say I need statistically relevant answers based on multiple people being tested and yet you also say quit on the first test. Make your minds up.

A few years ago I did a test at the University with Carl which gave a small indication that the RX heard me telepathically but the University staff told me that there was no proof that I was telepathic.

The rise in the GSR trace is where I am supposed to create a response which happened in the second large bar, or any large bar.

http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n1/moose1024/?action=view&current=CSDMILSTestWD.jpg

I requested another test with them and they agreed. With another RX and a new better thought out way of doing the tests I tried again and got the second plot shown below. The rise in GSR which happened 3 times was caused by me reading notes to him from a remote location, written by his girlfriend which were of embarrassing nature. They should have taken lass than 30 seconds to read to allow the rise in GSR to appear in the large bars but two of the notes took a little longer than necessary so the rise in GSR is just outside the required area. The University said it was not proof of telepathy again due to the rise in GSR not being in the correct place, when it was obvious proof.

http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n1/moose1024/?action=view&current=DCDMILS.jpg

They did not look deep enough into the test data to see its relevance just like you do, the first time or the second time or were deliberately blocking me off from proof like you intend to as written on this post.

If I had listened to them then I would not have the second plot would I, that is why I do not listen to you either just because the first test does not work. Think about why it did not work and then try and improve the results.

You guys would fail at the first hurdle in winning the $1M – you have a quitters attitude.

golfy
 
Last edited:
golfy said:
For the short sighted and lacking of insight and analysis.

If I did 6 cat ship tests then I would conclude that the tests are indicating that I am telepathic as it is unlikely that I would get six correct predictions in a row.

If I got six predictions in a row wrong, it is statistically equally unlikely that that would happen so it also has an equal amount of meaning that the first test had.
Click to expand...


6 is such an absurdly small sample size that runs are completely expected even in a random sample. That is why everyone keeps telling you that you need many many more tests.
 
Pixel42 said:
None.

What qualifications do you have that lead you to assume otherwise?
Click to expand...

Also none. Now please point out a place where I stated any assumptions on the effectiveness of your approach, because I can't remember doing it. Which is not to say I didn't.
 
golfy said:
You say I need statistically relevant answers based on multiple people being tested and yet you also say quit on the first test. Make your minds up.
Click to expand...
Who is this "you"? No-one has said quit on the first test.

With a 50:50 probability 6 runs is not enough to conclude anything, whether those 6 runs are all positive, all negative, or a mixture of the two. But the more runs you do, the more likely it is that a bias in one direction or another is a genuine indication that such a bias actually exists. And the more likely you are to see no such bias, if no such bias actually exists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom