dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
Why bother to post when you can just beam the messages to us? I have received nothing from you.
Assistance required for telepathy proof
- Thread starter golfy
- Start date
-
- Tags
- polygraphs telepathy
Why bother to post when you can just beam the messages to us? I have received nothing from you.
Sledge
Grammaton Cleric
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2009
- Messages
- 7,114
You refuse to answer questions. What's the point of asking more when we could be entertaining ourselves with mockery?
desertgal
Illuminator
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2008
- Messages
- 4,198
Great. Beam it to everyone when you're done. Don't forget to beam your address. I'm sure Randi will want to get the check in the mail to you as soon as he receives your transmission.
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
Not knowing anything about how GSRs work I would not expect to understand a couple of images supposedly obtained by them, but after seeing how you've responded to people who do understand such things I'd certainly be more inclined to take a University expert's opinion as to their significance over yours.
I note, however, that despite agreeing a test protocol (including success criteria of a response within 30 seconds, if I understand you correctly) beforehand, once you failed the test you then wanted to change the protocol by taking changes which happened more than 30 seconds later as significant. Tell me: if you had passed the test and your university experts had then decided that the success criteria had been set wrongly, responses had to be within 20 seconds, so you'd really failed it, what would have been your reaction? Needless to say no such moving of the goalposts in either direction would be allowed in a real MDC test.
Oh, and why did the people at the university go out their way to help you do this test in the first place? They already know whether or not they can hear your thoughts, and if you'd passed - as you should have done if you'd really been telepathic - you would have shown them to be liars when they told you (as I am sure they did) that they could not. So what possible motivation could they have had to give you their time so generously?
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
I'm starting to think the only answer you'll ever get to this question is the one you'll be able to infer from Golfy's sudden disappearance from the Forum.
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
Let's see. The word of the University of Northampton versus the word of an anonymous internet poster with a demonstrable lack of expertise in the use of GSR equipment backed by some faint lines on a Photobucket page.
Tough choice.
The trouble is, Golfy, what counts as proof for you alone won't win you the million dollars, and I doubt that you'll be able to insult the custodians into handing it over either.
Given that nobody believes a word you say, it seems that your explanations are a bit short of 'adequate'.
Anyone with a brain can see that.
Take care, I've heard that can affect your eyesight.
In all test there are the strict procedural methods (protocol) that people blindly stick to and there is reading into what the results mean even if they do not actually fit the protocol.
The later takes insight above the obvious to see the results and what it is telling you if it does not fit the protocol exactly.
For example, if you were measuring a comedians “funniness” then you could have a time slot graph like the graph I placed on photo bucket.
http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n1/moose1024/?action=view¤t=CSDMILSTestWD.jpg
In the “activate” slots you should make the audience laugh, in the lower slots you should not. A microphone will be placed in the audience to measure their laughter. Each joke should make the audience laugh in the 30 seconds allocated as this is the period where the laughter measurements will be taken.
If you start your joke and nothing happens to make the audience laugh in the first plot, then that joke was not funny. In the second bar you made a 12 or so second joke and the audience laughed, hence you have found something that the audience finds funny. You then try a few other ideas and nothing happens. Between the sixth and seventh “activate” periods, I mumbled something to myself and the audience chuckled so I repeated it in slot 7, but the joke was dead as the audience had already heard it when I mumbled it, so it had lost it’s impact.
http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n1/moose1024/?action=view¤t=DCDMILS.jpg
I thought about this and then asked someone else to write some jokes down (the comedian (me) is not telepathic in this example) and then the next time I tried the test I read the jokes out without having read them myself. The first few did not seem to work as they were not funny, but the fourth joke worked well but unfortunately the punch line was outside the 30 second slots as the writer had taken their time in padding out the joke to increase its impact. The fifth joke was about 12 seconds long and the punch line worked as intended. The seventh attempt was the same a the first, funny but too long and outside the 30 second laughter measurement period.
This was better, I was finding out what made the audience laugh and what did not. The plot line obviously shows that the audience was responding but it did not fit the protocol. This does not mean that the jokes were not funny, but that they were too long. If you measure the 4th joke procedurally it is not a funny joke as nowhere in the 4th slot is there a rise in the laughter line. If however you simply look at the laughter line, you can see that the joke is funny and that the audience did laugh. Which judgment do you take, the joke was not funny as it was over 30 seconds long or that it was funny but a little to long. If you strictly stick to the protocol and look inside the 30 second laughter measurement period, there is no rise in the audience laughter line so it is not funny by strict judgement. This is the stance that the University took. If it is not in the activate period then you have not activated the other person. Wrong, you have activated the other person, just not quite in the right place – the punch line is just the wrong side of 30 seconds, this does not mean that the person was not responding to my telepathy, just that the response that I elicited from him was in the wrong place.
I understood this as in my booth where I was reading embarrassing notes rather than jokes and watching the GSR line, then the GSR rose at the punch line point, showing that the RX was being “activated” by me telepathically. If I had a video of the GSR line on the screen and me reading the notes, there was a perfect correlation between the GSR rise and the notes I was reading. Only when the 30 second time slots were superimposed over the GSR line did I realise that the response was slightly outside the allocated area. It was obvious that I had progressed from the first test with one clear activation to the second test with 3 clear activations, not quite in the right place but that can be rectified in the third test and hopefully the rise in GSR would have been 4 or more and all in the right place as I was learning what the RX responded to. All I needed was more of the type of notes that caused the activations (more funny jokes, not more unfunny ones in the analogy) making sure they were no more than 20 seconds long to make it clear where the GSR was rising and I would have reached the goal of 4 plus activations all in the right place.
I think it is clear that the indications that I am telepathic are very strong.
The University did tell me that I could do as many tests as I wanted to at the beginning as they said they were very pleased to have someone so keen to participate in their tests, but after the second test made it difficult for me to do any more and restricted me as to who I could use as an RX, very close friend or relatives. My cousin volunteered for a test but then the University declined to allow me any more tests at all by changing their reasons and eventually said no to every application I put in.
I know that they can hear me already as when I was at the University they made it obvious. One of the researchers has since told me that if they proved telepathy then they would all be out of jobs.
To Pixel42 you claim that “Not knowing anything about how GSRs work” but yet you also stated Something similar to “Clearly golfy has no telepathic ability” based on a GSR test result. This is why I do not take the forum posters as the correct people to judge my tests or results.
But Pixel42, I agree with your question, “Oh, and why did the people at the university go out their way to help you do this test in the first place? They already know whether or not they can hear your thoughts, and if you'd passed - as you should have done if you'd really been telepathic - you would have shown them to be liars when they told you (as I am sure they did) that they could not. So what possible motivation could they have had to give you their time so generously?” as their tests were bound to prove me correct. This is backed up by their refusal to give me any more tests. Dr Deborah Delanoy, who is head of department has repeated my thoughts to me when on the phone from 60 miles away and mocked me when I am thinking to myself about heart rate monitor tests before I started using GSR. She said “It took you a long time to think of that one, didn’t it” which was not part of the conversation but was a perfect fit to my thoughts at the time. Eventually it becomes obvious that I am having two conversations, one with my spoken words and one with my mind. This often happens with people, they blurt out a reply to my thoughts in the middle of conversations.
I was a bit perplexed as to why the University let me do a DMILS test as it was bound to prove my ability and that they were liars, but was then not surprised when they suddenly stopped me doing more tests as my results improved with each test.
golfy
The later takes insight above the obvious to see the results and what it is telling you if it does not fit the protocol exactly.
For example, if you were measuring a comedians “funniness” then you could have a time slot graph like the graph I placed on photo bucket.
http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n1/moose1024/?action=view¤t=CSDMILSTestWD.jpg
In the “activate” slots you should make the audience laugh, in the lower slots you should not. A microphone will be placed in the audience to measure their laughter. Each joke should make the audience laugh in the 30 seconds allocated as this is the period where the laughter measurements will be taken.
If you start your joke and nothing happens to make the audience laugh in the first plot, then that joke was not funny. In the second bar you made a 12 or so second joke and the audience laughed, hence you have found something that the audience finds funny. You then try a few other ideas and nothing happens. Between the sixth and seventh “activate” periods, I mumbled something to myself and the audience chuckled so I repeated it in slot 7, but the joke was dead as the audience had already heard it when I mumbled it, so it had lost it’s impact.
http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n1/moose1024/?action=view¤t=DCDMILS.jpg
I thought about this and then asked someone else to write some jokes down (the comedian (me) is not telepathic in this example) and then the next time I tried the test I read the jokes out without having read them myself. The first few did not seem to work as they were not funny, but the fourth joke worked well but unfortunately the punch line was outside the 30 second slots as the writer had taken their time in padding out the joke to increase its impact. The fifth joke was about 12 seconds long and the punch line worked as intended. The seventh attempt was the same a the first, funny but too long and outside the 30 second laughter measurement period.
This was better, I was finding out what made the audience laugh and what did not. The plot line obviously shows that the audience was responding but it did not fit the protocol. This does not mean that the jokes were not funny, but that they were too long. If you measure the 4th joke procedurally it is not a funny joke as nowhere in the 4th slot is there a rise in the laughter line. If however you simply look at the laughter line, you can see that the joke is funny and that the audience did laugh. Which judgment do you take, the joke was not funny as it was over 30 seconds long or that it was funny but a little to long. If you strictly stick to the protocol and look inside the 30 second laughter measurement period, there is no rise in the audience laughter line so it is not funny by strict judgement. This is the stance that the University took. If it is not in the activate period then you have not activated the other person. Wrong, you have activated the other person, just not quite in the right place – the punch line is just the wrong side of 30 seconds, this does not mean that the person was not responding to my telepathy, just that the response that I elicited from him was in the wrong place.
I understood this as in my booth where I was reading embarrassing notes rather than jokes and watching the GSR line, then the GSR rose at the punch line point, showing that the RX was being “activated” by me telepathically. If I had a video of the GSR line on the screen and me reading the notes, there was a perfect correlation between the GSR rise and the notes I was reading. Only when the 30 second time slots were superimposed over the GSR line did I realise that the response was slightly outside the allocated area. It was obvious that I had progressed from the first test with one clear activation to the second test with 3 clear activations, not quite in the right place but that can be rectified in the third test and hopefully the rise in GSR would have been 4 or more and all in the right place as I was learning what the RX responded to. All I needed was more of the type of notes that caused the activations (more funny jokes, not more unfunny ones in the analogy) making sure they were no more than 20 seconds long to make it clear where the GSR was rising and I would have reached the goal of 4 plus activations all in the right place.
I think it is clear that the indications that I am telepathic are very strong.
The University did tell me that I could do as many tests as I wanted to at the beginning as they said they were very pleased to have someone so keen to participate in their tests, but after the second test made it difficult for me to do any more and restricted me as to who I could use as an RX, very close friend or relatives. My cousin volunteered for a test but then the University declined to allow me any more tests at all by changing their reasons and eventually said no to every application I put in.
I know that they can hear me already as when I was at the University they made it obvious. One of the researchers has since told me that if they proved telepathy then they would all be out of jobs.
To Pixel42 you claim that “Not knowing anything about how GSRs work” but yet you also stated Something similar to “Clearly golfy has no telepathic ability” based on a GSR test result. This is why I do not take the forum posters as the correct people to judge my tests or results.
But Pixel42, I agree with your question, “Oh, and why did the people at the university go out their way to help you do this test in the first place? They already know whether or not they can hear your thoughts, and if you'd passed - as you should have done if you'd really been telepathic - you would have shown them to be liars when they told you (as I am sure they did) that they could not. So what possible motivation could they have had to give you their time so generously?” as their tests were bound to prove me correct. This is backed up by their refusal to give me any more tests. Dr Deborah Delanoy, who is head of department has repeated my thoughts to me when on the phone from 60 miles away and mocked me when I am thinking to myself about heart rate monitor tests before I started using GSR. She said “It took you a long time to think of that one, didn’t it” which was not part of the conversation but was a perfect fit to my thoughts at the time. Eventually it becomes obvious that I am having two conversations, one with my spoken words and one with my mind. This often happens with people, they blurt out a reply to my thoughts in the middle of conversations.
I was a bit perplexed as to why the University let me do a DMILS test as it was bound to prove my ability and that they were liars, but was then not surprised when they suddenly stopped me doing more tests as my results improved with each test.
golfy
As an additional note.
At the beginning of the second test I was talking to a researcher in the TX booth with the monitor on which is displayed the GSR plot line. We had been talking for a few minute or so when he said “Look, you friend has fallen asleep, he’s flat lining.” As his GSR line was a constant unwavering line across the screen. I said “Wake up Dave, you’re flat lining!” and immediately his GSR rose very sharply. Turning to the researcher I said “There you go, telepathy!” He looked shocked and then walked to the booth door and stood there looking perplexed. I tried to discuss it with him but he refused and said we should just do the test.
I mentioned this to the head of department and she refused to acknowledge it as having meaning. A visual live response on a GSR was fairly indicative of telepathy as the researcher also realised but they do not want to help me prove it as they are liars about not being able to hear me as Pixel42 reasoned as a possibility. The University have made it abundantly clear that they do not want me to do any mores tests with them.
golfy
At the beginning of the second test I was talking to a researcher in the TX booth with the monitor on which is displayed the GSR plot line. We had been talking for a few minute or so when he said “Look, you friend has fallen asleep, he’s flat lining.” As his GSR line was a constant unwavering line across the screen. I said “Wake up Dave, you’re flat lining!” and immediately his GSR rose very sharply. Turning to the researcher I said “There you go, telepathy!” He looked shocked and then walked to the booth door and stood there looking perplexed. I tried to discuss it with him but he refused and said we should just do the test.
I mentioned this to the head of department and she refused to acknowledge it as having meaning. A visual live response on a GSR was fairly indicative of telepathy as the researcher also realised but they do not want to help me prove it as they are liars about not being able to hear me as Pixel42 reasoned as a possibility. The University have made it abundantly clear that they do not want me to do any mores tests with them.
golfy
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
Because it's obvious there's far greater job security in studying something that no-one handing out research grants seriously believes exists than there would be studying HOW such a ground breaking discovery in physics, biology and communication could function if it were proved.
Nope, clearly it would be, "Well, there you have it Golfy is the most unique individual in history, huge areas of accepted knowledge have been proven wrong. Better turn out the lights and go home no-one's going to be interested in this and instantly communicating with the entire human race obviously has no practical implications what so ever. I'm off to work in McDonalds".
AdMan
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Messages
- 10,293
I assume that was a slip of the tongue and you didn't mean you said the wake up statement, but thought it.
Why would the researcher look shocked and perplexed, if he had been hearing your thoughts all along?
Last edited:
Sean84
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2009
- Messages
- 951
Golfy, golfy, golfy...
Did you ever stop to think that maybe the University didn't want to deal with you anymore because you act nutty all the time?
Perhaps they didn't want to indulge the delusions of a guy who is in obvious need of professional help. Perhaps they didn't want to deal with a guy who takes every little scrap of information and tries to twist it into proof that he's telepathic, even when it's proof that he clearly isn't -- because he isn't sane.
Think about it.
Louder and with your mouth open.
Still nothing.
Anyway, what's up with the "police issue"?
Did you ever stop to think that maybe the University didn't want to deal with you anymore because you act nutty all the time?
Perhaps they didn't want to indulge the delusions of a guy who is in obvious need of professional help. Perhaps they didn't want to deal with a guy who takes every little scrap of information and tries to twist it into proof that he's telepathic, even when it's proof that he clearly isn't -- because he isn't sane.
Think about it.
Louder and with your mouth open.
Still nothing.
Anyway, what's up with the "police issue"?
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2010
- Messages
- 32,124
The former is actual science. The latter allows you to manipulate the data in order to get the results you want. This is why you invariably choose the latter when the former demonstrates time and time again that you are not telepathic.
Now, can you answer my questions, please?
Last edited:
Hitch
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2005
- Messages
- 834
Or it could be, sitting across the table from an individual who's been making irrational statements all along and they think something like that and get a crazed look in their eyes and you suddenly feel like you don't want to be alone in a room with them anymore. It has nothing to do with telepathy. It's body language.
I don't know that's what happened, but it seems to me a much more plausible explanation. I'm sure most people would agree. (But not Golfy.)
dlorde
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 6,864
A problem with that protocol as is, is that, even when supposedly chosen 'at random', some letters, colours, & numbers will come up far more often than chance would suggest. You'd also need some control tests with people who weren't telepathic. You could then score for matches and compare the telepathic results with the control results.
desertgal
Illuminator
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2008
- Messages
- 4,198
Nonsense. They are not liars. You are not telepathic.
Of course they don't. Why would they want to waste further time and effort trying to prove a delusion?
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
That comment was not based on a GSR result, but on the fact that the probability that every single person you ever met was lying to you was zero, as I stated clearly at the time. I place no confidence whatsoever in GSRs, and would therefore never make any statements based on results obtained with them.
Since then you have claimed that I should be able to hear your thoughts myself, which I cannot, thereby confirming the comment correct.
And I'm not the least bit surprised that the university folk have given up on you, but you have not explained why they went to the trouble of helping you with your testing in the first place if they were lying to you all along.
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2005
- Messages
- 24,532
Thinking about my own thinking, I realize my thoughts are not just English words and well-formed sentences. I think in images, smells, other sensations, emotions, abstract ideas, and so on. This raises many, many questions for me.
Golfy beliefs all of this thoughts are transmitted to everyone in existence all the time. He cannot restrict what is sent. So, to all the non-English speaking people of the world, how to golfy's language thoughts come across? Is it a sensation of gibberish most of use would experience listening to some foreign language conversation? If so, this may be an avenue for experiment without prior exposure to the receiver.
How do thoughts of imagery and color come across to individuals blind from birth?
With all the complex thoughts going on simultaneously in ones mind, how are golfy's thoughts tagged so the recipient can distinguish one from the other?
Finally, is this a strictly human phenomenon? Is my dog, for example, plagued by the continual drone of golfy's thoughts? Could a telepathy experiment be designed using animals as the receivers, or are they just as much dishonest liars as the humans?
Golfy beliefs all of this thoughts are transmitted to everyone in existence all the time. He cannot restrict what is sent. So, to all the non-English speaking people of the world, how to golfy's language thoughts come across? Is it a sensation of gibberish most of use would experience listening to some foreign language conversation? If so, this may be an avenue for experiment without prior exposure to the receiver.
How do thoughts of imagery and color come across to individuals blind from birth?
With all the complex thoughts going on simultaneously in ones mind, how are golfy's thoughts tagged so the recipient can distinguish one from the other?
Finally, is this a strictly human phenomenon? Is my dog, for example, plagued by the continual drone of golfy's thoughts? Could a telepathy experiment be designed using animals as the receivers, or are they just as much dishonest liars as the humans?
I cannot explain why they would give me a test in the first place - I volunteered and they accepted. They then stopped all further tests as soon as I showed progress in the testing, not proof but progress. Progress for long enough equals proof. What their initial motives were - how can I explain that? You will have to ask them why they did it.
I asked my Dr the same thing. Why would you do a test which will eventually ruin your career. She said because a single test would not be proof. A single test which works is an indication that she might be lying, might not me. Enough doubt to retest her again once I have proven that I am telepathic. I already know that she can hear me and will prove that later.
Short term she made sense, long term she did not as per the University.
golfy
Last edited:
AdMan
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2010
- Messages
- 10,293
Golfy, I am reposting an earlier question that you ignored, about your time with that researcher and your friend Dave:
Why would the researcher look shocked and perplexed, if he had been hearing your thoughts all along?
I am genuinely curious how you explain away this point, because it makes no sense.
Why would the researcher look shocked and perplexed, if he had been hearing your thoughts all along?
I am genuinely curious how you explain away this point, because it makes no sense.