• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Banachek taking over the MDC?

I asked this is the "Live Challenge Event" thread in the MDC sub-forum. Banachek is taking over from whom? Randi? Alison? If Banachek is running it now, who was running it before?

Ward
 
I am surprised that we did not hear this via Swift first. Glad somebody is going to look after the MDC. I only hope they start updating the MDC sub forum. It has not been updated for ages.
 
This came up at the demonstration. As I understand it, Allison handles the front end (applications, arrangements) and Banchek will doing the actual test.

Hope this makes sense, I am still very, very tired.
 
My involvement with the MDC is about to drastically change this month. I am taking full reign of the challenge for the JREF. I hope to make it more accessible to more people who want to attempt it. I hope to make it friendlier and bring more attention to it in the public eye and the media. Passing the challenge will not mean someone is psychic, just as failing does not mean they are not psychic. We would hope that if they passed we would bring more scientific attention to the claimant. Despite the fact we use scientific procedure for testing, it is not to be considered science. For it to be science it would have to be duplicated by others.

I also plan on setting up a separate web site for the challenge and making a few changes in the protocol of the challenge as it stands at this writing. You can find more about the MDC at:

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge/challenge-faq.html
Click to expand...

Interview linked to from his fb page.
 
Maybe that is the point, wardenclyffe. Perhaps the tasks were divided amongst so many folks that no one was focusing on the "marketing" aspect of the MDC.
 
I wonder why he plans to set up a new website to handle the MDC? What would he be able to do that would not be so easy on the current one?

Also timing?
 
Ooh, exciting!

Banachek is great and his comments about the direction of the MDC sound promising.
 
I still wish JREF would actually "call out" claimants (such as Sylvia Browne) with advertisements and press releases. I would rather the MDC actually target the big money frauds.

Nobody really cares that Anita Ikonen or Connie Sonne failed, but if the Claws were pressured into stepping up, I'll bet her public failure would open some eyes.
 
That is from 2008. There was a change of plan.

Here is an update:
http://www.randi.org/site/index.php...n-dollar-challenge-update-its-not-ending.html
Written by Phil Plait
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 10:00

We have a fantastic announcement to make:

The JREF's famous Million Dollar Challenge will continue!

Last year, we announced that the MDC would end in March 2010 due to the strains on time and effort of the JREF staff. However, after much discussion, we have decided not to terminate the Challenge. Instead, we are in the process of examining how it can be improved, streamlined, and made more efficient so that we can continue to use it to test claims of the paranormal.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Alan said:
That is from 2008. There was a change of plan.

I'll find a link of the update and edit in in.
Click to expand...

Cheers Alan. I recall he told me personally in 2009 challenge wasnt ending , I assumed he had changed his mind again! ;)
 
Last edited:
I don't like what I've read from him so far. It sounds to me to be more like a paranormal investigation than a nut up or shut up challenge. I especially do not like the language about proving or disproving somebody to be psychic because it presents being psychic as if it's an reasonable possibility. He sounds like VFF spouting her nonsense.

The Challenge should have meaning. He presents it like, "Well, if they pass, scientists should look further. If they don't pass, well, that doesn't mean they are not psychic." Well, then, what does it mean? What's the point of the test? A free shot a million bucks with a shrug if you fail?

I think the challenge should be, "If you pass, we'll be utterly amazed. We'll scrutinize the tests to figure out what we missed in our protocol because we highly doubt that our challenge is actually going to produce some unknown piece of science. By contrast, if you fail to do what you claim to do, then, really, you need to stop squawking about it, and observers should strongly consider that every time a so-called psychic is put under scientific controls, they fail."
 
Just blog comments so far. For example, in regards to the VFF demonstration he said, "in this case the result was negative and would been just as non important if positive." The reality is that the demonstration was perfectly suited to allow her to show her alleged ablities. It simply lacked the controls to eliminate other explanations. Her failure is quite significant, yet he called it non important. His quotes earlier in this thread seem to echo the same sentiments.

I have a big problem with that.
 
UncaYimmy said:
I think the challenge should be, "If you pass, we'll be utterly amazed. We'll scrutinize the tests to figure out what we missed in our protocol because we highly doubt that our challenge is actually going to produce some unknown piece of science. By contrast, if you fail to do what you claim to do, then, really, you need to stop squawking about it, and observers should strongly consider that every time a so-called psychic is put under scientific controls, they fail."
Click to expand...

You don't hear them talk about it in meeting, live events, Randi being interviewed? I had dinner with Banachek about two weeks ago, and this is the time of thing he has in mind. If you win - you'll be famous. When someone fails to pass a challenge test (every case so far), it's also promoted as that. Why do you think they keep trying to challenge Syliva Browne?
 
Geek Goddess said:
You don't hear them talk about it in meeting, live events, Randi being interviewed?
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about them. I am talking about Banachek. He's the subject of this thread, after all. It sounds to me like he's changing things.

I had dinner with Banachek about two weeks ago, and this is the time of thing he has in mind. If you win - you'll be famous. When someone fails to pass a challenge test (every case so far), it's also promoted as that. Why do you think they keep trying to challenge Syliva Browne?
Click to expand...
Under his guidance the only "challenge" was VFF's demonstration, and he stated that her failure was as non-important as if she passed. He did not take the opportunity to point out that her failure was yet another nail in the coffin. But I pointed that out already in this thread.

If you have some additional public comments, I'd be interested in reading them.
 
UncaYimmy said:
Just blog comments so far. For example, in regards to the VFF demonstration he said, "in this case the result was negative and would been just as non important if positive." The reality is that the demonstration was perfectly suited to allow her to show her alleged ablities. It simply lacked the controls to eliminate other explanations. Her failure is quite significant, yet he called it non important. His quotes earlier in this thread seem to echo the same sentiments.

I have a big problem with that.
Click to expand...

You're paraphrasing what was said about a demonstration and applying it to the MDC.

If VFF had chosen the correct person/kidney, would that have been significant?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom