• 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.

Challenge applications

PartSkeptic said:
I join those who are advising you to blind self-test, and start small. Although there are effects of scale, you need to experiment to find the needed scale
Click to expand...

Here we find common ground. I am not insisting that DD use one cubic foot, I just want to know if one cubic meter was calculated using trial and error or if it was more of a w.a.g.

Not too long ago, we had a poster claim he could find tiny flakes of gold by dowsing stream banks. When he failed a protocol he had previously agreed to he decided that anything other than a field test would require a target of five pounds of pure gold. He had never tested his ability to find five pounds, or four pounds or even one pound. He just claimed that the testers should provide five pounds of gold.
 
PartSkeptic said:
I did not think of this possibility because I assumed that the success rate would be so high that there would be no chance of misinterpretation of results.
Click to expand...
I think it's worth pointing out that there are many cases of a perceived paranormal ability (telepathy, remote viewing, communication with the dead, foretelling future events etc) for which careful testing has shown (e) to be the explanation, despite the claimant's conviction that they were achieving results much better than chance. In some of those cases cold reading was boosting their apparent success rate but in others it could never have been better than chance, yet the claimant was utterly and genuinely convinced it was. So this kind of misinterpretation must happen quite often.
 
Pixel42 said:
In a previous discussion here on dowsing someone who had investigated the subject in far greater depth than I have expressed the view that (b) makes far less contribution to the perceived success of dowsing than (e). Indeed he was unconvinced that (b) made any contribution whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I'd say (a) is likely a major contributor as well, especially when it comes to the open tests. It's pretty firmly established that dowsers are best at finding things when they already know where those things are. The actual muscle movements that cause the ideomotor effect are triggered subconsciously, but the knowledge leading to that is often clearly concious.

PartSkeptic said:
b) The subconscious gets information from physical senses such as smell, taste, vibration, magnetic fields, neutrino disturbance, sounds, sight and the brain analyzes these, no matter the tiny scale.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you could elaborate on exactly which physical sense humans posses which can detect neutrinos?

Open mind.
Click to expand...

I do not think this means what you think it means.
 
Marcus said:
I don't remember that one, missed it I guess. Do you remember which superpower was being tested for?

I really thought that Connie was going to accept the results of her test, she swore up and down that she was going too, so I suppose that I should assume this one will go the same way if it goes that far.
Click to expand...

There you go:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38788

And here's the original claim about the GSIC that ended up a mess:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36074&highlight=gsic
 
Cuddles said:
Perhaps you could elaborate on exactly which physical sense humans posses which can detect neutrinos?
Click to expand...

Sorry - silly thought that popped into my head when trying to think what can penetrate deep into rock.

Cuddles said:
I do not think this means what you think it means.
Click to expand...

Mmmm. I find your comment a bit cryptic. I was trying to say - be open my suggestion to "play" with the rods (cheap and quick) to experience the ideomotor effect, and then see if one can get (a) to work and see how that feels.
 
Thanks Pixel 42 for writing:-
Just to add that I am also retired and live in the UK so, depending on how far away from me the test takes place, I might be able to come along to witness it. So you'd have confirmation from a fairly long standing member of the forum of the results when you post them.
I'll send you a private message giving you details of where and when and my private e-mail address for contact.
 
I'd just like to say a big thank you to all who have answered my original questions and offered helpful advice.
I'm bowing out for the rest of February but will resume in March by which time I hope to be in a position to give a date for a homespun simplified double blind test recommended by so many, conducted as cheaply as possible, knowing that eventually it will need to be scaled up to satisfy the JREF requirements.
I hope Pixel 42 will attend.

You might like to Google National Trust + Dowsing. They run courses on it. Have a go. You could always ask for your money back if they don't succeed in teaching you.
 
Got your PM DowserDon and that location should be doable for me. PM the date when you have fixed it, and I'll let you know if I'm free.

I know a couple of members of the Cheltenham sceptics in the pub group (though I've yet to get to a meeting myself) who might be interested, would it be OK to bring them along?

ETA: I'm a member of the National Trust and saw an article in the magazine about dowsing a while back - very credulous, very poor - but I was unaware of any courses. I was glad to see some letters in the following edition of the magazine pointing out the lack of scientific evidence for it.

E again TA: Thread on that article: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=150586
 
Last edited:
Almo said:
There you go:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38788

And here's the original claim about the GSIC that ended up a mess:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36074&highlight=gsic
Click to expand...
Thanks. It looks like this case involved a guy trying to win a million dollars with a sound chip, no claim of supernatural powers on his part. I think I will still give DowserDon credit for being the first to admit that his superpowers don't exist if he accepts the results of a preliminary. A long shot, I know, but it's the slightly non-zero odds of all aspects of a Challenge that make it interesting. I don't even consider dowsing powers to be impossible, just very unlikely.
 
PartSkeptic said:
Re-read your post. A great summary. Yes, I agree.

If I was not such a natural doubter who also wants unshakeable proof (like God appearing daily to a large bunch of us to confirm what I think, then submitting to testing, and claiming the prize) I would not be saying I am not sure.
Click to expand...

Alright. The only thing I would add here, is that you seem to be fudging a bit here.

If I read you right, you are suggesting that you must say you are "not sure" unless you have absolutely incontrovertible evidence continuously. It's not really meaningful because we don't really have that kind of evidence about a lot of things. That isn't the kind of evidence we are looking for when we try to decide if something is really going on. Even small or infrequent results can convince if they turn up significantly more often than chance.
 
Marcus said:
Thanks. It looks like this case involved a guy trying to win a million dollars with a sound chip, no claim of supernatural powers on his part. I think I will still give DowserDon credit for being the first to admit that his superpowers don't exist if he accepts the results of a preliminary. A long shot, I know, but it's the slightly non-zero odds of all aspects of a Challenge that make it interesting. I don't even consider dowsing powers to be impossible, just very unlikely.
Click to expand...

You have to read about what the GSIC does. It would definitely be supernatural if it worked.

http://www.goldensound.com/installa...hip-gsic-cddvdsacd-upgrade-installation-guide

It purportedly improves the sound of a CD permanently just by playing the disc for 2 seconds while the chip is on the stereo. What's more, they wear out so you have to buy more of them.
 
How thoughtful of them to let you know just when the magic wears off, so you can run out and buy another one.
 
gnome said:
PartSkeptic said:
If I was not such a natural doubter who also wants unshakeable proof (like God appearing daily to a large bunch of us to confirm what I think, then submitting to testing, and claiming the prize) I would not be saying I am not sure.
Click to expand...
Alright. The only thing I would add here, is that you seem to be fudging a bit here.

If I read you right, you are suggesting that you must say you are "not sure" unless you have absolutely incontrovertible evidence continuously. It's not really meaningful because we don't really have that kind of evidence about a lot of things. That isn't the kind of evidence we are looking for when we try to decide if something is really going on. Even small or infrequent results can convince if they turn up significantly more often than chance.
Click to expand...

I have event after event happening to me and around me that defy explanations other than psychic manifestations. And yet I find myself saying "It could be coincidence, it could be tricks of the mind, I could be crazy".

I understand that that one needs to beat chance significantly in a test. If that happened and some-one won the prize, just how many would say "Since psychic phenomena do not exist, there was some cheating" or "What went wrong - I don't believe the test demonstrated psychic ability".

When I was 50 (well past my mental prime) I was given a IQ test in a job application. I was told it was an "open ended test" and told that it was impossible for anyone to finish the 50 questions in 15 minutes and get them all correct. I got 50 out of 50 with 10 seconds to spare. I can tell you that I could see people think I cheated somehow. I now think that perhaps I was helped in a psychic way because it seems impossible to me that I did so well. One explanation is that I lucked out by getting all questions within my capability. Another explanation is that the tester misstated the "open endedness".

I was twice openly accused in front of the whole class of cheating by a teacher said the only way I could get the test scores I did was by having a preview of the exam paper. I suspect she deliberately tried to trap me with obtuse questions that no-one else got correct.
 
I am going to experiment with mental telepathy with my son. He said that in the past he could tell what people were thinking until he got frightened by the unknown, and made a conscious effort to stop. I seem to be able to project thoughts. So we will make a transmitter/receiver team.

I will use the standard cards (circle/square/triangle/star/other), and practice with him. It is simple to do. I will be aiming for significant success, or else I will consider it a failure. I will read up on test procedure and make sure I eliminate human senses and super-senses.

Maybe I am wrong about non-testability rule.
 
#1 PartSkeptic: he must not be able to see you at all. Body language is a powerful communicator.

Watch the part of Kundun where the Dali Lama chooses his objects from his previous life. It's actually a quite realistic portrayal of how the process has probably worked. It also has the benefit of selecting a child who is in tune with other people, so maybe it's not such a bad idea after all. :)
 
PartSkeptic said:
I am going to experiment with mental telepathy with my son. He said that in the past he could tell what people were thinking until he got frightened by the unknown, and made a conscious effort to stop. I seem to be able to project thoughts. So we will make a transmitter/receiver team.

I will use the standard cards (circle/square/triangle/star/other), and practice with him. It is simple to do. I will be aiming for significant success, or else I will consider it a failure. I will read up on test procedure and make sure I eliminate human senses and super-senses.

Maybe I am wrong about non-testability rule.
Click to expand...

If i had a nickle, for every previous master of the arcane arts that got "frightened" away from their own ******* superpower, i could set up my own one trillion dollar challenge.

This is about the second biggest cliche ( in a tight race with ' I don't have to prove my powers to anyone.') in the realm of woo. And uttering it does nothing for your credibility.
 
PartSkeptic; said:
I understand that that one needs to beat chance significantly in a test. If that happened and some-one won the prize, just how many would say "Since psychic phenomena do not exist, there was some cheating" or "What went wrong - I don't believe the test demonstrated psychic ability".
Click to expand...
The whole purpose of the careful attention to protocol in a MDC preliminary is to eliminate any possible false positives. Assuming the conclusion is a trait of woos, not skeptics, if someone were to pass a preliminary they would definitely be the center of attention. Any possible sources of error would be addressed in the Final, if they passed that and won the prize, they would indeed have proved their superpower.
 
Thank you for all your suggestions and help.

When I learned hypnosis I read that people sub-vocalise, and under hypnosis some can "hear" the thoughts. Also that although eyes appear closed, some can "peep" and see the image of the card in the other person's eyes.

And body language, voice tone, and the words used are such give-aways. I am a really good poker player - I do not claim psychic power but knowledge of others, and good at calculating the odds.

So the two of us must be separated in rooms at opposite ends of the house. Perhaps my daughter-in-law in the passage shouts start 1, stop 1, start 2, stop 2 and we write down the card seen and perceived when the stop is shouted. And no-one sees anyone else. Do 20 and then compare sheets. And then again and again.

sadhatter said:
If i had a nickle, for every previous master of the arcane arts that got "frightened" away from their own ******* superpower, i could set up my own one trillion dollar challenge.
Click to expand...

Scared by the unknown? And what it might do to? Seems reasonable. It seems the numbers go against you because it suggests that "something" might be out there. And I doubt they were masters. Rather things happened beyond their control, and they knew they were not in control.

And I only started really using and trying to experiment and amplify possible psychic abilities once I had a greater understanding of what I am dealing with. Which is only recently. It seems there are powers of good and evil - and getting controlled by evil is frightening to many. I have had experiences which were lessons to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom