challenge history

[Ashles]

Hi Kramer,

I just wanted to know I will get back to you guys in a few weeks.. The company that is paying for my patenting does not want me showing any internal designs until they have all the paper work sent in and secured.. Then no problems with that.. So, after they do all that I will send a email letting you know I'm ready for testing.. I will say plan for about the the first week of Oct.

So, just put me on the side for now, and I will get back with you..

Thanks,

Kirk G

Probable follow up in October:
=============
Hi, Kirk here
The patenting I taking a little longer than expected because the dog ate my plans as I was about to patent them, then the printer ran out of toner, and I just missed the post office, then my uncle had an accident and we had a really busy day at work, and then I had an accident myself, after which, would you believe it, I lost all my calculations so I had to start again, then I discovered I was allergic to all the materials used in the design, followed by a plague of locusts, an attack by several roman centurions, the patent office was invided by identical robot clones called Robin, the inventor of post-it notes challenged my to a Wado-Ryu Karate tournament, my aunt exploded, my hands turned into chocolate and the planets aligned in a really annoying and distracting way.

Anyway, I'll have to put it back again to maybe late November, though I'm not sure what year.

All the best,

Kirk G.
============

 

[Patricio Elicer]

Sylvia Browne and John Edward say that Randi knows full well that paranormal phenomenon exists, but that he's dedicated his life to making people who actually have psychic powers look bad, and he'll do anything he needs to do in order to further that agenda, so I won't be a pawn in his little game. You guys can go to hell before I show you what I can do.

Well, this may be a bit unrelated but let me tell you. I once had a long and heated discussion about James Randi and the JREF at a Chilean forum. My "opponent" in that discussion made herself appear as very documented about the JREF (she gave out names and other detailed verifiable info), so she gained some credibility indeed.

She made the wild claim that the JREF main purpose was to make money at the expense of its "credulous" followers, and that it is funded by the CIA with thousands of millions of dollars to "silence" some scientists whose investigations are supposedly against the US financial interests.

Well, some people's imagination have no limit huh?. Their lack of argumentation and evidence is easily filled in with "conspiracy theories". After all who can argue on something that is so secret!

 

[KRAMER]

The JREF doesn't make money.

This is a shoe-string operation here, folks. Everything we bring in via donations, etc, goes out just as fast as it comes in. We scrape by every year, and we will continue to scrape by, unless we find an endowment...a yearly stipend (from some corporation or wealthy individual) that will allow us to continue our efforts without worrying about next month's bills.

Until then, just staying above-board is nerve wracking.

 

[Peter Morris]

So the "chap" is Dalton Walker, eh? OK. Now I understand.

Here's the answer to your question: Randi is NOT "resistant" to having Dalton's claim tested by a scientist. He simply agrees with most reasonable forum members

At this point you demonstrate your intellectual dishonesty.

You define "reasonable" as meaning "agrees with Randi." Anyone that doesn't agree with you is defined as "unreasonable."

Go look up the "no true Scotsman" fallacy to see how wrong your argument is. When you've done that, consult Carl Sagan's Baloney Detector.

When come back bring logic.

As for the rest of your post.... The fact is, Randi promised that his tests are carried out by "scientific expertise" and by "independent third parties" to ensure fairness. So on this occasion he sits as judge and jury of the claim and has decided that on this occasion he doesn't need to keep his promise. He has decided that the JREF is able to design a test, and the JREF can carry out the test fairly without needing the independent third parties he promised. Randi has decided that his own rules don't need to be followed in this case, so he will drop them at his whim.

Of course, by doing so, Randi has demonstrated the unfairness of his tests. In the past, when people have questioned him, he rants and rages against his crittics. He proves how fair his tests are like this:

http://www.randi.org/jr/08-10-01.html
This "whether I can be trusted" angle, however, we can eliminate here and now, in as few as 100 words: since my tests are designed and approved independently from me, and are, and must be, accepted without reservation by the applicant, after which the tests are carried out by an independent party, I remove myself entirely from any part of the process that would call for me to be "trusted."

You see, the issue here isn't the complexity of the tests - its the fairness of them.

Randi made the promise that to ensure fairness in his tests, he would not be involved with them. The tests are designed and carried out, by qualified scientists, independently from Randi. This is Randi's proof of how fair his tests are.

On this occasion, however, he has decided not to follow his promise. It will not be designed independendently and carried out by a third party, instead it will be designed by the JREF and carried out by the JREF.

By doing so, Randi has removed his own guarantee of fairness. THAT is the important point.

It's not a matter of this test needing a scientist because it's complex. Of course it's simple.

Randi, however, promised an independent scientist - the emphasis on independent - to make sure the test is fair[/i]

Randi promised an independent scientist, to ensure that Randi wouldn't be able to sabotage the test. Randi then went back on his word. That alone shows how Randi is untrustworthy.

The applicant is perfectly reasonable to refuse to be tested by a proven liar.

 

[steenkh]

Randi, however, promised an independent scientist - the emphasis on independent - to make sure the test is fair

As far as we have heard until now it is an independent qualified person who has been asked to negotiate and perform the test. He is not a high energy scientist, because that is not necessary for this claim, but he is qualified. What are you ranting about?

 

[kookbreaker]

At this point you demonstrate your intellectual dishonesty.

You define "reasonable" as meaning "agrees with Randi." Anyone that doesn't agree with you is defined as "unreasonable."

No, reasonable here is "You don't need a high energy scientists to tell if ice is melting or not".

The rest your post is a smokescreen of insults and bluster hiding the bunkruptcy of your argument. Steenkh has pointed this already, so I need not waste any more time on your whining.

 

[Peter Morris]

You appear to have trouble understanding the word "independent"

He had to correspond with Randi's lackey to get approval for the test, said lackey seeking Randi's approval. He also had to correspond with Doubt to discuss the design of the test. From his messages I get the impression he was intending to carry out the test himself, I'm not certain that's correct but it's the impression I get. Doubt has been posting on these boards for over 2 years, with more that 1000 messages. For all I know he's actually a member of the JREF, he's at the very least an admirer of Randi.

The test was to be designed by Randi's associates, approved by Randi's lackey, with Randi's approval, and (I understand) carried out by Randi's associates.

Randi promised a test "designed and approved independently from me" and "carried out by an independent party" Then he offered a test designed, approved and carried out by his own associates, admirers and lackies.

 

[kookbreaker]

You appear to have trouble understanding the word "independent"

We understand it fine, the demand made by Dalton was:

The JREF closed my claim because I would not allow a non scientist or a scientist with no expertise in the field of high energy radiation to conduct experiments on my gemstone. "

He had to correspond with Randi's lackey to get approval for the test, said lackey seeking Randi's approval. He also had to correspond...

<snip>

Blah, blah BLAH! Nothing but spew and nonsense from Peter. Read what Dalton wrote and demanded. Then explain how that equals the simple "independent".

Why isn't this sinking in?

 

[Peter Morris]

Grow up, Kook. What Dalton demanded was only what Randi promised.

 

[apoger]

Peter, you are simply regurgitating the same unfounded nonsense.

My quote from page one of this thread:

I will take you seriously the second you can explain why a scientist who is a radiation expert is required to judge whether ice is melting.

You have made no attempt to do this.
The claimant made a ridiculous requirement and the JREF denied it. The claimant then withdrew.

Unless you can come up with a coherent argument as to why the radiation scientist is needed, you have no foundation on which to build a case versus Randi/JREF.

 

[apoger]

Grow up, Kook. What Dalton demanded was only what Randi promised.

If you can show us evidence that Randi promised a radiation scientist you will have something...

 

[Peter Morris]

Peter, you are simply regurgitating the same unfounded nonsense.

None so blind....

 

[apoger]

None so blind....

Ah... but I am willing to see.
All you have to do is present a coherent argument and/or evidence.

 

[kookbreaker]

Grow up, Kook. What Dalton demanded was only what Randi promised.

Nonsense. Randi promised qualfied individuals, not unrelated specialists.

Or tell us why you need a 'high energy scientist' to tell if ice is melting. You danced around that point in true nutbar fashion.

 

[Peter Morris]

Ah... but I am willing to see.
All you have to do is present a coherent argument and/or evidence.

Given. I note your only answer is to deny the facts.

Once again, you have demonstrated there is no point arguing with fundamentalists.

 

[Peter Morris]

Nonsense. Randi promised qualfied individuals, not unrelated specialists.

Wrong. He promised that he would have experts conduict the test.

You've seen the quote many times over.

Or tell us why you need a 'high energy scientist' to tell if ice is melting. You danced around that point in true nutbar fashion. [/B]

Because he promised he would.

That's the point. If he had never made the promise in the first place, I wouldn't make a deal about it.

The fact is, he promised that he would get experts to conduct the test, he then weaseled out of it, and blamed everyone else for his lies.

 

[apoger]

Given. I note your only answer is to deny the facts.

What facts?

It would seem that the only "fact" of any relevance is that you seem to feel that the JREF has been unfair in denying the claimants request for a "high energy" scientist.

We have asked you repeatedly why such a request should be honored, and your only reply has been to assert the unfairness of the situation.

I'm sorry, but "Boo Hoo Hoo, Randi is unfair" is hardly an argument. In order to get any respect you will have to explain why Randi is unfair. Unless you can explain why a "high energy" scientist is needed, or can produce a promise from Randi that he would use a "high energy" scientist, you have nothing.

 

[Peter Morris]

What facts?
.

FACT #1 Randi said "we call upon proper academic and scientific expertise to advise us and/or actually conduct the tests."

FACT #2 A guy applied for the test, and asked Randi for a scientific expert to design and conduct the test.

FACT #3 Randi refused to honour his promise.


Why is it unreasonable to ask for the test to be performed by a scientist?

What motive did Randi have for refusing the request?

You need to answer these questuions.

Screaming "this test is simple" doesn't cut it. Randi made a promise. He broke it. That's his doing, and nobody else's fault. A broken promise is a broken promise, however you twist it.

Randi is a liar.

 

[Tricky]

FACT #1 Randi said "we call upon proper academic and scientific expertise to advise us and/or actually conduct the tests."

The word you apparently missed is "proper". That would mean that the academic and scientific expertise that they called upon would be relevant to the test.

FACT #2 A guy applied for the test, and asked Randi for a scientific expert to design and conduct the test.

Could he also ask for a paleontologist? A biochemist? Does the applicant have the right to ask for any kind of scientist they like regardless of whether or not their expertise is germane to what is being tested?

FACT #3 Randi refused to honour his promise.


Why is it unreasonable to ask for the test to be performed by a scientist?

Because the scientist he requested would not be able to provide any information relevant to the test. Perhaps if he had asked for a hydrologist...

What motive did Randi have for refusing the request?

To not waste his time looking for a scientist or the scientist's time observing a test in which he could have no input.

You need to answer these questuions.

They are answered.

Screaming "this test is simple" doesn't cut it. Randi made a promise. He broke it. That's his doing, and nobody else's fault. A broken promise is a broken promise, however you twist it.

No promise was made that says Randi must invite whoever the applicant requests. That is not what the rules say, no matter how you try to twist them.

Randi is a liar.

Did that feel good?

 

[Vikram]

The constant pigheadedness and illogical vitriol with which Peter Morris continues to table-thump over an issue that many have tried to logically explain to him and which he just refuses to understand make me wonder whether he has some major beef with the jref...