Would you play a hand of poker in a game that you knew was rigged?None of them have taken the challenge. So how could any of them have been cheated?
Thanz
Fuzzy Thinker
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2002
- Messages
- 3,895
Really? Why do you think so?
I thinkt he challenge is designed to be fair to the applicant, but I wouldn't say it was rigged in their favour.
If one considers that "all the applicant has to do is only what they claim they are able to do" as rigged in their favor, I would have a hard time arguing against that.
Really, this is pretty much like:
Applicant: I can jump over a 5ft obstacle.
JREF: prove it, here is a 5ft obstacle (and then the JREF only ensures that the obstacle is in fact 5 ft).
Applicant: Jumps over obstacle.
When you get to name your own talent, all you have to be able do is perform. That is rigged as greatly in favor of the applicant as is possible, short of just taking their word for it.
Really, this is pretty much like:
Applicant: I can jump over a 5ft obstacle.
JREF: prove it, here is a 5ft obstacle (and then the JREF only ensures that the obstacle is in fact 5 ft).
Applicant: Jumps over obstacle.
When you get to name your own talent, all you have to be able do is perform. That is rigged as greatly in favor of the applicant as is possible, short of just taking their word for it.
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
I did some research on the MDC. More to the point, research on three points.
Have you heard of the MDC? (yes/no/huh?)
What do you know about it? (if they answered yes)
Do you believe Randi will pay up? (if they knew about the challenge)
Try it yourself. Ask everybody you can in the next week. (Be prepared for some strange looks)
Have you heard of the MDC? (yes/no/huh?)
What do you know about it? (if they answered yes)
Do you believe Randi will pay up? (if they knew about the challenge)
Try it yourself. Ask everybody you can in the next week. (Be prepared for some strange looks)
Well, that's the point of controversy.
I believe the actual claim is that Randi -- usually not the foundation, but Randi himself -- cheats. He manages to use some form of sleight of hand to switch rulers, so that the obstacle measured at 5ft tall is really 8ft. If you think about how a three-card monte artist can put the queen anywhere he wants, and make sure you can't win--- why can't Randi put the water the dowsers are looking for anywhere he wants?
Of course, in theory the controls should prevent that. But they all "know" that Randi wouldn't accept a protocol unless he knew there was a loophole in it that he could exploit.
There is another issue. Not a popular one I'm sure. The perception that paranormal abilities are somewhat like extraordinary ones. And should be tested the same.
I'm not trying to argue, I'm making a point about peoples perceptions of the MDC.
Applicant: I can play Golf better than anyone else.
JREF: Prove it!
Applicant: How?
JREF: You tell us, you made the claim.
Applicant: Pick any course, any time, anywhere, and I will either win, or be in the top 10.
JREF: THAT NOT GOOD ENOUGH. You have to come in first 8 out of 10 times.
Applicant: Then I get a million dollars?
JREF: Yes, if you do it under proper viewing conditions.
Applicant: But, if I could do that I wouldn't need a million dollars!
JREF: You are afraid to take the challenge.
Applicant: Uh, no. Just doing what I claimed, I already made $65,712,324*. But good luck getting anyone to try your thing.
JREF: Another phony exposed!
*(Tiger Woods earnings so far)
I'm not trying to argue, I'm making a point about peoples perceptions of the MDC.
Applicant: I can play Golf better than anyone else.
JREF: Prove it!
Applicant: How?
JREF: You tell us, you made the claim.
Applicant: Pick any course, any time, anywhere, and I will either win, or be in the top 10.
JREF: THAT NOT GOOD ENOUGH. You have to come in first 8 out of 10 times.
Applicant: Then I get a million dollars?
JREF: Yes, if you do it under proper viewing conditions.
Applicant: But, if I could do that I wouldn't need a million dollars!
JREF: You are afraid to take the challenge.
Applicant: Uh, no. Just doing what I claimed, I already made $65,712,324*. But good luck getting anyone to try your thing.
JREF: Another phony exposed!
*(Tiger Woods earnings so far)
I don't think paranormal powers could be described as extraordinary powers. There are too many people who are extraordinarily good at things, so being extraordinary at something is not paranormal. It's normal for some people to be extraordinary.
I don't think the JREF would say that. They'd probably say, "I'm sorry, your powers aren't paranormal, you're just very good at golf, so go make money playing golf, you won't need the million".
First, the JREF would not demand that the applicant come in first place 8 out of 10 times, as that is not what the applicant is claiming to be able to do.
Second, even "extraordinary" paranormal abilities can be tested. If playing golf well were a paranormal ability, there is still a way to determine a statistically acceptable number of top ten finishes (which is what the applicant above is claiming).
If this distinction made sense, then I'm sure that it would be wrong.
And, again, if this made sense, I'm sure it would probably be wrong as well.
Ah, but that is the sticking point. The fictional case above was used as an example for just that reason. He claimed to be the best. What is the protocol to determine that? What would the JREF demand as proof?
It certainly is an unbelievable claim. It would take a huge amount of effort and time to prove.
And it is a real ability, not paranormal.
"there is still a way to determine a statistically acceptable number of top ten finishes"
Of course, but it is way beyond the JREF and any individuals power to do so. (This is making a point, remember?)
In regards to something demonstrated as real.
So how could some ability that is far more difficult to test ever be proved, with regards to the MDC?
Big Al
Mage Questor
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2006
- Messages
- 1,125
I have a paranormal ability - a sixth sense that a given applicant will pull out of the JREF Challenge because they can't back up their claims, and will then allege that Randi has rigged it so they can't win.
If you claim you can change doughnuts into diamonds, then just do it! If you can't, then don't whinge when Randi doesn't fork over the cash. Don't moan when he asks to roll up your sleeves and keep both hands in view at the same time. Don't be surprised if he asks to inspect the doughnuts and pass the diamonds for analysis.
After all, would you hand over a million bucks just on someone's say-so?
If you claim you can change doughnuts into diamonds, then just do it! If you can't, then don't whinge when Randi doesn't fork over the cash. Don't moan when he asks to roll up your sleeves and keep both hands in view at the same time. Don't be surprised if he asks to inspect the doughnuts and pass the diamonds for analysis.
After all, would you hand over a million bucks just on someone's say-so?
heh
I used Tiger Woods as an example, because by money standards, as well as statistics, he is the best golfer ever. (so far)
Of course someone will come along and dispute this.
But in regards to the MDC, the point is that some people don't think the MDC is capable of revealing a true paranormal ability.
Two reasons. Both of which have been discussed before. Saying those perceptions don't exist, doesn't make them go away.
The JREF would say that is an untestable claim. End of story.
It's really very simple. The JREF tests what the applicant claims. The JREF does not set a priori standards of proof. If what the applicant claims is untestable, there is nothing more to do. That doesn't mean the applicant is a fake, and the JREF wouldn't claim as much.
That is one of the points. That the JREF does NOT test what is claimed, but sets up another test. (this is true of every other challenge as well). Granted, how else could it be? If some dowser claims he has found an underground source of water that experts insist can not exist, you would have to drill wells to prove him wrong! It would cost as much as the prize money to do the test!
OK, not really. But even if you did drill wells, and even if you did find water, as the dowser predicted, you could still claim there is water everywhere, and insist that isn't proof.
See? I'm not saying this to be difficult. It is a real onbjection people have to the challenge. That it isn't "fair".
Of course the MDC is great for exposing frauds! (I love watching Randi do it as well). The objections are about other stuff.
Oh well, does it matter?
OK, not really. But even if you did drill wells, and even if you did find water, as the dowser predicted, you could still claim there is water everywhere, and insist that isn't proof.
See? I'm not saying this to be difficult. It is a real onbjection people have to the challenge. That it isn't "fair".
Of course the MDC is great for exposing frauds! (I love watching Randi do it as well). The objections are about other stuff.
Oh well, does it matter?
Last edited:
Yes. But his specific claim was : "Pick any course, any time, anywhere, and I will either win, or be in the top 10."
The JREF are very good at making sure they keep within the letter of the claim. However, they're not above demanding a very high level of repetitions.
The JREF would be well-within it's rights to demand that the claimant be in the top ten of fifty prechosen tournaments.
Huh? Of course it isn't. Tiger Woods is an example of a very good, but not paranormally good, golfer. His best run was (I think) 16 top ten finishes out of 21, about an 80% success rate.
If I did my math right, Tiger Woods has about one chance in a thousand going 32-for-32 in terms of top ten finishes, and therefore one chance in a million of going 64-for-64. Using him as a baseline, anyone who can go 64-for-64 is probably paranormally good.
By asking the applicant what they can do -- and then demanding that they do it sufficiently well or often that "random chance" can be ruled out with sufficient confidence.
Gr8wight
red-shirted crewman
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2004
- Messages
- 1,661
I may do this, just for fun. Before I start, allow me to make a prediction. I predict that fewer than 10% of the people I ask will have ever heard of the JREF, and the challenge. I will exempt anyone I know personally as they will have heard about it from me, and only ask complete strangers.
Does this number match your results, robinson?
How are you going to assure that the samples are representative?