Changes To The Challenge

[BillyJoe]

Thaibiguy,

I covered the faking possibility in a subsequent post.
If he can accurately predict the outcome, why fake forcing the outcome. He could simply win the prize by predicting it.

On the other hand, if he is predicting it subconsciously, the outcomes in both cases would be successful, not just in the latter case.

 

[Thabiguy]

I can run a marathon in 3 hours.

Whoa, this marathon analogy is cute! It's even more hilarious if you go all the way with it...

"I can run a marathon in 3 hours. In fact, I know a whole bunch of people who can do it. We run it every year. It's great."
"That's cool! I happen to have a million dollars to give to anyone who can run a marathon in 3 hours. Would you care for some easy cash?"
"You know, I would, but I'm feeling kinda sick today and I'm not wearing the right shoes. But I ran two weeks ago. Is it enough if I just give you a photo of myself holding the winning certificate?"
"Sorry, you see, the deal is that you must actually run it in front of me. But hey, maybe some of your friends can do it? How about you?"
"You know, it's a shame, I haven't slept for 48 hours."
"Too bad. Maybe someone else? You?"
"No way. You don't have a million dollars."
"What are you talking about? It's right here in my suitcase."
"I don't believe you. You're a liar."
"Er, okay... Anyone else, perhaps? How about you? You're a professional athlete, aren't you?"
"Oh yes, I am. That's why I don't need your stinking million. I'm making big bucks, man. Stop bothering me."
"What's wrong with you, guys? Does no-one want a million dollars? How about you, you look poor?"
"Well I would like the million, but the road is rigged, your stopwatch runs too fast and you'll just keep throwing sticks under my legs. But hey, what if you have a panel of judges look at my medals and decide if I deserve the million or not? That sounds fair to me."
"Is there anybody here who can run the damned thing?"
"I, I can do it!"
"Great! Get going!"
... runs for 30 meters, then collapses.
"*wheeze* *wheeze* I'm sorry. I ran yesterday and I'm all exhausted. I can't repeat it right now."
"That's okay... Why don't you go home, practice and rest as needed, and try again when you're ready? You can try as many times as you like."
"That's not fair. I'm telling you I did it yesterday. You should just give me the money."
"But... you didn't do it!"
"I told you, I did it yesterday! But I see... you're just trying to weasel out of it. Even if I did run it, you would just deny it. You're a fraud."
"Come on, guys! This poor fellow is tired, but surely there must be someone who's not tired? You said you do it every year, some of you even get paid for it..."
"Let's go home, this jerk is a fraud. And on top of that, he's insulting us by questioning our honesty."
"Come on! Is there no-one who can do it? Not a single person? Hey! Come back...!"
...
"Well if you find someone, tell them that I'm still waiting here, okay? ... Hello...?"

 

[Cuddles]

Observe: JM simply chooses heads of tails according to what feels right. A sufficiently large trial produces results no better than chance
Observe: JM chooses heads of tails according to what feels right. He then closes his eyes and concentrates on forcing that outcome just before and during the coin toss. A sufficently large trial shows he is successful 90% of the time.

I suppose, in the former case, he could be faking it and be actually picking heads or tails randomly and then do it properly in the latter case so that it all comes down to predicting instead of forcing. But then it wouldn't be an unconscious prediction that he misinterprets as a forcing, it would be deliberate faking. But, if that is the case, why wouldn't he just say he can predict it? It'll win him the prize all the same.

Why would he need to be faking it? He just might not know what he is doing. Maybe he thinks he is forcing it when actually his amazing mental superpowers aren't perfectly understood and the concentrating simply allows him to get the prediction more clearly. It is obvious why he claims forcing rather than prediction - he thinks he can force the world to do what he wants by concentrating on it. He isn't going to say he can predict things because this is not what he thinks he is doing, but this is irrelevant to the test. The simple fact is that if you test whether someone can call a coin toss correctly there is no way of telling if they are causing it or simply predicting it, unless you ensure that the result could only have been caused by them.

In fact, it is very interesting that Jim refuses to do this. No matter what the result of his tests, it seems that he cannot actually influence the outcome. Even if he got 100% accuracy, if he can only do this for a random outcome and not specifically choose a predetermined outcome, such as all heads, it demonstrates is that he knows the answer in advance, but that he can't do anything about it.

 

[Thabiguy]

If he can accurately predict the outcome, why fake forcing the outcome. He could simply win the prize by predicting it.

I'm sorry to say it, BillyJoe, but you're committing a logical fallacy of argument from incredulity.

You proposed your test as a way "to tell the difference between guessing and forcing". Now your argument is that it makes no sense for the subject to fake, therefore we can assume that the subject is not faking. This is a fallacious argument (easily falsified by a subject that is, for example, mentally ill) and applying it to my previous example - why would subject S bother faking it, if he could have simply claimed that he could predict the outcome? - leads once again to the false conclusion that subject S really is forcing the outcomes, not predicting them.

Assuming stuff about the subject's intentions and motives has no place in designing an objective test. What you proposed is not a valid method of differentiating between guessing and forcing.

 

[timokay]

I can run a marathon in 3 hours. Sorry, I can't do it again tomorrow.

Are you claiming this is due to a paranormal ability, if so,why? Why is it not just pure, natural athleticism? Please demonstrate the clearly paranormal aspect so that I can accept what you say. At least once. Somewhere.

Or is it that once, by yourself, you ran a 3 hour marathon. No one ever saw it, and you always knew in your heart that it was due to an angel on your shoulder, which proves angels exist. So while you cannot do it again, or in front of anyone, I still have to accept what you say is true or you will throw a hissyfit. Because angels exist is your premise, and your random experience years ago is your proof.

Oh wait, I will work out a protocol where you run and run and run at home with nobody watching. You will fail time and time again, but I will help you make excuses so that you can validate your premise. Eventually you will find that you cannot actually do it, but that will in no way affect your belief that it is possible, because I have never asked you to challenge the core of your premise. I guess the angel has to be on your other shoulder...oh, that's right. I forgot about that!

In case you still don't get the point....aw, no, you'll just have to read that other post again...
(Have you stopped beating your wife, timokay?)

Uh yeah, I get the point. Let me see....If I doubt that you can predict/influence/wish/mentally predict random events that no one has ever seen, and you can't provide any evidence for whatsoever, and that there is a much more resonable explanation for, but for whatever reason you do not wish to explore, then I have accused you of beating your wife.

Yeah, I got that.

 

[timokay]

Why? Can an artist produce an exceptional painting every time he puts paint to canvas? Why should a paranormal ability be any different from any other ability in this regard?

You might be able to succesfully solve maths problems for homework in the confort of your own home. You might not be able to achieve the same level of success in the austere evironment of an end-of-the-year examination. Why should paranormal abilities be any different?

Carl Lewis might hold the record for the 100 meters, but he hasn't won every race that he has ever entered.

Why do you equate paranormal abilities with normal ones? Plenty of woos claim that that "third eye" is perfectly normal, everybody has one, but only a few of us can use it to pick a card.

I say there is no third eye. Plain and simple. There is no evidence for it, and I am not convinced because there is no evidence. It's not prejudice. I just have no reason to accept it as a truth.

 

[BillyJoe]

Whoa, this marathon analogy is cute! It's even more hilarious if you go all the way with it...

"I can run a marathon in 3 hours. In fact, I know a whole bunch of people who can do it. We run it every year. It's great."
"That's cool! I happen to have a million dollars to give to anyone who can run a marathon in 3 hours. Would you care for some easy cash?"
"You know, I would, but I'm feeling kinda sick today and I'm not wearing the right shoes. But I ran two weeks ago. Is it enough if I just give you a photo of myself holding the winning certificate?"
"Sorry, you see, the deal is that you must actually run it in front of me. But hey, maybe some of your friends can do it? How about you?"
"You know, it's a shame, I haven't slept for 48 hours."
"Too bad. Maybe someone else? You?"
"No way. You don't have a million dollars."
"What are you talking about? It's right here in my suitcase."
"I don't believe you. You're a liar."
"Er, okay... Anyone else, perhaps? How about you? You're a professional athlete, aren't you?"
"Oh yes, I am. That's why I don't need your stinking million. I'm making big bucks, man. Stop bothering me."
"What's wrong with you, guys? Does no-one want a million dollars? How about you, you look poor?"
"Well I would like the million, but the road is rigged, your stopwatch runs too fast and you'll just keep throwing sticks under my legs. But hey, what if you have a panel of judges look at my medals and decide if I deserve the million or not? That sounds fair to me."
"Is there anybody here who can run the damned thing?"
"I, I can do it!"
"Great! Get going!"
... runs for 30 meters, then collapses.
"*wheeze* *wheeze* I'm sorry. I ran yesterday and I'm all exhausted. I can't repeat it right now."
"That's okay... Why don't you go home, practice and rest as needed, and try again when you're ready? You can try as many times as you like."
"That's not fair. I'm telling you I did it yesterday. You should just give me the money."
"But... you didn't do it!"
"I told you, I did it yesterday! But I see... you're just trying to weasel out of it. Even if I did run it, you would just deny it. You're a fraud."
"Come on, guys! This poor fellow is tired, but surely there must be someone who's not tired? You said you do it every year, some of you even get paid for it..."
"Let's go home, this jerk is a fraud. And on top of that, he's insulting us by questioning our honesty."
"Come on! Is there no-one who can do it? Not a single person? Hey! Come back...!"
...
"Well if you find someone, tell them that I'm still waiting here, okay? ... Hello...?"

Very funny, Thaibiguy.

Unfortunately, apart from the padding in your story, it is true.
Yes, I'm sorry, life's like that. Isn't it a bitch. Much nicer and simpler if it were so less complicated.

The fact is that Marathon running is an art and a science that interacts with the realities of life's circumstances, chance and opportunity. If you're good enough to be able to just manage a marathon in three hours, if you have this ability, you are simply not able to run it every day, or even at short notice, or even at a time of your choosing. Marathon running is very difficult. Most marathon runners peak once, or maybe twice, a year. And everything must go right, from family and work issues, to general health and avoidance of infections to correct training schedules that avoid over and under training at any particular point of the accelerating schedule. And the conditions on the day could spoil the whole thing.

Bummer hey.

regards,
BillyJoe

 

[BillyJoe]

I'm sorry to say it, BillyJoe, but you're committing a logical fallacy of argument from incredulity.

You proposed your test as a way "to tell the difference between guessing and forcing". Now your argument is that it makes no sense for the subject to fake, therefore we can assume that the subject is not faking. This is a fallacious argument (easily falsified by a subject that is, for example, mentally ill) and applying it to my previous example - why would subject S bother faking it, if he could have simply claimed that he could predict the outcome? - leads once again to the false conclusion that subject S really is forcing the outcomes, not predicting them.

Assuming stuff about the subject's intentions and motives has no place in designing an objective test. What you proposed is not a valid method of differentiating between guessing and forcing.

Okay, I will have to concede this point....

If the subject has the ability to predict the outcomes, but not the ability to force the outcomes and, if the subject is able to switch from predicting the outcomes to just choosing them randomly, then he could choose randomly in the former scenario, and use his ability to predict in the latter scenario. The reason for doing so would be to fake forcing the outcome of the coin toss. The motivation to do so would be that forcing the outcomes is a more impressive ability than merely predicting it.

Hmmm...

I still wonder, though, why he would bother if he is going for the million dollars. Just predicting is enough to win it. I suppose what you're saying is that he may actually believe he has the ability to force the outcomes. In this case the faking that occurs in the former scenario would have to be subconscious. In fact, he would have to be choosing randomly while believing he is trying to predict the outcome (going by what he feels will be the outcome), even whilst believing he cannot predict the outcome. I have to concede that this is possible, if not complicated.

Hmmm.

 

[Rasmus]

There is no evidence for it, and I am not convinced because there is no evidence. It's not prejudice. I just have no reason to accept it as a truth.

We do fully agree that there is nothing paranormal going on.

But that, nor any amount of lame excuses - and I fully agree that what we get here are mostly that or rationalisations at best - make the case that a paranormal ability should be working any more reliably than any other ability.

 

[timokay]

We do fully agree that there is nothing paranormal going on.

But that, nor any amount of lame excuses - and I fully agree that what we get here are mostly that or rationalisations at best - make the case that a paranormal ability should be working any more reliably than any other ability.

Sure, but only if you have evidence that the ability exists at all.

 

[BillyJoe]

Why would he need to be faking it? He just might not know what he is doing. Maybe he thinks he is forcing it when actually his amazing mental superpowers aren't perfectly understood and the concentrating simply allows him to get the prediction more clearly.

That can't be the explanation because he first chooses heads or tails (according to what feels right). If he is predicting the outcome, it's all done right there. Only then does he start concentrating on getting that outcome, so the concentrating cannot be part of predicting the outcome.

It is obvious why he claims forcing rather than prediction - he thinks he can force the world to do what he wants by concentrating on it.

He claims he forces the outcome simply because that's the way it feels to him. He wants to go home first. The table the teacher goes to first goes home first. He concentrates on getting the teacher to come to his table first. The teacher does come to his table first time and time again. Seems logical to him that he forces this to happen.

He isn't going to say he can predict things because this is not what he thinks he is doing...

And until shown otherwise it seems logical for him to think that that's what he is doing. He wants to go home first. The teacher goes to each table in turn. He concentrates on getting her to come to his table first. She starts coming to his table first. It is logical to think that he "forced" her to do so.

...but this is irrelevant to the test. The simple fact is that if you test whether someone can call a coin toss correctly there is no way of telling if they are causing it or simply predicting it, unless you ensure that the result could only have been caused by them.

I have already answered this, in the general case, in reply to thabiguy, so I will now reply in the specific case of JM. I am inclined to take JM at face value. By this I mean that I do not think he is faking it. If you think JM is merely predicting, then the following must apply. First of all, the prediction must be happening when he chooses heads or tails. He says he gets a feeling for what he should go for. It doesn't work if someone else picks for him. So, this feeling about whether he should go for heads or tails could actually be a prediction about the outcome. However, this would mean that concentrating on getting that outcome should make no difference at all. So, if we alternate a trial where he chooses+concentrates with a trial where he only chooses, it should make no difference if he is merely predicting the outcome but, if he is forcing the outcome, he would succeed when he chooses+concentrates and fail when he merely chooses.

In fact, it is very interesting that Jim refuses to do this. No matter what the result of his tests, it seems that he cannot actually influence the outcome. Even if he got 100% accuracy, if he can only do this for a random outcome and not specifically choose a predetermined outcome, such as all heads, it demonstrates is that he knows the answer in advance, but that he can't do anything about it.

I do see the problem here and I was hoping he could get all heads. However, even if you think we cannot distinguish between predicting and forcing in this case - although I would be interested in your comments about the above method of differentiating them - you cannot exclude that possibility either.

 

[Cuddles]

I have already answered this, in the general case, in reply to thabiguy, so I will now reply in the specific case of JM. I am inclined to take JM at face value. By this I mean that I do not think he is faking it. If you think JM is merely predicting, then the following must apply. First of all, the prediction must be happening when he chooses heads or tails. He says he gets a feeling for what he should go for. It doesn't work if someone else picks for him. So, this feeling about whether he should go for heads or tails could actually be a prediction about the outcome. However, this would mean that concentrating on getting that outcome should make no difference at all. So, if we alternate a trial where he chooses+concentrates with a trial where he only chooses, it should make no difference if he is merely predicting the outcome but, if he is forcing the outcome, he would succeed when he chooses+concentrates and fail when he merely chooses.

I think this would work. Of course, this would only be relevant if he can actually demonstrate he can do anything in the first palce. Could be interesting for a follow up if he wins the million.

 

[BillyJoe]

timokay,

You have now misread two things I have said, one of them repeatedly.
I will try one last time to explain both.
After that it's up to you.

JM has made a claim.
We are trying to set up a trial to see if his claim is true
In other words, it has not yet been proven whether his claim is true or false.
Nevertheless, you already assume, even before the trial has been set up that his claim is false.
You compound that error by asking JM questions which assume that his claim is false and expect him to answer them.
That is an insult.

The second is to do with my marathon analogy.
I am clearly not claiming marathon running is a paranormal event.
I am saying that the outcome of a normal event, such as me running a marathon in three hours, can depend on a whole lot of variables other than just my ability to run a marathon in 3 hours.
Likewise, a paranormal event, like JM forcing the outcome of a coin toss, can depend on a whole lot of variables other than just his ability to force a coin toss.

Yeah, I got that.

Here's hoping.

 

[BillyJoe]

We do fully agree that there is nothing paranormal going on.

Well that's different, then, if you AGREE....sorry, FULLY AGREE.

...and I fully agree that what we get here are mostly that or rationalisations at best...

What we get here is an unwillingness to actually test a claim before making pronouncements about it.

But that [does not] make the case that a paranormal ability should be working any more reliably than any other ability.

I fully agree.

 

[Dan O.]

First of all, the prediction must be happening when he chooses heads or tails. He says he gets a feeling for what he should go for. It doesn't work if someone else picks for him. So, this feeling about whether he should go for heads or tails could actually be a prediction about the outcome. However, this would mean that concentrating on getting that outcome should make no difference at all.

You are jumping to a conclusion about how predictions work. From what I know about time machines (ie: prediction devices) you need to maintain quantum coherence within the device from the time the prediction is generated until the event occurs and is fed into the device [assuming first that Stephen Hawking's "Chronology Protection" conjecture can be overcome].(superfluous delegation to authority to support an otherwise preposterous sounding idea)

If JM is making a prediction, his concentrating on the event may be necessary to maintain coherence and cause the prediction to come true. So it may not be possible to separate the prediction from the causation.

 

[robinson]

So, have there been any changes to the challenge?

 

[Reager]

So, have there been any changes to the challenge?

I assume you are being facetious, again....why?

 

[Dan O.]

So, have there been any changes to the challenge?

Are you trying to point out that this thread has drifted off topic? Maybe if Jim_Mich is still reading here he could ask the moderator to split the thread from his first post excluding the handful of posts that followed the original topic. I think the split is somewhere back on page 8 or 11.

I would like to here more about the changes and their ramifications. In a month or so this will become a hot topic again.

 

[timokay]

timokay,

You have now misread two things I have said, one of them repeatedly.
I will try one last time to explain both.
After that it's up to you.

I have misread nothing, you are simply ignoring my points, and repeating yourself instead of addressing my points. You see, I have one as well, you just do not wish to address it. Maybe I should post a little smiley, or tell you that you have not read the thread. That might help.

JM has made a claim.
We are trying to set up a trial to see if his claim is true
In other words, it has not yet been proven whether his claim is true or false.
Nevertheless, you already assume, even before the trial has been set up that his claim is false.
You compound that error by asking JM questions which assume that his claim is false and expect him to answer them.
That is an insult.

You are being deliberately obtuse here. You are designing a protocol for an ability that has not even been defined. Then you have altered the protocol, and you have even tried it yourself. It demonstrates nothing, because Jim never even once said that over the years, he has found that when flipping coins, his choice often go the way he intends. You just picked it out of a hat. Why not address the claims he actually made? I attempted to do this and evidently, you decided, not Jim, that addressing the statements he made that define his ability is the same as insulting. I clearly disagree, but you still insists that it is an insult.
This, btw, put Jim on the defensive, and now the subject is not even up for debate. Nice job there.

The second is to do with my marathon analogy.
I am clearly not claiming marathon running is a paranormal event.
I am saying that the outcome of a normal event, such as me running a marathon in three hours, can depend on a whole lot of variables other than just my ability to run a marathon in 3 hours.
Likewise, a paranormal event, like JM forcing the outcome of a coin toss, can depend on a whole lot of variables other than just his ability to force a coin toss.

Well, gee, I guess you have to go back and read my posts, because you do not address the point I have clearly made, which you choose to ignore.

Here, read slowly.

If you claim your ability is paranormal, then what is your evidence that this is the case? Let's discuss the actual events that you found so significant that you have come to the conclusion that you have demonstrated the paranormal?

Here's hoping.

You don't have to hope. I am a patient man. I will continue to explain it to you until you understand.

 

[timokay]

Are you trying to point out that this thread has drifted off topic? Maybe if Jim_Mich is still reading here he could ask the moderator to split the thread from his first post excluding the handful of posts that followed the original topic. I think the split is somewhere back on page 8 or 11.

I would like to here more about the changes and their ramifications. In a month or so this will become a hot topic again.

I think that is a capital idea. I apologize for my part in the derailment.