Cloud Busting

[RandFan]

as it is our contention (as well as that of the scientific community as a whole, with little dissent) that clouds will move, disperse and dissipate of their own accord, regardless of the efforts of the terra-bound.

I don't understand this response. What paranormal claim would this response not be applicable to?

It seems to me that perhaps a test could not be constructed to verify such a claim. Obviously the folks at JREF are familiar with the problems inherent in such tests and it is likely I don't understand those problems.

However the answer that the claim is counter to the understanding of the scientific community seems odd since all paranormal claims are. Unless I'm missing something.

 

[Antiquehunter]

Disclaimer - my own opinion ONLY:

If someone believes they are able to influence the actions of inanimate objects ie clouds - why is their ability limited only to clouds? Since they're pretty hard to test and tend to move / dissipate on their own accord, a claimant who has this ability should be willing to test on something more tangible.

Eg - I saw a claim a while ago from a guy who says he can influence streetlamps. Cool - lets see that one at work. Why not have a 'cloud-buster' test on something less transient.

 

[RandFan]

Disclaimer - my own opinion ONLY:

If someone believes they are able to influence the actions of inanimate objects ie clouds - why is their ability limited only to clouds? Since they're pretty hard to test and tend to move / dissipate on their own accord, a claimant who has this ability should be willing to test on something more tangible.

Eg - I saw a claim a while ago from a guy who says he can influence streetlamps. Cool - lets see that one at work. Why not have a 'cloud-buster' test on something less transient.

I can't argue with this logic. I think Randi wrote about the street light effect. Still doesn't deal with the response but I agree with you. What is it that people can't think critically. If you can move clouds with your mind then why can't you move cotton balls with your mind?

 

[Robaato]

I believe Randi wrote of a cloudbusting test in Flim-Flam! If I recall correctly, they set up a video camera to record a portion of sky over a period of time, and had the cloudbuster do his thing with whatever cloud he chose. They then showed the videotape to a third party, and had them pick out the cloud that was "busted." (The claimant did not pass, of course.)

 

[Jyera]

I can't argue with this logic. I think Randi wrote about the street light effect. Still doesn't deal with the response but I agree with you. What is it that people can't think critically. If you can move clouds with your mind then why can't you move cotton balls with your mind?

To make the above logical presumption requires you to accept the premise that "the cloudbuster has ability to move any object with the mind". This would put you temporarily into a believer mode. Not very objective.

If we give them the benefit of the doubt, perhaps, we can explain that they are unable to control their power to perform other task.

Let say a person claimed he is able to move your metal key without touching it. Would it be fair for us to insist that he should be able to conclude that he is able to move cotton balls without touching? And if he tried on cotton balls, and it didn't work. Do we expect him to reject the "apparent" demostratable effect on metal key? I think no.

The hidden science here might be magnetic forces which work only on metal. But what is the hidden science behind cloud busting?
I doubt the cloud-buster knows the science of how his ability works.
(if there is indeed an ability, and not a mere delusion)

When you think that you might have certain ability, previously unknown even to yourself, what do you do? You'd try to find how to control it.
And a logical first step would be to attempt to duplicate the phenomenon and situation that makes it worked.

 

[vbloke]

Perhaps a middle ground to this problem would be to get the applicant to dissipate a cloud formed in a cloud chamber, where the cloud can be generated and controlled.

 

[Antiquehunter]

If, Jyera, you feel I'm making too broad an assumption, then would you agree that if someone says they can influence a cloud, that they are saying they can move water vapour / ice particles? If so, they should be able to influence steam, or snow - no?

Clouds may contain dust particles and impurities as well. Are you suggesting that only certain TYPES of clouds containing certain types of impurities may be influenceable?

Perhaps the paranormal power required to influence clouds is different than the paranormal power required to move a cotton ball or key - I wouldn't know. However the root of the problem must be to find something more testable - move some snow across the room without touching it or blowing on it etc...

 

[Jyera]

If, Jyera, you feel I'm making too broad an assumption, then would you agree that if someone says they can influence a cloud, that they are saying they can move water vapour / ice particles? If so, they should be able to influence steam, or snow - no?

Sounds logical. And if the claimant agrees so.

Clouds may contain dust particles and impurities as well. Are you suggesting that only certain TYPES of clouds containing certain types of impurities may be influenceable? ...

No.

Perhaps the paranormal power required to influence clouds is different than the paranormal power required to move a cotton ball or key - I wouldn't know. However the root of the problem must be to find something more testable - move some snow across the room without touching it or blowing on it etc...

This isn't cloud busting. And will contribute in no way to convincing a cloudbuster of his delusion. But it's a good way to lure the cloud buster to fall into his own trap of over promising his ability.

I would say it is very easy to derive a test. Set a very high standard for cloud busting. Worthy cloudbuster, must be able to sculpt the clouds into shapes required by the tester within X minutes. He must succeed in doing it all the time, everytime. Eg. make 10 square clouds.

Too tough? The cloud buster will be reminded that there are countless people with very weak ability to affect clouds. Me for example, have extremely weak ability (=zero) to disperse cloud. But nevertheless I do. .

Observers of the JREF challenge will want claimant with insignificant ability to fail. Those with ability will have to be significant and clear cut success. It is not a $1 JREF challenge. It is 1 million.

If a person truely have ability and have been wrongfully denied. I trust the JREF testers are people of integrity, and will allow the chance to try again.

I expect a worthy JREF challenge winner to be able to contribute towards imparting his skill/ability to the others successfully.

 

[ChristineR]

You are all making it too complicated. If someone could cause a cloud to move to the left, overall, over a period of say, a minute, and then move to the right overall for the next minute, and repeat that pattern ten times, I'd say that qualifies. That clearly establishes that the claiment is influencing the cloud, and doesn't require a cloud chamber, or to distinguish between steam and dust, or to argue that it should work with cotton balls.

Once the guy has his million dollars, THEN someone can explain why it doesn't work with cotton balls.

 

[Hitch]

I think you're missing the real claim that these people have. If one came forward claiming to be able to shape clouds into a recognizable form in a specific period of time or move contrary to prevailing winds, the JREF might make one of their not-unheard-of exceptions to their own rules. But since the claim is that the "cloud busters" can either cause clouds to nearly accumulate or dissipate over a very vague time frame, the claim is untestable and will always be rejected.

Keep in mind, the Prophet Yahweh's claim was outside the normal parameters of the challenge, but they were willing to test him.

 

[Godmode]

If a person could move a cloud against the wind, opposite of the way all the other clouds are moving, that might be impressive. But you'd still have to check to be sure there wasn't some freaky air stream causing it.

 

[petre]

Think of cloud busting claims like so:

Dear JREF,

I have the ability to affect coin flips with my mind. I will demonstrate that with repeated coin flips, I can cause many of them (usually around HALF!!!!) to come up heads. I propose a test where we do coin flips over and over, and when half of them come up heads you give me $1 million, ok?

 

[RandFan]

To make the above logical presumption requires you to accept the premise that "the cloudbuster has ability to move any object with the mind". This would put you temporarily into a believer mode. Not very objective.

No.

One can ask a valid hypothetical to solve problems without believing in that hypothetical. In his famous thought experiment Einstein posited "if I could ride a beam of light". By your logic Einstein temporarily believed he could ride a beam of light. By your logic Einstein was not very objective.

When I observe the natural world I seek prosaic answers to why things work. I don't dismiss something just because it is paranormal. While I don't believe in the paranormal I'm willing to be shown wrong. In order to consider paranormal claims one must be able to ask hypothetical questions where one assumes for the sake of argument the validity of paranormal claims.

A popular and valid hypothetical: If the moon where made of green cheese it would be edible. It is logically possible to consider this valid hypothetical without actually believing that the moon is made of green cheese.

That is both logical and objective.

 

[Hitch]

If a person could move a cloud against the wind, opposite of the way all the other clouds are moving, that might be impressive. But you'd still have to check to be sure there wasn't some freaky air stream causing it.

True, that's why you make it a specific "impossible" task.

Instead of, "If we stare at these clouds long enough, one of them will exhibit anomalous movement." You say something like, "The clouds are currently moving northwest to southeast. Within the next five minutes, make one change direction to south to north for about a minute, then turn approximately 90 degrees and move east to west. All of this while the surrounding clouds continue their currently observed movement."

If someone could do that.... well, we might have to start working on a test protocol.

Or maybe not: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=50354

 

[sf108]

If a person could move a cloud against the wind, opposite of the way all the other clouds are moving, that might be impressive. But you'd still have to check to be sure there wasn't some freaky air stream causing it.

I've actually witnessed clouds moving in opposite directions. Looked real freaky to me. Maybe due to their different layers ie. stratosphere vs whatever sphere the other clouds are.

 

[RandFan]

I've actually witnessed clouds moving in opposite directions. Looked real freaky to me. Maybe due to their different layers ie. stratosphere vs whatever sphere the other clouds are.

Absolutely. I can see the rockets launched from Vandenberg airforce base. The trails they leave are sometimes pretty straight and sometimes scrambled in all different dirrections depending on the air currents.

 

[Jyera]

RandFan,

If the cloudbuster's claim is "I am a cloudbuster, and I can bust clouds".
To presume the cloudbuster can move cottonballs, you would have significantly modified the cloudbuster's claim.
Unless the even if the claimant agrees, he may blame you when he fails.

 

[RandFan]

RandFan,

If the cloudbuster's claim is "I am a cloudbuster, and I can bust clouds".
To presume the cloudbuster can move cottonballs, you would have significantly modified the cloudbuster's claim.
Unless the even if the claimant agrees, he may blame you when he fails.

Your missing my point.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that for whatever reason I came to believe that I could move clouds with my mind. Now, me being me, I would not be content to leave it at that. I would then have to ask myself "what else I could move with my mind?". I would experiment. I would try cotton balls, puffs of smoke, coffee mugs, etc. If I failed at all of those things I would have to wonder if my original belief might not simply be a delusion. I would seek out a more prosaic explanation for my observation.

That's objectivity. A person who lacks critical thinking would settle on his original belief without investigation. Noises at night become ghosts. Lights in the sky become UFOs. Movements in the water become monsters.

My point is that people who lack critical thinking are incapable of asking questions to test their beliefs. Hence, cotton balls.

 

[Jyera]

Your missing my point.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that for whatever reason I came to believe that I could move clouds with my mind.
Now, me being me, I would not be content to leave it at that. I would then have to ask myself "what else I could move with my mind?". I would experiment. I would try cotton balls, puffs of smoke, coffee mugs, etc. If I failed at all of those things I would have to wonder if my original belief might not simply be a delusion. I would seek out a more prosaic explanation for my observation.

That's objectivity. A person who lacks critical thinking would settle on his original belief without investigation. Noises at night become ghosts. Lights in the sky become UFOs. Movements in the water become monsters.

My point is that people who lack critical thinking are incapable of asking questions to test their beliefs. Hence, cotton balls.

My dear friend RandFan, I'm fine with encouraging critical thinking.
And I trust you to be objective.

But a claimant is just a claimant, there is no mandatory requirement to expect them to possess critical thinking skill all the time.

And if we try to force them to accept that, "because he cannot move cotton ball(etc) with his mind, therefore he cannot move cloud with his mind." I think they will think we are science-fundie trying to force our own views into their mind. We are in a million dollar challenge thread, not a science thread.

It is more important to honour their claim than to assert any claim-distorting logic.

 

[RandFan]

My dear friend RandFan, I'm fine with encouraging critical thinking.
And I trust you to be objective.

But a claimant is just a claimant, there is no mandatory requirement to expect them to possess critical thinking skill all the time.

And if we try to force them to accept that, "because he cannot move cotton ball(etc) with his mind, therefore he cannot move cloud with his mind." I think they will think we are science-fundie trying to force our own views into their mind. We are in a million dollar challenge thread, not a science thread.

My friend. You are still missing my point. My post that started this was just an observation. It was not a request that we force them to do anything. In any event I find your response silly. I don't see any rules that would obviate me making an observation about fundies.

If you have a problem with my posts then I would suggest that you notify a moderator. I'm not going to cease making observations because this isn't a science thread.

It is more important to honour their claim than to assert any claim-distorting logic.

Yeah, we wouldn't want logic asserted. Good point. ?