David Koenig MDC challenge treated unfairly?

[The_Animus]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122607

I was reading over the correspondence between Koenig and Remie and this was the first time I've ever read a challenge that seemed to be rejected unfairly.

The purpose of the MDC is to show proof that some paranormal event is occurring. Koenig offers to record clear and intelligible conversation with an entity which is not a living human being.

He states:

Please be advised that I am NOT talking about some squeaky little background noise. The "Voices' will be extremely audible and recognizable as to the content of their message.

I. David Koenig. will contact a Paranormal Entity and communicate with it in an intelligent and understandable manner. Reasonable questions will be asked and answered.

He also states that he will allow the JREF to do whatever they feel is necessary to prevent cheating. They can inspect the area as well as him for any devices. They can bring in any audio experts they want to search the area or look for ways of cheating. Whatever the JREF wants.

Despite this the challenge is denied because:

You have yet to illustrate how this test will be objective and quantifiable.

If there is distinct and obvious human language being used to talk and answer questions and this is not being done by a living human being and not by some hidden electronic device how does that not fit the category of supernatural? Whether you want to call it a ghost or entity or not doesn't mean a damn thing. If human language is being recorded and conversed with and it is not from a living person or from an electronic device then there is no natural explanation for its occurrence and is thus supernatural.

Like I said I respect the JREF and have always found their protocol for the challenges to be fair. In this case though it seems to me that either they are being unfair or are providing a very poor explanation as to why this is not considered objective enough.

If someone feels they understand this position, further explanation would be most helpful.

 

[paximperium]

Again, no matter what is captured it is a subjective interpretation - and I don't mean just because of what the "paranormal entity's voice" says, but also because whether or not it is paranormal in the first place is up for subjective interpretation.

This is simply not how Challenge tests are conducted.

I am asking you to, once more, please clarify how this test could ever be objective in any way. And if you are again unsuccessful, then I see no reason to leave your Challenge file open.

Seems pretty straightforward to me.
The issue is that there is no objective way to determine if what is being recorded is a real voice vs. background noise since any noise is subject to interpretation.

 

[CFLarsen]

I can easily prove that "entities" from beyond talk to me.

Especially if I get to choose the site, the time, the recording device, and get to ask the questions.

Where are the controls in that?

 

[GzuzKryzt]

...
If there is distinct and obvious human language being used to talk and answer questions and this is not being done by a living human being and not by some hidden electronic device how does that not fit the category of supernatural?
...

If there is no protocol proposal which ensures falsifiability and describes a proper success/failure scenario, how does the need for a discussion of fairness arise?

As far as I can see - application being accepted, RemieV removed, Jeff Wagg handling the matter personally plus The Professor is given looots of leeway regarding his forum manners - the JREF would accept a protocol proposal which allows for a controlled test to take place. Fair enough, The_Animus?

 

[Azrael 5]

The_Animus were he serious about taking the challenge we wouldnt have 37 pages and numerous threads professing(no pun intended)his genuine desire etc.We would have what every other applicant has,one thread with genuine intent.

 

[Pogo]

My understanding is that his claim has been accepted but he has, so far, not submitted an acceptable protocol by which his claim can be tested. Is this not the case?

 

[Azrael 5]

My understanding is that his claim has been accepted but he has, so far, not submitted an acceptable protocol by which his claim can be tested. Is this not the case?

You understand correctly Pogo.

 

[Pantaz]

I was reading over the correspondence between Koenig and Remie and this was the first time I've ever read a challenge that seemed to be rejected unfairly.

What makes you believe his application has been rejected?
The latest official mention of David Koenig's MDC challenge application is here:

I have not heard from The Professor since before Halloween.

In previous cases*, if an applicant fails to maintain contact with the MDC administrator, then the application is closed and the person must wait one year before reapplying. But, according to the latest publicly posted information, Mr. Koenig's application remains active.

* See the "Challenge Applications" subforum.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

What makes you believe his application has been rejected?
The latest official mention of David Koenig's MDC challenge application is here:


In previous cases*, if an applicant fails to maintain contact with the MDC administrator, then the application is closed and the person must wait one year before reapplying. But, according to the latest publicly posted information, Mr. Koenig's application remains active.

In light of this information, I have taken the liberty of fixing the OP:

I was reading over the correspondence between Koenig and Remie and this was the first time I've ever read a challenge that seemed to be rejected kept active unfairly.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

In light of this information, I have taken the liberty of fixing the OP:

The JREF. Alive and kicking their own rules for the sake of accepting one more applicant.

"All around me are familiar faces
Worn out places, worn out faces
Bright and early for their daily races
Going nowhere, going nowhere

Their tears are filling up their glasses
No expression, no expression
Hide my head I want to drown my sorrow
No tomorrow, no tomorrow

And I find it kind of funny
I find it kind of sad
The dreams in which I'm dying
Are the best I've ever had
I find it hard to tell you
I find it hard to take

When people run in circles
It's a very, very
Mad World

Children waiting for the day they feel good
Happy Birthday, Happy Birthday
Made to feel the way that every child should
Sit and listen, sit and listen

Went to school and I was very nervous
No one knew me, no one knew me
Hello teacher tell me what's my lesson
Look right through me, look right through me."

Tears for professors , um, Fears, "Mad World".

 

[fromdownunder]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122607

I was reading over the correspondence between Koenig and Remie and this was the first time I've ever read a challenge that seemed to be rejected unfairly.

The purpose of the MDC is to show proof that some paranormal event is occurring. Koenig offers to record clear and intelligible conversation with an entity which is not a living human being.

If you have a few hours to spare, and read through the challenge thread on the Forum, he seems to have totally backed away from the earler claim that he will be having a "clear and intelligible conversation with an entity which is not a living human being", and has absolutely refused to discuss the idea of asking questions unknown to him before the event.

In fact it is no longer clear what he is claiming, if it ever was.

Sorry if this post is steering too close to discussing the protocol that TP has NOT disclosed. I will refrain from further comment.

Norm

 

[rjh01]

To see how serious this application is read the posts made by The Professor who is the applicant. Also go to the magic cafe (where the applicant is known as Psychic Samurai) and look at the threads there. You will find threads that discuss related subjects are created and then get deleted (or moved from public access) every few days.

 

[CFLarsen]

If he doesn't even want to talk about the idea of asking questions unknown to him before the event, I got a pretty good idea of what he is really able to do.

Naturally he can't know what questions he must ask during the test. D'uh!

 

[learner]

The rules are simple.

Exactly what can you do that is self evidently paranormal and whats your protocol?

Easy to do if you have the "power" not so easy if you haven't. I wonder why the application is at a standstill..erm

 

[jojonete]

If there is distinct and obvious human language being used to talk and answer questions [...]
[...]
Like I said I respect the JREF and have always found their protocol for the challenges to be fair. In this case though it seems to me that either they are being unfair or are providing a very poor explanation as to why this is not considered objective enough.

Here's RemieV's explanation as to why it's not considered objective enough:

[...]you pick up something on the tape recorder. To you, it sounds like a woman's voice. To me, it sounds like a bird. To you, the voice is saying "Help me," whereas to me it sounds like "Caw, caw, caw."

We can argue about which it is for all time, but in the end, you have your interpretation and I have mine.

The_Animus, do you think this explanation is a poor one?
I, for one, find is as reasonable and solid as it can be.

 

[CFLarsen]

Is it "po-tah-to", or "po-taih-to"?

Because that is what this is really a test of.

 

[Azrael 5]

How can you define if a voice is paranormal,when heard through a radio device?

 

[The_Animus]

I only read the thread in the Challenge Applications subforum which details the correspondence between Remie and Koenig. I didn't know that The Professor was the same person so I didn't read the other thread where he talks to JREF forum members. In all honesty I don't really care what he said in that thread or whether others believe he is backpedaling. My contention is with the rejection of the protocol on the basis of "difference of interpretation".

Here's RemieV's explanation as to why it's not considered objective enough:The_Animus, do you think this explanation is a poor one?
I, for one, find is as reasonable and solid as it can be.

I do think it is a poor one. This very same reason could be applied to all sorts of other tests could it not? The applicant stated quite clearly that the voice would be clear and intelligible and even said the JREF would have the final say as to whether or not the sounds coming from the recording were clear and intelligible or just background noise. This was denied because what one person hears might not be what another person hears. If that is the case then no test using verbalization as a means of determining accuracy could be used.

Suppose an applicant said they could read a persons mind. They set up protocol whereby a third party thinks of a word and the applicant will concentrate on the person and verbalize the word they are thinking of. The applicant gives their answer. Except by Remie's reasoning in regards to his correspondence with Koenig, verbalization, even if in a clear and intelligent manner, is always subjective. Therefore this test is invalid because what the applicant thinks he said might be heard differently by someone else.

My problem with this is that it's being treated like the applicant is asking to interpret hissing and moaning as actual words when that is not what was put forward by the applicant. What is so difficult to understand by the phrase clear intelligible words? As in actual words being spoken just as if you or I were talking face to face. Or as if you were watching a tv show. You could even have 10 independent people with no knowledge whatsoever about this test be given the tape separately and asked to write down what they hear. If they all write down as hearing the same thing then it's obviously clear and intelligible and not some noise open to interpretation.

By no means do I advocate that background noise is objective, or that the crap they record on shows like TAPS and Ghost Hunters is objective. That is not what was put forth by the applicant. It's quite easy. If the resulting recording was not clear and intelligible the applicant immediately fails.

 

[Azrael 5]

The applicant stated quite clearly that the voice would be clear and intelligible and even said the JREF would have the final say as to whether or not the sounds coming from the recording were clear and intelligible or just background noise.

Still doesn't make it paranormal.As others have said: turn on any radio,tune around in AM mode you will hear many faint voices fade in and out.Are we to assume these are entities?

 

[remirol]

I only read the thread in the Challenge Applications subforum which details the correspondence between Remie and Koenig. I didn't know that The Professor was the same person so I didn't read the other thread where he talks to JREF forum members. In all honesty I don't really care what he said in that thread

Woops! I suggest becoming familiar with the entire story and situation prior to slinging around arbitrary complaints. Really, it will be difficult for you to be taken seriously when you insist that you aren't interested in knowing the entire set of circumstances.

My problem with this is that it's being treated like the applicant is asking to interpret hissing and moaning as actual words when that is not what was put forward by the applicant.

When you read all the threads and see what has been put forward by the applicant at various points, perhaps you will understand. If The Professor would remain consistent in his claims it would be much easier.

What is so difficult to understand by the phrase clear intelligible words?

Can you define clear and intelligible in a manner that is not subjective?

What if the entity is speaking Spanish?
What if the entity is speaking an obscure dialect of Chinese?
What if the entity sounds like they are speaking through a voice disguiser?

There are a number of variants of this question, all of which are possible sources of contention over what was actually said. The 8-out-of-10 thing has been brought up before, and the obvious problem is: how do you know the 2 aren't right, and the 8 aren't wrong?

Also, many other protocols have involved verbalization of some sort (achau nguyen, etc). However, this is one of the few in which the verbalization itself is to be defined as the paranormal event, and as such the determination of what is being said plays a correspondingly
greater role in the protocol than it would in others.