Dean Radin - harmless pseudo-psientist.

[baron]

Baron, you seem to missing the point. No mental content taken from one to the other? No SCL residue from the filter?

No, you're missing my point, which is it doesn't matter. Regardless of how much overspill there is from a previous image the measurements are based on analysis within each presentiment period. It doesn't matter if the subject is not perfectly neutral at t=-5, all that matters is how their reaction between t=-5 and t=0 appears to conform with the nature of the image.

BTW Baron, his paper led you to the sound of the HD, right? This is faux scientific integrity. Calling Mr Randi !

Not sure what you mean. The HD noise is irrelevant to the experiment. The only reason I suggested it should be eliminated was to prevent it diverting from real analysis of the experiment. It has no more effect than the buzz of the lights, the colour of the wall, the texture of the seat; indeed any and every possible sensory input to the subject.

 

[humber]

The HD and other leakages and stimulus are rather minor points

By low-pass filtering, taking the incremental skin value, delaying, using a wide sampling window upon the skin resistance input, he is conditioning that input so as to decrease the variance of each subject and leveling it between each subject.
This is tantamount to selecting the subject(s) for a particular characteristic.

He knows that he must do better than what is predicted by the GF. By conditioning the skin readings to resemble the simulation model (monotonic response) his manipulations will not work against him in that area, or be obvious in the data. That's the base line from which he must get a favourable result.

Because the input is now less variable, or tamed as I earlier put it, he is now in a better position to reliably apply any pattern of behaviour, additional stimulus, (or carried over mental state) to his advantage.

One means may be to keep the average level of stimulus high, so that the already processed skin readings are compressed to within an upper band (the response will 'top out' at some point).
If he uses small runs, the subject will relax between them. The GF effect will be present at the start of each run, and the response to the image will be higher than in a longer run, where the subject becomes fatigued, inured, bored, etc.
If the time constants in the input filtering are long enough, then there will be inter-symbol interference caused by information carried from one image to the next. The events are no longer independent, and no longer in agreement with the behaviour that would be attributed to GF. He can exploit this difference to his advantage.

For a more visceral explanation, take a look at Fig 2 of Experiment one. The response begins to climb just before the image goes off at t=3, and peaks roughly 1.5 secs later.
Where would the presentiment of the photo going off be? Does the future show us only the leading edge of discrete-time events?

If the change at t=3 is the result of the start of the image, but delayed, then wouldn't you expect something to happen around t=10? Couldn't that output carry on to the next trial at t=18? Wouldn't any post-image stimulus then have an effect?
Keep in mind that this chart represents the change in skin resistance, not the absolute level, and at no time is the actual measured voltage reset to a reference value.

Summary:
By filtering and controlling the subject's response at the analogue and sampling levels, he gets a reliable approximation that he may use in his simulations, and expect in practice. From that point, he finds a means of manipulation that serves his outcome, and tests it on the simulator. This manipulation is built into the experiment (which indeed looks contrived), slack is added to allow some real-time tweaking, expected criticism is diverted to matters of statistical bias, and the magic trick is done. (Look out for the faux accuracy).

 

[Limbo]

If I may resurrect this thread for a moment to present an interesting paper that people might want to take a gander at.

Understanding the Unconscious Brain: Evidence for Non-Linear Information

Maurits van den Noort (Maurits.Noort@psybp.uib.no)
Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, Jonas Lies vei 91
Bergen, N-5009 Norway

Peggy Bosch (Pbosch@online.no)
Department of Psychiatry and Clinical Medicine, Sandviksleitet 1
Bergen, N-5035 Norway

Kenneth Hugdahl (Hugdahl@psybp.uib.no)
Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, Jonas Lies vei 91
Bergen, N-5009 Norway

Abstract

Neuroimaging techniques have made breakthroughs in the field of conscious emotional processing possible. However, people process most emotional information at an unconscious level and this influences our daily life (Van den Noort, 2003). These unconscious processes still remain a great mystery. What are the limits of unconscious information processing? Neuroimaging- and skin conductance studies will be discussed to answer this question.

Interestingly, Radin (1997) found that the baseline level of skin conductance preceding highly emotional stimuli was higher than the baseline level preceding calm stimuli. He used a computer to randomly select and present target photos from a pool of digitized photographs. In this experiment, as discussed before, the calm pictures included pastoral scenes and neutral household objects, and the emotional pictures included erotic and violent scenes. In these prestimulus studies, the presentation of emotional and neutral stimuli was randomized with replacement so that each trial was completely independent of the previous ones.

Four different experiments were conducted in which 31 participants were involved and 1060 target photos were presented. The results, as can be seen in Figure 1, showed an expecting orienting response after the target photo was displayed. Moreover, there was a significant prestimulus effect that peaked with a four standard error difference in physiological measures between extreme and calm targets, one second before the target photo was displayed.

[...]

The analysis of the prestimulus phase showed a significant prestimulus effect that was widely distributed over many brain regions, including hippocampus, pallidus, amygdala, and caudate nucleus. Most brain regions did not show striking differences in anticipation before emotional and neutral stimuli. However, larger anticipatory activation preceding emotional stimuli compared to neutral stimuli was found in the right amygdala and in the caudate nucleus. For the male participants, as can be seen in Figure 2, this appeared before the erotic stimuli while for the female both erotic and violent stimuli produced this prestimulus effect (Van den Noort, 2003).

[...]

Given the effect of non-linear information processing, the question arises as to what functions it serves. A possible consequence of non-linear information is to predispose the individual’s behavior toward positive objects and away from negative ones when the conscious mind is otherwise occupied (Van den Noort, 2004c). In other words, it might be an old evolutionary mechanism that humans share with other species. Humans slowly ascended from lower life forms to what we are today (Darwin, 1871). Therefore, if unconscious non-linear information processing is an old evolutionary mechanism, then other species should have this same mechanism.

 

[steenkh]

A timing error in their software?

 

[Beth]

A timing error in their software?

Given the randomization and indepence of trials, that seems unlikely. In addition, there have been other experiments conducted that show that the decision to press a button is made prior to conscious awareness of making the decision. One possible explanation that could explain such effects is if quantum effects are involved in neurological processing as Penrose has claimed.

 

[steenkh]

Given the randomization and indepence of trials, that seems unlikely.

Well, there certainly seems to be something wrong here, and it does not appear that any of those researchers have been looking for it.

In addition, there have been other experiments conducted that show that the decision to press a button is made prior to conscious awareness of making the decision.

Yes, I have heard about this experiment, and I have always wondered how it is possible to measure when a person is conscious of something. Surely, the person cannot just press a button when he is conscious of the decision, because there is always a reaction time from the moment one decides to press a button and until the button is pressed.

One possible explanation that could explain such effects is if quantum effects are involved in neurological processing as Penrose has claimed.

It is also well known that Penrose has not got the faintest idea what QM is all about. Quantum effects are either random - which is very bad for being a mechanism for conscious decisions - or they are controlled at extremely low temperatures that are not feasible for biological processes. It is amazing how often "entanglement" is used as a magic wand for communicating impossible messages, and how it is always forgotten that for two particles to become entangled, they needed to start out together at some point, and that they are extremely difficult to maintain as entangled.

 

[Limbo]

I don't know if anyone around here speaks Dutch, but here is a video of Dr Bierman demonstrating a presentiment trial.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fo_D1ee5DNY

 

[steenkh]

These studies are very old, and yet it does not seem that it has stirred much interest in the physics departments. After all, if these results are true, some heavy rewriting of the physics laws are required. Not only is the future fixed (so QM is not the mechanism), but there must be some way to tap into this using normal molecules as found in biological organisms. Fascinating stuff!

Why have none of the presentiment proponents tried to grab the MDC. It should be fairly easy to demonstrate? I am not thinking of people like Radin or Bierman, who may not have either heard of the MDC or have enough money as it is, but normal people with technical skills. Skin conductance is not difficult to measure (frauds like the Scientologists are using it routinely to control their believers), and the timing issues are in seconds, not milliseconds, which should make it a piece of cake to handle with a simple computer system. Any takers?

 

[fls]

Why have none of the presentiment proponents tried to grab the MDC. It should be fairly easy to demonstrate? I am not thinking of people like Radin or Bierman, who may not have either heard of the MDC or have enough money as it is, but normal people with technical skills. Skin conductance is not difficult to measure (frauds like the Scientologists are using it routinely to control their believers), and the timing issues are in seconds, not milliseconds, which should make it a piece of cake to handle with a simple computer system. Any takers?

Have you looked at the studies? We're not talking about an effect that shows up as different from chance, so it would be unlikely that the average person (or even people like Radin or Bierman) would be able to pass the MDC.

Linda

 

[Limbo]

Why have none of the presentiment proponents tried to grab the MDC. It should be fairly easy to demonstrate? I am not thinking of people like Radin or Bierman, who may not have either heard of the MDC or have enough money as it is, but normal people with technical skills. Skin conductance is not difficult to measure (frauds like the Scientologists are using it routinely to control their believers), and the timing issues are in seconds, not milliseconds, which should make it a piece of cake to handle with a simple computer system. Any takers?

If you watch that YouTube video demonstration I linked to above, then it certainly looks easy to demonstrate. I would very much like to see Randi hooked-up as the subject of a presentiment trial like that one in the video.