You all said I wasn't ready, at the time I was willing.
Willing perhaps - but the protocol was very flawed. You were NOT ready and you are STILL not ready.
As far as saying they are cheats I never said that I said they know and changed the percentage.
At the time in Japan 60% was the number and now it's 70%.
I disagree. Percentages changed with your claims and you proposing different protocols. This is quite valid. But, as I said, if you claim 70% for a protocol and this is way beyond what would normally be regarded as minimum for significance beyond random chance, I certainly am prepared to point it out to you and also take it to the JREF testers to justify.
As far as the protocol it's the same as in 1999, the difference is one spot and the scales, which I had to add in, target will appear only 10 times out of 100.
If you know how they run it what's so hard to understand?
The test with the scales willl not work. Too many uncontrollable variables. Drop it, you'll not get anywhere. As simple as possible is best. Your proposal of a single site and a series of boxes of samples is better. Sort that one out. Ignore the scales attempt and the "proof by sluicing". Not going to happen. The potential results will NOT be obvious without qualifications of the circumstances. Both parties (as per the Challenge Rules) need to be happy that the results speak for themselves. These two demonstrations are NOT obvious.
EHocking said,
My application has only been in since February.
First the protocol, then the location.
Like I said I may go to them now, as far as a limestone quarry that would probably be ideal but not necessary as I can find a spot any where now, but only one spot at a time.
Not ten spots.
I can't figure how you can't understand this?
I understand this. My question is, since you state above you can find a spot anywhere now - why don't you propose one? 10 spots are not required to satisfy the conditions under which you wish to be tested.
Pick a spot that you're happy with, then you can proceed. JREF are not balking on choice of location, YOU are.
They have to say yes not me, and Jeff does read in here, how better to know what their up against.
I disagree. You have not proposed a test site for JREF to say yes TO. You have been AVOIDING this persistently. Pick a site. THEN you might have justification in claiming JREF are holding up the process.
As you can see by my the post above.
It's not me that's uncomfortable, like I said I assumed that they were comfortable with the first protocol at 60% since that would have been it in Japan.
But now they are not.
So I upped it to 70% and if I hit 90% I would win right away,
Wrong.
Preliminary - 1:10,000 - 7 hits from 10 trials (of 10 boxes and 1 target per trial)
Final - 1:1,000,000 (and the money) 8 hits from 10 trials with the same protocol
if I hit 70% the first time if they needed more proof then two more sets of 100 passes with the metals appearing another 20 times is ok with me plus the three could be factored together to get an over all %.
Again, no.
Pass the preliminary first (at 7 hits from 10 trials) to be eligible for the final Million Dollar test.
Pass the Final test at 8 hits from 10 trials and the money's yours.
The two tests are independent of each other, since the required success rates are different.
Prelim - better than random chance at 1:10,000.
Final - better than random chance at 1:1,000,000.
In other words if I hit 70 then 60 then 80 it's still 70%...
The two stages of the Challenge are independent. FOr your info - the preliminary will require a minimum of 5 trials passing over 10 boxes. Your numbers above are irrelevant. I also think that total success from potential success will be a smarter measure (ie, say 7 out of 10, 6 out of 10, 8 out of ten rather than doing percentages). That way no one can argue over the calculation of percentages.
How simple can it be then I have to make a decision and hopefully soon on a date.
What decision do you have to make before settling a date?
There's more to than that as you all pointed out, I would if they came here, have to support them financially, to do that here I would have to mine the money which is a possibility, but now with the visual of the scale and what I have learned the day after the let down of Japan is that I can do it in Florida and cover only my expenses.
Things still have to be worked out here in that regard, and it's a month away till I can mine on a scale that will support the operation and the expenses of the two members of the jref team, that includes housing and all that is involved.
You see in Japan it would have been easy to find the right spot at a quarry they must have several.
Sorry? You haven't found a spot in your area for a year and you're making the excuse that you could find a spot in Japan nearly immediately? Colour me sceptical on that claim, edge
Most of my testing has proven to me that 60% is doable, and now70% is doable but I expect more.
You don't need more that 7 hits in 10 trials to pass the preliminary. If it's doable as you claim. Do it.
If it was under 50% then I would say it doesn't prove it so what's the point.
But it shows me that it is provable.
On this you are right. 5 out of 10 is not a significant success beyond random chance at 1:10,000.
[re a chosen location]Yes I do but it's at Coffee Creek and I can't mine there till Septemeber.
Great. You have your location. 1 down. Sort the protocol and set a date in September.
Offer him 1% of the Prize for holding it on his property. $10,000 is a great incentive!
[/quote]That is a better month to do it in Florida also because of the Heat of the day there, it's much cooler then.[/quote]OK - so propose a location in Florida. What would it take?
Thanks for offering your help big E.
No problems, little e. I've had a long interest in the claims of dowsers (I'm in the oil field), so am willing to help you with the math so that you can be sure you're getting a fair deal.
You claim above you have a location. Sort a protocol. Your proposal that the test boxes must be placed in a single location proposal could STILL be worked. Don't use it as an excuse not to do this - throw the details at us here. There are enough smart and willing people to work out a solid protocol for that proposal.
Quote:
Pass the test and THEN you can tell JREF to shut up.
at's not my style and not necessary.
With respect, edge, my comment was in response to your statement:
Quote:
I know they are reading what I say and I told them to.
There’s a good chance they will lose now and are wondering if what I’m saying is true.
You imply that JREF are running scared from your claims.
My statement stands (if reworded) prove them wrong and that what you are saying is true. THAT will shut us all up. (actually it wouldn't, it would have us all reassessing our view on the validity of dowsing).
