EFT Claims

-42-

Thinker
4
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
153
In the recent commentary is a EFT (Emotional Freedom Technique) guy who wants to win the $1mil.

http://www.randi.org/jr/041505hollywood.html
http://www.emofree.com/

He clearly doesn't understand what the word "Prove" means as you can see throughout the correspondence.

I think there is a pretty easy way to easily induce a room full of simultaneous headaches, though. Simply have a group of people listen to him run on about the gobblygook. That would handle that aspect.

Looking through the website, there's a claim under Allergies to be able to cure symptoms within a few minutes.

Does that include a skin allergic reaction? ;p
 
I would have to agree with Randi that communication is much of the problem in regards to the claims on the million dollars, but it seems that Randi is somewhat guilty of not communicating clearly. Granted, he may not (probably IS not) publishing the entire conversation, but it seemed to me he left out a sentence or two that would have made his side of the conversation a little clearer. Such as, "We cannot determine if your claim qualifies for the prize until we know exactly what you claim you will be able to do." Or "Headaches can be of varying severity, and can stem from many causes. However, they show no outside indication that they are present or that they have passed. Therefore, headache is not the optimal ailment to use for a test of this kind, when you need a clear-cut proof of cure by alternative methods."

I realize Randi and Kramer can lose it occasionally, especially given the obtuseness exhibited by many claimants. However, I think, given that the JREF is an educatiuonal foundation, an attempt should be made to educate rather than immediately attacking a claimant too befuddled to know what their claim is in the first place.
 
Well, my above response probably deserves a little clarification.

If someone's going to apply to win a million bucks, they should at least read the rules and follow them. This is basic courtesy. If they don't have the time or inclination to do that, why would you even imagine that Randi (or anyone else at JREF) is obligated to help them formulate a proposal?

Nope, this comes under the heading of "I can't be bothered to read that crap you wrote - even for a million bucks - so here's what I'm gonna do to win it. You ok with that?"

It's a Challenge, not a counseling session!
 
All I'm saying is that if you alienate people before they even start to formulate a claim in their minds, then they will never get to the preliminary tests. And to me, it's much more effective to say that claimants have been tested and failed than to say no claimant is coherent enough to be tested. That sounds like arrogance, not the disproof of a claim.
 
jmercer said:
Well, my above response probably deserves a little clarification.

If someone's going to apply to win a million bucks, they should at least read the rules and follow them. This is basic courtesy. If they don't have the time or inclination to do that, why would you even imagine that Randi (or anyone else at JREF) is obligated to help them formulate a proposal?

Nope, this comes under the heading of "I can't be bothered to read that crap you wrote - even for a million bucks - so here's what I'm gonna do to win it. You ok with that?"

It's a Challenge, not a counseling session!
Click to expand...


The problem is, these people don't know how to follow rules. That's how they can believe in this nonsense in the first place. They believe that rules don't apply.
 
The guy was very clear about what (thinks) he could do - he can cure headaches with a series of taps and sentences. What he was unclear on is how to formulate a series of tests to analyse his 'abilities', for example, testing whether tapping in the 'wrong' areas or varying what he said affected the results. He was also unable to design his own test too, but all this proves is he's no scientist. Randi could've been more helpful in this respect - his responses seemed to anticipate more knowledge than the EFT guy clearly had.

Perhaps JREF could come up with a document outlining the expectations of the organisation, and making suggestions for protocols and methodology? I realise every claim is different, but it would be a start...
 
This whole thing sounds like a takeoff on "Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing" which you can research using a Google search. As the original garbage is copyrighted and costs a lot to learn, I wonder if the author of this scam just wanted to make a fast buck without the need to make up something original. On the other hand, there never seems to be anything "new" in this area, at least since Hahnemann.
 
I was a little disappointed in Randi's response.

I felt that the guy was sincere and deserved a little more explanation as to the problems with his claim as a qualification for the million dollar prize.

I think, in principle, the claim that tapping and saying a few magic words could cure headaches involves enough a paranormal element to make it eligible for the million dollar prize. It wasn't clear to me that Randi clearly conveyed this fact to the claimant.

The problem, of course, is with how such a claim could be tested in a reliable way. I thought Randi might have done a little better job of explaining this to the fellow. Randi seemed to assume that the guy had a skeptics understanding of the nature of a reasonable test. As was mentioned above, if he had that understanding he probably wouldn't be making the claim.

I have never tried to talk to somebody who thinks like this guy (unless kumar counts) so I don't know how successful talking to the guy about the concepts of the placebo effect and double blind testing would be, but I just couldn't see that Randi was making much of an effort to explain them to the guy.
 
I was also disappointed by Randi's response, or at least what we could see of it.

The guy seemed to be honestly deluded. I understand that Randi must deal with this junk constantly, but there isn't progress made if you don't try to get people to the testing stage.

If he's fed up, Randi should just forward these e-mails to other people at the JREF. If I was there, I'd be more than willing to deal with a few loonies every week on his behalf, if only to try and explain the basic rules to them. It'd be a novelty.
 
Yes, I agree, Randi should have helped him out alot more than he did. He probably wouldn't convince him but at least he may not now be passing on the ill-feeling that he has regarding Randi and scepticism

BJ.
 
For what it's worth I also felt Randi missed the point. The EFT guy is not stupid, probably, but he clearly has no idea how to conduct a scientific test. Why would he? It's often not taught in schools or anything.

The answer I think he was after was "Yes your claim would certainly qualify for the million dollar challenge. Please carefully read our rules here, and apply according to them, and we will go from there." Or something like that.
 
SquishyDave said:
For what it's worth I also felt Randi missed the point. The EFT guy is not stupid, probably, but he clearly has no idea how to conduct a scientific test. Why would he? It's often not taught in schools or anything.

The answer I think he was after was "Yes your claim would certainly qualify for the million dollar challenge. Please carefully read our rules here, and apply according to them, and we will go from there." Or something like that.
Click to expand...

I concur. I think that's what the guy was after, although I personally don't think his claim would quality. Sounded basically like something along the lines of SNL's Stuart Smalley's daily affirmations. I dunno, but there's probably a name for that sort of therapy, anyway it didn't sound paranormal to me.

Beth
 
EGarrett said:
I was also disappointed by Randi's response, or at least what we could see of it.

The guy seemed to be honestly deluded. I understand that Randi must deal with this junk constantly, but there isn't progress made if you don't try to get people to the testing stage.

If he's fed up, Randi should just forward these e-mails to other people at the JREF. If I was there, I'd be more than willing to deal with a few loonies every week on his behalf, if only to try and explain the basic rules to them. It'd be a novelty.
Click to expand...

I agree with this post. I think it's revealing that Randi included that exchange in his weekly column as an example of what he has to face. What we see is not only a potential claimant that has a hard time explaining a specific claim (which we expected) but also Randi being anything but patient and engaging. And remember, this is an exchange that Randi volunteered.

Granted, it must be a PITA (PITA = Pain In The A**) to constantly deal with people that are such poor communicators and/or wackos but then again that is by definition a major part of the JREF mission.

As I was reading the exchange I found myself wanting to engage the person and figure out exactly what it was they were claiming and how it could be tested. But then again, I never _have to_ deal with such people. If I'm in the mood then I go to go some website or Paltalk or something and engage such people and if I'm not in the mood I can do something else. If I _had_ to deal with such stuff day after day it'd probably drive me crazy.

The general notion of having JREF outsourcers that screen such things is a good one but in practice there might be problems. For example, the JREF probably wouldn't want non-employees formally representing them in such things even if it was just a case of doing prelminary screenings.

But in the end I don't see a way of avoiding an unpleasant reality given the JREF's mission and goals. Namely, if you're going to have a $1 million prize for something that you know beforehand is going to attract a certain type of people then you have to cope with such people when they want the prize, either by being extremely patient with them (which can be taxing) or else by blowing them off when they say something stupid.
 
I've got to chime in against Randi's approach. Yes, this other guy was a looney who will probably never understand what a proper protocol is, and yes, it is not our place to teach people what correct protocol is...

Ah, but wait. Is this not an educational foundation? Do we not volunteer our time trying to teach the world that these claims are bunk? I understand how terrible a burden it is, going over and over the same ground, but for those who just surrender in a heap of sarcasm, regardless of the relentless stream of dumbness flowing into our inbox, I suggest a re-evaluation. Even the most ignorant man can be taught.

So, yes. We are fulfilling the stereotype of "grumpy old skeptics with long beards and tweed jackets". Battles can certainly be lost in PR, I fear.
 
I can certainly understand the applicant's frustrations when he says this:

When I point you to a step by step detailed description of the process, you say you don't have time to read it. When I try to give a quick overview, you say the description is "fuzzy."
Click to expand...

What impression is that guy going to have about the Million Dollar Challenge, and who can blame him anyway? The Foundation rightly complains when people wriggle out of tests, lay down unacceptable conditions or fail to define what it is they can actually do, but this applicant was guilty of none of these sins.
 
Ian Osborne said:
Foundation rightly complains when people wriggle out of tests, lay down unacceptable conditions or fail to define what it is they can actually do, but this applicant was guilty of none of these sins.
Click to expand...

Well, I wouldn't say his conditions were acceptable, either. We need scientific, verifiable, reproducible evidence, and he wasn't even in the ballpark. My concern is merely over the unwillingness to tell this guy why his protocols were unacceptable.

I see a lot of people do this, skeptic or no: they try to give a person "enough rope to hang himself with". The problem is that you come off unhelpful and confusingly terse if this particular debating trap is used incorrectly, which I believe in this case it was.
 
I agree with much of the above. To be honest, I am seriously rethinking whether I want to support this foundation. Not that the pocket change I sent last year has any appreciable effect on the operations, but still. It's supposed to be an educational foundation.

Here's perfect example - my mother. She has an eight grade education at a rural school, and is natively smart but would really not know where to start to read and comprehend the legalese type of language of the challenge rules. And she believes in ghosts, and thinks she has evidence that her house is haunted. She is mistaken, of course.

But if I was to point her to JREF, she would write or email a very basic letter, along the lines of "there are ghosts in my house", along with some ambling anecdotes. With the expectation that there is somebody on the receiving end who is actually polite, and recognizes that she is a person with feelings. And that she isn't college educated. She'd, oddly enough, expect a conversation, and some honest help, because that is how she is normally treated. It's just her style, and the style of a heck of a lot of people who aren't college educated, or trained in offices on how to conduct official communications, or however one gains this experience.

But no, JREF has to act like a bunch of pompous f*****g a******s.


A company or individual who purposely lies in order to profit (spurious magnet devices, talking to the dead) warrants tough talk - a normal person without the sophistication to design, and articulate a double blind experiement does not.

Hey, I bet I'm stronger than Randi, through the luck of genetics. Shall I be rude and snide to him because of it, just like he is rude and snide to people with lesser IQs? Because that's the kindergarden level of petulancy that is being displayed here. "I'm stronger than you" - "I'm smarter than you".

:(
 
Whine whine whine ! Why are these people posting here if they hate the JREF or Randi so much ? I understand wanting it to change, but it's obviously not going to change, and it shouldn't change.
 
Keneke said:
Well, I wouldn't say his conditions were acceptable, either. We need scientific, verifiable, reproducible evidence, and he wasn't even in the ballpark.
Click to expand...

True enough, but what I meant was he wasn't building unneccessary barriers, giving him the opportunity to dodge the test and then blame JREF for his not taking it. I agree that nothing he offered was designed to produce 'scientific, verifiable, reproducible evidence' (though I think your reference to 'his conditions' is a little strong), but the ordinary man in the street has no idea how to formulate experiments to produce such evidence. And that's what the vast majority of applicants are - ordinary men (and women) in the street.

And Francois, no one here hates Randi. Quite the opposite. We respect and admire him, but do not uncritically accept everything he says and does. It's a credit to the Foundation that a thread like this can exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom