The 'neutral one' should be the skeptic, by definition.
Suggesting 3 'neutral' people from the same area of expertise kind of undermins the whole 'neutral' thing, too.
As the JREF is fronting up the money, they have the right to set the rules, and they ensure fairness through the process of negotiation over protocol. The only things they reject are those things that would permit cheating, so I am constantly surprised by the people who object to this. It's very telling.
Ultimately, though, the test should be such that it wouldn't matter who was observing. The challenger could bring all his friends, Uri Geller and an elephant, and JREF could bring Big Bird, Stephen Hawking, and the Boston Philharmonic Orchestra. Then the challenger would cause a bowling ball enclosed in a large, sealed glass tank to rise two feet off of the ground while standing ten feet away from the tank, thereby demonstrating his claim that he can move bowling balls with the power of his mind (or, at least, without effecting them through conventional means). And win the Challenge.
It should, in theory, all be on tape, and both parties should make the effort to set up the cameras from enough angles so as to preclude cheating on either side. There are your "neutral observers" right there.
Edited to add: I'm sorry, Rodney, but I think that your idea of finding three "objective" people to judge the input into the MDC makes about as much sense as finding "uninterested Danes" to moderate the Forum. It adds a great deal of complication to a process that does not -- to me at least -- appear to be broken.
Do you have any evidence that such a panel is necessary? By "evidence" I am talking about past Challenges that had specific problems that such a hypothetical panel would have fixed. I admit that my memory is by no means excellent, but the only problems (as in, "reasons people have not won") I have seen in the Challenges that have been heretofore reported have been due to: 1) applicants being unable to clearly state what they can do, 2) protocol negotiations breaking down because of 1) or because the applicant is insisting on something that would enable cheating or that would require subjective judgement calls, 3) a single applicant whose proctors did not follow the agreed-upon protocol, 4) an applicant applying in bad faith in order to use the Challenge for personal promotion, 5) an applicant insisting on changes to the rules, 6) applicants whose claims were not paranormal, 7) applicants whose claims would require them to engage in potentially lethal behavior, 8) applicants not being able to do what they claim to be able to do once controls were put in place. I could probably go on, but you see that in all of these cases but one, the issue was (largely) with the applicant, and usually boiled down to the applicant being unable to think of their claim in a critical fashion.
I have a suggestion for your Ganzfield question: get the help of one of your psychic buddies and apply for the Challenge (if you can get the academic affidavit and media notoriety, either on your part or the parts of your friends, that is). It's already been established that the claimant does not have to possess the powers -- if I'm telekinetic, you can apply by saying "I will demonstrate that the ability to move things only by the power of the mind exists and is real, and I will do so by having my friend Jackalgirl move a bowling ball placed inside a sealed glass tank. She will stand not less than 10 feet away from the tank and, within 5 minutes of the commencement of the test, will cause the bowling ball to raise completely above a mark painted on the glass whose height above the tank's base is equal to that of the bowling ball's diameter. To correct for parallax, video cameras will be placed so that they look square at the mark on stands that place the center of the camera's focal point at the same height as the mark. The recordings will be time-stamped and the commencement of the test will be clearly audible on the recordings. Success will be indicated by the ball rising completely above the mark as viewed on the cameras' recordings within five minutes of the test's commencement. Failure will be indicated by the ball failing to move completely above the mark as viewed on the cameras' recordings within five minutes of the commencement of the test." Then I do my thing with telekinesis and
you collect the million.
So your Ganzfield psychics don't have to apply. But you can, using them as the means to demonstrate paranormality. So devise a specific claim and protocol and actually apply. Then you can get the answer from JREF that you're looking for. But remember, if JREF rejects
your specific Ganzfield claim, it does not automatically follow that they will reject anyone else's.
