I have applied for the challenge

[Peter Morris]

Hi, everyone. Thank you for your replies. A few answers to your points :


GzuzKryzt - Yes, I've sent in my application. JREF has expressed doubts, but I've pointed out to them that my claim is in a similar category to the wine magnet, and if that's elligible, so is mine. I'm waiting for their reply.

My suggested protocol is listed on my website, under my application.


The Atheist Thanks, glad you like my site.


Moochie I agree that my claim isn't paranormal. I never said it was.

however it is in the same category as the wine magnet.

You understand, don't you that to succeed in the wine magnet challenge, you don't need to prove any paranormal effect. You need only to show that it works. If it works by NON_PARANORMAL means, you could still claim the million... just by showing that Mr Randi is wrong.

My claim is the same as this. Mr Randi believes that my claim is a delusion. I'm willing to prove him wrong on that point.


Jekyll No anti-gravity required. The channels are filled with things like gravel and sdand, the water flows around the particles. BTW, I'm trying to avoid saying "underground rivers" I call them channels. Only some of the channels are rivers, many are not.


quixotecoyote on point four, consider Mr Randi's words in this report :
http://www.skeptics.com.au/articles/divining.htm
<<A better test would be to ask the dowser whether he can find a DRY spot within 100 metres of a well he has dowsed. >>

I don't claim anything about dowsing, but as for the rest, I claim that it is quite likely to have a dry spot less than 100 metres from a well. Mr Randi seemingly does not believe me.


Robinson The MDC is more than that, it's not just about exposing frauds. It's also about making people prove their claims are true. There is a specific challenge that Mr Randi has issued for years "find me a dry spot" a challenge that I feel free to accept, and prove my claim.



Silly Green Monkey & Webfusion Yes, AIUI showing an underground river is elligible for the prize - but note that I state from the start, it's not paranormal, Mr Randi is just mistaken.


psy kick delusional is in quotes because it is a direct quote from Mr Randi.


JackPT Actually, I was hoping to apply some months ago. But first, I wanted to wait until Randi was out of hospital, then I had a bit of trouble setting up my website (my first time) plus a few other problems that were a more immediate demand on my time.


everyone Thanks for the interesting discussions about geology.

 

[Peter Morris]

Mr. Morris has shot himself in the foot with his own dueling pistol.
He wants to use the One Mill Challenge to call Mr, Randi out to a duel.

BTW, this is completely wrong. I want to use the MDC to get rich. And isn't that the point?

 

[GzuzKryzt]

BTW, this is completely wrong. I want to use the MDC to get rich. And isn't that the point?

Getting rich may be one of several points. If it is the only one for you, fair enough.

However, the name of your related website suggests otherwise, Peter Morris.

 

[Peter Morris]

James Randi said "prove me wrong and win a million dollars"

winning a million dollars is what I want. Proving Randi wrong is the way I shall do it.

I'm making it as plain as possible that I don't claim any psychic powers, merely that Mr Randi is mistaken.

That's why my website is called "prove Randi Wrong"

 

[JackPT]

That's why my website is called "prove Randi Wrong"

I had no idea proving James Randi wrong was paranormal. I spotted a typo in his commentary ages ago. I guess that must be paranormal...

Not.

Somehow I don't think proving James Randi wrong is a paranormal claim.

 

[Ririon]

Do you deny the idea that in relatively flat areas there is such a thing as a "water table"? IANAGeologist, so I just want to know if you have a fundamentally different view of the world, or you want to "catch" Randi at making a broad generalization and "dare" him to give you the million.

 

[NiallM]

This claim will never possible succeed.

The test is not about disproving anything said by Randi.

The test is about overturning scientific paradigms; about performing feats which are not considered to be possible within the bounds of what we currently know.

Before a challenge such as this is accepted, the terminology will need to be strictly and rigorously defined in a manner which accords with accepted scientific definitions. \this process will necessarily involve evaluation the claim itself, and of the claim is seen to accord with the predictions which a professional geologist would make, then the protocol will be made stringent enough to defeat statistical chance.

The claim will have to be reversed; if the claimant can claim to be able to find "dry" spots, he will have to show amethod other than random selection. This will necessarily lead to the corollary claim - that he can find water as well.

There is simply no way, in any event, that JREF would consider a claim whereby even the most random selection for a spot to drill in would expose them to a 1M liability. That's playing with chance for a lot of money. In particular when the only claim made is that Randi is wrong.

Hell, unlike many others, he fesses up to the occasional error when he makes one. Does that mean that we're entitled to a mill if we spot it first and slap in an application?

I'm not saying that he is wrong here, by the way. The "shared" Y-chromosone allegation by Morris shows a trite misunderstanding of genetics which is matched in its ignorance only by a practically obsessive intent to defend a moot and inapplicable point of pedantry.

In genetic terms, "shared" DNA is always understood to refer to a shared common root. It is all but axiomatic that any definition of DNA includes the fact that it invariably replicates itself with some variation. "sharing" is indicative of a common source, but in no way implies identity - to read that into the term displays a woeful lack of knowledge of how DNA replicates. of what it actually is, and of how biologists describe its functions and its characteristics.

With that much clear about the applicant, I am reasonably confident that his other gripes are also without any serious basis in fact.

 

[Apathia]

This claim will never possible succeed.

The test is not about disproving anything said by Randi. In particular when the only claim made is that Randi is wrong.

Hell, unlike many others, he fesses up to the occasional error when he makes one. Does that mean that we're entitled to a mill if we spot it first and slap in an application?

Sorry, Mr. Morris, but the MDC is not a cash cow.

 

[The Atheist]

Sorry, Mr. Morris, but the MDC is not a cash cow.

You have to give the guy a few points for his honesty in stating that he realises there's nothing paranormal going on and his only intention is to try and score a mio.

On the other hand, as a proven liar, he loses more points than he gained, but gets 2 back for sheer entertainment value and persistence.

Overall score: -3.

 

[Flange Desire]

Peter Morris,

You could come down here to oz and drill a few holes anywhere in the great artesian basin.
It's mostly dry desert up on top, but you are almost certain to hit water.
I was going to say it is impossible to not hit water, but stopped myself just in the nick of time.

 

[Major Billy]

James Randi said "prove me wrong and win a million dollars"

OK, I finally understand this. Randi actually said: "Make an easy million, Bob! PROVE ME WRONG and win a million dollars!"

Peter Morris was made no such offer, and as such must comply with the challenge rules, which state:

"US$1,000,000 to any person who can demonstrate any psychic, supernatural or paranormal ability"

 

[Peter Morris]

And just out of interest, what is the psychic, supernatural, or paranormal ability involved with the wine magnets, exactly?

Or the Tice Clock?

Or dozens of other similar challenges?

 

[Flange Desire]

And just out of interest, what is the psychic, supernatural, or paranormal ability involved with the wine magnets, exactly?

Or the Tice Clock?

Or dozens of other similar challenges?

I would say that if dowsing worked as described by the woos, then it would be paranormal, because it is not normal for things to behave magically.
Ditto for wine magnets, tice clocks and cd enhancing chippery.

Just my opinion of course.

 

[Peter Morris]

Hypothetical question, but one at the basis of my application.

Just suppose I told you wine magnet actually works. Suppose I said that the mechanism is NON-PARANORMAL, and based on a known scientific principle, that just happens to lie outside the knowledge of James Randi.

Further suppose that I applied for the challenge, saying all along "it's not paranormal, Mr Randi is just wrong"

Then, suppose that I succeeded in proving that true.

So, having done something that isn't paranormal, and having said from the start that it isn't paranormal, would I be entitled to the prize?

Same question for Tice clock and CD chips, and dozens of other devices or theories challenged by Randi over the years.

 

[JackPT]

Just suppose I told you wine magnet actually works. Suppose I said that the mechanism is NON-PARANORMAL, and based on a known scientific principle, that just happens to lie outside the knowledge of James Randi.

Then it's not paranormal.

Further suppose that I applied for the challenge, saying all along "it's not paranormal, Mr Randi is just wrong"

Claiming James Randi is wrong is not a paranormal claim.

Then, suppose that I succeeded in proving that true.

So, having done something that isn't paranormal, and having said from the start that it isn't paranormal, would I be entitled to the prize?

No, because it's not paranormal.

Same question for Tice clock and CD chips, and dozens of other devices or theories challenged by Randi over the years.

The point about those things is that the only way they could work would be to break known laws. Therefore they are essentially paranormal claims.

Thank-you for being my 50th post.

 

[robinson]

My understanding of the rules is that it doesn't matter why it can be done, how it can be done, or how many people can do it.

If Randi claims it is nonsense, and you prove him wrong, you get the million dollars.

But of course, the protocol and what is considered proof, is the hard part to agree on.

And while the MDC starts off by saying "At JREF, we offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event.", but the application changes it to "Applicant must state clearly in advance, and applicant and JREF will agree upon, what powers or abilities will be demonstrated,".

Obviously these are two different offers/challenges.

For example, if you claim to be a being from another dimension, and you can prove it, you win. But if you claim that beings from other dimensions are here, and can prove it, you don't get to enter the challenge, much less have a chance to win. Correct?

Or is this one of them semantics things?

 

[Peter Morris]

Then it's not paranormal.
Claiming James Randi is wrong is not a paranormal claim.
No, because it's not paranormal.

so, let's get this straight...

Bob, the maker of the wine magnet, claims that it works on scientific principles. He does not say it's paranormal.

James Randi does not believe him.

If Bob proves Randi wrong, and shows the wine magnet does indeed work on scientific principles, then he STILL wouldn't get the million ... because it isn't paranormal.

Is that what you're saying?

The point about those things is that the only way they could work would be to break known laws. .

That assumes that Randi knows what he is talking about.

 

[JackPT]

so, let's get this straight...

Bob, the maker of the wine magnet, claims that it works on scientific principles.
James Randi does not believe him.

I'm sure the maker of the wine magnet does claim it works on scientific principles. That has no bearing on the consensus as to whether it actually does. I believe that the consensus is that it doesn't. That makes his claims paranormal.

If Bob proves Randi wrong, and shows the wine magnet does indeed work on scientific principles, then he STILL wouldn't get the million.

The consensus is that wine magnets don't work on any scientific principle. The only claims that can be made about it are paranormal claims.

Is that what you're saying?

No. The point of the prize isn't to prove James Randi is wrong. All applicants have to do is demonstrate under proper observing conditions something that cannot be explained normally. If something can be explained normally it is not eligible for the challenge.

 

[Gr8wight]

Hypothetical question, but one at the basis of my application.

Just suppose I told you wine magnet actually works. Suppose I said that the mechanism is NON-PARANORMAL, and based on a known scientific principle, that just happens to lie outside the knowledge of James Randi.

Further suppose that I applied for the challenge, saying all along "it's not paranormal, Mr Randi is just wrong"

Then, suppose that I succeeded in proving that true.

So, having done something that isn't paranormal, and having said from the start that it isn't paranormal, would I be entitled to the prize?

Same question for Tice clock and CD chips, and dozens of other devices or theories challenged by Randi over the years.

Randi would consult with a scientist who is well versed in the subject matter. If that scientist told him, "sorry, but you were wrong, and there is a well understood mechanism that explains how this works," then Mr. Randi would not accept that application. The intention of the million dollar challenge is to offer those who are making claims that cannot be backed up by science the opportunity to attempt to demonstrate them.

For example, the Wine Magnet, the Tice Clock, and the super duper magic CD chip are eligible because if they could be demonstrated to work, every scientist in the world would have to discard a significant number of working theories and start from scratch.

In the case of your claim, if a geologist tells Randi that he shot his mouth off too early, and that these underground rivers that dowsers refer to truly do exist, then the application would not be eligible. It is not Randi's opinion that a claimant needs to refute, but reality as we currently understand it.

 

[Apathia]

Randi would consult with a scientist who is well versed in the subject matter. If that scientist told him, "sorry, but you were wrong, and there is a well understood mechanism that explains how this works," then Mr. Randi would not accept that application. The intention of the million dollar challenge is to offer those who are making claims that cannot be backed up by science the opportunity to attempt to demonstrate them.

For example, the Wine Magnet, the Tice Clock, and the super duper magic CD chip are eligible because if they could be demonstrated to work, every scientist in the world would have to discard a significant number of working theories and start from scratch.

In the case of your claim, if a geologist tells Randi that he shot his mouth off too early, and that these underground rivers that dowsers refer to truly do exist, then the application would not be eligible. It is not Randi's opinion that a claimant needs to refute, but reality as we currently understand it.

Precisely!

Also let me repeat: it's the Foundation's Challenge not James Randi's.