I have applied for the challenge

[psy kick]

I believe the "dry spot" has been found. Its in Peter's theory. So, do I get one million?

 

[Peter Morris]

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.

But if that's true, it totally defeats the point of the MDC. You see that, don't you?

So, Randi says to some guy, I don't believe your product works, prove it and win a million dollars. The guy doesn't respond. What reason could he have? Could it be that his device isn't paranormal, and thus inelligible for the prize? Could that be why he doesn't respond? Is that possible?

You see, IF your statement is correct, if somebody fails to apply for the million, that proves nothing at all.

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.

Just out of interest, what are your qualifications? Do you personally have a background in science? Are you personally able to describe in detail how a CD player works, and say from your own personal knowledge what's wrong with the Tice clock? Do you have the knowledge to accurately describe the effects of magnetism on wine tannins? And would you be willing to put money on the accuracy of your statements?

... Or are you just taking Mr Randi's word for it?

Is it possible that some of these devices actually work, but the principle just lies beyond the understanding of Mr Randi? Is that remotely possible?

 

[NiallM]

But if that's true, it totally defeats the point of the MDC. You see that, don't you?

So, Randi says to some guy, I don't believe your product works, prove it and win a million dollars. The guy doesn't respond. What reason could he have? Could it be that his device isn't paranormal, and thus inelligible for the prize? Could that be why he doesn't respond? Is that possible?

You see, IF your statement is correct, if somebody fails to apply for the million, that proves nothing at all.

Just out of interest, what are your qualifications? Do you personally have a background in science? Are you personally able to describe in detail how a CD player works, and say from your own personal knowledge what's wrong with the Tice clock? Do you have the knowledge to accurately describe the effects of magnetism on wine tannins? And would you be willing to put money on the accuracy of your statements?

... Or are you just taking Mr Randi's word for it?

Is it possible that some of these devices actually work, but the principle just lies beyond the understanding of Mr Randi? Is that remotely possible?

This wrong - so wrong.

The chip to improve CD playback is a classic example. The advertising for it made the usual pseduoscientific claims about how it "worked". It was obvious that this was a preposterous claim, as teh science was clearly bogus. JREF accepted an application, however, for a test of the device. If the device worked, that would be adequate - even though the fact that it worked wouldn't render the garbles explanations any more relevant than they were beforehand.

The test was run in a blinded protocol and showed no difference at all between treated and untreated cd's. Application failed.

Do you believe that the wine clip works? It doesn't have to be the inventor who applies for the 1M. If you accept that it works, you can forget about the magentised tannins or whatever; JREF doesn't require an explanation - all that it requires is to see that it works.

A blind testing should establish whether you - or anyone - can distinguish between treated and untreated bottles, then you're home and hosed.

JREF doesn't appear to demand proof of a paranormal explanation when an unknown one or one which defies science seems to be the only ones available.

Even in the case that I were to make a new scientific discovery - one which showed an effect at odds with known science - I could claim the Million. This holds even if I were to later discover a rational scientific principle was behind it.

I note that you haven't yet responded in any meaningful way to many of the substative issues raised about your claim.

 

[webfusion]

Is it possible that some of these devices actually work, but the principle just lies beyond the understanding of Mr Randi? Is that remotely possible?

No. It is impossible for them to work.
In the same vein as perpetual motion machines being impossible.
That is why the Challenge exists.
That is why Randi has Challenged the woos to show evidence of "vast undergound rivers" (of the magnitude of the major rivers above ground). *
They simply do not exist.

(See: GSIC thread for numerous technical explanations as to why it is impossible for that scam to function as claimed.)


* NOTE: Randi clearly is not talking about minor streams or springs or underground caverns or fissures. He most specifically described the case of "George Langlois... Armed only with a forked twig, he proclaimed that (the British Isle of) Jersey did not have a water crisis at all. The island’s water, he insisted, originates from France. It is, er, pulled by the moons gravity via wide streams which run beneath the English Channel."
---- From the linked Commentary in the OP which formed your basis for claiming Randi is wrong.

 

[Peter Morris]

Do you believe that the wine clip works? It doesn't have to be the inventor who applies for the 1M. If you accept that it works, you can forget about the magentised tannins or whatever; JREF doesn't require an explanation - all that it requires is to see that it works.

Exactly my point. You just have to show that it works by any method.

You do not need to show that it works by paranormal means.

If you demonstrate that it works through NON-PARANORMAL means, you're still entitled to the prize.

 

[Cuddles]

Exactly my point. You just have to show that it works by any method.

You do not need to show that it works by paranormal means.

If you demonstrate that it works through NON-PARANORMAL means, you're still entitled to the prize.

No. If you demonstrate that it works through non-paranormal means, it is not paranormal, and therefore not elligible. What the challenge tests is if something works while it is considered paranormal. If some scientific breakthrough occured that showed how a small magnetic field could make a major difference to the flavour of wine, that would no longer be elligible for the challenge. At the moment, however, no science (outside of the woos' fantasies) can explain how any change could occur, so the phenomenon would be considered paranormal, if anyone could actually demonstrate it happening.

The problem is that the woos have no evidence that what they claim happens, and they have no explanation that makes sense. Using words like "magnetic" and "quantum" does not mean their ideas are suddenly scientific and not paranormal, it simply means they are making things up. If they ever come up with real scientific theories then there might be a serious debate over whether they should be elligible, since it would be ambiguous if they were paranormal or not. This appears to be what you are trying to do, claiming that something is a controversial scientific idea rather than a paranormal one. Unfortunately for you, everything you have said is merely nitpicking comments that were aimed at entirely magical fantasies, and not coming up with any sensible ideas yourself.

 

[Peter Morris]

No. If you demonstrate that it works through non-paranormal means, it is not paranormal, and therefore not elligible.

This is strange.

In the past I've been critical of Randi's tests. I have stated in the past that the JREF challenge is meaningless, because it has a built in escape clause. JR might say "oops, seems I was wrong... it does work, but it's not paranormal" and refuse to pay. This escape clause makes the thing worthless. Why would anyone bother?

I was flamed to death for saying that. I had dozens of people telling me that I'm wrong, that Randi never would do such a thing, that it would be illegal to do that, etc, etc, etc. Go search the archives for "it's not paranormal" and you'll see the things they all said to me. After talking about it, off and on for a couple of years, I've come around to their way of thinking. So I'll say that Randi won't back out of a challenge that he issued.

Do you mean to imply that I was right all along, and everyone else in all those previous threads was wrong?

 

[Cuddles]

Do you mean to imply that I was right all along, and everyone else in all those previous threads was wrong?

No. The challenge does not test how something works, it only tests to see if it works. The challenge only tests things that are currently thought to be paranormal, so if you show that something works in a non-paranormal way, it will no longer be elligible, but you cannot show this as part of the challenge.

ETA : Of course, if something passes the challenge, it will be studied scientifically, and if shown to exist it will no longer be considered paranormal. What is important is whether something is considered paranormal at the time the challenge is undertaken. It is not possible to say afterwards "Hey, this is real, so I won't give you any money" because when the challenge was taken, it was paranormal. Of course, there is also the simple fact that there is a binding contract that Randi cannot escape even if you believe he would be unscrupulous enough to try and so.

 

[JackPT]

I was flamed to death for saying that. I had dozens of people telling me that I'm wrong, that Randi never would do such a thing, that it would be illegal to do that, etc, etc, etc. Go search the archives for "it's not paranormal" and you'll see the things they all said to me. After talking about it, off and on for a couple of years, I've come around to their way of thinking. So I'll say that Randi won't back out of a challenge that he issued.

Once something is formally accepted as a challenge James Randi can't back out. That is why claims that aren't paranoramal are weeded out during the process. If something turned out not to be paranormal during a challenge, after it was formerly accepted, I don't think James Randi legally has an escape clause. IANAL, but I think this is why the challenge isn't called Prove Randi Wrong. That would be silly in the extreme.

Do you mean to imply that I was right all along, and everyone else in all those previous threads was wrong?

No, the consensus is that you're wrong.

Edit: Changed formerly to formally, thanks to Spektator for pointing this out, I hadn't noticed.

 

[Spektator]

Once something is formerly accepted as a challenge James Randi can't back out. That is why claims that aren't paranoramal are weeded out during the process. If something turned out not to be paranormal during a challenge, after it was formerly accepted, I don't think James Randi legally has an escape clause. {snip}

Formerly accepted or formally accepted? It makes a difference.

 

[JackPT]

Formerly accepted or formally accepted? It makes a difference.

Formally, sorry, my mistake.

 

[robinson]

This is strange.

In the past I've been critical of Randi's tests. I have stated in the past that the JREF challenge is meaningless, because it has a built in escape clause. JR might say "oops, seems I was wrong... it does work, but it's not paranormal" and refuse to pay. This escape clause makes the thing worthless. Why would anyone bother?
...
Do you mean to imply that I was right all along, and everyone else in all those previous threads was wrong?

Hello Peter.

I did a lot of research since you started this thread. While I have often been amusedby the responses to your statements, as well as the non-responses to my commentary here, I am glad you brought this up. It is much more interesting than the crackpot stuff that has dribbled in to the MDC of late.

I don't think it will matter, but I would like to point out that a response like, "I'm right, everybody else is wrong" doesn't go over well with most people. It doesn't lead to rational discussion, but emotional responses. IMO of course. Your point has been brought up before by others, and seems to be a belief of more than a few people who have dismissed the challenge as a trick, some sort of gimmick. The response to such a belief is most often, "You are wrong, Randi is right", which doesn't seem to change anyones mind.

I think in both cases, the reason is the same. People want evidence, they want to be right, they don't want to be wrong, and before they will change their mind, they need something that is beyond reproach to point at. Emotional statements, insults, appeals to authority, none of that sways the real thinker.

I can't go on long about this, because unlike some people, who seem to have unlimited time and energy to spend on this forum, I don't.

But I get a great deal of information and enjoyment out of it, so I do try to read everything here. And follow links, and read everything there, and do some research.

In regards to your main point, there is great irony afoot, and something is going to happen soon. While I think I understand your point(s), the MDC is crafted so that you can't win. You can't even get a hearing. Because of the very wording of the agreement. But I think you know that, and are holding Randi's feet to the fire. It really is about exposing a flaw in the challenge, proving Randi has been wrong about stuff.

Right?

Once something is formally accepted as a challenge James Randi can't back out. That is why claims that aren't paranoramal are weeded out during the process.

Yes! Which is the great big reason some people think the challenge is flawed. The months of negotiation, the detail about the test procedure, the protocol being worked out, it all gives the JREF a lot of time and information to research anything being brought to the table. The demand that only one person can apply, and that one person must have a special power, this guarantees that no event or odd occurrence can qualify. Only one person, who can demonstrate every time, some special power, with great accuracy, will be considered.

And that person must perform some act, under certain conditions, and they must be of normal mental health. And be able to repeat the act, at a certain time, according to certain conditions.

While this seems reasonable, rational, scientific, it does seem to create an "out" for many people. Because the paranormal, the strange, doesn't exist under those conditions. If it did, there would already be scientific evidence of strange and unexplained events.

Maybe even scientific explanations for them as well. Certainly this has happened in the past.

To sum up, while it may be a novel idea, your challenge, your method, I think it will be like so many things. Those who blindly believe will never be swayed by evidence. Closed minds are not opened by force. And proving Randi wrong will not get you a million dollars.

Its the Golden Rule. Him who has the Gold, makes the rules.

 

[NiallM]

This is strange.

In the past I've been critical of Randi's tests. I have stated in the past that the JREF challenge is meaningless, because it has a built in escape clause. JR might say "oops, seems I was wrong... it does work, but it's not paranormal" and refuse to pay. This escape clause makes the thing worthless. Why would anyone bother?

I was flamed to death for saying that. I had dozens of people telling me that I'm wrong, that Randi never would do such a thing, that it would be illegal to do that, etc, etc, etc. Go search the archives for "it's not paranormal" and you'll see the things they all said to me. After talking about it, off and on for a couple of years, I've come around to their way of thinking. So I'll say that Randi won't back out of a challenge that he issued.

Do you mean to imply that I was right all along, and everyone else in all those previous threads was wrong?

A valid consideration for someone in your position is to closely examine your position when you are the only person who is out of step with the rest. It doesn't invariably mean that you are the one that is wrong, but it is certainly worth giving more than cursory consideration to that possibility.

It has been repeatedly stressed within multiple discussions of the Challenge that JREF doesn't require a means to explain an effect; most woos are more than forthcoming with their own versions of how quantum fluctuations at the sub-transic level of chidom can disform the coprporeal aura allowing blah blah blah. JREF doesn't appear to give this crap any time, and correctly so.

What they focus on - through the challenge - is the actual manifestations of all that woo, and whether or not it can be proven.

To give an example. I tell JREF that when Staurn is ascendant in the moon of Jupiter and the Cusp of Virgo is aligned with the second phase of Alpha Centauri that the conjunction of my life-force with the Feng-Shui of mys surroundings can combine to allow me effect the outcome of coin tosses.

"Fine", says JREF. We'll give you a blue room on the appropriate date and you can demonstrate 60 consective coins tosses showing "heads". Well, of course they won't, but that is where we end up after extensive protocol negotiations.

On the appointed day, I turn up and I perform as I predicted.

Does the JREF care about how I did it? Possibly - to the extent that may worry that there was some trickery involved. But the protocol has been designed to eliminate that possibility.

So, accepting that there was no trickery involved, are they concerned about "how?". Intellectually, they may well be. But in the context of whether they should pay me the Million, they can't even consider that question. The award will be made solely on results and not on the explanation for the effect. If, a couple of years later, it becomes evident that I had accidentally hit upon a hitherto unkown method of achieving this, it matters nothing that my explanation for the effect - which was pure grabage - doesn't explain it. It matters nothing if it turns out that there was a rational explanation all along, but that it was unkown when I preformed the Challenge.

JREF cares not a whit about purported explanations; it cares only about results. What is convenient about the challenge is that when every attempt to take it fails, it fatally undermines the claims - not only about the ability, but about the paranormal forces which were claimed also.

In the meantime, however, the challenge is designed to produce a result which can only ever be decided upon by the results of a test, not by attempts to detect or to explain the mysterious paranormal forces behind it.

Your claim appears to be a claim based on an almost anal level of pedantry - yet your application doesn't satisfy in any way the levels of pedantry which you appear to apply to James Randi alone.

Your claim essentially devolves around a very inspecific drilling which gives at best, a 16-1 chance to you of winning teh challenge. JREF would be crazy to accept such a challenge - in particular when it is based on a motivation to memerly prove Randi wrong, and when it involves odds which are at variance with the normal odds which must be proved to win the challenge. At variance by several orders.

I notice that you haven't had the courtesy to address the issue about shared DNA. It's relevant as to your motivation and as to your claims about Randi, which are - after all - central to your challenge.

 

[JackPT]

Yes! Which is the great big reason some people think the challenge is flawed. The months of negotiation, the detail about the test procedure, the protocol being worked out, it all gives the JREF a lot of time and information to research anything being brought to the table. The demand that only one person can apply, and that one person must have a special power, this guarantees that no event or odd occurrence can qualify. Only one person, who can demonstrate every time, some special power, with great accuracy, will be considered.

Great post. But I don't see how the MDC could ever be applied to an 'event or odd occurrence', unless something shows significance it can't be tested. So I don't see that the test could work in any other way. There are people who claim their special powers work.

While this seems reasonable, rational, scientific, it does seem to create an "out" for many people. Because the paranormal, the strange, doesn't exist under those conditions. If it did, there would already be scientific evidence of strange and unexplained events.

Which is exactly the reason people shouldn't assert these things exist.

Maybe even scientific explanations for them as well. Certainly this has happened in the past.

Sure, but many of these claims would break fundamental laws. The thing about science is that if it's proven wrong we all benefit. In the case of the wine magnet, if they could be shown to work scientifically, the sales in France would render $1,000,000 pocket money.

To sum up, while it may be a novel idea, your challenge, your method, I think it will be like so many things. Those who blindly believe will never be swayed by evidence. Closed minds are not opened by force. And proving Randi wrong will not get you a million dollars.

Its the Golden Rule. Him who has the Gold, makes the rules.

I think there is no other way to do it. The challenge is aimed at people that assert their paranormal power exists, not people who don't. If that provides an out for some people it's a very, very weak out. Take Peter for instance...

 

[robinson]

I don't think I was clear enough on one point. The "out" is for the JREF. If somebody makes a claim that can be demonstrated, something that is actually new, not documented, accepted, or known already, if somebody submits that sort of claim, the JREF and Randi have plenty of time to find out how it is done, to prove it themselves.

BEFORE the challenge becomes a binding legal document.

So anyone who applies, with something really new, that really works, will not be accepted. Because the JREF (quite honestly) states that it is not paranormal. They can show HOW it works, or at least that it does.

So there will be no test, no challenge.

That is the essential point. Is this true? Is that what is happening? I don't know. I'm saying that is the perception. It certainly seems that is the case. Especially when the person is claiming it is not paranormal, and can explain how it is done.

If this is the case, (I don't know that it is), it certainly gives some people an out. I'm wondering here, not trying to sway. Is that indeed the case? Does the JREF reject challenges during the wrangling over protocol? Based on the JREF finding it is a real ability, not paranormal?

 

[Darat]

...snip...


It really is about exposing a flaw in the challenge, proving Randi has been wrong about stuff.

Right?

I doubt that can be the case - if it was the case then the evidence is in SWIFT article after SWIFT article in which Randi corrects his mistakes.

Yes! Which is the great big reason some people think the challenge is flawed. The months of negotiation, the detail about the test procedure, the protocol being worked out, it all gives the JREF a lot of time and information to research anything being brought to the table. The demand that only one person can apply, and that one person must have a special power, this guarantees that no event or odd occurrence can qualify. Only one person, who can demonstrate every time, some special power, with great accuracy, will be considered.

If this was the case you may have a point however this is not how the Challenge has ever been run so your conclusions are not based on any evidence.

And that person must perform some act, under certain conditions, and they must be of normal mental health. And be able to repeat the act, at a certain time, according to certain conditions.

...snip...

If someone can't duplicate what they claim they can do how can they know they can do it....

You should also do some research on the many preliminary test that have been carried out - generally the person making the claim has to agree that their powers are working - so in the case of dowsers they are allowed to see the samples, only once that "calibration" has happened does the test move on.

While this seems reasonable, rational, scientific, it does seem to create an "out" for many people. Because the paranormal, the strange, doesn't exist under those conditions. If it did, there would already be scientific evidence of strange and unexplained events.

...snip....

Yet so many people claim there powers do indeed work like this. For example Uri Geller claims his powers have been "scientifically validated" - the remote viewers claim the CIA confirmed their powers work and so on.

Perhaps you should do research into what claims people actually make?

...snip...

To sum up, while it may be a novel idea, your challenge, your method, I think it will be like so many things. Those who blindly believe will never be swayed by evidence. Closed minds are not opened by force. And proving Randi wrong will not get you a million dollars.

Its the Golden Rule. Him who has the Gold, makes the rules.

What evidence does Peter's misunderstanding about the challenge provide us apart from the fact he doesn't understand the Challange?

 

[JackPT]

If this is the case, (I don't know that it is), it certainly gives some people an out. I'm wondering here, not trying to sway. Is that indeed the case? Does the JREF reject challenges during the wrangling over protocol? Based on the JREF finding it is a real ability, not paranormal?

I honestly don't know. I hope they do reject abilities that can be explained scientifically, because it would mean the applicant could no longer go around pretending their powers are paranormal. More to the point it may actually held rid the applicant (and their followers) of their erroneous beliefs.

 

[Gr8wight]

But if that's true, it totally defeats the point of the MDC. You see that, don't you?

No, no it doesn't. The point of the million dollar challenge is to show the public that the claims made by shysters like dowsers, psychics, and extreme audiophile gadget makers are bogus. If Mr. Randi has made a simple error by describing something as not existing that clearly does, he can be corrected by simply being shown the extant evidence. The MDC is only for those claims for which there is no extant evidence. For claims which, if demonstrated successfully, would provide the first ever evidence for that phenomenon. If there is already a strong body of peer reviewed, scientific evidence supporting the existence of vast underwater rivers then that claim is not eligible.

So, Randi says to some guy, I don't believe your product works, prove it and win a million dollars. The guy doesn't respond. What reason could he have? Could it be that his device isn't paranormal, and thus inelligible for the prize? Could that be why he doesn't respond? Is that possible?

You see, IF your statement is correct, if somebody fails to apply for the million, that proves nothing at all.

You are absolutely correct. You have, however, already stated your motives. You want a million dollars. Do you believe that the maker of the wine clip is so incredibly wealthy that he wouldn't be interested in one million dollars as well?

Here's the thing. If the wine clip worked; if it really made some change to the tannins of the wine that was actually detectable, by taste, or any other method; and if that change made use of a well known, previously studied process, then the guy who makes it needs only bring to Mr. Randi's attention the evidence. Show him the studies explaining it, and Mr. Randi would immediately retract his statements, apologise to the person, and recommend everyone go out and buy one.

If, on the other hand, the wine clip really does work; really does make a difference in the wine that can be detected by taste, but the process is currently unknown, the maker can easily pick up a cool million dollars for a couple of afternoons' work. He can also get a ton of free advertising for his product at the same time, as well as have the satisfaction of saying, "ha! In your face!" to Randi as he accepts the cheque.

So we are left with your question: the maker of the wine clip, or Tice clock, or Golden Sound Intelligent Chip have done neither of the above. They have not produced any evidence that their product does follow a well understood scientific process, nor have they accepted the challenge of showing that their product actually does what it claims in the absence of any rational explanation. Why not? You are correct to say that those fact prove nothing. Still, the facts are:

1) these things do not operate under any known scientific processes.
2) the manufacturers refuse to accept the opportunity of making one million US dollars for a demonstration that they actually work.

We are free to draw our own conclusions. Yours may be different than mine. That is your perogative.

Just out of interest, what are your qualifications? Do you personally have a background in science? Are you personally able to describe in detail how a CD player works, and say from your own personal knowledge what's wrong with the Tice clock? Do you have the knowledge to accurately describe the effects of magnetism on wine tannins? And would you be willing to put money on the accuracy of your statements?

... Or are you just taking Mr Randi's word for it?

I am not a scientist, nor do I play one on TV. I have a high school science education. I can read. I do read. I am taking the word of several different sources, some of whom post on this message board, some of whom do not. Mr Randi is included in that group, but is but one of many sources.

Is it possible that some of these devices actually work, but the principle just lies beyond the understanding of Mr Randi? Is that remotely possible?

Yes. And if their designers would kindly demonstrate that actually do work, we would be getting somewhere. None of this impacts on your claim. Assuming your claim is true, I see two possibilities:

1) These great underground rivers are well known by science, and Mr. Randi was just talking through his hat.

2) These great underground rivers are unknown to science.

If number one is the case then your claim should be rejected. If number two is the case then your claim should be accepted. In the second case, if you are successful in demonstrating your claim you will not only win one million dollars, you will be assisting the human race in the discovery of new and exciting knowledge.

 

[robinson]

Why not?

Perhaps you should do research into what claims people actually make?

Sure. Are you willing to let me? I can come by your foundation and go through every application you have recieved. I've already gone through most of what you have online. But according to your statistics, there are many more. Sounds like a wonderful idea.

Any objections?

 

[Gr8wight]

Sure. Are you willing to let me? I can come by your foundation and go through every application you have recieved. I've already gone through most of what you have online. But according to your statistics, there are many more. Sounds like a wonderful idea.

Any objections?

Don't ask Darat. He's not an employee of the JREF. Email Randi and ask him. Let us know what he says.