Information on Protocol for Pavel Ziborov Applicant

[Peristarkawan]

I cant claim 29 out of 40.. cause that not beating 1.000 odds..

Just to make sure you understand this, it is possible to claim a success rate lower than 75% and still have 1:1000 odds. A lower success rate would just require more trials to prove. For example, as I noted above, the odds of getting 60 or more correct out of 90 are also about 1:1000. The real problem with that is that it would be a much longer test.

 

[Startz]

Just to make sure you understand this, it is possible to claim a success rate lower than 75% and still have 1:1000 odds. A lower success rate would just require more trials to prove. For example, as I noted above, the odds of getting 60 or more correct out of 90 are also about 1:1000. The real problem with that is that it would be a much longer test.

Pavel understands this. He originally proposed more trials, but JREF felt this was problematic. The current design is intended to accommodate concerns raised by JREF.

 

[Rodney]

And what if Pavel gets only 10 correct out of 40? The odds of that are the same as the odds of getting 30 correct. Do you claim Pavel should also be retested in that case?

Now that you mention it, yes.

 

[Rodney]

Pavel understands this. He originally proposed more trials, but JREF felt this was problematic. The current design is intended to accommodate concerns raised by JREF.

Which is why he definitely should be retested if he gets 29 -- or even 27 or 28 -- out of 40. If the JREF is serious about the paranormal, it can't ignore unusual results that fall just below an arbitrary standard that it establishes.

 

[RemieV]

Which is why he definitely should be retested if he gets 29 -- or even 27 or 28 -- out of 40. If the JREF is serious about the paranormal, it can't ignore unusual results that fall just below an arbitrary standard that it establishes.

Please stay on topic, particularly in this thread. The topic of the thread is the protocol for Pavel Ziborov's claim. Potential future testing has no place here.

 

[Gr8wight]

Which is why he definitely should be retested if he gets 29 -- or even 27 or 28 -- out of 40. If the JREF is serious about the paranormal, it can't ignore unusual results that fall just below an arbitrary standard that it establishes.

Oh, Rodney, we've all had this discussion before. Fifteen or twenty times, if I recall correctly. The JREF is not serious about the paranormal. They are serious about challenging those people who make claims about the paranormal to demonstrate their abilities. That's all we're asking Pavel, or any other applicant, to do. Demonstrate the exact ability you claim to have. If Pavel claims to be able to correctly identify 30 of 40 photographs, then 29 does not meet his own conditions.

Of course, until Pavel undertakes his test, your position on this is moot. What happens if he only gets 26 correct? Or 25? Or 19? Where do you draw the line? Or do you not recognise why it is necessary to draw a line?

Do you?

 

[Rodney]

Oh, Rodney, we've all had this discussion before. Fifteen or twenty times, if I recall correctly. The JREF is not serious about the paranormal. They are serious about challenging those people who make claims about the paranormal to demonstrate their abilities. That's all we're asking Pavel, or any other applicant, to do. Demonstrate the exact ability you claim to have. If Pavel claims to be able to correctly identify 30 of 40 photographs, then 29 does not meet his own conditions.

Of course, until Pavel undertakes his test, your position on this is moot. What happens if he only gets 26 correct? Or 25? Or 19? Where do you draw the line? Or do you not recognise why it is necessary to draw a line?

Do you?

Let's continue this discussion in the existing thread "Odds Standard for Preliminary Test."

 

[GzuzKryzt]

Let's continue this discussion in the existing thread "Odds Standard for Preliminary Test."

In said thread, Pavel made the following post:

He is right, though I think I will be able to perform 30 out of 40, will do my best for that. If I was sure I cant do that I would say I am not going for it… I was the one who asked for 40 pairs.. At least..
But the conditions is not as good for me as the other tests that would give me enough time, less stress in order to perform positive results.
I know some one will say now.. you see.. he prepared already an excuse in case he fails..
THERE WILL BE NO EXCUSES… no one forced me to apply and take test.. It is my own decision..
Just that I want test to happen.. And if I will not step out of my way and test conditions that would make me really comfortable etc.. that the test will never happen.. cause it take too many hours.. cause I have advantage, cause it is too many photos etc.. CAUSE IT IS POSSIBLE FOR ME TO PASS IT WITH THOSE CONDITONS..
I stepped way to far just to move some how the negotiations and make test possible..
I would be more comfortable with 2-3 trials ( let say by 30 pairs in each) where achieving positive results in any would mean I passed it by covering any way 1.000 odds that needed to pass preliminary test.. I am sure during all 2-3 trial I would perform evident results that I am real deal and able to see and perform what I am claiming to! Having 2-3 trials also reduce a stress level that is the main issue for me in order to be as calm as I can during a test… Every one would feel calmer and more comfortable knowing that he can perform 2-3 trial.. But not 1.. I have explained that many times.
Same with more pairs.. that is still covers 1.000 that is way far from getting by a chance and I see no problem in having a few hour test with allot of pairs that I am the one who pays for any way..
Etc.. many reasons that I have explained before many times that is just ignored, and I am in front of the fact that it will be not allowed full stop.
Like passing it make them to give me the money! that is just a preliminary test as we all know.
Just that passing it will mean that is possible to pass the second one and get the money.

I will be honest with you. If the JREF will not let me to have results revealed immediately after each pair is named, I am not taking this test. Cause that would mean I have agreed to everything that will make test almost impossible to pass and I have to rely in chance to pass it..
Ill just drop it, and will be looking for other ways of testing ( maybe JREF offer something reasonable too). There is a time.. my claim valid for 1 year if I am not mistaken.
I really want test to happen and doing my best to make it possible. Cause I know I will be able to show that such things is real and can exist and has to be studied etc.. There is a fake psychics.. but that dose not mean there is no real ones!

I highlighted one relevant part.

 

[pavel_do]

In said thread, Pavel made the following post:

I highlighted one relevant part.

I am sure most of people read it there, same as JREF.. I see no reasons to copy and post it here too.. Or... Oh yes.. cause I said if JREF will not allow the envelopes to be opened immediately.. (that is not affect odds in any ways), so I am not taking this test.
And I am not taking this test with pairs, as I agreed to all that they wanted so far and that the last thing that would help me to show good results… and I am not getting off that.. If it cant not be agreed, that we have to find the other test to test me and I will do my best for that as I am doing any ways. So what the problem? I am being honest , as always but..
Every body, have a nice weekend.
Regards,
Pavel

 

[IXP]

I highlighted one relevant part.

What is your point? Pavel has always maintained that he foresees what will happen when the envelope is opened and this is why he needs each envelope to be opened immediately after the guess, so it is not confuse it with others.

IXP

 

[pavel_do]

What is your point? Pavel has always maintained that he foresees what will happen when the envelope is opened and this is why he needs each envelope to be opened immediately after the guess, so it is not confuse it with others.

IXP

His point is obvious.. to twist it and make look like I have no intentions to have any test and sort of wasting my time and the others etc..

I am not even going to argue it.. it is pointless. I am just sick of it to be honnest. When some one don’t want to see (admit) the truth, he will not see or admit it.. and the truth is that I am not wasting anyone’s time, and I really want to have proper good test and show that what I am claiming I am able to perform. And I will do my best to make it happen. I just cant as a lame sheep, agree to all the conditions that would put me in the position to lose the test, but not being able to perform it is best…
Any way I am sure who want to see it he sees it..

Or that was another joke? Or the way to encourage me? I am sorry but maybe due to a cultural difference and some others.. I don’t take it as a joke, and obviously not taking it as an encouraging…

 

[IXP]

I am with you Pavel.

I think you have been quite reasonable in trying to determine exactly what you can do and under what circumstances. You are one of the few who has not changed your story or come up with new demands each time JREF proposes something. I hope you get a test that you believe you can pass.

IXP

p.s. This does not mean that I think you will pass!

 

[Startz]

I am with you Pavel.

I think you have been quite reasonable in trying to determine exactly what you can do and under what circumstances. You are one of the few who has not changed your story or come up with new demands each time JREF proposes something. I hope you get a test that you believe you can pass.

IXP

p.s. This does not mean that I think you will pass!

I fully agree with IXP's position.

 

[Akhenaten]

Hi Pavel.

Welcome to город skeptiks

It was always going to be tough for you to deal with the rigourous examination of your ability here. It's just the nature of the place that it will sometimes become quite adversarial, and you seem to have done a brilliant job so far of not taking it personally, but rather in the spirit of transparency in which most criticisms and suggestions have been made.

Please believe that nobody here will attempt to twist your words with intent to discredit you. That's just not what the folks here do. Well, mostly

But people will insist, quite rightly, that all the cards are on the table, so to speak.

Your honesty has set you apart from the vast majority of previous claimants, and I'm sure this will continue until a mutually agreeable test is designed.


I understand your need to see the envelopes opened as you make your choices, and I also understand the objections to this, but sadly I don't know nearly enough to help with a solution. I just wanted to add a voice of support for the way you've gone about this, regardless of the outcome.


Good Luck Mate,

Dave

 

[Ravenwood]

I can't believe I missed this! Pavel, you said earier that you could not use the blank/white photos because you confused it sometimes with the cross picture. What if you used only blank/white photos & black/exposed photos as your "targets" in your test? if you had one black & one white in the pair, perhaps you would "see" one or the other more distinctively. If that is the case, then you could do say sets of 5 envelopes, but only one contains the black or white photo(whichever you can feel strongest about), the other 4 contain the opposite color photo. That would be a 1 in five chance, or 20% as opposed to the 50% chance per pair, meaning less runs. I would be really interested in seeing what your success with that protocol is, I'm sure one of our number crunchers will come up with how many runs you would have to do to meet the odds, assuming that you are sticking to the 75% accuracy claim...

 

[Peristarkawan]

I can't believe I missed this! Pavel, you said earier that you could not use the blank/white photos because you confused it sometimes with the cross picture. What if you used only blank/white photos & black/exposed photos as your "targets" in your test? if you had one black & one white in the pair, perhaps you would "see" one or the other more distinctively. If that is the case, then you could do say sets of 5 envelopes, but only one contains the black or white photo(whichever you can feel strongest about), the other 4 contain the opposite color photo. That would be a 1 in five chance, or 20% as opposed to the 50% chance per pair, meaning less runs. I would be really interested in seeing what your success with that protocol is, I'm sure one of our number crunchers will come up with how many runs you would have to do to meet the odds, assuming that you are sticking to the 75% accuracy claim...

The odds of getting 7 correct out of 10 would be 0.00086, about 1:1157.
At a 60% accuracy rate, the odds of getting 9 correct out of 15 would be 0.00078, about 1:1274.

 

[Startz]

Protocol under consideration

There are a large number of statistical designs that can be used for these tests, as well as a large number of experimental procedures. Forumites have made a number of helpful suggestions along both lines that Pavel has used in coming up with a protocol.

As of right now, there is a specific proposed protocol that was emailed to JREF just over a week ago. It was also posted here in the forum. While waiting for JREF to respond, it would be most helpful for folks here to comment on the current draft protocol.

Remember that:

(1) Pavel's claimed ability is to "see" the content of envelopes that will be opened after his identification. He "sees" the envelopes being opened. He does not claim to see into the sealed envelopes. This is a claim of clairvoyance, as opposed to "x-ray vision."

(2) Pavel has always said his that his ability is imperfect.

(3) JREF wants to hold down the number of envelopes involved, and has expressed some preference for the test to be done in pairs of envelopes.

 

[pavel_do]

Thanks Startz, I wouldn't answer better!

 

[petre]

There are a large number of statistical designs that can be used for these tests, as well as a large number of experimental procedures. Forumites have made a number of helpful suggestions along both lines that Pavel has used in coming up with a protocol.

As of right now, there is a specific proposed protocol that was emailed to JREF just over a week ago. It was also posted here in the forum. While waiting for JREF to respond, it would be most helpful for folks here to comment on the current draft protocol.

Remember that:

(1) Pavel's claimed ability is to "see" the content of envelopes that will be opened after his identification. He "sees" the envelopes being opened. He does not claim to see into the sealed envelopes. This is a claim of clairvoyance, as opposed to "x-ray vision."

(2) Pavel has always said his that his ability is imperfect.

(3) JREF wants to hold down the number of envelopes involved, and has expressed some preference for the test to be done in pairs of envelopes.

Thanks for the summary! I might have missed it in my skimming, or it might have gotten a bit obfuscated in translation, but it wasn't until this thread that I realized the claimed ability was clairvoyance rather than some flavor of remote viewing. That makes it greatly more clear why the post-selection reveal might impact performance.

The following have probably already been suggested but...
It would seem likely that with an ability like this, testing several differentation classes would be much easier (one would be less likely to confuse the results of multiple trials). For example, do one trial with six envelopes containing pictures of zenner cards. Pavel points the one out from a list that will be chosen, then a die is rolled and that number envelope opened and the item shown to Pavel. A second trial is then done with pictures of six different colors of full-page rectangles. Another trial might use pictures of numerical digits, etc.

Perhaps he has more difficulty picking out one item from among a similar class of items though, so his own testing will have to guide the protocol. I was just hoping to offer a helpful suggestion based on my recent new understanding of the described ability.

 

[pavel_do]

Thanks for the summary! I might have missed it in my skimming, or it might have gotten a bit obfuscated in translation, but it wasn't until this thread that I realized the claimed ability was clairvoyance rather than some flavor of remote viewing. That makes it greatly more clear why the post-selection reveal might impact performance.

The following have probably already been suggested but...
It would seem likely that with an ability like this, testing several differentation classes would be much easier (one would be less likely to confuse the results of multiple trials). For example, do one trial with six envelopes containing pictures of zenner cards. Pavel points the one out from a list that will be chosen, then a die is rolled and that number envelope opened and the item shown to Pavel. A second trial is then done with pictures of six different colors of full-page rectangles. Another trial might use pictures of numerical digits, etc.

Perhaps he has more difficulty picking out one item from among a similar class of items though, so his own testing will have to guide the protocol. I was just hoping to offer a helpful suggestion based on my recent new understanding of the described ability.

Thank you, good advise.. But I think for JREF such test will be too complicated as it will again involve allot of different pictures etc... and they are not research team that interested in researching and testing.. it is a challenge..