• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Looking for Skeptics - Continuation (Cassidy's EVP/diamond damage claim)

Cassidy said:
How can I say I am right when it hasn't yet been investigated? How can anyone say they are right without investigation? All I can say is what is happening. I have a perfectly normal GP who also agrees it's worthy of investigation. Have you heard what emits this PC these days? I can only say "Yes that's a voice" I'm just not buying pareidolia as an answer.
Click to expand...

A GP? What is his expertise on this, that you resort to his authority?
 
Cassidy said:
How can I say I am right when it hasn't yet been investigated? How can anyone say they are right without investigation?
Click to expand...
Your EVP claims have been investigated by posters here and by ASKE. I would estimate a few tens of manhours have been devoted to their investigation. Nothing of significance was discovered.

Have you heard what emits this PC these days?
Click to expand...

This question makes no grammatical sense. I assume you're talking about your EVP recordings, which several people here have listened to.

I can only say "Yes that's a voice" I'm just not buying pareidolia as an answer.
Click to expand...
What you personally can or cannot buy does not alter reality.

In any case none of this is on topic in a thread about UFOs.
 
Pixel42 said:
Your EVP claims have been investigated by posters here and by ASKE. I would estimate a few tens of manhours have been devoted to their investigation. Nothing of significance was discovered.



This question makes no grammatical sense. I assume you're talking about your EVP recordings, which several people here have listened to.


What you personally can or cannot buy does not alter reality.

In any case none of this is on topic in a thread about UFOs.
Click to expand...

This stepped up gears and I still don't buy pareidolia sorry. A voice coming from nowhere is suspicious. ASKE visited my home and broke protocol from the off. The magazine write-up was incorrect and I do still have the evidence to prove so. He stopped the challenge because I asked him if he could check that his PC was fit enough before we continued, and he realised his PC couldn't perform like it should do. Most affected PC's cannot record a held note.

You failed to mention that the GP also isn't buying pareidolia. Realty is, there is a signal running through folk's PC's, I'm afraid it's a voice, not just noise coming from nowhere.

Yes none of this is on-topic (Well said, at the end of your say) I agree there.
 
Last edited:
You keep mentioning a GP. Do you mean a general practitioner? What makes you think that he or she is in any way qualified to give an opinion on this?
 
Last edited:
Pixel42 said:
There is nothing 'suspicious' about your images.
Click to expand...

Then there is nothing suspicious, same as the signal that spreads, nothing suspicious about it. The diamonds do break and that's not suspicious either. Each to their own but I like to get to the bottom of the things that don't gel with my train of thought.
 
Cassidy said:
I'm just not buying pareidolia as an answer.
Click to expand...

Why?

Why are you different from everyone else? Everyone experiences pareidolia, except for you, apparently.

Why do you need to believe it is not pareidolia so badly? What motivates you to dismiss this as the answer?
 
Cassidy said:
Then there is nothing suspicious, same as the signal that spreads, nothing suspicious about it. .
Click to expand...
Correct. There are plausible mundane explanations of both, you just need to look for them (which might involve studying some fairly complex subjects in depth). There is no need to invent paranormal explanations.

The diamonds do break and that's not suspicious either.
Click to expand...
If you have indeed had diamonds break there will be plausible mundane explanations of that too. Again, you might need to do some studying to find them.

Each to their own but I like to get to the bottom of the things that don't gel with my train of thought
Click to expand...
You seem to automatically reject all plausible explanations that don't gel with your line of thought, i.e. that don't involve spirits and the paranormal.
 
I agree that it's the effect on the diamond/s that is to be tested here and everything else is incidental.

Whenever we deal with Cassidy could it be beyond us to just reel it in a tiny little bit? Obviously it is easy to get frustrated, but I really do think that lecturing her about her shortcomings etc. is counter to what we all should want to achieve here.

Having written that, the ball is very much in your court Cassidy. You must concentrate and follow through with requests for informtion and clarification. Why don't you produce a file (and publish it the same way you did your sound files originally) of everything you have sent to the MDC for THIS CLAIM ONLY and members here will identify what still needs to be done and how to improve your chance of being tested. When they do, READ their advice and follow it through to the letter. We all, everyone of us, would love to see you being successful in your challenge. I'll repeat that, because I believe you don't get this fundamental fact; we all want you to succeed.

Where we are just now is that we know you will not get past first post with the way you've structured your approach and your protocol is not rigorous nor robust enough. Pixel42 has been very helpful in this regard previously with you and you should read everything she has written in this thread. Stop fighting against people and read exactly what they are writing.

Work with us.
 
Cassidy said:
...
I forwarded a "suggested" protocol, very straight-forward. Equipment required, how it needs to be delivered, and how I can demonstrate paranormal activity. If the JREF see fit to alter those suggestions I've yet to know about it.
...
...
Click to expand...
I don't think they will offer you help with suggestions as to how you 'can' demonstrate your claim.
That is entirely up to you. You're the one who is supposed to know what you think you can accomplish.

It seems to me that you've sent the JREF a worthless proposition.

Cassidy said:
...
(To be delivered direct to a JREF representative here in the UK)
...
(To be delivered direct to a JREF representative here in the UK)
...
Click to expand...
Why? Did you think you'd do the MDC through the mail?
 
Pixel42 said:
Correct. There are plausible mundane explanations of both, you just need to look for them (which might involve studying some fairly complex subjects in depth). There is no need to invent paranormal explanations.


If you have indeed had diamonds break there will be plausible mundane explanations of that too. Again, you might need to do some studying to find them.


You seem to automatically reject all plausible explanations that don't gel with your line of thought, i.e. that don't involve spirits and the paranormal.
Click to expand...

I didn't go through experimenting for nothing. You believe we, including a GP is as deluded, despite the on-going phenomena stepping up gears. You are welcome to continue to resort to pareidolia.

I'm still challenging Mr Randi regarding the diamonds. I've given up with the thread because it's like listening to a broken record. It's full of unnecessary sarcasm, and folk forcing me to believe that nothing is going on.
 
That's not how this board works. When you make a claim there is no obligation on our part to accept it with no supporting evidence.

Word of advice, and I mean this sincerely. Change your GP, he/she is incompetent.
 
bluesjnr said:
I agree that it's the effect on the diamond/s that is to be tested here and everything else is incidental.
...
Click to expand...

Any claim for sorting any claimed effect on diamonds is indeed a separate claim from the claim for spirits being a causal agent in the as yet unsubstantiated claim for diamonds getting damaged through non mechanical means.
For Cassidy/flaccon however it is all about the spirits though, not incidental at all.

If she can overcome that obstacle it may be meaningful to work with everyone here to define a clear claim and develop a proper protocol to test it.
Otherwise everyone here would simply be wasting their time.

Cassidy, as others have done, I invite you to post the full content of your claim and what you call your 'suggested protocol' as you say you have sent to the JREF, for evaluation here in this thread.
 
Last edited:
Susheel said:
That's not how this board works. When you make a claim there is no obligation on our part to accept it with no supporting evidence.

Word of advice, and I mean this sincerely. Change your GP, he/she is incompetent.
Click to expand...

I do have supporting evidence, and a supporting GP. I have tested re tested, and I am happy to move on and prove my claim.

The GP is from a long line of NHS GP's, and is happy to provide Mr Randi a professional letter to support my claim. Lets move this over to elsewhere, it's nothing to do with this thread.
 
Well, she has just announced in the UFO thread that she was giving up on this one because everyone is being mean to her and not believing her and her GP.
 
Cassidy,

Please answer these questions.

Why?

Why are you different from everyone else? Everyone experiences pareidolia, except for you, apparently.

Why do you need to believe it is not pareidolia so badly? What motivates you to dismiss this as the answer?

I would truly like an answer to these questions.
 
Susheel said:
Well, she has just announced in the UFO thread that she was giving up on this one because everyone is being mean to her and not believing her and her GP.
Click to expand...

I see it, so she's hijacking another thread :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I posted this in the MDC thread but I think it needs repeating. From the MDC FAQ page,

If you are submitting a claim that works off a previous assumption, you have to present evidence proving the assumption correct first. For instance, there was a man who claimed that his mustache curled in the presence of ghosts. In order to test this, you would first have to prove the existence of ghosts. And if you did that, the person who proved that ghosts exist would win the million dollars.
Click to expand...

Her claim includes the previous assumption that spirits exist. That spirits can smash diamonds with a PC, a drum, and a rubber band is not, IMO, a valid claim to test.

ETA: Of course as it's their challenge so I am sure JREF can make exceptions as they see fit.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom