Looking for Skeptics

[Maurice Ledifficile]

I could be wrong, but it looks to me as though Flocon answering the following questions would move things along:

Can the spirits see (Y\N)
Can the spirits hear (Y\N)
Can the spirits answer specific, easy questions (Y\N)

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Let me know if this an acceptable tester?

Step 1. (Live record 1) Recording of live TV.
a) Familiarise with volume & sound.

Step 2. Listen to pre recorded messages.
a) Clear, reducing to cluttered.
a) Familiarise to the different types of vocal ability.

Step 3 (Live record 2)
a) Hearing out the Spirits.
b) Communication test (Method of their ability to communicate)

Test 1. (Live record 3+)
a) Repeating of certain words/phrases.

Test 2. (Live record 4+)
a) Identifying and comparing words.

Test 3. Hidden colour-card identification tests.
Viewing; 80 images of art work.
Visual examination of the originals.
(4 tiny stains, protected behind glass)

Could you skip the rest and just go straight to this bit?

It would be great if you could concentrate on proving the spirits are real and can communicate real information to you. That's the bit that really matters.

Other stuff like whether other people can hear voices too doesn't matter for now.

The fundamental point, the one which coincidentally can win you €1,000,000, is whether or not you can prove this spirit communication is real.


So, identifying these coloured cards: how exactly will the test proceed?

How many cards will there be, how will they be shown to the spirits, how much time will you need to hear and write down each answer and what would be a reasonable number to expect to get right, considering the spirits might not answer clearly every time (if they deign to answer at all)?

This is the stuff that matters right now.

 

[Cassidy]

Alright alright.

Claim: spirits exist and can manipulate electronics at will.

Does that sound right?

Not at will no. They used a mobile phone to communicate 13 years ago. I didn't use a mobile phone for over a decade. Their first contact I heard via computer, was an Acer (External Altec Lansing) 3 years ago. I did not record after hearing them, until October 2012.

They did not communicate with "voice" via the mobile 13 years ago.

 

[Biscuit]

Not at will no. They used a mobile phone to communicate 13 years ago. I didn't use a mobile phone for over a decade. Their first contact I heard via computer, was an Acer (External Altec Lansing) 3 years ago. I did not record after hearing them, until October 2012.

They did not communicate with "voice" via the mobile 13 years ago.

Ok back to the cards then. What do you propose?

 

[IXP]

It appears to me that they do not wish to be approached by a lesser intelligent form such as man, and must perform magician-like acts to be taken serious.

Such primitive testing is not necessary to prove their existence.

Ah, so the spirits are more intelligent than mere humans and are insulted by the ridiculous tests we wish to put them through.

This gives me an idea for a test that they might not consider as insulting as identifying the color of playing cards.

The Clay Mathematics Institute offers $1Million to anyone who can solve any of 7 long standing problems in mathematics. One has already been won, but 6 remain. Surely giving a solution to one of these 6 problems that mathematicians have been puzzling over for decades would not be beneath their intelligence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Prize_Problems

So I propose that you ask your super-intelligent spirits to dictate the solution to any one of those puzzles. If they succeed, you will instantly be world-famous and have $1 million to help you promote your message. How could you lose?

IXP

 

[Scopedog]

flaccon,

Pretend somebody is claiming to you that spirits are communicating with them or that they can predict the future or that they can bend spoons with their mind or that they've seen bigfoot or that they've been abducted by aliens or that pyramids were built by ancient aliens or that there was a global flood 6,000 years ago. Do you believe every claim without question? If not, what sort of test or evidence would convince you their claim is true? Approach your testing protocol that way.

 

[Biscuit]

Playing cards ace, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 of random suites are selected and five numbered Manila envelopes. Without flaccon's knowledge 5 cards are randomly selected and one is placed in each of the 5 envelopes. Flaccon will then use whatever means she wants with out anyone physically handling the envelopes or the cards to determine the suite and number of each card in each envelope. She will write her answers down on paper each answer clearly correlated to a specific envelope by the envelopes number. Once she has written down all 5 answers the envelopes will be opened. Repeat from beginning 5 times.

A correct answer will identify the suite and number of the card. No partial credit will be given.

How many out of 25 should she need to get right?

 

[Pixel42]

How many out of 25 should she need to get right?

I have a degree in Mathematics and I have no idea.

Why on earth make it so complicated? It needs to be simple enough for flaccon to understand how the chance success rate and success criteria are calculated.

 

[abaddon]

It's like I mentioned Maurice, the more I explain of the spirit world, the more baffling/silly it will sound. Until one has the firm understanding, through experiencing evidence, that spirits exist.

Flaccon, could you cease and desist with the quote tag tomfoolery as above. It has been explained to you in sufficient detail that it can only be intentional at this point.

 

[Biscuit]

I have a degree in Mathematics and I have no idea.

Why on earth make it so complicated? It needs to be simple enough for flaccon to understand how the chance success rate and success criteria are calculated.

Haha. I see your point.

Get rid of the extra cards and the extra randomizing. Cards 1 - 5 randomly placed in an envelope.

I figure playing cards are better as nothing has to be made and they are easy to come across.

 

[zooterkin]

Flaccon, could you cease and desist with the quote tag tomfoolery as above. It has been explained to you in sufficient detail that it can only be intentional at this point.

Actually, it was Biscuit who started it this time. But you're right, it could easily be stopped if people checked their posts after making them. As you could have, for instance.

 

[abaddon]

Actually, it was Biscuit who started it this time. But you're right, it could easily be stopped if people checked their posts after making them. As you could have, for instance.

LOL, that was intentional, to illustrate the issue.

 

[jsfisher]

I have a degree in Mathematics and I have no idea.

Why on earth make it so complicated? It needs to be simple enough for flaccon to understand how the chance success rate and success criteria are calculated.

I agree. This is a more of a simple self-test, not a go at the MDC.

How about just two cards drawn from a standard deck of 52 playing cards. Flaccon handles neither the cards nor the envelopes into which the cards are placed. Success criterion is get both correct.

Should there an unblinded test run at the start? (I have mixed feelings about this.)

Two, maybe three, record-then-listen sessions wouldn't be too onerous a task for flaccon, I wouldn't think. She may need to repeat a session to get a clear statement from the spirits, but still all within range of one afternoon's testing.

 

[steenkh]

I think that the colour card test is ambiguous unless it has been agreed in advance exactly what the names of the colours are. Would "azure" be acceptable for "blue", for instance? People often disagree about colours.

Assuming that the spirits can read, would it not be better to write a different word on a number of cards and put them in an envelope, all with the backside up. The tester (Alderman) then picks a random card and takes it out so that neither he, nor the claimant (flaccon) can see it, but the spirits can have a clear view of the front side of the card. Then the card is placed on the table with the back upwards, still without having been seen by the tester or the claimant.

The claimant makes the spirit recording, and asks the spirits what card they had seen, and makes a playback which she listens to and writes down what she believes is the answer by the spirits. Then a comparison is made with the actual card.

Since this is an informal test, no number of hits and misses need be agreed upon in advance, but if the spirits can read, and the writing is clear, we would expect every single answer to be right, or allowing for the fact that flaccon may not always be able to hear what the spirits say, perhaps 3 misses out of 25 would be acceptable?

This test is easy to do, and only needs the cooperation of the spirits. We could promise the spirits that a successful test would give the support of the skeptics for a renewed contact to a bishop!

 

[Maurice Ledifficile]

I think that the colour card test is ambiguous unless it has been agreed in advance exactly what the names of the colours are. Would "azure" be acceptable for "blue", for instance? People often disagree about colours.

Assuming that the spirits can read, would it not be better to write a different word on a number of cards and put them in an envelope, all with the backside up. The tester (Alderman) then picks a random card and takes it out so that neither he, nor the claimant (flaccon) can see it, but the spirits can have a clear view of the front side of the card. Then the card is placed on the table with the back upwards, still without having been seen by the tester or the claimant.

The claimant makes the spirit recording, and asks the spirits what card they had seen, and makes a playback which she listens to and writes down what she believes is the answer by the spirits. Then a comparison is made with the actual card.

Since this is an informal test, no number of hits and misses need be agreed upon in advance, but if the spirits can read, and the writing is clear, we would expect every single answer to be right, or allowing for the fact that flaccon may not always be able to hear what the spirits say, perhaps 3 misses out of 25 would be acceptable?

This test is easy to do, and only needs the cooperation of the spirits. We could promise the spirits that a successful test would give the support of the skeptics for a renewed contact to a bishop!

I would go so far as saying that any correct answer, barring cheating, is grounds for serious inquiry.

Consider a card with a specific colour on one side, with the name in large letters, say magenta. The participants don't know the specific names of the colours used. If, then, different witnesses correctly identify the "spirits" as saying magenta, not red or purplish, then I'm impressed enough to fully encourage a more serious test, with sound experts, magicians, or whatever is necessary. Then we can worry about what constitutes a fair "well above chance" level of accuracy.

Just a thought.

 

[IXP]

I don't know why people keep trying to come up with tests of the kind being proposed here. We already know that the spirits are insulted and will not participate in such a childish exercise. I have proposed a test that might not be insulting to the super-human intelligences that flaccon has claimed the spirits to be. I would like to hear what the spirits say about my proposal (from post #825)

Edited: Of course my proposal would not prove that there were sprits, but the other possibility, that flaccon is among the greatest mathematicians in history seems equally unlikely to me.

IXP

 

[jsfisher]

I don't know why people keep trying to come up with tests of the kind being proposed here. We already know that the spirits are insulted and will not participate in such a childish exercise. I have proposed a test that might not be insulting to the super-human intelligences that flaccon has claimed the spirits to be. I would like to hear what the spirits say about my proposal (from post #825)

Edited: Of course my proposal would not prove that there were sprits, but the other possibility, that flaccon is among the greatest mathematicians in history seems equally unlikely to me.

IXP

You realize that yours is the same basic method used to expose Clever Hans. I don't think the spirits will be all that happy with you when they figure this out.

Neigh, I do not.

 

[Orphia Nay]

Testing spirit's with coloured cards, after explaining the great mystery of life, is seriously insulting them. I am not reluctant with any test, they are.

It's no excuse, it's a reason. It's no fault of mine that they find such monkey-like tests very insulting. I'd be insulted too.

Flaccon contradicts herself here.

This reminds me of the famous Susan B Anthony quote, which I shall paraphrase:

I distrust those people who know so well what God [the spirits] wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.

Yet again, I worry that flaccon is not being honest with herself, or us.

 

[Cassidy]

I could be wrong, but it looks to me as though Flocon answering the following questions would move things along:

Can the spirits see (Y\N)
Can the spirits hear (Y\N)
Can the spirits answer specific, easy questions (Y\N)

Maurice, try to understand this one ! I just been going thru old recordings for Alderbank,, and I noticed the sentence "We don't belong in a circus" I thought "nope you don't" Then I thought about it. That recording was a few months back, and this is a new saying of theirs (are you following that so far?)

So I opened another old recording, and the same sentence appeared. I clicked open another old recording and ask them to say a different phrase, and they repeated that instead of "We don't belong in a circus" This is my point about they are not actually being recorded as such.

The spirits can see yes (confirmed)
The spirits cannot hear properly. They hear bits and pieces and lipread the rest.
The spirits can read.
The spirits answer questions yes.

 

[Maurice Ledifficile]

Or her customers.



ETA: I was trying to add to Orphi Nay's post and git nijaed.

Yet again, I worry that flaccon is not being honest with herself, or us - Or her customers.