Looking for Skeptics

Status
Not open for further replies.
tuxcat said:
With a lot of luck she'll fill in the protocol form and reupload it when it's completed. If everyone could download it then they have a reference.
Click to expand...

I doubt she will complete it.

Don't worry if you don't have MS Word; LibreOffice will open it and write it as a .doc without any bother. LO is available for Windows, Mac and all flavours of Linux.
Click to expand...

Actually, this is a very, very bad idea. Unbeknownst to many, Microsoft Word Office documents carry "property" data, and some of the property data may be considered personal by some.

There are ways, of course, to sanitize a files properties, but most don't know how, and it is easy to forget or to do it wrong.
 
Alderbank said:
Before anyone says anything they regret, could we call a truce?

I think that deep down we all want to see the same thing - skeptics and flaccon work out a protocol

Could we start afresh, let bygones be bygones and all work together?

I will commit to that. Anyone follow me?

ETA You first, flaccon?
Click to expand...

Fair enough. :)

I'll sit back and wait to see if flaccon ever begins to cooperate with designing a test protocol. I hope she does.
 
Pixel42 said:
flaccon's latest claim was "the spirits can transfer into James Randi's laptop and speak to him". flaccon first needs to confirm that this is the claim she wants tested, or suggest an alternative.
...
Click to expand...

Yep, this is exactly the "Pixel42 has the right approach" to which I was referring.
 
I know most of you don’t think it’s a big deal, but I want to apologize again for starting the new thread without much consultation, and for naming Flaccon in the title, which is probably what makes it a call-out thread.

My thought was that it would be good to separate the banter from the serious protocol discussion. This is not remotely what happened, and if the three amigos really wanted to work out a test, they could easily get it done with or without the distracting bickering between the relevant posts. I’ll know better next time. ☻☺☻
 
jsfisher said:
I doubt she will complete it.



Actually, this is a very, very bad idea. Unbeknownst to many, Microsoft Word Office documents carry "property" data, and some of the property data may be considered personal by some.

There are ways, of course, to sanitize a files properties, but most don't know how, and it is easy to forget or to do it wrong.
Click to expand...

Hmm I didn't know that. I don't use M$ Orifice so I don't have the experience. It would be nice if the JREF would support ODT file formats so we don't have that problem but there we go.
 
Right flaccon can you please fill in this form:

My claim is:



I can test my claim by doing this:



I can rule out paredolia by doing this:



I can rule out hallucinations by doing this:



I know I will have been successful because:
 
A filled out form or an actual protocol would be nice, but I would be quite happy with just an unambiguous claim, one that doesn't vaporize.
 
Can I just say, it is difficult to think like you guys unless you've hung out here for a while. When I first started here (at JREF) I had no idea I could not just assert something and people would believe me. I now understand one must be able to back up anything and everything posted. BJREF (before JREF), I thought I found pennies and they were communication from my cousin who deceased at a young age. Heck, I even found a copper-type coin at the Vatican and I was sure it was because he was communicating with me. Yet I do not think I could write a protocol about proving that.

Wouldn't it be easier, instead of harping on a protocol from flaccon, if we tried to narrow down exactly what the claim is? Flaccon - I am suggesting you write, in specific detail, what happened when you gave your file to Mr. Roberts. Something such as:

1. The file played on my computer as silent.
2. I emailed the file to Mr. Roberts.
3. Mr. Roberts played the file on his laptop and he heard xyz.

Can we just start there?
 
Last edited:
jsfisher said:
I doubt she will complete it.



Actually, this is a very, very bad idea. Unbeknownst to many, Microsoft Word Office documents carry "property" data, and some of the property data may be considered personal by some.

There are ways, of course, to sanitize a files properties, but most don't know how, and it is easy to forget or to do it wrong.
Click to expand...

Have removed the offending file. Forgot to uncheck "apply user data" to sanitise it.
 
Ampulla of Vater said:
Wouldn't it be easier, instead of harping on a protocol from flaccon, if we tried to narrow down exactly what the claim is?
Click to expand...

Yep. Maybe it would help if I proxied for them on one of the cases:
  1. I created a 45-second .WAV file in a generally quiet house with the internal microphone volume full up.
  2. On playback, I heard only background noise and a couple of random recording artifacts. This was at full speaker volume and then with Audacity's amplify effect enabled.
  3. I emailed the file to both scrappy and flaccon.
  4. On first playback scrappy heard nothing of significance.
  5. After flaccon played it back on her computer, she noted a 6-second period of pure silence beginning 21 seconds into the recording, and she heard the word, "Robin", at the 38 second mark.
  6. After flaccon reported to scrappy what she heard, scrappy again played the file on his computer. He now also noted the 6 seconds of silence and the word, "Robin", matching flaccon's experience.
  7. I, some 3,200 miles distant from Chester, UK, have noted no changes at all in the original .WAV file. Qualitatively, it sounds the same; quantitatively, the MD5 hash is unchanged.
 
Ampulla of Vater said:
Can I just say, it is difficult to think like you guys unless you've hung out here for a while. When I first started here (at JREF) I had no idea I could not just assert something and people would believe me. I now understand one must be able to back up anything and everything posted. BJREF (before JREF), I thought I found pennies and they were communication from my cousin who deceased at a young age. Heck, I even found a copper-type coin at the Vatican and I was sure it was because he was communicating with me. Yet I do not think I could write a protocol about proving that.

Wouldn't it be easier, instead of harping on a protocol from flaccon, if we tried to narrow down exactly what the claim is? Flaccon - I am suggesting you write, in specific detail, what happened when you gave your file to Mr. Roberts. Something such as:

1. The file played on my computer as silent.
2. I emailed the file to Mr. Roberts.
3. Mr. Roberts played the file on his laptop and he heard xyz.

Can we just start there?
Click to expand...

The problem is that flaccon's claim changes every day. It's like chasing a wild snipe.
 
jsfisher said:
Yep. Maybe it would help if I proxied for them on one of the cases:
  1. I created a 45-second .WAV file in a generally quiet house with the internal microphone volume full up.
  2. On playback, I heard only background noise and a couple of random recording artifacts. This was at full speaker volume and then with Audacity's amplify effect enabled.
  3. I emailed the file to both scrappy and flaccon.
  4. On first playback scrappy heard nothing of significance.
  5. After flaccon played it back on her computer, she noted a 6-second period of pure silence beginning 21 seconds into the recording, and she heard the word, "Robin", at the 38 second mark.
  6. After flaccon reported to scrappy what she heard, scrappy again played the file on his computer. He now also noted the 6 seconds of silence and the word, "Robin", matching flaccon's experience.
  7. I, some 3,200 miles distant from Chester, UK, have noted no changes at all in the original .WAV file. Qualitatively, it sounds the same; quantitatively, the MD5 hash is unchanged.
Click to expand...

Could you post that .wav file for us? I'd like to give it a listen and see what it sounds like to see what could have caused "robin."
 
Flaccon, is there some other issue preventing a commitment to working up a protocol? Remember, you can put irritating people on ignore, so you only have to work with folk you feel comfortable with.
 
tuxcat said:
Could you post that .wav file for us? I'd like to give it a listen and see what it sounds like to see what could have caused "robin."
Click to expand...

If this process works it is paranormal so none of us understand the mechanism. Copying a file sounds harmless but it might be critical and ruin the process. I think we should not deviate from what has been agreed between flaccon and jsf unless flaccon confirms it will be OK to do so

Just my opinion
 
flaccon: Does a file have to be WMV before you can hear the "spirits"? *
If not, what other kind of file can be used?


* Please quote this as I fear I'm on ignore.
 
Alderbank said:
If this process works it is paranormal so none of us understand the mechanism. Copying a file sounds harmless but it might be critical and ruin the process. I think we should not deviate from what has been agreed between flaccon and jsf unless flaccon confirms it will be OK to do so

Just my opinion
Click to expand...

Hmm you've got a point there.
 
Donn said:
flaccon: Does a file have to be WMV before you can hear the "spirits"? *
If not, what other kind of file can be used?
Click to expand...

Good question. flaccon told me off for not sending WMV file but all she asked for was a 15 sec file of 'silence'. There are several options for audio-only files. FLAC format is one. It is a nice name and sounds a little like 'flaccon'.

What do you think, flac?
 
Can't find anything about this in the help so I'll just stick it here: if you're on someone's ignore list, can you see their posts or not? I know that the ignorer cannot see the ignoree's posts.

ETA: And another thing that's occurred to me - would it be worthwhile making this a moderated thread to keep people on track and stop the bickering and poo-flinging matches that seem to take place? And yes I know I'm as guilty as flaccon for losing my cool and calling her obtuse, deluded and a time-wasting joke; and calling her "listen darling". However in my defence when I am annoyed by people I will attack their bad qualities and the problems that they bring to the thread. Just as I will praise their good qualities.
 
Last edited:
Alderbank said:
Good question. flaccon told me off for not sending WMV file but all she asked for was a 15 sec file of 'silence'. There are several options for audio-only files. FLAC format is one. It is a nice name and sounds a little like 'flaccon'.

What do you think, flac?
Click to expand...

How much hassle will it give to be able to play flac files?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom