[Moderated]Hypothetical Million Dollar Winner

[DMG]

It does strongly infer but not prove psi-esp.

And do those inferences constitute evidence? If so, the money is paid. The Challenge asks for evidence - not proof - which can then be further studied.

Actually I think this has been said many time this thread - are you ignoring it for a reason?

“In all cases, applicant will be required to perform a preliminary test either before an appointed representative, if distance and time dictate that need, or in a location where a member or representative of the JREF staff can attend.”

… In human performance testing, this is extremely unprofessional. There would have to be a 3rd party representative instead, who is neutral and not any of the following:

adversarial, in support of, or acting on behalf of, the adversary in any way (while conducting any aspect of a test).

The presence of any such person can interfere with the actual performance of the subject. In the presence of an adversary, a subject can easily feel intimidated and therefore is at high risk (as proven by a huge body of research) for under-performing - or outright failing to demonstrate - whatever gift s/he claims to have. “Performance anxiety” is real, and extends beyond the bedroom, you see. “Test anxiety” is the specific form involved here. As long as the test isn’t controlled for this, the outcome is laughable. There is no way to confidently measure results in such conditions. Pure and simple.

Right - so the first psychic (or whatever) to have the cajones to overcome his performance anxiety will have some nice pocket change and maybe a little credibility. Problem solved.

I trust that if somebody runs with a million dollars, he or she must have done something quite extraordinary.

Indeed - even if it turned out to be mundane trickery.

If I 'can' I will not because it will demean and trivialise the ability.

Yeah - I'm an artist and it's so demeaning to draw things for people.

I have not said I 'can'.

In the context of the particular psi-esp conscious faculty, to which you are referring, it is the self imposed discipline of those who 'can'.

They have no interest in any public display to indulge those who deny the possibility of what they can do, and who by definition have no way of proving or disproving the truth or falsity of psi-esp.

All the talk about fame and fortune through the JREF MDC is of no interest to them whatsoever, and it would breach their code.

What???? So why are you even here fighting the good fight then??? If you can't do it and the ones who can don't care to prove it (yeah right) then why do you bother here?

 

[babbits]

The presence of any such person can interfere with the actual performance of the subject.

This is one version of the "spirits will not enter the room if it is lighted" defense.

Others:

"The presence of a skeptic upsets the medium and interferes with his/her concentration; so only believers may attend the seance to attest to the medium's powers."

"We have to search everyone, removing celphones, and any object which may be a recording device, because such items would damage the ectoplasm."

 

[maatorc]

........
1... ...If you can't do it...
2... ...then why do you bother here?

1... I have not said I cannot.

2... It is really very simple.
I am merely pointing out something people like you will eventually be forced to accept, namely that the MDC will never have a proveable result of

JREF: evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event.

because it has no means of measuring such an event, any more than you could 'prove' that you held a particular 'thought', which is not even psi-esp.

 

[sthomson]

because it has no means of measuring such an event, any more than you could 'prove' that you held a particular 'thought', which is not even psi-esp.

Actually, with the scientific discoveries in the mechanisms of the human brain, I wouldn't be surprised if we COULD predict thoughts from fMRI data in the near future.

Anyway, maatorc, you're missing the point. You seem to think that we're looking for a way to test the noumenal fact of psi-esp (or whatever you call it), but really, the MDC is looking to test the phenomenal effects of ESP. If ESP has no phenomenal representation - if it has no physical or informational effect on its surroundings - then what's the point of it? How would I distinguish it from my own internal thoughts or delusions?

 

[maatorc]

Originally Posted by maatorc View Post
because it has no means of measuring such an event, any more than you could 'prove' that you held a particular 'thought', which is not even psi-esp.

.......but really, the MDC is looking to test the phenomenal effects of ESP........

Can you give an example of such an effect?

 

[Gr8wight]

Quote:
Originally Posted by maatorc View Post
because it has no means of measuring such an event, any more than you could 'prove' that you held a particular 'thought', which is not even psi-esp.
Originally Posted by sthomson View Post
.......but really, the MDC is looking to test the phenomenal effects of ESP........

Can you give an example of such an effect?

No. That is the whole point. The Million Dollar Challenge is asking for an example of such an effect. No one to date has provided one. Does that mean ESP or PSI - or whatever you want to call it - doesn't exist? Of course not. It simply means its existence has not yet been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the rules of the challenge. We all agree that it will probably never be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the challenge rules. We simply disagree on the reasons why.

Still, the MDC manta remains: "show us...or go away."

 

[maatorc]

No. That is the whole point. The Million Dollar Challenge is asking for an example of such an effect. No one to date has provided one. Does that mean ESP or PSI - or whatever you want to call it - doesn't exist? Of course not. It simply means its existence has not yet been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the rules of the challenge. We all agree that it will probably never be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the challenge rules. We simply disagree on the reasons why.Still, the MDC manta remains: "show us...or go away."

The whole point is the MDC cannot identify or measure such an effect even where it does exist.

 

[Gr8wight]

The whole point is the MDC cannot identify or measure such an effect even where it does exist.

No, the whole point is that you are completely unable to explain how an "effect" can be unmeasurable, and still be an "effect." Anything that exists can be measured in some way. Name one thing that exists and is unable to be measured.

 

[maatorc]

No, the whole point is that you are completely unable to explain how an "effect" can be unmeasurable, and still be an "effect." Anything that exists can be measured in some way. Name one thing that exists and is unable to be measured.

A thought.

 

[steenkh]

A thought.

It can be recorded indirectly by asking the person what he was thinking of. He could lie of course, but there are means to counter that.

Psi-esp is much easier because it is not just any thought but usually comes with provable claims. If a psi-esp practitioner (I know you react negatively to the term "psychic") claims he can read the mind of another person, it is easy to compare what both of them claim were their thoughts.

Can you give a reason why the MDC cannot test such a claim? Or would insist that such a claim would not be representative of pis-esp?

 

[DMG]

The whole point is the MDC cannot identify or measure such an effect even where it does exist.

(bold mine)

But you said a test where psy powers performed better than chance would strongly infer the existence of said powers.

This seems a contradictory stance.

 

[petre]

A thought.

You cannot prove thoughts exist.

 

[sthomson]

Can you give an example of such an effect?

That's not my responsibility, but sure, I'll do it.

I sit in a locked room with no doors or windows, with a deck of cards. A psychic records whether I'm looking at a red card or a black card.

10 people bring 10 personal objects that have no identifying features. An objective recorder writes which object goes to which person. Someone who claims to have this particular ability should be able to match each object to each person.

Hell, if a psychic could tell me something personal about my past, like the color of my neighbor's dog, I'd consider that pretty freaking "phenomenal".

 

[Gr8wight]

A thought.

Incorrect. Scientists are able to use various imaging techniques to measure electro-chemical activity in the brain, and can observe that activity change as subjects are asked to think different thoughts. Try again.

 

[maatorc]

You cannot prove thoughts exist.

Actually or experientially?

 

[maatorc]

Incorrect. Scientists are able to use various imaging techniques to measure electro-chemical activity in the brain, and can observe that activity change as subjects are asked to think different thoughts. Try again.

The method you mention does not identify the thought.

 

[maatorc]

That's not my responsibility, but sure, I'll do it.
I sit in a locked room with no doors or windows, with a deck of cards. A psychic records whether I'm looking at a red card or a black card.
10 people bring 10 personal objects that have no identifying features. An objective recorder writes which object goes to which person. Someone who claims to have this particular ability should be able to match each object to each person.
Hell, if a psychic could tell me something personal about my past, like the color of my neighbor's dog, I'd consider that pretty freaking "phenomenal".

These effects do not measure the process.
The psychic-psi-esp process may operate but in itself is not measured.
The above would be generally convincing.
Note, though, the JREF-MDC presumption, and that of Mr. Randi, is that it is all deception, cold reading, and fraud.

 

[maatorc]

....But you said a test where psy powers performed better than chance would strongly infer the existence of said powers.
This seems a contradictory stance.

Measuring a process and studying its effects are not the same, and this is critical to this matter.

 

[Gr8wight]

The method you mention does not identify the thought.

I don't believe I used the word "identify" in my original question. We are not talking about identifying a thought, simply using some empirical method of measuring it. Demonstrating that it exists and is occurring at any given time. Scientists are doing that as we speak. Sorry, but I won't let you move the goal posts here. Try again.

Please name something that exists but cannot be measured.

 

[Gr8wight]

These effects do not measure the process.
The psychic-psi-esp process may operate but in itself is not measured.
The above would be generally convincing.
Note, though, the JREF-MDC presumption, and that of Mr. Randi, is that it is all deception, cold reading, and fraud.

Oh, wait, in this response you are more concerned with measurement, and not identification. You cannot have it both ways, maatorc. Try again.