My Struggle

[Wellfed]

Re: Olive Branch

Gulliver,

I most certainly appreciate your gracious offer. I respectfully choose to decline however. I would prefer to prove my claim with a methodology that more closely emulates how I naturally listen to music while assessing GSIC efficiacy. I am currently content testing myself with my own resources and methodology. As I view the matter, JREF is the party that needs to prove themselves credible at this point.

Michael

 

[-42-]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by -42-
1. You threaten to suspend things until October.
2. Kramer threatens to close your claim. Naturally, this is what you wanted to happen, so:
3. You carried through on your threat.
4. Kramer then closes your file.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My "threat" was conditional. Kramer met the condition. I was actually quite surprised by the brazen manner in which he did this.

How is that in any way surprising? I'd have taken 20:1 on it.

I am actually honest enough and humble enough to do just that [Admit to doubting ability]. I haven't done it because I don't doubt it. I am wise enough to know that the I would fail the testing without the proper conditions. I was looking to close every escape portal possible.

Three things here:

1) The degree of your claims of effectiveness of the device has changed during this process, as evident by "conditions" that need to be in place.

2) I think you are vastly underestimating the power of delusion and of the brain to decieve itself.

Given the number of people who have outright explained to you why the chip does not work (which I won't repeat) why would you not immediately seek to see for yourself in DB fashion and rule out any delusions of the mind?

You stated on many occasions about ironing down some kind of restrictive protocol for a DBT-Self Test. This is ENTIRELY unnecessary. It only becomes necessary if you PASS. In the meantime, You can have valuable information. If you FAIL with less restrictive DBT protocol then there is no point in tightening it up, right?

It's wasted time spending 4 months to nail down a perfect DBT-Self Test if you can't pass one made up in 7 minutes. (Of which you commented about "specifics")

3) You can ignore this one. But also it's possible you're a pepetuator of a scam, with some sort of vested interest or kickback in the sales of the gsic.

I do doubt it.... but let us say a hypothetical person submited a claim on it, like yours. If the protocol eliminated their ability to perform a trick, get near-chance or better-than-chance odds, what would they do? (Or if their design was never to be tested, but to try to show that someone wanted it tested and got an effect) They would do anything to get out of it, of course, and accuse the whole foundation of fraud. . . . . .

PianoTeacher, in his long-windedness, discussed many such ways such a trick could be performed - or chance odds could be obtained. (In reality, that's what would happen in the seconary test, from your questioning about it to Kramer. You can bet if someone passed the preliminary there'd be a bit-by-bit comparison of the source CDs among other measures to rule out a trick or built in chance-odds to the protocol.)

I have no need to see my system.

Then why even comment on it during protocol negotiations?

Just accept that as something that doesn't matter and move on.
Bedsheet, Trashbag over system, facing away from system, moving system, moving speakers, blindfold, any number of things.

Very true, they very well could have not accepted my application. The reality is they did. They even "said" they were thrilled to do so. Perhaps they were at the time. Apply your powers of suspicion to this matter and let me know what you think. Me/GSIC/Me is an issue that JREF has waffled on.

I'm curious what you mean here.

Do you think that JREF has come to believe that this device functions and that you can tell a difference. As a result lied to everyone and denied your claim? I hope that you don't really think that, it saddens me. I'm guessing that you don't think that is it, since they accepted another claim on the device.

At the least, I hope you mean suspicious in the sense that they didn't want to devote resources to the test? Is that it? Tired of talking about it?

Or maybe suspicious in the sense that JREF thinks you are performing a trick that they haven't accounted for or can figure out? And as a result "lied to everyone" and denied your claim?

Or maybe suspicious in the sense that you can't tell the difference and want to get out of it?

Maybe you should clarify.

Actually I am now becoming insistent that I be tested, I believe very strongly that the Randi Challenge IS a complete farce if I am not allowed to do so under reasonable and customary conditions.

Excellent. Come back to the JREF in a year. In the meantime, there is other challenge money to be won from places just like JREF.

Why not apply there too?

Maybe even one in your state.

Then when you start raking in the $1,000 $5,000 etc prize bucks Randi will be sweating indeed.

Plus you will be a celebrity in the meantime - certainly on talk shows and news shows across the country, for having discovered new evidence of the workings of the universe.

It won't be Randi calling out Sylvia, it'll be you calling out Randi. Won't that be fun to teach this fradulent institution a lesson?

 

[Winny]

Re: Re: Olive Branch

Gulliver,

I most certainly appreciate your gracious offer. I respectfully choose to decline however. I would prefer to prove my claim with a methodology that more closely emulates how I naturally listen to music while assessing GSIC efficiacy. I am currently content testing myself with my own resources and methodology. As I view the matter, JREF is the party that needs to prove themselves credible at this point.

Michael

Michael,

How can this not "emulate how you naturally listen to music"? In what way does this prevent you from using your "preferred methodology"?

Gulliver has made a remarkable and generous offer. You get the CDs and you can listen to them at your leisure, in your own home, under whatever circumstances you usually listen to music. If you were sincere about being tested, I would have thought you would leap at this opportunity. That fact that you once again begin to prevaricate speaks volumes.

Winny

 

[Gulliver]

Regrettable Decision

Your decision is a regrettable one.

At this point, I must conclude that you are unwilling to submit to any reasonable test. I can't imagine a fairer approach than I presented. You would end up with 10 CDs of your choice with a value of up to $400. All you'd have to do is to listen.

You are very much mistaken about who has to prove what. You're the challenger. You're making the absolutely preposterous claim. You should know that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.

I hope that you'll reconsider. My offer will remain open indefinitely.

Until then, I believe that I'll be posting only recipes in the threads involving you.

Regards,
Gulliver

 

[-42-]

Re: Regrettable Decision

Your decision is a regrettable one.

At this point, I must conclude that you are unwilling to submit to any reasonable test. I can't imagine a fairer approach than I presented. You would end up with 10 CDs of your choice with a value of up to $400. All you'd have to do is to listen.

Numerous people have provided such assistance as yours and have put in time to provide an easy BT that would require extremely little time on the 2nd party.

He doesn't want to test. He wants to spend 100x the time on the forums.

 

[69dodge]

Re: Re: Olive Branch

Originally posted by Wellfed
Gulliver,

I most certainly appreciate your gracious offer. I respectfully choose to decline however. I would prefer to prove my claim with a methodology that more closely emulates how I naturally listen to music while assessing GSIC efficiacy.

I don't understand. Gulliver's offer places no restrictions whatsoever on how you listen to the CDs. Is the problem the time limit of a week? Perhaps he'd be willing to extend it. The length of time isn't really essential. What's essential is that you don't have prior knowledge about whether a CD was treated.

 

[chillzero]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am actually honest enough and humble enough to do just that [Admit to doubting ability]. I haven't done it because I don't doubt it. I am wise enough to know that the I would fail the testing without the proper conditions. I was looking to close every escape portal possible.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See, I don't understand this.

Part of the reason I cam to this forum was because I was a committed believer in tarot and psychic ability. I had been defending my beliefs on a different forum, and someone pointed me here - to win the million if I could really divine the future as I claimed.

Until then I had believed in my ability. Like you, I didn't doubt it for a second. But unlike you, the reason for my lack of doubt was that I had tested myself. I now realise how inadequate and biased my testing had been, but I still remained open to testing myself over and over. In fact, I believed that was what prevented me from stagnating.

I opened myself to the various suggestions I read here for testing psychic ability, and fully expected to amaze everybody. Thankfully I tried things out myself before I made a complete idiot of myself in front of the entire JREF, and the world.

Why are you so against challenging yourself?
Why would you not want to do a 'dry run' of any testing you may undertake?
I think it is a shame you have refused the offer from Gulliver - that seems to me to be perfectly reasonable.
I also think it is a shame you did not continue to try and comply with JREF requirements for testing. But even if you did, or if you re-apply next year, the most common sense thing you can do, is test yourself.
Test yourself with or without the already discussed protocols, and keep records. You should have nothing to fear if you are being sincere and genuine, and only knowledge to gain if you turn out to be misled in your beliefs.

 

[-42-]

Part of the reason I cam to this forum was because I was a committed believer in tarot and psychic ability. I had been defending my beliefs on a different forum, and someone pointed me here - to win the million if I could really divine the future as I claimed.

Until then I had believed in my ability. Like you, I didn't doubt it for a second. But unlike you, the reason for my lack of doubt was that I had tested myself. I now realise how inadequate and biased my testing had been, but I still remained open to testing myself over and over. In fact, I believed that was what prevented me from stagnating.

I opened myself to the various suggestions I read here for testing psychic ability, and fully expected to amaze everybody. Thankfully I tried things out myself before I made a complete idiot of myself in front of the entire JREF, and the world.

Why are you so against challenging yourself?
Why would you not want to do a 'dry run' of any testing you may undertake?
I think it is a shame you have refused the offer from Gulliver - that seems to me to be perfectly reasonable.
I also think it is a shame you did not continue to try and comply with JREF requirements for testing. But even if you did, or if you re-apply next year, the most common sense thing you can do, is test yourself.
Test yourself with or without the already discussed protocols, and keep records. You should have nothing to fear if you are being sincere and genuine, and only knowledge to gain if you turn out to be misled in your beliefs.

Great post.

Imagine if you actually did submit to JREF testing before doing your own, though.

I certainly won't surmise what YOU would have done, but it's very hard to bow out and admit you are wrong, especially with the eyes on the world on you. I think most of us have experienced this with very non-paranormal things and with a lot less eyes than 'the world'.

I'm not right all the time and in lesser matters I may be wrong quite a bit. When it comes down to this paranormal stuff all it really takes is: SHOW ME.

Or, In this case of the 'audio critic' I'm willing for: SHOW YOURSELF.


What the 'believers' often don't grasp is that many of the 'skeptics' want to be proven wrong. In the case of paranormal/pseudoscience medical claims, it could mean saving LIVES or improving the quality of life for so many in need. In other claims, it could mean changing the way we look at the world and the universe. Redefining all laws as we so far know. And all it takes is simply being able to do what they say they can :/

 

[Squidd]

Re: Regrettable Decision

I can't imagine a fairer approach than I presented. You would end up with 10 CDs of your choice with a value of up to $400. All you'd have to do is to listen.

Hey, I'd like $400 worth of free CDs. And, uh--cough--boy, I sure do believe that the Golden Sound Intelligent Chip is the greatest thing ever invented, and boy, it sure does work, and boy, I sure can hear the difference, but boy, I sure couldn't let JREF test me on accounta they're mean and nasty and tell lies about people and all that stuff. Yeah. No lie, I'm not yankin' your chain, it's all one-hundred-percent Honest-Injun gospel.

Whaddaya say, Gulliver? Wanna put me to the test? I can have a list ready by this afternoon.

Please?

 

[Wellfed]

Re: Regrettable Decision

Your decision is a regrettable one.

At this point, I must conclude that you are unwilling to submit to any reasonable test. I can't imagine a fairer approach than I presented. You would end up with 10 CDs of your choice with a value of up to $400. All you'd have to do is to listen.

You are very much mistaken about who has to prove what. You're the challenger. You're making the absolutely preposterous claim. You should know that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.

I hope that you'll reconsider. My offer will remain open indefinitely.

Until then, I believe that I'll be posting only recipes in the threads involving you.

Regards,
Gulliver

The ball is in JREF's hands. It would seem they believe they have the lead and are attempting to let the clock run out. I was not tested simply because JREF was not willing to make it happen. My offer remains open as well. I want to be tested by JREF. My hope is that others would voice their desire to see me tested too. Extraordinary claims require ordinary refutation. JREF doesn't seem to be in a position to do this simple task. I am left to wonder why.

 

[jmercer]

Re: Re: Regrettable Decision

The ball is in JREF's hands. It would seem they believe they have the lead and are attempting to let the clock run out. I was not tested simply because JREF was not willing to make it happen. My offer remains open as well. I want to be tested by JREF. My hope is that others would voice their desire to see me tested too. Extraordinary claims require ordinary refutation. JREF doesn't seem to be in a position to do this simple task. I am left to wonder why.

You are incorrect - "The ball" is no longer in play. JREF has officially closed your application - there is no "clock" to run out, except for the 12 month waiting period before you can submit another claim.

This was done when - after months of fruitless efforts on the part of JREF and Forum Members - you arbitrarily suspended protocol negotiations. You did this in spite of being publicly warned that suspending negotiations would result in your application being closed.

Your refusal to acknowledge this is either an indication that you are deluding yourself, or an intentional deception on your part.

 

[webfusion]

The LostAngeles Test Will Proceed

Mr Anda indicates:
"My offer remains open as well."

No, it most certainly doesn't. Your claim was rejected.
Didn't you get an eMail about that?

If you received such communication, the record you posted here is incomplete.
Please clarify with the JREF, if you have not gotten an eMail that officially rejects your claim.

 

[Gulliver]

Re: Re: Regrettable Decision

The ball is in JREF's hands. It would seem they believe they have the lead and are attempting to let the clock run out. I was not tested simply because JREF was not willing to make it happen. My offer remains open as well. I want to be tested by JREF. My hope is that others would voice their desire to see me tested too. Extraordinary claims require ordinary refutation. JREF doesn't seem to be in a position to do this simple task. I am left to wonder why.

You won't hear my voice expressing a desire to see you tested (by JREF).

I believe that your refusal to accept my test demonstrates that you aren't interested in being tested. There's simply no valid reason for your regrettable decision.

You're still welcome to accept my offer.

BTW, extraordinary claims do not require any refutation. The claimant must prove the claim. The ball is in your court.

 

[Hitch]

Okay, I'm just being mean and petty

But I've reviewed the threads related to this to confirm that I'm not crazy, and Wellfed's account of lies on the part of Kramer and JREF are unfounded and came accross a quote that many here may have forgoten.

KRAMER on 03-14-2005 posted:

I must disagree with some who feel that this applicant is out to defraud the JREF. He is definitely an honest cat who truly believes that this little chip works wonders. I have just spoken with him via telephone, and I have absolutely no reason to believe that he isn't wholly confident of his ability to prove his claim. He is courteous and polite. No red flags anywhere, so far as I can see.

Oh boy, I bet he wishes he could go back and unsay that.

There's a thread claiming that Kramer in the wrong person for the job. Kramer's problem is not as the poster claims that Kramer is too undiplomatic in dealing with applicants. Apparently he's too gullible when a slightly reasonable sounding crackpot comes along.

 

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

An anecdote

As my first post to the JREF forums, I'd like to offer a personal experience that I think demonstrates the problem here quite well:

When I was about 17, I was working at a gas station. As far as I can tell, one day someone must have broken into my car while I was working, and stole my gym membership. A few days later, police officers showed up at my gym to question me, because my gym membership was found at the scene of a break-in a few blocks from my work.

After vehemently denying that I had committed this crime, the police simply asked me,
"Would you be willing to take a lie detector test to prove this?"
Without hesitating, I replied,
"Of course. Just let me know when and where. Absolutely."
At this point, the police officers knew I was innocent. I didn't commit that crime, and you're damn right I was going to do whatever I had to prove it.

It would have been a very different story if, when the police asked me to take the test, if I said, "Hmmm... Well, yes, I'll take the test, but I'll only take it 3 months from now, and only if conditions 1 through 20 are met. Oh, and what if I'm really nervous or sick? And noone can be in the room while I take it.".

My point is, if I was so confident that something was true, and there was a million dollars on the line, I would be standing on the front porch of the JREF until I was tested.

Wellfed's requests are not the requests of a man who has any confidence in what he claims. This is common sense.

-Ripley 29

 

[edthedoc]

It takes courage to admit to being wrong and backing down gracefully. Some people just can't do it.

 

[jmercer]

It takes courage to admit to being wrong and backing down gracefully. Some people just can't do it.

Especially when their reputation is at stake in the Audiophile's forums, where they write their reviews of such products... and in particular, glowingly endorsed the product under discussion here.

 

[jj]

Re: Re: Olive Branch

Gulliver,

I most certainly appreciate your gracious offer. I respectfully choose to decline however. I would prefer to prove my claim with a methodology that more closely emulates how I naturally listen to music while assessing GSIC efficiacy. I am currently content testing myself with my own resources and methodology. As I view the matter, JREF is the party that needs to prove themselves credible at this point.

Michael

Now, Michael, that is offensive. What you're doing here is a classic abuse of the "range rule", basically, one that audiophiles have been doing pretty much since the dawn of time.

Attacking JREF's credibility is simply not called for here.

 

[BPSCG]

Re: Re: Re: Olive Branch

What you're doing here is a classic abuse of the "range rule", basically, one that audiophiles have been doing pretty much since the dawn of time.

What is the "range rule?"

 

[Wellfed]

Re: Re: Re: Regrettable Decision

You are incorrect - "The ball" is no longer in play. JREF has officially closed your application - there is no "clock" to run out, except for the 12 month waiting period before you can submit another claim.

This was done when - after months of fruitless efforts on the part of JREF and Forum Members - you arbitrarily suspended protocol negotiations. You did this in spite of being publicly warned that suspending negotiations would result in your application being closed.

Your refusal to acknowledge this is either an indication that you are deluding yourself, or an intentional deception on your part.

ar·bi·trar·y (är'bÄ_-trÄ•r'Ä“) pronunciation
adj.

1. Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle: stopped at the first motel we passed, an arbitrary choice.
2. Based on or subject to individual judgment or preference: The diet imposes overall calorie limits, but daily menus are arbitrary.
3. Established by a court or judge rather than by a specific law or statute: an arbitrary penalty.
4. Not limited by law; despotic: the arbitrary rule of a dictator.