Natal'ya Votonikova - Man in a Box

[Cuddles]

And even if it does, who cares? What relevance would there even be to a person who can identify a brightly painted box containing a Russian speaking male person in the same room with other boxes but no other boxes containing people?

In all fairness, that's really beside the point. It doesn't matter how useless an ability is, or how weird you'd have to be to discover you have it in the first place, all that matters is that it's paranormal.

Of course, one of the really fun things about science is that many things appear to be completely useless at first, but turn out to change the world. Steam power and gunpowder, for example, were both thought useful for nothing more than little toys for thousands of years, but look what they ended up doing.

This is not to say that I think this particular case has any chance of being anything other than a performance that will never go to test because the JREF won't let through a protocol that allows tricks, but that's not the point. Whatever you think about a particular claim, that fact that the ability appears pointless is not a valid reason to dismiss it.

In the whole history of the world, I doubt that anyone has ever needed someone with that particular paranormal ability.

Do horses count as boxes? I know some guys from Troy who would find it quite handy.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

...
More and more applications seem to be falling into the category of publicity stunt, guessing game, or try to figure out my trick.
...

With the Challenge ending soon, the vultures come out at daylight. Of course, only a cynic would say that.

What matters is: The JREF accepted her application.

It seems to become a likely notch in the belt of the category: "Applicants accepted on a semi-ludicrous premise who STILL failed to proceed to a test."

 

[RoboTimbo]

With the Challenge ending soon, the vultures come out at daylight. Of course, only a cynic would say that.

What matters is: The JREF accepted her application.

It seems to become a likely notch in the belt of the category: "Applicants accepted on a semi-ludicrous premise who STILL failed to proceed to a test."

A shame, isn't it? I'd like to afford her the benefit of the doubt. We don't have much to go on yet. I wonder if we'll be able to communicate with her or if she only speaks Russian. Maybe Pavel could help.

 

[scratchy]

Re body heat: The human body produces heat comparable to a 100 watt light bulb. That would certainly effect air movement around the box when a person stays there for hours. If any light source in the room makes it possible to see dust, smoke or mist of any kind in the air, that alone could help her to identify the box even from say 10 meters away.

 

[jojonete]

At some point it may even be necessary to define what she means by a Russian speaking man.

I would assume she wants a person who's native language is Russian.

Assuming she has tested herself previously, who was in the box in her tests?
I mean, telepaths usually bring their own "receiver" to the test because they have tried their powers with that receiver and no one else (at least, not so thoroughly or not so successfully); so they can't be sure their powers work with other people. This idea could be also applied to this test (i.e. let her bring to the test someone from her previous tests). However I'm afraid this might render the whole claim untestable, as it would probably require to have someone else inside the box to check that the target-man doesn't make intentional sounds (what was that? was it an unintentional noise not audible from outside the box? was it a deliberately loud breathing sound?). Also, two persons produce more heat that one, bigger boxes are needed, etc. A big mess.

So I'd vote for the male being someone from a Russian skeptic organization (so no worries about intentional communication). About Doubt's question, I'd define a Russian-speaking male as "someone who Ms. Vorotnikova has known and approved some minutes before the test".
The idea that she must know the person in advance might raise concerns about what information she can get from him during this meeting, and how that information can be of use during the test (e.g. a particular odor from him, a breathing pattern, etc.). However, I guess this is not a big problem as long as she's not allowed to touch him (touching would imply more serious concerns as she could leave some object or "mark" on him that could allow detection by non-paranormal means).
Also, a previous baseline test would be nice (although this tortures a little more the poor man in the box, and it may worsen the body heat/odor concerns).

In summary:

1. Ms. Vorotnikova knows Mr. X, and they talk for a few minutes so she can make sure he can speak Russian well enough, he is male enough, he's not wearing the wrong watch, etc. She is NOT allowed to touch him. Any doubt about the validity of Mr. X as a target aborts the whole test until a more suitable man can be found.
2. Mr. X enters box number 4 in full view of Ms. Vorotnikova, and she is asked if she can perceive him in that box. If she can't, the test is considered failed.
3. The double-blind test begins.

All in all, I think we need an answer to the question:
What is the shortest distance from the boxes she needs to be?

 

[Crispy Duck]

Maybe her ability would be confused by other humans, but not by other living things? If so, you could put some large animal - maybe a donkey or a pony - in every box, and the Russian-speaking man in just one. The general noise and heat of the animals moving would mask anything the man might do.

The downside is that the animal might react to the man's presence in an identifiable way - so that's probably a non-starter... unless it can be controlled for. Perhaps each box could be divided into two, so that the animal in the front half wouldn't be aware of the man in the back half?

It's all just guessing without knowing more about the applicant's specific technique, of course.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

Maybe her ability would be confused by other humans, but not by other living things? If so, you could put some large animal - maybe a donkey or a pony - in every box, and the Russian-speaking man in just one. The general noise and heat of the animals moving would mask anything the man might do.

The downside is that the animal might react to the man's presence in an identifiable way - so that's probably a non-starter... unless it can be controlled for. Perhaps each box could be divided into two, so that the animal in the front half wouldn't be aware of the man in the back half?

It's all just guessing without knowing more about the applicant's specific technique, of course.

What would you expect this procedure to cost?

 

[Crispy Duck]

I don't know, I guess it would depend on whether donkeys cost more or less per hour than Russian-speaking men. It would be for the applicant to decide whether she wanted to invest the necessary funds, in any case.

Depending on the definition of 'box', the whole show could be held at a stable at relatively little cost, I would think.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

Assuming she has tested herself previously, who was in the box in her tests?
I mean, telepaths usually bring their own "receiver" to the test because they have tried their powers with that receiver and no one else (at least, not so thoroughly or not so successfully); so they can't be sure their powers work with other people. This idea could be also applied to this test (i.e. let her bring to the test someone from her previous tests). However I'm afraid this might render the whole claim untestable, as it would probably require to have someone else inside the box to check that the target-man doesn't make intentional sounds (what was that? was it an unintentional noise not audible from outside the box? was it a deliberately loud breathing sound?). Also, two persons produce more heat that one, bigger boxes are needed, etc. A big mess.

So I'd vote for the male being someone from a Russian skeptic organization (so no worries about intentional communication). About Doubt's question, I'd define a Russian-speaking male as "someone who Ms. Vorotnikova has known and approved some minutes before the test".
The idea that she must know the person in advance might raise concerns about what information she can get from him during this meeting, and how that information can be of use during the test (e.g. a particular odor from him, a breathing pattern, etc.). However, I guess this is not a big problem as long as she's not allowed to touch him (touching would imply more serious concerns as she could leave some object or "mark" on him that could allow detection by non-paranormal means).
Also, a previous baseline test would be nice (although this tortures a little more the poor man in the box, and it may worsen the body heat/odor concerns).

In summary:

1. Ms. Vorotnikova knows Mr. X, and they talk for a few minutes so she can make sure he can speak Russian well enough, he is male enough, he's not wearing the wrong watch, etc. She is NOT allowed to touch him. Any doubt about the validity of Mr. X as a target aborts the whole test until a more suitable man can be found.
2. Mr. X enters box number 4 in full view of Ms. Vorotnikova, and she is asked if she can perceive him in that box. If she can't, the test is considered failed.
3. The double-blind test begins.

All in all, I think we need an answer to the question:
What is the shortest distance from the boxes she needs to be?

I would think that, should she be allowed to talk to the man, it should be done through a prison-type window, so that any perfumes she might be wearing can't translate to him, to be detected later on.

Also, does the claimant need to see? Can she be led around the warehouse blindfolded? (Has this already been asked?)

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I would just send her back to the drawing board.

There doesn't seem any way to make this claim testable while ruling out non-paranormal ways of detecting which box contains the man.

Even if she doesn't consciously cheat, if she found him correctly 3 times in a row, I wouldn't say that gives compelling evidence of a paranormal ability.

 

[The Professor]

If she could do it three times without fail that would be paranormal.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

If she could do it three times without fail that would be paranormal.

That would be a terribly wrong conclusion. You'd sooner postulate a hitherto unknown sense or paranormal power rather than suspect she was hearing, smelling, or sensing through some ordinary means which box has a man in it. Honestly, as it's described, I could probably find the one box with a man in it. I've got very sensitive hearing, and unless the guy is able to hold his breath every time I'm within earshot (and can simultaneously avoid making tiny involuntary movements) I'm sure I could pick out the correct box using my hearing. If I did this 3 times in a row without fail, you'd declare it a paranormal power.

You would be wrong. Luckily, you're not putting up a million bucks on such a challenge.

 

[steenkh]

If she could do it three times without fail that would be paranormal.

Do what three times without fail? Just how close would she be allowed to be to the boxes? The man inside will need to breathe, and air holes need to be drilled. How can you be sure that it will not be possible to hear or smell the breath or perspiration through the holes, or measuring the temperature of the boxes with a clandestine infra-red sensor?

 

[AndyD]

Hmmm, perform the test multiple times but use a Russian speaking man/men only a few of those times and use non-Russian-speaking man/men/women the other times (one at a time of course). This would presumably take care of many of the obvious "human" problems, like the noises, smells and movements that involuntarily occur whilst trying to survive in a box.

She'd need to get the Russian every time and never the others (or meet an agreed hit/miss rate)

Naturally, all subjects would need to be sufficiently ignorant of the details of the test and just do as they are told.

That said, what a weird gift to have been blessed with - and discovered

 

[Cuddles]

Hmmm, perform the test multiple times but use a Russian speaking man/men only a few of those times and use non-Russian-speaking man/men/women the other times (one at a time of course).

Unfortunately she's already said:

She can only find a Russian-speaking man. None of the other boxes may contain humans. They must all be boxes, and not rooms.

 

[The Professor]

Hey guys ... It's HER PROTOCOL. She is supposed to design it. Why do you bring up stuff that is SO different from what she suggests?

 

[Drs_Res]

It's a processes Dave.

It's her protocol, yes, but needs to be agreeded to by BOTH parties.
There are problems that need to be addressed to exclude cheating and information leakage.

One of my questions is, why is it so important that it be a box and can not be a room?
A room is just a box after all.

We are curious.

And just to be clear, we could suggest that the Russian man is on a different planet on the forum here, but this has no impact on the final protocol since we are just asking questions and making suggestions.

 

[CriticalThanking]

Hey guys ... It's HER PROTOCOL. She is supposed to design it. Why do you bring up stuff that is SO different from what she suggests?

It is indeed her protocol. The protocol as outlined has been rejected by JREF for the sound reasons provided by RemieV. Nothing posted in this thread stops the applicant from altering the protocol or submitting an entirely different one.

As for why people are suggesting things, there are many reasons. You would have to ask each poster which applies. First, many people here have experience with experimental controls. A challenge applicant would do well to evaluate the suggestions offerred. The applicant is of course, free to accept or reject any of said items, with or without comment. No protocols will have been interfered with by these postings.

Because the applicant has not offerred details on what tests have been attempted and their results, the posters are left to suggest items that may or may not be in line with the applicant's abilities. Such speculation may provide insight to the applicant to amend the protocol. I have heard another applicant indicate a willingness to listen to help on a protocol - in fact rumor has it the applicant is always open to improvement. Posters such as Jackalgirl, steenkh, Cuddles, and others have been extremely helpful to MDC protocol discussions. My apologies to the many other posters I failed to mention who have been helpful and respectful.

Some people post in these threads to learn. They make suggestions and ask for critical review. It is an excellent way to learn about topics such as statistical validity, experimental controls, and self-evident results. Would that all applicants felt the same way.

It may be presumptuous of me, but I believe that some applicants might be helped in their protocol development by reading such posts for the reasons cited above. I must admit it is certainly possible that some applicants might not listen to advice offered and instead might delay submitting protocols, give protocols not meeting the JREF rules, insult helpful posters and the JREF, repeatedly question the integrity of Randi, the JREF, and even the existence of the million dollars in spite of evidence.

CT

 

[The Professor]

It is indeed her protocol. The protocol as outlined has been rejected by JREF for the sound reasons provided by RemieV. Nothing posted in this thread stops the applicant from altering the protocol or submitting an entirely different one.

As for why people are suggesting things, there are many reasons. You would have to ask each poster which applies. First, many people here have experience with experimental controls. A challenge applicant would do well to evaluate the suggestions offerred. The applicant is of course, free to accept or reject any of said items, with or without comment. No protocols will have been interfered with by these postings.

Because the applicant has not offerred details on what tests have been attempted and their results, the posters are left to suggest items that may or may not be in line with the applicant's abilities. Such speculation may provide insight to the applicant to amend the protocol. I have heard another applicant indicate a willingness to listen to help on a protocol - in fact rumor has it the applicant is always open to improvement. Posters such as Jackalgirl, steenkh, Cuddles, and others have been extremely helpful to MDC protocol discussions. My apologies to the many other posters I failed to mention who have been helpful and respectful.

Some people post in these threads to learn. They make suggestions and ask for critical review. It is an excellent way to learn about topics such as statistical validity, experimental controls, and self-evident results. Would that all applicants felt the same way.

It may be presumptuous of me, but I believe that some applicants might be helped in their protocol development by reading such posts for the reasons cited above. I must admit it is certainly possible that some applicants might not listen to advice offered and instead might delay submitting protocols, give protocols not meeting the JREF rules, insult helpful posters and the JREF, repeatedly question the integrity of Randi, the JREF, and even the existence of the million dollars in spite of evidence.

CT

At first I may have agreed with you, but I found that many here are NOT trying to help the applicants, but instead are causing problems and distractions. Some even resort to name calling and snarkey bashing (not MY words here). How does this help?

As Critical thinkers, how does this seem fair in the slightest?

I am doing as you've suggested and I've been looking at other applicants threads and I see all of these problems.

She can find a Russian Speaking man in a box. Let her try.

 

[CriticalThanking]

At first I may have agreed with you, but I found that many here are NOT trying to help the applicants, but instead are causing problems and distractions. Some even resort to name calling and snarkey bashing (not MY words here). How does this help?

I am glad you believe that some are helpful. This is an open message board, filled with humans (I can't speak for Piscivore and a few others). It has been my experience that some humans are less helpful than others. Some can be downright rude! Does rudeness help? Of course not. I don't think anyone claimed that name calling helps. As you do in real life, ignore the noisemakers and appreciate those who try to help. You can always ask for a moderated thread if you feel the signal to noise ratio is too bad.

As Critical thinkers, how does this seem fair in the slightest?

Critical thinking is a process - a way of evaluating and presenting information to make (hopefully) better decisions. Crash testing ideas into reality is in no way "fair" - but it is the best way we know of to explore reality. An idea making a testable prediction is true, false, or does not have the necessary conditions to determine truth/falsehood. Protocol design is intended to create some of those conditions.

To state the obvious, there is no test of critical thinking abilities to be able to join this forum. If there were, many members, and many MDC applicants might not be allowed to post here.

I am doing as you've suggested and I've been looking at other applicants threads and I see all of these problems.

Excellent!

She can find a Russian Speaking man in a box. Let her try.

I agree with you 100%- let her try once there is a mutually agreeable protocol.

CT