New telepathy test, the sequel.

Michel H · Apr 18, 2022

Dave Rogers said:
Given the opinions you have expressed on the current crisis, I for one am quite relieved that your ability to do anything about it exists only in your imagination.

Dave

Childlike Empress said something interesting recently about a certain Empire.

I invite you to take a look: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=13785117#post13785117.

Food for thinking ...

Carlotta · Apr 18, 2022

To quote a bowl of petunias, "oh no, not again."

Dave Rogers · Apr 18, 2022

Michel H said:
Childlike Empress said something interesting recently about a certain Empire.

I find it interesting too, but not for a reason either of you would like.

Dave

p0lka · Apr 18, 2022

Michel H said:
A member of this forum said recently, in another thread:

Delusional, me?

In order to hopefully help clarify things a little bit, I invite you to participate in a new, simple telepathy test, which will perhaps help proving your remarkable extra-sensory perception abilities.

I recently wrote (and circled) one of the following four words: "2022", "Russia", "attacked" and "Ukraine" on a piece of paper near me.

I ask you to tell me which of these four words I wrote.

This word was selected by means of this random number generator: https://www.random.org/integers/, all four words have equal probabilities.

We have to pick one of the four?

You might as well just say ' I'm thinking of a number... it's 1 or it's 2 or it's 3 or it's 4. pick one'

Are the labels you put on the numbers ie '2022' 'russia' 'attacked' and 'ukraine' important?

p0lka · Apr 18, 2022

Cosmic Yak said:
Would these supposed telepathic waves travel through the earth, or somehow bend to follow the curve of the surface?

Well p and s add up to 27, that's got to mean something yeah.

edit: sorry just watched 'the number 23' with jim carey for the first time, love it, but yeah numbers.

Jack by the hedge · Apr 18, 2022

p0lka said:
Well p and s add up to 27, that's got to mean something yeah.

edit: sorry just watched 'the number 23' with jim carey for the first time, love it, but yeah numbers.

Please be aware that Michel will assign meaning to anything you say like this. Even if you are obviously joking, Michel will either not recognise that you are joking or will decide that although you might believe it was a joke you were really responding to some subconscious telepathic effect. There is no limit to the degree of word-twisting available.

abaddon · Apr 18, 2022

Michel H said:
No. By the way, I meant "wide range" (like "broad range"), not "wire range". I have corrected the erroneous post.

Radio transmitters emit in very narrow ranges of frequencies, for example WCWP in New York, a Jazz radio station emits at frequencies close to 88.1 MHz.

I assume this is probably not true about telepathy, but I don't know much about the physical and neurological explanation of telepathy.

As a graduate radio and telecoms engineer surrounded by high tech gear, have a guess whose voice has never appeared?

abaddon · Apr 18, 2022

Oh and before anyone asks, lets have a look at who broadcasts on those.

But according to michel, they all hear him.

junkshop · Apr 18, 2022

Michel,
I would thank you to stop interfering with popmaster. It's bad enough that I have to put up with Scott Mills filling in while Ken is away, but your incessant interruptions are ruining my average scores*.

*I realise that this can be read two ways. Both work.

Michel H · Apr 18, 2022

p0lka said:
We have to pick one of the four?

You might as well just say ' I'm thinking of a number... it's 1 or it's 2 or it's 3 or it's 4. pick one'

Are the labels you put on the numbers ie '2022' 'russia' 'attacked' and 'ukraine' important?

Technically, no, but psychologically, yes.

People might get bored from seeing too many "1 2 3 4" tests.

p0lka · Apr 18, 2022

Michel H said:
Technically, no, but psychologically, yes.

People might get bored from seeing too many "1 2 3 4" tests.

If my labels were 'pink' 'fluffy' 'clouds' and 'mutilation' I would worry that the labels might influence the choosing in the test.

Is it the labels you are testing for?

junkshop · Apr 18, 2022

Michel H said:
...People might get bored from seeing too many "1 2 3 4" tests.

Why do you need to give people options?

If, as you claim, others can hear/read your thoughts then the question

'I have written a word, what is it?'

should surely suffice, and the right-or-wrongness of any answers you get would be less ambiguous, and less open to interpretation*, no?

_{*assuming, of course that this is your aim.}

Michel H · Apr 18, 2022

junkshop said:
Why do you need to give people options?

If, as you claim, others can hear/read your thoughts then the question

'I have written a word, what is it?'
should surely suffice, and the right-or-wrongness of any answers you get would be less ambiguous, and less open to interpretation*, no?

_{*assuming, of course that this is your aim.}

Doing telepathy tests in this way is very common, since J.B. Rhine and even before. The ganzfeld studies are for example also done using options.

These options may make the tests easier psychologically for people (there are always psychological factors which must be taken into account, for both the sender and the percipients, people are not machines or robots). In addition, they simplify the statistical analysis.

Skeptics have an unfortunate tendency to try to sabotage good tests by giving terrible "advice".

Dabop · Apr 19, 2022

Michel H said:
The answer seems clear: though extra-sensory perception, perhaps related to (as yet unmeasured) electromagnetic waves emitted by the sender.

You seem to be forgetting that answerers could write some interesting comments, together with their answers, for example these skeptics' favourites:

Try answering the test yourself, your answer might not be so random.

I notice you have ONCE AGAIN chosen to deliberately and dishonestly try and claim that Loss Leader supported your fantasy- which is not the case...

This is imho a very low act indeed...

junkshop · Apr 19, 2022

junkshop said:
Why do you need to give people options?

If, as you claim, others can hear/read your thoughts then the question

'I have written a word, what is it?'
should surely suffice, and the right-or-wrongness of any answers you get would be less ambiguous, and less open to interpretation*, no?

_{*assuming, of course that this is your aim.}

Michel H said:
Doing telepathy tests in this way is very common, since J.B. Rhine and even before. The ganzfeld studies are for example also done using options.

These options may make the tests easier psychologically for people (there are always psychological factors which must be taken into account, for both the sender and the percipients, people are not machines or robots). In addition, they simplify the statistical analysis.

Skeptics have an unfortunate tendency to try to sabotage good tests by giving terrible "advice".

You have claimed (on more than one occasion) that other people can hear your thoughts. If that is true, then the only question you need to ask is

'what am I thinking?'

There is no need for multiple choice answers, no need for hints as to what form that thought takes (eg a number, a word, etc). If other people can hear your thoughts then they can tell you what they hear.

Some believers have an unfortunate tendency to try to sabotage ~~good~~ fundamentally flawed tests by dishonestly making semantic pretzels out of any responses, until they fit their desired outcome. Advice is wasted on you, and so I offer none.

ETA: As I say, you have previously claimed that others can hear your thoughts. You have also claimed that they deny having that ability, for some undefined (but probably nefarious) reason. If these claims are true, then what is the point in these ridiculous 'tests' you periodically trot out?

If you are right, then we all hear your thoughts, but dishonestly refuse to admit it (no proof of telepathy).

If you are wrong, then we don't hear your thoughts, and honestly say so (no proof of telepathy).

What do you hope to acheive?

ETA2: On Planet X everyone is telepathic, but in a dead language.

Gord_in_Toronto · Apr 19, 2022

Michel H said:
Doing telepathy tests in this way is very common, since J.B. Rhine and even before. The ganzfeld studies are for example also done using options.

These options may make the tests easier psychologically for people (there are always psychological factors which must be taken into account, for both the sender and the percipients, people are not machines or robots). In addition, they simplify the statistical analysis.

Skeptics have an unfortunate tendency to try to sabotage good tests by giving terrible "advice".

Poor old JB spent decades conducting much more thorough ESP tests than what you propose. Hundreds, if not thousands, of them. At the end he claimed a teeny tiny positive result. But then it was found that he admitted throwing away a few really bad ones because he thought his test subjects were having fun with him. Thus explaining his result.

Oh. And my guess is rhubarb.

Pixel42 · Apr 19, 2022

Michel H said:
Technically, no, but psychologically, yes.

People might get bored from seeing too many "1 2 3 4" tests.

Whether they are bored or not is irrelevant, any valid test protocol must use options that are equally likely to be picked by chance. This is problematic even with numbers, it's even more difficult to find four words with no psychological baggage which might lead people to choose or avoid one more than others. Any serious experimenter would know this, and design their test protocol accordingly.

Any valid test protocol must also be blinded and use all the data, of course. Any serious experimenter would know this too, and again design their test protocol accordingly.

To my knowledge you have only ever run one valid test. The rest of the time and effort you and your test subjects have expended has been completely wasted.

MBDK · Apr 19, 2022

sackett said:
The word MH wrote was "arglebarg." He doesn't realize that.

Please don't tell him. Poor fellow has enough problems already.

Does that translate to "Istanbul"? That's the message I got.

arthwollipot · Apr 19, 2022

Michel H said:
Technically, no, but psychologically, yes.

People might get bored from seeing too many "1 2 3 4" tests.

The problem with your tests is that there is a 25% chance that someone will get the correct result, even if there is no telepathy. One in four. That's so high as to make a singly-iterated test like this useless.

Make it a choice out of ten options, and iterate the test ten times, and I will consider participating again.

Dave Rogers · Apr 19, 2022

arthwollipot said:
Make it a choice out of ten options, and iterate the test ten times, and interpret the test results honestly rather than biasing the result by declaring most of the misses to be not credible, and I will consider participating again.

FTFY. It's important to remember the blatant dishonesty exhibited in the interpretation of every iteration of this charade so far.

Dave

New telepathy test, the sequel.

Banned

Graduate Poster

Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through

Illuminator

Illuminator

Safely Ignored

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Otto's Favourite

Banned

Illuminator

Otto's Favourite

Banned

Master Poster

Otto's Favourite

Penultimate Amazing

Schrödinger's cat

Muse

Limerick Purist Pronouns: He/Him

Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through