Merged New telepathy test: which number did I write ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Innocuous said:
I thought I had read the entire discussion, but I am thinking now I must have missed one iteration - I thought we were on the second.
Click to expand...

The first iteration has its own thread, this third one was merged with the second one so you need to read this thread from the beginning to see what happened.

I know that I am not lying when I say I am receiving nothing from Michel telepathically, and any guess I made would be completely random. You, and every other person contributing to this thread including those who guess a number, know the same. The only person who needs to be convinced of this is Michel, and its clear by now that nothing will ever convince him.
 
Michel H said:
At the beginning of my online telepathy tests, I was using a greater number of possibilities, I even used a three-digit target. But these tests generally did not produce good results.
Click to expand...

You mean they did not produce the results you wanted.



Here, you can see that the test was (superficially at least) a total failure, a real skeptical paradise ;).
Click to expand...
You mean they did not produce the results you wanted.


One of the difficulties in these tests is that people might think that they're doing a "good enough job", if they give an answer which is related (but not necessarily equal) to the target, from example, they might give just one digit right (or answer 53 instead of 55), and you have to try to figure out if the answer was (in a sense) "close" to the target (and good luck with that).
Click to expand...
How are they doing a "good enough job"? They are either receiving a number or not receiving a number. If you think that receiving "53" is same as "55", then either you are not sending a number or others are not receiving it. No wonder you cannot accept a proper protocol when you think that a near miss counts as "good enough" or close enough to be a pass!

I tell you what. Start a thread where people have to guess between one and 999,999 and accept any answer that has one digit anywhere in the response which matches your answer, even out of order. You will be over the moon with the result because you will have a success rate of well over 66%, and possibly up to 90%, and can happily go away thinking you are the chosen one.


Norm
 
Last edited:
Innocuous said:
Would you also agree that if the test permits you to throw away some responses because of their credibility rating, that those responses will never be revealed to anyone? So no one will ever know what the numbers for those responses were (except the responders, individually).
Click to expand...
Even if we assume adherence to the protocol, this would still only be acceptable if the submissions were anonymous, as Michael is now aware of previous posts of the thread participants and can therefore be influenced, consciously or otherwise, by those posts.

You may think that doesn't matter if he doesn't see the numbers until afterwards, but it would be one more uncontrolled variable. If he's to judge on the submission alone, he can't know who the posters are. OTOH if he's to judge on the credibility of the posters, he can exclude from the test, in advance, those he doesn't find credible.
 
Last edited:
Michel H said:
At the beginning of my online telepathy tests, I was using a greater number of possibilities, I even used a three-digit target. But these tests generally did not produce good results.
Click to expand...


When this silly test fails will the next one be "pick a whole number between one and three" then?
 
With all my heart, Honest Abe, Scouts Honor, With sparkling eyes and child like innocence my number is

~~$$~~ c81e728d9d4c2f636f067f89cc14862c
 
How optimistic you are, Michel.

Twelve hundred posts in this thread and not even the tiniest shread of evidence that telepathy exists.

Please see a doctor.
 
Ladewig said:
How optimistic you are, Michel.

Twelve hundred posts in this thread and not even the tiniest shread of evidence that telepathy exists.

Please see a doctor.
Click to expand...

Oh, well if you want evidence that should only take a few minutes.

My test protocol:

I will spend the next five minutes thinking about my phone number, thinking about a password and thinking about the £1,000 cash prize I will give to the first telepathic person anywhere on the planet who simply rings the number and says the password.

Lines are open now, clock is ticking.
 
There's still time to call. I'm going to keep the prize line open.

By the way, the password was not "This is an important message regarding your payment protection insurance...".
 
Michel H said:
At the beginning of my online telepathy tests, I was using a greater number of possibilities, I even used a three-digit target. But these tests generally did not produce good results. Here is an example (with a target between 1 and 100): answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091010125251AAOZnTS.
Here, you can see that the test was (superficially at least) a total failure, a real skeptical paradise ;). One of the difficulties in these tests is that people might think that they're doing a "good enough job", if they give an answer which is related (but not necessarily equal) to the target, from example, they might give just one digit right (or answer 53 instead of 55), and you have to try to figure out if the answer was (in a sense) "close" to the target (and good luck with that).
Click to expand...

You assume someone "sees" a number between 1 and 4 more definitely than a large number? Interesting. So 3 is not "close to" 4, but 1241123 is close to 1241124?

So why not try a series of numbers between 1 and 4, sent sequentially, as I think has been suggested? This would eliminate the bias, interpretation, and statistics errors very well. Just number picks, no measure of "reliability" needed. Something like:

4 2 1 1 2 3 3 4 (randomly chosen, of course)

If someone sees the correct string of all 7 digits, then that is very convincing and you don't have to worry about guessing a potentially "confusing" large number. If they can accurately chose 1 to 4, then they should be able to do that 7 times in a row and get the whole string correctly.

Clearly you are convinced you are telepathic. Okay, although you should see a doctor even if you are telepathic. But why devise tests that don't convince anyone else: why not just be secure about your conviction? You seem to have failed an accurate test already, so I think I cannot help you if the only acceptable test will prove what you already believe, but will fail to prove it to anyone else.
 
Nay_Sayer said:
With all my heart, Honest Abe, Scouts Honor, With sparkling eyes and child like innocence my number is

~~$$~~ c81e728d9d4c2f636f067f89cc14862c
Click to expand...
Thank you, Nay Sayer. I think your answer is valid, I count 32 characters in the hash code, which is correct for a MD5 hash.



Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test. Please, do answer! I need more answers (only three valid so far).
 
Giordano said:
why devise tests that don't convince anyone else
Click to expand...
Everybody else already knows that we cannot hear his thoughts, but Michel believes that everybody else can hear his thoughts and lies about it. The point of his tests is to try to find the rare people who are willing to tell the truth, not convince them of something they (according to him) must already know perfectly well.

The only reason to participate in one of Michel's tests would be if there was any chance at all that he would accept the result as proof of what the rest of us already know - that we cannot hear his thoughts. But it's clear that he never will.
 
Ladewig said:
I concentrated on the assigned task and an image of a brightly lit piece of paper appeared, the circled number on it was xx.



.
I am not encrypting it, I will just send it to Agatha
Click to expand...
Ladewig said:
How optimistic you are, Michel.

Twelve hundred posts in this thread and not even the tiniest shread of evidence that telepathy exists.

Please see a doctor.
Click to expand...
This statement from you surprises me, Ladewig, in view of the fact that your own hit rate is equal to 100% in this thread!! (one answer given, with a testimony, and it was correct - and you're welcome to give more). I hope you're not taking too much psychiatric drugs. Protect your talent!


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test. Please, do answer! I need more answers (only three valid so far).
 
Michel H said:
Thank you, Nay Sayer. I think your answer is valid, I count 32 characters in the hash code, which is correct for a MD5 hash.



Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test. Please, do answer! I need more answers (only three valid so far).
Click to expand...


How can I make it more valid? What if I cross my heart hope to die stick a needle in my eye, double pinky swear no take backs?
 
Nay_Sayer said:
How can I make it more valid? What if I cross my heart hope to die stick a needle in my eye, double pinky swear no take backs?
Click to expand...
When I saw you'd made a new post, I wondered if it was to say something like "my answer was a joke, and you didn't see it, dummy!". But now, I see something different, please don't hurt yourself! There are many ups and down in this thread. One of the goals of this thread, by the way, is to try to bring more security to the world, I hope it doesn't have the opposite effect.


Newcomers in the thread, please go to post #1031 to find the opening post of this test. Please, do answer! I need more answers (only three valid so far).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom