Paranormal detection

[TSR]

just a question :
If after i win the challenge someone found that it was a fraud operation, will there be any legal actions against me ?, i mean will i lose the money ?

PS:I'm a little scared, I'm sure the Russians will be interested in kidnapping me to develop their new telepathic weapon.
But i hope the Americans get me first. hint: Sniper Detection System

Why do you have concerns about fraud, if you can actually do as you claim?

Besides, any talk of what happens after you win would appear to be very premature, since you do not seem to have a testable claim

 

[nathan]

just a question :
If after i win the challenge someone found that it was a fraud operation, will there be any legal actions against me ?, i mean will i lose the money ?

If you want legal advice, see a lawyer. If you want to defraud the JREF, go away.

Now, how's that protocol coming along? I see you've still not answered how you've ruled out confirmation bias in your current experiences, or how you've determined your head movement has not caused people to look at you, or whether you have someone who can help you perform a controlled experiment.[1]

It seems that people who claim wonderous powers, but then keep wittering on about whether the million will be withheld from them are just time wasting attention seekers.

[1]continually posting 'I'm not ignoring you' and then continuing to evade the questions is ignoring the issues.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

just a question :
If after i win the challenge someone found that it was a fraud operation, will there be any legal actions against me ?, i mean will i lose the money ?

PS:I'm a little scared, I'm sure the Russians will be interested in kidnapping me to develop their new telepathic weapon.
But i hope the Americans get me first. hint: Sniper Detection System

Reason1, first you would have to prove in a controlled test that there is an ability. Upon the very unlikely success - given our hundreds of years of knowledge in physics - you would have to do the same thing a second time successfully.

However, I think you either massively deluded about your capabilities or your are pulling a prank on the people of this messageboard. But since your deduction abilities seem to work quite well, given from what I read in your posts, you probably have figured out two things by now:

1. The simple self-tests which have been suggested here would easily detect that you have not the ability you claim.
2. Hence: No million dollars for you.



Be advised that would-be applicants using the words "lawyer", "legal action", "sue" or "the Russians" usually do not last very long on this messageboard. Perhaps you could try a different approach. I sincerely hope you will.

 

[reason1]

Why do you have concerns about fraud, if you can actually do as you claim?

If you want legal advice, see a lawyer. If you want to defraud the JREF, go away.

It seems that people who claim wonderous powers, but then keep wittering on about whether the million will be withheld from them are just time wasting attention seekers.

Yea...sorry, i thought it would be more interesting to skeptics to think of it that way and spare me the delusions and the confirmation bias thing !
but it's not...it's not a fraud, it's real,just ignore that post (if you want )

[1]continually posting 'I'm not ignoring you' and then continuing to evade the questions is ignoring the issues.

well...most of the questions I'm being asked are repeated ones of what I've already answered in my argument in page 2.but as I'm preparing a long post, i will answer them again in more details

 

[reason1]

Be advised that would-be applicants using the words "lawyer", "legal action", "sue" or "the Russians" usually do not last very long on this messageboard. Perhaps you could try a different approach. I sincerely hope you will.

i'm sorry....no offense to the Russians

 

[wardenclyffe]

reason1,

Earlier in this thread, you said that it would mess you up if the testers were looking at you during the test. This makes sense, since staring is staring, but now your claim seems to hinge on the motivation and state of mind of the person staring at you. Since you can only detect strangers staring at you in a public place, why would it be a problem to have the testers looking at you as well. Certainly, their "signal" would be completely different and undetectable to you. That's not the type of staring you detect. I'm just a little confused about what you can detect and what you cannot. If you detect the testers looking at you, you should certainly be able to detect volunteers in a controlled test.

Ward

 

[reason1]

reason1, You have a lot of people staring at you in public places? Why? Are you wearing an ugly hat?

"ugly hat" ?

I don't mean this as an attack

I didn't think it is either, i don't mind objective attacks though.

Confirmation bias is something to avoid.

I know, i meant i was trying to figure out how my claim is confirmation bias as skeptics say.

 

[TSR]

[/SPOILER][/TABLE]

I know, i meant i was trying to figure out how my claim is confirmation bias as skeptics say.

Oh, well that's easy then: tell us how many times you have been stared at in public by a stranger and not noticed, and how you know this has (or hasn't) happened? If you don't know this piece of information among others, you don't know if your "ability" amounts to "I rilly rilly want to be special." Which is, of course, your bias.

Is that clearer for you?

BTW, you will not "spared" a valid test which, among other things, eliminates as much as possible, confirmation bias.

And also, I'm not clear on how your concerns for your own potentially fraudulent behaviour will help you figure anything out unless you know, at some level, that you cannot do as you have claimed and need help coming to grips with that?

 

[Belz...]

i want to know first, did you read the whole topic before posting this ?

No. I read the OP, responded, and then worked my way down.

You still don't have that ability.

 

[Belz...]

just a question :
If after i win the challenge someone found that it was a fraud operation, will there be any legal actions against me ?, i mean will i lose the money ?

That's an odd question for someone who can alledgedly do what he claims he can do.

 

[nathan]

well...most of the questions I'm being asked are repeated ones of what I've already answered in my argument in page 2.but as I'm preparing a long post, i will answer them again in more details

Yeah, right.

 

[reason1]

reason1,

Earlier in this thread, you said that it would mess you up if the testers were looking at you during the test. This makes sense, since staring is staring, but now your claim seems to hinge on the motivation and state of mind of the person staring at you. Since you can only detect strangers staring at you in a public place, why would it be a problem to have the testers looking at you as well. Certainly, their "signal" would be completely different and undetectable to you. That's not the type of staring you detect. I'm just a little confused about what you can detect and what you cannot. If you detect the testers looking at you, you should certainly be able to detect volunteers in a controlled test.

Ward

Hi Ward,
I'm sure that there will be some testers eager to find out how I'm going to cheat (if i could) and that counts as active staring ,but wait a little for more details

 

[reason1]

Yeah, right.

are you being sarcastic ? , i don't mind it though

That's an odd question for someone who can alledgedly do what he claims he can do.

man... did you read this post :

Yea...sorry, i thought it would be more interesting to skeptics to think of it that way and spare me the delusions and the confirmation bias thing !
but it's not...it's not a fraud, it's real,just ignore that post (if you want )

i will not be able to respond to you if you don't read all the posts !

 

[nathan]

reason1, you are becoming less and less distinguishable from vision from feeling. quit posting excuses about why you've not responded and promises to respond at some future point. Instead, respond in a meaningful way. I think you've used up the default credibility a new arrival has -- you need to earn that back if you want to be taken seriously.

On the other hand, if all you want is to say 'look at me, I'm special, me me me!', twitter is available elsewhere.

I fully expect you to respond to this with some excuse about you're preparing some full response. That, of course, only digs your hole deeper.

 

[Kariboo]

thanks Kariboo,
well... yea actually I'm trying to apply confirmation bias to my suggested protocol not the other ones .
And that is because I've proved in page 2 that these protocols not controllable nor reliable , allow cheating, and even more don't count as staring by the definition.
Maybe confirmation bias is actually off-topic

It's probably your command of the English language but I have no idea what you are trying to say.

You said earlier that you didn't know how confirmation bias was applicable to your claim. I gave you examples of how that was possible and what you would need to do to avoid it. As far as I am aware you have not proven anything on page 2.

What people are trying to explain to you is that the idea that you have that you can accurately say when people are looking at you is caused by confirmation bias. As in: you think that you can predict this better than the average person but actually you can do this with exactly the same odds as anyone else. In other words you have no better chance in predicting who is looking at you than anyone else even though you THINK you do. You THINK this because you have not tried to exclude confirmation bias when you defined your claim. .

People have given you experiments to do to see if that is the case or alternatively to see if you can set up an experiment that excludes confirmation bias. You seem not able to comprehend this, maybe due to language. Is it possible for you to have someone who speaks the language better than you translate the posts to you??

j
PS:I'm a little scared, I'm sure the Russians will be interested in kidnapping me to develop their new telepathic weapon.
But i hope the Americans get me first. hint: Sniper Detection System

Dude....get a grip.

Yea...sorry, i thought it would be more interesting to skeptics to think of it that way and spare me the delusions and the confirmation bias thing !

See, this is your problem. People are trying to help you to set up an experiment that excludes the results being caused by confirmation bias, delusions or other NON paranormal phenomena. But you just don't want to hear it. It is NOT more interesting for us to think that you could use fraud to get the million. 1) you couldn't since the protocol that JREF would set up with you would exclude that. 2) we are trying to help you exclude unwittingly thinking you have an ability when that is not the case. Please try and answer the questions that have to do with that instead of coming up with pointless posts

well...most of the questions I'm being asked are repeated ones of what I've already answered in my argument in page 2.

No you have not. Please copy and paste the questions that people have asked and answer them one by one.

I know, i meant i was trying to figure out how my claim is confirmation bias as skeptics say.

The idea that you have that you can accurately say when people are looking at you is caused by confirmation bias. As in: you think that you can predict this better than the average person but actually you can do this with exactly the same odds as anyone else.

 

[Belz...]

man... did you read this post

Yes. It's still an odd question.

And you still don't have that ability.

i will not be able to respond to you if you don't read all the posts !

That doesn't follow. You can answer me no matter how many posts I read because your answer is only dependent upon YOU reading one post of mine.

 

[Lanzy]

Yep, ugly hat. I was trying to think of WHY people would be caught staring at you, especially the back of your head.

I can understand you catching their eye when you turn around, really I can, but catching them returning your gaze is NOT proof that they were staring at you to begin with. How do you determine this? Do you walk up to them and ask why they were staring at you? If you do, what do they say? Do they say the back of your head is simply fascinating? Or maybe you give them a, "What ju lookin at?"

Unless someone can explain why it is not confimation bias, I'm going with that.

 

[reason1]

reason1 will not accept any protocol that is conducted in a small room, with a limited number of people or even with people who are staring based on, say, the flip of a coin or the roll of a die.

well...actually this is very true, i will not accept any uncontrolled protocol that doesn't even demonstrate my claim which is "I can detect when people stare at me" not "i can detect when people look at me from behind".
I don't know why some people still don't get that, but if it is because of some confusion, i will restate the whole claim in my detailed post.

Yep, ugly hat. I was trying to think of WHY people would be caught staring at you, especially the back of your head.

I'm sorry... i thought you said "Why Are you wearing an ugly hat?"

I can understand you catching their eye when you turn around, really I can, but catching them returning your gaze is NOT proof that they were staring at you to begin with.

I don't catch them returning my gaze, i catch them avoiding my gaze, while in normal situations they shouldn't (as you stated)

 

[reason1]

And you still don't have that ability.

It's amazing how you can detect the exact location of someone when he/she calls your name, think of it this way.

That doesn't follow. You can answer me no matter how many posts I read because your answer is only dependent upon YOU reading one post of mine.

I'd appreciate it if you do read all the posts ,i don't have time to answer the same questions again !.

 

[reason1]

I don't catch them returning my gaze, i catch them avoiding my gaze, while in normal situations they shouldn't (as you stated)

and this is why I'm saying it's self-evident

to Lanzy : thank you for being objective, it really undoes some frustrations.

to Belz... : at least read my own posts ok ?