Paul Carey applied for the Challenge several months ago, but many problems stood in the way of his being tested. His caustic wit (manifest in his clear disdain for all non-believers) does not endear him to those with whom he hopes to communicate, least of all me.
Upon acceptance of his claim, he immediately began to demand immediate testing. He wanted little to do with test design negotiations (as in..."Come on! What are you afraid of? Let's do this and you guys get ready to pay up!"), and repeatedly demanded to be tested at his whim. Additionally, he demanded to be tested not near his place of abode, in Ireland, but in The Netherlands. We declined, insisting that the Challenge rules (regarding the testing of applicants in a location convenient to them) be adhered to.
It took quite some time to get him to back down from insisting on Holland as a test location, and all the while, I was subjected to scorn and abuse that Randi would never have stood for.
We attempted to contact a Skeptic's Society in his area but, after weeks of attempts, received no response. Finally, I made contact with Mike Reen of IRISH SKEPTICS, who agreed in principle to conduct the test. He advised us that it would take some time to arrange this, as he was on vacation at the time, and Irish Skeptics would not be operating again until his return in September.
No sooner did Mike get involved that he himself became the target of similar abuse and scorn from the applicant, who was now trying to demand that Randi himself conduct the test during his recent lecture in Dublin. The fact that Randi does not conduct tests himself (and the fact that Randi was to be in Dublin for only ONE DAY and had a full schedule during that limited time) fell upon deaf ears. The applicants demands and caustic email behavior brought both JREF and Irish Skeptics to the very brink of frustration. Frankly, if I could tell Mr. Carey to take a walk, I would.
That, however, is neither my job, nor my goal. My goal is to see him tested.
The email correspondence us voluminous, to say the least.
I will post as much of the correspondence as I deem relevant to the actual claim. I will keep the diatribes to a minimum.
Here is the initial claim letter:
==============================================
My abilities include the transference of thought, and the alteration of physical states in others, i.e.; the direct transference of sensation.
The degree of inesity of these experiences not having been fully scientifically evaluated may vary from one individual to another.
The only limitation being location where I hope you agree, is that London is just as close as Dublin for transatlantic purposes.
- Paul Carey
=============================================
I wrote to Mr. Carey asking that he define "thought transference", and that he tell us how intends to demonstrate his claim, etc...
=============================================
Kramer,
When I mention the term "thought transference" it means that I can project at will any of my emergent thoughts into the mind of another. As to the circumstances there are no specific needs other than a relaxed situation. Concerning accuracy, all you need to do is provide me with any randon text that I will project in the above-mentioned fashion.
I can also project physical sensations by an act of will which includes local and indifferent impressions to as-yet untested degrees of pleasure and pain. Any image of a well known and reliable subject could be used to verify this. For instance any person sitting in an adjoining room will experience a physical sensation in a pre-agreed place. The distance over which this ability is effective is as yet uncomfirmed.
I presume that any of the above - if the other fails - will qualify as an adequate demonstration.
-Carey
==============================================
At this point, I instructed the applicant to contact Irish Skeptics in Limerick, closest to the applicant's place of residence. They declined to offer a respond to our numerous emails and letters.
I also advised Mr. Carey that the "feelings/sensations" part of his claim would be much more difficult to test under proper observing conditions that his claim regarding "thought transference".
I suggested that he stick with the latter claim, which seemed much easier for him to prove than the former.
I soon received this from Mr. Carey:
==============================================
Kramer,
Just in case you did not understand, the test subject in the physical sensation part of my proposed demonstration would have no advance knowledge of where the target of my intent is. The pain/pleasure polarity being just a representation can be easily discarded).
Furthermore, when you compare simple physical "on and off" effects as being scientifically improvable and yet are willing to accept a much less unlikely scenario where the variables have not yet been mapped is a situation that needs a third party.
So, while accepting the conditions (provisionally) for the "thought" part of the test, an independent scientific arbitration as to the question of the physical issue needs to be agreed before we can proceed any further.
As to the venue, since a neutral point of view is desirable, perhaps you could explore the possibilities in Holland.
-Carey
==============================================
At this point it became clear that the applicant was addressing issues he was concerned with, and ignoring JREF's issues and concerns. When I asked him if he had made contact with Irish Skeptics in Limerick (and why he wanted to be tested in Holland), here is what I received:
==============================================
Kramer,
I am naturally very eager to proceed with our project. Notwithstanding, and having explained my point of view, we still need to agree a venue and deal with the issue of arbitrating the second part of my claim.
-Carey
==============================================
I sent Mr. Carey an email stating that testing would take place as close to his residence as possible (according to the Challenge rules), and soon received this in reply:
==============================================
Kramer,
It has already been explained to you why a neutral venue would be preferable in this case, and since a trip abroad is in the offing within the next few months...two birds with one stone, etc. What difference it makes to you (unless you wish to do away with the preliminaries) is something you must explain.
An agreement regarding the part of my application posited as being unprovable is also still required. And an independent adjudication taken on without influence from either side is I think the only reasonable solution.
- Carey
=============================================
At this point I suddenly realized that this applicant was rather cleverly attempting to assume control of the negotiations, making it all about HIS "requirements" while ignoring the Challenge rules. I responded thusly:
=============================================
Mr. Carey,
JREF and its associates will arrange for testing; not you. You will be tested in Ireland at the earliest convenience for ALL those involved. Please let me know if you agree to comply with this Challenge rule.
Additionally, we do not "influence" those we enlist to assist us in testing your claim. They are independent of JREF in every way, in order to insure absolute impartiality.
JREF offers the Challenge and prize, JREF sets the rules, and JREF arranges for and determines the test site and time, in concert with our investigators, doing our very best to make all specifics convenient for the applicant.
-Kramer, JREF
==============================================
Kramer,
As far as the venue is concerned you still have not given me a reason as to why it would make any difference to you where it would be held. As to those chosen to carry out the test, skepticism precludes objectivism.
When you posted the Challenge on the net it ceased to be your "personal" property and instead became a matter to be scientifically validated. And as such requires some third party other than your group to agree the terms in a disinterested way.
I remain very eager to proceed and hope you are ready to pay up. - Carey
==============================================
I then heard nothing from Mr. Carey for about two months before receiving another email in which he states that he had finally received a reply from a Mr. Peter O'Hara from Irish Skeptics in Limerick, who claimed to have...
"...No knowledge of the JREF, and no interest in your claim".
As I personally never received any reply from Limerick, I have no way of confirming this assertion. My requests for a copy of this letter were ignored.
The email I received notifying me of this alleged letter concluded with (in bold letters)...
WHAT'S GOING ON???"
==============================================
Dear Mr. Carey,
Nothing is "going on". I'm not absolutely sure what you are implying by this question, but I can easily guess. You may believe what you wish (or need) to believe, but the fact is that we are anxious to see you tested. Having not heard from you in almost two months after so many daily emails, we had thought you had backed out of the Challenge.
I will now investigate alternative possibilities for testing in Ireland and let you know when I have found qualified investigators. Please be patient. - Kramer, JREF
==============================================
At this point I wrote a letter to Limerick in an attempt to verify Mr. Carey's claim, but again, no reply was forthcoming.
I then made contact with Irish Skeptics in the Dublin area, and instructed Mr. Carey to now make contact with them via email.
He did so, and here is Irish Skeptics reply to him:
Dear Paul,
Thank you for your email. We have just received this and the email from Mr. Kramer at JREF. We are currently abroad and will give the matter our consideration when we return to Ireland.
-Mike Reen, Irish Skeptics
Mike "cc'd" me this letter, so I sent him this in return:
Dear Mike,
Thanks so very much for your speedy reply. It has been enormously difficult to address Mr,. Carey's claim expeditiously, so your reply is a most welcome event in these proceedings. It is my sincerest hope that, together with Mr. Carey, you will find a way to arrive at a mutually agreeable test protocol that will conclusively validate or refute his paranormal claim, while satisfying both the applicants needs and the scientific standards under which any test of this kind must be adhered to.
I hope the protocol negotiations go smoothly, and I hope that Mr. Carey sees his claim tested at the earliest possible convenience. - Kramer, JREF
=============================================
Kramer,
I have recieved an email from Irish Skeptics almost a month ago, but they gave me no contact email to interact with. Patience is a virtue, but they seem to be dragging their heels on this.
-Carey
==============================================
Well, this didn't make much sense, as all one needs to do to reply to someone who has emailed you is to hit REPLY, compose your response, and hit SEND. Paul's complaint made little sense.
Soon, however, this problem was rendered moot by the arrival of another email from Mike Reen in response to what I can only assume was a sarcastic email from Carey. I was not "cc'd" this email so I am unable to post it here.
==============================================
Hello Paul,
Firstly, just to clarify that we have no connection whatsoever to the JREF and have been asked by them if we would falicitate your request for testing. We have never been involved in this Challenge before and will not be making any rash decisions as to our involvement. Although we have yet to make a final decision, it is my hope that we will be able to accomodate both you and the JREF.
There are a number of people involved in making the decision to facilitate this request and two of them are just back from annual leave. I live in a different part of the country but I would hope to meet up with them in the next week or two. After that meeting I will contact both you and Kramer with a definitive yes or no regarding our involvement.
All Best, Mike Reen
==============================================
I soon received this from Paul...
Kramer,
I have sent two emails to Irish Skeptics since our last contact, and both have been returned to me as "unwelcome messages". WHAT GIVES?
-Carey
==============================================
This debate went on for a while before being rendered moot by the arrival of THIS email:
Dear Paul,
I have discussed your request for us to falicitate the testing of your claim to the JREF and we are in agreement that we will be able to do so. Please be advised trhat we will not rush into this and have agreed that we will committ to try to test your claim sometime before the end of the year, although the likelihood is that we will be able to test it in the next 8-12 weeks. We will contact you in due course with the details which will need to be agreed and signed off on before continuing.
We wish you all the best and are very interested to see how you do. Best Wishes, Mike Reen
=============================================
I soon began to receive numerous "cc" emails from a correspondence conducted by Mike Reen and a scientist whom he enlisted to assist him in devising "a water-tight, experimental protocol to test his claim".
It was painfully clear that Mike was doing his best to move matters forward and see this claim tested.
Sadly, the applicant's patience had seemingly and abruptly run dry, as evidenced by this email I received from Mike Reen.
Dear Kramer,
I sent Paul several emails asking for a reply but I think he just hit REPLY to bounce it back to me, to show that he got it. There was no message from him.
Do you have any criteria for the suspected mental health of an applicant? Our core group are all practising clinical psychologists who have some serious questions about this particular claimant.
There are some ethical and professional anxieties attached to testing people who may have mental health problems. I understand that it's impossible to know this, but thought I'd ask, as I am sure that this has come up for you before.
Secondly, Paul's attitude in his emails has been, let's say, a tad brusque. You should know that if he continues in this fashion we will have no hesitation in withdrawing our our agreement to facilitate his request for testing. We will of course point this out to him if his manner remains curt, but I thought you should know that we will hold a particular line in this regard.
All Best, Mike Reen
==============================================
I wrote back to Mike advising him that I understood completely.
Randi's 24-hour visit to Dublin left him little time for sleep, and no time for testing paranormal claims. This incensed the applicant, who (following Randi's departure from Ireland) wrote:
Kramer,
Apologies for my compatriates failure to carry out the test. It seems you both have the same disease of being unable to accept the obvious.
-Carey
=============================================
Hello Paul,
Nice to hear from you. I recognized your tone immediately. As regards accepting the obvious, as you put it, if this IS a "disease", I hope I'm never cured of it. You won't get anywhere continuing to be nasty, Paul. Irish Skeptics are under absolutely no obligation whatsoever to to test you. I strongly suggest that you keep this fact firmly in mind when corresponding with them.
-Kramer, JREF
==============================================
Mike Reen at Irish Skeptics soon saw fit to send this to the applicant:
Hello Paul,
We have, as you know, agreed to carry out a test of your claim before the end of this year. I will be in touch once I have confirmed matters with Kramer and have arranged the time and venue and a protocol has been agreed to.
However, let me be clear about a couple of matters:
1. We will carry out this test in a time-frame specified in correspondence to you and Kramer.
2. We are accomodating your application for this prize and have engaged you in a respectful and mannerly correspondence.
We would appreciate your not introducing a hostile or sarcastic manner into your correspondence to us or about us to others.
We reserve the right to withdraw from this agreement if you insist on introducing such attitudes into this matter.
3. To echo Randi's advice I would ask you to carefully assess your own ability before we go further, lest you suffer any embarrassment or we waste each other's time. Your own semi-structured test might involve the following:
I suggest you sit in one room with another person in an adjoining room. Have a third, independent person pick a book randomly from a selection and then pick a paragraph from that book at random. Then have the person give you the selected paragraph which you then have five minutes to mentally transfer to the person in the other room who should be instructed to write down the paragraph word-for-word as they receive it, within the five minutes. You will have succeeded if the person has had absolutely no physical, audible or visual contact with you during that five minutes but can emerge from the room with a word-for-word hand-written copy of the originally selected text.
If you cannot succeed in doing this, you are unlikely to pass our test (which will be more stringent), and we would appreciate your honest assessment of this.
Regards, Mike Reen
==============================================
Yesterday, after I received notice from Mike Reen that they were close to being able to determine a time and place for the test, I received THIS from the applicant:
Mr Kramer ,
The obvious is that which is known to exist ( beyond comprehension being the whole point of your institutes existence) "OBVIOUSLY" you know I can fullfill the claim put forward- and then some- . There is only one reason why the test did not take place while randi was here.( if you can guess what it was send me 5$)
- Paul Carey
=============================================
I declined to respond to this, as my response would not have been, shall we say, "professional".
This came in from Mike Reen about 5 minutes ago:
Hi Kramer,
Ok, let's get this thing done as soon as possible!! I'm definitely committed to testing this guy at this stage even if he does continue to be sarcastic and ignorant ... the best argument will be the test result.
Regards,
Mike
==============================================
I would be very happy to be posting the results of the testing of Paul Carey sometime soon, and, depending on the results, either write Paul Carey a check, or close his file accordingly.
Upon acceptance of his claim, he immediately began to demand immediate testing. He wanted little to do with test design negotiations (as in..."Come on! What are you afraid of? Let's do this and you guys get ready to pay up!"), and repeatedly demanded to be tested at his whim. Additionally, he demanded to be tested not near his place of abode, in Ireland, but in The Netherlands. We declined, insisting that the Challenge rules (regarding the testing of applicants in a location convenient to them) be adhered to.
It took quite some time to get him to back down from insisting on Holland as a test location, and all the while, I was subjected to scorn and abuse that Randi would never have stood for.
We attempted to contact a Skeptic's Society in his area but, after weeks of attempts, received no response. Finally, I made contact with Mike Reen of IRISH SKEPTICS, who agreed in principle to conduct the test. He advised us that it would take some time to arrange this, as he was on vacation at the time, and Irish Skeptics would not be operating again until his return in September.
No sooner did Mike get involved that he himself became the target of similar abuse and scorn from the applicant, who was now trying to demand that Randi himself conduct the test during his recent lecture in Dublin. The fact that Randi does not conduct tests himself (and the fact that Randi was to be in Dublin for only ONE DAY and had a full schedule during that limited time) fell upon deaf ears. The applicants demands and caustic email behavior brought both JREF and Irish Skeptics to the very brink of frustration. Frankly, if I could tell Mr. Carey to take a walk, I would.
That, however, is neither my job, nor my goal. My goal is to see him tested.
The email correspondence us voluminous, to say the least.
I will post as much of the correspondence as I deem relevant to the actual claim. I will keep the diatribes to a minimum.
Here is the initial claim letter:
==============================================
My abilities include the transference of thought, and the alteration of physical states in others, i.e.; the direct transference of sensation.
The degree of inesity of these experiences not having been fully scientifically evaluated may vary from one individual to another.
The only limitation being location where I hope you agree, is that London is just as close as Dublin for transatlantic purposes.
- Paul Carey
=============================================
I wrote to Mr. Carey asking that he define "thought transference", and that he tell us how intends to demonstrate his claim, etc...
=============================================
Kramer,
When I mention the term "thought transference" it means that I can project at will any of my emergent thoughts into the mind of another. As to the circumstances there are no specific needs other than a relaxed situation. Concerning accuracy, all you need to do is provide me with any randon text that I will project in the above-mentioned fashion.
I can also project physical sensations by an act of will which includes local and indifferent impressions to as-yet untested degrees of pleasure and pain. Any image of a well known and reliable subject could be used to verify this. For instance any person sitting in an adjoining room will experience a physical sensation in a pre-agreed place. The distance over which this ability is effective is as yet uncomfirmed.
I presume that any of the above - if the other fails - will qualify as an adequate demonstration.
-Carey
==============================================
At this point, I instructed the applicant to contact Irish Skeptics in Limerick, closest to the applicant's place of residence. They declined to offer a respond to our numerous emails and letters.
I also advised Mr. Carey that the "feelings/sensations" part of his claim would be much more difficult to test under proper observing conditions that his claim regarding "thought transference".
I suggested that he stick with the latter claim, which seemed much easier for him to prove than the former.
I soon received this from Mr. Carey:
==============================================
Kramer,
Just in case you did not understand, the test subject in the physical sensation part of my proposed demonstration would have no advance knowledge of where the target of my intent is. The pain/pleasure polarity being just a representation can be easily discarded).
Furthermore, when you compare simple physical "on and off" effects as being scientifically improvable and yet are willing to accept a much less unlikely scenario where the variables have not yet been mapped is a situation that needs a third party.
So, while accepting the conditions (provisionally) for the "thought" part of the test, an independent scientific arbitration as to the question of the physical issue needs to be agreed before we can proceed any further.
As to the venue, since a neutral point of view is desirable, perhaps you could explore the possibilities in Holland.
-Carey
==============================================
At this point it became clear that the applicant was addressing issues he was concerned with, and ignoring JREF's issues and concerns. When I asked him if he had made contact with Irish Skeptics in Limerick (and why he wanted to be tested in Holland), here is what I received:
==============================================
Kramer,
I am naturally very eager to proceed with our project. Notwithstanding, and having explained my point of view, we still need to agree a venue and deal with the issue of arbitrating the second part of my claim.
-Carey
==============================================
I sent Mr. Carey an email stating that testing would take place as close to his residence as possible (according to the Challenge rules), and soon received this in reply:
==============================================
Kramer,
It has already been explained to you why a neutral venue would be preferable in this case, and since a trip abroad is in the offing within the next few months...two birds with one stone, etc. What difference it makes to you (unless you wish to do away with the preliminaries) is something you must explain.
An agreement regarding the part of my application posited as being unprovable is also still required. And an independent adjudication taken on without influence from either side is I think the only reasonable solution.
- Carey
=============================================
At this point I suddenly realized that this applicant was rather cleverly attempting to assume control of the negotiations, making it all about HIS "requirements" while ignoring the Challenge rules. I responded thusly:
=============================================
Mr. Carey,
JREF and its associates will arrange for testing; not you. You will be tested in Ireland at the earliest convenience for ALL those involved. Please let me know if you agree to comply with this Challenge rule.
Additionally, we do not "influence" those we enlist to assist us in testing your claim. They are independent of JREF in every way, in order to insure absolute impartiality.
JREF offers the Challenge and prize, JREF sets the rules, and JREF arranges for and determines the test site and time, in concert with our investigators, doing our very best to make all specifics convenient for the applicant.
-Kramer, JREF
==============================================
Kramer,
As far as the venue is concerned you still have not given me a reason as to why it would make any difference to you where it would be held. As to those chosen to carry out the test, skepticism precludes objectivism.
When you posted the Challenge on the net it ceased to be your "personal" property and instead became a matter to be scientifically validated. And as such requires some third party other than your group to agree the terms in a disinterested way.
I remain very eager to proceed and hope you are ready to pay up. - Carey
==============================================
I then heard nothing from Mr. Carey for about two months before receiving another email in which he states that he had finally received a reply from a Mr. Peter O'Hara from Irish Skeptics in Limerick, who claimed to have...
"...No knowledge of the JREF, and no interest in your claim".
As I personally never received any reply from Limerick, I have no way of confirming this assertion. My requests for a copy of this letter were ignored.
The email I received notifying me of this alleged letter concluded with (in bold letters)...
WHAT'S GOING ON???"
==============================================
Dear Mr. Carey,
Nothing is "going on". I'm not absolutely sure what you are implying by this question, but I can easily guess. You may believe what you wish (or need) to believe, but the fact is that we are anxious to see you tested. Having not heard from you in almost two months after so many daily emails, we had thought you had backed out of the Challenge.
I will now investigate alternative possibilities for testing in Ireland and let you know when I have found qualified investigators. Please be patient. - Kramer, JREF
==============================================
At this point I wrote a letter to Limerick in an attempt to verify Mr. Carey's claim, but again, no reply was forthcoming.
I then made contact with Irish Skeptics in the Dublin area, and instructed Mr. Carey to now make contact with them via email.
He did so, and here is Irish Skeptics reply to him:
Dear Paul,
Thank you for your email. We have just received this and the email from Mr. Kramer at JREF. We are currently abroad and will give the matter our consideration when we return to Ireland.
-Mike Reen, Irish Skeptics
Mike "cc'd" me this letter, so I sent him this in return:
Dear Mike,
Thanks so very much for your speedy reply. It has been enormously difficult to address Mr,. Carey's claim expeditiously, so your reply is a most welcome event in these proceedings. It is my sincerest hope that, together with Mr. Carey, you will find a way to arrive at a mutually agreeable test protocol that will conclusively validate or refute his paranormal claim, while satisfying both the applicants needs and the scientific standards under which any test of this kind must be adhered to.
I hope the protocol negotiations go smoothly, and I hope that Mr. Carey sees his claim tested at the earliest possible convenience. - Kramer, JREF
=============================================
Kramer,
I have recieved an email from Irish Skeptics almost a month ago, but they gave me no contact email to interact with. Patience is a virtue, but they seem to be dragging their heels on this.
-Carey
==============================================
Well, this didn't make much sense, as all one needs to do to reply to someone who has emailed you is to hit REPLY, compose your response, and hit SEND. Paul's complaint made little sense.
Soon, however, this problem was rendered moot by the arrival of another email from Mike Reen in response to what I can only assume was a sarcastic email from Carey. I was not "cc'd" this email so I am unable to post it here.
==============================================
Hello Paul,
Firstly, just to clarify that we have no connection whatsoever to the JREF and have been asked by them if we would falicitate your request for testing. We have never been involved in this Challenge before and will not be making any rash decisions as to our involvement. Although we have yet to make a final decision, it is my hope that we will be able to accomodate both you and the JREF.
There are a number of people involved in making the decision to facilitate this request and two of them are just back from annual leave. I live in a different part of the country but I would hope to meet up with them in the next week or two. After that meeting I will contact both you and Kramer with a definitive yes or no regarding our involvement.
All Best, Mike Reen
==============================================
I soon received this from Paul...
Kramer,
I have sent two emails to Irish Skeptics since our last contact, and both have been returned to me as "unwelcome messages". WHAT GIVES?
-Carey
==============================================
This debate went on for a while before being rendered moot by the arrival of THIS email:
Dear Paul,
I have discussed your request for us to falicitate the testing of your claim to the JREF and we are in agreement that we will be able to do so. Please be advised trhat we will not rush into this and have agreed that we will committ to try to test your claim sometime before the end of the year, although the likelihood is that we will be able to test it in the next 8-12 weeks. We will contact you in due course with the details which will need to be agreed and signed off on before continuing.
We wish you all the best and are very interested to see how you do. Best Wishes, Mike Reen
=============================================
I soon began to receive numerous "cc" emails from a correspondence conducted by Mike Reen and a scientist whom he enlisted to assist him in devising "a water-tight, experimental protocol to test his claim".
It was painfully clear that Mike was doing his best to move matters forward and see this claim tested.
Sadly, the applicant's patience had seemingly and abruptly run dry, as evidenced by this email I received from Mike Reen.
Dear Kramer,
I sent Paul several emails asking for a reply but I think he just hit REPLY to bounce it back to me, to show that he got it. There was no message from him.
Do you have any criteria for the suspected mental health of an applicant? Our core group are all practising clinical psychologists who have some serious questions about this particular claimant.
There are some ethical and professional anxieties attached to testing people who may have mental health problems. I understand that it's impossible to know this, but thought I'd ask, as I am sure that this has come up for you before.
Secondly, Paul's attitude in his emails has been, let's say, a tad brusque. You should know that if he continues in this fashion we will have no hesitation in withdrawing our our agreement to facilitate his request for testing. We will of course point this out to him if his manner remains curt, but I thought you should know that we will hold a particular line in this regard.
All Best, Mike Reen
==============================================
I wrote back to Mike advising him that I understood completely.
Randi's 24-hour visit to Dublin left him little time for sleep, and no time for testing paranormal claims. This incensed the applicant, who (following Randi's departure from Ireland) wrote:
Kramer,
Apologies for my compatriates failure to carry out the test. It seems you both have the same disease of being unable to accept the obvious.
-Carey
=============================================
Hello Paul,
Nice to hear from you. I recognized your tone immediately. As regards accepting the obvious, as you put it, if this IS a "disease", I hope I'm never cured of it. You won't get anywhere continuing to be nasty, Paul. Irish Skeptics are under absolutely no obligation whatsoever to to test you. I strongly suggest that you keep this fact firmly in mind when corresponding with them.
-Kramer, JREF
==============================================
Mike Reen at Irish Skeptics soon saw fit to send this to the applicant:
Hello Paul,
We have, as you know, agreed to carry out a test of your claim before the end of this year. I will be in touch once I have confirmed matters with Kramer and have arranged the time and venue and a protocol has been agreed to.
However, let me be clear about a couple of matters:
1. We will carry out this test in a time-frame specified in correspondence to you and Kramer.
2. We are accomodating your application for this prize and have engaged you in a respectful and mannerly correspondence.
We would appreciate your not introducing a hostile or sarcastic manner into your correspondence to us or about us to others.
We reserve the right to withdraw from this agreement if you insist on introducing such attitudes into this matter.
3. To echo Randi's advice I would ask you to carefully assess your own ability before we go further, lest you suffer any embarrassment or we waste each other's time. Your own semi-structured test might involve the following:
I suggest you sit in one room with another person in an adjoining room. Have a third, independent person pick a book randomly from a selection and then pick a paragraph from that book at random. Then have the person give you the selected paragraph which you then have five minutes to mentally transfer to the person in the other room who should be instructed to write down the paragraph word-for-word as they receive it, within the five minutes. You will have succeeded if the person has had absolutely no physical, audible or visual contact with you during that five minutes but can emerge from the room with a word-for-word hand-written copy of the originally selected text.
If you cannot succeed in doing this, you are unlikely to pass our test (which will be more stringent), and we would appreciate your honest assessment of this.
Regards, Mike Reen
==============================================
Yesterday, after I received notice from Mike Reen that they were close to being able to determine a time and place for the test, I received THIS from the applicant:
Mr Kramer ,
The obvious is that which is known to exist ( beyond comprehension being the whole point of your institutes existence) "OBVIOUSLY" you know I can fullfill the claim put forward- and then some- . There is only one reason why the test did not take place while randi was here.( if you can guess what it was send me 5$)
- Paul Carey
=============================================
I declined to respond to this, as my response would not have been, shall we say, "professional".
This came in from Mike Reen about 5 minutes ago:
Hi Kramer,
Ok, let's get this thing done as soon as possible!! I'm definitely committed to testing this guy at this stage even if he does continue to be sarcastic and ignorant ... the best argument will be the test result.
Regards,
Mike
==============================================
I would be very happy to be posting the results of the testing of Paul Carey sometime soon, and, depending on the results, either write Paul Carey a check, or close his file accordingly.