PETER HUBINKSY, I WALK THE LINE
- Thread starter jmercer
- Start date
Let me get this straight: if this guy walks in an area where there is a lot of debris like pebbles or paper clips, then there will be more paper clips and pebbles lying around?
And he has conducted a double-blind test of his abilities? How did he do that? Who was blinded, and in what sense was it double blinded?
Is this guy a magician who has invented a new trick that he thinks can net him a million dollars? Possibly he has found a way of surreptitiously kicking pebbles a few meters to miraculously land in a new place.
I would object to having him walk in surroundings that are too familiar to him, or at least he should be restricted to an area where every pebble can be controlled, like painting the entire area pink. I suppose that any new pebbles will not be pink?
(Edited to fix grammar)
And he has conducted a double-blind test of his abilities? How did he do that? Who was blinded, and in what sense was it double blinded?
Is this guy a magician who has invented a new trick that he thinks can net him a million dollars? Possibly he has found a way of surreptitiously kicking pebbles a few meters to miraculously land in a new place.
I would object to having him walk in surroundings that are too familiar to him, or at least he should be restricted to an area where every pebble can be controlled, like painting the entire area pink. I suppose that any new pebbles will not be pink?
(Edited to fix grammar)
Anti_Hypeman
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2005
- Messages
- 1,007
As long as the actual teleportation is captured on camera. If he is producing dozens of them in 20 minutes that should not be a problem. It will be like Star Trek stuff just materalizing all over the place AWESOME!!!
To try and better phrase his ability, if he walks through an area with small debris, additional debris will materialize and/or debris will move around at random.
I expect a bit of back-and-forth on the test protocol since I believe the ability will likely not manifest in significantly reduced settings (e.g. in a sealed room containing nothing but white walls, etc). Personally, I would suggest a clear path on which to walk, sided by appropriate items. This would help clarify that any movement/materialization is not a result of direct physical contact with the applicant. The applicant should give some indication of exactly what scope of movement/materialization we could expect under such conditions and a baseline for success would be set.
If the the debris must be aranged such that the applicant is able to walk on it, a protocol becomes more difficult. It would then need to be made clear that movement as a result of contact with the applicant will not be considered. That type of result-disqualification requires a kind of evaluation JREF tries to avoid.
It seems that usually the preliminary test is the first time the applicants attempt to demonstrate under the conditions of the agreed protocol. I've often wondered if JREF should suggest (but not require) that applicants do a 'dry run' of the approved protocol on their own, so that they can become comfortable reproducing the results before an outside observer is present. Kind of like studying before an exam. Certainly, when a million dollars is on the line and a full year must pass before a second attempt can be made, this would be good advice for potential applicants?
Lastly, and let me say that this has NOTHING to do with the current applicant, I've wondered if during the course of an examination it became clear an applicant was attempting to cheat to achieve success, should JREF pursue fraud charges? Obviously this would be rarely used, as the object would not be to unduely discourage applicants. I'm thinking of a situation, say, where an applicant claims some remote viewing ability and attempts to sneak in a camera, which would be an obvious attempt to defraud.
I expect a bit of back-and-forth on the test protocol since I believe the ability will likely not manifest in significantly reduced settings (e.g. in a sealed room containing nothing but white walls, etc). Personally, I would suggest a clear path on which to walk, sided by appropriate items. This would help clarify that any movement/materialization is not a result of direct physical contact with the applicant. The applicant should give some indication of exactly what scope of movement/materialization we could expect under such conditions and a baseline for success would be set.
If the the debris must be aranged such that the applicant is able to walk on it, a protocol becomes more difficult. It would then need to be made clear that movement as a result of contact with the applicant will not be considered. That type of result-disqualification requires a kind of evaluation JREF tries to avoid.
It seems that usually the preliminary test is the first time the applicants attempt to demonstrate under the conditions of the agreed protocol. I've often wondered if JREF should suggest (but not require) that applicants do a 'dry run' of the approved protocol on their own, so that they can become comfortable reproducing the results before an outside observer is present. Kind of like studying before an exam. Certainly, when a million dollars is on the line and a full year must pass before a second attempt can be made, this would be good advice for potential applicants?
Lastly, and let me say that this has NOTHING to do with the current applicant, I've wondered if during the course of an examination it became clear an applicant was attempting to cheat to achieve success, should JREF pursue fraud charges? Obviously this would be rarely used, as the object would not be to unduely discourage applicants. I'm thinking of a situation, say, where an applicant claims some remote viewing ability and attempts to sneak in a camera, which would be an obvious attempt to defraud.
geni said:
Why not? A fair number of people who make claims and want to apply are mentally ill. This pretty much eliminates them from wasting JREF's time, and may result in them accidently bringing their condition to the attention of people who might be able to help them.
I think it's a great idea.
prewitt81
Notoriously Glorious
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2004
- Messages
- 2,226
The idea is good, and it has been common practice lately, but I believe geni's point is that the official rules governing the challenge do not specifically mention this.
I know, too, that this practice is mentioned in the Challenge FAQ, but don't some applicants conduct their correspondence completely via "snail" mail?
I know, too, that this practice is mentioned in the Challenge FAQ, but don't some applicants conduct their correspondence completely via "snail" mail?
geni
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2003
- Messages
- 28,209
jmercer said:Why not? A fair number of people who make claims and want to apply are mentally ill. This pretty much eliminates them from wasting JREF's time, and may result in them accidently bringing their condition to the attention of people who might be able to help them.
I think it's a great idea.
You've got to find 3 people who are not personal friends who are preparded to come and see what is lets be fair a pretty unbeliverble claim. What chance does that give you? It's practicaly asking them to take the prelim 3 times (unless you manage some rather neat organisation) before they even come to see you. On top of that it rules out friends and family who would be in the best persition to do something if the person is mentaly ill. JREF says it is ready to test people. Makeing people arange for other people to test them first hardly seems consitent with these claims. I was able to get a provisional driveing lisence with less hassel.
davidhorman
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2001
- Messages
- 991
It's nothing like taking the prelim three times. Kramer isn't asking that these 3 people each construct a double blinded test - only that they witnessed a demonstration of the ability and were <span style="text-decoration:line-through">fooled by it</span> unable to find a rational explanation.
But I do think it's a bit unfair that Kramer tends to wheel this caveat out whenever he gets an application for which there are no clear arguments against performing the test ("you're nuts" notwithstanding).
David
But I do think it's a bit unfair that Kramer tends to wheel this caveat out whenever he gets an application for which there are no clear arguments against performing the test ("you're nuts" notwithstanding).
David
IXP
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,395
I have read his application several times and I do not see where he says anything about the nature of the objects that will appear. What makes you say that it will be more paper clips and pebbles? Is this just your assumption or am I missing something?steenkh said:
I can't wait to hear how he conducted double-blind tests of this ability.
IXP
prewitt81
Notoriously Glorious
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2004
- Messages
- 2,226
Let me clarify my position. I think it is a good idea to ask for the three affadavits. The only reason I mentioned the rules is that I don't want the JREF to get sued for asking people to do things outside of the Official Rules. I'm not a lawyer and know nothing about legal matters, so my concerns are probably not even warranted.
I promise my intentions were good, though!
I promise my intentions were good, though!
eri
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2005
- Messages
- 457
I get your intention, prewitt, but I think that he should have to obtain some additional evidence. I agree that the nature of the objects wasn't clarified in the original claim - just seemed to say they would be among the debris. However, since he DID say that the judges would have to look very closely to see the objects, it makes me think that he just didn't notice them himself. Also, it says a walk between 5 sec and 20 min - would they judges need to know the exact location of everything within a 20 min walking distance of the starting position?
I think the purpose of the affidavits here would be a sanity check for the applicant - I doubt many professionals wouldn't point out the same problem to him.
I think the purpose of the affidavits here would be a sanity check for the applicant - I doubt many professionals wouldn't point out the same problem to him.
Shouldn't it constitute a simple task to approach three people and ask them to witness something which you explain to them first?
Or does every claimant-to-be need to "power up" first? (like "Chrono"?)
Does it cost that much "psychic energy" to perform those "abilities"?
Do they need a mil to get off their lazy butts?
Or do they basically fear that they can't fool "normal" people for five cents but instead might do it with experts for a mil?
Does this logic seem to eat itself?
Shouldn't it delight everyone to amaze their fellow man by letting objects appear out of bleeping thin air?
Perhaps even on demand? (Coffee, pizza, lifesaving medicine, etc.) Favourably with a fingersnip, like Q?
I agree with Anti_Hypeman: Bleeping AWESOME!
Or does every claimant-to-be need to "power up" first? (like "Chrono"?)
Does it cost that much "psychic energy" to perform those "abilities"?
Do they need a mil to get off their lazy butts?
Or do they basically fear that they can't fool "normal" people for five cents but instead might do it with experts for a mil?
Does this logic seem to eat itself?
Shouldn't it delight everyone to amaze their fellow man by letting objects appear out of bleeping thin air?
Perhaps even on demand? (Coffee, pizza, lifesaving medicine, etc.) Favourably with a fingersnip, like Q?
I agree with Anti_Hypeman: Bleeping AWESOME!
Katachresis
Learning to Fly
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2005
- Messages
- 2,423
lost time
I printed out the entirety of this thread just before the most recent crash. I may decide to type in the main points made by posters that were lost, or I can fax you a copy, or I might just do nothing, depending on the interest that is shown about this thread.
Ketyk
I printed out the entirety of this thread just before the most recent crash. I may decide to type in the main points made by posters that were lost, or I can fax you a copy, or I might just do nothing, depending on the interest that is shown about this thread.
Ketyk
Last edited:
3 Affidavits
Ketyk,
Did you by any chance print out the spin-off from this thread? ... 3 affidavits required for some applications.
Kramer's reply to my query about who would and wouldn't make an acceptable affidavit signer was in that thread and also in my PMs. Both are lost. Of course, Kramer may have it saved in his own folders.
Ketyk,
Did you by any chance print out the spin-off from this thread? ... 3 affidavits required for some applications.
Kramer's reply to my query about who would and wouldn't make an acceptable affidavit signer was in that thread and also in my PMs. Both are lost. Of course, Kramer may have it saved in his own folders.
Pedro Gomes
Scholar
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2005
- Messages
- 52
That thread was still in my browser’s cache (I’d been reading it and had actually posted a message there). Please find it attached as a zipped HTML page (only text with no images, to keep it small). It’s up to IXP’s post on 09-29-2005 02:35 AM GMT, but there may have been further posts that I didn’t read.
Affidavits...
I cannot believe anyone could object to the requirement for notarized affidavits when applying to the JREF Challenge.
Doing so saves a monumental amount of time by winnowing out the certified morons from those less afflicted.
By my way of thinking, anyone with a real paranormal ability would be out and about revealing to all and sundry the nature of such an ability, and most likely reaping majestic rewards while doing so.
Those who apply for the JREF Challenge tend to be the seriously deluded, and while they deserve our sympathy, should be directed to confront their delusions before the JREF gets seriously involved.
We all know that the really gross charlatans out there are making too much money from the gullible to bother with the JREF Challenge.
Regards,
I cannot believe anyone could object to the requirement for notarized affidavits when applying to the JREF Challenge.
Doing so saves a monumental amount of time by winnowing out the certified morons from those less afflicted.
By my way of thinking, anyone with a real paranormal ability would be out and about revealing to all and sundry the nature of such an ability, and most likely reaping majestic rewards while doing so.
Those who apply for the JREF Challenge tend to be the seriously deluded, and while they deserve our sympathy, should be directed to confront their delusions before the JREF gets seriously involved.
We all know that the really gross charlatans out there are making too much money from the gullible to bother with the JREF Challenge.
Regards,