• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Put a Fork in her she's done! VfF

Science profs may want to test her, they'll find no ability and draw the reality based conclusion that nothing was found that could be any kind of paranormal ability.
Case closed.

Skeptics on the other hand are not expected to ever draw any conclusions based on her inability to demonstrate any of her claims.
They are to be open minded and wanting to investigate ad nauseam...but never to draw any reality based conclusion.

I think that is why she is associating with skeptics, instead of having a scientist (at her school for instance) do any kind of test.

Her science shyness is quite deliberate.
 
Last edited:
I guess you haven't been following along.

* She used this "gift" to create a website and conduct seminars on breatharianism: http://www.angelfire.com/stars3/breathe_light/breatharianism.html

* She also contacted a migraine sufferers Meetup group to offer to "heal" them.

* She has referred to "saving lives" of people.

* On her website she lists a number of foods she has determined to have health benefits (http://www.visionfromfeeling.com/foodperceptions.html). Fortunately, I saw it and informed her that apricot seeds can be poisonous, so she at least added that warning.

* She has claimed to have found cures for cancer using her Vibrational AlgebraTM.

* She told us she wanted to do a radio call-in show.

* She has offered to investigate haunted houses.

* She says that in the past she has detected crime scenes via supernatural powers.

However, there is no supporting evidence of any success, and every single demonstration conducted in the presence of a third party has failed to provide anything of interest.

Thanks for the update. I really don't kno wwhat she's been doing. But honestly, that's morally very shakey. Very very shakey. She must have a "pass" in life and the after life if she's mucking about like that.
 
From the title of this thread all the way through it, this thread is overly harsh. You skeptics think that gifted people can just perform on demand without regard to the myriad of issues that should be in place when dealing with someone who can do something special.

Unfortunately someone on this site has poisoned Anita against me. If that had not happened I am certain our motel room study would have been on A&E.
 
Science profs may want to test her, they'll find no ability and draw the reality based conclusion that nothing was found that could be any kind of paranormal ability.
Case closed.

Skeptics on the other hand are not expected to ever draw any conclusions based on her inability to demonstrate any of her claims.
They are to be open minded and wanting to investigate ad nauseam...but never to draw any reality based conclusion.

I think that is why she is associating with skeptics, instead of having a scientist (at her school for instance) do any kind of test.

Her science shyness is quite deliberate.
Hmm ... interesting. So in this sense, the skeptical community can't call it quits because of the nature of skepticism? So it's a potentially never ending dance of woo/skeptic, almost making both the rubes in some ways. Where does one community eventually shut out an individual all-together though, and "close it's doors"? Ever? Is it a skeptical loop hole so to speak?

The skepchick has an interesting blog post related to this, I think, here. It has a similar vein of moral conflict within it as might apply here, for those interested.

From the title of this thread all the way through it, this thread is overly harsh. You skeptics think that gifted people can just perform on demand without regard to the myriad of issues that should be in place when dealing with someone who can do something special.

Unfortunately someone on this site has poisoned Anita against me. If that had not happened I am certain our motel room study would have been on A&E.
Blame Mark Edward ;)
 
If you studied anything of worth in a motel room, then it would end up on Skinemax, not A&E. This whole thing keeps going on and on because we are people that love to argue and win, and she keeps coming back for more.

That and the fact that if she were Miss January in a "Ladies of Woo" calendar, then February would never come.
 
Last edited:
The claim is falsified because you very clearly have no super powers. Logic is a normal power and I find you lacking in those as well. Allow me to propose a hypothetical example. A known pathological liar claims that he or she has an invisible unicorn in his or her garage. Why bother going through the motions of skepticism when it saves a lot of time and nonsense to simply call B.S. on the whole affair? Personality and psychological conditions matter.
Unfortunately I have experiences with my claim now and then in which I accurately describe health information that I should not have known. I suppose it is a good idea to start carrying a "documentation kit" with me where ever I go to try to capture all experiences with the claim and be able to share those with you. Pen, papers, health checklist, camera and video recording equipment. You have not witnessed my personal experiences with this claim simply because you were not present at those times, but that does not allow you to conclude on them as lies although it does grant you the right to question their honesty. They are also not the case of delusions as their occurrence and accuracy were confirmed by others present. Just not documented. That is why you and I are in disagreement as to the importance and continuation of this claim.

"Taking responsibility for your own actions" includes your failures. As far as your paranormal claimS are concerned you are a TOTAL failure.
Some of you internet Skeptics confuse my lengthy study with real tests. The study involved several scenarios testing test design, and deliberately set up to study the claim under conditions in which it may be likely to fail, so to map out the outer boundaries of what test conditions the claim can perform under. This is a normal procedure done in any scientific research. If I deliberately set up to test my claim with a full-body screen, knowing that my claim is likely to not form perceptions then, then such a failure under those conditions does not lead to falsification of the claim. There is a difference in exploring test parameters during the formation of a clearer understanding of the claim and in formation of test design, and to then agree to test conditions and to fail then during a formal test. Perhaps you are not a research scientist, but I am educating myself to become one.

One more thing, was Carlson naked when you really really did see that he was missing a kidney? No napkins? Nothing?
I need to look at the person I am reading and to see the outline of the part of the body that I am looking into. Clothing, for some reason, is ok, but screens are not. I do not pretend to insist that anything paranormal is going on. I have studied the claim under various conditions and outlined the requirements it has to perform, and I do agree that the conditions required do perhaps provide clues as to what normal, as opposed to paranormal, event is occurring.

The conditions under which the claim does manifest and all of its requirements as to screens or no screens and other conditions, still boils down to a claim of the unusual that we may for these purposes call a "paranormal claim".
 
Please do not lie. When you were touring Poland as Alenara the Breatharian you were making these very same claims including, "I am blessed with what I at least perceive to be extrasensory perception and am able to experience matter, molecules, atoms, and various forms of light on my own without the use of instruments."
I have since gained an interest in science and skepticism and turned around to look back at my claims in an investigative and exploratory manner.

For years you were utterly convinced you had ESP. When you first arrived here you said you believed it might be ESP. You have also made variety of other claims
The experiences I have, can be very easily misinterpreted by the experiencer as being something "paranormal". I do see and feel health information. And there is accuracy and in cases where there should be none. However I do agree that the conclusion that this be a true case of ESP was made prematurely, and that is how I now look back again at my experience in an investigative manner and expecting to reveal a normal, not paranormal, explanation.

including repeated statements that you are not human. Your exact quote to me was, "Am... no, I don't believe I am human." I'm pretty sure nothing is being lost in the translation.
My childhood was filled with experiences that can lead any child to beginning to think of themselves as otherwordly. And no, I am not talking about personal traumas or dissociation from self, but actual encounters of UFOs and all that comes with it. Then in my teens, while still young, I came across the woo concept of "Star People", which is the idea that one's consciousness or soul comes from another world somewhere in outer space, while living here and in a human body, so it was natural for me to relate to this concept.

It may very well be nothing but a social construct and cultural artifact of our space-age and day, but it remains rooted in my sense of self. However I am now today an adult and can look back to say that I will not state this as a fact but I will acknowledge that my identity remains containing elements of such a childhood and past and that those are best not discarded, because they are too intertwined with who I became.

In other words, my childhood was different and did contain several strange experiences related to UFOs and such, and I must say not all in my mind alone but in the real tangible world itself, and that this all took part during my development of identity. I do not claim this to be real, yet it is part of my sense of self. We all have an identity that is subjective, shaped by our experiences and culture, and none of us can claim that who we are as individuals is "real".

You have made a wide variety of extraordinary claims and have failed every single time you have attempted to demonstrate them to others. Skeptics follow the evidence. They don't start with ridiculous beliefs and continue to say, "Nope, still not enough to falsify this belief for which I have no evidence."
My paranormal claim of medical perceptions remains unfalsified.

Why do you insist on validation from others? Millions of people go through their own periods of self-discovery without writing a million words on the Internet about it. Why don't you do the same and come back when you've either got the evidence we will be forced to accept or an admission that you were wrong all along? Why must you make it a public spectacle and then insist you're not after attention?
I make my investigation a documentary, therefore I share it with others who might be interested. I do think it might benefit the skeptical community to have a fully disclosed example of a paranormal claim, and for the woo community to experience a case of woo taken through the process of skepticism.
 
The excuses become more absurd with each post. You are missing the most obvious point: You can't tell when your "ability" is working or it is not. This alone should tell you it's just a figment of your imagination. In the IIG test you were detecting kidneys where none were and failing to detect when one was missing, yet you continued along. You have repeatedly stated you wouldn't guess, but clearly that's what you're doing. In your silly induced information test, which is very similar to the finger test, you made guess after guess and did no better than chance.

Your "conclusion" was that the conditions were not right for your abilities to work, but that's patently absurd. If I want to test my eyes in the dark, I don't just rattle off letters from an eye chart I cannot see. I simply say, "I can't see anything!" You think you're sensing things when you clearly are not. You did that when you failed the test reading photos. You didn't tell us you couldn't sense anything. You gave us very specific ailments, and they were all wrong.

Do you understand what I'm saying here? Whenever you make predictions and fail, you come up with an excuse for why it didn't work and claim it simply establishes limits on your ability. What you keep ignoring is that whatever you think you're sensing is not real. Therefore, you cannot even distinguish when your "ability" is working or when it's not because in every case you are relaying perceptions.

As for the napkin over the hand, that's ridiculous. You told us, "When the person was behind an opaque full-body screen I did perceive tissues and organs, but I had a hard time finding the kidneys." And this:

As I have already said, with the full-body opaque screen the first perception of tissue I landed at was the layer of yellow fat tissue on the back beneath the skin, and after that what I saw was the heart. I was having difficulty with orientation in the body. I tend to see one thing at a time, rather than everything at once. Meanwhile if I can see the clothed back of a person, I can construct perception of the kidneys right away.

I do not see everything at once like in that picture, but rather one region of the body at a time. I can choose the depth from which I create images provided I have a sense of location and distance to the body.

The contradictions in your stories are astounding but not surprising.

Just because the legs of a spider keep twitching after a child pulls them off one by one doesn't mean this skeptical investigation isn't long since dead.
 
Do you ever think that VFF is kind of like in two parts? One part of her genuinely sees things that are not there and the other part knows it is an illusion but keeps trying to rationalize it, it seems to not only try and trick the skeptics that VFF is genuine but also to keep Part One in the dark about it as well.
Like the crushed pill test, surely if she 100% believed she could identify chemicals she would have just blithely written down 5 things that she imagined they were and would have had absolutely no idea that her answer was wrong. But Part Two came up with all these reasons why she couldn't do it, it didn't convince the skeptics but it kept Part One's beliefs intact.
Unfortunately this is not that simple.

There is a paranormal claim and it remains unfalsified. I do experience perception of health information. That in itself is perhaps not interesting. I also do experience cases of synesthesia, such as that when I read numbers I feel and see them in colors; colors that are not actually there. 1 and 7 and 3 are not really yellow, green and orange. But the reason I investigate the medical perceptions, is because there is accuracy! What I perceive of a person's health, is accurate! Well, then again that may not be so interesting.

Perhaps there is prior knowledge? Perhaps I communicate with the persons to find clues and to receive feedback? Perhaps there are externally visible clues and in the person's body language? Problem is, I am detecting information in cases where I can not find any of these or other normal explanations.

I am looking for cases where I can claim to have perceived some health information only to find that it is inaccurate. Each and every time that has almost happened, the people I have been with have seen that I am happy to find falsifying evidence, but it has not happened!

As for the crushed pill test, it first of all is not my main claim of medical perceptions, but I did identify two pairs of compounds in the group that were similar, and was unable to make the distinction without at least reference samples. And once I looked up the compounds by their names that I had been given on a list, I found that it is true that there were two pairs among the group that had similar effects to each other. So it was almost like saying which of two similar shades of red is more red.
 
So basically each time you read someone now you will simply say you can't see anything.
But that doesn't mean they don't have anything.

So, your ability is exactly like... any other member of the general population then. :rolleyes:
Ha ha no Ashles. I do come across several bits of health information that I can claim to have perceived. Many people have health problems, but Mark feels healthy, pain free, and well-nourished.

I did do a reading on another person while in Hollywood last weekend, and I felt this burning tingle at the tip of her nose, but not in the inside of the nose, and with it I saw a perception of her stroking the tip of the nose when that happens. Aha, I knew it was cocaine use. Turns out it was. How common is cocaine use? I have never perceived this in another person before. And you certainly would not have guessed just by looking at this person. What ever outward clues you might think that a person who does this has, she would not have had it.
 
Last edited:
Ha ha no Ashles. I do come across several bits of health information that I can claim to have perceived. Many people have health problems, but Mark feels healthy, pain free, and well-nourished.
So your power is useless.

I did do a reading on another person while in Hollywood last weekend, and I felt this burning tingle at the tip of her nose, but not in the inside of the nose, and with it I saw a perception of her stroking the tip of the nose when that happens. Aha, I knew it was cocaine use. Turns out it was. How common is cocaine use? I have never perceived this in another person before. And you certainly would not have guessed just by looking at this person. What ever outward clues you might think that a person who does this has, she would not have had it.
Nobody believes you.
How odd your story fails to jive with reality everytime someone decides to check on your story.
 
I have since gained an interest in science and skepticism and turned around to look back at my claims in an investigative and exploratory manner.
Your actions do not match your words.

The experiences I have, can be very easily misinterpreted by the experiencer as being something "paranormal". I do see and feel health information. And there is accuracy and in cases where there should be none.
You have repeated this hundreds of times, but it's still not true. Every single one of your unverified anecdotes has a simple explanation, and every single time you have tried to demonstrate your ability, you have failed. There is nothing to see. You are still working from a belief rather than from the evidence.

However I do agree that the conclusion that this be a true case of ESP was made prematurely, and that is how I now look back again at my experience in an investigative manner and expecting to reveal a normal, not paranormal, explanation.
So, when are you going to update your Alenara website and remove what is very clearly false and dangerous information? When you are going to pull down your claims about detecting cancer treatments in ordinary fruits and vegetables?

And what about all of your other claims? Can you really talk to ghosts? You keep pretending like it's one thing when in fact you have made over 30 outrageous claims.

My childhood was filled with experiences that can lead any child to beginning to think of themselves as otherwordly. And no, I am not talking about personal traumas or dissociation from self, but actual encounters of UFOs and all that comes with it. Then in my teens, while still young, I came across the woo concept of "Star People", which is the idea that one's consciousness or soul comes from another world somewhere in outer space, while living here and in a human body, so it was natural for me to relate to this concept.
Are you a human?

It may very well be nothing but a social construct and cultural artifact of our space-age and day, but it remains rooted in my sense of self. However I am now today an adult and can look back to say that I will not state this as a fact but I will acknowledge that my identity remains containing elements of such a childhood and past and that those are best not discarded, because they are too intertwined with who I became.
That's nothing but making excuses. If your identity is built upon a child's foolishness, it should most definitely be discarded along with Santa, the Tooth Fairy, and your blankie.

In other words, my childhood was different and did contain several strange experiences related to UFOs and such, and I must say not all in my mind alone but in the real tangible world itself, and that this all took part during my development of identity. I do not claim this to be real, yet it is part of my sense of self. We all have an identity that is subjective, shaped by our experiences and culture, and none of us can claim that who we are as individuals is "real".
I've heard this same spiel before followed by you later stating categorically that you are not human, so pardon me if I don't believe you this time.

Why do you insist on making this a public spectacle? It sounds like you have serious issues you need to deal with, and spewing them on public message boards is counterproductive.

My paranormal claim of medical perceptions remains unfalsified.
Then you have learned nothing. It's all just words. The claim was never proven or even likely. It was false to start with and remains false to this day. When you can wrap your head around that concept, you'll be on to something.

I make my investigation a documentary, therefore I share it with others who might be interested. I do think it might benefit the skeptical community to have a fully disclosed example of a paranormal claim, and for the woo community to experience a case of woo taken through the process of skepticism.
Nonsense. You are not investigating anything. You have repeatedly rebuffed all attempts at assistance. Instead, you have been an advocate trying to convince people your abilities are real. You are not passively documenting anything. You are actively promoting yourself. There's nothing scientific about what you're doing at all.

The best thing you can do for your credibility is to work this out on your own - privately - and come back when you have something of substance to offer.
 
Ha ha no Ashles. I do come across several bits of health information that I can claim to have perceived. Many people have health problems, but Mark feels healthy, pain free, and well-nourished.

I did do a reading on another person while in Hollywood last weekend, and I felt this burning tingle at the tip of her nose, but not in the inside of the nose, and with it I saw a perception of her stroking the tip of the nose when that happens. Aha, I knew it was cocaine use. Turns out it was. How common is cocaine use? [...]


In Hollywood?
:dl:​
 
I did do a reading on another person while in Hollywood last weekend, and I felt this burning tingle at the tip of her nose, but not in the inside of the nose, and with it I saw a perception of her stroking the tip of the nose when that happens. Aha, I knew it was cocaine use. Turns out it was. How common is cocaine use? I have never perceived this in another person before. And you certainly would not have guessed just by looking at this person. What ever outward clues you might think that a person who does this has, she would not have had it.

This is striking evidence that you are not the least bit skeptical.

1) Synesthesia, which you offer periodically as an explanation, does not result in visions of people scratching their noses.

2) You are offering an unverified account as evidence.

3) You did not bother to research cocaine use to see just how hard it would be to guess that somebody in Hollywood(!) on a weekend might have used cocaine at some point.

4) You did not bother to research the visible effects of cocaine. Current intoxication is not hard to notice. Prolonged use certainly affects the face in a visible way.

Even if your story is 100% true, it's laughable. Your claims are all of a similar nature except for those done in front of a third party. In all those cases there wasn't even a semblance of something interesting.

Stop trying to convince us. It won't work.
 
So it's a potentially never ending dance of woo/skeptic, almost making both the rubes in some ways. Where does one community eventually shut out an individual all-together though, and "close it's doors"? Ever? Is it a skeptical loop hole so to speak?

I think it's VfF that thinks the skeptical community should never "close it's doors" on her claims.
The door on Anita Ikonen, as a person, doesn't necessarily need to be closed, but the door on her claims can and should now be closed.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom