Randi always has an out?

[CFLarsen]

Even if it were true that "Randi always has an out" it would be relevant only if Randi were the only person willing to entertain the notion of doing these tests. If someone truly had abilities they could show them and if they showed them over and over to many testers and they worked for everybody except Randi then (a) Randi would look like a fool and (b) Randi would be irrelevant. Of course, having a dozen woos certify you and then losing to Randi doesn't qualify as true proof because you didn't test with non-woos, but there are lots of testers in the world besides just Randi and woos.

Indeed. E.g., the Danish skeptics sure aren't inundated with paranormal claimants, even to be tested while not applying for the JREF million.

 

[Blue Mountain]

There's not much ambiguity in Randi's response.

But we have no good evidence he actually said it.

I just did a search on Google for "have an out I'm right". There were four results returned:

1. Wikipedia article on Sylvia Browne
2. Wikipedia talk page on the above article
3. The Book of THoTH (a paranormal wiki, entry on Extra-sensory perception)
4. This previous forum thread - "How to get people to accept the challenge?"

The Book of THoTH entry has this interesting line:

There is no direct way to confirm Randi indeed made the quote attributed to him by Rawlins, and the quote appears in none of Randi's books or other writings.

The above list of Google hits seems to bear that out.

In light of that, I'd like to hear Randi's take on the quote. Can he provide us with some context on it? Perhaps he said on a television program or in a radio interview. That would explain why it doesn't show up on Google.

If no-one else does so before I get home in a few hours, I'll e-mail Randi and ask.

 

[ponderingturtle]

The person, if they are interested in testing their whatever-it-is-they-claim scientically, they should probably follow the standard channels of science, not challenges by skeptical clubs.

Yes, but it is a lot easier for them to pretend that they are following science by spouting BS and get most of their audience to believe it, as they are often unfamiliar with how real science is conducted. Also the prize is vitally important part of it, it provides a reason to say "if you can do what you say you can, why don't you spend an afternoon and win a million dollars?".

That is important because with regards to science they can always make up some cop out, but copping out of a million dollars is a lot harder to do.

[as for paranormal predictions, I predict that this reply will be pointless, OK that is not paranormal but a real lock given experience]

 

[CFLarsen]

But we have no good evidence he actually said it.

We have Randi's own account, and Rawlins retelling.

I just did a search on Google for "have an out I'm right". There were four results returned:

1. Wikipedia article on Sylvia Browne
2. Wikipedia talk page on the above article
3. The Book of THoTH (a paranormal wiki, entry on Extra-sensory perception)
4. This previous forum thread - "How to get people to accept the challenge?"

The Book of THoTH entry has this interesting line:


The above list of Google hits seems to bear that out.

Only if they have independent sources. Which they don't: We only have one real source: Randi himself.

In light of that, I'd like to hear Randi's take on the quote. Can he provide us with some context on it? Perhaps he said on a television program or in a radio interview. That would explain why it doesn't show up on Google.

If no-one else does so before I get home in a few hours, I'll e-mail Randi and ask.

Think about it: Let's say that Randi hadn't meant it as "he is right, because he won't allow cheating", but instead - as Rawlins, T'ai Chi and others want us to understand it: Randi inadvertently revealed that he will stack the test in his favor. Do you think Randi would be stupid enough to reveal it?

Hm?

 

[Spindrift]

Think about it: Let's say that Randi hadn't meant it as "he is right, because he won't allow cheating", but instead - as Rawlins, T'ai Chi and others want us to understand it: Randi inadvertently revealed that he will stack the test in his favor. Do you think Randi would be stupid enough to reveal it?
Hm?

The hallmark of a classic Conspiracy Theory: The perpetrator is very cunning and ingenuous putting together and pulling off their plot but is caught by a slip of the tongue. (i.e. "I always have an out", "pull it", etc.)

The fact remains that Randi does have on out: Paranormal phemonena does not exist. And if by some "miracle" someone legitimately wins the challenge, Randi will gain more publicity and fame in that one instance than during his entire career. Think about it, he will be the one who has helped proved the woo. It really is a win-win for Randi. There is no downside to him losing the challenge.

 

[CFLarsen]

The hallmark of a classic Conspiracy Theory: The perpetrator is very cunning and ingenuous putting together and pulling off their plot but is caught by a slip of the tongue. (i.e. "I always have an out", "pull it", etc.)

The fact remains that Randi does have on out: Paranormal phemonena does not exist. And if by some "miracle" someone legitimately wins the challenge, Randi will gain more publicity and fame in that one instance than during his entire career. Think about it, he will be the one who has helped proved the woo. It really is a win-win for Randi. There is no downside to him losing the challenge.

Quite so. Especially since Randi has also said (e.g. in his discussion with Dawkins at TAM) that if someone won the money by showing a new "perinormal" phenomenon, it would be worth it, just to see it for real.

 

[hammegk]

LOL.

The 100% certain "out" remains as it's always been: If science finds the effect in question, that effect is no longer "paranormal", just normal science.

IIRC, Randi & Dawkins danced around it in their recent discussion.

 

[CFLarsen]

LOL.

The 100% certain "out" remains as it's always been: If science finds the effect in question, that effect is no longer "paranormal", just normal science.

But it would still earn the claimant a million bucks. Agree?

IIRC, Randi & Dawkins danced around it in their recent discussion.

How so?

 

[Spindrift]

LOL.

The 100% certain "out" remains as it's always been: If science finds the effect in question, that effect is no longer "paranormal", just normal science.

IIRC, Randi & Dawkins danced around it in their recent discussion.

If the challenge is agreed to and successfully done and later is shown to be not paranormal, the challenger still wins the $1 million.

The challenger doesn't have to explain why or how they do something just that they do it.

Just because someone wins the challenge doesn't mean we would understand how they did it.

 

[T'ai Chi]

Why would someone offer a challenge, one for which it was said there is "always" an out? Always means always.

It is not too honest. I can see therefore why someone people don't give it serious respect. It is interesting and entertaining, however.

 

[Mercutio]

Why would someone offer a challenge, one for which it was said there is "always" an out? Always means always.

One could just as easily ask "why would one say there is always an out, when there is a legally binding contract guaranteeing the money?" Legally binding means legally binding.

It is not too honest. I can see therefore why someone people don't give it serious respect. It is interesting and entertaining, however.

It is not too literal. I can see, though, that someone could pretend it is, in order to make a disingenuous point. It is an understandable rhetorical device, however.

 

[ObscureReferenceMan]

Why would someone offer a challenge, one for which it was said there is "always" an out? Always means always.

It is not too honest. I can see therefore why someone people don't give it serious respect. It is interesting and entertaining, however.

Criminey! Do you know anything about the challenge at all? Or are you just being difficult? He's not making it because he has an out. He is making it because he has been investigating the paranormal for years, has found nothing, and is "putting his money where his mouth is".

 

[Spindrift]

Why would someone offer a challenge, one for which it was said there is "always" an out? Always means always.

It is not too honest. I can see therefore why someone people don't give it serious respect. It is interesting and entertaining, however.

The only reason "always mean always" is that there is no such thing as paranormal phenomena.

It is very honest. The dishonesty is in the people claiming such "powers". People don't give it serious respect because they are afraid of it and what it will do to their fantasy world.

 

[ChristineR]

LOL.

The 100% certain "out" remains as it's always been: If science finds the effect in question, that effect is no longer "paranormal", just normal science.

IIRC, Randi & Dawkins danced around it in their recent discussion.

Absolutely not true! The challenge simply states that the claimant will do something, the JREF agrees to pay them the million if they will do it.

If someone did something that was thought to be paranormal but turned out to be normal, the JREF would pay them and the scientists could have fun with this newly discovered effect. Randi has stated that this would be worth a million dollars to the scientific community.

 

[CFLarsen]

Criminey! Do you know anything about the challenge at all? Or are you just being difficult?

T'ai Chi knows exactly how the Challenge works. But, like other believers in the paranormal (he defends psychics, creationists, global consciousness, esp, Ganzfeld - to name a few), he has a long history of misrepresentation, selective quoting and outright deception.

Because he knows his arguments and evidence sucks, he has to try to paint skeptics in a bad light.

Evidence on request.

 

[valis]

Why would someone offer a challenge, one for which it was said there is "always" an out? Always means always.

It is not too honest. I can see therefore why someone people don't give it serious respect. It is interesting and entertaining, however.

I think it was useful in the early days of it. It allowed a way to hold well know psychics and such feet to the fire. It didn't take long for the pros to learn to stay a million miles away, and it ended up being the self deluded and the mentally ill.

I think the recent changes to it are a great idea and may help it get back on track.

Also; none of us can know what another person really thinks in the privacy of their own mind, but I find it almost impossible to beleive that Randi approaches this thinking there is any non-zero chance of the powers being tested turning out to be real.

 

[hammegk]

I, James Randi, through the JREF, will pay US$1,000,000 to any person who can demonstrate any psychic, supernatural or paranormal ability under satisfactory observing conditions.

IMPORTANT: Only claims that can be verified by evidence under proper observing conditions will be accepted.

So y'all have faith that that any scientifically measurable effect could be classed as "psychic, supernatural or paranormal"? I don't share that faith.

 

[Mercutio]

So y'all have faith that that any scientifically measurable effect could be classed as "psychic, supernatural or paranormal"? I don't share that faith.

Currently, psychokinesis and telepathy would be considered paranormal. Both of those, though, would be easily tested under controlled conditions. Hell, J. B. Rhine built a lab based on that.

If someone claimed to be able to bend metal without touching it, Do you (hammegk) think that A) this would qualify as paranormal (for purposes of the challenge--and I know you cannot speak for the challenge; I am asking your own opinion), and B) it would be scientifically measurable?

 

[hammegk]

A) Not enough info to judge, so B) irrelevant.

If you mean by "mind" alone ,A) sure ,B)yes.

Perhaps, I, hammegk, should offer $1,000,000 to anyone who can walk, unaided by any device or devices, hanging head down from my ceiling?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Criminey! Do you know anything about the challenge at all? Or are you just being difficult? He's not making it because he has an out. He is making it because he has been investigating the paranormal for years, has found nothing, and is "putting his money where his mouth is".

I see you are unfarmilier with Tai Chi.