Randi not dealing with religious paranormal?

[UrsulaV]

I do not want to push Randi to deal with events he does not feel confortable to deal with.

Well, dude, then I'm thinkin' you're kinda stuck. Our thoughts aren't working for you, and you don't want to talk to the one human being on earth who has a front row seat on Randi's motivations (i.e. Randi himself.) He doesn't read the forums and so isn't going to take this as a hint.

What outcome are you hoping for, here? This isn't a rhetorical question, I'm genuinely asking--what outcome do you desire from this discussion?

 

[deBergerac]

In my opinion Randi deals with religious paranormal believes, explicitly if they are examinable, and generally by stating that he is an atheist.

Most religion is based on some paranormal believes but most of these believes are not possible to test, is there a God or not? If the claim is impossible to test it is a matter of opinion, or faith, some would say.

If there is a testable claim, like the shroud of Turin or statues crying blood, Randi is all over the claim asking for evidence. The problem with “miracles” of a medical nature is that they are often anecdotal or only single cases. From a rational point of view there is not much to deal with.

 

[Matteo Martini]

Randi has commented on this from time to time, and as I recall, the reason miracles aren't tested is because of the difficulty of setting up a test. First of all, you have to get a number of people with nearly identical conditions in order that the results be statistically significant. Then you must get written declarations by independant doctors certifying that the patients all have the condition and that spontaneous remission is very unlikely. Then you must have them agree to abandon medical treatment so that there won't be any confusion as to what caused the "miracle" (and this step is a big stopper, because to ask someone to go off their meds is highly unethical). Then you must be certain that the patients are "cured" by doing lots of follow-up.

All in all, it is not the sort of test that Randi can do, even if it were ethical. Now if the miracles could be something obvious (as StoatBringer suggests), like regrowing severed limbs or giving Jean Claude Van Damme the ability to act, it would be a lot easier to judge.

I did not know that Randi was only dealing with claims on the paranormal which are " easier to judge ".
In addition, to reply to your point, you do not need to set up a test, an analysis on the medical data available and on that of other spontaneus remissions would already be something and such analysis` have already been done in the past ( not by Randi!! ): http://www.internetbookshop.it/ser/serdsp.asp?shop=1&c=YYYWWP5WNLUYY ( in Italian )

 

[UrsulaV]

In addition, to reply to your point, you do not need to set up a test, an analysis on the medical data available and on that of other spontaneus remissions would already be something

You keep saying this, and I still don't think it's true. Lots of people have pointed out the paucity of the data and the inability to determine things like paranormal intervention from it.

But we're rational thinkers! Let's test stuff!

In this case, let's test your theory about a medical report. Grab us one of these analyses--preferably in English--and let's see what possible use we can make of it, were we trying to debunk miracles. No reason you have to wait for Randi to do it--seize the intiative! Show us what you've got!

 

[Matteo Martini]

Well, dude, then I'm thinkin' you're kinda stuck. Our thoughts aren't working for you, and you don't want to talk to the one human being on earth who has a front row seat on Randi's motivations (i.e. Randi himself.) He doesn't read the forums and so isn't going to take this as a hint.

What outcome are you hoping for, here? This isn't a rhetorical question, I'm genuinely asking--what outcome do you desire from this discussion?

I have started this discussion with a precise question to anybody who is willing to discuss the subject with me.
I have never said that your thoughts " aren't working " for me, I have replied to what you said in a polite and friendly way explaining, with data and links, why I do not believe the reasons you gave are/should be relevant to the point.
If you are not interested in this discussion anymore or if you are too bored, there are other threads open in this forum

 

[Tricky]

I did not know that Randi was only dealing with claims on the paranormal which are " easier to judge ".

It states clearly in the rules that the tester and the JREF must come to a mutual agreement as to protocol. If the miracle workers want to set up a test, they need to submit a protocol. What sort of protocol would you suggest?

In addition, to reply to your point, you do not need to set up a test, an analysis on the medical data available and on that of other spontaneus remissions would already be something and such analysis` have already been done in the past ( not by Randi!! ): http://www.internetbookshop.it/ser/serdsp.asp?shop=1&c=YYYWWP5WNLUYY ( in Italian )

Very rarely, Randi will allow an entrant to submit his data as the preliminary test, such as in the case with Gary Schwartz, but that is not part of the challenge and Randi is free to relax the rules at his own discretion. As a general rule, though, applicants must submit a claim that can be tested by the JREF with agreed upon results constituting success. Oddly, no miracle claimants have been willing or able to do this. The standard suite of excuses is employed instead.

But even if Randi did allow the data you linked (I assume it's data. I don't read Italian) to be allowed as proof of the initial challenge, the applicant would still have to prepare and submit the protocol for the final challenge. This would be very difficult. Whinging is so much easier.

 

[Matteo Martini]

You keep saying this, and I still don't think it's true. Lots of people have pointed out the paucity of the data and the inability to determine things like paranormal intervention from it.

But we're rational thinkers! Let's test stuff!

In this case, let's test your theory about a medical report. Grab us one of these analyses--preferably in English--and let's see what possible use we can make of it, were we trying to debunk miracles. No reason you have to wait for Randi to do it--seize the intiative! Show us what you've got!

I hope I have not been too rude with my last post.
Again, the " stuff " you are talking about, is available: there are books available ( I can provide the links ) describing the medical details of the events claimed as " miracles "
Even the links I submitted in my previous posts are a good start
And about your sentence " No reason you have to wait for Randi to do it--seize the intiative! ", I think you are changing " the cards on the table " ( as we say in Italy ).
I have never said that Randi has to deal with the claims on religious paranormal, my question is why he just does not deal with the official claims of the Church, being precise claims on the paranormal.
It is Randi who has set up the JREF as " an educational resource on the paranormal " ( as we can read above ), so why does he leave out some of the ( big ) claims?

 

[Tricky]

It is Randi who has set up the JREF as " an educational resource on the paranormal " ( as we can read above ), so why does he leave out some of the ( big ) claims?

Because it is the responsibility of the claimant to submit the claim. Randi has discussed religious miracle claims, but I don't think he has tested many, because they have not submitted applications, or if they have, they have not followed through.

You can't win the lottery if you don't buy a ticket.

 

[Matteo Martini]

In my opinion Randi deals with religious paranormal believes, explicitly if they are examinable, and generally by stating that he is an atheist.

Most religion is based on some paranormal believes but most of these believes are not possible to test, is there a God or not? .

We are not talking about " is there a God or not? " here, but if some events occurred in the past about which we have medical documentation have or have not any rational explanation other than that of a supernatural intervention

If the claim is impossible to test it is a matter of opinion, or faith, some would say.

You do not test the " miracle ", you test if the medical documentation available has or has not any rational explanation other than that of a supernatural intervention

If there is a testable claim, like the shroud of Turin or statues crying blood, Randi is all over the claim asking for evidence. .

These are not official claims of the Catholic Church

The problem with “miracles” of a medical nature is that they are often anecdotal or only single cases. From a rational point of view there is not much to deal with.

The " miracles " are not anedoctal, there is precise medical documentation supporting the claims

 

[Matteo Martini]

Because it is the responsibility of the claimant to submit the claim. Randi has discussed religious miracle claims, but I don't think he has tested many, because they have not submitted applications, or if they have, they have not followed through.

You can't win the lottery if you don't buy a ticket.

As I have already said, in his commentaries Randi deals with many people/institutions that have never applied for the prize.
I would say that 80% or more of the commentaries are dedicated to people/institutions that have never applied for the prize.
Strange to see why Randi does not deal with the " official " claims of the Church

 

[Tricky]

As I have already said, in his commentaries Randi deals with many people/institutions that have never applied for the prize.
I would say that 80% or more of the commentaries are dedicated to people/institutions that have never applied for the prize.
Strange to see why Randi does not deal with the " official " claims of the Church

Well, he has. Here are a few examples
The Circus of God
Garabandal, Spain
Another virgin in the news
That prayer study.
Saythya Sai Baba
Look! It's Matteo Martini!
Hallelujah Prayer Center
Statue of Stature
The QXCI prayer wheel
And of course, the infamous
Yellow Bamboo
You may argue that many of these are not church-acknowledged miracles (depending on which church you accept as the authority), but they are surely religious-based miracles or talents, and Randi has definitely not avoided them.

Frankly, I thought your contribution was very well done. I am glad you are truly trying to investigate these things. If you and others like you would do more of the sort of thing you did before, then surely Randi would have more to say about religious miracles.

 

[Matteo Martini]

Well, he has. Here are a few examples
The Circus of God.

Not an official claim of the Church

Garabandal, Spain
.

Not an official claim of the Church

Another virgin in the news
.

Not an official claim of the Church

That prayer study.
.

Not an official claim of the Church

Saythya Sai Baba
.

Not even a claim of the Church

Look! It's Matteo Martini!
.

Yes, that is me.
The ONLY commentary of Randi dedicated to Medjugorje, I have tried to contact Randi to publish other material I have prepared but no success
Unfortunately, Medjugorje is still not an official claim of the Catholic Church ( even if, according to many estimates 25 million+ people went as pilgrims to Medjugorje since 1981 )

Hallelujah Prayer Center
.

Not an official claim of the Church

Statue of Stature
.

Not an official claim of the Church

The QXCI prayer wheel
.

Not an official claim of the Church

And of course, the infamous
Yellow Bamboo
.

Not an official claim of the Church

You may argue that many of these are not church-acknowledged miracles (depending on which church you accept as the authority), but they are surely religious-based miracles or talents, and Randi has definitely not avoided them.

He seems to deliberately avoid the " official " claims of the Church.
Not a commentary on Padre Pio.
Not a commentary on Mother Theresa.
Only some generic hints about Lourdes ( without any precise reference to any actual " miracle " )

Frankly, I thought your contribution was very well done. I am glad you are truly trying to investigate these things. If you and others like you would do more of the sort of thing you did before, then surely Randi would have more to say about religious miracles.

But when I tried to do things seriously ( publish videos, etc. ), Randi refused to proceed..

 

[UrsulaV]

I have started this discussion with a precise question to anybody who is willing to discuss the subject with me.
I have never said that your thoughts " aren't working " for me, I have replied to what you said in a polite and friendly way explaining, with data and links, why I do not believe the reasons you gave are/should be relevant to the point.
If you are not interested in this discussion anymore or if you are too bored, there are other threads open in this forum

Chill, dude, I never said I was bored. You seem to be guessing at people's motivations here, but are unwilling to actually ask the person! In this case, however, I'm happy to tell you my motivations--I'm not bored. I am, however, trying to figure out where this discussion can go from here, so that we can address your concerns.

We already have gone over--and most posters were also polite and friendly, I believe--exactly why a lot of these claims aren't something that are testable or debunkable by Randi, and have pointed out some of the religious miracles he HAS debunked.

And you have explained why you don't like those reasons, or feel that they're relevant.

And here, to my mind, we're sorta stuck. You don't find the given reasons relevant, but you don't want to ask Randi about it. I'm out of reasons to offer you, since I still think mine are quite valid.

Now, I would love to become unstuck. Which is why I suggested that perhaps we could actually look at one of these cases and discuss how one would go about debunking it, in hopes that we could see whether the various reasons given were indeed valid, or, as you believed, they weren't relevant. My intent here is not to change cards around, whatever that means in Italian, it's to try and get an actual concrete example in front of us that we can get our teeth into and address so that we can see what concerns arise when you try to debunk such things, and perhaps get a better understanding of whether or not it's doable.

The links you've offered really aren't much good for this purpose--they're abstracts. We'd need the actual medical documentation you keep mentioning. If you can link to one, wonderful! But if you don't want to deal with that sort of thing, that's perfectly fine. It's just that I fear the discussion is going to keep going in circles.

But once again, I'm not bored. Don't worry your little head about my boredom. Not a concern, I assure you.

 

[Elind]

Yes, I know that this subject has been raised recently by other members but I still can not understand why Randi is not dealing with the official claims of the Catholic Church about the miracles.
There is nothing in Randi' s site ( or, very little ) about the claims of miracles of Matteo Pio Colella ( http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/saints/ns_lit_doc_20020616_padre-pio_en.html ), Dr. Manuel Nevado ( http://www.vatican.va/latest/documents/escriva_miracolo-canoniz_en.html ), etc.

I think a miracle has to be classified among the " paranormal " events ( right? ) and I think Randi is not shy about dealing with religion at all ( http://www.randi.org/jr/072503.html )

So, why does not he stop to deal with that stupid Sylvia Browne, and start to deal with more serious claims?

Perhaps because there is no point in debunking issues that, fundamentally, are not claimed to be repeatable and under human control?

 

[Matteo Martini]

Chill, dude, I never said I was bored. .

My name is not " dude ", please address me with my own name

You seem to be guessing at people's motivations here, but are unwilling to actually ask the person!.

I have already said that I sent mails to Randi
He gave me generic answers that the Church does not offer evidence, but this, as I have shown in the links submitted, this is not true.
At least, the Catholic Church presents it as evidence.
If, according to Randi, it is not, he should deal with this subject

In this case, however, I'm happy to tell you my motivations--I'm not bored. I am, however, trying to figure out where this discussion can go from here, so that we can address your concerns.

We already have gone over--and most posters were also polite and friendly, I believe--exactly why a lot of these claims aren't something that are testable or debunkable by Randi,

I have already said that the ( claimed ) medical evidence is available
And, if the medical evidence is not correct or enough to claim that a " miracle " is, err.., a " miracle ", Randi could, for example, present what is available to the public about one miracle and say, " look guys, with the data we have ( quoting which data ) we can not state the this miracle ( quoting which miracle he is talking about ) is as of supernatural intervention because there are other similar natural healings occurring spontaneously ( with quotes )

This is just an example about how I would proceed

Randi is doing nothing like that.

and have pointed out some of the religious miracles he HAS debunked.

Avoiding to even quote one of the " officials " of the Church

And you have explained why you don't like those reasons, or feel that they're relevant.

And here, to my mind, we're sorta stuck. You don't find the given reasons relevant, but you don't want to ask Randi about it.

I have already done that
He gave me generic answers that the Church does not offer evidence, but this, as I have shown in the links submitted, is not true.
At least, the Catholic Church presents it as evidence.
If, according to Randi, it is not, he should deal with this subject

I'm out of reasons to offer you, since I still think mine are quite valid.

I do not think your reasons are valid and I have tried to explain why.
But I accept your opinion, we just think differently

Now, I would love to become unstuck. Which is why I suggested that perhaps we could actually look at one of these cases and discuss how one would go about debunking it, in hopes that we could see whether the various reasons given were indeed valid, or, as you believed, they weren't relevant. .

Take one miracle, look at and present the medical evidence available and see if it is enough to claim that the event can only be as of supernatural intervention
Present the conclusions in the weekly commentaries

My intent here is not to change cards around, whatever that means in Italian, it's to try and get an actual concrete example in front of us that we can get our teeth into and address so that we can see what concerns arise when you try to debunk such things, and perhaps get a better understanding of whether or not it's doable. .

The healing of Matteo Pio Colella; the healing of Dr. Nevado, ..
I have given the links in several languages few posts ago
I can provide others

The links you've offered really aren't much good for this purpose--they're abstracts. We'd need the actual medical documentation you keep mentioning. If you can link to one, wonderful! But if you don't want to deal with that sort of thing, that's perfectly fine. It's just that I fear the discussion is going to keep going in circles. .

Towards the beginning of November 1992 I had to go to the Ministry of Agriculture to deal with some questions of farming. While we were trying to find the person we had an appointment with, we providentially met Luis Eugenio Bernardo Carrascal, an agronomic engineer who works at the Ministry. He kindly looked after us while we waited for the person we were meant to see.

While we were talking about various matters related to the Ministry, Luis Eugenio noticed my hands, and asked me what had happened to them. I explained briefly to him that I had advanced chronic radiodermatitis, and that it was an incurable disease. He gave me a prayer-card of Blessed Josemaria Escriva and recommended that I seek his intercession.

I did so straight away. A few days later, I went to Vienna to attend a medical conference. In Vienna I was very impressed to find prayer-cards of Blessed Josemaria in all the churches I visited. This made me invoke his intercession more often, as I had been recommended to do. I prayed in my own words, commending myself to his intercession, without sticking to the words on the prayer-card. But I did also use the prayer on the prayer-card sometimes.

As I have mentioned, I had suffered from chronic radiodermatitis for many years. I think I already had the first symptoms, such as loss of hair and erythema on the back of the left hand, in 1962 when I got married. Since then the condition grew worse, because for many years I had to operate on bone fractures using poor quality radio-diagnostic equipment with very limited protection.

In November 1992, when I went to the Ministry of Agriculture, the fingers of both hands were very badly affected. On the left hand it was the index, middle and ring fingers, and on the right hand mainly the index and middle fingers. In particular I had hyperkeratotic plaques and ulcers of different sizes on those three fingers of my left hand. Some of them measured up to 2 centimeters in diameter at the widest point. There were more on the back of my left hand and on the proximal phalanxes and the back of my right hand.

The condition of my hands made them quite painful and I had to stop operating. Not many people noticed them because I did my best to keep them covered. No doctor suggested I should get treatment, as it is well known that nothing can be done for radiodermatitis. Some told me to use Vaseline or lanolin to soothe the skin, which I was already doing.

From the day I was given the prayer-card, from the moment I placed myself under the intercession of Blessed Josemaria, my hands began to improve and, after approximately a fortnight, all the damage caused by the disease disappeared and my hands were perfectly healed, as they are now.

It is evident that this cure cannot be due to natural causes. I have already said that there is no cure for radiodermatitis, and that I did not use any medication. It had crossed my mind to ask a dermatologist to do a skin transplant to try closing the ulcers, but I never actually got round to it. Although I tried to hide my hands, there are many people who can testify as to the state they were in. Among others, there is obviously my wife, one of my sons who is a doctor specializing in anatomic pathology, and two other doctors who are dermatologists who I had sometimes asked to have a look at my hands. These were Isidro Parra and Ginés Sánchez.

I have put down here exactly how my radiodermatitis was cured. I was very much afraid that a metastasis might develop, which would have left me with no possible hope of recovery. But that did not happen. Quite simply, the radiodermatitis has been cured, and I can only attribute it to the intercession of Blessed Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer.

Since my recovery I have gone back to work normally and I am again doing general surgery."

http://www.opusdei.org/art.php?w=32&p=2507

This is more than enough to start a research.
If the above claims, in Randi' s opinion, do not count as " evidence ", Randi should say why

But once again, I'm not bored. Don't worry your little head about my boredom. Not a concern, I assure you.

My " little head "??
Seems that you are becoming insulting here..
Again, if you want to insult me, go find another thread.
The forum is big.

 

[Matteo Martini]

Perhaps because there is no point in debunking issues that, fundamentally, are not claimed to be repeatable and under human control?

Many claims Randi deals with are not repeteable and not under human control ( if we consider an event occurred during hospitalization not to be under human control )

 

[Complexity]

Matteo Martini - Take it up with Randi. Continuing to talk about it here will accomplish nothing.

 

[Matteo Martini]

Matteo Martini - Take it up with Randi. Continuing to talk about it here will accomplish nothing.

If I am the only one interested in testing the official claims of the Church ( as it seems ), I think there is no hope to keep on mailing Randi

 

[UrsulaV]

My " little head "??
Seems that you are becoming insulting here..
Again, if you want to insult me, go find another thread.
The forum is big.

Pardon, that was an idiom in MY language, rather like "changing cards" is in yours. Don't get worked up over it.

 

[UrsulaV]

Lovely anecdote you've posted!

Now, let's get down to brass tacks.

Before we got anywhere with supernatural stuff, we'd need to know answers to the following questions:

1) Does the report of the doctor treating this gentleman correspond to his claim? (i.e. could he be lying, exaggerating, or misremembering?)

2) Are there any other known cases of spontaneous remission of chronic radiodermatitis? (I know, the Vatican claims there aren't. I'd like a non-biased source on that one.)

3) Are there any diseases--and here we'd need a dermatologist--which can be mistaken for radiodermatitis, which might have caused a misdiagnosis?

Assuming all those questions were answered satisfactorily, at best we'd be left with a unique case of spontaneous remission of a disease. However, this would of course not prove supernatural intervention, it would merely prove that for some as yet unknown reason, the patient went into remission, while providing no proof as to what may or may not have caused it.

Do we agree so far?