• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The VFF Test is On!

Hokulele said:
I am prepared for an explanation of why her failure was really a success, because although she didn't outright say that participant #6 was missing a kidney, she knew they did, but didn't want to bias the results...

...or something.
Click to expand...

Yes. I believe that is how it will end, as well.
 
I for one congratulate VfF for actually confirming the test, agreeing to a protocol, buying the plane ticket and actually giving an undertaking to go through with it. I will watch the outcome with interest, and at this point seriously suggest that people not be overly harsh until the event happens, and the results are in.

At least unlike many others, she is actually willing to put her money where her mouth is. Wait until after the test for the snide remarks, please.

Norm
 
Yes, it's true. The test is finally scheduled and only less than a month away. I have purchased non-refundable flight tickets. I will even be arriving early on the day before, and leaving in the afternoon on the day after the test so that I can have a full day for the test in case there are delays - and so that I can not be expected to blame anything on fatigue or on being rushed.

I have also sent a whopping $750 to the IIG to cover some of the costs of arranging the test. Don't worry, other people my age spend that kind of money on other things that they enjoy doing. I have been saving for a long time and this is something that is meaningful to me.

I have e-mailed the IIG asking them to confirm that I may post the test protocol. As soon as they confirm, I will post the protocol here in full. It is the best protocol ever, it is just that good.

I do hope you can attend the test, SezMe! Are you a member of the IIG, scientist from UCLA, or representative of the media? Otherwise they won't let you attend.

GeeMack, I don't think the IIG or the press would laugh at me when I fail the test, but if someone finds it entertaining then so be it. I will still be glad that I chose to go through with this, and I will still feel that it was the right choice to present a public and open example of a paranormal claim and its investigation. To have investigated an experience I can't explain, to have shared that with other people, to have set an example to other "psychic claimants", to show that it is possible and even very easy to submit a claim for a paranormal test and to go through with the test, and to embrace the conclusion of that test. And regardless of how other people will feel, I will be proud, not embarrassed.
 
Last edited:
SezMe said:
Do the airlines even sell refundable tickets any more? At least ones without a huge cancellation penalty.
Click to expand...
I believe most offer fully refundable tickets .. You just pay considerably more up front..
Which is not a problem if you never intend to use it ...:)


I could be wrong ... It's just my gut feeling ...


P.S.

I see I was wrong about the ticket ..

Can't wait to see the spin on the test, if it takes place ..


I would like to see the protocol .. I'm sure IIG will do a respectable job ..
I wonder if it allows for none of the subjects to have a missing organ ?
 
Last edited:
While it doesn't spell out the exact protocol, the press release does say:

During this preliminary demonstration Ms. Ikonen will be presented with multiple human test subjects and asked to identify those who are missing internal organs. If she is successful Anita will move on to the formal test for the IIG’s “$50,000 Challenge,"<snip>
Click to expand...
 
fromdownunder said:
I for one congratulate VfF for actually confirming the test, agreeing to a protocol, buying the plane ticket and actually giving an undertaking to go through with it. I will watch the outcome with interest, and at this point seriously suggest that people not be overly harsh until the event happens, and the results are in.

At least unlike many others, she is actually willing to put her money where her mouth is. Wait until after the test for the snide remarks, please.

Norm
Click to expand...
I prefer to start my snide remarks now ...

Think what a wonderful opportunity VFF will have to say " I told you so ! " if the snide remarks are without merit.

It's been almost a year ( Nov 5th will make it a year ) since VFF first made her claims here, and it would have been easy to be tested for her claims from day one ..

Why the dog and pony show a year later ?
 
Last edited:
Skeptical Greg said:
It's been almost a year ( Nov 5th will make it a year ) since VFF first made her claims here, and it would have been easy to be tested for her claims from day one ..

Why the dog and pony show a year later ?
Click to expand...
I submitted my claim to the IIG more than two years ago, in July 2007. The claim, then, was based on limited experience with various perceptions and with checking for their accuracy. I included a large list of various health information that I had experienced detecting in the past and had confirmed as accurate. The IIG however wanted the test to focus on one or a few types of health information only. Ironically, they did suggest that we test the claim on missing kidneys, and back then I had not had that particular experience and had to say no. My claim is strictly based on what I claim to have experienced, and nothing more.

Experiencing something in everyday life can be very different from attempting the same in a test environment. I was not sure of which health information to choose for a test, and also I was not sure of how my claim might perform in a test. What test conditions would it perform under? Could I use a screen? Would I have to see the person from the front, and for how long? The protocol negotiations came to a halt.

Both IIG and the local Skeptics group suggested to me that I study my claim to learn more about it, and so I did. During the study, I had the specific (claimed) experience of detecting a missing kidney, and also learned plenty of other things about how my claim can and can not perform under various test conditions.

I was pleased to find that not only do the perceptions work if I see the person from behind, but that I would actually prefer that. I learned that I only need a few seconds to form and conclude on the perceptions. That the perceptions are not based on my thoughts or logic and are an entirely different process. That I do not use any interaction with the person, such as speaking or touching. But I also learned that I do need to see the person with my eyesight in order for the perceptions to form.

Anyhow, that is why it took the time it did before I was then able to submit a new and much more specific claim to the IIG. I then returned to the JREF Forums and discussed the test protocol with you all and learned many valuable suggestions that I included in my new test protocol draft that I submitted to the IIG based on this more specific claim.

And the test protocol that will be used is actually almost exactly as what I submitted as my initial draft.

The protocol negotiations went by very quickly and smoothly. I do not think the IIG and me experienced any of the complications that are common for many other paranormal claimants who try to arrive at a test. To submit your claim to a test and to actually go through with the test is very easy, and I do hope that other claimants become inspired to do the same, or to withdraw their claims.

You can read more about my claim and its investigation at www.visionfromfeeling.com
 
As I recall in some VfF thread she claimed that she wasn't good at "seeing" missing appendix,tonsils, etc. But the IIG press release says "missing internal organs" so is she looking for missing kidneys? She claims this was her strongest perception.
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
I submitted my claim to the IIG more than two years ago. <snippage> The protocol negotiations went by very quickly and smoothly. <abounds>
Click to expand...
Akhenaten said:
One of these things is not like the other thing.
Click to expand...
Once I submitted the new suggested protocol draft for the more specific claim it did not take long for it to become a final test protocol. But the process overall took more than two years, but that is because I was working on designing a more specific claim and studying how the claim does with various test conditions.
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
I do hope you can attend the test, SezMe! Are you a member of the IIG, scientist from UCLA, or representative of the media? Otherwise they won't let you attend.
Click to expand...
I was one of the original members of the IIG and, in fact, for a brief period was the Investigations Chair. However, living more than 100 miles from the IIG location made it difficult to participate regularly (especially given LA traffic :() so I had to end my participation.

But for this test one of the people you have been negotiating with has given me VIP status (*snort* First and last time that'll happen :)) and permission to attend. Hopefully I can be there, closely monitor the test, take some photos for JREFers, and get a chance to meet you.

Good luck!

ETA: As I indicated in the OP, the IIG has no problem with you releasing the protocol. Of course, you should not take my word for it but after they confirm, please post it here ASAP. It is of central importance to this test and should answer Audible Click's question in some detail.
 
Last edited:
Audible Click said:
As I recall in some VfF thread she claimed that she wasn't good at "seeing" missing appendix,tonsils, etc. But the IIG press release says "missing internal organs" so is she looking for missing kidneys? She claims this was her strongest perception.
Click to expand...
Audible Click said:
@VfF
Will you please answer my question?
Click to expand...
I thought I already answered earlier. I have e-mailed the IIG asking them to confirm whether I am allowed to post our test protocol or reveal details from it.
 
Win, lose or draw, good on you for having a go.

I can't imagine you will win the test - but all the very best.
 
SezMe said:
But for this test one of the people you have been negotiating with has given me VIP status (*snort* First and last time that'll happen :)) and permission to attend. Hopefully I can be there, closely monitor the test, take some photos for JREFers, and get a chance to meet you.

Good luck!

ETA: As I indicated in the OP, the IIG has no problem with you releasing the protocol. Of course, you should not take my word for it but after they confirm, please post it here ASAP. It is of central importance to this test and should answer Audible Click's question in some detail.
Click to expand...
I would look forward to meeting you too! I hope to see you at the test, VIP!

There are reasons why I am unclear as to whether I may publish the test protocol. There is the possibility that the IIG is choosing not to reveal certain aspects of the test, so it is better that I confirm with them first. If I am incorrect, then I will tell you what I thought the reasons were.

PS. I will be up all night. I have homework. And coffee.
 
Last edited:
Test Protocol will NOT be published

The test protocol will not be published. This is to protect the integrity of the test and to better ensure a double blind procedure for all of those involved. I am allowed to publish the protocol, but the IIG will not, and so neither will I. You only have less than a month to wait until you get to see the test itself and once the test has been concluded I am sure the protocol will be published then. Just think of it as a surprise that way.
 
Last edited:
Nonsense. Publishing the protocol will ensure the integrity of the test. I have sent an e-mail to the IIG stating that keeping the protocol private is a "serious problem".

We'll see.

ETA: "Nonsense" being in response to #38, not #39....which is merely tongue-in-cheek nonsense. :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom