The VFF Test is On!

VisionFromFeeling said:
From http://www.nineronline.com/viewpoint/unc-charlotte-s-student-inner-sight-1.2056167
No claims on my website? That is because I only have one, and that one claim is well-covered on my website. The medical perceptions are my only paranormal claim. The claim is that I would have experienced accuracy and real-world correlation with health perceptions in cases where it shouldn't be possible to know the information that I did. The other things are just descriptions of what else is involved in my experience of colors and vibrational information, but I do not claim the other things to have any interesting accuracy and they are not paranormal claims.

And how dare you talk about financial and emotional loss? Who on earth have I scammed with my paranormal claim? The only one undergoing financial and emotional loss is me! I've spent well in excess of $1,000 on my IIG Preliminary, and I am constantly the target of personal attack from internet Skeptics! For the sake of science, I will endure.

What do you mean I'll laugh my way to the bank? Only if I win the Challenge, you dope.*

*If this comment was indeed posted by ours James Randi, I do apologize since you are entitled to make some comments, I'll love you anyway for the awesome work you've done all these years. :blush:
Click to expand...

A Day Late and A Dollar Short
 
Edited by Tricky: 
Rule 12 violation removed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Prediction: Anita will fail the IIG test, but continue to assert that she "really really" did detect Dr Carlson's kidney.
 
volatile said:
Let's not let these slide, eh Anita? A response would be greatly appreciated!
Click to expand...

She was kind enough to respond to your questions on the stopvisionfromfeeling website, where I don't believe you post, volatile. Strange, that.

She states that she hasn't read the links, presumably b/c she's so bogged down in schoolwork that she's only getting three to four hours of sleep a night. (Amazing how she finds time to post on web forums when she's so underneath. Doubtless, her overwhelming work load is why she keeps forgetting to answer your questions here where you asked them, instead of somewhere you might not see the response.)

Fortunately, she's aware how terribly worried we all are about her health and well-being, so she goes on to let us know that she won't be too tired to take the IIG test, and is looking forward to it as a mini-vacation and a chance to catch up on her rest.

Can I get a relieved Hallelujah?
 
This all reminds me of a humourous conversation I had once with an ex.

Her: Wow! Ive been here and done this before! Im sure I have!
Me: ahhhh, deja vu! freaky isnt it?
Her: no, no.... Ive *really* been here and done this before, Im absolutely positive!
Me: Thats what deja vu is..... its the strong feeling of familiarity in an unfamiliar situation, just as you are experiencing now
Her: THIS ISNT DEJA VU!!!! IVE REALLY REALLY BEEN HERE AND DONE THIS BEFORE!!!!
Me: ??????

Ive shortened this conversation by about 3 hours mind you.
 
SezMe said:
Aw, c'mon. Can we give the snipping a rest?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand you.
VFF has claimed I'm a 'bad skeptic', 'prejudiced' and, after having asking me how I think she should investigate her migraine condition 'claims' has pointedly ignored my suggestions.

My concerns with VFF's credibility as a claimant for the the IIG West test or any other still stand unanswered.
 
Blackwell said:
After repeated, civil, and well-thought out posts by volatile, which she seems to be quite obviously ignoring?
I say "no."
Click to expand...
I agree with those adjectives but volatile has been pressing her on her inability to admit to the fallibility of her memory claims. That's fair but does not directly relate to the IIG test.

Um, let me be clear. It relates to how Anita may interpret her IIG results but not to the results themselves or how others (read JREFers) may chose to interpret them. That is the sense in which I wish others would lay off Anita.
 
pakeha said:
VFF has claimed I'm a 'bad skeptic', 'prejudiced' and, after having asking me how I think she should investigate her migraine condition 'claims' has pointedly ignored my suggestions.
Click to expand...
All of which have nothing to do with the upcoming test.

ETA: Look, I'm not in the business of defending Anita here. Rather, I'm trying to keep the focus on the test and its interpretation. Other "stuff" is ... well "other".
 
Last edited:
We can certainly agree there, SezMe.
In point of fact it was VFF, after all, who informed us by posting here she was going to piggy-back a migraine att. treatment to her IIG demonstration journey.
And I protested this, warning the woman such piggybacking was possibly damaging the credibility of the testing because of the possible legal problems with these att. treatments in California.

I was under the impression this was on topic, SezMe.

added: I was perhaps misled by VFF's post talking about an att. treatment with a skeptic during her stay in California.
Is VFF's announced proposed att. treatment completely unrelated to the IIG demonstration?
 
Last edited:
Agreed 100%.
Good to know the att. treatment is completely unrelated to the IIG demonstration.
This means the att. treatment is not proposed for an IIG member, correct me if I'm wrong.
Thanks for the information, SezMe.
 
SezMe said:
I agree with those adjectives but volatile has been pressing her on her inability to admit to the fallibility of her memory claims. That's fair but does not directly relate to the IIG test.

Um, let me be clear. It relates to how Anita may interpret her IIG results but not to the results themselves or how others (read JREFers) may chose to interpret them. That is the sense in which I wish others would lay off Anita.
Click to expand...

Well, I see your point and accept your criticism, but I don't think it's entirely fair.

Whilst it may seem off-topic to press these more general questions, I'm pursuing them in this thread because they relate quite directly to the purpose of the test. As things stand, and without an understaning on VFF's part to relate the IIG test to her previous experience, all this test is evaluating, and all it's going to falsify in her conception, is her ability to see kidneys on the specific day in question.

Note the use of the word "again" I picked up on in a previous post. It's clear that Anita does not feel that this is a test of her ability in general, and that no matter what happens with IIG, she will still contend and still assert and still believe that she has magical x-ray vision. In other words, she does not see this test as anything other than a show, despite her cargo-cult type use of words like "falsify".

If she is not approaching the test with the understanding that its results reflect on her previous experiences as well as the ones that occur specifically during the test, the whole charade is rather pointless. It's just an exercise in ego-stroking rather than any kind of sceptical enquiry at all.
 
volatile said:
*snip* (there. I dunnit again)

If she is not approaching the test with the understanding that its results reflect on her previous experiences as well as the ones that occur specifically during the test, the whole charade is rather pointless. It's just an exercise in ego-stroking rather than any kind of sceptical enquiry at all.
Click to expand...
Agree.

It would seem that VFF is claiming:

1) Her original observation stands as true, no matter what subsequent testing may show.

2) She is a scientist.

On a skeptical forum, such a position must be fair game for continued challenge.

Hans
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom