The VFF Test is On!

VisionFromFeeling said:
And you believe in your delusions, because...? From my website: "The IIG Preliminary taught me that I am able to perform just as well in a test setting as anywhere else, and that being in the presence of Skeptics, video cameras, and an audience, and following a test procedure, does not inhibit my claim or performance in any way. I do not become nervous, and the claim is fully capable of expressing itself in a test setting."
Click to expand...

More proof of your own delusions, Anita. What you quoted has absolutely no relevance to what I said. Of course, that never stops you, does it?


VisionFromFeeling said:
You are a poor representative of your university, LightinDarkness. You are expressing your speculations in the form of accusations, of things that I never intend to do and have shown no inclination of ever doing. You are practicing prejudice and you fail as an objective Skeptic.
Click to expand...

When I found out you went to a UNC school I was rather sad. Although the faculty at UNCC are great, the school has a low ranking because of their admissions policy - as you demonstrate. Its a terrible thing since the professors there do some great research, but the undergraduates..well..you can imagine.

You should stop using words you don't understand. Your antics here have shown you have no idea what "skeptic" means. Indeed, as your own lies and spin have shown, you continue to seek out more attention even after you FAIL every test - from the most recent one to the ones you subjected yourself to.

You failed the test, your claim is falsified. These antics of screaming "I KNEW I WAS RIGHT EVEN WHEN I WAS WRONG" is so laughable that even your defenders find it unbelievable. Keep it up, Anita, you are working on alienating just about everyone.

Do you have any shame? I find it amazing you can lie to so many people and have no shame about it.

Lets see what the IIG has to say about you:

Human MRI Crashes and Burns
...
So how did she do? She failed. Unequivocally she failed the demonstration.
...
But even though she clearly failed the test, I have a problem. She got one right.
...
That’s a problem because instead of admitting that her alleged ability is disproved, she still thinks there is something special about herself and wants to set up another test. I’m sure she’ll convince others that she was at least somewhat successful too. That’s simply not true.
...
Anita Ikonen’s degree of accuracy is completely consistent with that of a guesser. If she really had this ability, you’d think her results would stand apart from what probability would predict. They do not.
Click to expand...
http://hollywoodrealitycheck.com/?p=1319

This from the blog of the IIG founder. It seems to agree that not only did you fail in a spectacular manner, but that there is nothing at all special about your proclaimed "abilities" (its all chance and cold reading). The post even goes on to say that you should move on with your life.
 
Last edited:
This "I know when I am right and when I am wrong" claim is stupidly genius.

Another test is set up. Doesn't have to be kidneys because it is only the right/wrong claim that is being tested. Shockingly, Anita performs very slightly under the parameters of chance.

New Claim from VFF: When I am wrong, I am more wrong than most people. Fascinating! This needs to be tested immediately! Who has a stage and some cameras?
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
And you believe in your delusions, because...? From my website: "The IIG Preliminary taught me that I am able to perform just as well in a test setting as anywhere else, and that being in the presence of Skeptics, video cameras, and an audience, and following a test procedure, does not inhibit my claim or performance in any way. I do not become nervous, and the claim is fully capable of expressing itself in a test setting."
Click to expand...

Do you even realize what you said there, or are you that stupid? I'm beginning to believe that only one personality cannot do you justice, Anita.
 
VisionFromFeeling said:
And you believe in your delusions, because...? From my website: "The IIG Preliminary taught me that I am able to perform just as well in a test setting as anywhere else...
Click to expand...

I agree 100%! At the IIG on two of three possible occasions you repeatedly detected a kidney that was not there. On five other occasions you failed to detect a kidney when, in fact, one was present. That is a very good indication of how well you have performed throughout this saga, which is to say no better than chance.

So, yes, the IIG test firmly established that there is nothing there, just like The Study concluded. And The Survey. And the Photo Readings. And the Ghost Conversations. And the Crushed Pill Test. The list goes on.

BTW, your claim about "knowing" and "not knowing" (besides being a huge indicator of your inability to distinguish fantasy from reality) is another glaring case of a false memory. Fortunately, we have this on tape.

False Memory #1: "I knew I was wrong in round 1..."
During the interview after the test, you immediately asked to see your notes and a list of what the correct answers were. An odd request from someone who "knew" that she was right when she was right and wrong when she was wrong.

Anyway, you got very excited about Round 1 and began this whole lecture telling us how you took notes so you could show us that you actually detected two people missing a kidney. You then proudly told us that #14, your unofficial guess, was the correct answer. You started telling us how you looked and looked at #14, but you just couldn't find a kidney and kept writing question marks. That is, until someone in the audience pointed out that #11 was actually the correct answer. Then you shut up.

It was at that exact moment that in your deluded mind, Round 1 changed from being a "near hit" to "knew I was wrong."

False Memory #2: "I knew I was right in round 2..."
Immediately after Round 2 you were heard off camera saying that you "feel really good about" it, but "this one I never saw either." Yep, you had two guesses. Again.

The real reason you liked Round was stated off-camera immediately after the test. "At least all of these [those with kidneys] were very clear to me. So if it is one of those, it's clearly just nonsense." After the results you told us again that you were very excited because you could detect "ALL of the kidneys. Except two." You said you could see the multiple times, up to 10x each. You were excited about the kidneys you saw and were simply more confident about the two(!) you couldn't find.

Never once did you say "I knew I was right" about Round 2. You couldn't say that because you had two guesses in your notes.

It's amazing to watch your delusional mind at work. You're slowly but surely convincing yourself about what happened. You get more confident with each telling. It was the same way with Dr. Carlson's kidney. There was no indication at the time about your "success." It was only a few days later that you made your claim.

And then what? It was six months later when you finally convinced yourself that this "strongest perception yet" was worthy of submitting to the IIG to be tested. During the intervening period you still conducted a couple of studies and planned yet another study. You canceled that study because you said the kidney claim was just too powerful and no more studies were needed.

Nothing changed about that night with Dr. Carlson except your memory of it, especially when it comes to your own thoughts and feelings. That's why it took six months to finally decide it was the Mother of All Claims.

It's over, Anita. Get some help. Remember, 90 people on my website have recommended that you seek the help of a mental health professional. If I had 90 people telling me to see a doctor, I'd go.
 
Last edited:
Rodney said:
I'm not sure what you mean, but I'll bet you a few dollars (U.S. or Australian) that Geemack's and McLuvin's identical selections did not occur by chance.
Click to expand...


I don't know whether they did or not. But I like the cut of your jib, so please, carry on. :)


M.
 
Anita, you have got so many folks here excited that I almost feel you ought to be paid for your participation here. Please do continue on your quest -- it will undoubtedly provide hours of amusement for all concerned.


M.
 
Moochie said:
Anita, you have got so many folks here excited that I almost feel you ought to be paid for your participation here. Please do continue on your quest -- it will undoubtedly provide hours of amusement for all concerned.


M.
Click to expand...


Hehe. I must admit I have lately been imagining....


Vision From Feeling - The Movie.
 
Rodney said:
That's not the issue. The issue is what the probability is that Anita's results would have been achieved by random chance. And the answer is 5.67%.
Click to expand...

'Random chance' is redundant and your answer is wrong. That's an F in both English and stat.
No 4.0 for you this semester.
 
GeeMack said:
Oh it is. It is. But for some reason you refuse to go have yourself properly analyzed by a competent mental health professional.

<snip>

You could learn an awful lot more if you go get yourself thoroughly checked out with a mental health professional. :)
Click to expand...

On the front page of www.StopVisionFromFeeling.com there's a survey near the bottom. You don't need to be registered to submit an answer. Here's where the tally stands right now:

She's fooling herself (65) 25%
She's playing games (36) 14%
She's setting up for a future scam (48) 19%
She needs the help of a mental health professional (99) 39%
Her claims are real (9) 4%

I don't think anybody is being flip when they make this recommendation. I remember back to probably last February Anita asking me in private chat, "Do you REALLY think I might be mentally ill?" I was shocked. I thought I had made myself very clear and approached it very seriously as had others. And yet she didn't think I had been serious?

Her actions after this test make it even more clear. She's always fallen back on the excuse that this stuff doesn't interfere with her life, so what's the big deal? Well, now she's spending big money on it, flying across the country, threatening lawsuits and dealing with repercussions of her actions with the staff and faculty at UNCC. It all stems from her perceptions and obsessive pursuit in convincing others they are real.

She needs to drop it and get some help.
 
UncaYimmy said:
On the front page of www.StopVisionFromFeeling.com there's a survey near the bottom. You don't need to be registered to submit an answer. Here's where the tally stands right now:

She's fooling herself (65) 25%
She's playing games (36) 14%
She's setting up for a future scam (48) 19%
She needs the help of a mental health professional (99) 39%
Her claims are real (9) 4%

I don't think anybody is being flip when they make this recommendation. I remember back to probably last February Anita asking me in private chat, "Do you REALLY think I might be mentally ill?" I was shocked. I thought I had made myself very clear and approached it very seriously as had others. And yet she didn't think I had been serious?

Her actions after this test make it even more clear. She's always fallen back on the excuse that this stuff doesn't interfere with her life, so what's the big deal? Well, now she's spending big money on it, flying across the country, threatening lawsuits and dealing with repercussions of her actions with the staff and faculty at UNCC. It all stems from her perceptions and obsessive pursuit in convincing others they are real.

She needs to drop it and get some help.
Click to expand...

I'm reasonably sure that in the fullness of time all will be revealed.


M. (channeling Carlos)
 
Rodney said:
Nice spin, but that's not what the protocol clearly stated.
Click to expand...


So, Rodney, why don't you show where the protocol explained the credit given for selecting a person with a missing kidney but failing to guess the correct kidney?

Or maybe you're ignorant?

Or maybe you have a reading comprehension problem?
 
UncaYimmy said:
BTW, your claim about "knowing" and "not knowing" (besides being a huge indicator of your inability to distinguish fantasy from reality) is another glaring case of a false memory. Fortunately, we have this on tape.
Click to expand...

And I think UY is being extremely generous casting this as a case of false memory. I think she's just simply lying.
 
Jeff Corey said:
'Random chance' is redundant and your answer is wrong. That's an F in both English and stat.
No 4.0 for you this semester.
Click to expand...


Yes, it's pretty clear that Rodney doesn't understand chance and odds and such things. His contribution to the conversation has pretty much become just noise at this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom