The VFF Test is On!

[Tizzy]

I can't yet post quotes with links...(meaningful posts to come)

 

[GeeMack]

First of all, I do have some forms of synesthesia.

No, you don't.

And I do know the accuracy of my perceptions of kidneys beforehand.

No, you don't.

I know when I am right and when I am wrong.

It is certain that you don't. We have seen many examples of you thinking you were right when you were in fact wrong.

And I did detect Dr. Carlson missing a left kidney.

Yes, you detected it, by the same method anyone else might use. He told you.

I would not be too quick to conclude this as a mental illness.

A huge body of evidence points towards that. There's really only one way to know for sure. Have you set an appointment with a qualified mental health professional to pursue this very likely possibility?

As far as I know, there is no mental illness that lets you feel the presence or absence of kidneys in a person and to know the accuracy of what you feel in advance.

Truth be known, as far as anyone else knows, there is no state of rational sanity that lets you feel the presence or absence of kidneys in a person and to believe you know the accuracy of what you feel in advance. This bears repeating. There is no state of rational sanity that lets you feel the presence or absence of kidneys in a person.

Excuse me? This is the most un-Skeptical thing you could ever say.

And your thanklessly using hundreds of hours of various people's time, effort, and expertise, in good faith, only to crap on them all is pretty damned unskeptical of you. Honestly, Anita, don't you have a conscience? Don't you feel any shame for the way you've treated all the good folks that have done everything they have to help you?

 

[Rodney]

But the positions of the potential kidneys was 36. She made 36 separate judgments of whether a kidney was in a place or not. Each judgment can be considered a trial.

No, there were only three two-part trials, or rounds. An N of 36 is appropriate only if there are 36 rounds.

 

[Tizzy]

...until...(keep with me)

 

[desertgal]

What kind of Skeptic are you? So you encourage what she is doing? I think she should try to have her skills verified by scientists. Certainly if she can do what she offers, that would be wonderful. But it needs to be scientifically proven.

The fact that you believe that, and it isn't true, is probably just a manifestation of your schizophrenia. You can certainly suspect it to not have happened, but since it did happen, and you are totally convinced that it didn't, I'd say there's something not right with you.

I'm not the one with a diagnose of schizophrenia.

You could ask your mental health provider what kind of mental illness causes you to look at a video, and see that I am sure that trial 1 and 3 are wrong and that trial 2 is correct, and you would still think that I did not know the accuracy beforehand. Oh, that's right. Schizophrenia can do that.

Not the one with the diagnose.

Find a quote where I claim to have passed the IIG Preliminary. You won't, because you are delusional about thinking that I claim to have passed. All I am saying is that I am arranging to have another test.

I don't have schizophrenia-as "your" link clearly shows. Maybe you should learn how to read.

Here, I'll help you:

Schizotypal disorder is spelled "s-c-h-i-z-o-t-y-p-a-l d-i-s-o-r-d-e-r".
Schizophrenia is spelled "s-c-h-i-z-o-p-h-r-e-n-i-a".

See? Whole other set of letters at the end of "schizo". D'ya get how that works now?

Oh, and it is "d-i-a-g-n-o-s-i-s" not "d-i-a-g-n-o-s-e". You might want to keep that in mind, since you're going into the ...ahem... medical field and all.

You keep bringing that up like it means something. It doesn't.

Not the one who is schizophrenic.

Prove it.

Oh, that's right. You can't.

 

[Tizzy]

...Now! (Sorry about that, I had to get over 15). I'll respond to the posts now...

 

[bookitty]

I was looking at the kidneys. Not at anything else what so ever, except for the bladder in subject 12 to find my way up to the kidneys. The weak heart I sensed in one of the Skeptics, and that was while the demonstration was not taking place. So what's your point?

My point is that you missed numerous large medical issues on a person that you looked at intently for quite a while. My point is that your "automatic synesthesia" failed to notice these completely. My point is that missing all of that information makes everything you have ever said about your sooper-dooper medical perception powers null and void.

My point is that you don't need any of this. Frustrating people until they respond to you is no great trick. It's the same manipulation that is used in warm/cold reading. Sure the VFF threads get almost as much play as the bigfoot ones but do you really want to be in that race? Especially when even Bigfoot has a few people who believe in him

There is nothing wrong with looking at the IIG test with a critical eye and learning from it. You have contradicted yourself so many times that now you're just silly.

Before you start, don't give me that "I AM trying to learn from it!" nonsense. You are transparently trying to drag out your 15 minutes. Frankly, it is difficult to read your responses without being so embarrassed for and by you that my face burns.

You really don't need this. You can walk away and deal with your ego later. Go be the bright young girl with a future that you are supposed to be. Trust me, by the time you're 35 all this witch-child bunkum will be something you cringe to remember.

 

[Akhenaten]

I can't yet post quotes with links...(meaningful posts to come)

I can. Make your post with munged links and I'll quote it for you.


ETA: Never mind. I saw what you did there.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Nah, you just jealous of what Brent has got going on.

Nope. 'Cause if I wanted to, I could open up shop and charge $1,579 and get all her customers. 'Cause I'd throw in a special free-of-charge Holiday Specials att. in there too. And totally get away with it.

 

[GeeMack]

I never said it counted for anything in terms of Anita passing the protocol, I'm simply saying that the protocol clearly specified a two-step process that Anita was supposed to follow. Therefore, my calculation of the probability that Anita would get two of the targets and one of the locations correct is accurate.

... and still entirely irrelevant and meaningless to the discussion.

 

[Furcifer]

Nope.

I knew I was wrong. As soon as it hit "Submit Reply" I knew I was wrong. I went back over things and I realized you weren't the oldest, but you have a younger sister. I just knew it. I knew I was so wrong. It's harder because I can't see your aurora right now, but I knew you had a younger sister. You two are always in competition, she's better at spelling, but you're better at math. And she hates it. But that's how sisters are you know.

 

[desertgal]

Nope. 'Cause if I wanted to, I could open up shop and charge $1,579 and get all her customers. 'Cause I'd throw in a special free-of-charge Holiday Specials att. in there too. And totally get away with it.

So...you admit you are a fraud.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

And yet missed the laundry list of medical issues in the second trial. What inaccuracy indeed.

So if someone offers you to take an exam, and you say you don't want to. Does that mean you failed the test? In your world it does. I wasn't paying any attention to other things besides the kidneys. Sorry if that disappoints you.

 

[Farencue]

What kind of skeptic am I Anita?
Oooh, I'm with Jeff Corey. We are very bad skeptics indeed.

The problem is with you Anita - you just can't see how good Brent is. She really, really can see people's organs. And, she has never been incorrect one single time!

I'm excited.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

I am..amazed. How gracious of him to submit to the test. This demonstrates why Anita not only failed, but failed in a spectacular manner. How can a human MRI miss all that when they are supposedly using their superpowers to look for kidneys?

Hm... was it because... I was looking at kidneys?

 

[bookitty]

So if someone offers you to take an exam, and you say you don't want to. Does that mean you failed the test? In your world it does. I wasn't paying any attention to other things besides the kidneys. Sorry if that disappoints you.

Oh dear. You just can't stop, can you.

You have stated repeatably that your medical perceptions are spontaneous, automatic and instantaneous. By your own definition, it would have been impossible for you to miss the other medical issues.

It is this lying and intellectual dishonesty that disappoints me. I really do think you are capable of being bigger than this mess.

 

[Farencue]

Nope. 'Cause if I wanted to, I could open up shop and charge $1,579 and get all her customers. 'Cause I'd throw in a special free-of-charge Holiday Specials att. in there too. And totally get away with it.

Nah, see, you ARE the problem to this answer Anita. You have proved in public that your skills aren't real.
Brent is waaaaay cooler than you girlfriend.

 

[bookitty]

Hm... was it because... I was looking at kidneys?

Perhaps it has slipped your mind, but you failed to find those kidneys as well.

 

[Tizzy]

My claim is an interesting experience I am investigating. I learned a lot from the IIG Preliminary demonstration, and have more to learn about the experience and that is why I am setting up another test. I am not trying to pass as a psychic so there is no need to get upset about me having another test. I am not challenging the results of the Preliminary, any results of another test will simply add to those past official results.

Why not with the IIG, JREF, or FACT? I would assume that they are mostly interested in psychic/not psychic, rather than learning more about a claim.

My motives for having another test and what I still want to learn are outlined at
www.visionfromfeeling.com/paranormaltest.html
www.visionfromfeeling.com/study.html

I never suggested you were trying to pass as a psychic, and you're assumption that I am "upset" about you having another test is completely baseless. It makes no difference to me.

To quote myself...

<snip>
I'm indifferent; it won't affect my life either way if another test happens. I really can't think of any vast changes in protocol; after the IIG test, I would be much more critical of any future test.

The reason I would be more critical is because you did, in fact, learn a lot. To paraphrase myself earlier, if this type of test (IIG) were to be done over and over, statistics say you would eventually score 100%. How can the changes in protocol prove it would be fair? You yourself stated that there would be no involvement of FACT, JREF, IIG, and you also stated you would not work with a group that is not skeptical. What skeptical groups would be willing to test you?

Furthermore, and out of curiosity, do you acknowledge there were at least 150 individuals who helped make this test happen (apart from members here) as GeeMack stated?

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

There you go projecting again. Although we can't diagnose anyone over the internet, the evidence suggests that you do indeed have mental illness issues due to your behavior here and at the test. A sane person, after failing all these tests, would conclude that they do not have superpowers.

It took me forever to see through subject 12 in trial 1 and in trial 3 I was exhausted. I detected Dr. Carlson missing a kidney. And I knew the accuracy of each trial beforehand. Being interested in having another test is, in my opinion, not a mental illness. It is just curiosity.

You do not, because you have some mental wellness issues. No one knows what they are until you get a proper diagnosis, but it could be any number of things: schizophrenia, delusions (of different types), personality disorders, etc.

All it is, is I feel kidneys when I look at people, and I know the accuracy beforehand.

The problem for you is that the tapes don't at all show that you knew ahead of time that you were wrong. What they do is show that you don't have magical superpowers, and decided to make up this lie on the fly in order to shield yourself when it came time to explain yourself. If you KNEW YOU WERE WRONG you would not have selected the subjects you did.

The tapes do show that I knew the accuracy beforehand. There are no lies. Only your delusions that are based on your expectations. I did not have time to find the right one in trial 1, and in trial 3 I was exhausted to the point where I nearly cancelled the trial before it began. Want to call me a liar again? How about that I wasn't tired at all? Go ahead, call me a liar and say that I wasn't tired in trial 3. And then we'll see what you say when the IIG posts the draft papers that are signed by James Underdown and stapled to the back of the answer sheets.

Keep it up, Anita, the more you post the more you destroy yourself. Just think of the reams of threads future employers will find on you. Just when I thought you couldn't get anymore disgusting with your actions, you raise the bar.

Not being destroyed at all. And nothing disgusting with further inquiry into an interesting phenomenon. The future employers I would be interested in would all encourage research.

I think the key to dealing with Anita's lies is only reading a bit at a time. Anymore than that and you become so disgusted with her abhorrent behavior and deceptive practices that you risk getting yourself banned. So I'm out for now.

Unfortunately there are no lies, so you are clearly delusional about that.