• 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 Wine Clip Taste Test video

Starting with the obvious:

- Not double blind. Questionable whether it was even single blind, since all they did was have the subjects turn around.

- No control group

- There might have been an aura of "peer pressure" since all the subjects were tested with the other subjects watching.

Moving on to the explanation section:

- The guy explaining it mentioned something about it being an adaptation of magnetic water softeners (that a google search led me to believe the jury was still out on) that industries and the US Navy use. Now, I have never seen (nor heard of until this video)a magnetic water softener, and I was in the Navy for 9 years in the Engineering department, so I actually have some knowledge of the water streams on a US Navy ship. All ships I have ever heard of use distillation and/or evaporation techniques along with ion exhangers for water purification.
 
Well, that two people, John Gavin and Nina Gavin, have the same last name, and were sitting by each other, hints to me they are husband and wife.

So how exactly were these people selected? Randomly? Are they friends of the wine clip inventor?


I'd personally like to see a video of the sugar or other particles in the wine being broken by the magnetic field as they claim is being done.
 
Pointing at the Answer Card

Since DaveW mentioned about "peer pressure".

I cannot help notice the following little seemingly insignificant action.

One of the testee gave his an answer by pointing to the "answer card" rather than pointing to the glass of wine. And he is the only one to say that the glass of wine without wine clip taste better.

Was he too conscious about the fact to get the "right" answer?Why wasn't he more concerned with the taste of the wine than the answer? Did he tried too hard too please? Or what?

.
 
Another thing, is that the people were present, but with their backs turned, as the surveyors first poured the wine without the Clip, and then poured the wine with the Clip.

Well, put two cups behind you, one to your left and one to your right, turn around, and have somebody pour some liquid into one of them. Depending on how the liquid was poured (height, for example), one could tell which cup it was poured into, just by listening to the sound, and thereby knowing which cups were poured without and with the Clip.

I think this is possible, and at about 2min 7 and 8 seconds into the video, when they are doing the pouring, the pouring can be heard.

The wine should have been poured without the people being present.
 
They should have had the people eat cheese and crackers before drinking each glass. Instead, they drink the first sample with a clean mouth, and the second one with cheese and cracker residue still in their mouth. I'm not surprised they taste different.
 
And not to mention the pourers and Clip people shouldn't have known which glass contained what wine. Maybe they raised their eyebrows or fidgited everytime a person drank out of the Clip glass.
 
It should also be noted that only one of the cards was turned over for each test. We don't know what was on the card for the glass that wasn't picked. Perhaps both cards said 'The wine clip'. The guy who picked the 'No wine clip' card may have had two failing cards in front of him in order to make the test look more legitimate.
 
*yawn*... I try very hard to not get impatient with people who flash goofy advertising videos at randi.org as if they were evidence of facts.

The tendency to do so doesn't mean you're dumb. Not long ago a fellow who imagines himself a great innovator in psychiatry showed me the "evidence" he was finally getting ready to publish showing that allergies cause autism. His "evidence" was videos of 5 autistic kids who have recovered and are leading more or less normal lives, together with testimonials from the parents. Anybody who does any reading on autism finds that a certain number of autistics outgrow their condition and lead normal lives, even if they receive no treatment at all. So the burden of proof still sits on him that the 5 kids he documented in 40 years of "research" are NOT exactly those who would have recovered anyhow. Nope, no statistics, no protocols, no peer-reviewed publications, just disappointment. And this is a very intelligent guy who really believes he has The Cure To Everything. He also believes in John Edwards and The Counterfeit-Detector Pen and "All imported fruits and vegetables have poisons on them." :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom