• 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.

VFF Preliminary Kidney Detection Test

Folks...Please stick to the OP; this thread is not about any other issues/claims VisionFromFeeling is/had made...but about developing a preliminary kidney detection test protocol as defined here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4987880&postcount=1

All non-related posts have been/will be moved or dumped to AAH.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Locknar
 
As a general comment, VFF, you have no medical background, as further evidenced by the above approach to "kidney detection" and yet you appear determined to continue in your attempts to diagnose people.


It won't end well.

As far as I see the claim is a paranormal one, not about being a doctor.
In the original post there was written that he would check the subjects with or without clothes on their back. The person checking for scars to see if they have had an operation would in any case not be him but the examiner or such after or before the challenge.

I guess a good idea would be a medical test of those that think that have both kidneys before the actual test. In case the preliminary one is successful
 
Sorry, my perspective is Dutch/Swedish where an insurance could be used for such. In case of Sweden healthcare is even free.
In the USA the person wanting the challenge would pay for it I suppose. I have no idea about echoscopy costs and if that should not easily be raised by VFF.

Aren't medical tests often involved in these kind of challenges?
 
Sorry, my perspective is Dutch/Swedish where an insurance could be used for such. In case of Sweden healthcare is even free.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that in Sweden and person could walk into a hospital and say I'd like you to do a brief ultrasound imaging of each of my kidneys because a psychic is going to use me a control subject in a test of x-ray vision and that the hospital technicians would do it with no charge?
 
Anita wrote:
There will always be countless of parameters, such as lighting, room temperature, air humidity, what I ate for breakfast, etc., so it is important that just before having the test I confirm that I am happy with the conditions.

This statement makes it very convenient for Anita if she fails the test. Naming a countless number of parameters to blame the failure on, including her own breakfast, will no doubt cover any and all possibilities.
 
Coming in late, again...

I don't make any claims to being scientific in my view of things, (quit snickering, Rolfe :p ), I do believe it makes more sense to follow JREF's guidelines for the Challenge, and it makes even more sense to keep this whole business as simple as possible. Making it overly complicated, or turning it into an endura for anyone accomplishes nothing, except irritating the participants. Hell, when Jeff Wagg was the test subject, the time limit was fifteen minutes. It seems to me if you can't figure out which hand has a slab of raw meat in it with a quick glance, how will you spot the person with one kidney over a four hour period?

(And, yes, I probably missed the more thorough explanation as to why four hours was required, but, hey, I'm just a dumb trucker.)

As to another claim made, I'd like to see evidence of VFF lacking kidneys, or the lack of their necessity. Show me a willingness to test other claims, and this one might make some sense.
 
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that in Sweden and person could walk into a hospital and say I'd like you to do a brief ultrasound imaging of each of my kidneys because a psychic is going to use me a control subject in a test of x-ray vision and that the hospital technicians would do it with no charge?

A person in Sweden certainly couldn't say that. They might say...

sey I'd leeke-a yuoo tu du a breeeff ultresuoond imegeeng ooff iech ooff my keedneys becoose-a a psycheec is gueeng tu use-a me-a a cuntrul soobject in a test ooff x-rey feesiun und thet zee huspeetel techneeciuns vuoold du it veet nu cherge-a?
Bork Bork Bork! :D

Senex, you have me in laughter when I read your posts re: the haunted motel test, as it reminds me of a particularly funny stage play written by David McGillivray and Walter Zerlin Jr called "The Haunted Through Lounge and Recessed Dining Nook at Farndale Castle".

I hope the protagonist gets some in that play. Real life is harsh. I'm looking forward to this play.

Honestly, I think Anita is a sweety. I'm skeptical about this kidney stuff, but I believe she believes. I'm willing to put up four eight hour days of labor (however Anita wants to define it;)) against one good spanking if she fails.
 
Everyone, please respect that this thread is about the kidney detection test and that this is the test I will have arranged in the near future. All other claims and tests are referred to the General VFF Thread. Thank you Moderators for cleaning up this thread regarding topics, note that I did not report any bickering posts because all comments are welcome, as long as they relate to the topic.

Why do you think that a thin but opaque screen (with bathing suits that won't be covering their kidneys) won't work but you can see through clothing that is actually thicker? This makes no sense.
It depends on feeling where the location of the information is. The opaque screen might work, but then it should be very close to the person so that I have a sense of the distance to the person. Interestingly, if I were to fail to "see kidneys" through an opaque screen placed close to the person, that would suggest that body shape or posture would be part of my source of information wouldn't it? I will test the opaque screen such as a sheet with a friend immediately.

1. Exactly which patch of bare skin big enough to have a number written on it which you can read from that distance do you think will be visible to you?
Could we write the number on top of their hand or on the wrist or arm? It would be sufficient for me to see that number once before starting the reading. The number would then stay on their hand since it is a permanent marker that can not be washed off and fades away after a few days, and after the test the volunteers still have the numbers on them.

2. How many volunteers do you think will be willing to not only sit still for 30 minutes, but have a large number written on their skin in the sort of ink which won't wash off?
The number written on their hand is more cheat-proof than simply wearing a sweater, and it can be written small enough.

How many minutes would you suggest that the volunteer sits? How about 5 seconds?

3. What was your reason why the volunteers could not wear football shirts with a number pre-printed on it again? They're apparently made of polyester these days rather than cotton - i.e. exactly the sort of material that many of your volunteers "ordinary clothes" will be made of
Alright, first I assumed you meant a thick sweater. This kind of shirt would be fine, with a number on it. But I don't want to have to pay for ten shirts.

My boyfriend had the good idea that we can attach a small card with a number or a numbered tag on their shirt with a safety pin, that would serve the same purpose as a numbered shirt and that way I won't have to pay for ten shirts. Yes, numbered tags can be switched, but so can football shirts.

This will be my last post on this thread, because I agree with the posters who said anyone who tries to help you is wasting their time.
Gee, let's just put everybody in an underground bunker that is sound-, light- and airproof, blindfold me and drive me 100 miles from the site in an unknown direction and ask me how many kidneys they have and what the winning lottery numbers are.
 
Last edited:
In the original post there was written that he would check the subjects with or without clothes on their back. The person checking for scars to see if they have had an operation would in any case not be him but the examiner or such after or before the challenge.

I guess a good idea would be a medical test of those that think that have both kidneys before the actual test. In case the preliminary one is successful
Well hello fellow Swedish person. It is by no means necessary for my "visions from feeling" that the backs be bare, therefore to honor the quality of the test, the volunteers must have clothes on their back. (Also remember, it seems that the Preliminary test will involve women.)

I would also strongly recommend that only if I pick a person that I think has one kidney, and that person is not the target person, I may have that person go through an ultrasound at my own expense. That way only one, but not all nine, might need an ultrasound. We have also determined that checking for scars is insufficient as evidence of how many kidneys, since scars could be due to other things and not just kidney removal surgery, and since some persons (1 in 700) are born without a kidney.

VFF is a she.
 
Okay, here is a comment that is entirely on topic for this thread.

I do not believe this Kidney Detection Test test will happen because no other test proposed by Anita has ever happened.

(Except for two other tests which I daren't mention because a) Anita failed them and b) For some reason mentioning othr tests which a claimant has taken and failed appears to be somehow 'off topic' in a thread relating to a claimant's latest claims)

The protocol is too complicated and requires too much organisation by people other than Anita. So it won't happen.
 
Consider this quote...

Once we have the volunteers for the test and the location, I will contact places local to that area that have this technology and make arrangements. I will pay for the ultrasound if necessary.


... and contrast it with this one...

Alright, first I assumed you meant a thick sweater. This kind of shirt would be fine, with a number on it. But I don't want to have to pay for ten shirts.


You know, directly relevant to the subject of this thread: Makes me wonder what the cost differential might be between ultrasound tests to determine if the subjects are missing a kidney, and paying for ten jerseys at a local t-thirt shop. Given the ridiculousness of this comparison, if this was someone else on another forum who didn't have the luxury of having her ass covered by the moderators, someone might say these kinds of contradictory comments support the possibility the claimant is full of it. Lucky that on this forum, for this claimant anyway, criticism of the validity of these kinds of statements is out of bounds.

Everyone, please respect that this thread is about the kidney detection test and that this is the test I will have arranged in the near future.


And again, directly relevant to the subject of this thread: If the history of this claimant's avoidance of any actual testing is any indicator of the likelihood of carrying through with this test, then no, it won't be arranged in the near future.
 
Frankly, I don't see much point, reagrdless of the complexities, money issues, and etc.

You're talking five hours for a 1 in 10 chance.

Say -- miraculously -- we manage to find enough people, a place, the shirts and items needed, and say we even have a portable ultrasound and someone competent to use it.

At the end of the day, it's a 1 in 10 chance. What would it prove, either way? Rolling a ten-sided dice and getting a 10 is not so unusual that it means anything, anyway. What, really, would be the point of spending all the time, effort and money necessary to bring about a test that cannot provide any relevant evidence, regardless of the outcome?
 
I have submitted a claim and suggested test protocol to the Independent Investigations Group IIG West and they are arranging a test for me to take place in Hollywood California hopefully by the end of the year.

Anita,

Did I miss where you have provided evidence that you have actually submitted a claim that is being considered by IIG ?
 
There are simple tests that could be explored using previous claims of VfF but I don't think they can be mentioned here. I believe that this current "missing kidney test" and any protocol designed for it will be too cumbersome to initiate. I may be wrong in this assesment and, in a way, I hope I am as I'd be very interested to see VfF tested for any of her claims.
 
By design.

I think that was understood from the start. My biggest problem with this, though, is that it seems to uphold the Alt-Med nonsense that seems to be a part of the health care debate in this country. We've already got Chiropractic, Herbalism, Holism, and other such nonsense, all of which in the current discussion are vying for their place in the debate, for their share of what could amount to Federal dollars.

The French political scientist I once read was discussing Louis the XVI, saying, "You don't need a good (hearted) king, you need a competent one." I don't want a doctor with good intentions poking around in my innards, I want one who knows what the hell he's doing, and can diagnose and cure what's wrong with me.

What's desired here isn't an actual test, (hence, the reason for the complicated protocols proposed), but rather the chimera of credibility, something just valid enough to justify the claim. The Million is safe; it's not the goal. Credibility among a particular group is.

Assume that we go through the same game that we did with The Professor; unworkable proposals follow unworkable proposals, with no clear definition of a "self-evident" proof. VFF then can go out and declare that JREF was terrified, terrified, I tell you, of testing this marvelous ability! Money, baby, money!

It's the reason Sylvia Browne has fled as fast as her caretakers can push the wheelchair that carries her fat backside. There's great profit in these people claiming that James Randi is too scared to test them, and it's a claim that's believed by the woos, even as the evidence, posted here on the board, shows that not only was Randi willing to see them tested, but that the JREF staff went out of their way to make it possible for them to be tested.

To put it another way, go back and read the abusive display from The Professor, and follow the whole repellent business. There were people writing the protocols for him, and he ignored them!

Sorry, but while this sounds incredibly cynical, I'm just not interested in seeing a repeat. I don't have the time or inclination to participate, (so this could be my last post in this thread), and since this "ability" is based on the downright weird claim of VFF being "Arcturian," offered without evidence of any sort, (even of a wooish nature), I'd like nothing more than to see this whole business die a slow, quiet death. I'm not willing to see people's lives endangered to cater to the whimsies of a self-centered fantasist, someone we'll likely see on daytime TV in the near future. I'm not afraid to see this tested; I'm afraid of the consequences of giving even the most infinitesimal credence to such a destructive flight of fancy.

Now, if you'll excuse me, my buddy, Harvey, and I need to get aboard our flying saucer, since we're meeting Bigfoot and a couple of Yetis over lunch. Seems Xenu's been hitting the sauce pretty hard, and an intervention is called for. Later.
 
At the end of the day, it's a 1 in 10 chance. What would it prove, either way? Rolling a ten-sided dice and getting a 10 is not so unusual that it means anything, anyway. What, really, would be the point of spending all the time, effort and money necessary to bring about a test that cannot provide any relevant evidence, regardless of the outcome?


On the extremely remote chance that this test ever actually occurs, the design of the test, as you've said, will undoubtedly be so cumbersome that it can't possibly demonstrate that Anita has any super powers. So why bother, you ask? Well, she takes the position that until her magic powers have been disproved, they exist. So if the test can't prove that she has the magic vision, but also can't prove that she doesn't, then her claim won't been falsified, and she can carry on with business as usual.

What's desired here isn't an actual test, (hence, the reason for the complicated protocols proposed), but rather the chimera of credibility, something just valid enough to justify the claim. The Million is safe; it's not the goal. Credibility among a particular group is.


Yep.

To put it another way, go back and read the abusive display from The Professor, and follow the whole repellent business. There were people writing the protocols for him, and he ignored them!


People wrote protocols for him, were willing to help him develop tests, and he ignored them? Really! And Anita? You don't suppose? ;)

Sorry, but while this sounds incredibly cynical, I'm just not interested in seeing a repeat. I don't have the time or inclination to participate, (so this could be my last post in this thread), and since this "ability" is based on the downright weird claim of VFF being "Arcturian," offered without evidence of any sort, (even of a wooish nature), I'd like nothing more than to see this whole business die a slow, quiet death. I'm not willing to see people's lives endangered to cater to the whimsies of a self-centered fantasist, someone we'll likely see on daytime TV in the near future. I'm not afraid to see this tested; I'm afraid of the consequences of giving even the most infinitesimal credence to such a destructive flight of fancy.


As this discussion of the kidney test continues, it's important to remember that the claimant's better interests aren't served by either the whole business dying a slow, quiet death, or by the claimant undergoing and failing a legitimate, scientific test. On the other hand, the better interests of the general public probably would be.
 

Back
Top Bottom