Vision From Feeling 2

[Vortigern99]

Anita's hoaxer-ish behavior, if it continues, has the potential of misleading innocent people about their medical conditions. She has already stated, several times, that she will continue to believe in her ability, regardless of whether she ever completes a controlled test. She has already approached people on this forum about composing a waiver for performing public "psychic medical diagnosis"-and we all know those waivers aren't worth the paper they are written on when it comes to what gullible people will believe. As well, recently, we saw her proclaiming that, as a former LPN with no formal medical training, she considers herself to be "medical staff", and that she always behaves with the utmost professionalism. She seems to be hovering on the edge of joining the woo economy.

Juvenile satire aside, you don't believe that proposing to perform something that may cause other people emotional distress (or worse), and possibly misleading them about her level of training in the medical field is worthy of some public ridicule?

Her other claims are of negligible concern. If she wishes to chase ghosts, or promote herself as a "star person", however ridiculous, there is no potential for harm to other people. Although, I imagine, for those who believe in woos, her other claims would be an added incentive to believe her main claim.

I understand and agree. Please allow me to rescind any implications of wrongdoing I might have made against you, either perceived or actual.

 

[Jeff Corey]

OK, that's it then. She's gone and any of this other stuff is just a case of sadistic necrophilic beastiality.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Excellent, how about you do that?

Regarding telepathy:

I had a chat with VFF a while back about this very subject. She refuses to use Zener cards. She's tried them in the past, but she needs animals in order to do telepathy because [insert Wall o' Text here]. She refused to work with anything unambiguous (surprise). The conversation was exceedingly frustrating. It was like arguing with a prepubescent girl in that she insisted she needed "wet noses" and "furry faces" instead of the lifeless Zener cards.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Wet noses and furry faces? She only reads mammals?





<----- Read this.

 

[Vortigern99]

Regarding telepathy:

I had a chat with VFF a while back about this very subject. She refuses to use Zener cards. She's tried them in the past, but she needs animals in order to do telepathy because [insert Wall o' Text here]. She refused to work with anything unambiguous (surprise). The conversation was exceedingly frustrating. It was like arguing with a prepubescent girl in that she insisted she needed "wet noses" and "furry faces" instead of the lifeless Zener cards.

I knew this thread would intersect with bigfoot if I just hung around long enough.

 

[Uncayimmy]

I knew this thread would intersect with bigfoot if I just hung around long enough.

This is not the first bigfoot intersection. Anita has already encountered bigfoot in Europe. And she's sure she could find one in America.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4259686#post4259686
I am confident that if I were in American Bigfoot territory I could connect with it and if I win its trust I might be able to meet them. I have a good way of communicating with beings when we connect mind to mind. I always know what to say, how they respond and how to win their trust. I am quite confident that if I ever undertook such a mission, I could venture out into the woods of America with a camera and be able to encounter the Bigfoot

And you wonder why frustration levels are high...

 

[Farencue]

wow, another VfF thread, how exciting. What happened to the dinosaurs Anita saw in the woods, anybody know?

 

[Jeff Corey]

Bigfoot ate them.

 

[Miss_Kitt]

Farencue -- To be fair, Anita never claimed she saw actual dinosaurs. What she saw were the ghosts of dinosaurs.

FWIW, I think that the whole "steak topping protocol" subsection should be put into its own thread in "Community", perhaps titled, "Satires of paranormal claimant -style posts"? I know that if this thread happened to be my first exposure to the JREF, I'd have decided that no actual skepticism or analysis was being displayed, and I'd likely have not come back.

I understand the frustration, but there are times in life when it's the job of the reasonable to "outgrownup" the unreasonable.

YMMV, etc. MK

PS The "wet noses" --> Bigfoot connection almost made me spit up on my computer! That was unexpected, and funny.

 

[Vortigern99]

PS The "wet noses" --> Bigfoot connection almost made me spit up on my computer! That was unexpected, and funny.

Well then, I'm glad I could contribute to some light-heartedness around here, instead of the crankiness I generally inspire.

 

[plumjam]

Vortigern, I wouldn't worry; what you said was correct.
The Vision From Feeling threads are where the forum's most cowardly bullies like to hang out. They know that here they can engage in ridicule and derision to their hearts content, with very little comeback or threat from other members.
Not a single forum character I respect (and there are many) is still posting frequently in them; that says it all really.

 

[Tapio]

...I know that if this thread happened to be my first exposure to the JREF, I'd have decided that no actual skepticism or analysis was being displayed, and I'd likely have not come back...

It's like you read my mind...

I've only registered fairly recently and haven't been a lurker before that long either. So I haven't really had the chance to witness paranormal claim after claim after claim of skeptics trying to patiently and constructively help people in the better understanding of their experiences. But I've read about these tons of claims enough to understand that many forum members have been hardened to the point of not simply having an open mind anymore.

It's only human to give up at some point. Still, it's been quite disappointing to read through some of the recent threads of claimants coming openly to reflect on their supposed paranormal abilities. Some reactions from forum members I find contemptible, and I think that this forum would be of greater use without those kind of remarks (but I am a newb, so maybe I've just understood the function of this forum incorrectly...).

So what to do in order for this thread not to be completely spoiled by a few individuals not capable of letting their fingers rest when there's nothing constructive to type? Here's what I suggest:

- We could choose max 5 forum members (besides Anita) who participate in this thread. These members should be people who we mutually find reliable and civil in a manner that helps Anita to proceed in the designing of her protocol. These would be members who've proved to be of this sort of worth in the VfF #1 thread

- Anita refrains to comment on any other writings than the ones posted by the chosen members

Anita, I (as well as many others) said this in the very beginning of VfF #1, but I'll say it again. Nothing matters more on this forum than evidence. Even if you wrote a book on your supposed ability and published it, but presented zero evidence of your claim, you'd only get ridiculed at here. Your opinions, feelings, thoughts and pondering is worth nothing (in relation to why you say you've signed up in the first place) without evidence.

...and what's counted as evidence to most skeptics here should, by now, be fairly clear. I think you'd do your claim (and your peace of mind) a great big favour if also you would refrain from posting nothing else than stuff related to gathering, evaluating and presenting evidence relative to your claim.

Sorry, don't mean to sound patronizing. Just some thoughts.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

We already have a thread for just uncayimmy and anita (moderated). I think Anita poted there once or twice, then just ignored it.

 

[Tapio]

We already have a thread for just uncayimmy and anita (moderated). I think Anita poted there once or twice, then just ignored it.

Thanks for the reminder.

Anita, why is this? Do you not agree that all the mindless rambling about everything else except your central claim is just wasting everyone's time and certainly doing you no good?

I still have some faith in your integrity and would be fascinated and delighted to see you reaching your (originally proposed) goal. But ignoring a most effective way in reaching that goal does hinder my faith, so I'd be happy to hear just why you stopped posting to the thread mentioned by Yaffle.

Also, only one on one is not such a good idea, I think. It might get too intimidating.

 

[desertgal]

Vortigern, I wouldn't worry; what you said was correct.
The Vision From Feeling threads are where the forum's most cowardly bullies like to hang out. They know that here they can engage in ridicule and derision to their hearts content, with very little comeback or threat from other members.

Setting aside derision and ridicule, what is the point of further discussing her claim?

• She has consistently refused to objectively analyze any single one of her past perceptions.
• She has consistently refused to accept any other objective analysis offered about any of the claims she has made on this forum, or the anecdotal examples she has offered.
• She has consistently refused to offer any objective data about her past perceptions, or, in the case of Wayne and her 'survey', gather any objective data that might reveal her claimed abilities to be anything other than paranormal or her version of synesthesia.
• She has consistently refused to accept any suggested protocol that doesn't allow her wiggle room-both here and through IIG West.
• She has consistently refused to clarify her claimed abilities-again, both here and with IIG West, to the point that they stated, in their latest update, that that is the sole reason they have been unable to establish a testing protocol with her.
• She has consistently failed all experiments of her claimed abilities via this forum, and, when confronted with those failures, she consistently refuses to acknowledge them, and simply shift the goalposts to turn every miss into either a hit, or, at least, a "non-miss".
• She consistently refuses to perform any experiments on any other aspects of her alleged abilities-even after she has agreed to. Pup expended personal time, effort, and expense to mail her samples after she agreed to perform an experiment based on claims she made. Now, she refuses to do it. It was suggested that she perform an experiment with crystals, since that was also one of the claims she made, and she agreed - and then refused.
• She has consistently stated that she is basing her investigation on unverified, unsubstantiated anecdotes. She offers no corroborative statements about any of her "correct" perceptions, and she has immediately dismissed, out of hand, a few witness statements that didn't corroborate her point of view.
• She has made every attempt to dodge and delay her proposed 'study', despite willing efforts by skeptics here and with FACT, and avoid controlled testing. When confronted with her delaying tactics, she simply shifts the goalposts and condemns the skeptics as being "impatient". We can't be impatient for something that is never going to happen.
• She has not conclusively ruled out mental illness via examination by a qualified therapist. She has not conclusively ruled out that she has convinced herself to believe in something that isn't true.
• She has offered other unsubstantiated, unverified claims that have demolished her credibility (i.e. her description of an 'encounter' with the ghost of Benjamin Franklin which turned the erudite founding father into the colonial version of Jeff Spiccoli, and which was, when examined against the established facts of Franklin's life, largely discredited by more than one skeptic here.)

Please explain:

• How the above eliminates the possibility that she is delusional, dishonest, or simply attempting to run a scam?
• How the above establishes her as a "reasonable" claimant?
• Why the skeptics here should expect anything different than the above, and waste further time and effort going nowhere?
• How this thread could possibly be of value, considering the above?

I can believe that there are pink fluffy elephants dancing on my roof. I can come here and make that claim. I can 'investigate' my subjective reality that there are pink fluffy elephants dancing on my roof. But, without indisputable proof that a) there are pink fluffy elephants in the world; and b) that a portion of them are doing the Charleston on my shingles, it would not be unreasonable for skeptics here to conclude that my claim was the result of my imagination, a mental instability, or simply a lie. Nor would it be unreasonable for them to conclude that I have convinced myself of something that isn't actually true, and logically, I have no reason to investigate my claim.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

"In short, I marked several ailments to the lowest extent that he did not mark. There was a very significant ailment that I detected but I did not mark on my questionnaire, because I was worried about being wrong. "

"I sensed a tense jaw and a heart issue that was related to a significant anxiety. I crossed out 'anxiety' and wrote down 'excitement' because I thought it was a nicer way to say it, although I meant it as anxiety and just that."

This is in keeping with the above points. If she is not willing to conduct the study in an honest and forthright manner, then how can she expect to "form a more specific claim in order to proceed with the test protocol formations"? If a perception is inaccurate, would not determining that help her in establishing the "correlation between what I perceive and with the actual health of that person."?

As well, if she isn't willing to conduct the study in an honest and forthright manner, what is the point of discussing it further?

She says the problem is that several skeptics "refuse to accept the fact" that she can see into the human body at an atomic level, etc. That isn't true. Where has it been established as fact?

She says that her chances to discuss her claim here are being ruined. That isn't true. She had TWO moderated threads on this forum where she could have discussed her claim until the end of time, with a minimum of "hostilities". She CHOSE not to utilize them.

Not a single forum character I respect (and there are many) is still posting frequently in them; that says it all really.

Perhaps because they know it isn't going to get them anywhere.

I already apologized for my silliness yesterday. I was tired, and it was stupid and thoughtless. I admit that.

I also realize, of course, PJ, that you have been a driving force in helping Anita authenticate her claims, so perhaps you could tell us exactly what else anyone here can do to further her investigation?

 

[Ocelot]

2 days four pages. Somewhere in here there apparently Anita claiming under her chosen conditions that somebody has a heart condition. however I can only find references after the fact. Is it in another thread?

Of the four statements.

a) Anita's medical diagnoses are never wrong and this test subject has a heart condition.
b) Anita's medical diagnoses are sometimes wrong and this test subject has a heart condition.
c) Anita's medical diagnoses are never wrong and this test subject does not have a heart condition.
d) Anita's medical diagnoses are sometimes wrong and this test subject does not have a heart condition.

Obvioulsty c is a logical contradiction. This means that if this test subject does not have a heart condition we've proven that Anita's medical diagnoses are not 100% accurate.

That would be a significant finding, though Anita could still continue with a modified claim that when she perceives a medical diagnosis she is correct better than chance should allow.

As such I'd be greatful if someone should direct me to the record where Anita said something about the heart. I'd like to see what was said. Also if scans of the actual sheets could be provided that would be great.

I see we've also got claims of joint pain that on being proven wrong have been retro fitted into noticing that these people had joints. Yes yes yes. Classic cold reading. However in this case Anita seem adament that there is a heart condition. Am I reading this correctly?

Perhaps she's trying the different tack of of claiming that the condition might be undiagnosed. In whihc case it would be useful to see whether the prediction is specific enough to be falsified by a simple low cost ECG.

 

[desertgal]

2 days four pages. Somewhere in here there apparently Anita claiming under her chosen conditions that somebody has a heart condition. however I can only find references after the fact. Is it in another thread?

From her website (Scroll down to "Skeptics Meeting March 2009":

Next I did a reading with another member of the group. I had her sit so that I had view of her back. At first I could not find anything that was listed on the questionnaire. I sensed no pain anywhere. I sensed a tense jaw and a heart issue that was related to a significant anxiety. I crossed out 'anxiety' and wrote down 'excitement' because I thought it was a nicer way to say it, although I meant it as anxiety and just that. I decided to do an "open-reading" where I just freely check the body and write down in words what I find rather than to look for the listed ailments specificly. This way, I found and I wrote down that her internal female system was red or inflamed. I said to her, that if I may ask, does she have her menstruation now? She said that she did! Turns out she also suffers from anxiety, but everyone at the meeting agreed that she shows no external symptoms of this.

I'm not clear what she means by "heart issue", unless she is referring to an accelerated heartbeat as a result of anxiety. She doesn't clarify her meaning. If she means a more serious heart issue, then it doesn't appear to have been verified by the subject.

 

[Tapio]

I also realize, of course, PJ, that you have been a driving force in helping Anita authenticate her claims, so perhaps you could tell us exactly what else anyone here can do to further her investigation?

Sorry, PJ, if I rush in before you get a chance to answer. But at this point I believe what I'm about to suggest does no harm.

What could we do?

One word: Wait.

She has had enough advice, that's for sure. Now all that matters is what evidence she can bring forth to support her claim (which at the moment, at least for me, is none). Every minute she spends here bickering is a minute from her actually trying to accomplish something substantial. Let's leave her be. Stop posting to this thread, and warmly welcome her back after she brings her next piece of evidence. THEN pick just a few members to evaluate it. And continue so on...

At least for me this is goodbye's to Anita, for now.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

...... I know that if this thread happened to be my first exposure to the JREF, I'd have decided that no actual skepticism or analysis was being displayed, and I'd likely have not come back.

Anyone who stumbled upon this thread, decided it summed up the JREF forums, and left without looking at the context and other threads about VFF , would be showing an accute lack of skeptical analysis themself; and I agree they wouldn't feel at home here.

After five months of patience and courtesy - what else do you feel deserves additional skeptical analysis ?

The VFF threads keep disappearing off the front page, but Anita seems compelled to revive them and even start new ones. No one has invited her to do that ...

 

[tsig]

Vortigern, I wouldn't worry; what you said was correct.
The Vision From Feeling threads are where the forum's most cowardly bullies like to hang out. They know that here they can engage in ridicule and derision to their hearts content, with very little comeback or threat from other members.
Not a single forum character I respect (and there are many) is still posting frequently in them; that says it all really.

And yet you read and post here. Humm...