Vision From Feeling 2

[TSR]

At this point I am focusing on the paranormal claim. As for all the other interesting perceptions I've had they are not part of my investigation at this point.

"... even though I have already agreed to do the test, agreed to all of the conditions of the test, and taken advantage of someone's time, trouble and money to enable the test to proceed, and even though everything about that test is something I've claimed to be able to do with ease before...."
.

.

Are you really not capable of seeing how transparent this is?
.

BTW, what is it about the pill test which makes your claim regarding it *not* paranormal?
.

 

[desertgal]

Can we focus on what this thread is all about?

What is the point of further discussing your claim?

* You have consistently refused to objectively analyze any single one of your past perceptions.
* You have consistently refused to accept any other objective analysis offered about any of the claims you have made on this forum, or the anecdotal examples you have offered.
* You have consistently refused to offer any objective data about your past perceptions, or, in the case of Wayne and your 'survey', gather any objective data that might reveal your claimed abilities to be anything other than paranormal.
* You have consistently refused to accept any suggested protocol that doesn't allow you wiggle room-both here and through IIG West.
* You have consistently refused to clarify your 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 you.
* You have consistently failed all experiments of your claimed abilities via this forum, and, when confronted with those failures, you consistently refuse to acknowledge them, and simply shift the goalposts to turn every miss into either a hit, or, at least, a "non-miss".
* You have consistently stated that you are basing your investigation on unverified, unsubstantiated anecdotes. You offer no corroborative statements about any of your "correct" perceptions, and you have immediately dismissed, out of hand, a few witness statements that didn't corroborate your point of view.
* You have made every attempt to dodge and delay your proposed 'study', and avoid controlled testing. When confronted with your delaying tactics, you simply shift the goalposts and condemn the skeptics as being "impatient". We can't be impatient for something that is never going to happen.
* You have not conclusively ruled out mental illness via examination by a qualified therapist. You have not conclusively ruled out that you have convinced yourself to believe in something that isn't true.
* You have offered other unsubstantiated, unverified claims that have demolished your credibility (i.e. your 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.)
* You have openly admitted that you only come here to make fun of the skeptics.


Please explain:

* How the above eliminates the possibility that you are delusional, dishonest, or simply attempting to run a scam?
* How the above establishes you 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?
* Why we should contribute to any discussion of your claim when you have openly stated you have chosen to only come here to ridicule the skeptics?'


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. "

This is in keeping with the above points. If you are not willing to conduct the study in an honest and forthright manner, then how can you 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 you in establishing the "correlation between what I perceive and with the actual health of that person."?

As well, if you aren't willing to conduct the study in an honest and forthright manner, why should anyone here get involved in a discussion about your claim?

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

But, according to you, you are never wrong. So why this time, over something this major?

I did detect the missing left kidney but I did not write it. I felt joints and bones but they were not health problems. I might have not been wrong. There are two problems that need to be worked out: To not report all things that I "feel" because I feel both healthy and unhealthy things. And to not be modest or afraid of being wrong leading to me not reporting some of what I perceive.

Especially when one cannot do what one claims to be able to. How many times are you going go back and change what you claim rather than supply all the information up front?

My claim is still the same. To supply all the information up front is difficult, since I don't always know before-hand what information would be required.

I have symptoms of synesthesia. But I have not seen a specialist to be diagnosed with synesthesia.

Why ever would you need to do that? Not only do you claim to be able "see" inside a variety of containers, including the human body, but you have specifically claimed to be able to see inside the packaging of a box of cereal.

Medicines are not kept in cereal boxes.

What is it about the package of an antihistamine which prevents this miraculous ability of yours which doesn't prevent you from seeing into tanks of gas?

I am not going to waste time on the other aspects of my experiences. I am investigating the medical perceptions.

 

[Kariboo]

The heart problem was not false.

(

So she has a heart condition?

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

I just had an epiphany. JREF Forum Skeptics are not real Skeptics. It is just full of rude personalities. You guys are ridiculous.

I will take the discussions of my claim elsewhere.

 

[Kariboo]

IThere are two problems that need to be worked out: To not report all things that I "feel" because I feel both healthy and unhealthy things. And to not be modest or afraid of being wrong leading to me not reporting some of what I perceive.

You do understand that these are mutually exclusive, right?

 

[fromdownunder]

Did I say all my posts were just fun? Those are quite serious. Whatever. Some Skeptics think what they choose to think.

What you said was

"I meant all the silly posts I've been making in the other threads."

No qualifiers, not "some of my other posts, "all", was your word, not mine. Perhaps you need a qualifier on all of your posts on other threads, because at the moment, you are doing a Humpty Dumpty, and retrospectively redifining your term, deciding now which posts were "all the silly posts on other threads", and which were not "all the silly posts on other threads". Would you make a list of which are which?

Because how are we supposed to tell which are which? Every post you make sounds equally silly to me.

Norm

 

[Kariboo]

I just had an epiphany. JREF Forum Skeptics are not real Skeptics. It is just full of rude personalities. You guys are ridiculous.

I will take the discussions of my claim elsewhere.

Ooh, surprising ^TM

 

[TSR]

Allright Ms. All-I-wanna-talk-about-is-mental-illness.

.
Actually, DG is mostly talking about your lie that you never attacked anyone in this forum.
.

People can read the thread on their own and find out the background of all of that.

.
Indeed. And they will see that your attacks were unprovoked
.

And I do not have schizotypal disorder,

.
Really? You've finally seen someone qualified to make that diagnosis?
.

and I do have synesthesia.

.
Really? You've finally seen someone qualified to make that diagnosis?
.

Can we focus on what this thread is all about?

.
This thread is all about you, according to the subject line -- just the way you like it. So anything you have said is fair game -- especially the lies you've told in a lame attempt to prop up your claims of various abilities, none of which you ever apparently intend to subject to testing which could falsify those claims and demonstrate that you're not a special starchild.
.

 

[paperskater]

Medicines are not kept in cereal boxes.

This seems like a strange statement to me because boxes of OTC medications are often packaged in boxes that are similar to (or exactly the same as) cereal boxes. Just light cardboard material, most OTC medicines are packaged in "little cereal boxes." Your statement claiming that you saw nitrogen in the metal gas tanks at school makes it hard to believe that you have trouble seeing through light cardboard.

ETA: Just for the record, you did state that seeing through things needs to come naturally. Still, it is hard to believe that cardboard would give you so much trouble when one takes everything you have claimed to do in context.

 

[Gmonster2]

So hows that crystal test coming a long?

Can u still shoot blue flames out of them? or just out of your a## ?

 

[desertgal]

Allright Ms. All-I-wanna-talk-about-is-mental-illness.

Nope. I couldn't care less any more what the motivation for your scam is. Mental illness only came up this time because you claimed that you have never posted anything negative or hurtful towards a JREF member - which was, of course, another lie on your part.

...and I do have synesthesia.

Lie.

I did detect the missing left kidney but I did not write it.

Which simply means that she 'postdicted' the missing left kidney.

Especially when one cannot do what one claims to be able to. How many times are you going go back and change what you claim rather than supply all the information up front?

As many times as she can post.

I have symptoms of synesthesia. But I have not seen a specialist to be diagnosed with synesthesia.

Synesthesia is just her fall back position. You know, so she can continue to claim an 'extraordinary' ability, no matter what. She'll never have it diagnosed, though. She can't continue to scam with something that has been proven not to exist.

Why ever would you need to do that? Not only do you claim to be able "see" inside a variety of containers, including the human body, but you have specifically claimed to be able to see inside the packaging of a box of cereal.

Medicines are not kept in cereal boxes.

Translation: It was never true.

I am not going to waste time on the other aspects of my experiences. I am investigating the medical perceptions.

Translation: None of the other aspects of my experiences are true, either.

As LE said - scam. Pure scam.

 

[desertgal]

Fixed it for her:

I just had an epiphany. JREF Forum Skeptics are not real Skeptics. It is just full of rude stellar personalities. You guys are ridiculous awesome.

I will take the discussions of my claim elsewhere.

Yeah. Try a woo board. You don't need to prove anything there. Probably a bunch of star people, too.

 

[TSR]

I did detect the missing left kidney but I did not write it.

.
Because ... ?
.

To supply all the information up front is difficult, since I don't always know before-hand what information would be required.

.
Well, that's simple: absolutely everything you observed. They haven't taught you this in science class?
.

I have symptoms of synesthesia. But I have not seen a specialist to be diagnosed with synesthesia.

.
Of course you haven't -- because it would mean you couldn't tell that lie anymore.
.

Medicines are not kept in cereal boxes.

.
So, the question stands: in what way, *exactly*, does the packaging of cereal differ from that of antihistamines?
.

I am not going to waste time on the other aspects of my experiences. I am investigating the medical perceptions.

.
And will that investigation take the same route as the pill test: agree to everything up front, impose on someone(s) to take the time, trouble and money to help you test, and then decide "no, that's not what I want to concentrate on?"
.

 

[Gmonster2]

From her website

She has changed her website a lot check out this latest rubbish..

Besides perceiving images and felt information (texture, shape, temperature, density, weight, and more) of health information from human bodies, I also have other types of perceptions but much less often and in less detail and I have much less experience with them than I do with medical perceptions. I want to primarily test the perceptions on the detection of health information that should not be accessible to ordinary perception. It is with health information I have chosen to test my ability to find out what its actual accuracy is, and whether I might be able to verify an extrasensory ability. Some of the other aspects of the perceptions, I can very clearly sense people's emotions, and know how others are feeling. I will know what people think about me. I can sense the gist of people's thoughts, and sometimes hear the words that they are thinking.

I have done telepathy exercises with friends with amazing results. A fun game of mine is telepathy: I have a friend to whom I will send a telepathic image. I will give him the category, my favorite category is animals. I will construct a clear image in my mind and send it to him. Animals have shape and size, but so much more. The texture of their skin, feathers, fur, or scales of fish or reptiles. I strengthen the image by adding a lot of feeling into it. The friend will then describe the animal and (unless either of us becomes tired) we are almost always correct. It is such a fun game.

Of course its not her main claim so she would never just do this at the fact meeting and then win the million at Jref..

 

[Jeff Corey]

.. I do have synesthesia.[../QUOTE]
No.
Synesthesia (Greek, syn = together + aisthesis = perception) is the involuntary physical experience of a cross-modal association. That is, the stimulation of one sensory modality reliably causes a perception in one or more different senses. Its phenomenology clearly distinguishes it from metaphor, literary tropes, sound symbolism, and deliberate artistic contrivances that sometimes employ the term "synesthesia" to describe their multisensory joinings.(R. E. Cytowic, 1995, p.1)

 

[tsig]

I suspect that the four joint or bone issues were due to the same reasons that made me report "Wayne's adam's apple". I never sensed nor reported pain in the joints or bones, and I listed it to an extent of 1. What did it feel like to me, you should ask? All it was, was that I "felt" the joints and bones in some areas of his body more so than in other areas so I thought that he "feels" them too. I learn from this study how to practice my claim.

In my defence the location was very noisy and also cold and I was also stressed by a 15 minute time limit. I did not finish the "head-to-toe" to the extent I would have chosen to. This is a study, not a test. The study is intended for me to try out various things, such as the use of a questionnaire, the use of a time limit, etc. I do not conclude too soon neither for or against the ability in the study. So I missed pain and swallowing problem.

I did not miss the missing left kidney. I perceived this, but I did not write this down being afraid of being wrong. Whatever you might think of me, I would never sink so low to lie about this. I have great respect for Dr. Carlson and for him volunteering for the study and for disclosing personal information like this. I would never disrespect him by being dishonest about this. All I can do is to be sincere, even when it means saying things that some of you can't tolerate.

The heart problem was not false.

I apologize for having done that. It's just that we are analyzing everything in great detail and that is why more details always come up. It is not easy being a paranormal claimant.

Esp. when you don't have a paranormal ability.

 

[tsig]

Allright Ms. All-I-wanna-talk-about-is-mental-illness. People can read the thread on their own and find out the background of all of that. And I do not have schizotypal disorder, and I do have synesthesia. Can we focus on what this thread is all about?

That would, of course, would be YOU.

 

[tsig]

She has changed her website a lot check out this latest rubbish..

Besides perceiving images and felt information (texture, shape, temperature, density, weight, and more) of health information from human bodies, I also have other types of perceptions but much less often and in less detail and I have much less experience with them than I do with medical perceptions. I want to primarily test the perceptions on the detection of health information that should not be accessible to ordinary perception. It is with health information I have chosen to test my ability to find out what its actual accuracy is, and whether I might be able to verify an extrasensory ability. Some of the other aspects of the perceptions, I can very clearly sense people's emotions, and know how others are feeling. I will know what people think about me. I can sense the gist of people's thoughts, and sometimes hear the words that they are thinking.

I have done telepathy exercises with friends with amazing results. A fun game of mine is telepathy: I have a friend to whom I will send a telepathic image. I will give him the category, my favorite category is animals. I will construct a clear image in my mind and send it to him. Animals have shape and size, but so much more. The texture of their skin, feathers, fur, or scales of fish or reptiles. I strengthen the image by adding a lot of feeling into it. The friend will then describe the animal and (unless either of us becomes tired) we are almost always correct. It is such a fun game.

Of course its not her main claim so she would never just do this at the fact meeting and then win the million at Jref..

Randi's million means nothing to woos. They'd rather get money the old-fashioned way. Scams.

 

[Improbable Joe]

Dear Skeptics,
This will be my second thread here on the JREF Forum, continuing with the first one, which was closed after 4 months and 66 pages of posts because of hostile discussions on behalf of some JREF Forum members. The investigation into my paranormal claim continues, and it has not been falsified at this point. I wish to continue with discussions toward a final test protocol and toward reaching the final conclusion in my claim to answer the questions what is the actual correlation between my medical perceptions and with actual health, am I performing better than the average person or the skilled cold reader, and what is the source of the health information?

Please everyone keep this thread civil. I do not wish to see this thread become placed on moderated status and I definitely do not want to see this thread closed too soon. If you can not remain friendly and tolerant towards me as a person as well as in your response toward my claim and paranormal investigation then please have the courtesy to not disgrace this valuable thread with your hostility. There are several other threads where you can express your negativity, but please, not here!

I am a reasonable claimant, I have not made myself responsible to deserve hostilities which are ruining my chances of having the opportunity to discuss my claim here with Skeptics. Do not ruin this thread for everyone, let's keep it open since this investigation is ongoing.

And to remind everyone, my paranormal claim is to perceive visual and felt health information when I look at a person, to have experienced compelling correlation between what I perceive and with the actual health of that person, and even in cases when the health information should not be detectable by ordinary means of perception. It is a wonderfully interesting claim, if I do say so myself. So let's not be responsible for closing this thread again there is more work to be done and I wish to remain available here on the JREF Forums to discuss my ongoing investigation. Thank you!

My understanding of the James Randi Million Dollar Challenge is that the results should be somehow apart from and beyond any interpretation. In other words, you should be able to contact me today, I can set up a test tomorrow, and Monday you should be able to walk past 100 patients in a hospital and identify their illnesses with a near 100% certainty.

So. Do it. Do it, get someone to document it. Do it, or shut up.