Vision From Feeling

[Uncayimmy]

fail to dismiss the possibility of extrasensory ability,

In other words you won't dismiss the possibility of something that has never been proven to exist despite countless attempts over thousands of years.

How can you call yourself a scientist? Seriously, Anita, you could just as easily say, "nothing has caused me to dismiss the possibility that a purple marmot living in the New York sewer systems implanted an undetectable mind-control device in my head and is sending messages to my subconscious." I'm not being flip. If you are a scientist, then you must attempt to explain your experiences by looking at known processes rather than expound upon the unproven and unknown first.

I challenge you right now to stop wasting time on nonsense discussions. Start a new thread. In it state as succinctly as possible what it is you claim you can do. Feel free to stick to one claim to keep it simple.

Do NOT explain how you think it works.

List out all of the possible ways through ordinary means that could explain what you are experiencing without mentioning anything that is not already scientifically established.

Explain ways you could eliminate these ordinary means as possibilities.

Doing so will move you much, much closer to understanding what it's all about. And by following this process you earn a lot of respect. That's important, because right now you're losing respect at a staggering rate.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

desertgal:

"at will": as one chooses. Of course it was at will. The woman handed you a picture, asked you about the health of her daughter, you took the picture, looked at it, and reached your conclusion. You chose to do that. It certainly wasn't involuntary.

The information came to me without effort. With UncaYimmy's pictures I had to make an effort.

UncaYimmy:

For me, reading a sign is involuntary. Recognizing someone's voice is involuntary. But it has to be easily accomplished. By that I mean if the sign is far away or the voice is not one I immediately recognize, then I have to expend effort to do it or it won't happen. And sometimes I fail.

I think that's what she's driving at. Of course, you are correct that I choose to look at the sign or hear a voice in the sense that I could avoid it. But the recognition happens automatically without conscious effort.

I think she looked at the photo and BAM! recognized something as opposed to mulling it over and trying to recognize something.

Well it is not an ability like reading a sign. If it is an ability it may be some sort of brain function that does not always kick in when it comes to pictures. When it comes to information from live persons it always kicks in. There was no BAM! when I looked at your photos, except for the neck vertebrae problem. Let's conduct live tests and I will clearly report the confidence level. However regarding your photos I did state,

I am not fully confident in this perception.

I never say this in live situations. I am always confident with real life persons, and often even say "this doesn't make sense to me now that I think about it, however I am fully confident because I see it". BAM!

We all pick and choose our battles. In this case I think Anita (VFF) has the window cracked just enough to allow herself to be shown that her abilities are not what they think they are. Otherwise I wouldn't waste my time.

My claim is medical information from real life persons. I have always thought that pictures is not reliable, and that is still what I think, so my abilities are still what I think they are before and after our picture test.

I just wish she would recognize (or admit) just how extraordinary her claims are and how her behavior is looking more and more like she's unwilling to approach it dispassionately.

I approach having a medical diagnose test with live persons very passionately.

Normal Dude:

I quit this thread at page four. Has there been a proper test yet? I'm guessing no.

Not yet.

nathan:

* Anita will be just as good at predicting medical predictions of a person by examining photographs of a different person of similar age and gender as she is by examining a photograph of the person in question.

Not likely to be so.

Anita will not conduct a properly blinded experiment before May 1st 2009.

This is not in my hands and depends on the testing organizations. You may write to the IIG West and ask them to get on with it. I do this from time to time.

Skeptic:

Well, THAT is certainly a first from a self-proclaimed psychic, to realize that he doesn't have as much "powers" as they think they've had.

I have always stated that I am not good with pictures and I found out that I am not good with pictures so I have exactly as much powers as I thought I had!

Ocelot:

Looking forward to the results of yopur next test. I assume that'll be another lactobacillus cereal test. When should I expect to see something?

I will put all my effort into arranging a medical diagnose test on live persons with a local skeptics group, so that is what the next test will be. I would have it today but it is not in my hands. You may write to them and ask that they get on with it. I will.

desertgal:

However, if she is practicing self deception, it might not be possible for her to do that.

The observations on www.visionfromfeeling.com/observations.html is why I continue toward a properly set-up test. Had you had the experiences listed on that page, would you consider it self-deception to proceed to having a test?

I am just mystified as to the purpose of this thread. To come to a skeptic's Internet forum and make fantastic claims without any evidence to back them up is, to me, not the way to find accurate critical analysis.

I was here to discuss the claim and tests on medical diagnose from live persons. Evidence is presented as soon as it becomes available.

 

[Senex]

I'm the last person to call myself prescient but I did post within an hour of your original post...

If you can demonstrate any of these abilities to reputable witnesses who would publish your success I think you would qualify for the JREF test. Personally I'm pretty skeptical you could pass a well designed test that would eliminate any information outside of just what you say is needed to gain chemical knowledge or whatever mumbo-jumbo atomic vibrations you can translate. I'm much less skeptical you believe you could pass a test.

I hope you get a chance to be tested. You seem sincere and we all enjoy a sincere person putting their special abilities to the test. We're pretty tired of people who make bold statements about special abilities but always dodge being directly tested.

And you must now admit this is true. You sometimes, seem to be willing to take some sort of a test, but you clearly are not willing to take a test that would make the issue clear. You are sincere on one level, but you know you can't pass a real test and your mind wouln't allow you to have to face the fact you have no yet undiscovered abilities. I don't believe you are trying to trick other people, I believe you tried to trick yourself.

My life wasn't what I hoped -- join my club.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Diogenes:

What constitutes ' quality ' in regard to video ?

That I do not know. I do know that I want a test with live persons.

Locknar:

And you have done this...detected reproductive cysts, vasectomies, bacteria?

Oh wait...of course, there is the vast amount of proof you've provided us already, such as this:

The observations on my website are my experiences that are proof for me to proceed, and I have consistently stated that they are not formal evidence to others. They are examples of why I proceed toward properly set-up tests. I'm arranging to have tests with local skeptics groups and proof is on the way.

desertgal:
I am accused of having stated that I could perform with pictures when I have consistently explained that those perceptions are less frequent and not as clear. The results of the picture test were consistent with my claim yet y'all make it sounds otherwise.

The example with the mother and child was information that came to me on its own without effort. The test with UncaYimmy did not yield information on its own and was done with effort. ETA: And I knew that.

Information in real life has been very specific, and I am convinced of this myself although there is no evidence gathered from those experiences to present to you. They are examples that explain why I am personally convinced to proceed toward formal and properly set-up tests.

UncaYimmy:

In other words you won't dismiss the possibility of something that has never been proven to exist despite countless attempts over thousands of years.

Oh I've just started a few years ago working on this.

How can you call yourself a scientist?

And there it is, as I expected (or perhaps I am psychic). When I look at people I perceive images in my mind of organs and tissue, and can accurately describe health information that should not be detectable by ordinary senses. I am therefore, in accordance with scientific thinking, interested in having a properly set-up test to establish the source of that accurate information. I have not concluded that I have an ESP ability, nor have I concluded otherwise.

I challenge you right now to stop wasting time on nonsense discussions.

No offense, but the nonsense discussions arise from when I respond to nonsense comments and nonsense questions made by members of this Forum.

 

[desertgal]

desertgal:
The observations on www.visionfromfeeling.com/observations.html is why I continue toward a properly set-up test. Had you had the experiences listed on that page, would you consider it self-deception to proceed to having a test?

That isn't what I said. I said that, in my opinion, the experiences themselves are self deception, and, given that, it may not be possible for you to "recognize (or admit) just how extraordinary her claims are and how her behavior is looking more and more like she's unwilling to approach it dispassionately."

I was here to discuss the claim and tests on medical diagnose from live persons. Evidence is presented as soon as it becomes available.

Yeah, that part I understood.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Senex:

And you must now admit this is true. You sometimes, seem to be willing to take some sort of a test, but you clearly are not willing to take a test that would make the issue clear. You are sincere on one level, but you know you can't pass a real test and your mind wouln't allow you to have to face the fact you have no yet undiscovered abilities. I don't believe you are trying to trick other people, I believe you tried to trick yourself.

My claim is to detect accurate health information from real life persons. I have absolutely never avoided such a test and would have it today if I could.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Self-deception? How??? How do I detect a vasectomy through self-deception? Please explain since I don't understand. Guys: just accept that I have reasons to proceed toward a real test. The observations on the page are real and I witnessed them, and can personally not identify the sources of cold reading or self deception. The only conclusions I have made are
1) Proceed toward a real test
2) Can not dismiss the possibility of an extrasensory ability at this point

Professor Yaffle:
I sense plenty of health issues with the little girl and will send the information to you in a private post, at which you are entirely free to post it here if you so choose.

 

[desertgal]

desertgal:
I am accused of having stated that I could perform with pictures when I have consistently explained that those perceptions are less frequent and not as clear. The results of the picture test were consistent with my claim yet y'all make it sounds otherwise.

HELLO? We are past that. We have moved on.

The example with the mother and child was information that came to me on its own without effort. The test with UncaYimmy did not yield information on its own and was done with effort. ETA: And I knew that.

And, once again, what I said had nothing to do with whether the information came to you on it's own or took effort. With effort, or without, you performed on demand in both cases. Moving on...

No offense, but the nonsense discussions arise from when I respond to nonsense comments and nonsense questions made by members of this Forum.

Oh, I'm sorry. Do forgive me. You see, I'm not a scientist. I don't have ESP. I can't make mental connections with mythical creatures I can't see, or watch dinosaur ghosts walking, or talk to the animals, or diagnose illnesses with a single glance.

I'm just a lowly researcher, posting nonsense.

 

[Locknar]

The observations on my website are my experiences that are proof for me to proceed, and I have consistently stated that they are not formal evidence to others. They are examples of why I proceed toward properly set-up tests.

Claims are not proof...but you already knew this.

I'm arranging to have tests with local skeptics groups and proof is on the way.

I have little doubt you'll be as sucessful as your other attempts at being tested; all talk, no action.

This skeptics group you claim to have joined; I asked before, proof? What is its name, where is it located, who runs it, do they have a website, etc.

 

[desertgal]

Self-deception? How??? How do I detect a vasectomy through self-deception?

Once again, as has been explained to you several times here, your claims of detecting anything-whether you are self deceiving, whether it actually does happen, or whether it is your imagination - are unsubstantiated. I don't know that you detected a vasectomy, or anything else. Claims are not proof.

 

[Senex]

My claim is to detect accurate health information from real life persons. I have absolutely never avoided such a test and would have it today if I could.

Well, we live in the 21st century and in the USA. We can do whatever we want as long as it isn't unethical (or illegal, they are usually related).

Do it. Whatever it is you can do you should prove it right now. But I know you can't because you believe you can do something that isn't possible. There is no shame at thinking you can do something you can not do -- the shame is in underestimating yourself. You, however, picked a topic that is well researched. You can't make this work on this website.

If you continue to think as you do you will be considered a woo.

That's not to say I wouldn't like to have a drink with you.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Locknar:
As I answered in thread http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129731&page=3 where you first presented this question:

I joined the Winston Salem Skeptics, located in Winston Salem, North Carolina. You can find them at http://skeptics.meetup.com/182/
I do not know what they might have published, but so far I have a good impression of them as a skeptic group. I am hoping that they can arrange a simple medical information test with me and that they will publish the results here. If you are very interested, perhaps they will let you join the group and take part in discussions even though you can't attend the meetings in person? You could ask the organizer Jim Moury. I do not have his email address but can send an email on your behalf. (The website has one of those email services that does not show the email address but enables members to send an email.)

ETA: You can all access the material of this skeptics group following that link. You are not required to join in order to read about our scheduled meetings, messages and discussions! Check it out!

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Alright guys don't make me cry here. I came to this Forum to discuss my experiences with perceiving accurate health information and the tests to establish the source of that information. The information on my observations page is all according to experiences as they took place and you can see several examples there where I attempt to scrutinize the accuracy and reliability the best a person can do.

I am working towards reliable tests with skeptical organizations, now involving both the Independent Investigations Group (www.iigwest.com) and the Winston Salem Skeptics (http://skeptics.meetup.com/182/) and there is also a Forsyth Area Critical Thinkers as soon as I can get my hands on them.

I'm working on it.

 

[Questioninggeller]

Yes and absolutely. If I have a test and fail I admit that there is no ability. I have done so already on some of the other aspects of the perceptions. I have already admitted that I am unable to detect medical information to the required extent from pictures. Nor was that ever my claim. If a test shows that I do not have ESP for medical information in live persons I will admit it. The objective of the test is to find out, and I am open for either possibility.

If so, I applaud your honesty in taking the conclusions of such a test you agree to seriously.

 

[Locknar]

Locknar:
As I answered in thread http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129731&page=3 where you first presented this question:


ETA: You can all access the material of this skeptics group following that link. You are not required to join in order to read about our scheduled meetings, messages and discussions! Check it out!

I see you joined a Internet forum board and that you joined yesterday; but do not see anything about the tests you claim to have set up.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Dear Locknar:
The tests have not been set up yet, but I will ensure that if the skeptics group agrees to participate they will be set up at everyone's earliest convenience. In fact I am typing up a request right now which should be available on http://skeptics.meetup.com/182/ soon for you to read and follow up with.

 

[SimonD]

VFV

10 pages of nothing.

Either you can do what you say you can do or you can't.

Now ◊◊◊◊ or get off the pot. You are just talking up my bandwidth.

 

[Akhenaten]

Alright guys don't make me cry here.

Your tears will start in earnest if/when you finally realise the extent of your self-delusion.

I came to this Forum to discuss my experiences with perceiving accurate health information outlandish and unevidenced claims and the tests to establish the source of that information.

That was just crying out to be corrected.

The information on my observations page is all according to experiences as they took place and you can see several examples there where I attempt to scrutinize the accuracy and reliability the best a person can do.

The only information you provide is gleaned from your own extremely subjective observations. Please don't tell us what we can see - you have less chance of being correct about that than you do with being correct about your observations of atoms and human ailments.

I am working towards reliable tests with skeptical organizations, now involving both the Independent Investigations Group (www.iigwest.com) and the Winston Salem Skeptics (http://skeptics.meetup.com/182/) and there is also a Forsyth Area Critical Thinkers as soon as I can get my hands on them.

I'm working on it.

You're working on furthering your own delusion. The best that can be hoped for is that if any of these tests ever happen you'll be forced to stop spouting about having an "ability" and do something about whatever your actual problem is. Honestly, you come across as a one-legged person who can't stop raving about the huge advantages of hopping everywhere.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Professor Yaffle:
I sense plenty of health issues with the little girl and will send the information to you in a private post, at which you are entirely free to post it here if you so choose.

Why are you going down this road again ?
You have repeatably said that you cannot reliably diagnose with pictures...

Less than four hours ago..

I have already admitted that I am unable to detect medical information to the required extent from pictures.

You seem to have a problem with remembering from moment to moment, what supernatural powers, you do and do not have..

 

[Pup]

Quote:
I do recall one incident where a mother showed me a picture of her daughter and asked me to describe her health problems. I did so without any prior knowledge and according to the mother I was fully correct.

Is that not performing on demand? Please post and tell me how it wasn't what it appears to be.

Well, I've hardly been one of VFF's supporters, but in this case, I don't see the contradiction. It's not performing on demand, because I think this is what she means:

Performing on demand would be if every time someone comes up and says, "Here's a picture, tell me what you see," she can see something and respond.

What she's saying is that sometimes, randomly, when someone says, "Here's a picture, tell me what you see," she can see something and answer. But they can't demand that she see and answer; she either sees or she doesn't, and if she doesn't, she can't change that fact.

The weak spot, of course, is if she doesn't specify ahead of time that she's not seeing anything, before answering. Then it's too easy to guess and if it's wrong afterwards, assume that this wasn't one of the times that the power was working, but if it's right, use it as evidence that it was working. A classic way to fool yourself and others.

So, as Diogenes wrote above:

Professor Yaffle:
I sense plenty of health issues with the little girl and will send the information to you in a private post, at which you are entirely free to post it here if you so choose.

Why are you going down this road again ?
You have repeatably said that you cannot reliably diagnose with pictures...

So, are these definite observations about the little girl that you're absolutely sure are correct, or are these guesses?