Vision From Feeling

Status
Not open for further replies.
A study is a step in the right direction, but the informal survey was (is) much simpler. All she has to do is sit in the eatery, look at people, and write down what she sees, if anything. Right now she cannot answer the question about how many people she can even read regardless of apparent accuracy. The next best thing is to just do the study at the skeptics group meeting.

This thing she came up with is simply unworkable from a practical standpoint.
 
Clerical Man is merely a sidekick to...


Skeptic Man!

Skeptic Man, Skeptic Man,
Does whatever a sceptic can
Hears a claim, any size,
Catches frauds just like flies
Look Out!
Here comes the Skeptic Man.

Is he calm?
Listen bud,
He's got logical heathan blood.
Can he post on a thread
Take a look overhead
Hey, there
There goes the Skeptic Man.

In the chill of night
At the scene of a claim
Like a streak of light
He arrives for the game.

Skeptic Man, Skeptic Man
Friendly neighborhood Skeptic Man
Wealth and fame
He's ignored
Busting crap is his reward.

To him, life is a great big bang up
Whenever there's a hang up
You'll find the Skeptic Man.
 
Ashles said:
Thanks for that.
So no actual specific claim then? Just 'impressions' and no agreed judging of what is deemed a hit or a miss?
Click to expand...

In all fairness, she needs to do this in order to make a specific claim. All she has at this point is a disjointed collection of one-off readings. We don't want her to make a claim if she has no idea what she can do.

As for hit or miss, my listing of ailments was reasonably specific given the practical constraints (see attachment). It's a hit if she and the subject check the same box. I already posted elsewhere how the results should be reported. If there's a pattern in what she can detect, we'll see it. At that point she might be able to make a claim that can be tested.

What's more likely to happen is that it will be a hodgepodge of check marks where we will have to convince her that what she got right was no better than chance. Sigh...


(Sorry for asking but I just don't know why I can't see the protocol link - probably sodding Websense again)
Click to expand...

It's Flash based. I couldn't even print it to PDF because it comes out as an image and is thus too big to post.
 

Attachments

Moochie said:
Guess I'll go back to doing crosswords.
Click to expand...
No way - we've got a franchise brewing here. Marvel and DC can start fighting for the rights now.

(And Fox will probably retain them and take 8% anyway - Little Watchmen gag there)
 
UncaYimmy said:
In all fairness, she needs to do this in order to make a specific claim. All she has at this point is a disjointed collection of one-off readings. We don't want her to make a claim if she has no idea what she can do.
Click to expand...


I agree, I'm just not clear on what it is Anita is trying to define with this study. Is she going to be attempting to perceive ailments with her allegedly paranormal ability, or the synesthesia she claims to have, or simply establish that she can do cold reading? The root purpose of the study seems to have disappeared.
 
I agree, I'm just not clear on what it is Anita is trying to define with this study. Is she going to be attempting to perceive ailments with her allegedly paranormal ability, or the synesthesia she claims to have, or simply establish that she can do cold reading? The root purpose of the study seems to have disappeared.
Click to expand...

To be honest I'll be happy if she doesn't try to form any theories about the methodology until she actually has some observations worthy of consideration.
 
UncaYimmy said:
To be honest I'll be happy if she doesn't try to form any theories about the methodology until she actually has some observations worthy of consideration.
Click to expand...

The Devil will have frostbite before you get any observations worthy of consideration. IMHO
 
I wonder if Vibrational WavesTM could be used to produce power, cook food, transmit information....we could be at the dawn of Aquarius. If only she could define them...think of the children.

Personally I find her latest call for "help" disingenuous; there has been plenty offered here alone...none of which she has followed or otherwise accepted.

My advice, conduct the test study survey what ever its called as written and post what ever results aftermath you (VFF) wish as you will anyway.
 
Ashles said:
No way - we've got a franchise brewing here. Marvel and DC can start fighting for the rights now.

(And Fox will probably retain them and take 8% anyway - Little Watchmen gag there)
Click to expand...

OK, ClericalMan will keep his pencils sharpened. :D


M.
 
Moochie said:
OK, ClericalMan will keep his pencils sharpened. :D
Click to expand...
Using the brilliant HeroMachine I have created Skeptic ManTM


Now available with Hammer of LogicTM, FraudoVisionTM, Suit of No Grey AreaTM, Glove of Firm but Fair ProbingTM, and handy pockets for pens.

(Button on back causes figure to say "Evidence?" in LarsenVoiceTM)
 
Last edited:
UncaYimmy said:
As for hit or miss, my listing of ailments was reasonably specific given the practical constraints (see attachment). It's a hit if she and the subject check the same box.
Click to expand...
With that definition of a hit, I can get 100% accuracy.

bob
 
IXP said:
With that definition of a hit, I can get 100% accuracy.

bob
Click to expand...

There is no "accuracy" being tested because it's not a test. The idea is simply for Anita to determine what, if any, ailments she can reliably detect. She has no idea what she can detect or whether she can even detect the same thing in multiple people.

By using check boxes we eliminate interpretation. She can't just say "pain in the right arm" and claim someone saying "wrist pain" is a hit. They both need to check "Right Wrist" for it to be a hit.

When it comes to analyzing the data, we will look at it many ways. This will include false positives (she checked something the subject did not) and clear misses (subject checked something she did not). We'll also know how often she checked each box, which will expose fishing.

Thing is, she has no incentive to try to scam the study. She could skip it altogether and simply make whatever specific claim she wants. It's been 18 months since she started with IIG, and there's still no specific claim. We're trying to help her make a specific claim or realize that, in fact, she has no specific claim whatsoever.

Even if Anita believes she sees a pattern and we (skeptics) do not, that's fine. We'll simply devise a test based on her (misguided) claim and settle it once and for all.
 
Ashles said:
Using the brilliant HeroMachine I have created Skeptic ManTM
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_10784978a28695d76.jpg[/qimg]

Now available with Hammer of LogicTM, FraudoVisionTM, Suit of No Grey AreaTM, Glove of Firm but Fair ProbingTM, and handy pockets for pens.

(Button on back causes figure to say "Evidence?" in LarsenVoiceTM)
Click to expand...

That's brilliant. Thank you.

I can't wait for the movie of this thread to come out.



[nitpick]Boots of No Grey Area perhaps? I've spotted a grey area on the suit itself[/nitpick]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom