VisionFromFeeling - General discussion thread

[VisionFromFeeling]

You know exactly why the discussion is as it is - it is because you pretend to be here to ask for advice and then ignore every single useful piece of advice, suggestion, testing protocol, marking protocol etc.

I am asked to test things that are not my paranormal claim, and I am given advice that are based on either the misunderstanding or lack or acceptance toward the fact that I am working on the study and not yet the test.

So Anita we don't really know why you are here. It certainly isn't for our input.
You seem determined to use only protocols you have unilaterally agreed, you won't tell anyone about them beforehand and you sem to be the only one judging the results.
None of that is useful.

The study was carried out in a manner that is greatly improved from anything before. I will be publishing it on my website as soon as the data becomes available to me, as I have left it in the reliable hands of other Skeptics until I can receive a copy.

I have suggested several times you work on a decent test and only post when you actually have some results to share, but you are unable to do so. You need to keep telling us what you are planning etc.
There would only be a point to that if you listened to suggestions regarding planned tests.
It is beyond doubt noe that you do not listen to suggestions and actively ignore them.

Seriously, why not simply not post in any of these threads until you have a clear test to describe and some clear results to publish, free from your own interpretation or analysis?

So when Forum members post outright lies and misconceptions about me I have no right to post in my defense? So I am being kicked out so that the Forum Skeptics can have their fun with posting lies about me that could not only hurt my feelings but my life and career otherwise?

That's how this should all work.

Then no more lies and personal attacks while I'm gone.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Since when did anyone diagnose you as having synesthesia? This is how Science works. It's not up to me to prove you don't - though I could make a pretty damn good case of it.

skeen, don't be ridiculous. That's it. I am going to go see a specialist of synesthesia and have what ever tests and when I come back diagnosed with synesthesia what will you say then?! Will you admit that you are easy to jump into false conclusions and hold utter belief in them as true? I'd like to see when you are proven wrong, then maybe it will help people like you to realize that so very often you believe things that aren't true. I mean, I'm here claiming to perceive accurate health information that shouldn't be accessible to ordinary perception, yet I'm not even stating with utter belief one way or the other! So who's the Skeptic here?

 

[Ashles]

If there was a real test set up for me with people sitting in a row, and I was asked "which of them had just emptied their bladders" and "which of them are in fairly urgent need to do so" and all ordinary means of detecting this were concealed, and... of course the test would have to have a time limit to it. Would that be of no interest?

Well it sure isn't the medical perception claim you have repeatedly informed us is the only claim you are interested in testing.

If you are doing this by the visual process you have described previously then it is not a good test because, for example, a person with more urine in their bladder may, nonetheless have less requirement for the lavatory than someone with less urine.
Or maybe you are describing how somebody is feeling in which case this is not the test you have insisted everyone focus on.

So, no, this certainly isn't your actual medical claim - this is a different claim.

Are we now allowed to suggest different claims you have previously mentioned now you are changing your focus?

Or, if this (somehow) is still considered your medical claim does this mean that any incorrect reading will be considered a miss and thus your 100% accuracy rate will be considered no longer applicable?

 

[Ashles]

You know exactly why the discussion is as it is - it is because you pretend to be here to ask for advice and then ignore every single useful piece of advice, suggestion, testing protocol, marking protocol etc.

I am asked to test things that are not my paranormal claim, and I am given advice that are based on either the misunderstanding or lack or acceptance toward the fact that I am working on the study and not yet the test.

Everything we have suggested are paranormal claims you have made.
You have, for some reason, decided to focus on the hardest of those to test.

Again I reiterate - in all the other tests you do not need to succeed at 100% or even spectacularly - a result significantly greater than chance would be all that is required.
You have never so far adressed this other than to attampt to wave it away with "That's not my main claim."
Why are the others not also valid claims?

So Anita we don't really know why you are here. It certainly isn't for our input.
You seem determined to use only protocols you have unilaterally agreed, you won't tell anyone about them beforehand and you sem to be the only one judging the results.
None of that is useful.

The study was carried out in a manner that is greatly improved from anything before. I will be publishing it on my website as soon as the data becomes available to me, as I have left it in the reliable hands of other Skeptics until I can receive a copy.

Will they be publishing it too?
Can we get a copy directly from them?
Can we see the results before analysis or interpretation is applied to them by either yourself or the skeptics?

I have suggested several times you work on a decent test and only post when you actually have some results to share, but you are unable to do so. You need to keep telling us what you are planning etc.
There would only be a point to that if you listened to suggestions regarding planned tests.
It is beyond doubt noe that you do not listen to suggestions and actively ignore them.

Seriously, why not simply not post in any of these threads until you have a clear test to describe and some clear results to publish, free from your own interpretation or analysis?

So when Forum members post outright lies and misconceptions about me I have no right to post in my defense?

You have every right.
But will achieve nothing. It will alter no-one's opinion.

But following my suggestion actually could change people's opinions - in fact publishing real test results is the only thing that can affect anyone's opinions of you at this stage.

Also several times you have posted not to address some perceived 'lie' or 'misperception' but siply to announce something that has no useful information.

So I am being kicked out so that the Forum Skeptics can have their fun with posting lies about me that could not only hurt my feelings but my life and career otherwise?

No, nothng we have posted can harm your life or career. Some of things you have posted might.
You made this claim public.

Then no more lies and personal attacks while I'm gone.

Gone? When are you ever gone?

And please quote any lies on this thread.

 

[Ashles]

It's doubly sad as I have never before read a thread in which I disagreed with you lionking.

 

[Uncayimmy]

skeen, don't be ridiculous. That's it. I am going to go see a specialist of synesthesia and have what ever tests and when I come back diagnosed with synesthesia what will you say then?! Will you admit that you are easy to jump into false conclusions and hold utter belief in them as true? I'd like to see when you are proven wrong, then maybe it will help people like you to realize that so very often you believe things that aren't true. I mean, I'm here claiming to perceive accurate health information that shouldn't be accessible to ordinary perception, yet I'm not even stating with utter belief one way or the other! So who's the Skeptic here?

Please stop twisting things around.

1) What you describe (seeing inside the human body, identifying chemicals) is nothing like any description of synesthesia that anyone here has been able to find documented.

2) You have repeatedly claimed your abilities are due to the downloading of "vibrational information" - this same information that allows you to perform Vibrational Algebra to predict the effects of a substance on the body.

3) Nobody said you don't have synesthesia. We have repeatedly stated that you have not proven you have synesthesia.

3) You may in fact have synesthesia, but it has nothing to do with your specific claims, an example of which is below:

That is the nature of the vibrational information that forms the images. The way I understand it, the vibrational information is what I detect. This vibration is then what the atoms are composed of, then the molecules, cells, and tissue. Based on the perceived structure of the vibrational information, this is then in my awareness constructed upwards into corresponding structure on the atomic, molecular, and cellular and tissue level and becomes perception that is visual in structure, shape and color, and also texture, feeling, density, weight, temperature, and sometimes sound, taste, and scent.

 

[Ashles]

And I find it sad that people who I enjoy in other threads participate in this. Someone earlier suggested that VFF be ignored and her threads just disappear. But some members just seem that they can't help themselves.

We did. She kept bumping them.

 

[Audible Click]

I agree.

 

[desertgal]

We did. She kept bumping them.

No, he's referring to my earlier post today. I posted again to point out his meat puppetry, and he somehow thought I was talking to Anita.

If there was any indication that Anita's claims were authentic, I would support them. Fact is, she has refused from the beginning to provide anything more than anecdotal evidence. Even her readings at the FACT meetings are unsupported-and with some glaring contradictions in the anecdotal data. We offered numerous suggestions, which she ignored, and protocols, which she ignored. If interest started to wane, she would interject outrageous claims to bring it back to her - and then have a hissy fit if anyone addressed them. If her threads fell off the front page, she bumped them up again. If we ignored that she'd hijack other threads.

When I said she was delusional, it was because she said things that indicated she is, in my opinion, delusional. It's only an insult to her and Plumjam and Lionking, who think mental illness is something to be ashamed of. When I called her a liar, it was because she was lied. When I said she was seeking attention, it was because she was seeking attention. Yeah, I wasn't always polite, and I said many things that were uncalled for - but who called for Anita to come here and play us?

She could have left at any time. Her repeated cries that she needs "her" skeptics were ridiculous, since she didn't use any of the advice she sought. She just wants the attention.

It's okay, somehow, to come here and jerk people around as long as you do it politely, I guess. Whatever. I'll leave the happy trio to it.

 

[skeen]

skeen, don't be ridiculous. That's it. I am going to go see a specialist of synesthesia and have what ever tests and when I come back diagnosed with synesthesia what will you say then?! Will you admit that you are easy to jump into false conclusions and hold utter belief in them as true? I'd like to see when you are proven wrong, then maybe it will help people like you to realize that so very often you believe things that aren't true. I mean, I'm here claiming to perceive accurate health information that shouldn't be accessible to ordinary perception, yet I'm not even stating with utter belief one way or the other! So who's the Skeptic here?

Great! Do it. You should have done it many years ago. Of course, you won't do it. But if you did, the diagnoses would come back negative, because it is clear you do not have synesthesia.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Anita's 'study' page is becoming almost incomprehensible now (I assume by design).

I understand there is little doubt that she is (on the whole) a high-scoring science student.
I just cannot understand how.
If she were writing or describing experimental design in her courses in this way she would score terribly.

I've cleared out some of the mess on my study page now and also added a little update on how the first study went. But I also wanted to mention that I write my webpage for a much wider audience, trying to keep in mind that young people and people without science background might be reading, and that the language I use on my website does not reflect my writing skills or way of expressing in science or my professional life. (And don't say that I don't have a professional life that I'm just a science student, because I do.)

You have, for some reason, decided to focus on the hardest of those to test.

It is the aspect that is the easiest for me.

(...) as I have left it in the reliable hands of other Skeptics until I can receive a copy.

Will they be publishing it too?

I would like it if they did, but I have not discussed that with them yet. I won't burden them with the extra assignment unless they are happy with doing this.

Can we get a copy directly from them?

I knew you were going to ask that. I will talk to the participants about whether they are able to provide other people with copies. Only if they are happy to take on the extra assignment can we ask them to.

Can we see the results before analysis or interpretation is applied to them by either yourself or the skeptics?

No? Why would you need to? When I post the raw data as well as my conclusions you can just disregard my conclusions for that time and only look at the data. However I will try to remember your request and can send the scanned copies of the health questionnaires (and that is what makes up the raw data) to you first before anyone else receives them and before they are even posted on my website. How's that for appreciating you, Ashles?

ETA: I forget that Ashles has a degree in experimental design and psychology and therefore I will not question his motives for how he wishes to receive the data from the study and I will definitely ensure that he receives copies in the way that he has requested. Only good can come from that.

But following my suggestion actually could change people's opinions - in fact publishing real test results is the only thing that can affect anyone's opinions of you at this stage.

I will soon be publishing real study results. It was a study, not a test. You can decide for yourself to what extent the study results qualify as evidence one way or the other, considering the conditions of the study that took place. It can only go up from here, the next step is either the second study, a real test, or falsified claim, all of which you would like more than the first study.

No, nothng we have posted can harm your life or career. Some of things you have posted might.
You made this claim public.

I seriously doubt that my paranormal investigation would harm my career.

And please quote any lies on this thread.

I really don't have time. But there are many. Do you remember when I spent two hours composing a thorough reply to answer one of your statements where you said that I hadn't answered a question when I said that I had? That was a lot of work and I'd rather not do that again tonight. I might later on though if you keep repeating this request many times like you did then. (Not intended in a negative manner.)

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

1) What you describe (seeing inside the human body, identifying chemicals) is nothing like any description of synesthesia that anyone here has been able to find documented.

As I told you, I described my experience of medical perception to a Professor who specializes in human perception and she said that it was reminiscent of synesthesia, so who are you to conclude with such utter conviction that what I have could not possibly be an expression of synesthesia? Her comment was not a diagnose, but yours is not a diagnose either, and her comment holds more weight in this conversation than does yours. Sorry Jim.

2) You have repeatedly claimed your abilities are due to the downloading of "vibrational information" - this same information that allows you to perform Vibrational Algebra to predict the effects of a substance on the body.

So now we are believing in my Vibrational Information explanation just because it allows us to deny the Synesthesia explanation? Just to keep it going that none of what I say could possibly be true?

3) Nobody said you don't have synesthesia. We have repeatedly stated that you have not proven you have synesthesia.

And, as a Forum Skeptic would say, that is clearly a lie! Don't make me go and find all the quotes, I really don't have time for it.

3) You may in fact have synesthesia, but it has nothing to do with your specific claims, an example of which is below:

Sounds like synesthesia to me.

Great! Do it. You should have done it many years ago. Of course, you won't do it. But if you did, the diagnoses would come back negative, because it is clear you do not have synesthesia.

So, when I read and a color pops up from the page and with the same consistent color to the same things, it couldn't possibly be synesthesia? I am of course imagining things, and delusional because that's all a paranormal claimant could ever be.

 

[Kuko 4000]

3) Nobody said you don't have synesthesia. We have repeatedly stated that you have not proven you have synesthesia.

I recall seeing someone in the original thread saying that Anita doesn't have synesthesia (which surprised me), and skeen is playing right into VFF's hands in his previous post...I wonder how you know this skeen, psychic powers?

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

another wall of text and still no results

 

[eirik]

Was there talk of data?

 

[Cuddles]

Since people appear to be posting in this thread solely to avoid the moderation on other threads discussing the same subject, and since the behaviour here has not improved in the slightest, this thread is also being set to moderated status.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles

 

[dafydd]

Contrary to Vision,I have experienced synesthesia during acid trips in the 1960's. Seeing sounds,hearing colours,all grist to the mill of the psychedelic voyager.Synesthesia is not about seeing people's internal organs and diagnosing diseases,she can't even get the terminology of her fantasy right.

 

[desertgal]

I recall seeing someone in the original thread saying that Anita doesn't have synesthesia (which surprised me), and skeen is playing right into VFF's hands in his previous post...I wonder how you know this skeen, psychic powers?

I've said she doesn't have synesthesia, and so has skeen. It was a response to Anita moving from "I may have synesthesia" to "I have synesthesia".

Her description of her main claim is not consistent with synesthesia. Hence, right now, to some here, she does not have synesthesia.

If she goes to a doctor, and he proves otherwise, we'll accept that.

 

[Cuddles]

There have been enough chances given. The bickering, personal attacks and derailing stop now.

There are three threads currently open to discuss these topics. this one for general discussion about VisionFromFeeling's claims and study attempts, this one for discussion about UncaYimmy's site, and this one for the original moderated interview should VisionFromFeeling choose to continue with it.

All threads on this topic have either ended up being moderated or closed due to the apparent inability of some people to stay civil and on topic. Do not create any more new threads in order to avoid the moderation in place on these threads.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles

 

[desertgal]

3) You may in fact have synesthesia, but it has nothing to do with your specific claims, an example of which is below...

Sounds like synesthesia to me.

Okay. Then your ability is the result of synesthesia, which is not paranormal. That brings an end to your paranormal claim, and to any further discussion in this section.