VisionFromFeeling - General discussion thread

[Uncayimmy]

Ahem. I am not a psychic, nor do I attempt to be.

Another lie.

Your website is littered with the word "psychic" including, "How many psychic claimants or claimed healers (although I don't claim to be a healer) would willingly take the initiative to contact a very tough Skeptic and ask them to be the subject in a test to see whether their claim holds up?"

Among your many claims are things like telepathy, sensing people at a distance, and speaking with the dead. That's what psychics do.

You are trying to say what you think people want to hear right now in order to get your attention fix. We know you lie, and we know you can't do any of the wild things you claim to do. You just can't step away from the attention, can you? Even if it's negative, you still crave it. It's better to be infamous than unnoticed, huh?

 

[TSR]

Well excuse me. I have all A's except for one class

.
... which means you do not have a 4.0. And you knew you did not at the time you made the claim. As I used to ask the Bear when he was caught in a fib: "What is it called when you say something you know isn't so?"
.

I am replacing that F with a new grade because the school lets students do that twice, for various reasons such as if a professor hit students with papers and that grade should not count and a student gets another chance.

.
And *if* that happens, and assuming that you aren't lying about that policy as you were the "fighting words" policy *then* and only then can you truthfully claim to have a 4.0
.

I think it is still a 4.0.

.
Yes, but then you "think" you can get high from a picture of marijuana.
.

If that is your best example of when I would have lied, it is pretty pitiful. It is not like I would have taken exams and failed and would be trying to cover
that up.

.
No, it's like you *didn't* take the exams, didn't officially withdraw from the course, and tried to cover that up.
.

You, Mr. Carr, were given the opportunity to call the persons who were involved in the migraine treatment so that you could investigate that claim. You, Mr. Carr, graciously declined to do so.

.
Irrelevant to you claim that you had affidavits which you did not.
.

You are the one who brought up the topic, when you asked me to send you topless pictures.

Can you deny that you are the one who brought up the subject? I said that I would not send you any pictures. I do admit that I did tease you on a few
occasions after that to tell you that I would not send you any pictures, because you had indicated that you wanted some. But you are the one who invented this whole story, you brought it up. Can you admit to that, Jim Carr?

Jim, if I had wanted to send you such pictures, I would have done that. The fact that I didn't says a lot.

.
No, what says a lot is

[4/2/2009 6:46:15 PM] Anita Ikonen: Do you want to see my boobs if I buy a webcam?
[4/2/2009 6:46:21 PM] Anita Ikonen: Maybe that'd make you less cranky against me.
[4/2/2009 6:46:27 PM] Anita Ikonen: Don't post that on your site though.

And what says more is that you continue to lie about it.
.

I don't think any of the above discredits me as a person.

.
But then, you "think" you can talk to ghosts.
.

How about when you came up with all of these lies, starting from claiming that you were drunk

http://www.stopvisionfromfeeling.com/Discussion/tabid/294/aff/1/aft/149/afv/topic/Default.aspx? Were those lies, or would you call those something else?

.
How about your biologically impossible claim that that you can drink large amounts of liquors and not get drunk, but do get drunk from wine?
.

Oh really? Broken a promise? Such as when I was going to send you the study notes, and then you pulled this stunt

http://www.stopvisionfromfeeling.com/Discussion/tabid/294/aff/1/aft/149/afv/topic/Default.aspx and really hurt my feelings and I said I wasn't
going to send them to you anymore?

.
Ah, so you *have* posted the raw data from the mall "study" as you promised to do? Why didn't you post an announcement and a linky?

<checks her website>

Nope, still nothing there.
.

You're the one acting like an attention whore by asking someone who is in a relationship since four years for topless pictures, while you have a wife and two kids.

.
Oh, so clever in your lying personal attacks.
.

The only reason I am here is because of a paranormal investigation. I got a test protocol out of this place. I also come here to defend myself against
hurtful lies.

.
By telling them, instead?
.

 

[Ness36]

Honestly, VisionFromFeeling,

I feel bad for you since I think you are basically shooting yourself in the foot, and I think you should really talk to someone you trust and respect, like maybe a woman professor or graduate student, and get some advice about your future science career and the strange feelings you experience. Maybe it would be better, even if you think you see things , to not expose yourself so publicly, and instead buckle down and focus on your studies, so you can get into the science field. Then, later on you can investigate your experiences. Seriously. If you want a science career, you should not write so many crazy things on the internet. My advice would be take your website down, do a blinded test to confirm if there is anything going on, and go back to studying.

Even with no crazy websites, it is super hard to get a scientific career!!!! Ask some of your friends who have just graduated, or other Graduate students, post-docs, or professors, or professionals working in the fields you like. Any scientific field is a small world, everyone knows everyone else.

 

[Akhenaten]

The vibrations I feel are high frequency. But, you are looking for real-world correlation, not me.

Umm. That doesn't sound right.

 

[Chimera]

Oh really? Broken a promise? Such as when I was going to send you the study notes, and then you pulled this stunt http://www.stopvisionfromfeeling.com/Discussion/tabid/294/aff/1/aft/149/afv/topic/Default.aspx and really hurt my feelings and I said I wasn't going to send them to you anymore?

Um, you just cited you breaking a promise as a defense of being accused of breaking a promise.

 

[Cuddles]

OK. This makes absolutely no sense at all for a few reasons.

Well, that makes a change.

To add a few more reasons:
4) She has claimed numerous times that her perceptions are automatic and instantaneous. Some of her descriptions of her ability have included things like seeing inside someone in a fraction of a second as they walked past a door.

5) Related to 1), even given that she has had this ability for years and apparently never tested it, why would she go to such great expense and effort without having checked that her ability would actually work under test conditions?

6) She claims to see vibrations, quantum wavefunctions, 3D coloured images, and so on. How exactly does the distribution of fat (and apparently also the skin colour) alter the quantum wavefuction of a person in such a way as to make it difficult to see? Remember, she explicitly denies any such things as x-ray vision and remote viewing, so she can't use the excuse that there's more material for her to look through.

7) Prior to the IIG test, she claimed to have viewed a total of one kidney. Given that every single person in the test will have been different in some way from the original person, why the focus on fat people at all? The difference in anatomy between women and men, for example, is something that should cause a much bigger problem than a small layer of fat. Of course, it's worth noting here that a reasonably slim woman may well have more body fat than an overweight male anyway, as a proportion of body weight at least.

But let's be honest here, there's really very little point in pointing out things that don't make sense. There isn't a single part of this whole debacle that has made sense, starting with the ludicrous claims, moving on to the utter failure at testing, and ending up with the excuses that contradict the earlier claims.

 

[Rodney]

. . . the utter failure at testing . . .

In which Anita performed at the P=.0567 level, barely above the generally-accepted statistically significant level of P=.05.

 

[GeeMack]

But let's be honest here, there's really very little point in pointing out things that don't make sense. There isn't a single part of this whole debacle that has made sense, starting with the ludicrous claims, moving on to the utter failure at testing, and ending up with the excuses that contradict the earlier claims.

That's not true. It makes damned near perfect sense if you go where the evidence leads.

 

[Maia]

In which Anita performed at the P=.0567 level, barely above the generally-accepted statistically significant level of P=.05.

Everybody has already discussed this to death, and as un-fond as I am of stats, I'm not going to even try to tackle it (I'll get more than enough of that in the stats class I have to take this spring!!) But let me tell you a little story about a game show we all know and love (okay, maybe we don't all love it.) So many happy memories of my childhood are inextricably tied up with staying home sick from school and watching Family Feud, back when it had that horribly tacky set and was hosted by Richard Dawson. It was always a show for complete idiots, because everything was based on the most popular answer rather than on anything that was actually correct, but I loved it anyway. At the end, they'd have a speed round. After the second person lost (or something, I don't remember exactly how or why it happened), they'd end the show. So you never got to find out what the rest of the most-popular answers were for the speed round questions. And that always drove me nuts!! No, there was absolutely no good reason for this, but there you go.

So, to make a long story even longer, that's basically the same reason why I would have had extremely mild interest in seeing another VFF test if the P level had been higher for what she did do (which it wasn't) even though she still would have failed the test by any definition of failure. Call it OCD curiosity. But I'm not going to pretend that it's anything else.

 

[Moochie]

The young scientist on the right looks somewhat familiar. Could be mistaken, though. Probably am.

Aw, heck, ignore it.


M.

 

[Rodney]

The young scientist on the right looks somewhat familiar. Could be mistaken, though. Probably am.

No, you're right: It's Anita and another future Nobel laureate demonstrating that water has memory.

 

[Furcifer]

@maia- if they 200 points the show ended. Most of the time Richard gave the top answer to the remaining questions but not always. It drove me nuts too.

 

[Akhenaten]

The young scientist on the right looks somewhat familiar. Could be mistaken, though. Probably am.

Aw, heck, ignore it.


M.

Probably not Moochie. As far as is known Anita would still have been in Sweden at that age. She's in the US at the moment on a Student Visa.

 

[LostAngeles]

BTW I went to UC Berkeley. Hooray for the UC system! Although I hear it is now horribly underfunded. As an alumnus, how do you feel about the UCLA school color of light blue, being changed to a dark navy blue officially titled "Adidas Blue" in return for lots of money from Adidas?

Is that recent because I know we're still using the light blue in probably more than half the stuff. If Undie Run was still on, I'd pop down and take a few pics of the assless girls in UCLA shorts.

I was really suprised about the scalar thing. I can understand trying to pull the wool over people's eyes by talking about atomic vibrations or probability distributions. But scalars and gradients is really just the most random, pulled out of a hat argument for her to make.

Because scalars sound big and important and mysterious to someone who doesn't know what they are.

I'm sure as a math major, you must have super duper scalar and gradient powers. Who knows what you could accomplish!

Shh! You'll blow my cover as a crime-fighting superstar!

No easy task. Although being the go to guy when the study group needs beer makes it a little easier.

Feel free to drop by the protocol thread and do some stats for us.

I said I had a math degree. Not stats.

Plus, you could probably contribute to the guffaws. UY said the claimant was as irrational as Vibrational Algerbra, I said the claims were like complex number theory, imaginary.

Well, she's certainly not in any countable sets.

Honestly, VisionFromFeeling,

I feel bad for you since I think you are basically shooting yourself in the foot, and I think you should really talk to someone you trust and respect, like maybe a woman professor or graduate student, and get some advice about your future science career and the strange feelings you experience. Maybe it would be better, even if you think you see things , to not expose yourself so publicly, and instead buckle down and focus on your studies, so you can get into the science field. Then, later on you can investigate your experiences. Seriously. If you want a science career, you should not write so many crazy things on the internet. My advice would be take your website down, do a blinded test to confirm if there is anything going on, and go back to studying.

Even with no crazy websites, it is super hard to get a scientific career!!!! Ask some of your friends who have just graduated, or other Graduate students, post-docs, or professors, or professionals working in the fields you like. Any scientific field is a small world, everyone knows everyone else.

This.

I didn't see it said here, but what's really sad is that she seems like a nice, if rather off, person. And now that she's failed she seems to be chugging down the Banning trail.

Anita, take a deep breath and take it easy. Consider all the reasons you might have failed. Evaluate them. You're a scientist in training. How valid are those hypothesis?

 

[Uncayimmy]

* You claimed to have a 4.0. You do not.'

Just a little follow-up to this. Anita claimed that a professor physically and verbally harassed her, which is why she stopped attending the class and subsequently failed it. She said that other students witnessed this but were afraid to back her up when she presented this to the administration. And, we're told, the administration took no action regarding this egregious conduct.

Well, just today, somebody from her class is offering a different account of the event on my StopVFF website. In my opinion it is much more plausible. Actually, what I mean is that Anita's sounds outrageous while this story has the ring of truth to it. It's not the first time that we have seen Anita's version of events differ from other accounts.

Essentially, Anita was having troubles in the class, ticked off the professor, he responded rudely, and rather than accept responsibility, she tried to blame everyone else and attempted to get the professor in trouble with the administration. Sound familiar?

 

[Moochie]

Just a little follow-up to this. Anita claimed that a professor physically and verbally harassed her, which is why she stopped attending the class and subsequently failed it. She said that other students witnessed this but were afraid to back her up when she presented this to the administration. And, we're told, the administration took no action regarding this egregious conduct.

Well, just today, somebody from her class is offering a different account of the event on my StopVFF website. In my opinion it is much more plausible. Actually, what I mean is that Anita's sounds outrageous while this story has the ring of truth to it. It's not the first time that we have seen Anita's version of events differ from other accounts.

Essentially, Anita was having troubles in the class, ticked off the professor, he responded rudely, and rather than accept responsibility, she tried to blame everyone else and attempted to get the professor in trouble with the administration. Sound familiar?

Interesting follow-up.

I do think you might have been a little precipitate in banning her from your site, though. Your posting this smidgin of trivia suggests this to me.



M.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Thank you for speculating, UncaYimmy, however you only represent part of the story. What is failed to mention is also that the professor liked to hit students with papers and on one occasion attacked me simply because he thought I was sitting in the wrong chair when I wasn't. He yelled at students, insulted them frequently, called students stupid, said that he hates them and that he is going to murder them, and yelled at students who he did not like to get out of his classroom and to withdraw, and that he doesn't want to see them again.

I never struggled with the coursematerial itself, in fact I make high A's in the exams with other professors. What this story should say about me, above all, is that I do not appreciate or tolerate anger, insults, or harassment, and you all know that of me by now. I have merely represented the truth about the professor, his rudeness affected my studying, I have not misrepresented or exaggerated my description of his behavior toward students in the least bit.

Those students who were personally not mistreated by the professor think highly of him, of course. He only picked on some of the students, including me, who he did not like.

As for the incident where I wanted to review the stereochemistry table before an exam. I was yelled at for asking such a "stupid question". Two seconds later, one of his favorite students - who obviously thought it was a good idea to review the stereochemistry - asked us to do such a problem on the board, and she was given praise and the professor was delighted to review these problems.

I have only described this the way it was. The consequence was that I stopped attending his second course. And that is the only reason I received an F. My only non-A grade on my entire transcript. If you would please apply your skeptical minds... would a straight-A student really be likely to struggle with a course so badly that she actually earns an F on the tests and fails a course? Or is it more likely that something happened, what ever it was, and she chose to stop attending the course and to not take the exams, and therefore failed?

It is sad that you always try to spin things into seeming that I would have lied. I have told the truth. I did not appreciate being called stupid, hit with papers, and insulted by a professor. He did this to several of the students. Other students he treated exceedingly well. And that is why I stopped attending his course. And that is why I have an F.

Please think about it. Just in case it happened, just in case I did not exaggerate. I think this professors behavior is despicable, and it is he, not me, who shames the Chemistry Department.

 

[Cuddles]

If you would please apply your skeptical minds... would a straight-A student really be likely to struggle with a course so badly that she actually earns an F on the tests and fails a course?

Yes. Happens all the time. And given the understanding of science you have demonstrated here, I don't think anyone is at all surprised that you got an F on a science course. We're far more surprised that you managed to get anything else.

 

[Jeff Corey]

.... And that is the only reason I received an F. My only non-A grade on my entire transcript. If you would please apply your skeptical minds... would a straight-A student really be likely to struggle with a course so badly that she actually earns an F on the tests and fails a course?...

If this is so, why don't you appear on the Chancellor's List for any semester from the Spring of 2008 to the Spring of 2009? Surely, a straight A student must appear there. http://registrar.uncc.edu/students/chanc_lists.htm
I caught you in your original 4.0 deceit - isn't this another?

 

[GeeMack]

Thank you for speculating, UncaYimmy, however you only represent part of the story. What is failed to mention is also that the professor liked to hit students with papers and on one occasion attacked me simply because he thought I was sitting in the wrong chair when I wasn't. He yelled at students, insulted them frequently, called students stupid, said that he hates them and that he is going to murder them, and yelled at students who he did not like to get out of his classroom and to withdraw, and that he doesn't want to see them again.

I never struggled with the coursematerial itself, in fact I make high A's in the exams with other professors. What this story should say about me, above all, is that I do not appreciate or tolerate anger, insults, or harassment, and you all know that of me by now. I have merely represented the truth about the professor, his rudeness affected my studying, I have not misrepresented or exaggerated my description of his behavior toward students in the least bit.

Those students who were personally not mistreated by the professor think highly of him, of course. He only picked on some of the students, including me, who he did not like.

As for the incident where I wanted to review the stereochemistry table before an exam. I was yelled at for asking such a "stupid question". Two seconds later, one of his favorite students - who obviously thought it was a good idea to review the stereochemistry - asked us to do such a problem on the board, and she was given praise and the professor was delighted to review these problems.

I have only described this the way it was. The consequence was that I stopped attending his second course. And that is the only reason I received an F. My only non-A grade on my entire transcript. If you would please apply your skeptical minds... would a straight-A student really be likely to struggle with a course so badly that she actually earns an F on the tests and fails a course? Or is it more likely that something happened, what ever it was, and she chose to stop attending the course and to not take the exams, and therefore failed?

It is sad that you always try to spin things into seeming that I would have lied. I have told the truth. I did not appreciate being called stupid, hit with papers, and insulted by a professor. He did this to several of the students. Other students he treated exceedingly well. And that is why I stopped attending his course. And that is why I have an F.

Please think about it. Just in case it happened, just in case I did not exaggerate. I think this professors behavior is despicable, and it is he, not me, who shames the Chemistry Department.

This re-telling of the 4.0 GPA tale speaks to the credibility concern, but your failure to be honest about other issues is probably more important to the skeptical community and to your future. You stated many times in several places that you would announce the end of your paranormal medical claims after you failed the IIG demonstration. You failed that demonstration, 100%, but you have yet to make any announcement about ending your medical claims. In fact you seem to still believe you have magical powers and you talk like you intend to carry on as if no such failure occurred.

Unfortunately for you, Anita, because of this and your other lies, you have virtually destroyed your credibility. It's also unfortunate that your problem isn't limited to a handful of Internet forums. You've created a situation which has the potential to follow you, in a very bad way, into some very important areas of your life. You claim to have career aspirations in the field of science while at that same time you claim to have magical x-ray vision and you claim to have some sort of extra-terrestrial origin. That career goal and your delusions simply cannot coincide.

You could go a long way to rectifying your credibility problem if you would make the announcement that you failed the IIG test, straight out with no waffling and no excuses, and make the statement that you'll be dropping your silly paranormal claims. That was what you said you would do, and if you expect anyone to ever take you seriously again, that is what you should do. Publicly admit that it was all a foolish diversion and drop the whole supernatural powers and space alien fantasy. It's not real, none of it is. Everyone who has been watching this fiasco knows it, and unless you're completely entrenched in your delusion, you know it, too.

Oh, and it might just put the icing on the cake if you would apologize to those dozens and dozens of people who invested so much time and effort trying to help you straighten out your problem, but who you eventually spit on by lying about your intent and the results of that IIG demonstration. That apology is long overdue.

So can we expect an admission of your failure, a renouncement of your claims, and an apology for treating everyone like crap soon?