What Happened With Dr. Vass

[wardenclyffe]

Two things:

snip

The people at the JREF saying, "How absurd! Of course we're credible! The Million Dollars is real and will be paid according to the agreement!" misses the point. It's not what you know about yourself; it's how others see you. Perception and reality are far too often opposite.

snip

This is absolutely true. There is not much that can be done to counteract such accusations, though. The counterargument would be to tell people to take the Challenge, win it, and then if JREF does not pay up, then sue the pants off them. The paranormal claimants would certainly win their cases since they had obviously beaten the Challenge and their powers would be recognized in a court of law. This forces the claimants to say that the courts (and big pharma and big oil and the illuminati) are out to get them. Of course, that will be believed by a certain number of their followers, as well, but not quite as many. Generally, the more crazy your claims, the smaller your following.

and:

snip

CSI has the same problem. If anyone tries to mention them as an investigative group, "sTARBABY" gets flung in his face. The perception of the Gauquelin case is that CSI [CSICOP, as it was then] was not objective or honest. They can't dispel that perception. They have no credibility.

snip

I'm not familiar with this story. Is there a link to something I can read or can someone enlighten me?

Thanks,
Ward

 

[zooterkin]

I'm not familiar with this story. Is there a link to something I can read or can someone enlighten me?

Thanks,
Ward

I haven't read it yet myself, but this looks like it.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Thank you all for proving my point.

That is how you think they think.

And in turn they think you all know perfectly well that the paranormal powers exist, but acknowledging them would be inconvenient, or painful, or shattering to your world-view, so you deny them.

Thus Dr. Vass's people's observation that they can't prove the existence of dowsing to people who don't think it's possible.

So no one can demonstrate a paranormal ability in an independent way? The World is not divided into paranormalists and ebil skeptricks. Convince the educated unconvinced.

 

[ufology]

I dunno about dowsing for bodies, but when I worked for the City Electric system, this old Italian guy used to dowse for where to dig for stuff like water lines and cables. I was the noob and he showed me how to make a couple of dowsing rods out of copper wire. Back in those days I didn't think anything of it and this guy was my boss so I just did what I was told. Whether by coincidence or woo-woo force, I got pretty good at using the stupid things. I haven't done it in years, but if dowsing could win me a cool million it would be fun to try sometime.

j.r.

 

[Pixel42]

Whether by coincidence or woo-woo force

Confirmation bias and the ideomotor effect, actually.

if dowsing could win me a cool million it would be fun to try sometime.

It can't, because the kind of test JREF does eliminates those effects. Sorry.

 

[TSR]

And in turn they think you all know perfectly well that the paranormal powers exist, but acknowledging them would be inconvenient, or painful, or shattering to your world-view, so you deny them.

.
Except for the teeny tiny fact that the JREF nor anyone here with whom I am acquainted flat out denies the possibility of paranormal powers, and most would be thrilled should they be proven.

That last is the rub: what *is* denied, on the basis of years and years of attempts, is any proof that such powers have been reproduced under controlled, independently observed conditions has yet been produced. This is the same way every other facet of our lives is, at some point, confirmed: we know that the bean of the coffee plant, properly raised and roasted then subjected to boiling water will, after filtering, yield a tasty beverage because generations of people from all over the world have been doing so using this process. We know that this beverage is, as a cultural thing, usually consumed in the morning shortly after the Sun has risen in the East because for millennia people have observed it doing so.

Can we be certain that the above process will not, at some point, produce an emetic instead, or that the Sun will without warning start rising in the South instead? No, we cannot. But it would take an awful lot of proof and independent confirmation before it becomes accepted.

In the case of dowsing: if the presence of skeptics somehow puts forth a "vibe" which interferes with the process, then a test could be designed which prevents the dowsing itself from being so contaminated, while allowing the result of same to be observed -- unless one is going to posit that the act of observation eliminates the substance being dowsed for, a claim even more fantastic than the original. But still testable.

No, I'm afraid that none of the excuses offered by those who might otherwise be tested are simply excuses (whether or not the potential testee realizes it) to avoid being proven wrong. OTOH, I am also certain that should one poll the members here and those non-members involved in the Challenge, one would find a slight variation of my own take on the whole thing: "that would be really cool if it worked, now prove that it does."
.

 

[Major Major]

.Except for the teeny tiny fact that the JREF nor anyone here with whom I am acquainted flat out denies the possibility of paranormal powers, and most would be thrilled should they be proven..

That's all very well, but it doesn't matter. Just as you know that they "know" that they're hoaxing, they know that you "know" that acknowledging their powers would be inconvenient, or painful, or shattering to your world-view.

Your opponents believe what they believe, not what you find it convenient for them to believe.

 

[Major Major]

This is absolutely true. There is not much that can be done to counteract such accusations, though. The counterargument would be to tell people to take the Challenge, win it, and then if JREF does not pay up, then sue the pants off them. The paranormal claimants would certainly win their cases since they had obviously beaten the Challenge and their powers would be recognized in a court of law. This forces the claimants to say that the courts (and big pharma and big oil and the illuminati) are out to get them. Of course, that will be believed by a certain number of their followers, as well, but not quite as many. Generally, the more crazy your claims, the smaller your following.

If that's the case, why doesn't some holocaust scholar take the NAFCASH Challenge, win it, and then if they don't pay off, then sue the pants off them?

Why doesn't some biologist take the "show me an intermediate form" creationist challenge, win it, and then if they don't pay off, then sue the pants off them?


Such a legal challenge would be extremely excruciating, and worse yet, in vain. It's a gambling bet, and not legally collectable. Look at the fate of Alfred Russell Wallace when he took the flat-earther challenge to show that the world was round.

 

[wardenclyffe]

If that's the case, why doesn't some holocaust scholar take the NAFCASH Challenge, win it, and then if they don't pay off, then sue the pants off them?

Why doesn't some biologist take the "show me an intermediate form" creationist challenge, win it, and then if they don't pay off, then sue the pants off them?


Such a legal challenge would be extremely excruciating, and worse yet, in vain. It's a gambling bet, and not legally collectable. Look at the fate of Alfred Russell Wallace when he took the flat-earther challenge to show that the world was round.

Those other challenges are unwinnable because those who offer those challenges keep moving the goalposts. They will never be satisfied with any evidence. If you take the JREF's challenge, you and the JREF together craft a testing protocol that both sides must sign off on. And when I say sign off, I mean sign off. It's not merely a gambling bet, it's a signed contract.

Ward

 

[Major Major]

Those other challenges are unwinnable because those who offer those challenges keep moving the goalposts. They will never be satisfied with any evidence. If you take the JREF's challenge, you and the JREF together craft a testing protocol that both sides must sign off on. And when I say sign off, I mean sign off. It's not merely a gambling bet, it's a signed contract.

Ward

Ipse dixit:

Some kooks even challenged us and Dr. Vass to take a Million Dollar Challenge and prove, once and for all, that divining for bodies using the ideomotor effect was a hoax. (The ideomotor effect is defined as involuntary movements caused by the mind. A good example of this would be the supposed movement of the pointer of a Ouija board by a person's mind.) It is impossible to prove to some people that we went to the moon if they don't want to believe it. The same is true for divining. If you have convinced yourself that you do not want to believe it, then it doesn't matter what we say; you'll never be convinced. Thus, we respectfully declined their challenge, told them to go bother someone else, and blocked them forever from our e-mail system.

Seems to me that they're saying they concluded that no matter what they did, the JREF would move the goalposts.

And note that this was not some mystical dowser claiming messages from the great beyond, but forensic scientists from a recognized law-enforcement organization.

 

[wardenclyffe]

The JREF rarely chases claimants around. It was more likely some other "kooks" who brought up the JREF challenge to them. They did not say they entered protocol negotiations which broke down because the JREF was unreasonable. They did not say they had any communications with the JREF at all. They did not say that anyone was changing the rules or moving the goalposts. They did say that they believed that they could not convince some people.

They would not even have to win the JREF's million. With their talents, they should all be jillionaires by now. I'm sure they are.

Ward

 

[Mojo]

Seems to me that they're saying they concluded that no matter what they did, the JREF would move the goalposts.

Which is precisely what the challenge rules, in particular the prior agreement of a test protocol, are designed to prevent. It isn't the JREF that wants to be able to move the goalposts.

 

[TSR]

Your opponents believe what they believe, not what you find it convenient for them to believe.

.
I hve no opponents as regards the MDC, and which part of "would be thrilled" did you not understand.
.

 

[TSR]

If that's the case, why doesn't some holocaust scholar take the NAFCASH Challenge, win it, and then if they don't pay off, then sue the pants off them?

.
Apples and oranges. Gerdes has not established that the 'prize' even exists, and zie is the sole judge of whether the details of the 'proof' (which zie alone established, and which are not open for negotiation) are met.

As opposed to the MDC, where the money is easily verifiable, and where there is no judge: the "proof is negotiated to be obvious and objective, or there is no challenge.
.

Why doesn't some biologist take the "show me an intermediate form" creationist challenge, win it, and then if they don't pay off, then sue the pants off them?

.
Where is this challenge offered? How is the money kept safe? Who judges the challenge?
.

Such a legal challenge would be extremely excruciating, and worse yet, in vain.

.
In the two cases you posit above, probably.

For the MDC, not so much.
.

It's a gambling bet, and not legally collectable.

.
In the two cases you posit above, probably.

For the MDC, not so much.
.

Look at the fate of Alfred Russell Wallace when he took the flat-earther challenge to show that the world was round.

.
Which was not a challenge with safe guards such as a signed contract à la the MDC, but a flat out wager.

Apples and oranges again.
.

 

[Major Major]

.
I hve no opponents as regards the MDC, and which part of "would be thrilled" did you not understand.
.

I understand your opinion on the matter. But it's not entirely relevant to the argument in question. Let's begin: what part of, "Your opponents believe what they believe, not what it's convenient for you to believe they believe," is incomprehensible?

 

[Major Major]

Which was not a challenge with safe guards such as a signed contract à la the MDC, but a flat out wager.

Apples and oranges again.

Your opponents believe what they believe, not what you find it convenient to believe what they believe.

In this case, they believe that any such lawsuit will run into "Applicant gives up all right to sue the JREF."

 

[dropzone]

I forget. Did Dr Vass officially apply?