Re: Beware
Homeopath Syed said:
Therefore, the most easy way for us to meet the STUPID CHALLENGE is through Biological Assay of Human Being. We have done it earlier, we are doing it and we will do it again.
There is no need for concerns about the non-availibility of a subject for this cause. We always have a group willing to do it and learn about it. You can't get one... I ll get two.
------------------------------
The Test.
Catagory 1 : I will not be using minerals, animal poisons, or disease products for it. Only light plant poisons in dilutions of 1:1 trillionth of even more lean. My objective is not to induce a full fledged disease here. Just enough to get the desired responce form the immune.
Catagory 2 : I would rather choose Hayfever, Rhinitis and/or Coryza that is non-febrile in nature. because you wont need few days or hours to cure them...Just 20 mins ... and the Stupid Challenge would be Busted.
Syed, maybe you should get your attorney to read the rules of the challenge, since it looks as if you haven't really managed that yourself. You have to state what you can do, clearly and unambiguously, and propose a way you can demonstrate that to a high degree of statistical probability, again clearly and unambiguously. Simply giving a remedy to somebody and saying, look, everything has happened as I said it would happen, is not enough.
You have to show that when the real remedy is given, things happen as you anticipate, and that when what is given is not the real remedy, this does not happen. And the best person to be the judge of whether the person has reacted as anticipated or not is you. That way you have no complaint that the judge of what happened to the person was at fault. To do this, it has to be arranged so that you give something to the people, not knowing if it is the real remedy or not, and then by observing what happens, declare which it was.
The simplest way to meet the requirements of the challenge, as I said before, is to make your claim that you can distinguish between a homoeopathic preparation of your choice, and the stock solvent/sugar pills. You probably need to do it about 15 times to show that you're not just a lucky guesser.
To try to put it more simply than I did in my previous post, as I don't think you followed what I said, for each repetition of the test you declare which remedy you want. You are given either your chosen remedy, or the solvent/sugar pills, you don't know which. You administer that to your "patient", and you then say, by observing what happens, whether you think you were given the real thing or not.
You do this about 15 times. Then everybody looks to see if you were right. If you were, you win. How simple is that? If you're really serious about this, you might ask the JREF if the test can be spread over several days.
You can use all healthy people for "provings", or sick people you aim to make better, or a combination. You can use a different remedy every time, or the same one. You can re-use the same subject more than once if you think that's appropriate. The only thing you have to be able to do is, say whether what you gave to the person/people was the actual potentised remedy or not.
No doubt there will be much more to discuss, for example who prepares the remedies to be used in the test so that everybody knows they are what they're supposed to be, how they're labelled, and exactly how things are arranged so that nobody involved in the test knowws which is the real thing and which isn't, and yet the information is there to be revealed at the end.
These details can be tedious, but they are essential. The JREF isn't just going to hand over the money for you asking for it, or because you managed one or two lucky guesses. You have to be prepared to fulfil the rules to prove that you really and truly can do what you say, no doubt at all about it.
We have all seen many applicants back out because they seem to have no patience to work those things out. I can anticipate that this might happen to you, as you aren't showing much parience, or indeed foresight, here. Be warned, if you do that you will be deemed to have shown for all to see that you have no confidence in your methods, and indeed are nothing but a fraud. So, think carefully how you want to approach the JREF, and be prepared to spend time devising a good protocol to satisfy everyone.
Rolfe.
By the way, I've thought about this quite a lot, and I think I can say for sure that if I could do what the homoeopaths claim to be able to do, I'd have the money in my pocket by now. Working out a protocol should be perfectly straightforward, and I can't see why all these homoeopaths have such a problem with it.
Certainly, there is the matter of how long it takes to determine for sure if the patient has had the expected reaction or not, but as Syed has pointed out here there are remedies he expects to act very quickly, so one could concentrate on these. There is also the question of the number of repetitions required meaning that the test might have to be spread out in time, but I would be confident that could be addressed. It's so simple that I can only conclude that the money has not been seriously attempted by a homoeopath so far because they really know in their hearts that what they do is fraudulent.
I am not against skeptical discussion, my only request is, try to understand homeopathy after having understand basic fundamental rules of science. 
The same example is fit here.