• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Who runs the tests?

Being rude doesn't make him wrong.

Nor does it make him incapable of conducting a fair test - particularly since the challenge is set up so that in many cases the actual testing is out of his hands.

If I had to deal with the amount of rubbish Randi gets in his inbox, I'd be harsh and abrupt as well.

And let's be clear - it's A MILLION DOLLARS on offer here. And you seriously don't blame applicants for giving up because Randi's mannerisms tend towards the brusque? Seems foolish to me, IF they can do as they claim. Personally I'd take all kinds of abuse if it was going to get me a million...
 
If they receive a rude response to their application, they are unlikely to trust Randi to conduct the test fairly. If somebody doesn't trust Randi to conduct the test fairly, then they won't submit to it, no matter how much the prize.
 
Then that's their problem.

If someone really believes that the fact that Randi does not suffer fools gladly makes him untrustworthy, despite the fact that he has laid out, very specifically, in a legal agreement, the EXACT provisions which ensure that anyone can trust the JREF to administer the Challenge is fairly... well, too bad for them.
 
Peter Morris said:
If they receive a rude response to their application, they are unlikely to trust Randi to conduct the test fairly. If somebody doesn't trust Randi to conduct the test fairly, then they won't submit to it, no matter how much the prize.
Click to expand...

Ever talk to somebody whose gone through the Phd process? You wanna talk about rude? Randi is gentle by comparison. Keep in mind that those people are not dealing with bs claims either.

"Randi was rude" is an excuse. Since he need not be present for the test all they need to do is establish a protocol. Randi isn't there to hold their tender little hands.
 
TheBoyPaj said:
Then the agreement should state:

All formal experiments will be conducted by independent researchers with the approval of both parties or, in certain circumstances, by a member of the JREF, again with both parties' approval.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, why do you insist that the people performing the test meet with the approval of both parties?

Its Randi's (or, more exactly, the JREF's) million dollars, they are the ones risking money, so they should decide on who runs the test. Also, allowing the person being tested to have a hand in choosing who runs the test might lead to a deadlock, since an applicant could easily restrict his choice to someone who is 'biased', and if the JREF refuses, he can then claim "Oh they don't want a fair test".
 
Because at the moment it leaves a nice get-out clause for famous mediums like S B.

All she has to say is "I'm not going to sign it because I don't know who will end up running the test. It might be someone who is obviously biased against me, meaning I would have to pull out of the test. Then Randi will crow about how I reneged on the agreement and it will ruin my reputation."
 
TheBoyPaj said:
Because at the moment it leaves a nice get-out clause for famous mediums like S B.

All she has to say is "I'm not going to sign it because I don't know who will end up running the test. It might be someone who is obviously biased against me, meaning I would have to pull out of the test. Then Randi will crow about how I reneged on the agreement and it will ruin my reputation."
Click to expand...

But they still have that 'get out' clause; its just that instead of Sylvia saying "I won't bother applying", she could apply, then say "I only want John Edward (or some other fraud) to do the testing". The JREF says no, then she can make an even worse claim... "The JREF backed out because they were afraid of my awesome power".
 
TheBoyPaj said:
All she has to say is "I'm not going to sign it because I don't know who will end up running the test. It might be someone who is obviously biased against me, meaning I would have to pull out of the test. Then Randi will crow about how I reneged on the agreement and it will ruin my reputation."
Click to expand...

OK, does she want the money or doesn't she?

If I thought I could do anything that would get me that money (and I don't by the way), I'd be busting a gut trying to get a protocol agreed. Not crawling round trying to find ways to back out of the challenge.

That's the neat bit. It's a real quick way to sift those who genuinely believe they have the power they describe from those who, consciously or subconsciously, know they're frauds. The frauds instantly identify themselves by going into defence mode.

This even works with very rich frauds to whom a million bucks is small change, or for some reason think the money is "tainted". Never mind the money. Don't take it. Give it to charity. Just refuse it. Concentrate on the publicity coup of winning, the newspaper articles, the validation of all your disputed claims. Me, personally, I'll never criticise you again. Just go pass the test, why don't you?

But all they ever do is whine about how the test is rigged.

Rolfe.
 
Paj, if I may be blunt, I don't think JREF gives a damn if some people excuse themselves from the test for various reasons involving the personality or negative vibe of James Randi.

~~ Paul
 
Could I ask what you think the point of the challenge is?

Randi's not just offering his money for nothing. What does he get out of the test's existence?
 
Shouldn't you be down cheering David Blaine on?

The point of the test is to get someone... anyone who claim they have superpowers to demonstrate them in a controled environment. This has been explained several times. Why is it so hard to understand?
 
So, what meaning do you draw from the fact that no one has taken the test? Do you see that as a victory for the skeptic's cause?

(PS. London is dirty and crowded enough without the rest of the nation travelling down to watch a man do nothing in a box)
 
TheBoyPaj said:
So, what meaning do you draw from the fact that no one has taken the test? Do you see that as a victory for the skeptic's cause?

(PS. London is dirty and crowded enough without the rest of the nation travelling down to watch a man do nothing in a box)
Click to expand...

I see the fact that people aren't able to demonstrate their claimed superpowers under controlled conditions to mean that these people don't have superpowers. I just wish more people who supposedly have real superpowers would put them up to testing under controlled conditions so we can find out if they really do have superpowers or if they're delusional or frauds as well.
 
And that's the point. People who think they have supernatural powers are not putting themselves up for the challenge with the excuse that they don't think it would be a fair test.

Now, we assume that it's because they know they are frauds, but then we're hardline sceptics aren't we? We don't need convincing. But I don't think the point of the challenge is just to give us something to laugh about. It's there to act as an example for those people who need convincing. It forms part of an argument which goes "all they have to do is pass this test and they win a million dollars. Isn't it odd that {insert named psychic here} refuses to take the test?".

But since the agreement does not state that the test will be fair (the word does not appear anywhere in the document) many fence-sitters who might otherwise be convinced will not find it at all odd that a psychic with a reputation to protect might not want to apply. Why should they risk being cheated?
 
I've been wondering about this myself. If Randi/JREF is not supposed to be involved in the actual tests, then why was Randi there to beef up Natalia's blindfold? And did he not say he was present during Edge's preliminary test? There seems to be a contradiction here. I did attempt to ask him about this but received one of his famous "go away"'s.

I suspect the rules apply to the actual tests as opposed to the prelim test, but Randi denied this saying the rules apply to "all" tests. So I repeat, why was Randi involved during these two tests?

Reb
 
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos said:
I think Randi was requested by Natalia's handlers.
Click to expand...
I don't remember seeing this. Do you have a cite?

I didn't even know he tested Edge.
Click to expand...
Here is the description of the test.
http://www.randi.org/jr/032902.html
Now that I reread it, it's not clear that Randi himself was actually present during the attempts, but he does say that he spoke to at some point.

Reb
 
Here is the description of the test.
http://www.randi.org/jr/032902.html
Now that I reread it, it's not clear that Randi himself was actually present during the attempts, but he does say that he spoke to at some point.
Click to expand...
The link you provide is to dowser Mike G.'s test.

It contains the following :
Following the "open" sequence, for each of the "blind" tests, Mr. G. and I stepped out of the library area, and two other persons randomly (by choosing a face-down card, as before) placed the target package in position, then they left the area and informed us that the target was in place. Mike and I re-entered, alone, and he made his determination while I watched carefully...
Click to expand...
The 'I' in question appears to be Randi, since Randi is writing the article.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom