Yellow Bamboo: The notarized agreement

[CFLarsen]

I have received an image of the purported notarized agreement from Yellow Bamboo.

I have cut away the surroundings - the letter was placed on a bed with a quilt.

There are several clues as to why I think this is a hoax.

I have never - ever - seen anybody sign his last name with caps only. I am also very suspicious of the very immature way the signature is made.

I find the fact that Randi's signature is found at the start of a page odd.

I also question why we should see the "WAIVER OF LIABILITY" clause, but that might be a minor point.

The most damaging fact is that, despite the call for verifiable evidence, it is impossible to read the name of the notary, or any of the text. Therefore, we don't know how the initial try-out (it wasn't a formal test) was supposed to happen.

I cannot imagine the Yellow Bamboo people not looking at the image, before they sent it to me by email.

A curious fact: The mail was sent with IMP Webmail Client, which is not something you would use if you were a technological newbie (YB has indicated a low knowledge of technology).

This, combined with the points of disagreement made by Randi, as well as the useless video, and the extremely quick way they claimed that they had passed the test (and won the million), makes me strongly suspect this is a hoax. Anyone who were sure they had won a million dollars fairly, would take the time and effort to present their case much better.

This stinks to high heaven.

 

[Brown]

I reserve judgment on the question of whether this is a hoax, but I note that there are a couple of other odd things.

First, one of the pages is partially obscured: the top is obscured by the envelope and the bottom is obscured by a second page placed over the first.

Second, the second page has a grey band across the top, suggesting that it may be a black-and-white photocopy. (A4 paper is longer than 8.5-by-11 inch paper used in the states.) And yet, at least one signature is in color.

 

[Brown]

I add that it is possible to read some of the text under the "WAIVER OF LIABILITY" section. I believe I can read at least 90 percent of it. What is not clear to me, however, is what bearing this has on Yellow Bamboo's claims.

 

[NoZed Avenger]

Is it me, or do the fonts not match on the different pages?

N/A

Edited to add: It's not me.

 

[ceo_esq]

I can hardly make any of this out from the picture, but the Florida notarial stamp seems consistent with real Florida notarial stamps. An embossing stamp does not appear to have been used along with the rubber stamp, which is also consistent with Florida notarial practice. Finally, I note that the venue notation "State of Florida, County of Broward" - all on a single line rather than two as you commonly see in many states - is also consistent with Florida practice.

If we could make out the notary's name just a little bit better, or get the commission number, we could cross-check the online Florida notarial registry. I considered looking through the registry for names that seem close to the signature, but given that there are hundreds of registered notaries in the JREF's zip code alone, I quickly discarded that idea.

I have some familiarity with notarization/apostille practices in U.S. consulates, and have examined several documents notarized by U.S. consular officers abroad. Usually, in my experience, an embossing stamp is used as well as a rubber stamp (which seems not to be the case with the Yellow Bamboo letter), but I suspect that the practice varies from consulate to consulate.

The consular officer named in this letter (Andrew F. Toth) is in fact the U.S. consular agent in Bali, for what that's worth.

 

[CFLarsen]

Brown,

You can read that? What does it say?

 

[ceo_esq]

Brown,

You can read that? What does it say?

I read it as follows:

WAIVER OF LIABILITY

Mr. Joko Tri agrees that the management of Bambu Kuning (Yellow Bamboo) Society, through Alvin G. Donovan III, will not be responsible for any damages to his person resulting directly from any special ability exhibited by Mr. N_________ S ________ exerting his claimed powers at a distance, as described in the attachment headed, "Yellow Bamboo demonstration". This excludes any chemical, physical, or other influences or forces, projectiles, weapons, or other such intervention that might be applied against Mr. Joko Tri. Mr. Joko Tri will not be touched in any way, nor interfered with in the process of attacking Mr. S________, and is not required to actually contact Mr. S_______ except by attempting to gently tap him with a piece of bamboo, since the claim is that he - Mr. Joko Tri - will be knocked down solely by Mr. S______'s use of "the energy of Yellow Bamboo," which does not involve any physical contact. If Mr. Joko Tri cannot tap Mr. S______ with the bamboo due to Mr. S______'s movements to avoid that action, and Mr. Joko Tri is not knocked down solely by “the energy of Yellow Bamboo” within a 10-minute time interval, the test will be terminated.

EDITED TO ADD:

I gather from the other thread that the first proper name is Joko Tri, so I've inserted it throughout (I initially read it as "Jaka Tit", and decided to go with J___ T__ instead).

 

[Brown]

My reading of the "WAIVER OF LIABILITY" is basically consistent with that of ceo_esq.

I am unable to read virtually anything else, however. There is a typewritten paragraph that seems to end with the words "James Randi" and includes the word "Please" at a couple of sites. I am, however, unable to read the paragraph.

It would be odd indeed if this were to be the entire contents of the envelope. The "WAIVER OF LIABILITY" makes a clear mention of an "attachment," which is not shown. Also, there would ordinarily be a cover letter of some kind accompanying the materials, but I cannot say whether Mr. Randi's practice is to include a cover letter.

 

[ceo_esq]

I read the other paragraph as follows:

Please be advised that several [claimants?] have suffered great personal embarrassment after [taking? failing?] these tests. I strongly advise you to conduct proper double-blind tests of any ability you believe you can [demonstrate?], before attempting to undergo a __________ for the prize. This has [saved?] me and [many?] claimants much time and work, by showing that the powers were ________ imaginary on the part of the would-be claimant. [Please do this?], and __ not _______ to ignore the need for such a precaution.

- James Randi

 

[uneasy]

As I mentioned in another thread. I don't think JREF has done a good job communicating what has gone on in the YB matter.

Of the two parties involved, one is a group of people in yellow shirts who run around screaming and falling down, and the other is a man most of us admire for his rational thinking. And yet, JREF only gives us a few sentences per week to figure out what happened. In an effort to find out what transpired, we have to resort to analyzing fuzzy pictures provided by the screaming, falling down people. ??? It doesn't make sense to me.

 

[T'ai Chi]

There are several clues as to why I think this is a hoax.

It is possible, of course, that you are correct and it is a hoax, but I think you are jumping the gun here.

I have never - ever - seen anybody sign his last name with caps only. I am also very suspicious of the very immature way the signature is made.

I have seen the former, and in my opinion the latter is a pretty absurd thing to say.

Are you claiming that you can rate the maturity of a person based on their signature? You should apply for the 1 Million Claus, really. Sheesh.

I find the fact that Randi's signature is found at the start of a page odd.

The document was longer than one page and printed from a web-browser. Stuff like that happens all the time.

The most damaging fact is that, despite the call for verifiable evidence, it is impossible to read the name of the notary, or any of the text. Therefore, we don't know how the initial try-out (it wasn't a formal test) was supposed to happen.

I agree. Hey, why don't you ask Randi for a copy?

A curious fact: The mail was sent with IMP Webmail Client, which is not something you would use if you were a technological newbie

Why would you think that??

 

[arcticpenguin]

On the page with Randi's alleged signature, I can find no mention of Joko Tri. Randi has already stated that he had negotiations with Yellow Bamboo, which might explain why there is a form with Randi's signature on it. He said Joko Tri's trip was not in official representation of JREF.

The only mention of Joko Tri is in the liability waiver, which is on a separate page, and we haven't even been shown any signatures on that page.

I also see some odd effects around Randi's signature, but I can't tell if it's just JPEG artifacts.

 

[CFLarsen]

Re: Re: Yellow Bamboo: The notarized agreement

It is possible, of course, that you are correct and it is a hoax, but I think you are jumping the gun here.

If you read what I actually wrote, instead of inventing things, you would have seen that I specifically say "I think". I say "I question". "I suspect".

I have not decided if this is, indeed, a hoax. Stop attributing opinions to me that I don't have.

I have seen the former, and in my opinion the latter is a pretty absurd thing to say.

Are you claiming that you can rate the maturity of a person based on their signature? You should apply for the 1 Million Claus, really. Sheesh.

Again, stop attributing opinions to me that I don't have. I specifically say "I am also very suspicious".

The document was longer than one page and printed from a web-browser. Stuff like that happens all the time.

How do you know it was printed from a web browser??

I agree. Hey, why don't you ask Randi for a copy?

Randi has stated that he will - in his own time - say what he has to say.

Why would you think that??

It just strikes me as odd. In my almost two decades of working as a computer professional, most of the time dealing with user interactivity and usability issues, I find that the vast majority of newbies stick to the beaten path. They are very unsure of trying things like that.

I would appreciate if you could address my questions. You are quickly developing a habit of avoiding them, and not just from me.

 

[Brown]

Re: Re: Re: Yellow Bamboo: The notarized agreement

I have not decided if this is, indeed, a hoax.

Claus's remarks seemed pretty clear to me. I too withheld judgment on the question of whether this is a hoax, but there were (and as of this writing, still are) some things about this that are rather fishy.

It is possible that the final paragraph of the document is the same as the final paragraph appearing on the challenge web page. In addition, some of the language seems to be consistent with public statements issued by Mr. Randi. Nevertheless, things are still not quite right. For one thing, it does not appear that this photo shows all of the documentation.

 

[Patricio Elicer]

IMO, it's quite clear that this is a hoax intended to mislead people into thinking that yellowbamboo has passed the Preliminary Test.

It was consciously set up to leave the impression that Randi effectively signed the "Waiver of Liability" which states the conditions for the preliminary test.

It's clear that the "Waiver of Liability" and Randi's signature are in different sheets, they are not part of the same document. One sheet is smaller than the other, and the fonts are different as well.

Let's not forget that Randi said in his last commentary that both parts had come to an agreement on the protocol for the test. So yellowbamboo may very well have taken Randi's signature and the envelope of the said protocol document out of context, to leave the wrong impression.

If this is the case, then yellowbamboo has already shown their dirty intentions.

But I may be wrong,... let's wait for what Randi has to say about it.

 

[ImpyTimpy]

How is the waiver a contract for the actual preliminary test? A waiver is just that - a waiver... I see no mention of preliminary testing in that waiver, I just see a document protecting everyone's butts.

 

[Zep]

It's VERY fishy to me, but then on another thread I believe I have determined that this Alvin Donovan III guy is not exactly the most honest and up-front person, and it is thus even possible that the actual Yellow Bamboo organisation may not be involved in any way, shape or form in this exercise.

For example, since when does Alvin Donovan III get to be a signatory for Yellow Bamboo, when he has told us previously that "he was just helping out a friend" by posting the claims on the web? Can't Mr Serengen, a Balinese government official (or possibly a schoolteacher) actually write and sign for himself?

The longer this goes on, the more I'm convinced that Alvin, with the possible help of an Australian and some Balinese associates, is simply trying to pull a fast one for a million bucks.

 

[Blue Monk]

Big deal.

I would expect that if Yellow Bamboo wanted to offer proof of a contract between themselves and Randi they should at least post a document (besides being legible and complete) where they and Randi are the principles.

This is a waiver of liability and is merely an agreement between Yellow Bambo and Mr. Joko Tri.

I do believe now the Mr. Joko Tri agreed not to sue them unless they shoot, gas or electrocute him despite the fact that portions of the the initial page have been deliberaty obscured and we only have their word that the signature page goes with the waiver.

OK, we have Mr. Joko Tri's waiver of liability. How about posting this so-called contract with Randi now.

 

[Pyrrho]

Compare the signature to Randi's signature on the Commentary page. Any doofus with an image-editing program could use that to trick up a signature on a scanned document.

If this gets any more amateurish, I swear someone's gonna hit the gong.

 

[T'ai Chi]

Re: Re: Re: Yellow Bamboo: The notarized agreement

Someone said:

There are several clues as to why I think this is a hoax.

and

, makes me strongly suspect this is a hoax.

My comments that person jumping the gun, was not that he, without a doubt, is claiming it is a hoax. My comments on jumping the gun was providing 'analysis' on why it might be a hoax, and for saying he strongly suspects it is, and that there are "several clues". I don't think there is much solid evidence to go by from this letter. Seems pretty wishy-washy of an analysis in terms of the lack of evidence.

Oops. That should have been: "word-processor", not "web-browser".

I am still wondering about this:

I am also very suspicious of the very immature way the signature is made.

Could anyone tell us how one can tell maturity or lack of, in an adult, from a signature? This can be easily tested, if in fact, that is a person's claim.