Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The Myth of the JREF $$ Challenge
Topic Started: Mar 10 2008, 01:30 AM (513 Views)
mynameis
Member Avatar
Internet Jujitsu
The Myth of the Million Dollar Challenge
Posted February 22nd, 2008 by Greg


For ten years, the modern skeptical movement has wielded a cudgel against claims of the paranormal: the James Randi Million Dollar Challenge. In many debates over the possibility of psi abilities, the Challenge provides a final word for one side... [Randi's Million] "has so-and-so applied for the Challenge?" The financial reward offered by the James Randi Educational Foundation is seen by many skeptics as providing an irresistible motivation for anybody with paranormal ability - after all, if someone could genuinely exhibit such powers, surely they would step forward to take the million?

However, after ten years, the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) says nobody has even got past their preliminary testing. Furthermore, none of the 'big fish' - medium John Edward, spoon-bender Uri Geller, psychic Sylvia Browne - have applied (although Sylvia Browne did accept James Randi's direct challenge on Larry King Live, without going any further). And now, perhaps as a result of that fact, James Randi has announced that the Challenge will come to an end in two years, on March 6th, 2010.

But does the challenge really make a statement about the existence of the paranormal and/or psi abilities? According to paranormal investigator Loyd Auerbach (who, like Randi, is a member of the magic fraternity):

The suggestion that ending the Challenge after 10 years supports any statement that psi does not exist or someone would have won the challenge, is absurd on many levels.

The procedures for the Challenge included several hurdles in favor of, and multiple "outs" for Randi and the JREF that any discerning individual capable of any kind of extraordinary human performance would think twice about (and here I'm not just referring to psychics and the like).

What are these hurdles that Auerbach refers to?

Chances, of Anything...

First, and perhaps the most important, is the effect size required to win the challenge. While the JREF says that "all tests are designed with the participation and approval of the applicant", this does not mean that the tests are fair scientific tests. The JREF need to protect a very large amount of money from possible "long-range shots", and as such they ask for extremely significant results before paying out - much higher than are generally accepted in scientific research (and if you don’t agree to terms, your application is rejected). In the case of parapsychological research, however, where effect size is often small (though apparently robust), this means most researchers would have to go to extraordinary lengths to win the million dollars. As one psi researcher pointed out to me:

In the ganzfeld telepathy test the meta-analytic hit rate with unselected subjects is 32% where chance expectation is 25%. If that 32% hit rate is the "real" telepathy effect, then for us to have a 99% chance of getting a significant effect at p < 0.005, we would need to run 989 trials. One ganzfeld session lasts about 1.5 hours, or about 1,483 total hours. Previous experiments show that it is not advisable to run more than one session per day. So we have to potentially recruit 989 x 2 people to participate, an experimenter who will spend 4+ years running these people day in and day out, and at the end we'll end up with p < 0.005. Randi will say those results aren't good enough, because you could get such a result by chance 5 in 1,000 times. Thus, he will require odds against chance of at least a million to 1 to pay out $1 million, and then the amount of time and money it would take to get a significant result would be far in excess of $1 million.

Furthermore, applicants must first pass a 'preliminary test', before they are allowed to progress to the actual 'formal' test which pays the million dollars. So an applicant must first show positive results in a preliminary test (yielding results against chance of at least 1000 to 1, apparently), then once through to the next stage they would then have to show positive results against much higher odds to claim the prize (by all reports, at odds of around 1 million to 1). Failure in either test means no cash prize, and a fail beside their name. It many respects it would be like telling a professional golfer to shoot 63 around Augusta National, then come back and shoot 59, to prove that he can play golf. In the words of Chris Carter, author of Parapsychology and the Skeptics:

If Randi were genuinely interested in testing unusual claims, then he would also not insist upon odds of at least one million to one against chance for the results. Anyone familiar with scientific studies will be aware that experimental results against chance of say, 800,000 to one would be considered extraordinary; but results this high would be, according to Randi, a “failure.”

Dr Michael Sudduth of San Francisco State University also pointed out to me a wonderful irony in one of the rules. Challenge rule #3 states: "We have no interest in theories nor explanations of how the claimed powers might work." As Sudduth puts it: “Curiously, Randi's challenge itself is saddled with assumptions of this very kind. The challenge makes little sense unless we assume that psi is the sort of thing that, if genuine, can be produced on demand, or at least is likely to manifest itself in some perspicuous manner under the conditions specified by the challenge.”

Researchers Step Up to the Plate

As a consequence, you might well say "no wonder no serious researcher has applied for the Challenge." Interestingly, this is not the case. Dr Dick Bierman, who has a PhD in physics, informed me that he did in fact approach James Randi about the Million Dollar Challenge in late 1998. Bierman reported a success in replicating the presentiment experiments of Dr Dean Radin (where human reactions seem to occur marginally before an event occurs), and was subsequently asked by Stanley Klein of the University of California why, if his results for psi effects were positive and replicable, he didn't respond to Randi's challenge. Bierman replied that he would rather invest his time in good scientific research, rather than convincing skeptics in a one-off test. However, after further discussion, he decided that he may be able to combine the two:

After some exchange of ideas I was brought into contact with Randi. Randi sounded sincerely interested and I worked out a proposal for an interesting experiment that would last about a year. Experimental effects in this type of research are small and require a lot of measurements to reach the required statistical significance (I think Randi wanted a p-value of 0.000001).

Note that he didn't insist on showing the effect on stage. Rather I proposed to do a kind of precognition (actually presentiment) experiment on-line over Internet where he or some other independent skeptic could generate the targets once the responses were communicated over the Internet (all this would be done automatically on a computer under his control within a second). This would prevent cheating from the experimenter's side but we still had to work out how to prevent cheating from the Randi-side.

At that point Randi mentioned that before proceeding he had to submit this preliminary proposal to his scientific board or committee. And basically that was the end of it. I have no idea where the process was obstructed but I must confess that I was glad that I could devote myself purely to science rather than having to deal with the skeptics and the associated media hypes.

Bierman said I should also contact Suitbert Ertel, Professor Emeritus of Georg-August-University of Göttingent, who has developed a new type of parapsychology experiment which seems to facilitate large-scale psi effects - which would be much more suited to the Randi challenge. Ertel, I was told, had apparently also discussed the challenge with James Randi, after his results had been replicated by other skeptical researchers. Ertel replied to my query by explaining his involvement with not just Randi's challenge, but also a separate 'Prize Challenge' offered by a German skeptical group:

My first approach [to Randi] was made because I thought the prize might be achieved by the Gauquelin planetary effect, a statistical "paranormal" or "neo-astrological" effect, with which I was very familiar as researcher. The problem was that decisions regarding the sample which would amount to 1000 natal charts was dependent on much informed thought, and Randi didn't know how to deal with the conditions. So the correspondence came to an end.

The second approach was made because I had applied to win the prize of 10,000 EURO which the German GWUP promised to give to someone who would be able to demonstrate large psi effects. Winning this prize would have been considered by Randi as passing his preliminary test, his first test which must be passed before someone is allowed to apply for Randi's main $1 000 000 test.

The psi effect demanded, even for the GWUP test = Randi's preliminary test, was so large that I was not hopeful that I would be able to show so much of psi, with the help of my psi-gifted students which I selected by my "pingpong ball test". My only goal was to achieve a statistically significant effect so as to make the skeptics admit that they observed a significant psi effect. This goal was achieved by my first test trial (one psi-gifted participant) in 2005. In 2006 another test was conducted with the presence of GWUP people: two of my students, psi-gifted in earlier tests, participated. In this test the effect was not significant.

One of the apparent reasons for this failure was that the skeptics had changed the conditions of this test arbitrarily in many ways so that the participants felt uneasy under strong control - such feelings have psi-reducing effects.

Ertel's first test with the GWUP had a p value of .018. He mentioned however, that two additional students among a number of observers also participated, secretly, during the test. Their results were also significant, giving a total significance p-value of .002. Ertel told me that the GWUP skeptics, to their credit, did note the results of the two students who had participated secretly.

Ertel thinks that the Million Dollar Prize is winnable, though obviously the odds required are not 'fair' scientifically. However, as one of the rules is that applicants must pay all their own expenses, he estimates that he would need at least $US10,000 to make a ‘long shot’ bid for the formal challenge. He would also like to have a personal attorney present and another independent scientist as observer, and would need to select 3-4 psi-gifted participants near the JREF institution where the tests would be performed:

But winning the prize would not be my main concern. My main concern is to achieve high levels of significance under control by the skeptics. Psi effects would have to be acknowledged as existent by the science community if they were achieved, i.e. replicated (because they would have been observed before the Randi test was made) with, say, p = .0001 - it need not be .000001. Winning the Randi prize is no scientific standard for acknowledging the existence of causal effects. P = .0001 or so obtained under control of people who are experts in deception (so that this factor is ruled out) and whose intention and bias is to prove that psi does NOT exist (so bias is also ruled out) would let psi appear existent beyond reasonable doubt.

Would You Trust This Man?

Ertel's mention of the expenses required to engage in Randi's challenge, returns us to to the "hurdles" mentioned by Loyd Auerbach. Perusing the rules of the Million Dollar Challenge would certainly give most people cause for concern. Two of the most important, especially when combined, are rules #4 and #8:

4. Applicant agrees that all data (photographic, recorded, written, etc.) gathered as a result of the setup, the protocol, and the actual testing, may be used freely by the JREF.

8. When entering into this challenge, as far as this may be done by established legal statutes, the applicant surrenders any and all rights to legal action against Mr. Randi, and/or against any persons peripherally involved, and/or against the James Randi Educational Foundation. This applies to injury, and/or accident, and/or any other damage of a physical and/or emotional nature, and/or financial and/or professional loss, and/or damage of any kind. However, this rule in no way affects the awarding of the prize, once it is properly won in accord with the protocol.

In other words, applicants give the JREF/Randi virtually absolute license to use the data as best suits their publicity needs, without any legal recourse for the participant. Not exactly enticing for an applicant, although if James Randi was held in higher esteem by the parapsychology research community then it might not matter so much. However, a number of scientists iterated to me their distrust of Randi...and a number of them appear to have good reason for that judgement. When I asked Rupert Sheldrake about the Million Dollar Challenge – a scientist who has investigated ‘telephone telepathy’, the sense of being stared at, and possible psychic talents in animals, Sheldrake told me quite simply: "I don’t take the prize seriously, and above all I don’t trust Randi since I’ve found him to be dishonest...He is not a scientist, has no scientific credentials, and is essentially a showman and an expert in deception". Sheldrake pointed out a previous confrontation as evidence for his distrust of James Randi:

The January 2000 issue of Dog World magazine included an article on a possible sixth sense in dogs, which discussed some of my research. In this article Randi was quoted as saying that in relation to canine ESP, "We at the JREF [James Randi Educational Foundation] have tested these claims. They fail." No details were given of these tests.

I emailed James Randi to ask for details of this JREF research. He did not reply. He ignored a second request for information too.

I then asked members of the JREF Scientific Advisory Board to help me find out more about this claim. They did indeed help by advising Randi to reply. In an email sent on Februaury 6, 2000 he told me that the tests he referred to were not done at the JREF, but took place "years ago" and were "informal". They involved two dogs belonging to a friend of his that he observed over a two-week period. All records had been lost. He wrote: "I overstated my case for doubting the reality of dog ESP based on the small amount of data I obtained. It was rash and improper of me to do so."

Randi also claimed to have debunked one of my experiments with the dog Jaytee, a part of which was shown on television. Jaytee went to the window to wait for his owner when she set off to come home, but did not do so before she set off. In Dog World, Randi stated: "Viewing the entire tape, we see that the dog responded to every car that drove by, and to every person who walked by." This is simply not true, and Randi now admits that he has never seen the tape.

Dr Gary Schwartz has often come under attack from James Randi for his research into mediumship. Labelled "Gullible Gary" by Randi, and accused of believing in the tooth fairy, Dr Schwartz refused an invitation from Randi to allow an "independently qualified panel" to hold forth on the data he has collected. According to Dr Schwartz: "He calls it an 'independently qualified panel', but it is composed mostly of people hand-picked to guarantee the decision would likely be a foregone conclusion, merely rubber-stamping his prejudices". In this case, Randi suggested a panel comprising of Ray Hyman (CSICOP Fellow), Marvin Minsky (CSICOP Fellow), Michael Shermer (CSICOP Fellow) and Stanley Krippner (a parapsychologist whom Randi is familiar with). Not exactly “independent”, one would surmise. Unfortunately, according to Dr Schwartz:

James Randi has a history of engaging in the twisting of the truth...Randi's recommendation of Dr. Krippner was certainly acceptable to me. However, when I contacted Dr. Krippner directly to see if Mr. Randi’s statement about him serving on the panel was correct, Dr. Krippner was concerned. Dr. Krippner explained that he had previously emailed Mr. Randi stating that he would not agree to serve on such a committee. The truth is, Dr. Krippner was not willing to serve on the panel, and he made this clear to Mr. Randi.

Lastly, despite James Randi's assurances that applying for the prize is a simple matter, this seems not to be the case. A number of the more 'general' applicants have waited multiple years to have their claim tested; one of the more recent, Carina Landin, went through a 3 year process just to reach the preliminary test, and after failing her test (achieving above chance results, but not to a significant level) found that her protocol had not been adhered to...and so is now waiting to be retested. According to 'Kramer', a former JREF employee who helped with applications:

We experience this a lot, and this most certainly leads many applicants to the conclusion that JREF is "jerking them around", forgetting that no JREF representative is involved in testing, and that tests are determined with Randi's approval, but without his direct involvement, in order to insure absolute impartiality in the testing procedure. JREF cannot guarantee the continued involvement of any third parties who volunteer their time (without any form of compensation) on behalf of The JREF Challenge."

All in all, it's rather easy to see why 'psychic personalities' would ignore the Million Dollar Challenge, irrespective of anyone's opinion as to whether their talents are real or fraudulent. It asks them to risk their careers on a million to one shot (assuming they are not fraudulent), putting all the power into the hands of a man they distrust - and who has been antagonistic towards them over a number of years - with no legal recourse available to them.

On the other hand, although parapsychologists face similar worries, it is now apparent that some are so determined to show the evidence for psi effects that they are willing to risk a failure in order to make an impression. Both Dick Bierman and Suitbert Ertel feel that there is a robust enough effect for them to at least scientifically prove to the skeptics that something interesting is going on. And perhaps others are aware of this fact...

You Say Paranormal, I Say Perinormal

At The Amaz!ng Meeting #3 (TAM3), the JREF-sponsored conference held in January 2005, Richard Dawkins made an intriguing comment during an on-stage chat with James Randi:

About the million dollar prize, I would be worried if I were you because of the fact that we have perinormal possibilities. I mean, what if somebody - what if there really is a perinormal phenomenon which is then embraced within science and will become normal, but at present is classified conventionally as paranormal?

Certainly, suspicious (some might say 'skeptical') minds might wonder whether the influx of positive “perinormal” results - such as from the decades of Ganzfeld telepathy research, replicated presentiment experiments, and Ertel’s new ball-drawing test - may have influenced the JREF’s decision to withdraw the Challenge. It’s interesting to note that Rule #14 of the challenge states:

This prize will continue to be offered until it is awarded. Upon the death of James Randi, the administration of the prize will pass into other hands, and it is intended that it continue in force.

Similarly, in a previous discussion regarding the Challenge, Randi had stated: “...the million dollars is not my million dollars, sir, it belongs to the foundation I represent, and it cannot be used for any purpose other than as prize money in the challenge." It would seem this is no longer the case…

Whatever the reasoning behind the withdrawal of the Million Dollar Challenge, it has little impact on scientific acceptance of psi effects. Even if a challenger took on the risks and won the million dollars – despite Suitbert Ertel’s best intentions - it is doubtful that skeptics would be convinced. According to CSICOP Fellow Dr Ray Hyman:

Scientists don't settle issues with a single test, so even if someone does win a big cash prize in a demonstration, this isn't going to convince anyone. Proof in science happens through replication, not through single experiments.

Ultimately, Irrelevant

It would seem the modern skeptical movement has all bases covered. If you don’t apply, it shows you have no evidence of the paranormal. If you do apply and fail, ditto. If you put your career on the line and apply, beat initial odds of 1000 to 1, and then 1,000,000 to 1, to win the Challenge, then it still offers no proof of the paranormal.

Ironically, paranormal investigator Dr Stephen Braude agrees with Ray Hyman about the merits of the Challenge: “The very idea that there could be a conclusive demonstration to the scientific community of psychic functioning is fundamentally flawed, and the suggestion that a scientifically ignorant showman should decide the matter is simply hilarious.“

Skepticism is certainly demanded in examinations of paranormal claims (not to mention, in all facets of life). However, the JREF Challenge seems to be primarily aimed at providing the modern skeptical movement with a purely rhetorical tool for attacking the topic of the paranormal. In a recent newsletter, James Randi says as much: “The purpose of the challenge has always been to provide an arguing basis for skeptics to point that the claimants just won’t accept the confrontation.” It appears though that some parapsychology researchers are actually more willing than Randi thought...

It seems quite obvious that the Million Dollar challenge does not offer - and has not offered in the past - a fair scientific evaluation of paranormal claims - rather, the statistics employed are primarily based on ensuring the million dollars remains safe. Other rules further stack the deck against participants, by handing control of publicity to the JREF. Suitbert Ertel commented to me:

Randi and those who offer a large monetary prize for psi effect demonstrations are entitled to demand unachievable psi effects. It's their money and they must be careful not to lose it. Everybody must admit that this is reasonable economically. But careful reasoning about money and property is quite a different thing than careful scientific reasoning.

Dr Dean Radin was more blunt in his assessment:

This 'challenge' was like Evel Knievel's steam-powered motorcycle jump over the Snake River Canyon: A great stunt, accompanied by pomp and bluster, but ultimately irrelevant.

-------------------

Update: James Randi has responded to this post in his JREF newsletter dated 29/02/2008: "The Grubbies Attack". While I don't consider this article an "attack" (nor consider myself "grubby"), I do thank Randi for responding. To be clear: I contacted the JREF three times while writing this article, and extended the deadline by a week, to allow for responses and clarifications from Randi (or JREF officials). I would have preferred that, rather than a rhetorical and selective newsletter 'debunking', but Randi is entitled to do what he likes.

Although I would like to leave the article to stand alone, rather than debating points, Randi makes some unfortunate errors in his newsletter, which I feel bound to point out here. Most importantly, in multiple passages, Randi refers to the words of "Loyd Auerbach" - these are not Auerbach's words, they are mine (apart from one short quote from Auerbach). This is unfortunate, as Randi directly addresses Loyd Auerbach in a rhetorical fashion on multiple occasions, when Auerbach did not say the words Randi attributes to him.

Other than that: I am not "chortling" over the end of the challenge, nor is this a "19,000 word tirade" (it doesn't even measure 4000 words, and it is simply an examination of the challenge). Surely Randi is not so sensitive about people offering skeptical analyses (this is his raison d'être, after all) of his own work, as to label them "tirades" (three times no less), when it most obviously isn't?

Randi defines "applied" for the challenge as it suits him. Sylvia Browne "applied", according to Randi, by responding on national TV after being "forced into it" (labeling my statement "wrong" as a consequence). Later, Professor Dick Bierman did not "apply", despite approaching Randi without being forced into it, because "his name appears in none of the application files". For the record, when I queried Randi about his in a private email, he confessed that "Browne never applied."

The passage about "none of the “big fish”" having applied is not a "canard", as Randi labels it - it is in fact a point in favour of the Challenge. For Randi's own edification, I am in agreement with him regarding Sylvia Browne.

In the only correct attribution to Loyd Auerbach, Randi says "we have never said nor even suggested [that the challenge disproves psi]. Loyd invented that, all by himself." Loyd did not claim that Randi made that statement. However, numerous self-described skeptics *have* suggested it. Auerbach had no need to "invent" it (a wonderfully descriptive phrase by Randi though, credit where due for his rhetorical skills).

Randi says "the applicant invests nothing, has nothing to lose, and should be able to beat the odds in the same way that any person could ." This is patently untrue, as the article shows.

Randi: "Again, nonsense. We have NEVER had an applicant fail to come to agreement with us when terms were negotiated, and every one of those applicants simply failed and did not re-apply." I stand corrected.

Randi: "What Auerbach purposely fails to understand – in order to have an argument – is that a pole-vaulter should be able to pole-vault, a cook should be able to cook, and a psychic should be able to do what he/she claims, to better than 1/100 odds."

Nonsense, Randi has no such knowledge that a psychic should do better than his arbitrary 1/100 odds - it is his personal opinion. Would it be snarky of me to point out that in earlier paragraphs Randi claimed to have an "abysmal ignorance of statistics"?

Randi says: "And, I have to wonder why Dr. Bierman did not press me to pursue the matter, since he reports that it seems to have simply vanished. We’ve had many of such disappearances, in which apparently interested persons, scientists among them such as Dr. Wayne E. Carr – also a PhD, so we know he’s a real scientist – who negotiated with us literally for years before backing out. "

Randi turns this around rather deftly with some rhetorical sleight-of-hand. According to Dr Bierman, the ball was in Randi's court when the application "disappeared"; Bierman did not "back out". Randi need not have "wondered" why Bierman did not follow up - Bierman says himself in the article. Further, Randi says his correspondence with Bierman terminated in 1983...I'm not sure of this date, as Bierman's email correspondence about presentiment was in 1998.

[The mention of Victor Zammit's own attack mid-response is nothing to do with my article.]

However, I am glad to see that my article has prompted Randi to lower the odds (to 1 in 100 for the preliminary, and 1 in 100,000 for the main challenge). This may make the Challenge a more attractive proposition for parapsychology researchers. It certainly remedies (to a degree) one of the main problems with the challenge - that the odds are so long. One in one hundred thousand is still no easy task however.

http://dailygrail.com/features/the-myth-of-james-randis-million-dollar-challenge
http://dailygrail.com/node/6008
Edited by mynameis, Mar 10 2008, 01:30 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bongo Thud
Member Avatar
Libertarian Atheist
James Randi has done quite a bit to expose frauds such as peter popoff and uri geller, and a lot of less-than-notable people. Quite a few fraudulent psychics and people who allege to have supernatural powers have been shamed, even on national TV, by his million dollar challenge. I find that admirable, and his challenge is based on scientific principles that are agreed upon by the applicants.

I understand why the JREF forum members who obsess about 9/11's official story are disliked here, because i dislike most of them as much as you do. But it's no reason to pretend some biased article attacking his work is somehow relevant to 9/11. He's an extremely intelligent person who has done a lot of good.
Edited by Bongo Thud, Mar 10 2008, 03:23 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Citizen Pawn
Member Avatar

Bongo Thud
Mar 10 2008, 03:22 AM
James Randi has done quite a bit to expose frauds such as peter popoff and uri geller, and a lot of less-than-notable people. Quite a few fraudulent psychics and people who allege to have supernatural powers have been shamed, even on national TV, by his million dollar challenge. I find that admirable, and his challenge is based on scientific principles that are agreed upon by the applicants.

I understand why the JREF forum members who obsess about 9/11's official story are disliked here, because i dislike most of them as much as you do. But it's no reason to pretend some biased article attacking his work is somehow relevant to 9/11. He's an extremely intelligent person who has done a lot of good.
JREF is filled with many informed people who are true "critical thinkers" and rationalists. When I say this, I'm excluding the "conspiracy theory" sub-forum. That part seems to attract people that, well, are personally and intellectually fallacious. Some more than others.

I do enjoy the work of exposing psychic frauds and the debate on creation vs. evolution, no harm there, and beneficial to many. Overall though, many JREF skeptics seemed to be misinformed on MANY subjects, even outside the scope of 9/11. Many posts there deal with material that has long been either discovered or discussed.

I've heard lectures also by young "skeptics" that visit colleges and give their "hey guys, everything is very simple here" on issues of immense complexity and scale, and where MASSIVE amounts of data are omitted.

I believe that being too "broad minded" can hurt in the end, but myopic views tend to hurt just as much. Couple that with childish attitudes and cult behavior? Not my kind of people, but hey....to each his own.
Edited by Citizen Pawn, Mar 10 2008, 04:26 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Q
Member Avatar
A Higher Evolution
It has been demonstrated by researcher Joseph Cater, that Randi himself is probably psychic. Cater has noticed that people who achieve statistically higher results in laboratory tests, find themselves achieving statistically LOWER results in the presence of RANDI. It is Cater's polite suggestion is that Randi may be completely unaware of his "ability", but that his belief in skepticism is so strong that it overwhelms a potential applicant, and his less polite suggestion is that Randi is fully aware of his "suppressive" ability, and is therefore a "fraudulent skeptic"!

PS: Right or wrong, Cater is as far up himself as is Randi.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
22205
Member Avatar
Arlingtonian
Bongo Thud
Mar 10 2008, 03:22 AM
I understand why the JREF forum members who obsess about 9/11's official story are disliked here, because i dislike most of them as much as you do. But it's no reason to pretend some biased article attacking his work is somehow relevant to 9/11.
im curious, who did that? this is posted in the lounge and the OP (nor the posters) ever made any Randi/9-11 related allusions and/or assertions. its a little weird how your mind made that connection even though such a notion was never stated (NOR inferred) in this thread. you seperate yourself from "them", yet you are inserting an adversarial divide between said groups with yourself clearly on "their" side instead of a neutral position. a neutral mind wouldnt have inserted and then defended a perceived (but non-existant) allusion. i ask that you please re-examine your understanding of your position to be more aware of your bias (or of the OP) so that you dont mistakenly turn this into a thread about JREFERS and 9/11. from what i gathered this thread was about Randi and his non-911-related "challenge".


Quote:
 
He's an extremely intelligent person who has done a lot of good.

i agree with you that when it comes to exposing "psychics" who happen to be frauds, randi seems to have done a good job. i admit i only have a superficial understanding of randi's opponents (so im no expert on the man), but reading the above text would seem to indicate that Randi has made more than a few enemies, when it comes to non 911 related areas of skepticism or debunking. so the above served as some insight in to the world of Randi, EVEN THO the above also had a transparent bias, as well as some shortcomings (evidence-wise) in stating a more compelling case in some instances.

none the less, certain (negative/critical) characterizations of randi's methods above do in fact seem familiar from a 911 debate perspective. i doubt that the 911-focused "debunkers" spend much time worried about the para-peri normal, nor that they study randi's methods much. yet strangely, there is some common denominator there between their ways of "attacking" the truth and the above methods Randi stands accused of. BUT that topic is better suited for the "skeptic's tactics" thread...

what would fit here however, with specific regard to your "mis-reading" of this thread, is that Randi is strangely silent from any 911 debunking. although his site has somehow become home to the 9/11 skeptics, Randi himself has yet to show up in the forums with anything to add. wether it be support or actual theories or debunkments, James Randi seems to me to be keeping a calculated distance from those who have in our ("truther") eyes, tainted his name. JREF is synonymous around here with obfuscation and circular logic. i guess we couldnt (as "truthers") expect Randi to disallow or outright denounce the 911-debunking-faction of the JREF society, but i see his distance as an indication that he himself (because he knows bullshit and lies when he sees it) doesnt want to commit to any OFFICIAL and/or DETAILED position on the specifics, for it may one day come back to bite him in the ass.

now how does that relate to your "mis-reading" of this thread? it relates because Randi is NOT calling out the 9/11 truth movement. LIKEWISE, no one around here is calling out Randi from any 9/11 related direction.

Randi seems to focus on "psychics" and snake-oil salesmen (like the water-detetcting psychics in australia), and to challenge anyone to prove the existence of "psi". so the focus of the article came from someone who has a bone to pick with Randi regarding the paranormal, not the JREF as known around here. likewise the poster (mynameis) never said word about 9/11 or JREFers. so its Randi the man, not the JREF conspiracy forum members, that the thread is about.

inspite or despite the skeptics who have come to be known by his foundation's name, he himself has not come out with any manifesto or official "randi position" on 911. his tactics notwithstanding, until he does directly address 9/11 details, i doubt anyone here is going to want or be able to make him (james randi) directly relevant to 9/11 debate.


***

as far as existence of actual people with para-peri/normal powers, my personal belief is that if anyone does possess it (and i believe they do - just in varying degrees), but that such people will keep it to themselves. especially those who could in fact produce "on-demand" results with repeated accuracy. they stay hidden, wether cuz of fear of being labled as freaks and outcasts or cuz of fear of exploitation by those seeking to harvest and manipulate their powers. it seems plausible, even logical to me, that people truly possessing such powers would calculate the negative consequences of outing themselves and therefore only display such powers when absolutely necessary, and always in secret or self-suppression.

so even if Randi's million dollars doesnt ever go to anybody, that still isnt proof that people with "extraordinary" powers dont exist (just as much as it doesnt prove that they DO exist). Randi's challenge has little actual bearing on that which it infers it is qualified to ascertain. Randi himself knows the bigger equation, he knows the factors that would keep real "psychics" away (and i dont mean those claims of the article's author in the OP). Randi knows the counter-arguments to his own, he's that smart. he knows that there is the chance such powers are real, and actual people may possess them. he cant rule out that possibility and knows that just because they dont show up to take his test and arent signing up to be validated by way of his trademark, doesNt mean they dont exist (it just means they didnt come to take his test and that 1 million dollars isnt something that motivates them).

but that trademark and that slogan, of the "randi million dollar challenge", is why (imo) he has set up the "challenge" in the first place.

its isNt about finding actual people with powers, what it actually does is that it serves to strengthen Randi's public persona and lends credibility to his validity as a "skeptic". its a publicized stunt where he is "putting his money where his mouth is", except that the money is all for show (apparently). cuz when u read the fine print, the criteria set are meant to make success near impossible. so the "million dollar challenge" is more of a marketing ploy than anything else.

im not sayin he is living off the million, no. he is exploiting the myth and enigma as any showman does to keep himself marketable. when you are a debunker by trade (or is he a magician/illusionist?) then you have to earn your living as a debunker, right? but is that easy? you look at the jref site and there are like over 50,000 debunkers, but only one Randi. its Randi alone that has figured out how to turn debunking into not just a profession, but a franchise, and he has done well at it. but to maintain his market-value, he has to keep his name current and his product fresh. so you have the open-running "million dollar challenge".

just my 2cents...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
alexvegas
Member Avatar
alex25smash
What's the point in attacking that side of JREF? That's the honourable part of the organisation. It has nothing to do with the people on Randi's forum who like to try and debunk conspiracy theories.
Edited by alexvegas, Mar 10 2008, 09:23 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
alexvegas
Member Avatar
alex25smash
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Mar 10 2008, 05:09 AM
people who achieve statistically higher results in laboratory tests, find themselves achieving statistically LOWER results in the presence of RANDI. It is Cater's polite suggestion is that Randi may be completely unaware of his "ability", but that his belief in skepticism is so strong that it overwhelms a potential applicant
That's the most ridiculous assertion I have read in a long time.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mynameis
Member Avatar
Internet Jujitsu
My experiment is simple. I can predict a possible outcome. I can write it in a sealed envelope. And it won't come true until 03/06/12. Does that make me psychic? Randi and his bullshit quest isn't for trying to find phenomena. It's just to create divisive fighting tactics, not unlike most political parties in the United States. Randi and his spam squads, err goon squads, err you know what I mean....only work as a disservice. As the time and efforts it would take to produce said result in the challenge is undesirable for all parties.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Reddawn

Here is an interesting letter from Randi's "Swift" newsletter from just last Friday. He puts the newsletter out every week and the archives makes for some fascinating reading.

A HAPPY CONVERT
Mr. Sam Opuku, an applicant for the JREF prize, had the chance to ponder further on the matter, on the JREF and its employees, and on his real reasons for believing he had supernatural powers that could capture the prize. After his epiphany, he agreed to prepare the following document for use here on SWIFT:



In Pursuit of the James Randi Educational Foundation Million Dollar Challenge

Many who profess psychic or other powers say they've felt that they were “special” since childhood. I also thought I had a “sense” of how those sorts of things worked. I would find out that my childhood imaginations had carried themselves into adulthood and that I started to value the illusions as part of how I saw reality and myself. Once I realized this, I was able to start letting them go and see things more as they are. These revelations came through my pursuit of the JREF Challenge, an experience for which I am incredibly grateful. I learned about myself, how I was seeing things, and got started on a “rehab” for my incorrect perceptions.

Although I’d looked into many different “metaphysical” things before I started after the JREF Challenge, I'd never done it with any focus, I never had a purpose for it. This allowed me to look at things in ways that confirmed my beliefs and to ignore those things that were in opposition. If something didn't work as advertised, it was a minor footnote or user error; if it did, it was a big discovery. Of course any explanation of a successful result outside the metaphysical was unheard of. I had a blind spot that meant reason and metaphysics would never meet in my head, even worse I didn't know I had one. However, a showdown between reason and metaphysics would happen with the JREF Challenge.

I don't remember exactly how I became aware of the challenge, only that once I did I thought it'd be easy. I allowed myself excuses for the challenge going unanswered for so long. I thought with all the psychics and mystics out there who made books, videos, or audio courses, and had financial success, something had to work. I saw things work, so why had no one ever succeeded? I created all sorts of theories as to why the Challenge persisted:

• JREF was unreasonable about the test to make sure it failed

• JREF was being deceitful in some way or rude to discourage valid claimants and only allowed sure failures to apply

• “Other people” didn't know what they were doing (of course I would...)

…and so the list goes on. I thought of more excuses than I can list in anything less than an encyclopedia-sized volume of text.

No matter what the reasons were, I committed myself to overcome all roadblocks and either succeed or prove JREF fraudulent. This attitude persisted until I met that insurmountable roadblock to the challenge called REALITY.

Once I'd decided to pursue the prize I set about investigation and research into the challenge itself. I joined the JREF forum to get a look inside, username “Mente” – if you're curious, I never posted, just lurked and gathered intel. I'm a Mensan, so I was able to join the Mensan group for parapsychology where I met a few others who'd pursued the Challenge and confirmed my theory that JREF was unreasonable and intentionally difficult. I searched online and found a few who tried to answer the challenge and blogged about it. I listened to all the Randi lectures I could find. I watched video of him debunking Lydick and others. I read his biography and the history of the Challenge. While I was doing this investigation I was working on a paranormal device I came up with in college based on several other devices I'd observed in books or other places. After some testing at home to come up with the sort of experimental terms I'd agree to, I filled out an application, got it notarized, and sent it in. This brought me into contact with Jeff Wagg, who turned out to be the first step in my re-examining what I believed.

I was prepared for rudeness, to be ignored, to be deceived, or even insulted but Jeff was exactly the opposite. At worst Jeff was strictly polite but most of the time he was cordial or outright friendly. I even shared a joke with him via email during our correspondence as we worked out what the test would be. We got to a point where it would be up to Randi himself to accept the terms. At some point Jeff put my name in as someone who could potentially be tested on Japanese TV. Being unable to settle testing criteria on TV with Randi, it never happened, but the TV crew did come to my apartment to film me and my device for footage later. They even paid me for my time and trouble. After that experience, I decided that one of my other theories was right: JREF was a bit too stringent. Despite that validation, I was left with an experience that was in opposition to something else I thought about JREF. It was the first contradiction I acknowledged, everyone I interacted with was absolutely reasonable. I could not find fault with any part of their professionalism. This was disconcerting as it upset my earlier perceptions. Always on the look out for information I asked the film crew from Japan about James Randi and they spoke of him as a nice, kind person.

Despite this information, by now I not only wanted to answer the challenge for the money and fame, but also to validate what I believed about myself. Reality was less important to me at that point than what I wanted to believe.

Not to be stopped in the action I’d committed to, I decided I would pursue the challenge through affiliates of JREF. I started to speak to affiliates of JREF, if I had a success with one of them it was agreed they'd work with JREF to get a formal test. I started to seek advocates, like college professors, who could vouch for the validity of my claim. At some point, an I'm not sure what it was but the evidence against my claim reached a threshold where I was forced to reexamine everything and stop pursuing the prize altogether.

I mulled over all the strange questions I found through the whole process:

• If JREF was so unreasonable how could it be filled with professionalism and reasonable people?

• If my claim was so valid why did my criteria have to be so specific? (Maybe I was the one who was being too strict?)

• If it was that easy to come up with a claim and JREF couldn't be blamed, why was the Challenge unanswered?

• Why didn't any of the professional psychics seek the easy money?

…and on and on and on...

One easy answer to all the questions and more: I was wrong.

A very tough pill to swallow. Once I fully admitted it to myself, I devoted the same determination I used to pursue the JREF Challenge to finding out why. I researched “psychics” and “mystics,” especially the "greats" like Geller, I learned a few magician’s tricks and how to make tricks, I looked into scams of all sorts and the psychology of how you are fooled and how you fool yourself, all of which was VERY educational. This knowledge in hand, I looked at everything surrounding my claim and the prize, again.

If I was someone else looking at what I did, I would have been amused. The JREF Challenge has helped me realize limitations in thinking I didn't know I had. In one sense, the challenge has served as an incredible educational tool. I was sorry to hear the challenge is expiring. I've been honored to have been educated by it and JREF as a whole. I'm not completely purged of spurious beliefs/perspective but I am on the road to recovery.

To the Amazing James Randi, Jeff Wagg, and all of JREF –

Thank you.

http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/172/27/



Edited by Reddawn, Mar 10 2008, 11:47 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JFK
Member Avatar

Quote:
 
• If JREF was so unreasonable how could it be filled with professionalism and reasonable people?


I laughed so hard it hurts... thanks Reddawn.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Q
Member Avatar
A Higher Evolution
alexvegas
Mar 10 2008, 09:26 AM
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Mar 10 2008, 05:09 AM
people who achieve statistically higher results in laboratory tests, find themselves achieving statistically LOWER results in the presence of RANDI. It is Cater's polite suggestion is that Randi may be completely unaware of his "ability", but that his belief in skepticism is so strong that it overwhelms a potential applicant
That's the most ridiculous assertion I have read in a long time.
That is Cater's opinion. My opinion is that they are both equally up themselves.

Randi is not a person. He is an ego.

There was a clip from around 1980 recently re-aired on our Channel 9. Back in the 70/80 period we had "The Don Lane Show". Don Lane was a chat-show host who owed the continued existence of his show to his side-kick Bert Newton. The bit that re-aired was the finality of his interview with Randi.

"You're ***** ! We're going to an ad-break and you can just PISS OFF!"

I so wish I had a disc inserted at the time, I would be copying it up to Gootube. Maybe someone else has.

From all the reading I've done, only Randi's devout followers think kindly of him, and everyone else (even other skeptics) have nothing polite to say at all.

My personal opinion is that James Randi is the polar opposite of L. Ron Hubbard. They have both appropriated other people's materials and used them as their own, and they've both been caught doing it. Randi loves attributing Churchill-esque quotes to himself (even in conversations that never happened). Hubbard's personal history, if true, means his name should occupy 50% of Tthe Guinness Book of Records.

Now add Michelle Malkin to the mix, and we should have enough bull shit to never have to worry about oil again.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
« Previous Topic · The Lounge · Next Topic »
Add Reply