Still Paranormal?

[DaiGer]

A member of this forum told me that there was a $1million reward for someone who can prove something paranormal that is scientifically verifiable.

My question is: is it still considered paranormal if its scientifically verifiable?

[Whisperer]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranormal

Soooo....no

[Davros of Skaro]

A member of this forum told me that there was a $1million reward for someone who can prove something paranormal that is scientifically verifiable.

My question is: is it still considered paranormal if its scientifically verifiable?

It depends.The proof for some paranormal claims have to be way above the probability of guessing.

Seth Raphael claims Randi's Million Dollar Challenge - YouTube

Edited March 8, 2015 by davros of skaro

[DaiGer]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranormal

Soooo....no

so the challange of bringing paranormal stuff that is scientifically verifiable was just somekind of paradox?

[Whisperer]

No, its just semantics, a play on words as we all understand the initial concept of the challenge...

You can take a purists view or a generalized view, it matters not as we require labels to understand and accept a consensus of understanding...

[DaiGer]

No, its just semantics, a play on words as we all understand the initial concept of the challenge...

You can take a purists view or a generalized view, it matters not as we require labels to understand and accept a consensus of understanding...

I bet the one that made the challange don't have the 1million.

[Whisperer]

I thought the prize was 10 million.

You can search this site as it is mentioned many times but the one time it seems to have come close to winning was disallowed for some reason....

Good luck...

[DaiGer]

I thought the prize was 10 million.

You can search this site as it is mentioned many times but the one time it seems to have come close to winning was disallowed for some reason....

Good luck...

there was actually someone who almost won?

[eight bits]

Greetings, DaiGer

Welcome aboard. The Randi (now JREF) million dollar challenge is broadly targeted at fake public claims of the paranormal. Randi was a stage magician, and continued a tradition started by Harry Houdini of resisting those who would use stagecraft to bilk innocent people or mislead the credulous for other forms of gain. Although the terms and conditions change over time, the JREF challenge usually includes a "public figure" filter. In other words, to qualify, you not only need to do something that another stage magician cannot, but also have attracted some media attention for doing so. Also, the only question in winning the challenge is that you perform a specific, mutually agreed upon, feat - including satisfying agreed-upon precuations against trickery and craftwork. If you do succeed, then how you did it is not an issue.

Randi personally extended the challenge to makers of some stereo equipment accessories, for example. They were not making paranormal claims, but were, in Randi's view, making false claims that relied on psychological phenonema, not better engineering, to succeed. That kind of way of having a false cliaim accepted is what Randi sees as the problem which he is addressing.

Richard Dawkins, whatever I think of him as a thinker and teacher, is a fine writer. He coined the word "perinormal," to refer to genuine material phenomena that are, at the moment, not known to science or understood scientifically. For example, 150 years ago, something like radio communication was possible by material means, but not yet accomplished. Dawkins pointed out to Randi that if the challnege had been made back then, then he might have had to pay out to a radio pioneer, even though nothing non-material was involved. So far as I can see, Randi accepted what Dawkins said, and was willing to carry on anyway.

The challenge is made with the intention that it not be won - it really is intended to expose fakery. The application procedure is such that the substance of the feat is fully disclosed by the applicant before any agreement is made, so in Dawkins' hypothetical, JREF might have simply said "We aren't sure that this radio of yours isn't an ordinary material thing," and that would be the end of it.

Finally, the challenge is not about establishing anything scientific, it is about establishing that the feat exceeds an expert level of stage magic performance. So, the only thing that would change in science if somebody won is that more scientists would be aware of the claim, and maybe some of them would become interested in investigating it further. If the feat was "paranormal" the day before the final round of the challenge, then it would still be paranormal the day after. Somne further time later? Maybe not.

Edited March 8, 2015 by eight bits

[DaiGer]

Greetings, DaiGer

Welcome aboard. The Randi (now JREF) million dollar challenge is broadly targeted at fake public claims of the paranormal. Randi was a stage magician, and continued a tradition started by Harry Houdini of resisting those who would use stagecraft to bilk innocent people or mislead the credulous for other forms of gain. Although the terms and conditions change over time, the JREF challenge usually includes a "public figure" filter. In other words, to qualify, you not only need to do something that another stage magician cannot, but also have attracted some media attention for doing so. Also, the only question in winning the challenge is that you perform a specific, mutually agreed upon, feat - including satisfying agreed-upon precuations against trickery and craftwork. If you do succeed, then how you did it is not an issue.

Randi personally extended the challenge to makers of some stereo equipment accessories, for example. They were not making paranormal claims, but were, in Randi's view, making false claims that relied on psychological phenonema, not better engineering, to succeed. That kind of way of having a false cliaim accepted is what Randi sees as the problem which he is addressing.

Richard Dawkins, whatever I think of him as a thinker and teacher, is a fine writer. He coined the word "perinormal," to refer to genuine material phenomena that are, at the moment, not known to science or understood scientifically. For example, 150 years ago, something like radio communication was possible by material means, but not yet accomplished. Dawkins pointed out to Randi that if the challnege had been made back then, then he might have had to pay out to a radio pioneer, even though nothing non-material was involved. So far as I can see, Randi accepted what Dawkins said, and was willing to carry on anyway.

The challenge is made with the intention that it not be won - it really is intended to expose fakery. The application procedure is such that the substance of the feat is fully disclosed by the applicant before any agreement is made, so in Dawkins' hypothetical, JREF might have simply said "We aren't sure that this radio of yours isn't an ordinary material thing," and that would be the end of it.

Finally, the challenge is not about establishing anything scientific, it is about establishing that the feat exceeds an expert level of stage magic performance. So, the only thing that would change in science if somebody won is that more scientists would be aware of the claim, and maybe some of them would become interested in investigating it further. If the feat was "paranormal" the day before the final round of the challenge, then it would still be paranormal the day after. Somne further time later? Maybe not.

That was long and informative. Thanks dude.

[eight bits]

DaiGer

Two matters arising. As to the existence of the 1 million, yes, some bonds in that amount were donated by Randi to the Foundation. A few years ago, I did check that through Guidestar (an American site with information about non-profits), who provided me copies of the Foundation's IRS filings. So, I am persuaded that they have the million.

As to coming close to winning, I don't know what the other poster had in mind. The most prominent group that I know of that claims it "ought to" have won was an applicant who practices homeopathic medicine. That's searchable, so I won't get into it, but it is not a "paranormal" issue. Homeopaths claim that their methods are medically and scientifically sound, however, what they do often makes no sense to other medical practitioners. The suspicion, then, is that there may be some placebo effect (which is a real thing, after all), but that there is nothing beyond that and nothing peculiar to their "remedies" as far as effectiveness goes.

(Now there's a paradox.... if I came up with something that was more effcetive than usual at eliciting the placebo effect, then my remedy would win a clinical trial against the placebo... so you can see that this could be a real-life Dawkins' perinormal thing... Theodore Kaptchuk, searchable, teaches at Harvard Medical and specializes in studies of placebo effectiveness. It is entirely possible that his group could come up with something that "really works," by being a better placebo than anything previously used.)

Edited March 8, 2015 by eight bits

[Stubbly_Dooright]

You know, I wonder if this should have been in the ghosts, or sightings, or another part of this forum. Then again, this is the 'spiritual and skeptics' section. In the end, I guess, it deals with going beyond belief, and experiencing the situation beyond normal.

Paranormal:

adjective

1.

of or relating to the claimed occurrence of an event or perceptionwithout scientific explanation, as psychokinesis, extrasensoryperception, or other purportedly supernatural phenomena.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paranormal

The actual word is derived from the Latin use of the prefix para meaning "outside or beyond" what is considered normal.

http://www.milwaukeeparanormal.com/What-IS-Paranormal.html

Scientific would than mean, something that is normally the case, and thus not paranormal anymore.

[Rafterman]

I bet the one that made the challange don't have the 1million.

No, the James Randi Educational Founation has the money. That is verified and they will send you bank statements to prove it. There is also another roughly $5 million worldwide from other groups offereing challenges.

And the challenge is quite simple really. Someone claims they can do something, they agree to the parameters of the test, and then they do it. BOOM - one million richer and we finallly have proof of the paranormal.

Edited March 8, 2015 by Rafterman

[DaiGer]

No, the James Randi Educational Founation has the money. That is verified and they will send you bank statements to prove it. There is also another roughly $5 million worldwide from other groups offereing challenges.

And the challenge is quite simple really. Someone claims they can do something, they agree to the parameters of the test, and then they do it. BOOM - one million richer and we finallly have proof of the paranormal.

but other members here are saying that if it is scientifically proven, then it must not be parabormal. or I that's what they're trying to say. so the challange might be a trick challange.

[Rafterman]

but other members here are saying that if it is scientifically proven, then it must not be parabormal. or I that's what they're trying to say. so the challange might be a trick challange.

No, that's not how it works. It's not a trick. Keep in mind Randi and everyone else involved in these challenges desperately want proof of the paranormal. They would love nothing more than to stroke a check for $1 million to someone who can prove ESP, dowsing, telekinesis, astral projection, etc.

It's really no more complicated than make the claim/prove it. For example, you claim to be a dowser. OK, here is a vacant lot with 100 holes that have been dug and refilled. 20 of those holes also has a container of water in them. Do you agree that this would be a fair test of your abilities? Yes. OK, find them.

No one, even after helping devise and agreeing to the parameters of the test, has been able to do it.

[DaiGer]

So the change is real and the money is real.. I hope the paranormal is also real

[eight bits]

Rafterman

Keep in mind Randi and everyone else involved in these challenges desperately want proof of the paranormal.

That's not in evidence. Randi, when he was working, clearly saw this as a continuation of the kind of activity pioneered by Houdini, who pursued the same profession as Randi. It is a matter of "doing well by doing good." The doing good is to expose fraudulent or dangerous exploitation of the credulous. The doing well part is that the activity promotes the magician as somebody especially skilled in his craft, as Houdini was and (so far as I have ever heard) so was Randi.

The substance of the challenge is that "I don't believe that there is a way to do what I and my fellow professionals do, except by our craft. I'll put a million dollars where my mouth is: there is no better stage magician than me in the sense of someone who can do a trick that I can't figure out how it's done." And indeed, in particular cases (famously Uri Geller), if somebody refused the challenge, then Randi might simply go ahead and perform the trick.

I have no idea, and neither do you, whether or not Randi would welcome "proof of the paranormal," no more or no less than he would have welcomed the success of the stereo accessories he invited to take the challenge. If you personally "desperately want proof of the paranormal," then perhaps it's best to speak for yourself, and leave it at that.

It's really no more complicated than make the claim/prove it.

Actually, it's a great deal more complicated. The negotiations alone can take years.

Dowsing would not necessarily be a paranormal matter if somebody could do it. In any case, consider your "100 holes" example. Did the dowswer claim that she worked with artificial placements of small quantities of water? Did she claim her spatial resolution was within 1% of the (unspecified) area of your vacant lot? If she did, then your proposal is fine. If she did not, then perhaps you can see why the negotiations often drag on.

In any case, prior to any other prerequisite, there is an IQ test. That is, does the applicant hire a lawyer first? Only a moron enters into a million-dollar negotiation without a lawyer.

[Rafterman]

Rafterman

That's not in evidence. Randi, when he was working, clearly saw this as a continuation of the kind of activity pioneered by Houdini, who pursued the same profession as Randi. It is a matter of "doing well by doing good." The doing good is to expose fraudulent or dangerous exploitation of the credulous. The doing well part is that the activity promotes the magician as somebody especially skilled in his craft, as Houdini was and (so far as I have ever heard) so was Randi.

The substance of the challenge is that "I don't believe that there is a way to do what I and my fellow professionals do, except by our craft. I'll put a million dollars where my mouth is: there is no better stage magician than me in the sense of someone who can do a trick that I can't figure out how it's done." And indeed, in particular cases (famously Uri Geller), if somebody refused the challenge, then Randi might simply go ahead and perform the trick.

I have no idea, and neither do you, whether or not Randi would welcome "proof of the paranormal," no more or no less than he would have welcomed the success of the stereo accessories he invited to take the challenge. If you personally "desperately want proof of the paranormal," then perhaps it's best to speak for yourself, and leave it at that.

Actually, it's a great deal more complicated. The negotiations alone can take years.

Dowsing would not necessarily be a paranormal matter if somebody could do it. In any case, consider your "100 holes" example. Did the dowswer claim that she worked with artificial placements of small quantities of water? Did she claim her spatial resolution was within 1% of the (unspecified) area of your vacant lot? If she did, then your proposal is fine. If she did not, then perhaps you can see why the negotiations often drag on.

In any case, prior to any other prerequisite, there is an IQ test. That is, does the applicant hire a lawyer first? Only a moron enters into a million-dollar negotiation without a lawyer.

Perhaps I could have said my initial statement better - what I was intending to say was that almost everyone involved in the skeptical movement, at one point, believed that the paranormal was real. They came from an initial point of belief and only when they realized that the evidence didn't support any of this stuff, did they become skeptics. I have heard this repeated time and time again in interview after interview.

As to the actual test itself, while it can be a drawn out process, it really is that simple in the end. Someone makes a claim and Randi and others say, "OK, do it". Using my example - which clearly I just made up for my point - the assumption was that the dowser was involved in setting the parameters and agreeing upon the methodology for the test.

It's typically after the paranormalist fails that they start making excuses why this didn't work, or that didn't work, or there was too much skeptical energy, etc. etc.

Edited March 9, 2015 by Rafterman

[+Liquid Gardens]

Perhaps I could have said my initial statement better - what I was intending to say was that almost everyone involved in the skeptical movement, at one point, believed that the paranormal was real. They came from an initial point of belief and only when they realized that the evidence didn't support any of this stuff, did they become skeptics. I have heard this repeated time and time again in interview after interview.

I think 'almost everyone' and/or 'believed is real' are probably over-stated, although I'm sure you are correct that there are several. I see no evidence that Randi himself ever believed the paranormal was real and am not aware of Carl Sagan believing in it either; historically, those are about the top two names in the modern-day skeptical movement.

[eight bits]

Rafterman

It's typically after the paranormalist fails that they start making excuses why this didn't work, or that didn't work, or there was too much skeptical energy, etc. etc.

That's part of the usefulness of the negotiation process. The applicant agreed to the conditions of the test, and predicted that they could succeed.

Using my example - which clearly I just made up for my point - the assumption was that the dowser was involved in setting the parameters and agreeing upon the methodology for the test.

That's part of the uselessness of the challenge as a scientific investigation of the paranormal. If the performance failed, under conditions which the applicant thought were OK, then the only unambiguously supported conclusion is that the applicant was a poor predictor.

Now, in the case of a heavily advertised claim of skill, that's interesting in it's own right - the ideal applicant would be charging the public big $$$ based on some claimed performance level. Of course, those people never apply. So, it's up to the sceptic to offer explanations of why they don't apply, when they clearly have no problem taking other people's money.

In your anonymous dowser case, however, yes, she may well have agreed to the terms of the test. So what? She didn't even ask for a hydrological survey of your vacant lot - at JREF's expense. Thus, we conclude that having a lawyer or other negotiation agent really is a good idea when making million dollar deals, whch it is, but we learn nothing about the merits of dowsing.

So, the challenge has a place in putting pressure on the higher-profile con artists and flim-flam operators. That's what it ws designed to do. It is isn't much use for simple private beliefs about the paranormal, and no use at all for paranormal beliefs that don't fit the "I has powerz" model.

Edited March 9, 2015 by eight bits

[DaiGer]

good point guys. and I'm running out of things to say.

[Mr Walker]

Greetings, DaiGer

Welcome aboard. The Randi (now JREF) million dollar challenge is broadly targeted at fake public claims of the paranormal. Randi was a stage magician, and continued a tradition started by Harry Houdini of resisting those who would use stagecraft to bilk innocent people or mislead the credulous for other forms of gain. Although the terms and conditions change over time, the JREF challenge usually includes a "public figure" filter. In other words, to qualify, you not only need to do something that another stage magician cannot, but also have attracted some media attention for doing so. Also, the only question in winning the challenge is that you perform a specific, mutually agreed upon, feat - including satisfying agreed-upon precuations against trickery and craftwork. If you do succeed, then how you did it is not an issue.

Randi personally extended the challenge to makers of some stereo equipment accessories, for example. They were not making paranormal claims, but were, in Randi's view, making false claims that relied on psychological phenonema, not better engineering, to succeed. That kind of way of having a false cliaim accepted is what Randi sees as the problem which he is addressing.

Richard Dawkins, whatever I think of him as a thinker and teacher, is a fine writer. He coined the word "perinormal," to refer to genuine material phenomena that are, at the moment, not known to science or understood scientifically. For example, 150 years ago, something like radio communication was possible by material means, but not yet accomplished. Dawkins pointed out to Randi that if the challnege had been made back then, then he might have had to pay out to a radio pioneer, even though nothing non-material was involved. So far as I can see, Randi accepted what Dawkins said, and was willing to carry on anyway.

The challenge is made with the intention that it not be won - it really is intended to expose fakery. The application procedure is such that the substance of the feat is fully disclosed by the applicant before any agreement is made, so in Dawkins' hypothetical, JREF might have simply said "We aren't sure that this radio of yours isn't an ordinary material thing," and that would be the end of it.

Finally, the challenge is not about establishing anything scientific, it is about establishing that the feat exceeds an expert level of stage magic performance. So, the only thing that would change in science if somebody won is that more scientists would be aware of the claim, and maybe some of them would become interested in investigating it further. If the feat was "paranormal" the day before the final round of the challenge, then it would still be paranormal the day after. Somne further time later? Maybe not.

So for example, a demonstration of matter transmission, which would once have been considered paranormal if experienced wold be disqualified because today it is scientifically achievable (If only in the early stages like early radio broadcasting)?.

That's very interesting. I hadn't realised the history of this. I thought it was a genuine test (if based on scepticism), to find if paranormal things /abilities existed.. If what you say is true, wasn't Randi guilty of fraudulent misrepresentation ? What would have happened if someone passed the test ? Did he have a million dollars to pay up? The most interesting example of this I believe, is mind reading. Sceptics long maintained that the non-material nature of thought made remote mind reading impossible, yet today it is being done scientifically, where both images and words can be read from one person's mind by another's.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Mr Walker

[eight bits]

Mr W

If what you say is true, wasn't Randi guilty of fraudulent misrepresentation ?

I am not aware of any occasion where Randi, or anybody from JREF, misrepresented anything about the challenge. On the contrary, it seems to me that all the particulars are spelled out in sumptuous detail, and have been for years on the foundation's website (I don't know how things were handled when it was Randi's purely personal project).

Neither Randi nor JREF is responsible for everything anybody has ever said about the challenge, and I have seen some posters taunt others with "Why don't you take Randi's challenge, and pick up an extra million dollars?" Now, if somebody writes that to Uri Geller or John Edwards, then it's a good question. Some psi-kiddie who spins his pinwheel without touching it? Not so much. The challeenge just isn't about that kind of thing, but that kind of thing is what you're more likely to find on a discussion forum than a headliner fielding questions.

What would have happened if someone passed the test ? Did he have a million dollars to pay up?

I expect that they would pay. After the negotiatons are concluded successfully (if they are), then you basically have a contract where somebody agrees to pay a certain fee if the other party performs a certain specified task. As I mentioned, the foundation has the million in bonds (or did when I checked a few years ago). Before that, Randi was a successful performer. He donated those bonds, so I infer that he was always good for the money if it ever came down to that.

I think Dawkins' point was well-taken. During Randi's lifetime, echolocation might have been an example of a previously unappreciated human ability, and which might have seemed doubtful before being both demonstrated and reasonably well understood. I just don't know what precautions, if any, the organizers take which gives them enough confidence to proceed, even as the possibility of being scored upon, fair and square, is known to them.

[Mr Walker]

Mr W

I am not aware of any occasion where Randi, or anybody from JREF, misrepresented anything about the challenge. On the contrary, it seems to me that all the particulars are spelled out in sumptuous detail, and have been for years on the foundation's website (I don't know how things were handled when it was Randi's purely personal project).

Neither Randi nor JREF is responsible for everything anybody has ever said about the challenge, and I have seen some posters taunt others with "Why don't you take Randi's challenge, and pick up an extra million dollars?" Now, if somebody writes that to Uri Geller or John Edwards, then it's a good question. Some psi-kiddie who spins his pinwheel without touching it? Not so much. The challeenge just isn't about that kind of thing, but that kind of thing is what you're more likely to find on a discussion forum than a headliner fielding questions.

I expect that they would pay. After the negotiatons are concluded successfully (if they are), then you basically have a contract where somebody agrees to pay a certain fee if the other party performs a certain specified task. As I mentioned, the foundation has the million in bonds (or did when I checked a few years ago). Before that, Randi was a successful performer. He donated those bonds, so I infer that he was always good for the money if it ever came down to that.

I think Dawkins' point was well-taken. During Randi's lifetime, echolocation might have been an example of a previously unappreciated human ability, and which might have seemed doubtful before being both demonstrated and reasonably well understood. I just don't know what precautions, if any, the organizers take which gives them enough confidence to proceed, even as the possibility of being scored upon, fair and square, is known to them.

Thanks for the info. I should really take more interest in this. It does sound as if the test is designed in a way which would make demonstrating a paranormal ability very difficult, UNLESS that ability was able to be produced on demand and under a very defined set of circumstances. (and if it could be, then arguably it would not be defined as paranormal) Thus while it might be argued that ongoing failures to pass the test show that no one has met the parameters set; it does not show, (as some might argue ) that such failures prove that paranormal abilities do not exist .

[Rafterman]

I think 'almost everyone' and/or 'believed is real' are probably over-stated, although I'm sure you are correct that there are several. I see no evidence that Randi himself ever believed the paranormal was real and am not aware of Carl Sagan believing in it either; historically, those are about the top two names in the modern-day skeptical movement.

Well I'm not going to pour through decades of James Randi interviews, but I'm pretty sure he stated that at some point. Now, keep in mind that we may be talking about when he was a child or young teen. I listen to a lot of skeptical and paranormal podcasts and watch a lot of presentations and lectures on things like You Tube and I can assure you that this is a fairly common statement. I know it's true for me and many around here.