have any of you read or witnessed james randi about being baffled by any "paranormal case"?

no.
he is quite the intelectual and can explain anything.
no matter how far fetched his explenations are.

In fairness to Randi specifically, he is a professional stage magician, and to some extent has concentrated his skeptical-explanation career on other professionals' performances.

There is a long, l-o-n-g history of professional frauds who raise money by displaying faked signs and wonders to establish themselves as being on good terms with the gods, or with ghosts, or being in possession of special powers, etc.

The methods used in these exploits are similar to those used in stage performances. The methods are elaborate and far-fetched. Their explanation, then, could hardly be simple and homey.

Apart from his professional expertise, Randi has a personal opinion about the subject as a whole, not just the cases which he has personally investigated. Many other people have personal opinions, too.

Someone would have got his $1,000,000 then.

Wondered how long it would take for that to come up. Yet again.

Randi is a show business performer, and his challenge is a promotional stunt. It has achieved its purpose: this thread is about Randi by name, rather than about any of the millions of other skeptics out there.

He is a "brand name" skeptic, at no cost other than keeping some of his money in government bonds. It's magic.

The problem about his challenge is that he makes the rules as he wish them to be to make sure the person with the ability will not be able to win the challenge according to his rules and definitions, and as long as he can explain something in a "rational" way he will claim that is the way it was done, i.e. fraud/tricks

There are many other ways that are far easier to get that million at least to put it that way for any person with psychic abilities

Ahh yes, Randi, I've heard about him...I once read that his offer of a grand is a hoax...First of all the million bucks is in bonds...Like IOU's essentially...I've also read of alot of cases where he and his team of investigators, just assume their ideas about how something coulda been hoaxed are right, and that he doesn't let people explain..They accuse psychics of not having evidence, but he doesn't gather any either...A complete fraud...


But I'm psychic, so what do I know?

No. The problem is that no one can show real proof. Just a bunch of excuses.


Excuses.

Do you have proof to prove that I'm making this up Eric? You seem to wan't proof for everything, so, prove I'm making this up...Having trouble? I thought so...

He's not the one making the claim, you are.

Sorry, couldn't help but chime in on a few of these.

I agree, the MDC is a promotional stunt. But this doesn't mean that it is useless in any practical way: it's real money, and is obtainable if someone can demonstrate a supernatural ability of some kind.


Again, yes. But this is his approach, and to many it's unpleasant. Personally, I have a lot of time for the man, and although I think he could do with toning down some of that brusqueness of his, I think there's a place for that. Randi has put himself right out there, and in many ways Randi and the MDC are shorthand descriptions or illustrations of very, very useful concepts.


No, you misunderstand the nature of the challenge. The rules are plain, and can be read here. Which of them do you consider to "make sure the person with the ability will not be able to win"? Regarding Randi "explaining something in a 'rational' way", as regards the challenge it doesn't matter how Randi explains it: the tests are designed to be self-evident and undeniable. Randi's opinion doesn't come into it, except to help construct a mutually-agreed protocol (his expertise here is in spotting potential trickery).


Yes, many have claimed this, though none have been able to back up what they say.


Bonds are not 'IOUs' - the money is there, and is held by the bank Goldman-Sachs in escrow ready for the prize to be won. The bonds are immediately negotiable and the claimant would have the actual money within ten days. The terms and conditions of the challenge are such that legally, if they fulfil their part of the challenge, the money must be paid. Read more about that here (Section 3), and view the latest statement on the value of the bonds here.


Could you name any? Any links or references to give? True, there are some disgruntled people around, who claim all sorts about Randi and his methods. The fact is, the way Randi operates does not leave room for assumption: if investigating or testing, Randi will attempt to rule out natural causes (often trickery). If the effect disappears along with the natural explanation, it's likely that this was the cause (or alternatively, that the claim is very difficult to test, since the ability would disappear along with the potential for fraud or mistake). In other cases, Randi will attempt to replicate an effect using admitted trickery; this, he always points out, does not mean that this is the method used by whichever psychic is being examined, but rather that if they are not doing it this way then "they're doing it the hard way".


Randi has gathered a great deal of evidence which has shown individuals to be frauds, or in some cases genuinely mistaken. The reason some psychics may be open to this accusation is that they may make grand claims for their powers, and refuse to back them up with anything.


You have most certainly not shown him to be.

In this thread, the matter came up casually, and I answered casually. Besides, people have already heard my full rap on the subject.

That the challenge has not been won is sometimes offered hereabouts as evidence about what abilities may or may not exist. I resist the invited inference since the legal situation would dissuade any serious person from spending the time and effort required to participate.

The challenge fails to create any obligation under American law for Randi to pay a particular amount to anybody. That does not make it a hoax, nor a scheme to defraud others.

It is an entirely lawful, even familiar, kind of commercial offer here in the United States. I also have no doubt that Randi has a million dollars, although in the absence of a perfectable, enforceable legal claim to it, so what?

It may also speed things up between us to note that it is, according to its own rules, a targeted challenge. One qualification is that the participant be known to the media. Clearly, Randi wishes to consentrate his own time and effort on exposing high-profile, self-promoting public frauds.

God's work, to be sure, but not a comprehensive survey of human abilities, either.

Fair enough, I realise I'm a newcomer - I also realise that this isn't the primary topic of the thread, and I seem to be developing an uncanny knack of derailing conversations by being sidetracked by a minor (to the matter in hand) issue. However, views have been put forth with which I disagree.


I don't think we can generalise too far beyond those cases which have been tested, and those which involve deeply unconvincing excuses not to be (particularly those cases who voice the intention to apply, but demonstrate no intention whatsoever).


I'm certainly no lawyer, and still less an American lawyer; but the JREF certainly seem to consider it a legally binding contract:


Are they lying, or mistaken? Of course I'm prepared to accept that they are, given evidence (this is not my 'thing' by a long shot).

But to me there's a far weightier matter hanging over the JREF than contract law and investigation by the IRS into its claimed charitable status: their reputation. Challenge applications are open and transparent. Both the JREF and the applicant of course have copies of their correspondence, and the JREF publish such correspondence on their website, and keep open files for inspection in person at their offices in Florida. Lately some challenges have been webcast live too, and the video subsequently posted onto YouTube.

The bottom line is, the test is designed in such a way that, if someone wins, it will be undeniable and self-evident. It is visible, transparent, and open to inspection. If someone does what was asked of them and the JREF does not cough up, then regardless of any legal issue, they would have shown themselves, and Randi in particular, to be charlatans of the worst kind. The JREF's reputation would be shot, any sceptical organisations with any affiliation or connection to the organisation would have to pick a stance, and I for one would know where I stand.

I know that if I fully believed I had an ability, I would apply for the prize in a heartbeat. Having followed the MDC quite closely for really quite a few years now, I honestly see nothing that indicates to me that if you can do what you say you can do, you wouldn't be able to pass the tests. I don't think it would involve a great deal of effort - local testers can be found - and Randi himself need have very little to do with the actual process, as is set out in the rules and borne out by ample demonstration.

They can write books just like Sylvia Brown....

Of course he makes the rules it's his challenge.

It seems to me people complain about the challenge because the tests are conducted under strict conditions to eliminate the possibility of hoax. If someone could for example move something with their minds at home or for their friends and what have you then there should be no problem regardless of the setting.

This is a big assumption to make as well since you nor anyone else on these boards has taken the challenge. So before you say it's all rigged how about taking the challenge? I've read the rules on the website and they seem perfectly reasonable.



Let me explain to you how bonds work... Each bond has to be purchased dollar for dollar, this criticism is really unwarranted and bonds are not IOU's. These bonds upon claiming them can be cashed in at the bank for the full million. Many people put their money into bonds more specifically government bonds to ensure the safety of their money and avoid taxes... Because the million was put up by a non-profit organization the information regarding the million which is in Goldman Sachs is publicly available.

As for his methods being fraudulent there is no evidence of this, people just don't like his methods because it eliminates the ability to trick your way to a million. Also they are not looking for an explanation they are looking for proof so their is no need to explain anything to anyone you just need to demonstrate your ability under controlled conditions.



Eric doesn't have anything to prove to anyone because he's not claiming to have super powers like you do.

However you contradict yourself a lot, you say one thing and do another like for example with posting a video in which you made 1 excuse after another. Basically a failure to cooperate in any sense of the word.

The circumstantial evidence leads me to believe that you believe powers exist but lie about yourself having them for whatever your reasons are. Remember you can't prove a negative if something exists their has to be evidence somewhere to confirm it's existence.

Sorry, I think you added tht after I'd started. Yes, it is now a targeted prize - though this has been the case only since April of last year. For the rest of the time, the prize has been open. The JREF did decide to narrow its scope, shortly prior to deciding to do away with it altogether, and it was a controversial decision I wasn't particularly happy with. But it is a fact that for the majority of its life, the MDC has been an open challenge.

But if you look at the criteria for 'known to the media' on the site, pretty much all you have to do is get an article on yourself in the local rag - not exactly a difficult feat. The reason for the change, therefore, probably had more to do with filtering out those with completely frivolous claims, and those with very evident mental illness, which is probably reasonable enough.

Thank you for clarifying the history of the challenge. I have only been a member of UM since May of 2007. All of my discussion of the challenge here has been about the current version, which went into effect in April of 2007.

JREF presents the application, if, as, and when signed by Randi, as a binding contract.

If memory serves, Randi has not signed an application. As to the future, Randi, like everybody else, has no obligation to sign a yet-to-be-negotiated contract.

No obligation means exactly that.

My objection has been to the use of the challenge as evidence regarding the abilities of people who have not been tested. We seem to be in substantial agreement about the conclusion that that is dicey, even if we have reached it by different, and incompatible, analyses.

So, wanting to practice my TK so I can have a good vid that will stand up against all your claims of me being a fraud, thats an excuse? Wanting to practice? How's that an excuse, I just wnat more time so I can make you guys happy...Because I like when skeptics are happy... size="1"]He, you could all go drown in a well for all I care[/size]

First it was a missing tripod and so on.... You made like 3 excuses one after the other in the TK thread.

Fact is while making a video may spare you from being ripped on and add to your credibility a bit only a peer reviewed study performed by reputable members in the scientific community will truly prove such abilities exist.

While video is nice it can still be hoaxed, although it is a start.

We skeptics do not care how good you are at TK we just want to know if you can do it or not, to us putting off the video as so many others have done in similar fashion is viewed as a bluff and a stall tactic.

Just to note though making comments like you did above about drowning among the other comments you have made is starting to wear my patience thin with you, I personally view this as flame baiting on your part as well as unproductive and immature. Yeah it definitely doesn't make you look good at all, I won't report you or at least not yet but I will ask you to stop a rather simple request I would think.

mr. randi makes people look like fools

what about the guy who has a magnetic head?

Fine...One week..Thats all I need, one week and you'll have your precious video...

You're video is nowhere near precious. That is unless it is deemed real by a group of scientists, who recorded it
under scrutinizing tests.

So, you bug me about a video..I agree ti make one, then you say it will be pointless?! Why the hell do you want me to make the vid if you aren't even gonna take it seriously in the first place...?!

I never said I wouldn't take your video seriously. I only said that it will not be precious, (That is what you called it.)
There are many such videos much like yours on the internet. But, I will have a close look at it, then give my opinion
on what I think of it.


Regards,
Tom

K...Next Friday the video will be up and running on here....

The video for me will prove nothing however what it does do is show a willingness to cooperate with other members who disagree with you on the issue.

I believe you're mistaken on that point. Again from the Challenge Application Instructions:


Thus, Randi signs the form after submission of the application form and protocol negotiations, but before any preliminary testing takes place (the preliminary test is a precursor to the formal test, the MDC being a two-phase challenge).

Thus, it seems to me that the document becomes a legally binding contract prior to any testing at all, but after all protocols are mutually agreed. Since many people have been preliminarily tested (though nobody has been able to progress to the formal challenge), we can assume that Randi has signed many applications, and thereby entered into the legal agreement that would constitute.


Substantial yes, though I suspect not total; probably again not enough to float a Heated Debate on the issue though

And yet even as you speak, people are debating it.

People are debating the subtle differences between eight bits' and my opinions of the generalisability of data from the JREF challenge??

Or do you mean people are debating about the JREF challenge generally?

Thank you, Nucular, for reviewing the agreement form. Nevertheless, I have not found an actual instance of Randi signing an application, and hence made the statement which I did, with the formulaic hedge it contained.

If you know where the record of such an occurrence can be found, then I would be grateful for the information.

In any case, the rest of that paragraph, "As to the future, Randi, like everybody else, has no obligation to sign a yet-to-be-negotiated contract," correctly states the legal status of the challenge as a commercial offer.

So, there we are. In something like agreement, despite disagreement about why.

I will try not to hold my breath in anticipation.

Oh Eric...You don't need to hold your breath in anticipation...You should just hold your breath long enough for you to pass out and die...Maybe get in a small Coma, thats all we ask for...

Once again your immaturity shows... No one except for you here is wishing death upon anyone. This in every way was uncalled for and just plain rude... This is also the last time I will ask you to refrain from making such comments about big contributers here who have been here and contributed way more to this site then you have... You wonder why people don't show you respect your above post is one of the reasons.

You poor thing.

It wasn't un-called for..It was needed...
Eric needs to get a taste of what he's dishing out..Calling us "x-men" and not taking a word we say seriously, mocking us...
He needs to know what the hell he's doing...
I only attacked cause he provoked me...
The top says no personal attacks, but he started it...So I am inclined to attack back...

How was wishing death on him needed



Eric wished death upon you? source please... Why should anyone take you seriously? You make some pretty bold claims then cry foul when people don't believe you.



What is he doing exactly besides making comparisons and the occasional sarcastic comment?



So the comment was just being sarcastic... no attack was made.



He never made a personal attack he was just implying he will believe it when he sees it... I fail to see the personal attack in that.

When a weak minded person can't prove something, it almost always escalates into a personal attack. Good for you of showing your true colors. Eric is a good guy and read many of his posts. I doubt you can even come close to competing on his level.

No need to blow smoke up his bum.

Good grief. Now attack Tommyo. Real nice.

No need for the death wishes- If you CAN produce.. then produce..

Heartagram...DON'T MAKE THE VIDEO. I'm not sure if you completley understand what it means to be a skeptic. To be a skeptic is to believe that NOTHING is absolute. So in other words, you can't win, you won't win, and they won't let you win. Honestly, skeptics in general are not really skeptics. Their what tends to be the type of person who will only believe what their comfortable with. Only what they feel like believing. And ALMOST EVERYONE in general the population believes in science so therefore it's very easier, comfortable, and mainstream to believe the way some of these people believe. I admit it I think science has a lot of truth to it. But I believe science is the beginning not the end. So as far this goes a true skeptic doesn't believe anything and is a utter, utter athiest. So really Heartagram these people are just going to blow you away not matter what you do, so don't WASTE YOUR TIME. Pick your battles, cause this is not one of them.

Thanks for that enlightening input! but I'm NO skeptic. I say big claims calls for big evidence... that's realism, not skepticism.

Didn't think you guys would take it so seriously...
But Eric just keeps mocking us psions and it gets annoying...

But I do retract my statement...Sorry Eric...


I have ADD...Ran out of medicine lol....

I totally agree, it's the only true way to separate fact from fiction especially with some of the bold claims made by many here.



Actually I want to believe such things, however in order for me to do this I need to separate the otherwise impossible from the possible.



Science is really a methodology for figuring out how things work and making new discoveries. In order to study something you first have to have something tangible to work with.

How can I possibly take something like psi seriously if no one claiming they can utilize it is willing to cooperate. I come to this site to figure out whats true and whats false, so far I have been far from impressed but there is always that chance someone will change my mind.



A true skeptic just simply doesn't accept something at face value.

Everyone is doubtful of something for example if I said 'my dog could breath flames that shoot out 50 feet' would you simply believe me just because I said it was true or would you ask for some sort of proof that this was the case? I can say with reasonable certainty that no almost no one would just take it at face value.

Well it's the same thing when someone comes here claiming they can move objects with their minds, control the weather, fire, electricity or make people turn around using telepathy and so on etc.

===

There was once a member who claimed to be psychic, we asked for something to back it up and they willingly did so by providing 'readings' to all those who asked.

I was impressed by the results she had said things about my personal life with uncanny results and the prediction of what would happen if I didn't act on certain impulses came to pass a few months later. I can't say that she was the real deal but I can't merely brush off what was said as mere coincidence either as their was no possible she could have known this information. I am sure other members here remember this thread as well... I am still on the fence about her wished she would come back and show some of these n00bs how it's done.

Needless to say when someone like this is willing to cooperate I will give them props because even if what they claim is not provable at least an effort is made.

IF Heartagram makes this video on Friday as she claims and what she does is unexplainable then I will give her props as well for at least putting fourth an effort.... I just hope the video doesn't look phony and staged.

You are totally wrong. I can't wait for the day to see real, hard , scientific proof. I will love it.It will make life alot more interesting.SO you are 100% wrong.

So you take zombie pills eh?... Every kid has ADD these days

Yes we do take these boards somewhat seriously if I didn't I wouldn't be over 4000 posts. I am here on an almost daily basis mostly because I don't leave the house as much as I want.

The Jref changellenge generally.

Well ya but I wish science does not prove it even if its real.

You made a few bold claims Heart! If you do not back up your claims with any kind of tangible evidence, almost
no one will ever take you seriously.

I would say that I am sorry! But, you have flaunted some of your claims around here like you are quite good at them,
with no evidence to back them up. I suppose that would be alright in a psion forum. But, this is an open forum full
of people with a wide range of opinions.


Regards,
Tom

I'm a guy...

Actually I want to believe such things, however in order for me to do this I need to separate the otherwise impossible from the possible.

Science is really a methodology for figuring out how things work and making new discoveries. In order to study something you first have to have something tangible to work with.
Ok you have made your point. But as soon as it is proven, it will become science. Then the scientists can only guess how it works. I mean the way I look at it, scientists cannot explain how it works now. If just a while after it is proven, science can give the infomation on how it works, does it not mean that science is as fraudulant as the pretend psychics that are all around us? Because so many psychic investigators cannot understand how it works, even now. If the scientists can, after a while after the so called psychic is proven tell us how it works, does it not mean they are cheating?