ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » Welcome to ISF » Other Skeptical Organizations » JREF » Million Dollar Challenge
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags pavel ziborov

Reply
Old 4th September 2009, 07:29 AM   #361
Rodney
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,942
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
So if Woods wanted to qualify for the Gold Driving Challenge, what do you think he would state as his rate of success?
I assume you meant "Golf" and not "Gold", but Woods would obviously have an incentive to specify as low a rate as he thought would pass muster with the judges. But based on the JREF's response to Pavel, the judges would tell Woods that he must hit 100% of the fairways to pass. It really isn't rocket science to come up with a fair protocol in either of these cases, but thus far the JREF hasn't seemed interested in fairly testing Pavel.
Rodney is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 07:33 AM   #362
pavel_do
Critical Thinker
 
pavel_do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post

So what do I say if I want the JREF to test my ability to run? 60 minutes. Because I know that it would be very unlikely for me to fail. I don't say that it might be 40 minutes, because it's quite likely I'll fail. I don't say 50 minutes because even though I'd be fairly confident, there's not much room for having a bad day. I certainly don't dither around for 2 years without ever actually giving a solid time I think I can run it in.
If only it would be all simple.. Ye.. you state your limits and accuracy and they accept it.. but ONLY after wards they tell you.. well.. you cant really run in your usual conditions, you cant wear your usual comfortable shoos, cause they might give you advantage..How about you do it in 2 sizes less of yours.. and it should rain too..to make sure u CAN perform under any conditions.. cause you confident you can..why not.. OH.. you cant perform it this way... than.. YOU FAKE TIME WAISTER...BYE... whos next??



Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post
On the other hand, if the JREF say that they'll only accept a time under 30 minutes, I simply wouldn't do it, since even though I may be able to with some effort, I've never done it before.
Ye you wouldn't if it would be told you before all the negotiation started or soon after claim was accepted.. But they say it in the end as you can see... can you??? You can, if you really read threads and negotiation... ( nevertheless I didn't not violet THEIR time limit of 8 hours.. I am not asking for 9 or 10..
(though if it would be up to me, I would ask for a week of testing lets say 50 pairs each day for 5 days.. that would FOR SURE be fair test and would allow me and any other applicant to prove to JREF there ability if they have any...) but as we know JREF is not scientific team or researchers.. they are challenge thats all..


Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post
You see how simple this is?
I guess you dont see how it is really IS.. and it is not as simple as presented from JREF side...


Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post
That was last August. Can anyone really argue that Pavel has been treated unfairly when he was only rejected year after he was given a final chance?
I think Startz (thanks to him) asnwered your question.. For past year that you talking about..the delay on JREF's side was about 9 month..12-9=3 ... So JREF 9 month Pavel/Startz 3...can you see the difference??

P.s.

The last thing.. YOU HAVE TO STATE YOUR ACCURACY when you send your claim.. That I DID. And they not asking you to state in advance how much time you need for that...

And as we all know, or at least as most people knows, that JREF DO NOT discuss any details of test or performance or what ever. BEFORE YOU SENT INN YOUR APPLICATION .. thats is really complicate things too..You can see from threads that before my application was accepted and sent inn.. I tried many times to find out details and conditions to make sure I have proper applications but to get the reply it was like ask Queen to come down for a tea.. So I had to do allot of different tests and tried ways from Zener cards to pairs and triples and 5th what ever.. during process and it would really save allot of time to me and JREF if they would only respond to questions and inquires cause they were directly related to test and application.. I didn't asked them something which is non of my business or out of boredom I would liked to know..
__________________
When there is wile, there is a way...

Last edited by pavel_do; 4th September 2009 at 07:52 AM.
pavel_do is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 08:02 AM   #363
petre
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 887
Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
Sort of like Tiger Woods' driving in a round of golf: He might hit the fairways 70% of the time, or 90%, or 67%, or something else. So, it's a good thing the JREF doesn't sponsor the "Golf Driving Challenge" -- Woods wouldn't qualify to be tested.
Tiger Woods actually hits the fairway 63.43% of the time this year:
http://www.pgatour.com/r/stats/info/xm.html?102

He's ranked 93rd, so he's hardly leading the category this year. Note that if you keep good records, it becomes fairly trivial to determine your success rate.

Given an accuracy of 63.43%, and a baseline performance of 50% (which is probably somewhere about right for the set of all golfers that play as often as Tiger does) one could craft a test to determine if Tiger did have such an accuracy. You could have him hit 250 drives and 150 or more fairway hits would have odds less than 1:1000 if his actual ability were 50%, but such a performance would have an almost 87% chance of happening if it were 63.43%. Now, even at a pretty strong pace of one drive every 2 minutes, that'd still be 500 minutes, or about 10 hours with a few breaks. Any reasonable person wouldn't fault Tiger for a dropping accuracy after such a long test, and so it would seem unlikely such a test might proceed.

Now with someone like David Toms this year (74.25%) it's a little easier to distinguish him from a 50% fairway hitter. A trial of 60 drives with a performance of 43 fairways is enough to state with 99.9% certainty that he is not a 50% hitter, and still give him a 73% chance of success if his skill is really 74.25%. With generous breaks seems you could get through that in 3 or 4 hours. If you're willing to add a few more trials you can improve his chances further of course.

What is really driving up the number of trials is that the ability appears to be wrong most of the time it is needed. Since a person guessing has a 50% chance of success, a 70% performance means it's only improving 20% over the norm. Looked at that way, it means when the guess is wrong, the ability can only fix that situation 40% of the time. Now, you could argue that it fixes wrong guesses 60% of the time, but ruins a correct guess 20% of the time, but overall I'd say either case is about as "impressive".

What would probably help is if Pavel were to actually try one of the protocols for a while and establish a baseline performance for him. The performance over 100 trials gives a pretty good comparison. From there, Pavel could try a few modifications to see if the success rate can be improved with changes.

I'd suggest that it'll take 10 times the length of a final test to really establish parameters that'll work. I don't think the JREF or the readers here (myself included) believe Pavel has done 1000 trials to be convinced the proposed 100 trial test is viable (even if it WERE approved).
petre is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 12:31 PM   #364
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Pavel, if you missed my earlier inquiry, here it is again:

Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt View Post
Do you really consider it a fact that the JREF acted fraudulently in your case?
Have you asked the JREF to reopen your file?

Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt View Post
Pavel:

1. You feel treated unfairly, unjustly or even fraudulently.

2. You do not agree that the JREF abandoned the 100 trial protocol when it worked for them all the time before.

3. You are ready to go now.

Correct me, if I am wrong on any of those points and please answer the following question:

Will you ask the JREF to re-open your file?
Originally Posted by pavel_do View Post
1. YES

2. YES

3. YES

Obviously!Its is clear and its not what I feel, that the fact!


I am going to write a letter to JREF and will post it here too and lets see what they will reply if they reply at all.. as so far as you can see they said NOTHING at all a part of post about “giving me last chance” and closing the file.
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 01:44 PM   #365
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Originally Posted by pavel_do View Post
...
The last thing.. YOU HAVE TO STATE YOUR ACCURACY when you send your claim.. That I DID. And they not asking you to state in advance how much time you need for that...
...
I think rule #01 could not be clearer on this:

"1. This is the primary and most important of these rules: Applicant must state clearly in advance, and applicant and JREF will agree upon, what powers and/or abilities will be demonstrated, the limits of the proposed demonstration (so far as time, location and other variables are concerned) and what will constitute both a positive and a negative result."



When you state an ability, there is usually a process involved which led you to say exactly that. It usually doesn't pop into your head at the drop of a hat. I found Cuddles' running analogy pretty good.
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 02:17 PM   #366
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Originally Posted by pavel_do View Post
...
And as we all know, or at least as most people knows, that JREF DO NOT discuss any details of test or performance or what ever. BEFORE YOU SENT INN YOUR APPLICATION .. thats is really complicate things too..You can see from threads that before my application was accepted and sent inn.. I tried many times to find out details and conditions to make sure I have proper applications but to get the reply it was like ask Queen to come down for a tea.. So I had to do allot of different tests and tried ways from Zener cards to pairs and triples and 5th what ever.. during process and it would really save allot of time to me and JREF if they would only respond to questions and inquires cause they were directly related to test and application.. I didn't asked them something which is non of my business or out of boredom I would liked to know..
Oy, Pavel, you are really milking this David-vs-Goliath-shtick.

Unfortunately, you do not seem to be very good at "History Adjustment Creation Karlroving" (HACK) or "Little Improvised Experience Stories".



The start.

@Anyone: Please read and make up your own mind. Watch how often the claim changes. Do you get the impression that this guy knows what he's doing, other than parading himself to an internet audience?
If you want to continue, please go here.

If you were the JREF and read all these exchanges, what would you think and what would you do? Keep in mind, they get hundreds of similar documents each year.
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 02:34 PM   #367
pavel_do
Critical Thinker
 
pavel_do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt View Post
Pavel, if you missed my earlier inquiry, here it is again:
Have you asked the JREF to reopen your file?
I am working on it... and I am doing it not for forum entertainment and first call..I do it, because I do feel I was treated unfairly and I have invested allot of time for the test to happen and I was refused “out of the blue”, when I am done Ill post it on forum, same as I did before with some letters. Beside JREF I have my own things to deal with and they are the priority not JREF, though till the last events the JREF was one fo them..

But any ways, thank you for consideration.
__________________
When there is wile, there is a way...
pavel_do is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 02:37 PM   #368
Startz
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt View Post

The start.

@Anyone: Please read and make up your own mind. Watch how often the claim changes. Do you get the impression that this guy knows what he's doing, other than parading himself to an internet audience?
If you want to continue, please go here.

If you were the JREF and read all these exchanges, what would you think and what would you do? Keep in mind, they get hundreds of similar documents each year.
GzuzKryzt:

With all respect, I think you are confusing Pavel's long, and sometimes wandering, discussions here in the forum with the protocols he submitted to JREF. Yes, it took him a long time to narrow down a testable protocol. But the "narrowing down" process on the forum isn't part of the Challenge. In the end, the protocols actually submitted were reasonable by past JREF standards. ("Reasonable" is just my opinion, which someone could legitimately differ with.) I would think that all JREF should care about in the end is that a testable protocol, one that guards against cheating or statistical fluke, is presented.
Startz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 03:13 PM   #369
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Originally Posted by Startz View Post
GzuzKryzt:

With all respect, I think you are confusing Pavel's long, and sometimes wandering, discussions here in the forum with the protocols he submitted to JREF. Yes, it took him a long time to narrow down a testable protocol. But the "narrowing down" process on the forum isn't part of the Challenge. In the end, the protocols actually submitted were reasonable by past JREF standards. ("Reasonable" is just my opinion, which someone could legitimately differ with.) I would think that all JREF should care about in the end is that a testable protocol, one that guards against cheating or statistical fluke, is presented.
I did say "claim", right?
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 03:18 PM   #370
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Originally Posted by pavel_do View Post
I am working on it... and I am doing it not for forum entertainment and first call..I do it, because I do feel I was treated unfairly and I have invested allot of time for the test to happen and I was refused “out of the blue”, when I am done Ill post it on forum, same as I did before with some letters. Beside JREF I have my own things to deal with and they are the priority not JREF, though till the last events the JREF was one fo them..

But any ways, thank you for consideration.
What takes you so long? You were pretty upset - i.e. motivated - and you said the facts were pretty clear. Taking this into consideration, the letter practically types itself.

And could you please answer this simple question: Do you feel the JREF acted fraudulently in your case?
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 03:30 PM   #371
pavel_do
Critical Thinker
 
pavel_do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt View Post
What takes you so long? You were pretty upset - i.e. motivated - and you said the facts were pretty clear. Taking this into consideration, the letter practically types itself.

And could you please answer this simple question: Do you feel the JREF acted fraudulently in your case?
Well I think you just “puling my leg” or “taking piss” sorry my French...
What take me so long.. well.. first of all its not public business what I am dealing with, but I can reveal some if its is really important to know to everyone..


Again i think it is clear that I DO FEEL THE JREF ACTED FRAUDULENTLY AND UNFAIR IN MY CASE.. and even you can see it.. just pretend not to.. cause its comfortable and convenient..you dont need to review some of your points and opinion about JREF and the Challenge..
__________________
When there is wile, there is a way...

Last edited by pavel_do; 4th September 2009 at 03:33 PM.
pavel_do is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 03:34 PM   #372
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Originally Posted by pavel_do View Post
I am working on it... and I am doing it not for forum entertainment and first call..I do it, because I do feel I was treated unfairly and I have invested allot of time for the test to happen and I was refused “out of the blue”, when I am done Ill post it on forum, same as I did before with some letters. Beside JREF I have my own things to deal with and they are the priority not JREF, though till the last events the JREF was one fo them..

But any ways, thank you for consideration.
I'll even front you an outline of the letter, Pavel.



"Dear JREF,



given our previous negotiations and your stipulation that every applicant is tested on what he claims, I consider the last stipulation by Mr. Randi unfair and unjust.

I apologize the negotiations have sometimes been unfocused on my part. But the often long response times on your part also contributed to the current situation.

I can perform to the discussed rate of [insert percentage] in a test of 100 trials.

I can do 100 trials in less than eight hours: [insert specific duration]

The expenses will of course be solely paid by me. I do not consider relatively high expenses for testing material a valid reason for the closing of my file.

Therefore, I plead with you to reopen my file.

I want to etch out the last details at your convenience and proceed to a test immediately.

Kind regards"



It's not perfect, I didn't sleep on it. This took me from the time of my last post.
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 03:36 PM   #373
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Originally Posted by pavel_do View Post
...
Again i think it is clear that I DO FEEL THE JREF ACTED FRAUDULENTLY AND UNFAIR IN MY CASE.. and even you can see it.. just pretend not to.. cause its comfortable and convenient..you dont need to review some of your points and opinion about JREF and the Challenge..
Where did the "fraud" part happen exactly?
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 03:37 PM   #374
Startz
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt View Post
I did say "claim", right?
You did indeed. Sorry if I misunderstood your point.
Startz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 03:51 PM   #375
pavel_do
Critical Thinker
 
pavel_do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt View Post
Where did the "fraud" part happen exactly?
You know what GzuzKryzt..I am sure you know... so no comment! I had enough...
__________________
When there is wile, there is a way...

Last edited by pavel_do; 4th September 2009 at 03:56 PM.
pavel_do is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 04:37 PM   #376
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt View Post
Where did the "fraud" part happen exactly?
Originally Posted by pavel_do View Post
You know what GzuzKryzt..I am sure you know... so no comment! I had enough...
Actually I don't. I think you are wrongly accusing the JREF of fraud.

Please tell us where you think the JREF committed fraud.
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th September 2009, 06:22 PM   #377
Olowkow
Philosopher
 
Olowkow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,230
Pavel do is becoming Pavel don't.
Olowkow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2009, 12:35 PM   #378
Moochie
Philosopher
 
Moochie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,491
Originally Posted by Olowkow View Post
Pavel do is becoming Pavel don't.
That made my morning.


I really do not understand how the JREF came to entertain the notion of proceeding to a test with this applicant. It's been pretty clear to me since day dot that it was all about having a go to beat the odds, rather than displaying any "paranormal" ability.

Pavel, do your business with someone else, apply for another challenge -- there are a few out there. Prove us all wrong; put egg on our collective faces. If successful, you'll not only be richer, but you'll be able to try for the $1M for real. Go on, give it a shot. I dare you.


M.
Moochie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2009, 06:15 PM   #379
JoeTheJuggler
Penultimate Amazing
 
JoeTheJuggler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27,766
Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
Sort of like Tiger Woods' driving in a round of golf: He might hit the fairways 70% of the time, or 90%, or 67%, or something else. So, it's a good thing the JREF doesn't sponsor the "Golf Driving Challenge" -- Woods wouldn't qualify to be tested.
You don't make any sense here, Rodney.

In fact, Tiger Woods hits the fairway some specific percentage of the time. If you had all the information, it could be calculated. You take the number of drives that hit the fairway, divide that number by the total number of drives and then multiply by 100. It wouldn't be 3 different values.

Do you think a baseball player can have simultaneously 3 different batting averages?
__________________
"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons
JoeTheJuggler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2009, 07:32 AM   #380
Rodney
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,942
Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler View Post
You don't make any sense here, Rodney.

In fact, Tiger Woods hits the fairway some specific percentage of the time. If you had all the information, it could be calculated. You take the number of drives that hit the fairway, divide that number by the total number of drives and then multiply by 100. It wouldn't be 3 different values.
Profound, very profound.

Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler View Post
Do you think a baseball player can have simultaneously 3 different batting averages?
No, but I do know that even a very good hitter will sometimes have a run of 20 at-bats where he gets no hits, or perhaps one or two hits.
Rodney is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2009, 10:43 AM   #381
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Rodney, you seem to be on Pavel's side, hence permit me this inquiry please: From what you can see on the JREF Forum, do you think the JREF acted fraudulently in Pavel's case?
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2009, 06:10 PM   #382
Rodney
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,942
Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt View Post
Rodney, you seem to be on Pavel's side, hence permit me this inquiry please: From what you can see on the JREF Forum, do you think the JREF acted fraudulently in Pavel's case?
More likely incompetently rather than fraudulently. It's pretty obvious that whoever was involved in processing Pavel's application does not know enough about statistics to devise a fair test for someone who is claiming a 70% hit rate, when 50% would be expected by chance.
Rodney is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2009, 06:46 PM   #383
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator
 
jsfisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,457
Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
More likely incompetently rather than fraudulently. It's pretty obvious that whoever was involved in processing Pavel's application does not know enough about statistics to devise a fair test for someone who is claiming a 70% hit rate, when 50% would be expected by chance.

Let's be clear: Pavel has yet to claim a hit rate. He's speculated as high as 90%, but he hasn't committed to anything. He did, however, offer 67% as something he felt he could meet or exceed in a specific 100-test trial.

Also, it is not the JREF's responsibility to see to it the test is fair to the claimant. That's the claimant's responsibility. The JREF should make sure the test is fair to the JREF.
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group.

"He's the greatest mod that never was!" -- Monketey Ghost
jsfisher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2009, 07:02 PM   #384
Rodney
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,942
Originally Posted by jsfisher View Post
Let's be clear: Pavel has yet to claim a hit rate. He's speculated as high as 90%, but he hasn't committed to anything. He did, however, offer 67% as something he felt he could meet or exceed in a specific 100-test trial.
So why didn't the JREF accept that 100-trial protocol?

Originally Posted by jsfisher View Post
Also, it is not the JREF's responsibility to see to it the test is fair to the claimant. That's the claimant's responsibility. The JREF should make sure the test is fair to the JREF.
By fair to the JREF, do you mean: "The applicant won't pass even if he has the claimed ability"?
Rodney is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2009, 08:00 PM   #385
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator
 
jsfisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,457
Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
So why didn't the JREF accept that 100-trial protocol?
Excellent question. One best answered by the JREF, don't you think?

Quote:
By fair to the JREF, do you mean: "The applicant won't pass even if he has the claimed ability"?
No, not at all. But for the case at hand, what specifically is the claimed ability?
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group.

"He's the greatest mod that never was!" -- Monketey Ghost
jsfisher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2009, 08:53 PM   #386
Startz
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by jsfisher View Post

... for the case at hand, what specifically is the claimed ability?
The claimed ability is that when presented with 100 pairs of envelopes that "sixty-seven or more of Ziborov's announced responses match the photographs within his chosen envelopes." (The quote is from JREF's posted proposed protocol.)
Startz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2009, 09:10 PM   #387
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator
 
jsfisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,457
Originally Posted by Startz View Post
The claimed ability is that when presented with 100 pairs of envelopes that "sixty-seven or more of Ziborov's announced responses match the photographs within his chosen envelopes." (The quote is from JREF's posted proposed protocol.)
Pavel does not claim his success rate is 67%. It appears the 67-out-of-100 may have been back-figured, as the 0.1% mark for blind luck in a sequence of 100 50/50 tests. He has implied his real number is much higher, but he won't commit to something more specific. Without this number, we cannot really tell how fair or unfair a given test might be to Pavel.
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group.

"He's the greatest mod that never was!" -- Monketey Ghost
jsfisher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2009, 09:28 PM   #388
Startz
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by jsfisher View Post
Pavel does not claim his success rate is 67%. It appears the 67-out-of-100 may have been back-figured, as the 0.1% mark for blind luck in a sequence of 100 50/50 tests. He has implied his real number is much higher, but he won't commit to something more specific. Without this number, we cannot really tell how fair or unfair a given test might be to Pavel.
Well put and perfectly fair. Yes, the 67/100 was back figured. I did the back figuring, and I think several other forum participants did as well. The "back figuring" was to ensure that the test met what appears to be the preferred JREF standard for a preliminary test, 1 out of 1,000.

I agree that we can't really say whether whether this is fair or unfair to Pavel. However, we can tell how fair or unfair the test is to JREF because they (at least implicitly) claim an underlying success rate of 50 percent. So JREF's chances are 999/1000 if they are right. However Pavel figures his success rate, he's willing to chance the 67/100 test.
Startz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th September 2009, 11:59 PM   #389
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,632
Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
So why didn't the JREF accept that 100-trial protocol?
I often wonder why the JREF is so much against setting up expensive or long tests, when they do have a rule that says that the claimant will have to pay for the testing. For some reason they want to save the claimant's money, and it may be because they do not want to cause huge expenses for obviously deluded persons, or even that they do not want the negative publicity involved with people who are obviously deluded, or in some cases, mentally ill, who lose a fortune in this way.

Another reason why they do not accept long tests might be because they think that tester fatigue may open a window of opportunity for the claimants to act fraudulently, or it makes protocol breaches more likely, with subsequent retesting being necessary.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2009, 06:19 AM   #390
Cuddles
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,560
Originally Posted by Startz View Post
The claimed ability is that when presented with 100 pairs of envelopes that "sixty-seven or more of Ziborov's announced responses match the photographs within his chosen envelopes." (The quote is from JREF's posted proposed protocol.)
That is not the claimed ability, it is part of the protocol. The claimed ability is whatever was actually claimed on the application that was sent in before any negotiations began.

Originally Posted by Startz View Post
Well put and perfectly fair. Yes, the 67/100 was back figured. I did the back figuring, and I think several other forum participants did as well. The "back figuring" was to ensure that the test met what appears to be the preferred JREF standard for a preliminary test, 1 out of 1,000.
And this back figuring is a big problem. As I noted earlier, the tests it was back figured from were not taken in order to work out accuracy, they were testing several different protocols to see which might be the best (in the sense of having the highest score, not necessarily best in terms of controls or ease of setup). That's not any use at all.

And this has been the problem with this application all along. Pavel has no idea with what accuracy or under what conditions he can perform. Again as I said earlier, these are the fundamental things he has to know before he can sensibly propose any kind of protocol. Regardless of how much the JREF has delayed in the negotiations (and this is not the only time I've been less than impressed with their communication abilities), Pavel should have known the details before any negotiations started, he's had 2 years in the meantime to work it out, yet he still doesn't know the answer. He's accepted an answer some other people tried to work out for him, but that answer is, quite frankly, nonsense, being based on a tiny number of inconsistent tests.

Originally Posted by pavel_do View Post
If only it would be all simple.. Ye.. you state your limits and accuracy and they accept it..
OK then, go ahead. State your limits and accuracy. Not numbers that have been fed to you by others based on a few self-tests you've reported no this forum - tell us your actual ability and its accuracy.

Quote:
but ONLY after wards they tell you.. well.. you cant really run in your usual conditions, you cant wear your usual comfortable shoos, cause they might give you advantage..How about you do it in 2 sizes less of yours.. and it should rain too..to make sure u CAN perform under any conditions.. cause you confident you can..why not.. OH.. you cant perform it this way... than.. YOU FAKE TIME WAISTER...BYE... whos next??
And perhaps you could enlighten us on what this has to do with anything? The JREF has set limits on the time allowed and on the success rate you have to achieve. As far as I'm aware they have not said anything about the conditions under which you must perform, and this is certainly the first time you have complained about it.

Quote:
Ye you wouldn't if it would be told you before all the negotiation started or soon after claim was accepted.. But they say it in the end as you can see... can you??? You can, if you really read threads and negotiation... ( nevertheless I didn't not violet THEIR time limit of 8 hours.. I am not asking for 9 or 10..
This has nothing to do with the paragraph you replied to.

Quote:
(though if it would be up to me, I would ask for a week of testing lets say 50 pairs each day for 5 days.. that would FOR SURE be fair test and would allow me and any other applicant to prove to JREF there ability if they have any...) but as we know JREF is not scientific team or researchers.. they are challenge thats all..
I'm glad you understand that. If you really want to investigate your claims thoroughly, the JREF is not the correct place for you to come. Neither is any other paranormal challenge. However, if you really do wish such investigation to take place, you will have to do far more work yourself first. As noted above and in my previous post, in over 2 years you have failed to make it clear what you think you can do, under what circumstances and with what accuracy. Scientific investigation does not just happen for everyone who has an idea, you need to show that investigation may actually be worthwhile. So far you have not done anywhere near enough to interest any serious researchers.

Quote:
I guess you dont see how it is really IS.. and it is not as simple as presented from JREF side...
Again, that has nothing to do with the part you replied to. I was addressing Rodney's post, not anything to do with you.

Quote:
I think Startz (thanks to him) asnwered your question.. For past year that you talking about..the delay on JREF's side was about 9 month..12-9=3 ... So JREF 9 month Pavel/Startz 3...can you see the difference??
And what difference does that make? 12 months or 3 months, the JREF had already reached the point where they were ready to give up, then carried on for months afterwards. And again, it was things you should have been able to answer before you even applied that caused the main problems.

Quote:
The last thing.. YOU HAVE TO STATE YOUR ACCURACY when you send your claim.. That I DID.
What accuracy did you state in your claim? Why did you later accept a completely different accuracy based on a few tests you reported here if you already knew your accuracy? Why have you never given a simple, clear answer when asked what your accuracy is?

Quote:
And they not asking you to state in advance how much time you need for that...
As GzuzKryzt already noted, the very first and most important rule of the challenge clearly states that you must state the time required. Perhaps this whole sags would have gone more smoothly if you'd paid a bit more attention to the rules.

Quote:
And as we all know, or at least as most people knows, that JREF DO NOT discuss any details of test or performance or what ever. BEFORE YOU SENT INN YOUR APPLICATION .. thats is really complicate things too..You can see from threads that before my application was accepted and sent inn.. I tried many times to find out details and conditions to make sure I have proper applications but to get the reply it was like ask Queen to come down for a tea..
I can understand it may be frustrating not to get much help from them before you apply, but it really shouldn't be necessary. The whole point is that you are already supposed to know exactly what you can do, how you can do it and how reliably you can do it. The protocol negotiations are supposed to be about working out the little details to make sure proper controls are in place. It shouldn't be necessary to guide an applicant along every step of working out what they can do and when.

Quote:
So I had to do allot of different tests and tried ways from Zener cards to pairs and triples and 5th what ever..
Perhaps you're forgetting. The thing that originally brought you to the attention of people on this forum was your performances with Zener cards, and you specifically said that you found them easier to see than photos. You now say that you find photos easier. Similarly, you were the one that tried to insist on a set of 5 photos you liked while other people were encouraging you to go as simply as possible with pairs. You should be careful about trying to blame other people when your story changes, since your words are preserved here for all to see.

Quote:
during process and it would really save allot of time to me and JREF if they would only respond to questions and inquires cause they were directly related to test and application.. I didn't asked them something which is non of my business or out of boredom I would liked to know..
The point is, most of the stuff you would have liked to know is stuff that is your responsibility to find out. If you can only see photos and not Zener cards, you need to tell the JREF that. If you find it easier with pairs or with 5 photos, you need to tell the JREF that. If the envelopes need to be opened straight away or can wait until later, you need to tell the JREF that. It's your claim, you're supposed to know how it works. If you tell the JREF a condition that they won't agree to, you can either try to work around it or just drop the test. Either they accept whatever you tell them, or dismiss your claim as untestable. Faffing around asking the JREF questions about your own ability was never going to get you anywhere.


In fact, I was just having a look back at some of the older thread. Not only have the claims about what you can see and how accurate is changed, the fundamental basis of the claim is different. When you first came here you were talking about telepathy and having someone transmit images of the Zener cards to you, but the claim has now evolved into you seeing them with no-one else involved. I was only criticising the lack of detail before, but it seems that you really have no idea what you can do at all.
Cuddles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2009, 12:32 PM   #391
Moochie
Philosopher
 
Moochie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,491
Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
So why didn't the JREF accept that 100-trial protocol?


By fair to the JREF, do you mean: "The applicant won't pass even if he has the claimed ability"?
This is so tiresome. Does anyone truly believe that persistence will bring rewards -- when it's persistence in banging one's head against a brick wall?

Almost anyone can see how utterly ridiculous this is. If Pavel or anyone had anything like the sorts of abilities claimed they'd be signing multimillion dollar contracts and living the high life, not petulantly prodding the JREF to hand over the cash.

Pavel, you (Rodney), and everybody else knows that there's nothing to stop anyone from proudly displaying their fantastic abilities to the entire world. They aren't doing so because in all likelihood such abilities are merely figments of overactive imaginations, or perhaps just some poor shyster's plot to make an easy buck.

Whatever it is, all that's being accomplished here is the provision of some light relief, away from the real world where people actually have to perform as they say they can in order to earn an honest living.

Keep it up, guys, but personally, I'd like to see something a little more intellectually stimulating than what's being offered here -- this plot's getting old very quickly.


M.
Moochie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2009, 06:01 PM   #392
Rodney
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,942
Originally Posted by Moochie View Post
If Pavel or anyone had anything like the sorts of abilities claimed they'd be signing multimillion dollar contracts and living the high life, not petulantly prodding the JREF to hand over the cash.
Not necessarily, if from the public's perspective, the ability is unspectacularly above what would be expected by chance. Pavel's proposed protocol calls for him to be correct in selecting one of two envelopes two-thirds of the time, when being correct one-half of the time would be expected by chance. If he can achieve that two-thirds percentage over hundreds of controlled trials, that would be overwhelming proof of the paranormal, but would hardly make for an exciting stage show. So, he would need to be able to translate his ability into something practical, such as correctly predicting two-thirds of the time a roulette wheel landing on red or black. However, it could be that his ability is so specialized that it would be difficult to turn it into a big moneymaker.
Rodney is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2009, 08:48 PM   #393
Paul2
Philosopher
 
Paul2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,343
Rodney, wouldn't the scientific community trumpeting Pavel's 67% success rate, because they are capable of understanding the significance of his achievement, communicate effectively to the public what they couldn't understand without it? Wouldn't the eventual Nobel Prize grab the public's attention? Wouldn't the chapters re-writing nearly every science textbook be enough?
Paul2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2009, 09:07 PM   #394
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
...if...would...If...would...would...would...could ...would...
There's your problem.

A bit of a cheap shot but one gets the point, right?
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2009, 10:21 PM   #395
fromdownunder
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,471
Here is the thing. If I could do a test of 100 paired photographs/blank photographic paper and claimed a success rate of 67%, even if the odds are 1000/1, and if I could test it locally (a couple of train fares to Melbourne, and the initial test with a local sceptics group), it would cost me next to nothing. I would even agree to one minute per pair, with no pee break, which means the whole test would take less than two hours. I would do it in a public park, so that there are no hiring of accomodation costs, and bring my daughter as the "true believer" at no cost (well, I may have to buy her lunch. Hell, I'll do lunch for the Sceptics group as well, win or lose.

So, through blind chance, I pass the first test - it is possible, as somebody wins lotto every week at blindingly high odds, I get to the final challenge. That already gives me bragging rights, and the lecture circuit to woo crowds for the rest of my life. The woos would probably even pay for my overseas trip, and turn up in droves to see my "talent" in action

The return of doing two such tests (preliminary and final), even if they do total at 1,000,000/1 and the cost, based on a cost benefit analysis, would mean it costs, in the absolute worst case for me, maybe $1,000 (if I have not missed something) and the benefit would be $1,000,000. Pretty good odds. If I fail, no biggie - well worth the try. If I win, well, I still do not have THE POWER, but I do have One Million Dollars.

Is that what the challenge is really about? Does JREF really want to, or need to test these sort of claims? Especially since thousands of would be Millionairres like me could start lining up and making this sort of claim.

Norm
fromdownunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2009, 10:39 PM   #396
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,763
Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
Not necessarily, if from the public's perspective, the ability is unspectacularly above what would be expected by chance. Pavel's proposed protocol calls for him to be correct in selecting one of two envelopes two-thirds of the time, when being correct one-half of the time would be expected by chance. If he can achieve that two-thirds percentage over hundreds of controlled trials, that would be overwhelming proof of the paranormal, but would hardly make for an exciting stage show. So, he would need to be able to translate his ability into something practical, such as correctly predicting two-thirds of the time a roulette wheel landing on red or black. However, it could be that his ability is so specialized that it would be difficult to turn it into a big moneymaker.
As has been mentioned in other threads at other times, this is not representative of the nature of such claims nor of Pavel's initial claim.

Pavel did not come here because he had an ability that was hard to parse from mundane guessing. He came here because--without doing any controlled tests on his own to verify it--he was convinced he had a spectacular ability. Not spectacular in the "stage show" sense, but spectacular in the sense it was obvious.

Yet again we are left picking at the margins because 67% is apparently too difficult. Since that is the case, how on earth did Pavel conclude he had this ability at all?

The MDC is not an investigative mechanism for claimants to discover if they have a claim or what the nature of their alleged abilities are.

It is a challenge for people who know their abilities to demonstrate it.

Pavel doesn't know what his ability is nor how it can be demonstrated. Why on earth, then, did he even apply?

JREF set itself up for a PR nightmare with this by accepting the undefined claim. If they had simply turned it down until Pavel had defined his claim, there would be no issue, but much like anyone who tries to go the extra mile, they got the black eye when they slammed into the brick wall at the end of it.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2009, 10:49 PM   #397
fromdownunder
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,471
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
JREF set itself up for a PR nightmare with this by accepting the undefined claim.
Bingo!

Norm
fromdownunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2009, 12:13 AM   #398
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 11,139
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
how on earth did Pavel conclude he had this ability at all?
That's the question, isn't it? It's always the first question to ask with every new applicant. From Pavel's recent posts (especially the one where he admitted that he ocasionally does much worse than chance) the answer seems clear: confirmation bias, perhaps combined with an early run of good luck. There's no ability here, there never has been, which is why pinning it down and measuring it consistently has proved impossible.
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2009, 03:13 AM   #399
pavel_do
Critical Thinker
 
pavel_do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 363
Well what can I say.. Its easy for you so to say Bla-bla-bla.. and ask me why on earth I think I have it.. I HAVE it and why on earth u DONT I don't know, and why on earth you stating that i dont have it before proving me wrong??? I said that my results some times were lower... What do you want me to LIE?? Why on earth some one decided that it has to be always 100% hits...??
And re to casino and stage offer.. I explained about casino already many times.. reread posts if some one interested!
What can I say.. you don't believe in my ability.. You WOLCOME to test me, I will pay photos envelopes and tea... until you did not proved me wrong did not witnessed anything... STOP “making me guilty” so to say..

You just comfortable not giving a chance to anyone and yourself to think that world can e different from what you used to believe it is.
I don't have anything more to say, but if you don't believe in my gift.. YOU WELCOME TO DO TEST!
__________________
When there is wile, there is a way...
pavel_do is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2009, 03:25 AM   #400
pavel_do
Critical Thinker
 
pavel_do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by Paul2 View Post
Rodney, wouldn't the scientific community trumpeting Pavel's 67% success rate, because they are capable of understanding the significance of his achievement, communicate effectively to the public what they couldn't understand without it? Wouldn't the eventual Nobel Prize grab the public's attention? Wouldn't the chapters re-writing nearly every science textbook be enough?

I am sure they would! But how can they if they don't do such tests? Or even JREF don't do it, and just dismiss it as too expansive Do you know of any scientist who would find a bit of spare time and have some interest in testing me?? I will be glad if you or anyone lets can refer me to... some one who has name so to say... as Letter from unknown to me before testing PhD professors from University in N.C not really prove cause there COULD NOT EXPLANE MY RESULTS... I guess any other letter would be considered self made by me, unless its WORLD REKNOWN people.. well.. thous WORLD Known people.. usually not bothered find time for 100 pair test.. and what they do,.,.they refer to JREF... saying.. there is JREF for 20 years NO ONE ever came close.. so when some one come maybe they will look in to it, and I am sure they will... if only JREF would test people and don't hide behind expanse and time limit..that is again.. 8 hours it TREIR limit and I did not asked for more.. the test could be much less maybe 5-6 hours.. But I don't want to be rushed and if I can have more space to rest and not be be MORE pressurized why shouldn't I??
__________________
When there is wile, there is a way...
pavel_do is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » Welcome to ISF » Other Skeptical Organizations » JREF » Million Dollar Challenge

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:18 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.