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

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


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 Anita Ikonen

Closed Thread
Old 12th December 2008, 01:41 AM   #401
nathan
Zygoticly Phased
 
nathan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,477
My prediction about random photos
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
Not likely to be so.
Your basis for this? I wasn't being facetious, I was showing you a good way that can be used for these kinds of claims. Get photos of N different (but similar) people. Make N readings. Provide all N people the N readings and get them to select which reading is theirs. The more accurate you are, the more of readings will be matched up. Statistics can tell you what the random chance matches would be expected. Is this an experiment you'd like to do?

But of course, you're not going to do this. You're going to waffle on about 'vibrational energies' that are supposedly transmitted through TV, or maybe through time, or something.

Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
This is not in my hands and depends on the testing organizations. You may write to the IIG West and ask them to get on with it. I do this from time to time.
Huh? since when are they the only people capable of performing a correctly blinded test? You attempted some experiments, with suggestions from here, but you consistently failed to blind them, and hence had systematic errors.

You are being just the typical woo claimant, making extraordinary claims, offering anecdotes, claiming to be open to suggestions, but ignoring them, claiming to answer questions, but not answering them, shifting your claim(s), blaming everybody else for your inability to provide evidence, making cold readings and then claiming hits for misses and things you did not mention until after the fact. Soon you will be indistinguishable from troll.

If you want to be taken seriously, provide some evidence. Stop with the anecdotes.
__________________
Crank works have one advantage: they don't really lose anything in translation. Skeptic
That's the beauty of Paranormal claims - there are no failures, only newly discovered restrictions on the ability. Ashles
nathan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 01:46 AM   #402
nathan
Zygoticly Phased
 
nathan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,477
Originally Posted by Pup View Post
So, are these definite observations about the little girl that you're absolutely sure are correct, or are these guesses?
And, how many of them do you, Anita, think are correct? I.e. if you've claimed 10 issues, and have a 'hit' on one, is that a success or failure?
__________________
Crank works have one advantage: they don't really lose anything in translation. Skeptic
That's the beauty of Paranormal claims - there are no failures, only newly discovered restrictions on the ability. Ashles
nathan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 04:38 AM   #403
VisionFromFeeling
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,361
Skeptic:
I feel sorry for throwing the computer at your post (post #382) and not the others' because you just joined in, so to make up for it here is a nice one just for you:

desertgal:
Originally Posted by desertgal
That isn't what I said. I said that, in my opinion, the experiences themselves are self deception, (...)
We don't know whether it is self deception yet. From my experiences I can not conclude self deception yet.
Originally Posted by desertgal
Once again, as has been explained to you several times here, your claims of detecting anything-whether you are self deceiving, whether it actually does happen, or whether it is your imagination - are unsubstantiated. I don't know that you detected a vasectomy, or anything else. Claims are not proof.
And as I have consistently stated, my past experiences are not evidence for others but are evidence enough for me to conclude that there is reason to proceed toward having a real test.

Senex:
Originally Posted by Senex
Do it. Whatever it is you can do you should prove it right now. But I know you can't because you believe you can do something that isn't possible. There is no shame at thinking you can do something you can not do -- the shame is in underestimating yourself.
If you look at my observations page and accept that I had those experiences, it will be clear why I proceed toward having a test. I am no woo for wanting a scientific test, nor for wanting to find out what the source of the perceptions are rather than just leave it be.

SimonD:
I am working as fast as I can. It is mostly not in my hands since other people are involved.

Akhenaten:
Originally Posted by Akhenaten
Your tears will start in earnest if/when you finally realise the extent of your self-delusion.
No, because I have not claimed to have an ESP ability. The objective is to find out what the source of the perceptions are, and either outcome is fine by me. I'm starting to think that some of you skeptics will have tears if I were to pass a test. I think I am being more neutral and objective here than some of the skeptics.
Originally Posted by Akhenaten
The only information you provide is gleaned from your own extremely subjective observations. Please don't tell us what we can see - you have less chance of being correct about that than you do with being correct about your observations of atoms and human ailments.
Not necessarily, but with a test we will find out. Medical diagnose from live persons is the main part of my claim.
Originally Posted by Akhenaten
You're working on furthering your own delusion. The best that can be hoped for is that if any of these tests ever happen you'll be forced to stop spouting about having an "ability" and do something about whatever your actual problem is.
I meet with a person for the very first time and we've only known each other for a few hours. I decide to confide in him that I perceive health information and ask if I could try with him. He agrees, and I do my thing. I say that there is a very specific small region on his abdomen, right below the sternum, 1.5 cm wide vertically and 4 cm wide horizontally, in which the small intestine has a tendency of locking up, which would lead to a sensation not of pain, but strain. This information was absolutely correct and has no external symptoms. Why is it deluded to then conclude that there may be an extrasensory perception and to proceed toward tests of scientific standard? And if I were to fail all tests there is no problem since the perceptions do not interfere.

Diogenes:
Originally Posted by Diogenes
Why are you going down this road again ?
You have repeatably said that you cannot reliably diagnose with pictures...
Just to have a try, why not. It's like when kids ask a grown-up to play darts with them, and the grown-up tries and is miserable at it. Then the kids want to play again so the grown-up does it even though he knows he's bad at it, just to make the kids happy.
Originally Posted by Diogenes
You seem to have a problem with remembering from moment to moment, what supernatural powers, you do and do not have..
Nope. I told Professor Yaffle that I do not diagnose from pictures.

Pup:
Originally Posted by Pup
The weak spot, of course, is if she doesn't specify ahead of time that she's not seeing anything, before answering. Then it's too easy to guess and if it's wrong afterwards, assume that this wasn't one of the times that the power was working, but if it's right, use it as evidence that it was working. A classic way to fool yourself and others.
When I conduct tests to find out if I can perform under those test conditions I push myself just to find out what the limits of the perceptions are. When in a formal test whose set up I have agreed to I must clearly state that I am confident in my answers and no such excuses can be made after that point.
Originally Posted by Pup
So, are these definite observations about the little girl that you're absolutely sure are correct, or are these guesses?
I quote myself as having said to Professor Yaffle in the private message I sent him concerning the little girl's health that what I say is "utter nonsense".

nathan:
Yes I would try the picture experiment that you suggested, but without expecting the results I have with real life persons. There is nothing wrong with requiring real life persons or vibrational information if that is what the paranormal claim is. I have a testable claim and we will find out.
Originally Posted by nathan
Huh? since when are they the only people capable of performing a correctly blinded test? You attempted some experiments, with suggestions from here, but you consistently failed to blind them, and hence had systematic errors.
Exactly, I can not set up a test all on my own. Tests with local skeptic groups will hopefully be done shortly. If I am invited to a test with other skeptic groups and can afford and have the time to travel I will definitely attend a test.
Originally Posted by nathan
You are being just the typical woo claimant, making extraordinary claims, offering anecdotes, claiming to be open to suggestions, but ignoring them, claiming to answer questions, but not answering them, shifting your claim(s), blaming everybody else for your inability to provide evidence, making cold readings and then claiming hits for misses and things you did not mention until after the fact. Soon you will be indistinguishable from troll.
I am not a typical woo claimant for instance because I am open minded to finding out that there is no ability and because I am working hard on arranging scientific standard tests. Yes I make an extraordinary claim because I have had extraordinary experiences. Yes I offer anecdotes but I consistently state that these are not proof for others but are proof enough to convince me that I have failed to dismiss a possible ability and must proceed toward better tests. I am open to suggestions but keep in mind what my claim actually is. I have carefully ensured that I have answered every single question posted on this thread, and that's a lot of work so please give me some credit for it. I have not shifted my claim, my claim has been and still is medical diagnose from live persons. I am unable to provide evidence on my own since I am the claimant and anything that I personally bring forth can be suspected of being tampered with, but I have no one else to blame for lack of evidence since no one else has been involved at this point. I make plenty of perceptions with live persons that I can not understand how to attribute to cold reading. I have not claimed a miss as a hit and have not had a miss yet in real life.
Originally Posted by nathan
If you want to be taken seriously, provide some evidence. Stop with the anecdotes.
This is simply the case of impatience.
Originally Posted by nathan
And, how many of them [perceptions of the girl in Professor Yaffle's picture] do you, Anita, think are correct?
As I said the perceptions from that picture are to be considered nonsense. Medical diagnose from pictures is not my claim since it does not occur often enough to have a reliable frequency to be suitable for a test.

ETA: The only example of diagnose from pictures that I did confidently since the information came on its own and without effort, was shown to be correct information. I would need an elaborate test with lots of pictures so that I can select the ones where I do detect information. I can not claim that I am unable to detect medical information from pictures, but I do state that I am less interested in a test with pictures when a test with live persons functions reliably often and with high confidence level.

Last edited by VisionFromFeeling; 12th December 2008 at 04:51 AM.
VisionFromFeeling is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 04:45 AM   #404
nathan
Zygoticly Phased
 
nathan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,477
thank you for taking the time to respond

Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
Medical diagnose from pictures is not my claim since it does not occur often enough to have a reliable frequency to be suitable for a test.
You are incorrect. You made the claim that you can sometimes make accurate medical diagnoses from pictures but sometimes it doesn't work. How do you know that times it did work weren't merely random chance?

That is one of your claims in this thread. Are you withdrawing it?
__________________
Crank works have one advantage: they don't really lose anything in translation. Skeptic
That's the beauty of Paranormal claims - there are no failures, only newly discovered restrictions on the ability. Ashles
nathan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 04:46 AM   #405
VisionFromFeeling
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,361
The little girl

Sent yesterday to Professor Yaffle in private message regarding picture on http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=373

Disclaimer: This attempt on medical diagnose is done on a picture, which is not part of my claim. Accurate information can not conclude that I have an ESP ability, and inaccurate information can not conclude that I do not have an ESP ability. My claim is to detect accurate information with people in life. This is however interesting to attempt just to see how it goes.

I am not confident in this information. This information does not represent an example of how I perform with real life people. This information is not as specific as it is in real life cases. But let's just see...

*The baby's body contains more water than is normal for babies of her age and size. Normally babies contain more of the dense, yellow fat tissue than she does. She has water where fat should be. She is also lacking on nutrients, specifically the ones that build tissue (fat and protein) as opposed to vitamins and minerals. There is a lot of water in the front forehead part of the head, although not causing any pressure against the brain and is harmless.
*The liver has an issue that would probably be helped by certain vitamins. The liver is darker than normal and slightly denser and harder than normal.
*There may be a slight drawback in what her awareness and learning level should be, however as an older girl and grown woman she would be fine.

Treat this information as utter nonsense - I do! And I am sure that her parents and also doctors are much better aware of her health situation. I just gave it a try, I presented some vague nonsense, and let me know what you think.

This is not a representative example of how I perform with real life persons.
VisionFromFeeling is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 05:08 AM   #406
VisionFromFeeling
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,361
News:

For some reason I was starting to lean toward finding other discussion sites.

I tried to join The Skeptics Guide to the Universe Forum at http://skepchick.org/skepticsguide/ but believe it or not they ask "Are you human?" and you have to answer "Yes" in order to register, so I couldn't do that and asked myself where is an extraterrestrial incarnation from a white dwarf star near Arcturus supposed to go and luckily Randi welcomes the opinions of all forms of life.

I then joined the British UK Skeptics and have a thread started at http://www.ukskeptics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3278.

I've tried to arrange for tests entirely with the skeptical and scientific community but progress is very slow, so I decided to contact an alleged psychic, and I ask her whether it would be possible for me to meet with some of her clients or if she could promote my interest in meeting with volunteers who are willing to let me try psychic medical diagnose with them, free of charge of course. This way I could gain some valuable experience while we await proper tests, and will again conclude either that there is no ability, or that I've failed to dismiss the possibility of an ability and to proceed toward further tests.
VisionFromFeeling is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 05:38 AM   #407
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,613
Before I go through your reading Anita, can I just clarify something? When you say that I should treat it as utter nonsense, do you mean that you saw nothing from the photo and justmade something up? Or did you see something similar to what you have been claiming here, but just not as strong?

Or to put it another way, if you got feelings like this from one of the subjects in a test, would you pass on her because you saw nothing, or would you include her in the test?

Last edited by Professor Yaffle; 12th December 2008 at 05:41 AM.
Professor Yaffle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 05:55 AM   #408
desertgal
Illuminator
 
desertgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,198
Originally Posted by Pup View Post
Well, I've hardly been one of VFF's supporters, but in this case, I don't see the contradiction. It's not performing on demand, because I think this is what she means:

Performing on demand would be if every time someone comes up and says, "Here's a picture, tell me what you see," she can see something and respond.

What she's saying is that sometimes, randomly, when someone says, "Here's a picture, tell me what you see," she can see something and answer. But they can't demand that she see and answer; she either sees or she doesn't, and if she doesn't, she can't change that fact.
Well, respectfully, I look at it differently. To me, "on demand" would be attempting to utilize her alleged ability at the specific request of someone, whether she was successful or not, in contrast to, say, looking at a television screen and, of her own volition, "seeing" something about a celebrity on the screen (which she has claimed she has done).

I didn't mean that anyone can demand that she "see" something, just to attempt to "see" something.
desertgal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 06:04 AM   #409
Pup
Philosopher
 
Pup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,679
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
Pup:
When I conduct tests to find out if I can perform under those test conditions I push myself just to find out what the limits of the perceptions are.
Here's what I don't understand. The way you've described your ability, I'm picturing it something like normal vision, only of course you're seeing things that normal people don't. But it's not a matter of hunches, hints, guesses. There's a bright green thing right there. Or a white glob. Or a view of veins and arteries. Either these colors/shapes/views appear to you, or they don't, but you can't force yourself to see them if they don't come.

Okay, fine.

The question is not whether you see these things. I think most of us believe that you do--at least I believe you. Synesthesia and similar visual anomalies are unusual, but not unheard of.

The question is whether these things provide you correct information that you couldn't get through other means. Are you really seeing inside someone's body, or is it just an illusion? Do you really see certain chemicals in certain colors in certain situations consistently, or is it just a random visual oddity with no correlation?

So I don't understand the concept of pushing oneself, or guessing. The way I'm picturing it, you look at someone. Either you can see inside their body, or you can't. Or when you look at a beaker of a chemical, either you see an odd color or you don't. You would know whether you do or you don't. Like I can look at my TV and say, yep, it's turned on, I see a picture. Or no, it's dark.

If you don't see something, well, you just don't. No test possible.

If you do see something, then the question is whether what you're seeing is accurate.

So what I don't understand is, why guess? How do you even guess, with this ability? If I was supposed to say what was on my TV, and the screen looked dark to me, I couldn't begin to guess beyond random chance, what might be broadcast, and I'd know I was only guessing randomly, because I'd know I wasn't seeing anything.

Am I understanding this correctly?

Quote:
I quote myself as having said to Professor Yaffle in the private message I sent him concerning the little girl's health that what I say is "utter nonsense".
So when you looked at the picture, did you or didn't you "see" what was wrong with her? I'm guessing the answer was no. But wouldn't it be cool if your response still turned out to be correct in all its details, huh?

That little bright hope of "wouldn't it be cool" is what drives people to fool themselves.

Otherwise, why bother to respond? Why not just say, nope, don't see anything?
Pup is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 06:18 AM   #410
Pup
Philosopher
 
Pup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,679
Originally Posted by desertgal View Post
Well, respectfully, I look at it differently. To me, "on demand" would be attempting to utilize her alleged ability at the specific request of someone, whether she was successful or not, in contrast to, say, looking at a television screen and, of her own volition, "seeing" something about a celebrity on the screen (which she has claimed she has done).

I didn't mean that anyone can demand that she "see" something, just to attempt to "see" something.
Okay, that makes sense too. I think "on demand" could be interpreted either way.

It certainly sets up all kinds of social/psychological issues if one becomes known as the kind of person who can (even sometimes) provide answers on demand to questions that others can't answer. That kind of "on demand," which you're talking about, leads down a path with certain temptations.
Pup is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 06:36 AM   #411
desertgal
Illuminator
 
desertgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,198
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
As I said the perceptions from that picture are to be considered nonsense.
Wow. Earlier, you claimed...

Quote:
I have had experiences of detecting information from photos, although not often. I do recall one incident where a mother showed me a picture of her daughter and asked me to describe her health problems. I did so without any prior knowledge and according to the mother I was fully correct. I do detect information about the health of people on television, although this occurs more often than with photos, and has also been confirmed as accurate many times
...to validate that you had, in fact, made a correct diagnosis from a picture, but now:

Those perceptions are just "nonsense".

You can't confidently diagnose from photos or television. and the results are questionable if you do.

Even though you claimed that you accurately detected, "many times" something from those mediums, that claim should be completely disregarded as evidence of your alleged ability, since you only want to be tested with live person demonstrations.

Your goalposts are doing the conga.
desertgal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 06:40 AM   #412
desertgal
Illuminator
 
desertgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,198
Originally Posted by Pup View Post
It certainly sets up all kinds of social/psychological issues if one becomes known as the kind of person who can (even sometimes) provide answers on demand to questions that others can't answer. That kind of "on demand," which you're talking about, leads down a path with certain temptations.
True, and in light of this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=130587, it appears to be a path that VfF is considering.
desertgal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 06:57 AM   #413
Kuko 4000
Graduate Poster
 
Kuko 4000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,586
Anita, your claim is that you can spot current medical information out of people if you see them live, and you think that you can do this in a way that is not known to current science. Ok. I think it would be best for everyone to just stick with this and forget everything else for now. I'm pretty sure your local skeptics group will arrange something for you in a short notice.

You could also ask if people from this forum would be willing to meet you so you could do a reading on them?

All the best to your tests, and remember to report back.

K4
__________________
Richard Dawkins: "We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further."

Pixie of key: "HOW IS YOU NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT I AM GIVING LECTURES ON A PROBLEM."
Kuko 4000 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 07:06 AM   #414
desertgal
Illuminator
 
desertgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,198
Originally Posted by Kuko 4000 View Post
Anita, your claim is that you can spot current medical information out of people if you see them live, and you think that you can do this in a way that is not known to current science. Ok. I think it would be best for everyone to just stick with this and forget everything else for now.
K4
Fair enough.
desertgal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 08:46 AM   #415
Lennyhipp
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 12
This whole forum is pretty funny...

VFF,
I came here from your post on the news story about psychics on the front page of SWIFT.

Reading through a couple of pages, it seems to me you're crying for attention. You're making spurious claims, but the few times on here you've tried your abilities you fail epically, then make excuses about why you failed. If the "abilities" only work when in person, stop making claims that you can do it from photos.

About your diagnosis with Uncle Yimminy, you failed to get a single thing right, but wanted to take credit for many things that were either vaguely similar, or things that you noticed, but failed to mention! Sorry, but in my book (and any sane observer) your abilities have produced ZERO correct guesses.

I'll check in from time to time to see if you're ever tested under proper conditions, (and good luck with it) but it seems to me like you're not interested in being tested, you just want some pen pals because you've got nothing to do!

My guess? (i should be a psychic, because I'm 100% confident I'll be right in this case) That you will fail just as miserably in person. I have SEVERAL well documented (in my medical record) maladies and have had 3 major operations and continue to have several medical conditions, and would be happy to volunteer for your services, and will GLADLY bring complete medical profile and x-rays for my proof.

Let's get you tested already.

Len
Lennyhipp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 09:48 AM   #416
Ashles
Pith Artist
 
Ashles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The '80s
Posts: 8,692
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
ETA: One professor of physics suggested that what I refer to as vibrational information may in fact be the use of thermal information, in which case a video would not transmit that information, so I can not conclude no ability just yet.
I'm surprised everyone has ignored this.

For clarity were you talking to this professor of physics about your claimed ability?
Or were you generally referring to 'vibrational information'?
What was the context?
Is this professor contactable?

Also, don't you feel a thermal test would be incredibly easy to set up?
Just casually you could see if a radiator was on or off.
It seems strange you would mention this yet seem to have never made any effort to test this.

Finally, would you object to a proposed chemical identification test in which you only made an identification if you were sure your ability was working?
So, much like your medical testing protocol, you can reject a test instance if you are unsure or feel your power is not working.
Surely that would be fair enough.
(If not how can you possibly have reached any conclusions about identifying elements up until now if you never have confidence of when this chemical ability is working or not?)

There must presumably be instances where you feel confident to say "I definitely feel my chemical ability is working in this instance" otherwise it makes a mockery of your previous claims of being able to identify elements.
__________________
With extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat. - Jeffrey Burton Russell
It is obvious to any scientist that the bumblebee can fly because experiment proves it. - Zetie 1996
Ashles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 09:57 AM   #417
Old man
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 838
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
The cereal tests so far have had very good results, although nothing can be concluded yet.
No, when you tightened controls, your accuracy went down. That's not 'good' results.

Quote:
Yes one of my "specialties" is to know when people have to pee.
Every mother can do that!

Quote:
I will not include this in my observations. I am working to test my claim on live persons and this was not such an experience. Also this was not automatic information but information obtained from effort that I was not confident in. All information on the observations page (www.visionfromfeeling.com/observations.html) was such that I was confident in, therefore their accuracy counts toward or against the credibility of the ability.
Cherry picking.

Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
I say that there is a very specific small region on his abdomen, right below the sternum, 1.5 cm wide vertically and 4 cm wide horizontally, in which the small intestine has a tendency of locking up, which would lead to a sensation not of pain, but strain. This information was absolutely correct...
No, Anita, it isnít. In a normal human being, the small intestine is much lower than that. Yes, you claimed that his anatomy is Ďunusualí, but neither you nor he have confirmed it.

Quote:
Why is it deluded to then conclude that there may be an extrasensory perception and to proceed toward tests of scientific standard?
See above.

I am troubled by the people that are demanding proof NOW, and by the people that seem to be ridiculing you. Like UncaYimmy, I think that's there's hope for you, and I'd like to see you continue to post about your tests and the results of them.

However, I also understand the impatience of others. Every time I've felt that I was 'unusual' in anyway, I immediately tested it to death. It's hard to understand why you don't do likewise, especially with a 'power' as strong as your alleged medical diagnostic ability.
Old man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 09:59 AM   #418
volatile
Scholar and a Gentleman
 
volatile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,729
Seems to me as if she only knows if the feeling is reliable or not after she's found out whether or not she was correct...

In other words - she's guessing, and when she finds out she's guessed wrongly, she knows her powers weren't working that time. Classic confirmation bias, wrapped up in a little post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc reasoning, with a sprinkle of post-hoc rationalisation to finish the mix off.
__________________
- ""My tribe has a saying: 'If you're bleeding, look for a man with scars'" - Leela, Doctor Who 'Robots of Death'.
volatile is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 10:07 AM   #419
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,613
That's pretty much why I would like her to tell me how confident she is about what she saw in the baby photo, before I go through it with her.
Professor Yaffle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 10:54 AM   #420
Ashles
Pith Artist
 
Ashles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The '80s
Posts: 8,692
At the moment it does seem a lot like guessing and then whenever there is a hit the ability was working and when there is a miss it was just a guess or 'finding out the limits of the ability'.

I agree completely with Professor Yaffle - in any testing (whether casual on this thread or official) it now seems very important to get clarification as to whether each response is considered by VfF to be an actual example of her ability or just guessing.
__________________
With extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat. - Jeffrey Burton Russell
It is obvious to any scientist that the bumblebee can fly because experiment proves it. - Zetie 1996
Ashles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 11:28 AM   #421
Moochie
Philosopher
 
Moochie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,491
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post

<snip>

One professor suggested to me that I might be reading thermal information, which is heat patterns, which is vibrational information. This would have to be detected in person, and this would be the case of an extrasensory ability.
That wouldn't be The Professor, would it?


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 Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 11:38 AM   #422
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,613
Originally Posted by Moochie View Post
That wouldn't be The Professor, would it?


M.
Well it certainly wasn't me.
Professor Yaffle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 11:44 AM   #423
skeen
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 255
Hi everyone, I'm new.

I've read too many of the pages in this thread, and I conclude that not a single spec of evidence has been presented thus far.

You would think this would be super easy to test, but as with all other claimants, it drags out into semantics, dissection of words and phrases, and in the end, we're left with what we started with: nothing.

The claimant is 100% indistinguishable from every other claimant I've ever read on this forum, and seen in Randi's videos. If I can kick a ball I can kick it every time. Do what you say you can do, win the million dollars, and, quite frankly, shake the very foundations of our understanding of the entire universe.

I cannot fathom that someone who truly believes they have this ability, would do anything at all, other than proving it to the world - the repercussions of such a thing would stop the world in its tracks. But so it goes. As always.
skeen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 12:05 PM   #424
Moochie
Philosopher
 
Moochie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,491
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
Locknar:
As I answered in thread http://www.internationalskeptics.com...=129731&page=3 where you first presented this question:


ETA: You can all access the material of this skeptics group following that link. You are not required to join in order to read about our scheduled meetings, messages and discussions! Check it out!
I smell hoax. That's my ability and I'm sticking to it.


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 Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 01:36 PM   #425
Senex
Philosopher
 
Senex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Connecticut School for Rumpology.
Posts: 5,978
Originally Posted by skeen View Post
Hi everyone, I'm new.
Hi Skeen!
Another escapee from AA
Quote:
I've read too many of the pages in this thread, and I conclude that not a single spec of evidence has been presented thus far
.
And your point?
Quote:
You would think this would be super easy to test, but as with all other claimants, it drags out into semantics, dissection of words and phrases, and in the end, we're left with what we started with: nothing.
Hold on, unlike these rascals I flirted. I didn't start with a date and I'm optimistic what I end up with.
Quote:
The claimant is 100% indistinguishable from every other claimant I've ever read on this forum, and seen in Randi's videos. If I can kick a ball I can kick it every time. Do what you say you can do, win the million dollars, and, quite frankly, shake the very foundations of our understanding of the entire universe.
That's not fair.
Quote:
I cannot fathom that someone who truly believes they have this ability, would do anything at all, other than proving it to the world - the repercussions of such a thing would stop the world in its tracks. But so it goes. As always.
That's not fair!

Did you notice how I stood up for you VFF? I even used an exclamation point
Senex is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 01:58 PM   #426
Coveredinbeeees
Scholar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by skeen View Post
The claimant is 100% indistinguishable from every other claimant I've ever read on this forum, and seen in Randi's videos.
Welcome to the Forum Skeen.

Sorry to pick on your post but this has been said by a few people and you happen to be the most recent.

I disagree strongly with the statement that VFF is the typical woo claimant. Her main distinguishing feature, for me, is her response to every question asked of her. I give her a great deal of credit for this and it gives me a great deal of hope that she will benefit from her time on the forum.

Her responses may not always be satisfactory and do not always indicate an understanding of the question asked but it certainly looks like she reads and considers every post in this thread. This behaviour stands out a mile from the typical claimant.

VFF, I am happy to take it on trust that you are setting up a test with your local skeptic group as well as the IIG. I wish you the best of luck with those arrangements.

I do have to say that I can understand the frustration of some of the posters on this thread though. When you agree to informal testing on the board, such as your photograph diagnoses but simultaneously claim that the results of those tests will make no difference to your thinking one way or the other, as in case of the photo' provided by Prof' Yaffle, It does make the whole process seem like a waste of their time and yours.

I look forward to hearing what you think of the sort of test suggested by Ashles in his most recent post, where you test one of your chemical identification abilities but only give an answer when you feel the ability is working.

It would likewise be possible to set up a double blind cereal test exactly mimicking the conditions in which you claim to have "seen" bacteria glowing. You could run such a test in such a way as to only give an answer when you actually see the glow rather than straining to see it when it is not there. I would be happy to write a protocol for you.

Likewise your idea for a photo test where a large number of photos are provided and you only read the ones in which you "see" something without straining is a good one.

However, all of the tests described above would be wasted if you did not agree ahead of time that you could draw a useful conclusion from their results positive or negative.

With such an agreement the tests above would be worthwhile and could be run on the forum or, in the case of a double blind cereal test by you with an assistant, for your own edification.

In the absence of such an agreement I would suggest that the best thing to do would be to concentrate on the tests you are arranging with IIG and your local group. It is the path of least frustration

Best of luck,

'beeees
Coveredinbeeees is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 02:01 PM   #427
VisionFromFeeling
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,361
The longest reply with no interesting content - yet:

Professor Yaffle:
Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle
When you say that I should treat it as utter nonsense, do you mean that you saw nothing from the photo and justmade something up? Or did you see something similar to what you have been claiming here, but just not as strong?

Or to put it another way, if you got feelings like this from one of the subjects in a test, would you pass on her because you saw nothing, or would you include her in the test?
The perceptions from this picture are not guesses, nor do they represent the confidence level I have with persons in life. I was using an entirely different type of hunch and am interested in finding out if it is able to produce any kind of results, although I am expecting that it does not. I would not mind trying a test with pictures although it would be to find out whether I can or can not perform with pictures, and would not be to investigate a claim of mine, as I have never claimed to be able to reliably on demand produce the images from pictures. The information I have given you is not of the same form as in real life, it is not nearly as strong, so if it were the case of a test with live persons and the quality of the information was as low as here, I would not state it as my answer since in other cases I experience information more confidently and would prefer to have that tested for accuracy as it represents what I claim to do.

No, the hunches from your picture are not strong enough for me to state them as answers in a test. Yet I do not know what I might be able to do with pictures and am, even if barely, interested in finding out.

You must also understand that I have never sought to find some extrasensory ability in myself, and I am not interested in investigating what are the weaker parts of the perceptions since they do not occur frequently. I am not searching for some new "psychic ability" nor am I trying to enhance one. I am interested in testing the medical diagnose with live persons since it has already and on its own produced interesting results.

Pup:
Originally Posted by Pup
So I don't understand the concept of pushing oneself, or guessing. The way I'm picturing it, you look at someone. Either you can see inside their body, or you can't. Or when you look at a beaker of a chemical, either you see an odd color or you don't. You would know whether you do or you don't.
With regard to chemical identification, colors from atoms, and medical diagnose from pictures and video, these are all perceptions that do not occur often, and not reliably often enough to be useful in a test setting. I have had little experience with these aspects of the perceptions and therefore in a test I will push myself even to the point of guessing, to find out if it is possible to produce anything of interest. As I have consistently stated these are not part of the claim I want to have tested, even if they were the case of a true even if infrequent extrasensory ability, I would have no interest in finding out. Medical information with live persons is frequent enough and interesting enough that I want to have it tested.

I have pushed myself on these tests of the other aspects of the perceptions to find out if there is anything of interest, and just as expected there does not seem to be. There either is no ESP ability in these other aspects, or their frequency is too low for us to find out, and I couldn't care less, since if there are abilities in these areas then it would also exist in medical diagnose in live persons and that is where I would find out.
Originally Posted by Pup
So when you looked at the picture, did you or didn't you "see" what was wrong with her? I'm guessing the answer was no. But wouldn't it be cool if your response still turned out to be correct in all its details, huh? That little bright hope of "wouldn't it be cool" is what drives people to fool themselves. Otherwise, why bother to respond? Why not just say, nope, don't see anything?
I did not receive the type of perceptions that I do in real life. I received hunches, and I have no idea as to the reliability of these hunches and will find out in little tests such as these. Even if I were able to perform to some extent with pictures, I would never want a formal test on this since I am not interested. I am wanting to find out if there is any ability with pictures, more so on your behalf than mine. While we are moving away from the main objective and claim and are getting excited although the results were as expected.

desertgal:
Originally Posted by desertgal
...to validate that you had, in fact, made a correct diagnosis from a picture, but now: Those perceptions are just "nonsense". You can't confidently diagnose from photos or television. and the results are questionable if you do. Even though you claimed that you accurately detected, "many times" something from those mediums, that claim should be completely disregarded as evidence of your alleged ability, since you only want to be tested with live person demonstrations.
I have made correct diagnose from pictures and television in the past, and whether truly so or due to confirmation bias I can not recall a single incorrect instance. Past experiences deal with information that came on its own and was not forced or acchieved with effort, and these past experiences represent something very seldomly occurring that I have not wanted to have tested due to that. The information with UncaYimmy's and Professor Yaffle's pictures did not come on its own and was an effort made by me, I have reported hunches as opposed to perceptions as my answers, just to find out, but neither expecting any good results nor being interested in pursuing such a claim since there is a much stronger and more reliable expression of the perceptions in which I have had past experiences that compel me to have it tested. (I'm a master of long sentences by the way.)

I have never claimed to be able to reproduce perceptions from pictures or video on demand and that is the reason why I have not wanted to have it tested. I consider it untestable and also uninteresting. And yes the claim that past experiences have yielded accurate information can not be taken as evidence, that is correct and all in accordance with what I have consistently said.

My goal is and has been to test whether I detect accurate medical information from live persons.

And no I have no intentions of becoming a "working psychic", I have consistently said that I do not offer my "services" openly to people and that I would not charge a fee for trying, so yours and Pup's claim that I am headed toward that "temptation" is unfounded nonsense. What I have expressed however is an interest in meeting with more people to gain experience and a better understanding in what this is and what this isn't, and that is purely for test purposes done out of a scientific interest.

Kuko 4000:
Originally Posted by Kuko 4000
You could also ask if people from this forum would be willing to meet you so you could do a reading on them?
I have made myself available for anyone willing to volunteer to meet with me and let me try this "ability" with them, and have received no answers yet even though there are those who are in the same area as I.

Lennyhipp:
Originally Posted by Lennyhipp
Reading through a couple of pages, it seems to me you're crying for attention. You're making spurious claims, but the few times on here you've tried your abilities you fail epically, then make excuses about why you failed.
I think my perceptions are entitled to some attention from a skeptics point of view, and whether you can believe it or not I approach this impersonally. I don't think this is about me, which is why I don't discuss myself as a person here, I think it is about the perceptions, their level of accuracy, and what tests can be done to find out.

My claim is to detect medical information in live persons. I have agreed to test some of the other aspects of the perceptions but as expected they are either non-existent or do not occur reliably enough to be testable, and which ever it is has not been established yet nor am I interested.

Regarding UncaYimmy's pictures what I was the most confident in, and quite confident at that, was a problem with the neck vertebrae, which was correct. However I am not interested in tests or results with pictures since that is not the claim I am here to test.
Originally Posted by Lennyhipp
but it seems to me like you're not interested in being tested, you just want some pen pals because you've got nothing to do!
I am absolutely and totally interested in having my claim tested and have done everything I can to work towards that goal. I've got plenty to do and this is one of those things right now.
Originally Posted by Lennyhipp
My guess? (...) That you will fail just as miserably in person. I have SEVERAL well documented (in my medical record) maladies and have had 3 major operations and continue to have several medical conditions, and would be happy to volunteer for your services, and will GLADLY bring complete medical profile and x-rays for my proof. Let's get you tested already.
Wonderful. When and where can we meet? I'd love to be tested right away, today even, and have done all I can to proceed towards a test. Perhaps you could write a friendly reminder to the IIG asking why it takes them months always to get back to me.

Ashles:
Originally Posted by Ashles
For clarity were you talking to this professor of physics about your claimed ability?
Or were you generally referring to 'vibrational information'?
What was the context?
Is this professor contactable?
Yes I shared with this professor about my perceptions, the accuracy I have experienced, and my speculations as to what the source of that information might be. We had a brief discussion about how different animals perceive through vibrational information, such as light, and instruments designed to access more of the reality humans don't perceive. I would need his permission before involving him in this. This is not a typical scientific inquiry and involves topics that are undesirable to many which is why I am careful with how I deal with this.

Originally Posted by Ashles
Also, don't you feel a thermal test would be incredibly easy to set up?
Just casually you could see if a radiator was on or off.
It seems strange you would mention this yet seem to have never made any effort to test this.
Interesting suggestion, however I suspect that there is something "extra" when it comes to tissue structure that I'd be better able to detect.

Originally Posted by Ashles
Finally, would you object to a proposed chemical identification test in which you only made an identification if you were sure your ability was working?
So, much like your medical testing protocol, you can reject a test instance if you are unsure or feel your power is not working.
Surely that would be fair enough.
Yes I would agree to such a test. In the test with Madalch with the beakers I did not perceive the answer but answered based on hunch just to find out if there would have been other aspects besides color that could lead to answers. However,

I am not interested in searching for hidden potentials in psychic abilities and am as reluctant today as ever before to "try" the weakest aspects of my perceptions. I am not here to "find" a psychic ability. The objective is to study the perceptions of medical information in live persons, that occur with a reliably high frequency. There already is a good candidate for tests and I do not want to "try to find" something else that was never part of my claim. I am not "trying to be psychic", I am merely wanting to study something that in its own right has compelled me to look into it.

Old man:
Originally Posted by Old man
No, when you tightened controls, your accuracy went down. That's not 'good' results.
My claim is medical diagnose from live persons and as pass-time I have agreed to test the weaker aspects of the perceptions.

Originally Posted by Old man
Every mother can do that!
And every mother can detect what men have had a vasectomy? Maybe that's why they are mothers in the first place!

Originally Posted by Old man
Cherry picking.
Absolutely not. The observations page represents all perceptions I have made since November 8 2008 where I have had the chance to investigate the accuracy of the perceptions. None have been excluded from that list. You'll just have to take my word for it since I can't prove what I haven't done.

Originally Posted by Old man
No, Anita, it isnít. In a normal human being, the small intestine is much lower than that.
I realize that now and agree that this represents incorrect information, thank you for pointing that out. Not to sound naive but I can not rule out that there'd been that feeling of cramp in that exact region and that it would somehow also involve the small intestine and have been perceived in connection. Sounds ridiculous I know but I am remaining objective. It is interesting that this person would agree with my description. Oh well, I can't wait to have real tests because how can I depend on the reliability of these persons' accounts of my accuracy? See, I embrace all results.

Originally Posted by Old man
Every time I've felt that I was 'unusual' in anyway, I immediately tested it to death. It's hard to understand why you don't do likewise, especially with a 'power' as strong as your alleged medical diagnostic ability.
I have taken all steps that I can think of toward having a test. What more would you suggest that I do at this very point?

volatile:
Originally Posted by volatile
Seems to me as if she only knows if the feeling is reliable or not after she's found out whether or not she was correct...
No I am well aware of the confidence level of the perceptions before hand. I stated the confidence level in both cases of picture tests with Forum members, but failed to emphasize the confidence level with the test with Madalch since I was not even trying something that was a specific claim of mine and just wanted to do it for the sake of trying.

Ashles:
Originally Posted by Ashles
At the moment it does seem a lot like guessing and then whenever there is a hit the ability was working and when there is a miss it was just a guess or 'finding out the limits of the ability'.
And that is why at a formal test I will clearly state the confidence level so that all of my answers can be checked for accuracy and a result can be obtained, at which no excuses can be made. My objective with all tests discussed in this thread has been to investigate the other aspects of the perceptions in case there is anything of use there, and mostly on your behalfs and not mine.

I would never come here claiming to be able to detect health information from pictures. I have had to test this due to requests from others.

Alright everyone: no more tests on what my claim is not. Let's just allow ourselves to become very impatient and bored while we await the tests of what my claim actually is, and that's how it's going to be. No more entertainment with the other aspects of perceptions.

Moochie:
Originally Posted by Moochie
That wouldn't be The Professor, would it?
Very funny (honestly is!), and that is why I now decide to not involve the professor in question in this discussion no matter what he would decide on himself if asked. This does not feel like the professional, objective and calm environment for scientific thought to which I would invite faculty. You skeptics are a special bunch.

skeen:
Hi and welcome to these lengthy skeptics discussion which have yielded nothing of interest yet.
Originally Posted by skeen
I've read too many of the pages in this thread, and I conclude that not a single spec of evidence has been presented thus far.

You would think this would be super easy to test, but as with all other claimants, it drags out into semantics, dissection of words and phrases, and in the end, we're left with what we started with: nothing.

The claimant is 100% indistinguishable from every other claimant I've ever read on this forum, and seen in Randi's videos. If I can kick a ball I can kick it every time. Do what you say you can do, win the million dollars, and, quite frankly, shake the very foundations of our understanding of the entire universe.

I cannot fathom that someone who truly believes they have this ability, would do anything at all, other than proving it to the world - the repercussions of such a thing would stop the world in its tracks. But so it goes. As always.
In my defense, it is true that no evidence toward my claim has been obtained at this point. I would agree that it is a testable claim, but I have taken all measures that a psychic claimant can toward having tests of my claim. It has been one and a half years since I contacted a group of paranormal investigators. It takes them months to get back each time, whereas I reply in full within the next day.

I am definitely not like other claimants come across! I am absolutely interested in testing my claim and have done nothing to prevent that from happening! This discussion thread however tangles into discussions about the other aspects of my perceptions that I have not wanted to test or investigate.

And if it were the case of a true extrasensory ability what says that it should work at all times? It is not necessarily like kicking a ball, we don't know that. What if it's more like painting, where a person has to have the right inspiration in order for it to be productive? We don't know that. But, however, what is my claim, ie. medical information from live persons, works reliably well and reliably often and that makes it a testworthy claim. The other aspects of the perceptions occur infrequently. Medical diagnose from live persons occurs frequently.

I admit that I am careful in how I arrange these tests. I have not told the world about this or aggressively sought to have the test asap. It concerns a topic that is provocative to many and I must respect that. I am now beginning to take more measures toward having a test, since I see that others won't do the work for me although they should because I can not test myself.

Moochie:
Originally Posted by Moochie
I smell hoax. That's my ability and I'm sticking to it.
Hoax? From me having contacted a local skeptics group? What?? So even when I take what should be the right measures I've done wrong! There is no hoax involved. I joined a local skeptics group (http://skeptics.meetup.com/182/) and have asked for an opportunity to try my ability with them.

Last edited by VisionFromFeeling; 12th December 2008 at 02:24 PM.
VisionFromFeeling is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 02:28 PM   #428
Tristan Chi
Thinker
 
Tristan Chi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southern Sweden
Posts: 189
Originally Posted by skeen View Post
Hi everyone, I'm new.

I've read too many of the pages in this thread, and I conclude that not a single spec of evidence has been presented thus far.

You would think this would be super easy to test, but as with all other claimants, it drags out into semantics, dissection of words and phrases, and in the end, we're left with what we started with: nothing.

The claimant is 100% indistinguishable from every other claimant I've ever read on this forum, and seen in Randi's videos. If I can kick a ball I can kick it every time. Do what you say you can do, win the million dollars, and, quite frankly, shake the very foundations of our understanding of the entire universe.

I cannot fathom that someone who truly believes they have this ability, would do anything at all, other than proving it to the world - the repercussions of such a thing would stop the world in its tracks. But so it goes. As always.
Greetings skeen. That's my sentiments precisely. And my hat off for omitting the apostrophe in 'its'
Tristan Chi 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 Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 02:36 PM   #429
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,613
Thanks for clarifying, Anita. Just one more question if you don't mind? When you have seen things in photoes or video before, were they always of a similar nature to how you felt with this photo? Or do you sometimes get a strong sensation like you say you do when seeing a person in the flesh? And have you ever verified any information you thought you received in a photo/video? Apologies if you have already mentioned this, but it is a long thread and hard to keep track.
Professor Yaffle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 02:48 PM   #430
Old man
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 838
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
Old man:
My claim is medical diagnose from live persons and as pass-time I have agreed to test the weaker aspects of the perceptions.
Your EXACT words -
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
The CEREAL TESTS Ö have had very good results...
No, they havenít had Ďgoodí results.

Quote:
And every mother can detect what men have had a vasectomy? Maybe that's why they are mothers in the first place!
Your EXACT words -
Quote:
YES ONE OF MY "SPECIALTIES" IS TO KNOW WHEN PEOPLE HAVE TO PEE.
I wasnít commenting on your vasectomy detection, was I?

Quote:
I have taken all steps that I can think of toward having a test. What more would you suggest that I do at this very point?
Gee, I donít know, how about going to the mall, picking out people who you think have had, say, appendectomies, and asking them if youíre right about it?

Last edited by Old man; 12th December 2008 at 02:53 PM. Reason: Correct mistake.
Old man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 02:52 PM   #431
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,613
Anyway, just for the sake of your curiosity:
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
*The baby's body contains more water than is normal for babies of her age and size. Normally babies contain more of the dense, yellow fat tissue than she does. She has water where fat should be..... There is a lot of water in the front forehead part of the head, although not causing any pressure against the brain and is harmless.
I think this is very unlikely. Because of her condition, the doctors very losely monitor the hydration and electrolyte balance etc in her body. At the time of that photo she hadrecently had such tests and all were in normal range.


Quote:
She is also lacking on nutrients, specifically the ones that build tissue (fat and protein) as opposed to vitamins and minerals.


At the time of the photo she was being fed a very carefully balanced nutritional feed as well as some breast milk. She was growing well so there is no indication that the nutrients were not being absorbed.


Quote:
*The liver has an issue that would probably be helped by certain vitamins. The liver is darker than normal and slightly denser and harder than normal.


When her problems were being diagnosed, she had scans that would have indicated if there was anything unusual about her liver - there wasn't.

Quote:
*There may be a slight drawback in what her awareness and learning level should be, however as an older girl and grown woman she would be fine.
The doctors believe there has been no cognitive delay as a result of her problems (which was a worry). She seems to be developing normally, except that her physical development is a little behind due to her being immobile for most of the first few months of her life.

And finally - what you didn't pick up, that I would expect someone to pick up if they could see into people's bodies and notice anything abnormal:

-A very large heart for her age, yet the heart is still smaller than the "space" for the heart. The heart is also different genetically than the rest of her body.

-A large amount of hair on her body.

-The presence of a particular drug (cyclosporin, an immunosuppressant) - which is what was causing the excess hair.

-Differences in her immune system, or her blood as a result of the aforementioned immunosuppressants.

In short she has had a heart transplant because of a severe congenital abnormality of her heart that the doctors were unable to correct.

Last edited by Professor Yaffle; 12th December 2008 at 02:55 PM.
Professor Yaffle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 03:45 PM   #432
desertgal
Illuminator
 
desertgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,198
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
[b]
And no I have no intentions of becoming a "working psychic", I have consistently said that I do not offer my "services" openly to people and that I would not charge a fee for trying, so yours and Pup's claim that I am headed toward that "temptation" is unfounded nonsense. What I have expressed however is an interest in meeting with more people to gain experience and a better understanding in what this is and what this isn't, and that is purely for test purposes done out of a scientific interest.
Once again, you have put your own misinterpretation on what was said. Nowhere did Pup or I state that you would "charge a fee for trying", and if you can show me where we did say that, please do so.

In the other thread, you spoke of practicing the ability, which is precisely what we were speaking of.

As for "unfounded nonsense", a) what you were referring to as "unfounded nonsense" was, again, something that neither Pup nor I said; and b) given some of the unbelievable tales you have spun in this forum, you are hardly one to point a finger at anyone else for "unfounded nonsense".
desertgal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 04:57 PM   #433
Ducky
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 11,933
(Note: Just so there isn't any confusion, all discussion of being administrator of a forum has nothing to do with the JREF forums. This is specifically discussing the Skeptic's Guide to the Universe forums.)


I fear either this forum is feeding a very ingenious troll, or someone who is not all there.

I am to the SGU podcast's forums as Terry is to this forum (that is to say, I am the technical admininistrator.) All of the emails to sguadmin@theforum go to both me and the social-policy admin (Beleth.) I woke up today to the following exchange:

Quote:
(from the newly registered user VisionFromFeeling)

I will kindly decline joining your skeptics forum since you do not welcome persons who believe that they have connections with other planets. I have come to understand myself as a reincarnation from a white dwarf star near Arcturus, and you force new members to answer "yes" to being human. As ridiculous as that sounds, especially to skeptics, it makes more sense to me than any other description of myself.

Please do not add me as a new member on your site.

Kind regards,
(name withheld)
Beleth replied:

Quote:
Hi, -

I feel that I owe you an explanation as to why we ask that question.

Internet forums like the SGU's are constantly plagued by automated systems trying to register accounts so that they can post unwanted advertisements. There are a few well-regarded methods for thwarting such attempts. One is the random-letter graphic which is easy for an intelligent responder to read but is difficult for an automated process. Another is a random but easy question which the user has to answer. We have decided to use both these methods.

The question is not designed to discriminate against non-human intelligence; it is designed to weed out attempts to post spam to our board. As a considerable majority of the intelligences who apply for membership are human, it seemed reasonable to have our question be "Are you human?". No offense should be implied by this question. We welcome intelligent, civil discussion from all sources.

I see that you have answered "Yes" to this question despite your actual origin, so I am going to approve your application. Feel free to join us, or not, as you wish. All I ask is that you don't take our nominal attempt at security as a personal insult.

Regards,
Beleth
Administrator, The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe Forum
I got Beleth's reply just as I was crafting this one myself which I didn't send as Beleth had addressed the issue much more eloquently and diplomatically:

Quote:
"You're human, you answered yes to the question. Now we are at an impasse because either you lied to register your account or you're trying to screw with me. Since your email is polite I rule out that you are actually a white-dwarf star. Everyone knows that those are the frat-boys of the universe. They pee in your closet when too drunk, try to sleep with your sister, and end up drunkenly shouting obscenities at cops as you try to drive or walk them home. Since I don't see in your email (or your thread at the JREF) any moment where you slam a beer bong, light a fart and scream an affirmation of all that is awesome of the party I don't believe you actually are one.

This leaves two possibilities: Either you are human or you are a very deviously programmed AI spam bot. Given how polite your email is, and how quickly and swiftly you reply to posts on the JREF forum, I am not convinced you are human, meaning you lied in the registration process for this forum. I further think you cannot possibly be human as any human would have been peeing themselves with laughter at the thought of acting in the way you have so far.

Now, I am open to White Dwarf Stars on the forums. If this is indeed the case send me pictures of your most recent party and I will be convinced. That is, if you send me pictures that are convincing I will be convinced. None of this knitting doilies and watching NCIS type parties. I want to see crotch grabbing, puking on the floor, self-urination and faux girls-gone-wild contests ending in fistfights and insults of others being latent-homosexuals. If it is a truly epic party there will be pics of an excursion to spread poop on a neighboring fraternity's front door.

Anything less than an epic drunken frat party picture series means you're AI spambot and banned.

I'm not joking. Send me pics or I *********** ban you.

Yours,

Ducky, Technical Administrator."
I'm not sure which would have been better to send. I think Beleth was much more charitable than I, but that is why he's the administrator of the moderation team and I don't deal with the public.

Seriously anyone who answers yes to being human to register for a forum then emails the admins and complains that they are a white dwarf star and you're discriminating against them is either not all there or completely screwing around.


Cheers.

-Ducky
Ducky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 05:00 PM   #434
VisionFromFeeling
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,361
Moving on...

- IIG West -
Since one and a half years I have now been in contact with the Independent Investigations Group (www.iigwest.com). In my defense although not intended as criticism the delay is due to their part as it typically takes them months to get back to me and I reply within the next day, but there is continuous even if slow progress. We are in the process of protocol negotiations and are not stuck in any difficulties or disagreements. Their last response involved issues regarding what ailments to include in the test, specifically I had said that ailments accompanied by pain would be easier to detect, and the IIG worry that they won't be able to find plenty of such subjects for the test. In my reply I agree to drop this suggestion in order to facilitate the arrangements of the test and I encourage the IIG to proceed since I believe that we can arrive at a test. I judge myself as being a most agreeable paranormal applicant and have agreed after careful consideration to all of the conditions, trusting that they as the testing organization know what is required of a test and having full faith that they are not trying to "trick me up". The only issue on my behalf is still whether music would distract me and I will have to find an answer to that.

A volunteer is needed to supply me with his or her e-mail address so that I can send the two versions of the protocol negotiation word documents to this person who can then post these as attachments on this Forum. I am unable to post .doc files larger than 19.5 KB and tried to crop the documents but it would end up being several of one paragraph each. I have seen others post documents here before so someone please step up and we can make the protocol negotiations available here for everyone. The best way to understand the work and interaction between myself and the IIG is to read those protocol documents.

- Winston Salem Local Skeptics Group -
I've joined a local skeptics group and that is perhaps the best thing to do at this point toward testing my claims. We are in fact meeting next Thursday!
E-mail from group organizer Jim Moury;
(...) Announcing a new Meetup for Winston Salem Skeptics Meetup Group!

What: Winston Salem Skeptics December Meetup
When: December 18, 2008 7:00 PM
Where: Click the link below to find out!

Meetup Description: This months meeting is going to be at Wake Forest University in the physics building. Eric Carlson will be giving a talk on testing applicants for the Million Dollar Challenge that is offered by the James Randi Educational Foundation. There is a woman from Charlotte that claims to have extra sensory perception and is interested in be tested and might be able to attend. As soon as we know what room number the meeting will be held on, we will pass that info on to you.

Learn more here:
http://www.meetup.com/f-a-c-t/calendar/9203122/
To which I replied;
Wonderful! It is held sooner! [It was first said to be held on December 29th] I am that woman from Charlotte interested in testing possible extrasensory perception and will definitely attend! I wouldn't miss it for the world! Hope to see many of you there, and if time permits, please consider letting me try psychic medical diagnose on you.
Read about our meetings and online discussions on http://skeptics.meetup.com/182/
I have written to Dr. Carlson who is an active member of this skeptics group and that was two days ago but I hope to see him at the meeting. (He is my hero, did you guys know he is a Quantum Physicist? In my world that's like a famous celebrity!)

- Other measures -
I do not qualify to apply with the JREF MDC since I do not have sufficient media presence nor have I been able to have a demonstration of my abilities. Seems like I need a test before I can have a test.

I have started a discussions thread in our British equivalent at http://www.ukskeptics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3278 to engage more people into this.

I have written to a couple of professors who have conducted investigations in psychic medical diagnose before asking if they would be willing to assist me in my own investigation. I have not heard a reply and can't write again because that would be nagging.

I wrote to a local alleged psychic (I feel obliged to say "alleged" especially since I am in skeptic territory) asking whether it would be possible for me to meet with some of her clients or for her to promote my interest in meeting with volunteers for psychic medical diagnose. Perhaps us psychics are part of a supportive network. That was yesterday and I await her response. I assumed that this would be a good way of finding volunteers and could give me some more valuable experience and understanding into what these perceptions are, however not evidence.

- In conclusion -
Become involved with the local skeptics group and with them try to dismiss the possibility of an extrasensory perception. We can not burden them unless they make that choice to set up a proper test whose results would prove an ability, but can easily set up tests that will either conclude no ability, or conclude to proceed toward further and more properly set up tests. Proceed in arranging a test with the IIG. As much as possible meet with volunteers who would let me try psychic medical diagnose with them. Continue in discussions with skeptical forum members to enhance understanding of this phenomenon as well as gain valuable outside perspective into this.
VisionFromFeeling is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 06:00 PM   #435
godofpie
Chief Cook & Bottle Washer
 
godofpie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 950
VFF-You can email the protocol pdf to me @ jim@agreatescape.net and I can post them on our meetup site. As soon as I receive the file from you, I will post a link here for others to see. Having a partially completed protocol should be a great help in trying to plan something for Thursday.
__________________
king of all that is pizza
"You only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out" - Warren Buffett
"Gods don't write books, people do. Gods create Universes. When you refuse to study the Universe, but choose instead to study a book, you are studying the work of men, not God." -Brainache
godofpie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 07:00 PM   #436
Ducky
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 11,933
Originally Posted by VisionFromFeeling View Post
For some reason I was starting to lean toward finding other discussion sites.

I tried to join The Skeptics Guide to the Universe Forum at http://skepchick.org/skepticsguide/ but believe it or not they ask "Are you human?" and you have to answer "Yes" in order to register, so I couldn't do that and asked myself where is an extraterrestrial incarnation from a white dwarf star near Arcturus supposed to go and luckily Randi welcomes the opinions of all forms of life.
Let's correct some misinformation here.

Hi, I am one of the admins at the Skeptic's Guide to the Universe Forum.

You answered yes to the "Are you human" question. I know this because had you not the registration process would have aborted. It did not abort, and your account was approved for permission to post. THEN you emailed us the fantastical pile of crap I quoted earlier.

So, the fact of the matter is you did register, you did answer yes, and then you emailed us some nonsense about being from another star system as a retraction of your registration.

Also, you registered at SGU on Dec 11th, 2008 - well after you've run a thread here at JREF for 11 pages (this thread starts on Nov 5th.) So no, you did not try to register with us first, and I have the logs to prove it.

This makes me think you are being less than forthcoming with your attempts to discuss whatever it is you're trying to claim here in this thread.

Last edited by Ducky; 12th December 2008 at 07:13 PM.
Ducky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 07:27 PM   #437
Senex
Philosopher
 
Senex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Connecticut School for Rumpology.
Posts: 5,978
Originally Posted by Ducky View Post
. THEN you emailed us the fantastical pile of crap I quoted earlier.
Hey, hey, hey. Slow down there Ducky. After reading Beleth's brilliant considered response I would have hoped working with someone as articulate as him would have worn off a little bit on you. VFF just has a sense of humor you don't understand.

(How am I doing VFF )

Last edited by Senex; 12th December 2008 at 07:31 PM.
Senex is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 07:45 PM   #438
VisionFromFeeling
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,361
Professor Yaffle:
Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle
Just one more question if you don't mind? When you have seen things in photoes or video before, were they always of a similar nature to how you felt with this photo? Or do you sometimes get a strong sensation like you say you do when seeing a person in the flesh? And have you ever verified any information you thought you received in a photo/video? Apologies if you have already mentioned this, but it is a long thread and hard to keep track.
Photos and video has never been as clear as perceptions from persons in life. Only rarely do I perceive health information from photos. Information in videos is also rare but more frequent than photos. I have verified information from television, for instance being from Sweden when I describe the health of lesser known American celebrities on television who I have never seen before, friends confirm the information. These aspects of the perceptions are less frequent and not as interesting as what I perceive from persons in life.
Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle
At the time of the photo she was being fed a very carefully balanced nutritional feed as well as some breast milk. She was growing well so there is no indication that the nutrients were not being absorbed.
In my possible defense it takes days and weeks before certain changes in diet and nutrition reflect on tissue. So it seems from what you wrote that the girl hadn't been receiving nutrition, including fat I presume until recently? I'd be reading current tissue structure, not recent eating habits (unless I detect contents of stomach and intestines...).

I am sorry to hear about the little girl's health problems. We conclude from my picture test with you that I am unable to detect health problems from pictures posted over the internet. Thank you for clarifying this, even though the results were as I had expected. And let's proceed toward medical diagnose with live persons.

desertgal:
Thank you for clearing out what it was you and Pup intended. You see I just want to make it very clear that I am not offering services as a psychic nor collecting fees, and I am very passionate about keeping that clear.

Old man:
Originally Posted by Old man
Gee, I donít know, how about going to the mall, picking out people who you think have had, say, appendectomies, and asking them if youíre right about it?
I sometimes do watch people and perceive all sorts of health information that I would like ask about to see what my accuracy was, and I would absolutely love to do this at a mall! Is it legal? Is it inappropriate?
VisionFromFeeling is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 08:05 PM   #439
VisionFromFeeling
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,361
Beleth, Ducky and the SGU:
Thank you Beleth for explaining the purpose of the Are you human? question as a measure against spamming. Ducky, as you should know white dwarf stars are among the oldest and highest evolved among the conscious inhabitants of the universe and do not fit with your random description, although I am sure you intended this as a joke.
Originally Posted by Ducky
So, the fact of the matter is you did register, you did answer yes, and then you emailed us some nonsense about being from another star system as a retraction of your registration.
I answered yes to the question to find out if that was what it was asking for, and, assuming that I'd not be welcome I decided to ask that you withdraw my request for registration. Respect the feelings of other people, arguing against how people understand themselves is like arguing against the emotions people experience. It's just one of those things that are personal that each is entitled to in their own way.
Originally Posted by Ducky
Also, you registered at SGU on Dec 11th, 2008 - well after you've run a thread here at JREF for 11 pages (this thread starts on Nov 5th.) So no, you did not try to register with us first, and I have the logs to prove it.

This makes me think you are being less than forthcoming with your attempts to discuss whatever it is you're trying to claim here in this thread.
Yet again another skeptic says something that is totally untrue and speaks too soon, but I have grown tolerant to this behavior. Nowhere did I state that I would have supposedly tried to join SGU before joining the JREF! I was saying that I was considering finding other forums! Skeptics so often here misunderstand what I have said and done, and without first letting me explain what was really going on, they conclude some garbage and throw it at me. Skeptics are a special bunch for sure and quick to judge. But I love you guys.

Senex:
Originally Posted by Senex
Hey, hey, hey. Slow down there Ducky. After reading Beleth's brilliant considered response I would have hoped working with someone as articulate as him would have worn off a little bit on you. VFF just has a sense of humor you don't understand.

(How am I doing VFF )
I was being quite sincere. Let's just move on to the objective of this thread. Let me go see what the British skeptics have concluded.

Last edited by VisionFromFeeling; 12th December 2008 at 08:14 PM.
VisionFromFeeling is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2008, 09:09 PM   #440
Uncayimmy
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,345
Quote:
I meet with a person for the very first time and we've only known each other for a few hours. I decide to confide in him that I perceive health information and ask if I could try with him. He agrees, and I do my thing. I say that there is a very specific small region on his abdomen, right below the sternum, 1.5 cm wide vertically and 4 cm wide horizontally, in which the small intestine has a tendency of locking up, which would lead to a sensation not of pain, but strain. This information was absolutely correct and has no external symptoms. Why is it deluded to then conclude that there may be an extrasensory perception and to proceed toward tests of scientific standard? And if I were to fail all tests there is no problem since the perceptions do not interfere.
Anita, I keep advising you to rule out the ordinary first. What I am about to say you may not like to hear, but I say it with the utmost sincerity:

1) Guys, especially in college, will say anything to get into a girl's pants.
2) When people encounter someone they consider "out there" (and claiming to see inside a body is "out there"), they will often humor the person rather than contradict them.
3) Both of the above are especially true when meeting someone for the first time.

If the picture on your website is of you, I'm going to say that, well, I wouldn't kick you out of bed for eating crackers. If I were to have met you in college, I would have totally played into what you were saying. If I met you when I was 35, I would have said whatever I thought would prevent "setting you off" on some rant.

What I am describing happens every single day across the world. I am not saying that everybody behaves as I describe, but I'm willing to bet that just about everybody here can relate to having been in or seen situations like I described.

Meanwhile, not one of the billions of people to have graced this planet has been able to scientifically prove what you describe.

So, as a scientist, which hypothesis would you think more likely? ESP or people telling you what you want to hear?

I have never met you in person, but based on how much effort you spend talking about your "abilities" and the fact that you would diagnose somebody you just met tells me that you may not be aware of the sheer force of your personality.
Uncayimmy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

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 06:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.