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

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


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

Reply
Old 27th August 2008, 05:42 PM   #161
Startz
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by Jeff Wagg View Post
Folks, I'm going to step in here.

This protocol has been going on forever. It seems like Pavel keeps trying things and then failing, and people are trying to modify the test so that he has a chance of winning. This is NOT what the challenge is about. The claimant should have a clear claim and confidence that he can accomplish what he claims before he applies.

RemieV recently went over a protocol with me that looked like it might be workable, and then I see here that ANOTHER one has been proposed and Pavel likes it. Now we're essentially back to square one.

It is now incumbent upon Pavel, who I admit seems sincere, to state what he can do and allow us to test it. It seems that he applied way before he was ready, and now the JREF is expending too many resources to try to make something work.

There are other applicants waiting.

The JREF will accept one more full protocol from Pavel (with Startz's kind help, if he's willing) and then we will move on to another candidate.
Jeff:

I am willing to help.

In fairness to Pavel, he has presented statistically sound protocols. JREF has been rather unresponsive as to what objections they have so that Pavel can revise them in accord with JREF's wishes.

Let me be more pointed than, as a fan of JREF, I wish were necessary. JREF has asked for communications to be done by email. When I have done as JREF has asked, JREF has not had the courtesy to return emails. If JREF were one of my PhD students, rather than an organization with a long, successful track record, I would say this in a less pleasant way.

Remie has sensibly pointed out that negotiations are better done by email than through this public forum. Following this wise advice, I have (on Pavel's behalf) sent in protocols by email (while posting informational copies to the forum). JREF's responses have been through the forum. There is no reason this could not have been settled in a week of back-and-forth email messages. Nearly all the delay time has been on JREF's end, not Pavel's

But in the interest of moving this forward, perhaps you could say what limit JREF has on the number of photos Pavel may use or how long the test can take, and whether JREF has objections to the specifics in previous proposals (those formally presented, not necessarily the side discussions here in the forum.)

While decisions are up to JREF and Pavel, if you find it helpful you should feel free to email me at the address I supplied to JREF when requested.

-Dick Startz
Startz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th August 2008, 05:34 AM   #162
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 7,089
With all due respect to everyone trying to make this work.

Why not go back to Pavel's basic claim?

That was he can pick 1 from 2, or 1 from 3 photographs.
7 times out of 10 (actually 67% in 50 trials)
This is a most basic test, it only then requires JREF to come up with the required number of trials required.

One of Pavel's first posts here, before his application, was to ask JREF what was the required success rate to win the Challenge.

This post of mine has links to the above initial discussion with Pavel.
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it. Art Buchwald
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th August 2008, 10:51 AM   #163
pavel_do
Critical Thinker
 
pavel_do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by Startz View Post
Jeff:

I am willing to help.

In fairness to Pavel, he has presented statistically sound protocols. JREF has been rather unresponsive as to what objections they have so that Pavel can revise them in accord with JREF's wishes.

Let me be more pointed than, as a fan of JREF, I wish were necessary. JREF has asked for communications to be done by email. When I have done as JREF has asked, JREF has not had the courtesy to return emails. If JREF were one of my PhD students, rather than an organization with a long, successful track record, I would say this in a less pleasant way.

Remie has sensibly pointed out that negotiations are better done by email than through this public forum. Following this wise advice, I have (on Pavel's behalf) sent in protocols by email (while posting informational copies to the forum). JREF's responses have been through the forum. There is no reason this could not have been settled in a week of back-and-forth email messages. Nearly all the delay time has been on JREF's end, not Pavel's

But in the interest of moving this forward, perhaps you could say what limit JREF has on the number of photos Pavel may use or how long the test can take, and whether JREF has objections to the specifics in previous proposals (those formally presented, not necessarily the side discussions here in the forum.)

While decisions are up to JREF and Pavel, if you find it helpful you should feel free to email me at the address I supplied to JREF when requested.

-Dick Startz

with all my respect to everyone.. the same was when I was trying to negotiate, sent propositions, asked questions regarding protocol, requirements etc... and there was not much result, first of all it is a weeks for a reply and second.. I have always answered every question that was asked or proposed by JREF (Remiev) and in my tern also posted question..and there was no reply...and as I have also written before, the replies would be really helpful in moving on with things.., yes JREF is busy, but to find out after weeks of waiting that the protocol is can not be accepted cause it is too complicated, and when I have asked like, why? what is the problem, what would be good enough etc.. nothing... so weeks was waisted.. and I was waiting in order not to waist myself and time of the others with the other protocols etc.. than have started to propose the other options hoping that one of them would suite.. again not knowing exactly what it should be suited in..a prat of time frame ( though I never asked for over 8 hours test) or the 1.000 odds to be covered for the first test.

Last edited by pavel_do; 28th August 2008 at 10:56 AM.
pavel_do is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2008, 08:41 AM   #164
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Do I dare to wake the dog? What's the lowdown on the progress here?
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2008, 09:47 AM   #165
Moochie
Philosopher
 
Moochie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 5,491
"Been down so long, it looks like up to me."


M.
Moochie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2008, 10:10 AM   #166
Startz
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt View Post
Do I dare to wake the dog? What's the lowdown on the progress here?
Pavel is actively working on a protocol that will be acceptable to JREF. He has also been traveling.
Startz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2008, 02:05 AM   #167
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,283
For kicks, I wrote up a protocol:

Materials Required:

87 5" x 6" color photographs processed at a shop approved by both parties. 29 each of the images Ship, Pyramids, Earth provided by the applicant.
6 sheets of 1-1/4" x 1-3/4" permanent white labels. Labels are printed for 29 each of the words Ship, Pyramids, Earth in black ink on three sheets, and the same in red ink on the other three sheets.
84 opaque envelopes large enough to hold a 5" x 6" photograph
28 rubber bands large enough to fit around the envelopes
28 small post-it notes
One standard six-sided die
One room with blank walls
One video camera
Two pens
Two pieces of paper
Clipboard
One chair
Two tables
One cardboard box or other device suitable to display examples of the three different photographs

Environment Stipulations:

1. Other than provided by JREF and Testers, no chemicals or devices that emit light or otherwise detect or reveal electromagnetic fields that would compromise the opacity of the envelopes may be possessed or used, unless approved by JREF.

2. To as much extent as possible, the test room shall be adequately lit, of a comfortable temperature, and free of distracting sounds and odors. Phones and other communication devices must remain off or on silent. Talking during the tests must be kept to a minimum and in quite tones. Cameras, other than the video camera used by the Testers, are not permitted. All persons attending the test should wear neutral colors with no distracting prints or images. No signs or banners are permitted during the test.

3. If any of the above listed are violated during a test trial, the person violating the rules may be required to leave the test room and the Applicant may be granted an additional break up to three minutes and restart the trial or choose to postpone the trial until the end of the set and start a new trial.

4. The walls of the test room shall not have any pictures, images, or distracting designs, unless approved by the Applicant.

5. All persons in the room during Test Preparation are not permitted to be present in the room during the test or to communicate in any way to any person present in the test room during the test.
6. If there is a setup or technological problem, or if for any reason the test must be halted due to extenuating circumstances, as determined by JREF, the test may be conducted up to two additional times.

Test Preparation:

1. The 87 photographs are produced and provided to the Testers.
2. JREF or Tester print labels for 29 each of the words “Ship”, “Pyramids”, “Earth” in black ink on three sheets, and the same in red ink on the other three sheets. Labels are provided to the Testers.
3. Tester writes on 28 post-it notes, numbers 1 to 27 and “TEST”.
4. Tester places 27 of each type of photograph into envelopes and seal the envelopes completely so that the photograph inside cannot be seen in any way. The photographs will be placed with the image facing the front of the envelope and the top of the image toward the top of the envelope. The envelopes will be kept separate so that there are three piles consisting of 27 envelopes that all contain the same image. Each Tester fulfilling these duties will fill/seal an envelope for each of the three types of photographs before proceeding to the next to ensure that there is no consistency in the manner in which all photographs of the same image are filled or sealed. The envelopes will have no markings of any kind.
5. Tester now has three piles of 27 envelopes. The envelopes in each pile contain photographs of the same image. These will be considered, from left to right, as piles A, B, and C. Test will compile 27 packets. Tester will pull down an envelope from each pile. Tester will roll a six-sided die. Tester will place the envelopes into a separate pile, bottom to top, based on the die roll as follows:
1) ABC
2) ACB
3) BAC
4) BCA
5) CAB
6) CBA
6. Tester takes the three envelopes as a packet, turns the packet 90 degrees to the right, and taps them on the table to move the contents of each envelope down. Tester places a rubber band around the packet, and places post-it note on the packet with the packer number (1-27). The envelopes will have no markings of any kind.
7. Tester compiles an additional packet, exactly as above, but does not seal the envelopes.
8. Tester holds each envelope up to at least the brightest light in the test room to ensure that the image of the photograph cannot be seen.
9. Tester places a rubber band around the three unsealed envelopes and places a post-it note on the packet labeled “TEST”.
10. Tester places the 27 packets, in order, on the storage table in the test room.
11. Tester places the TEST packet on the test table.
12. Tester places the labels printed in black ink on the test table.
13. Tester places the cardboard box or other device on the test table and tapes each of the three types of photographs up so that the Applicant will easily see them. Labels for each photograph will placed immediately above or below each photograph. Testers (and/or JREF) will verify that the labels match the photographs.
14. A chair will be placed at the test table for use by the Applicant.
15. A pen and piece of paper will be placed on the test table for use by the Applicant.

Test Verification:

1. Applicant will have up to 30 minutes to verify the test conditions.
2. Applicant will verify that the example photos and labels can be seen clearly and that the labels match the photographs.
3. Applicant will verify that the environment is suitable.
4. Applicant will verify that he can place a label on an envelope without difficulty. Applicant may use one of each label, or more if permitted by Testers or JREF.
5. Applicant will verify that he can demonstrate his ability according to the established protocol and standards in the current environment. Applicant may use the “TEST” packet to test his ability. The test packet consists of three envelopes containing each photo, exactly the same as every other packet that will be used in the test, except that the envelopes are not sealed so that the Applicant can verify that his abilities are working correctly.
6. If the Applicant cannot verify any of the above, JREF and Testers will, within reasonably ability and without altering the protocol, attempt to resolve any conflicts. Otherwise, the test may be considered a failure.
7. Both the Applicant and the Tester/JREF will verify that the conditions for the test are adequate.

Test Protocol:

1. JREF Staff will videotape all activity at the storage and test tables. The video will be time-stamped. The camera will be left running for the entirety of the test.
2. Tester will take a packet (in packet order) from the test table, remove the rubber band and post-it note, and place the packet on the test table. Tester will start a time clock for three minutes.
3. Applicant may use the paper provided for notes and may write on the envelope, but may not puncture the envelope in any way.
4. Applicant will have up to three minutes to identify and label the contents of one, and only one, envelope. Applicant will identify the contents of one envelope by placing a label on the envelope. Placing a label on an envelope constitutes a final decision.
5. If the Applicant has not placed a label on an envelope within the required time, it will be considered a “skip” and the packet will be placed on the storage at the end of the packet order be tried again. The Applicant may, at any time, choose to voluntarily skip a packet. The Applicant may only skip a maximum of nine packets (either voluntarily or involuntarily). If the Applicant has already skipped nine packets and the time expires on a packet, the test shall be considered a failure for the Applicant.
6. After the Applicant has placed a label on an envelope, the Tester will control the envelopes and the Applicant may not touch, write on, or place labels on the envelopes.
7. Tester will write the trial number (1-27) on all three envelopes.
8. Tester will record on paper the trial number and label applied by the Applicant.
9. Tester will open the envelope labeled by the Applicant. This will be done in front of the applicant.
10. Tester will select the red-ink label corresponding to the photo in the envelope and apply it to the envelope. This will be done in front of the applicant.
11. Tester will record on paper the label of the actual contents of the envelope and whether or not it matches the Applicant’s prediction. The Applicant will be told if this was recorded as a success or failure. The Tester may also state how many more failures are needed to fail the challenge.
12. Tester will open the other two envelopes in front of the applicant and place red-ink labels corresponding to their contents to demonstrate that the test is fair. Tester will move the packet to the storage table.
13. In the event that the Applicant fails a trial and it is revealed that the packet did not actually contain the three photos, the trial will be disregarded and done over.
14. Tester will repeat these procedures until all trials have been completed or the Applicant has conclusively failed.
15. If the Applicant has failed enough trials to be excluded from the terms of success, the test will end immediately.
16. Applicant may take up to 60 minutes of break time during the test. Applicant may take a break at any time. Tester will record break times and notify Applicant of amount of break time recorded and amount of break time available.

What Will Constitute a Successful Test:

Applicant must succeed in 18 of the 27 trials. If the Applicant fails on 10 trials, the test ends immediately.

Time required:

Maximum: 2.8 hours.
__________________
"Glass slippers don't come in half sizes." - Rachael Smith
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2008, 02:10 AM   #168
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,283
This looks like some good envelopes for the project: Black "Euro Flap" 5-1/4 x 7-1/4" (A7) Envelope 100 Pack

Just $17.75 for the whole 100 pack.

Seems like a lot of protocol for something so small. Pavel doesn't even seem to have a good hold on what he can do. I expect that under controlled conditions, Pavels ability equals chance. So the test time could be much shorter. However, that doesn’t reduce the preparation time required by JREF.
__________________
"Glass slippers don't come in half sizes." - Rachael Smith

Last edited by DevilsAdvocate; 21st September 2008 at 02:17 AM.
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2008, 02:51 AM   #169
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,283
I think I'm starting to see this as 8 hours JREF time to set all this up, and about 40 minutes for Pavel to fail. Maybe it's just me. It seems like a lot of work for someone who isn't real confident in his abilities.

I’m predicting total failure. If you can get better odds on it in Vegas, I’ll lay my money down. I’m not a gambling man, but I think I’d be willing to bet $1000 to any takers that Pavel can’t pass the protocol I posted.
__________________
"Glass slippers don't come in half sizes." - Rachael Smith
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2008, 06:55 PM   #170
Rodney
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,942
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
I think Iíd be willing to bet $1000 to any takers that Pavel canít pass the protocol I posted.
Are you giving odds? The (random) probability of Pavel passing your protocol is 2456 to 1 against. And if he gets 17 of 27, is that a failure with no possibility of a re-test within one year? The odds against that are 648 to 1 against.
Rodney is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2008, 09:35 PM   #171
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,283
Originally Posted by Rodney View Post
Are you giving odds? The (random) probability of Pavel passing your protocol is 2456 to 1 against. And if he gets 17 of 27, is that a failure with no possibility of a re-test within one year? The odds against that are 648 to 1 against.
So it seems pretty safe as a bet, doesnít it? That is, unless something paranormal is going on and Pavel is really clairvoyant.

Someone else mentioned a claim that they can do long division and being tested with 100 questions with 4 multiple choice answers. I can do long division. Iím sure I can get at least 95 questions correct. What are the odds of that happening?

I understand that Pavelís claim is that his ability is weak and doesnít work 100%. I offered the above because it seemed to be the protocol that Pavel had last chosen to move forward with. Getting 18 out of 27 is the minimum about beyond 1 in 1000 odds and outside of 3 standard deviations. So the test would prove either that Pavel can do what he claims or he got extraordinarily lucky. 17 of 27 just seems very lucky. I donít think there should be a do over for a close call (however if Pavel fails but comes close and wants to be retested in, say, 6 months, considering that the challenge will be ending soon, I think JREF should at least consider possibly bending the one year requirement a little.)

Personally, I think the whole thing should have stuck the original claim (at least I think it was) that Pavel can consistently get 7 out 10 picking from 2 images. I think you can get to 1 in 1000 odds in 6 sets of 10. You could just use 40 photos and start with 20 sets of envelopes and recycle the photos as the test goes on as needed. With 10 minutes between sets, 10 minutes break time per set, 3 minutes per trial with allowing a ďskip-do laterĒ for each trial, a set of 10 trials would take max 80 minutes, for max total test time of 8 hours. I would expect each set to actually take about 30 minutes, and that if Pavel was simply guessing that the test would be over within 2 hours. If Pavel was beating the odds well enough to keep going all the way through the test, I think JREF would want to keep putting together the envelope packages and stick out the potential 8 hours of testing.
__________________
"Glass slippers don't come in half sizes." - Rachael Smith
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2008, 01:06 AM   #172
DevilsAdvocate
Philosopher
 
DevilsAdvocate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,283
I watched the video at YouTube videos.

I think the test could be very much simplified and quickened.

2 tests of 30 trials of 2 images. 60 photos. 2 minutes per trial (in the videos, Pavel made a determination in 4-20 seconds, so a full 2 minutes should be adequate). Pavel is allowed a maximum of 30 minutes break time during each test. Pavel may choose to “skip” up to 30 trials during each test-a “skip” trial moves to the end of the test and Pavel will have an additional 2 minutes to repeat the trial.

Maximum time for a test, therefore, is 2.5 hours.

Pavel must get 21 of 30 correct to pass a test. If Pavel passes the first test, the second test will be repeated exactly as the first.

Pavel must get 21 of 30 correct to pass the second test. If Pavel passes the second test, he will have passed the preliminary test.

I would expect that a test of 30 trials would actually take less than one hour. If Pavel is simply guessing and the odds play out at or less than the mean, the test would be over in less than an hour (or at most, 2.5 hours).

There is no heavy burden on JREF, unless Pavel succeeds. Considering Pavel’s claim and videos, it should not be difficult to achieve these results. If Pavel fails the first test because the things didn’t turn out right, that’s the way it goes. If Pavel gets all 30 right on the first test simply by guessing, that’s the way it goes.

Everyone wins. Simple test.
__________________
"Glass slippers don't come in half sizes." - Rachael Smith

Last edited by DevilsAdvocate; 22nd September 2008 at 01:08 AM.
DevilsAdvocate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2008, 06:41 AM   #173
Unlike a Bull
Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 224
I normally read these to laugh at the applicants. Either when their proposal gets changed to avoid their cheating and they run away, or when they are simply delusional and ramble on about "energies" or "spirits" or whatever it is they think gives them the power to obey the laws of probabilities and guess things at chance. But I'm not laughing at this guy. I really want to see him get tested. Mind you, I don't think he has the abilities he claims to. But, I don't know that he doesn't. I don't think he is intentionally lying though. I wish they would get the preliminary underway.
Unlike a Bull is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2008, 06:44 AM   #174
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Originally Posted by Unlike a Bull View Post
I normally read these to laugh at the applicants. Either when their proposal gets changed to avoid their cheating and they run away, or when they are simply delusional and ramble on about "energies" or "spirits" or whatever it is they think gives them the power to obey the laws of probabilities and guess things at chance. But I'm not laughing at this guy. I really want to see him get tested. Mind you, I don't think he has the abilities he claims to. But, I don't know that he doesn't. I don't think he is intentionally lying though. I wish they would get the preliminary underway.
Welcome to the forum, Unlikab..., er, Unlike a Bull.

I feel the same way about Pavel. Hopefully he will proceed to a test.
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2008, 07:44 AM   #175
Startz
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt View Post
Welcome to the forum, Unlikab..., er, Unlike a Bull.

I feel the same way about Pavel. Hopefully he will proceed to a test.
A news update is probably due.

Pavel has been working on a protocol that we think will satisfy JREF and have good properties in terms of the likelihood of both false positives and false negatives. I expect to have more specifics to report in the (relatively) near future.

I should also mention that Pavel has received a courteous inquiry about progress from the JREF staff, so they are upholding their end.
Startz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th October 2008, 10:58 PM   #176
The Professor
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 718
Originally Posted by Unlike a Bull View Post
I normally read these to laugh at the applicants. Either when their proposal gets changed to avoid their cheating and they run away, or when they are simply delusional and ramble on about "energies" or "spirits" or whatever it is they think gives them the power to obey the laws of probabilities and guess things at chance. But I'm not laughing at this guy. I really want to see him get tested. Mind you, I don't think he has the abilities he claims to. But, I don't know that he doesn't. I don't think he is intentionally lying though. I wish they would get the preliminary underway.
I like the fact that you like to laugh at the applicants
The Professor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th October 2008, 11:34 PM   #177
Czarcasm
Groovy Groovy Guru
 
Czarcasm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 1,079
Originally Posted by The Professor View Post
I like the fact that you like to laugh at the applicants
Does that mean you like all the responses you've received so far?
__________________
The sun is out, the birds are singing and all is right with the world.
I loooove my meds!
Czarcasm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2008, 04:45 AM   #178
Crundy
Critical Thinker
 
Crundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 475
No news on this I take it?

Pavel started out with a very strong "I can see images inside envelopes" claim, which was very promising and a stark change from other applicants who bang on about energy and have a complete inability to state what they can actually do.

Ever since then, Pavel has been winding down the extent of his abilities until it became "Given a 50-50 chance, I can occasionally get better than 50% right". It became obvious to everyone except Pavel that he does not have the ability he claims. There have been some excellent suggestions for protocols which would be a breeze for him if he did actually have the ability he claims (such as the one about having 9 blank photos and one with a picture on, and he has to find the real photo 7 times out of 10), but he makes up weird excuses for why he can't do this, for example, now instead of being able to see inside the envelopes he can see forward in time to opening the envelopes (why this excludes the mentioned protocol I don't know).

I think it's time to give up on this one. It would be good if Pavel had a moment of self realisation and started living his life, but instead he will probably spend the rest of his life trying to find a way to 'prove' his abilities to people and live in a state of permanent frustration.
__________________
"You see, that is why we never do double-blind testing anymore. It never works!" - Chiropractor
Crundy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2008, 06:25 AM   #179
Startz
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by Crundy View Post
No news on this I take it?

Pavel started out with a very strong "I can see images inside envelopes" claim, which was very promising and a stark change from other applicants who bang on about energy and have a complete inability to state what they can actually do.
...

Originally Posted by Crundy View Post
I think it's time to give up on this one. It would be good if Pavel had a moment of self realisation and started living his life, but instead he will probably spend the rest of his life trying to find a way to 'prove' his abilities to people and live in a state of permanent frustration.
Pavel submitted a revised protocol on November 6.

Pavel had a completed new protocol at the beginning of October. I asked him to delay submission while I had the protocol reviewed by a statistician with experience in this area. We were fortunate to find a statistician who volunteered his services and was able to vet the new protocol.
Startz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2008, 10:48 AM   #180
RemieV
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,292
Originally Posted by Crundy View Post
No news on this I take it?

Pavel started out with a very strong "I can see images inside envelopes" claim, which was very promising and a stark change from other applicants who bang on about energy and have a complete inability to state what they can actually do.

Ever since then, Pavel has been winding down the extent of his abilities until it became "Given a 50-50 chance, I can occasionally get better than 50% right". It became obvious to everyone except Pavel that he does not have the ability he claims. There have been some excellent suggestions for protocols which would be a breeze for him if he did actually have the ability he claims (such as the one about having 9 blank photos and one with a picture on, and he has to find the real photo 7 times out of 10), but he makes up weird excuses for why he can't do this, for example, now instead of being able to see inside the envelopes he can see forward in time to opening the envelopes (why this excludes the mentioned protocol I don't know).

I think it's time to give up on this one. It would be good if Pavel had a moment of self realisation and started living his life, but instead he will probably spend the rest of his life trying to find a way to 'prove' his abilities to people and live in a state of permanent frustration.
Startz is right - Pavel has submitted a new protocol. Startz - I'm not sure if you got my response to that. I got an auto-response message back when I sent it.

Pavel's protocol is on the list for review, as soon as we work out the testing of Patricia Putt. Her protocol is complete, and all that remains is the test.
RemieV is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2008, 04:55 PM   #181
gibsonbaud
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7
I sure hope your statician works this out correctly, Last time I came on here and tried to explain it I got shot down. I'm not sure of the new protocols details, but if it is similar to those that where in place last time I checked on here you guys will be handing out a million dollars to someone that can guess just slightly better then chance.
gibsonbaud is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2008, 03:51 AM   #182
Cuddles
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,560
Originally Posted by gibsonbaud View Post
I sure hope your statician works this out correctly, Last time I came on here and tried to explain it I got shot down. I'm not sure of the new protocols details, but if it is similar to those that where in place last time I checked on here you guys will be handing out a million dollars to someone that can guess just slightly better then chance.
Last time you came on here you made a very basic error, had that pointed out to you and left having admitted that you were wrong:
Originally Posted by gibsonbaud View Post
ahh, im an idiot... Guss I've been out of school too long...lol.
Unless you've taken some maths classes since then, I'd think twice about accusing everyone of getting it wrong again.
Cuddles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2008, 04:12 PM   #183
gibsonbaud
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7
Hehe, Last time i dropeed it like that because it was very apparent that arguing the point was useless. You cannot convince some people the earth is round. I have taken plenty of math classes in my time. I suggest waiting to hear back from the stetician before talking trash like that.

My point is that you are resetting the odds each time. If you started with 60 envelopes, with 20 correct ones and 40 incorrect, he would have a 2.4% chance of getting all 20 correct, if you do sets of 3 where the previous envelopes are removed each time and it is reset to 1 correct, 2 incorrect, the odds will always be 1/3, so in a total of 20 tires, that would be 20/60, or 33%. But like I said, if you start with all 60, 20 being correct, each choice would reduce the odds, meaning, the first choice he would have 33% chance (20 correct cards, 40 incorrect), 2nd choice he would have a 32.2% (19 correct cards, 40 incorrect), keep going until the last one, which he would have a 2.4% chance of getting the correct one (1 correct card, 40 incorrect), which would satisfy the odds requerment.

Last edited by gibsonbaud; 5th December 2008 at 04:33 PM.
gibsonbaud is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2008, 07:15 PM   #184
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator
 
jsfisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 22,458
Originally Posted by gibsonbaud View Post
Hehe, Last time i dropeed it like that because it was very apparent that arguing the point was useless. You cannot convince some people the earth is round. I have taken plenty of math classes in my time. I suggest waiting to hear back from the stetician before talking trash like that.

My point is that you are resetting the odds each time. If you started with 60 envelopes, with 20 correct ones and 40 incorrect, he would have a 2.4% chance of getting all 20 correct, if you do sets of 3 where the previous envelopes are removed each time and it is reset to 1 correct, 2 incorrect, the odds will always be 1/3, so in a total of 20 tires, that would be 20/60, or 33%. But like I said, if you start with all 60, 20 being correct, each choice would reduce the odds, meaning, the first choice he would have 33% chance (20 correct cards, 40 incorrect), 2nd choice he would have a 32.2% (19 correct cards, 40 incorrect), keep going until the last one, which he would have a 2.4% chance of getting the correct one (1 correct card, 40 incorrect), which would satisfy the odds requerment.

Just to be absolutely sure of what you are saying here, gibsonbaud, are you talking about a series of tests with 20 sets of envelopes, three in each set and with only one correct "target" in each set? Moreover, are you saying the probability in each test of correctly selecting the target envelope is 1/3?
Then, finally, are you saying that the probability of getting each and every test correct, all 20, is 1/3?

A "yes" response to the first two queries will get you no argument. Please tell me I misinterpreted your post, though, and that you won't say "yes" to the third.
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group.

"He's the greatest mod that never was!" -- Monketey Ghost
jsfisher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2008, 09:48 PM   #185
Coveredinbeeees
Scholar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post
Last time you came on here you made a very basic error, had that pointed out to you and left having admitted that you were wrong:
Originally Posted by gibsonbaud View Post
Hehe, Last time i dropeed it like that because it was very apparent that arguing the point was useless. You cannot convince some people the earth is round. I have taken plenty of math classes in my time. I suggest waiting to hear back from the stetician before talking trash like that.
I'm going to hold off from commenting on your views on the test you described in your most recent post until you have answered jsfisher's question.

In the mean time your post seems to infer that you still stand by your earlier calculations regarding the 50:50 odds per trial test.

It could easily be that you are being sarcastic but, just in case, I'll have a go at convincing you "that the Earth is round."

Your second post seemed to sum up your opinion most clearly.

Originally Posted by gibsonbaud View Post
Not true, you have a 50% chance on envelopes 1 and 2, and a 50% chance on envelopes 3 and 4. No matter how many times you do it, if you are choosing between a correct and an incorrect it will always be 50%.

You could do it 500 times. The chance of getting them all correct is always 50%. It would be different if you had 4 cards, chose a correct one from the 4, then chose a correct one from the remaining 3... Then the overall probability would change, but as long as the total number of envelopes increases at a rate of 2 for each one attempt, the probability does not change.

Like I said... I could be wrong... Just how it appears to me...
bolding mine

Let me take the example of two consecutive tests. Gr8wight pointed out, correctly, that the odds of guessing a 50:50 chance correctly twice in a row are 1 in 4. You responded with the post I have just quoted claiming that the odds of guessing correctly twice in a row would actually be 1 in 2. If this is not your claim then feel free to ignore the following.

Consider the case of a coin toss. Each toss there are two possible outcomes and they are equally likely, heads or tails. Lets say that heads (H) represents a correct guess and tails (T) represents an incorrect guess. The odds of guessing this toss correctly are 1 in 2.

Now lets consider two tosses in a row. Again heads (H) will represent a correct guess.

There are four possible outcomes to a pair of tosses, all equally likely.

HH
HT
TH
TT

Only one of these four outcomes represents two correct guesses, the first one HH. The odds of correctly guessing two consecutive tosses is therefore 1 in 4.

Now consider the case of three tosses in a row. Now there are eight possible outcomes.

HHH
HHT
HTH
HTT
THH
THT
TTH
TTT

Only one of the eight outcomes above represents three correct guesses (HHH), so the odds of correctly guessing all 3 tosses is 1 in 8, not 1 in 2 as you suggested.

You can easily demonstrate this to yourself by following Startz' advice.

Originally Posted by Startz View Post
What Gr8wight said is right. This very easy for you to check. Take a coin, guess heads or tails. Do it again. If you're right both times, score it as a success. Now run this two-toss experiment a few dozen times. You'll see that you get both tosses right about one time in four.
I hope this helps.

'beeees

Last edited by Coveredinbeeees; 5th December 2008 at 09:51 PM. Reason: fixed slight ambiguity
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2008, 03:19 PM   #186
gibsonbaud
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7
hehe, worry not guys, Its been a while since ive been on here and just figured id come back to "stir things up" a bit...
I was wrong the first time around I was WRONG and I admit it, this time around... Im just messin around. The only reason I kept it going this time was because of Cuddles jackass comment.

Last edited by gibsonbaud; 6th December 2008 at 03:22 PM.
gibsonbaud is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2008, 03:23 PM   #187
gibsonbaud
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7
Does anyone know if Pavels revised protocol was approved yet?

Last edited by gibsonbaud; 6th December 2008 at 03:24 PM. Reason: Improper grammer...
gibsonbaud is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2008, 10:07 PM   #188
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
 
Akhenaten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 29,683
Considering your approach to this thread, how do you rate your chances of a polite response?

Hint: Aim low.
__________________


Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon
Akhenaten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th December 2008, 03:14 AM   #189
chillzero
Penultimate Amazing
 
chillzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 15,546
Mod WarningPlease remember to keep reponses in threads in this section strictly on topic to the Challenge.
Posted By:chillzero
chillzero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2008, 06:01 AM   #190
pavel_do
Critical Thinker
 
pavel_do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 363
I know its off topic..Mrs Moderator.. but still would like to post it..

Dear Boys and Girls.. Ho Ho Ho..
I know its a bit too yearly for Xmass letter, but since I am not sure that I will have an Internet access on xmass days, so sending you it now.

Marry Christmas and Happy new year to you and your beloved ones! Have a great holly days and a new year coming. Wishing you all the best, may all that you wish for 2009 will come true the way you want it, with allots of pleasant surprises!

Sincerely yours.

Pavel
pavel_do is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th December 2008, 12:40 AM   #191
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
 
Akhenaten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 29,683
I'll join you on the Naughty List.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year Pavel, to you and yours.

Cheers.

Dave
__________________


Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon
Akhenaten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2008, 08:57 PM   #192
The Professor
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 718
Originally Posted by gibsonbaud View Post
Does anyone know if Pavels revised protocol was approved yet?
Why no word on this approval?
What's the hold up?
It's been a MONTH!!!!!

Last edited by The Professor; 29th December 2008 at 08:58 PM.
The Professor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2008, 12:07 AM   #193
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 24,820
I would not worry, Professor. Sometimes applicants can take months to work out that they cannot work out a good protocol. Example here. http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=122607
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2008, 08:06 AM   #194
GzuzKryzt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Originally Posted by The Professor View Post
Why no word on this approval?
What's the hold up?
It's been a MONTH!!!!!
Rjh01 already made a valid point.
Also, the JREF lacks the resources to update the progess on each claim. I also find it unfortunate but we have to live with that - unless you want to donate a large sum and speed the process up.

And only a snarky cynic would say the JREF Staff's precious little time is often consumed by insincere applicants, wouldn't he?
GzuzKryzt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2009, 11:09 PM   #195
Klaymore
Critical Thinker
 
Klaymore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 282
So once the new protocol is vetted, where does Pavel get tested?
__________________
Zardoz is the greatest film ever made by a group of gay Irish teenagers as a prerequisite to graduation from a 72-hour drug-rehabilitation seminar.
Klaymore is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2009, 02:46 PM   #196
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
 
Akhenaten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 29,683
Originally Posted by Klaymore View Post
So once the new protocol is vetted, where does Pavel get tested?
Pavel travels a bit, and if I recall correctly he was at one stage hoping that a test could be arranged to coincide with one of his visits to the United States.
__________________


Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon
Akhenaten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2009, 07:12 AM   #197
pavel_do
Critical Thinker
 
pavel_do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 363
Hello to everyone,
Well I am planing to go to US in April-May for a few weeks, so I could be tested while I am there, as according the rules my claim is expires in 1 year after submission that is June 5th. So I must be tested by that date.. As last time JREF said, now they finishing with claimant who's protocol is ready and only testing left.. than they get back to my.. It still takes time but, since till April there are still a few month, I guess it will be all arranged.
pavel_do is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th January 2009, 01:52 PM   #198
RemieV
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,292
A preliminary protocol has been completed and posted in Pavel's thread in the Challenge Applicants subforum.

Pavel - the application does not expire one year from submission. It expires one year from loss of contact with the applicant. Additionally, a failed test will bar a claimant from re-submitting an application for one year.
RemieV is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th January 2009, 02:50 PM   #199
Sparhawk
Student
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 35
The protocol states that the answer is disclosed at the end of each guess (yes/no). This may create bias in the claimant if they get too many consecutive no results.
What about only disclosing the answers at the end of the test to the claimant, but conduct an open test every hour, to determine that the claimant is still satisfied that his powers are working.
Sparhawk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th January 2009, 04:49 PM   #200
Startz
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by Sparhawk View Post
The protocol states that the answer is disclosed at the end of each guess (yes/no). This may create bias in the claimant if they get too many consecutive no results.
What about only disclosing the answers at the end of the test to the claimant, but conduct an open test every hour, to determine that the claimant is still satisfied that his powers are working.
My understanding is that it is Pavel's preference that the envelopes be opened immediately.
Startz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

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

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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

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


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:32 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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

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