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 telepathy , telepathy test

Reply
Old 2nd December 2021, 10:33 AM   #2321
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 12,836
Originally Posted by Startz View Post
I wonder if a different approach might be valuable.

It is an interesting question as to how to design a valid statistical experiment in which there is an issue about the credibility of the answers. (There has been at least a little discussion about this in the past.) As someone who doesn't do experimental design, I would be interested in learning how this might be done. If a design appeals to Michel, fine. If not, also fine.

As an initial suggestion, I think one could design a setup where both responses and any accompanying comments go to a third party. The third party then tosses a coin and either changes the specific response or leaves it as submitted, keeping track of which were changed. Everything then goes to the person who evaluates each response and who can decide which ones are credible. Those considered credible are then revealed to all. It ought to be possible to back out a valid statistic I would think.
That's an interesting idea. To get around having to trust the third party, they could share a version of the original answers (plus a few random letters to stop its being guessable) scrambled with an MD5 Hash generator, and only reveal the key to decode it later.
Jack by the hedge 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 2nd December 2021, 11:31 AM   #2322
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,227
Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge View Post
That's an interesting idea. To get around having to trust the third party, they could share a version of the original answers (plus a few random letters to stop its being guessable) scrambled with an MD5 Hash generator, and only reveal the key to decode it later.
We tried that before. We were nearly at a workable protocol and Michel went with it. Right up until he realised that it would prove him utterly wrong.

One must remember, the goal is not to prove the hypothesis, rather, it is to cling to it at all costs.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...

Last edited by abaddon; 2nd December 2021 at 11:33 AM.
abaddon 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 2nd December 2021, 11:38 AM   #2323
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 21,491
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
We tried that before. We were nearly at a workable protocol and Michel went with it. Right up until he realised that it would prove him utterly wrong.
Correct. Michel insists that he needs to see the respondent's answer as part of his credibility judgment because his protocol considers the possibility that a wrong answer was given deliberately in order to skew the results. That is, if a wrong answer was given, Michel apparently needs to know that it was wrong so that he can consider the possibility, based on metadata in the response, that the respondent would have given the right answer if the respondent were not compromised by bias or skepticism. Or if the respondent gave two or more answers, Michel can evaluate (again based on metadata in the response) which of several possible values is the most "credible." By this means he can "correct" wrong answers to be right.

Michel defines "good" data as data with a hit rate that supports his hypothesis that others can hear his thoughts. That's really all we need to know about his commitment to a proper methodology.
JayUtah 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 2nd December 2021, 11:55 AM   #2324
Startz
Muse
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 639
I'm mostly hoping to learn something about how to set up an experiment. Whether Michel would like to conduct such an experiment is up to him.
Startz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2021, 11:56 AM   #2325
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8,571
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Logically, Michel H is complimenting everyone on Earth for their honesty.

Despite his claim he is broadcasting his bank, bank account number and PIN number, no one has ever cleared his bank accounts.
You're not the first person to point this out. Don't expect the obvious logic of it to make any impression at all.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer 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 2nd December 2021, 12:11 PM   #2326
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside
Posts: 17,078
Originally Posted by Startz View Post
I'm mostly hoping to learn something about how to set up an experiment. Whether Michel would like to conduct such an experiment is up to him.
Your experiment is perfectly sensible. An alternative would be to simply remove the numbers from all guesses and add them back in once Michel has decided which have credibility from what else has been said.

The issue as others have point out is that Michel wants to know whether the number is right before deciding whether or not to count it in the experiment. Without that he knows his telepathic skills are no better than chance.

Last edited by Lothian; 2nd December 2021 at 12:12 PM.
Lothian 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 2nd December 2021, 03:24 PM   #2327
JimOfAllTrades
Muse
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 834
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
We tried that before. We were nearly at a workable protocol and Michel went with it. Right up until he realised that it would prove him utterly wrong.

One must remember, the goal is not to prove the hypothesis, rather, it is to cling to it at all costs.

We actually got him to try once doing the ratings blind, and predictably he bombed. When asked why he wouldn't that again his answer was:
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
This has been done before:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...76#post9572476
but I found that this was complicated, and that the results:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...75#post9608775
were less good than when the simpler version of the test is used.

In addition, this is not really necessary because people have an opportunity to verify the credibilities assigned.
So that's his answer. If he can't lie to get the answers he wants it's not a good test.
JimOfAllTrades 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 2nd December 2021, 06:31 PM   #2328
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,227
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Correct. Michel insists that he needs to see the respondent's answer as part of his credibility judgment because his protocol considers the possibility that a wrong answer was given deliberately in order to skew the results. That is, if a wrong answer was given, Michel apparently needs to know that it was wrong so that he can consider the possibility, based on metadata in the response, that the respondent would have given the right answer if the respondent were not compromised by bias or skepticism. Or if the respondent gave two or more answers, Michel can evaluate (again based on metadata in the response) which of several possible values is the most "credible." By this means he can "correct" wrong answers to be right.

Michel defines "good" data as data with a hit rate that supports his hypothesis that others can hear his thoughts. That's really all we need to know about his commitment to a proper methodology.
At one point, I thought he might pay attention. Pixel42 gave solid at that time. So did you, or I or any amount of other members. We could have nailed down a test protocol that might have had a hope.

Michel simply refused because we are all criminals, somehow.

Quite how he concluded that is anyone's guess

He refuses to actually say beyond claiming just claiming it. And it was a mere unevidenced claim. What shall anyone do with that?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 2nd December 2021, 06:33 PM   #2329
Matthew Ellard
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,051
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard
Logically, Michel H is complimenting everyone on Earth for their honesty. Despite his claim he is broadcasting his bank, bank account number and PIN number, no one has ever cleared his bank accounts.
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
You're not the first person to point this out. Don't expect the obvious logic of it to make any impression at all.
There is a 25,000Euro award from the Belgium Skeptics, that Michel H avoids. He simply has to read out and think of a phone number while a person in the next room waits for anyone to ring that phone number. Michel H can't claim all humans are 100% dishonest (not ringing) and 100% honest (not clearing his bank account) at the same time.
https://skepp.be/en/sisyphus-prize

Originally Posted by Michel H
I have already tried to explain on this forum how I seem to be able to communicate telepathically with animals (cats, dogs, birds) near my building, but I am not sure you paid any attention. And this phenomenon is very easy to verify: for example, when a dog is barking, I talk to him/her from inside my apartment with a weak voice (so he/she cannot hear me normally, sensorially), and I study whether there is a reaction, a change (often there is).
Again, as dogs aren't honest or dishonest, all Michel H has to do it disrupt dogs at the starting gate of the two greyhound tracks run by the National Belge de Courses de Lévriers. He won't.
Matthew Ellard 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 2nd December 2021, 11:47 PM   #2330
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,227
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
There is a 25,000Euro award from the Belgium Skeptics, that Michel H avoids. He simply has to read out and think of a phone number while a person in the next room waits for anyone to ring that phone number. Michel H can't claim all humans are 100% dishonest (not ringing) and 100% honest (not clearing his bank account) at the same time.
https://skepp.be/en/sisyphus-prize
Told ya. The goal is to maintain the delusion at all cost.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Again, as dogs aren't honest or dishonest, all Michel H has to do it disrupt dogs at the starting gate of the two greyhound tracks run by the National Belge de Courses de Lévriers. He won't.
Oh he has wheeled out any amount of porkies. To him that matters not. The priority is to maintain the illusion. nothing else matters. He did claim that he could shut up all dogs barking in his neighbourhood by merely thinking. Now he is claiming he never said that. Yet that very claim can be referenced. Because he did, Right up to when that claim became inconvenient.

In such circumstance, I and I guess you, would fess up and say "I got that one wrong, sorry". But not everyone has that honesty.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 3rd December 2021, 01:46 AM   #2331
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 12,836
I seem to recall another of our imagined thought projecting members declined to try the million dollar challenge as he feared he could not trust anyone to want a share of $1M badly enough to overcome their loyalty to the worldwide conspiracy to pretend we couldn't all hear him.

It's a dilemma for the projector. Since his illness made him absolutely convinced we could all hear him, we must all have been lying about the plain fact that we can't. So however impossible and inexplicable that conspiracy was, he couldn't trust anyone to be honest during the challenge.
Jack by the hedge 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 2021, 04:41 AM   #2332
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 6,349
I always find it curious why we should be scared if any of the supernatural phenomena should turn out to be real, in this case telepathy.

My view is that if telepathy is real, it has always been real, and so it has always happened, but it has never influenced anybody’s life. And it is unlikely to change anything after we become aware of it being real.

For instance, police will not start using telepathics for questioning, because it has never worked before, and it is unlikely to suddenly start working.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2021, 07:15 AM   #2333
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,227
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
I always find it curious why we should be scared if any of the supernatural phenomena should turn out to be real, in this case telepathy.

My view is that if telepathy is real, it has always been real, and so it has always happened, but it has never influenced anybody’s life. And it is unlikely to change anything after we become aware of it being real.

For instance, police will not start using telepathics for questioning, because it has never worked before, and it is unlikely to suddenly start working.
If Michel's claims were true, police questioning of witnesses or suspects for any matter would be superfluous. Cops, judge and jury would all know without any court needed.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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 2021, 09:31 AM   #2334
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 21,491
The other chestnut is the notion that skeptics and scientists are averse to concluding that telepathy exists because it would upset some sort of sacred order of belief. That's entirely untrue. If objective, verifiable evidence of telepathy could be obtained, it would open up a whole new field of research. There would be a mad rush to characterize telepathic phenomena, harness them, and profit from them. Much of my hard science was done in the private sector where being (1) right and (2) first to market is paramount. Students would flock to university psychology and neuroscience programs. Grant money will fall like snow in the Himalayas.

What scientists and skeptics abhor is not the possibility that telepathy and other psi phenomena exist, but the constant attempts on the part of advocates to misuse the credibility of scientific inquiry in order to prove their abilities exist, for personal notoriety or gain. And that misuse takes exactly the form of trying to manipulate the method or hide the confounding variables in precisely the ways science has evolved to preclude. Evading proper control by claiming it's unnecessary, that it somehow interferes with the effect, or that it's too tedious to carry out -- and then arrogantly claiming that the resulting method is far superior to anything previously tried -- is what turns science off to this sort of research. Michel's approach flies every flag that psuedoscience has -- proudly. And his lament that everyone around him is closed-minded and biased is just one voice in the chorus of pseudoscientists who have gone before him.
JayUtah 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 13th December 2021, 09:47 AM   #2335
Nay_Sayer
I say nay!
 
Nay_Sayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 3,885
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Dollars to donuts Michel doesn't get the joke.
Michel has several spreadsheets and a chalkboard rife with equations trying to work out why the chicken crossed the road.

He's made no headway as of yet.
__________________
I am 100% confident all psychics and mediums are frauds.
If you see a Nazi. Egg them
Nay_Sayer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » 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 04:00 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, 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.