Welcome To Vegas

Rodney

Illuminator
R
Joined
Aug 28, 2005
Messages
3,942
I'm sure all Randi members will appreciate this insightful article: ;)

http://www.lasvegasweekly.com/2006/01/26/awsi3.html

Excerpt: Ray Hyman, a leading Fellow of CSICOP, has pointed out that Randi's challenge is illegitimate from a scientific standpoint. "Scientists don't settle issues with a single test ... Proof in science happens through replication." If Randi's challenge was legitimate, he would set up a double-blind experiment which he himself wouldn't judge. But considering his hostility toward scientists receptive to paranormal phenomena, this doesn't seem likely. His "challenge" is rigged, yet he can crow that his prize goes unclaimed because paranormal phenomena simply does not exist.

Compare this outlook to the philosophy adopted by followers of Charles Fort. Forteans (a term coined by screenwriter Ben Hecht, who, along with Theodore Dreiser, H.L. Mencken and Oliver Wendell Holmes, was a member of the original Fortean Society, formed upon Fort's death in 1932) entertain the notion that anything is possible until proven otherwise.

Some are scientists, some are street musicians. They are neither gullible nor pompous, neither "true believers" in—nor coldly dismissive of—anything. And they have a sense of humor largely missing from Randi's crowd.

"In and of itself," says a man once denigrated by the skeptical movement, "skepticism has made no actual contribution to science, just as music reviews in the newspaper make no contribution to the art of composition."
 
Rodney said:
Excerpt: Ray Hyman, a leading Fellow of CSICOP, has pointed out that Randi's challenge is illegitimate from a scientific standpoint. "Scientists don't settle issues with a single test ... Proof in science happens through replication." If Randi's challenge was legitimate, he would set up a double-blind experiment which he himself wouldn't judge. But considering his hostility toward scientists receptive to paranormal phenomena, this doesn't seem likely. His "challenge" is rigged, yet he can crow that his prize goes unclaimed because paranormal phenomena simply does not exist.
Click to expand...

Of course Randi's challenge is illegitimate from a scientific standpoint. It's not supposed to be science. And the better point to be made here is that if someone succeeds in Randi's challenge, that doesn't necessarily mean that their professed power really exists. It could just be that they are a better conjurer or have otherwise found a way to fool Randi. If a person fails in Randi's challenge, it's pretty good evidence that they do not have the power they claim.

As for the comment about double-blind experimenting and Randi judging, a big part of the whole protocol foofaraw that every challenge has to go through is to make a test that doesn't need to be judged at all, let alone by Randi. The person either does or does not do what they claim to be able to do; no "judging" required.

Also, many of the challenges are double-blind, in the proper sense of the word. Look at LostAngeles' challenge with that silly audio enhancement chip. All of the dowsing challenges are double blind, in that no-one present during the test knows where the water or whatever is located.

I wonder how many ads there are for psychics in the Las Vegas Weekly, by the way?
 
AND... not all legitimate science has to be double-blind. While double-blinding makes sense in drug trials and dowsing, it does not make sense for surgery nor "seeing" while blindfolded.

What it HAS to be is repeatable. Basically, given a set of circumstances someone somewhere else will get the same results.
 
Wow Rodney. This article must have made you feel all warm and squishy inside. Look at all of the terrible things they say about Randi and JREF! Hee hee!

Ray Hyman, a leading Fellow of CSICOP, has pointed out that Randi's challenge is illegitimate from a scientific standpoint. "Scientists don't settle issues with a single test ... Proof in science happens through replication."
Click to expand...
This is absolutely, 100%, without a doubt true. And you know what? James Randi says the same thing about it! Would you like me to get all of the quotes from Randi and Kramer saying that one test does not definitively disprove paranormal powers? The Million Dollar challenge is not for scientific study.

If Randi's challenge was legitimate, he would set up a double-blind experiment which he himself wouldn't judge.
Click to expand...
Riiiiiiight... Kind of like....... he already does.

Charismatic psychic Uri Geller, whose abilities have been tested by a number of prestigious laboratories, has probably been Randi's biggest target.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting way of putting it. He's been 'tested by a number of prestigious laboratories'. Has he ever passed those tests? No?

"skepticism has made no actual contribution to science, just as music reviews in the newspaper make no contribution to the art of composition."
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more. Skepticism is a tool, but merely having a skeptical way of thinking without actually doing anything with it is useless to society in general. A hammer by itself is pretty useless, but it sure is useful when you're trying to build a house.
 
Um, Randi's challenge is set up as a double-blind experiment that he doesn't judge. The writer has, apparantly, never read the challenge rules.

In any case, I don't believe Randi has ever said the test would provide scientific proof of anything. In fact, he seems rather adamant on this.

As to scepticism and science, again the person being quoted lacks an understanding of the issue. Both he and the article writer seem to be under the common misconception of skeptical=cynical. The scientific method itself is an example of applied scepticism, so saying sceptisim has added nothing to science is rather disingenious, at best. A better analogy than that provided would compare musical theory and training to music. Sure, you can write good music without training, but training in composition and an understanding of the reasons music clashes or harmonizes will help one consistently write better pieces.
 
I was trying to trace a source for the Hyman quote and found what I think is the whole quote on this site: http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1225.htm

The quote from there reads:

.... as Randi's fellow skeptic Ray Hyman has pointed out: "Scientists don't settle issues with a single test, so even if someone does win a big cash prize in a demonstration, this isn't going to convince anyone. Proof in science happens through replication, not through single experiments.
Click to expand...

Puts quite a different light on the article knowing how they've selectively and misleadingly used the Hyman quote.

Any one know where the quote originally comes from?



(Interstingly that site does point out that this is also what Randi says.)
 
That makes it sound as if Hyman used the term "illegitimate" and criticized Randi for not using double blind tests and neutral judges. In fact Hyman says that even if someone wins the million he will not necessarily be convinced, and Randi does in fact use double blind tests most of the time and always uses neutral judges.
 
Stage magicians, like lawyers and secret agents, make a living from deception, so perhaps they assume everyone else does, as well.
Click to expand...

Lawyers make a living from deception? Even with laws against suborning perjury?
 
Ripley Twenty-Nine said:
"skepticism has made no actual contribution to science, just as music reviews in the newspaper make no contribution to the art of composition."
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more. Skepticism is a tool, but merely having a skeptical way of thinking without actually doing anything with it is useless to society in general. A hammer by itself is pretty useless, but it sure is useful when you're trying to build a house.
Click to expand...
Science itself is just a tool, one that is used for determining truth. Skepticism is inseparable from science, because they are both founded in the requirement that there must be evidence before truth can be established.
 
Stage magicians, like lawyers and secret agents, make a living from deception, so perhaps they assume everyone else does, as well.
Click to expand...

Well there's more than enough evidence in this column to show that writers for "news" outlets do, like say... the Las Vegas Weekly.
 
I was at TAM last year, and I must say that it is a funny thing about Vegas. The success of the town is based almost entirely on the fact that paranormal ways of winning do not exist. The games are rigged to be strictly statistical, and that is a formula that works incredibly well for the casino owners. But they rely for their income on people who do belive very strongly in luck and ways of "beating the system". So perhaps it is important for them to foster this feeling of magical powers among the suckers. They want people to believe in the paranormal, meanwhile laughing up their sleeves and raking in their cash.

And of course, there are more magicians per square mile in Las Vegas than perhaps any other place. All magicians know that what they do is fake. Some even come out and say so. If they see another magician doing a trick, they don't say, "Wow! Real magic," they say "How did he do that illusion?" So there is another case of some of the greatest skeptics in the world making money off of people who pay to be fooled. In fact, one reason TAM is held in Vegas is the availability of such skeptics.

But on the surface, Vegas must maintain its ruse and denigrate those who would cause the true belivers to doubt their gods of luck. Thus you see ads for psychics and hatchet-job articles in the Vegas newspapers. The message is "Don't mess with our scam."
 
I was at TAM last year, and I must say that it is a funny thing about Vegas. The success of the town is based almost entirely on the fact that paranormal ways of winning do not exist. The games are rigged to be strictly statistical, and that is a formula that works incredibly well for the casino owners. But they rely for their income on people who do belive very strongly in luck and ways of "beating the system".
Click to expand...

If you happen to find a non-paranormal way of beating the system, the casino will find out, and you're gonna get raped! I suppose if you did the same thing through paranormal means, you'd find yourself in the same amount of trouble. If paranormal powers did exist, Vegas would be extremely paranoid about psychics and magicians.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom