|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..8..13..18..23..26~27~28~29~30..34..37..40..43..44~45~46 [Next] | ||||||||||
MagicMarker Elite user 498 Posts |
Holly,
Re the payment terms. Yes, I think if any of Jim's conditions contradict existing and already published terms of the challengers then that could pose a problem. I suppose the question is which conditions are necessary in order for Jim to achieve his vision. The salt and copper wire would presumably fall into that category. And which conditions are more to do with the trust between the parties and a fear of not getting paid etc. If the Million in cash on the night is important to Jim for the purposes of achieving what he does then he could probably trash that out in negotiations with JREF. On a matter of principle if someone issues a challenge and I offer to meet it, but I don't accept some of the rules of the original challenge then I am entitled to say that the challenger and I couldn't come to an agreeement, I'm not entitled to call them a coward. Either I meet the published rules or I don't. My worry reading this is that Jim is looking to buy some TV time for $5000 and a 200 to one shot at a million dollars. I worry that he doesn't care one way or the other whether he passes or fails because he'll continue working in the industry if he fails and will claim he wasn't "On" or "In the zone" on the night. No such thing as bad publicity. It's not like getting things wrong on TV or even being proven to be a fake does much to hurt people in this industry. Believers will always believe what they want to. I hope that worry isn't well founded. I'm impressed by how specific he is and his agreement that he won't engage in near misses etc. My curiosity is how this will play out if he's wrong. -Rd |
|||||||||
MagicMarker Elite user 498 Posts |
Richard,
Your lecture sounds great, and again we have a specific offer to demonstrate a specific power. I can bring my own spoon. You and nobody else will come near me or the spoon. There are no limitations placed on me such as how I grip the spoon it just rests on the palm of my hand. And it will bend all by itself. That is all I'd need to see. Perhaps the scientific community would like to get you into a lab and see multiple bends etc. Despite what people on here might think I actually have a slightly lower burden of proof (although I'd like to see the lab thing too, that would be great). If that happened as described above I personally would accept that as the proof I need that spoon bending, key bending etc. (which I believe is fake) is actually real. Regarding things like coercian etc, I'm not sure that it would be as clear cut an experiment as the spoon example above. I do various tricks in which it appears that I forced the spectator to do things, or I knew in advance what they would do. It would take a bit of thinking to figure out how to test this. But it sounds interesting. Hopefully I'll be back in Europe before your next lecture, if not, how often do you do this, and where would the next lecture after England be? -Rd |
|||||||||
chichi711 Inner circle 5810 Posts |
Is there anything a psychic could do that couldn't be replicated with a trick?
|
|||||||||
chichi711 Inner circle 5810 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-06-01 09:00, MagicMarker wrote: YES!!!! I have been waiting for one of the JREF's to admit this. So if this is the case and we all know that it is. What is the purpose of the JREF? Gives Randi an excuse to say stuff like "did I fool ya"? Gives Randi a nice pay check month to month? Sounds like a bigger con than most psychics I have read about. |
|||||||||
DJM Inner circle Israel 1681 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-06-01 10:47, chichi711 wrote: Are you serious? How about reading minds, predicting the future, finding missing people, telling specific things about the past? You know, the stuff real psychics are supposed to do. Not the general stories any cold reader can after reading a few books about this subject. Like I've said before, if any psychic could tell anything specific about my life, then I would believe him. If you know anyone who can do that please let me know. |
|||||||||
chichi711 Inner circle 5810 Posts |
Again DJM is there anything a psychic could do that cant be replicated with tricks? You did not even come close to answering that question. Nothing you listed fits the bill.
|
|||||||||
DJM Inner circle Israel 1681 Posts |
And why is that, chichi? What kind of things fit the bill?
|
|||||||||
chichi711 Inner circle 5810 Posts |
Exactly my point DJM. Nothing is the answer. So you basically have a built in out. No matter what the Psychic does you can pass it off as a trick/luck. Sounds like the kind of thing that most skeptics get so upset about. "Psychics" have found missing people. They have also made big big mistakes (Sylvia). Seems like the times they actually help we toss it to the side, or give the credit to a police force. The times they are wrong it is all over youtube and slammed on message boards. The built in out that the skeptics have is funny to me.
|
|||||||||
HollyMental Elite user OR 423 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-06-01 10:47, chichi711 wrote: The key here is the phrase, “replicated with a trick.” If test conditions are put into place to negate trickery, then the psychic should still be able to perform while the trickster should be unable. Chichi, you’ve just highlighted the precise reason why psychics must be tested under test conditions that eliminate the possibility of trickery. Holly
The devil can advocate for himself.
|
|||||||||
DJM Inner circle Israel 1681 Posts |
That's exactly the thing, chichi. Some psychics say they have helped the police in solving crimes, but there has never been any evidence that it really happened. Not even one single case where a psychic helped. On the other hand, we got so many cases that psychics say things like that but always get it wrong. Why do you think it's like that?
It's always easy to believe people who say certain things.. but we need to be careful of who we choose to trust. And I didn't say that anything a psychic does could be a trick, I have no idea how you got that from my post. I've already explained what a psychic needs to say in order to convicne that it's the real thing.. finding a missing child is one of them, at least those who claim they can do that. |
|||||||||
HollyMental Elite user OR 423 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-06-01 04:41, Richard Goodwin wrote: Hi Richard. I’m sorry to say that I won’t be able to travel to England. I’m a bit far away here in the U.S. Sorry. Please let me know if and when you have any lectures in the U.S., especially anywhere near the west coast. As far as the coercion thing, Richard, I wouldn’t be interested in participating in anything such as that. Quote:
On 2007-06-01 09:18, MagicMarker wrote: MM, this is great news! I hope you’re able to go. Please let me know how it goes. Holly
The devil can advocate for himself.
|
|||||||||
HollyMental Elite user OR 423 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-06-01 09:00, MagicMarker wrote: That’s the thing, MM. Jim’s payment conditions are against the JREF rules and Jim almost certainly would have known this when he made the condition. This leads to something puzzling about Jim. You see, as far as I can tell, Jim never actually applied for the challenge. Instead of applying, he just made up his own set of protocols and his own $5000 challenge and charged Mr. Randi a coward for not accepting. Jim knows about the million dollars so he has almost certainly read the JREF rules regarding the JREF challenge. Jim could simply have applied for the challenge. He fits the criteria nicely. He makes specific claims. If he indeed has the abilities he claims, he should easily be able to produce the three affidavits from working professionals. He should even be able to demonstrate he has a media presence. There’s no reason why he couldn’t just apply for the prize and work out the protocols with Jeff Wagg at the JREF. Here is a quote from the only article I can find regarding Jim on Mr. Randi’s website. The article is entitled, The Usual Tirade: “…As expected, he (Jim) tries to rewrite the rules and protocol to suit his carnival approach. Won’t work, Jim. “Sincere” or not, apply like anyone else, or go away.” MM, that’s what I don’t understand about Jim’s antagonism toward Mr. Randi. If Jim won’t apply, I don’t see how Mr. Randi can be the one who is afraid. Holly
The devil can advocate for himself.
|
|||||||||
mota Inner circle 1658 Posts |
A few quick thoughts...
If I was Jim I would want the press there also...Randi has bragged about always having an out...I would also want the money there too. I wouldn't trust Randi either. Past surveys suggest that approximately 35 percent of urban United States police departments and 19 percent of rural departments (Sweat and Durm 1993) admit to having used a psychic at least once in their investigations. In addition, Lyons and Truzzi (1991) report the widespread use of psychic detectives in several other countries including Britain, Holland, Germany, and France. Of course you can always explain away what you want to, but now are you skeptics telling us that you are also smarter than all these police departments? Finally, I and others have mentioned that essentially skeptics are irrelevant...the only people that care about you are other skeptics. You seem to have no real purpose other than self-aggrandizement. Your big win, Peter Popov, merely slowed down very briefly. Do you have any practical purpose in society? |
|||||||||
MagicMarker Elite user 498 Posts |
Chichi,
there are many many things that a real Psychic could do that could not be replicated by a trick. Yes if the trickster was allowed to operate on their own stage with their own props they could appear to replicate almost anything, that's why the test necessarily has to happen under more stringent conditions. Copperfield replicated the ability to fly. If Copperfield was dishonest and claimed that it was anything other than an illusion then it would be very easy to test his claim in such a way that there would be no "Out" as you put it. > YES!!!! I have been waiting for one of the JREF's to admit this. > So if this is the case and we all know that it is. What is the > purpose of the JREF? Not sure I understand this. Just because someone is shown to be a fake doesn't stop the believers from believing. But just because people believe doesn't make it true. The purpose of JREF as I see it is to convince people who need more than mere blind faith. Who cares what believers believe?, since they've shown they don't care about evidence one way or the other (actually shunning it in the case of religion) then their opinion is little more than a curiosity. Belief in and of itself isn't evidence of anything other than the desire in some humans to believe. I've agreed with Richard's post that if his spoon bending works as described that I'll accept that what he does is real. I'm coming half way to meet him because ideally I'd like to see him do it multiple times and at a location that he didn't have prior access to etc, etc. The usual stuff. But I'll go half way and just accept his lecture performance. I'll be in Europe from Early August onwards, and I don't mind travelling at my own expense to wherever the lecture happens. I'll report back here. If Richard agrees I'll even record the experience and upload the video, but I won't make a big deal about it if he doesn't want video involved, it is a lecture after all. If I get there and find the conditions aren't as I've been led to believe, i.e. he or someone else needs to examine my spoon before hand etc, then I'll be justifiably annoyed. I don't want to spend all the time, effort and money only to see a trick. What I'm proposing wouldn't convince a true skeptic reading my report. Even if I report back in the affirmative a true skeptic would suspect that I've been playing the part of a skeptic all along and I'm in on this with Richard. To be honest I don't care, I just want proof for myself. Richard and I have never met or had any contact that I know of. One other thing, if his test requires me to Believe that it's going to work, i.e. if he needs me to focus some sort of positive energy etc, then I'm not the guy for the job. I don't believe it will work. I could however bring someone with me who believes in some kinds of supernatutal powers, but who I would trust to be honest if asked to do anything fishy. -Rd |
|||||||||
MagicMarker Elite user 498 Posts |
> Do you have any practical purpose in society?
The discrediting of the Labotomy for starters. And of course round the world cruises. Do you want to erase the whole history of things which were once believed and later discredited? Just how much are you willing to give up in return for getting rid of skeptics? Would you prefer if nobody ever asked questions, asked for evidence, of anything? Desperate people suffering from illnesses also have to put up with the money they lose to charletains who prescribe magnets and other such nonsense. Do you really think skepticism has no place in such a world? You seem to be suggesting that just because such beliefs persist we should stop fighting them. How does that logic hold up? Should we stop figthing crime just because it persists? Should we forget about figthing SPAM just because it persists? Skepticism persists, why don't you stop fighting it? This thread started with a believer challenging a skeptic, not the other way around. Even though I'm a skeptic I no longer bother to start conversations with believers. I will only get involved if they state a claim or issue a challenge. -Rd |
|||||||||
DJM Inner circle Israel 1681 Posts |
MM, asking questions is a complicated thing.. why to do that when we can just believe and trust every single person and issue in this world?
|
|||||||||
HollyMental Elite user OR 423 Posts |
I would like to clear up one thing you said:
Quote:
On 2007-06-01 12:14, mota wrote: This is a gross misrepresentation of what he said. What he means is that he isn’t worried about losing the million dollars because he doesn’t believe there is anyone who’s going to be able to demonstrate psychic abilities under test conditions - because he doesn’t think psychic abilities are real. Your assertion that it implies he’s suggesting he’ll use trickery to avoid paying is false and paranoid. The statement is also a play on words based on the fact that psychics have a never ending list of excuses why they are never able to perform when the possibility of trickery is removed. Holly
The devil can advocate for himself.
|
|||||||||
Harry H Inner circle 1526 Posts |
Im bored of saying this but there are many awards for proof of psychic abilities without Randi's million.
http://www.aske.org Has a list.Pick one. |
|||||||||
chichi711 Inner circle 5810 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-06-01 11:39, HollyMental wrote: Wrong. Even under test conditions you can still do it. It would be a lot harder to pull off, but it is possible. |
|||||||||
Jim-Callahan V.I.P. 5018 Posts |
My test conditions are good enough to negate trickery by any mentalist judging from the fact that not one has offered up that they could duplicate my test.
It also is what bothers some skeptics I think. J ack H.o.A-X
“I can make Satan’s devils dance like fine gentlemen across the stage of reality”.
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » I have challenged Mr. Randi » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..8..13..18..23..26~27~28~29~30..34..37..40..43..44~45~46 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |