talkmagic.co.uk

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-20145664

Not surprisingly, Patricia Putt, rejected the suggestion that this showed any absence of psychic powers - saying that she needed to work face-to-face with people or to hear their voice, so that a connection could be established.

nobody has ever managed to pass the Randi test either! I wonder why

SpareJoker wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-20145664" target="_blank

Not surprisingly, Patricia Putt, rejected the suggestion that this showed any absence of psychic powers - saying that she needed to work face-to-face with people or to hear their voice, so that a connection could be established.

So.... she needs a physical connection, not a psychic one. Hmmm...

Oh boy, pull pin throw grenade.....

Heckler wrote:Oh boy, pull pin throw grenade.....

I got called all kinds of things on the Cafe the other week for merely posting the call to take part in a study into things psychic. Apparently, it doesn't work if you test it. You just have to take their word for it.

I once made the mistake of asking on a cycling forum the seemingly innocuous question 'Why doesn't everyone wear a helmet?' The resulting conflagration claimed thousands of lives and has left a scar on a generation that will never heal. There are some things you don't talk about, helmets on cycling forums, being one, 'are psychics real' on magic forums being another.

Heckler wrote:I once made the mistake of asking on a cycling forum the seemingly innocuous question 'Why doesn't everyone wear a helmet?' The resulting conflagration claimed thousands of lives and has left a scar on a generation that will never heal. There are some things you don't talk about, helmets on cycling forums, being one, 'are psychics real' on magic forums being another.

But from a purely voyeuristic perspective, the 'are psychics real' discussions are by far the most interesting to read! It's almost as good entertainment as trawling through the Sin Bin to find the gems where someone has a complete hissy fit and storms off the forum never to be seen again because the other forum members won't give away secrets!

She should have given a prediction that she would fail the test.

Before this thread goes all pear shaped, I found it interesting that the words are being used a little carelessly in that article. 'Psychic' doesn't mean mind reader or telepath who can contact people in another room or wherever, it's more akin to 'Intuitive' and that's a skill we all have, we do it when we meet new people, assess others for jobs or partnerships and so on. That has to be done face to face, not totally hidden from each other. Mediums are those who channel energies etc from spirits who have 'passed over' or whatever terminology you prefer. On all counts, Ms.Putt has a valid point depending on what the original question and study was designed to test and achieve.

Of course they were all going to fail, this sort of thing only works when all parties want it to work and then the results can be quite astounding.

For me, the whole idea that the results were based on a score out of five that the sitter gave just seems silly. A score like that is bound to be biased, who were the sitters in these tests and where did they come from? I wonder if the results would have been different if the sitters had been plucked from a local spiritualist church?

These sorts of tests a always nonsense and 9 times out of 10 are geared up to fail.

Lady of Mystery wrote:For me, the whole idea that the results were based on a score out of five that the sitter gave just seems silly. A score like that is bound to be biased, who were the sitters in these tests and where did they come from? I wonder if the results would have been different if the sitters had been plucked from a local spiritualist church?

These sorts of tests a always nonsense and 9 times out of 10 are geared up to fail.

Aren't James Randi's tests fair though? After all he is a magi himself and in a way he WANTS someone to prove their abilities so I thought the tests he does are quite fair if you ARE a Psychic

There are varying opinions about Randi's tests, apart from his stated desire to get proof, he also risks having to hand over that million dollar award so it's in his/the foundation's interests that no applicants win!

I should imagine the reward is covered by insurance!

For the record, 20% (1 in 5) is what you'll average from random guesses.

Too short a test runs the problem of Nyquist's theorem: you need lots of data to see a pattern. I think it would be useful to create an experiment that lasts a lot longer and collects a very large amount of data. A week, say, with one subject.

Didn't Banacheck in his early days go through tests (The Alpha Project) over a period of time - and still hoax his way through?