Well, that's just it -- "if psychics exist". They don't. James Randi even personally invited the shameless psychic fraud Sylvia Browne to demonstrate her powers, and she wisely turned it down. I say "wisely" because she knew it would expose her as the charlatan she is.
It's very enlightening (and amusing) to review all the JREF challenge applications and the back-and-forth dialogue between JREF and the applicants. You can find these in the JREF forum at randi.org. There's a pattern that emerges. First, you'll see the psychic being very confident and boastful about their powers and what they can do, and usually they describe their abilities it in very vague terms. When JREF seeks to pin them down to a claim that they can test, the psychic gets squirrelly, changing the subject, going off on very wild tangents.
If JREF is successful in getting a specific claim from the psychic, the next step is settling on the experimental protocol, which is the how and what of the testing for the psychic ability. Here is where 95% of all applicants fall apart. The idea here is to create an experimental condition where, if the psychic is successful, all other physical explanations can be eliminated such that the remaining explanation is the "unknown phenomenon", which is attributed to the psychic. But such an experimental set-up is extremely intimidating to so-called psychics. When you remove all possibility that they can use normal trickery to accomplish what they claim they can do using psychic powers, they become very defensive, argumentative, and cease to communicate in good faith. Negotiations break down, the "psychic" gets angry, and that's the end of that.
But there is a tiny minority that get past that point, agreeing upon a protocol and make it to the preliminary testing. That's where the protocol is first used to see if the psychic has any ability. NONE have been able to pass the preliminary testing. Their abilities all abandoned them, surprisingly enough, despite the protocol being pre-approved by the applicants.
Note that last part well -- both the applicant and JREF agree to and approve the protocol, after which no changes can be made by either. Detractors who say that the experimental requirements are "unfair" or that JREF keeps changing the requirements during the testing have absolutely no clue what they are talking about.
No, the reason why psychics aren't sailing through the Randi challenge is precisely because psychic powers don't actually exist. Some psychics may use the excuse that they think JREF will back out of the agreement, but they are ignorant or misinformed. It's an actual verifiable $1 million dollars, sitting in a trust fund right now, waiting for a psychic to snatch it up. The agreement between JREF and the applicant is legal and binding, so that money is legally guaranteed to the first psychic who can accomplish what they claim to be able to do according to the protocol they agreed to.
Some may use the pitiful excuse that they have psychic powers but simply aren't interested in the challenge, and that's bullocks as well. Even if one was selfless enough to not want the $1 million (yeah right), one could do enormous good by donating it to various charities. A psychic would have to be callous and cold to refuse to do something so easy yet so helpful for his/her fellow man, especially with the psychic's more highly evolved consciousness and all. In fact, I personally think a psychic should feel morally obligated to apply for the Randi Million Dollar Challenge. And besides, it's a chance to prove to the entire world that psychic powers are real! But, of course, they aren't.
2007-05-16 01:26:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by . 4
·
8⤊
5⤋
I am a psychic, Maggie Ann's Psychic World. And my facebook is Maggie A. Morris-Calderon. I have evidence and submitted it to him. I have picture's in my facebook photo album titled Maggie Ann's Psychic World. I have 5 consecutive year's of communication with the dead on incoming call's of history on my AT&T sheet's. I'm the only one in the world with. I have picture of death certificate, her disconnection sheet of her phone being turned off. And she never had my cell number while she was living. I got my cell phone with a new number after she died. I also have a recording. I have another photo album titled The Tree of Life! I have picture's of orbs, and more. I have a youtube page too.
2015-10-01 11:03:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by Maggie Morris-Calderon 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Randi organization is looking for absolute proof of a psychic ability. The criteria that I have just reviewed on their site does not consider a statistical probability as proof, but requires a statistical certainty.
Some skills are very difficult to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, and it is possible that pychic skills are like that.
Now, some people may argue that if you can read minds, you should be able to prove that you can do it 8 or 9 out of 10 times, and that sounds reasonable. But, if you were to ask Barry Bonds to hit 9 homeruns on 10 pitches, you are unlikely to see it happen. No one would argue that Bonds can't hit a homerun, and yet it is difficult to prove using this type of test.
It is possible that psychic abilities take much more talent than hitting a homerun and that a psychic is not able to perform at top level every time. If I were professing a psychic ability, I would not want to provide the skeptics with the amunition that they needed to ridicule me, and Randi's rules do require the most rigorous proof in order to be successful.
So, I think the main reason that psychics do not take Randi's challenge is that they don't think that they can pass his test. It's not because they don't have any abilities, it's because they cannot prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they have that ability.
2007-05-17 11:21:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Tunsa 6
·
5⤊
4⤋
because odds are he will be testing the hollywood stereotype of psychics without realizing that most psychics work nothing like what you see in hollywood. what he wants proof of doesnt exist. no psychic i have ever encounterd has had things happen to them like you see in movies or on tv. plus, knowing my damn luck id be sick the day i was getting tested, and my skills arent nearly as sharp when im sick, so id end up getting a lot wrong anyways. yeah, the money would be nice, i wont lie, its a million dollars for crying out loud. but i dont have any need to prove myself. no matter how much proof i give, there will always be people who doubt my skills. i know this for a fact. i have correctly predicted things before, about people i have never met in my life until the moment i was reading them, and still had people claiming it was a lucky guess....if i was really that lucky at guessing, i could have won the lottery by now. its not just guesswork, there is a lot more emotion and feeling that goes into it, its not just looking at something and having an immediate answer. my psychic ability is like playing a sport, ill have my good days and my bad, and there will always be skeptics. so even if i do prove it to that one man, i still wont have proven it to the world, so whats the point?
2007-05-16 10:07:49
·
answer #4
·
answered by Ashley M 7
·
2⤊
4⤋
As Dean Rading points out in his new book
"Entangled Minds" a million dollars sounds like a lot to most people but it would not start to fund the actual research being coducted by parapsychologist. Look at the operating cost of Princeton Engineering Anomaly Research (PEAR) which has already provided statistical evidence of mind/machine interaction. Human minds can influence random number generator in a desired direction.
However, this can not be demonstrated in a hour as Randi would require for his test it requires years of work, thousands of trials, thousands of volunteers, multiple replications, and excellent statistics. None of which (statistics and experiments) Randi has any education or training in. When any skeptical organization is allowed into the American Academy for the Advancement of Science as was the Parapsychologigal Association then perhaps skeptics wil start to practice real science.
What Randi wants is a demonstration of conjuring that he can't explain under the controlled conditions he set up.
Real psi phenomena doesn't work that way (according to evidence so far).
Or put another way it's like asking a professional basketball player to prove he can score 60 points a game. This might be possible depending on conditions but he couldn't guarantee that it would happen in his next game. Since psi involves human performance why do we hold psychics to higher standards than professional athletes. The best way to determine this might be instead to look at their records acquired through years of playing (or controlled research).
Michael John Weaver
2007-05-16 12:03:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by psiexploration 7
·
5⤊
4⤋
maybe they will.
ps. having just read the website from your link.. this maybe a major downfall for a lot of psychics... no.12 of his rules...
12. This offer is not open to any and all persons. Before being considered as an applicant, the person applying must satisfy two conditions: First, he/she must have a “media presence,” which means having been published, written about, or known to the media in regard to his/her claimed abilities or powers. This can be established by producing articles, videos, books, or other published material that specifically addresses the person’s abilities. Second, he/she must produce at least one signed document from an academic who has witnessed the powers or abilities of the person, and will validate that these powers or abilities have been verified.
2007-05-17 10:00:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by emma m 4
·
5⤊
2⤋
Everyone misunderstands psychics. They cannot control their visions. They see what ever it is that they see. someone wanted to know why they don't win the lottery every day. that is why. They have solved crimes. What they see is real. They have no control over what comes to mind though. There are fakes out there, but there are real honest psychics too. I have been to several, I could tell who was seeing the future and who was just trying to pretend to. How many times have you gone to a psychic?
None I would imagine, but you think you are the expert. They are not spooks that exist they are just people like me or you except they have tuned in to their sixth sense. I wish I could do it. I get messages from my dreams, and usually when I wake up I can't remember the message. I did a couple of times, and it did come true. I am a believer.
2007-05-16 18:05:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by Cassy 3
·
4⤊
4⤋
Randis a professional skeptic. If psychic abilities were proved then he would be out of a Job. Thus he would not allow that. Now my question is, "How many times will this question be repeated?
2007-05-22 12:30:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by . 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
Because no real psychic would be foolish enough to take the challenge. The challenge is not a real challenge, its only purpose is to humiliate our fellow humans and add more false evidence to prove a skeptics hypothesis of fraud.
If you are absolutely convinced that something exists or does not exist then you will not believe the opposite no matter what. If you were to hypnotize a person and gave said person a suggestion that candles do not exist and assuming it was accepted by the person. Then when you exposed said person to a candle he/she would deny its existence.
2007-05-18 09:41:59
·
answer #9
·
answered by ikeman32 6
·
2⤊
4⤋
Because they don't exist. Even though the challenge was supposedly intended to verify the existence of such abilities, I think it was really meant to show that such powers probably don't exist.
People who rant and rave about closed-minded skeptics and the challenge probably haven't actually read the terms of the challenge. It's extremely fair, mainly because Randi didn't want claimants to have any excuses for failure. The big money reward is intended to encourage attempts and show psychics up for what they are: frauds or self-deceived individuals. The few people who have failed the test are not what give us cause to doubt. It is the huge number of people who have been too chicken to take the test. Or maybe they know something we don't. Hmmm?
2007-05-16 12:53:22
·
answer #10
·
answered by Brant 7
·
3⤊
5⤋