paradox

[zosima]

Isn't this challenge paradoxical? Once someone proves that something that is paranormal can happen, it goes from paranormal to just normal. Any phenomenon that can occur in our world is by definition natural. I think Randi has got himself in win-win position with this challenge.

[William Smith]

A lot of people get hung up on the semantics of the "One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge".

It has been established that not the wording of the event provides the core meaning but the event itself: The providing of evidence for a claim in two controlled tests. If the applicant does what he claims (performs successfully as defined in the test protocol) he wins the JREF Prize.

If you feel uncomfortable with the word paranormal, use the phrase "event previously unknown to science".

The James Randi Educational Foundation One Million Dollar Event Previously Unknown To Science Challenge does not sound that catchy, does it?.

[cyborg]

I think you mean an "event previously unknown to science which would overturn a good deal of what is already known about it on its head".

That would be even less catchy.

[Czarcasm]

Can we come up with a short and simple official answer that can be linked to every time this comes up? I think it could eliminate rehashing for pages upon pages what has already been discussed many times before.

[zosima]

Isn't this challenge paradoxical? Once someone proves that something that is paranormal can happen, it goes from paranormal to just normal. Any phenomenon that can occur in our world is by definition natural. I think Randi has got himself in win-win position with this challenge.

Ya, I tried checking the FAQ first, before posting this, but as far as I could tell, the FAQ was under construction.

[The Atheist]

Ya, I tried checking the FAQ first, before posting this, but as far as I could tell, the FAQ was under construction.

Has been for a very long time - I believe there is a team of pyramid-builders hard at work on it as we type and it should be ready around 2083.

[Ginarley]

Isn't this challenge paradoxical? Once someone proves that something that is paranormal can happen, it goes from paranormal to just normal. Any phenomenon that can occur in our world is by definition natural. I think Randi has got himself in win-win position with this challenge.

Actually one of my first posts on this forum was asking the very same question. I have since realised that it isn't quite like that. If a dowser could get 100% accuracy under proper double blind conditions it would win the prize yet we would be no closer to understanding it. The MDC can be won without any need for explanation. For all intents and purposes it is paranormal or supernatural according to what we know, and would remain so after the test as well.

It is also worth noting the test isn't "prove something is paranormal", it is "prove you can do something we both think is paranormal".

[William Smith]

...

It is also worth noting the test isn't "prove something is paranormal", it is "prove you can do something we both think is paranormal".

A nice observation

However, we could examine the data gained from both tests - should the applicant perform successful.
It should open a crack into the yet unknown.

[Ginarley]

A nice observation

However, we could examine the data gained from both tests - should the applicant perform successful.
It should open a crack into the yet unknown.

This depends on the nature of the protocol. Looking at most of the protocols proposed for the MDC (and similar tests) that I have seen, the collected data would most likely only be in the form of "successes versus misses". I'm not sure what else you could learn by way of mechanism or causal chain from most of these tests.

Also it seems common that the additional monitoring that a good scientific test would often include is avoided to make life easier for applicants and testers (and to avoid the easy excuse "the monitoring equipment influenced my results" lol).

Of course a genuinely successful test would most likely trigger a fair bit of research so the same effect may occur mid-long term.