What Constitutes Paranormal/Supernatural?

[Son of Rea]

Kinda new here, so I tried to read the FAQ first, but the link doesn't work, so I'll ask my questions.

By simple definition, paranormal means that which science can't explain. However, there are many things that are known to exist that science can't explain.

If I tried to collect the prize, couldn't I just present life itself as something science can't explain? What about consciousness? Ball Lightning? Or any other result that comes up when you Google "Scientific Mystery".

What is paranormal may seem obvious to most of us, but I ask for a clarification because there may be things that are in the gray area.

For example, through meditation, it is widely known that Buddhist monks can raise their body temperature and melt frozen blankets they are wrapped in-- something that would cause normal people to suffer hypothermia.

I remember an old "That's Incredible" episode where an expert Yogi stuffed himself into a 4x4x4 box and was submerged underwater for the entire show.
Sure this may have been a trick, but if it weren't would it qualify as supernatural?

Thanks.

SoR

[The Atheist]

By simple definition, paranormal means that which science can't explain. However, there are many things that are known to exist that science can't explain.

Not quite right - that would make quarks, the big bang and many other things "paranormal".

Paranormal and supernatural things are outside of science - things with no natural origin.

What is paranormal may seem obvious to most of us, but I ask for a clarification because there may be things that are in the gray area.

None that I know of. If you think you can come up with some, have at it.

For example, through meditation, it is widely known that Buddhist monks can raise their body temperature and melt frozen blankets they are wrapped in-- something that would cause normal people to suffer hypothermia.

Far from being "widely known" it sounds like a load of tripe to me.

If you think it's real, have you got any evidence*?

I remember an old "That's Incredible" episode where an expert Yogi stuffed himself into a 4x4x4 box and was submerged underwater for the entire show.
Sure this may have been a trick, but if it weren't would it qualify as supernatural?

Maybe, but since it was, it doesn't really matter. If you do come across someone able to stay underwater for an hour without oxygen, it will definitely count as paranormal if they're alive at the end of it.

*This is another easy way of separating science from paranormal. If the evidence consists of lots of stories and personal anecdotes but no independent evidence whatsoever, it's definitely supernatural/paranormal.

[rjh01]

<snip>
I remember an old "That's Incredible" episode where an expert Yogi stuffed himself into a 4x4x4 box and was submerged underwater for the entire show.
Sure this may have been a trick, but if it weren't would it qualify as supernatural?

Thanks.

SoR

Just to address this point. There was a Mythbusters show (aired 5 Nov 08 in USA) where they sealed a person for a time in a coffin. I forget how long he was in it for before the oxygen ran out. The volume of a coffin would be less than 8 X 1.5 X 1.5 feet =18 cubic feet.

The box you mention would have a far greater volume (4 X 4 X 4 = 64 cubic feet) and oxygen. So a person should be able to be there for several hours without problems. That is assuming the box was air tight.

[maatorc]

......Paranormal and supernatural things are ... - things with no natural origin......

How can anything, 'paranormal' or otherwise, exist without a 'natural' origin?
There is no such thing as 'supernatural': There is nothing 'super' beyond the natural as all that does or possibly exists must be natural.

[wombatwal]

I am with you Maatoric on that.
If it is real, exists then it is natural.

[Jackalgirl]

I think that The Atheist hit it the nail on the head. Son of Rea, do you have something particular in mind? And are you planning to apply for the Challenge?

[William Smith]

Kinda new here, so I tried to read the FAQ first, but the link doesn't work, so I'll ask my questions.
...

Try this one. (http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge/challenge-faq.html)

[chillzero]

I think that The Atheist hit it the nail on the head. Son of Rea, do you have something particular in mind? And are you planning to apply for the Challenge?

I'd like to see answers to both these questions too, please.
(It may result in a move of this thread for you to get a better response).

[Son of Rea]

No, I don't have any intent of applying for the challenge, but it seems the rules are subject to interpretation. My inquiry is out of curiosity only.

By the answers received so far, it would imply that JREF need not pay the million dollars to anyone, because anything that is shown to them in a trial, is by definition, natural, since it exists in the first place.

Once it is observed in a scientific environment, it becomes a scientific phenomenon no different than ball lightning: observed but not understood.

If anyone ever did walk in and start moving things by thought alone, what is to say that such a thing is supernatural? Just because science doesn't understand it, doesn't make it supernatural, as has been indicated with the examples already given.

[Son of Rea]

As for the meditating monks reference, check tinyurl DOT com SLASH y7u6yn
-sorry I don't have enough posts to post the link.

Now, such an example may be perfectly natural, but since it is uncommon, and unexplainable, does it qualify as paranormal?

This is why "paranormal" or "supernatural" needs to be better defined. If defining is too difficult, perhaps a list of specific examples should be given as paranormal, and worthy of the prize.

[666]

As for the meditating monks reference, check tinyurl DOT com SLASH y7u6yn
-sorry I don't have enough posts to post the link.

http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/04.18/09-tummo.html

[Czarcasm]

By the answers received so far, it would imply that JREF need not pay the million dollars to anyone, because anything that is shown to them in a trial, is by definition, natural, since it exists in the first place.

Once it is observed in a scientific environment, it becomes a scientific phenomenon no different than ball lightning: observed but not understood.

From the FAQ:Within the Challenge, this means that at the time your application is submitted and approved, your claim will be considered paranormal for the duration. If, after testing, it is decided that your ability is either scientifically explainable or will be someday, you needn’t worry. If the JREF has agreed to test you, then your claim is paranormal.

[Son of Rea]

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

And thanks for posting the link for me.

So does JREF publish all claims that are tested and all that are turned down?

If not, it seems that who/what is approved for testing could be arbitrary--subject to the whim of whomever reviews the applications.

[shadron]

One other thing - your challenge protocol will not be accepted if it presents a significant risk of life or limb to any person, including yourself. Keep that in mind.

[Pantaz]

So does JREF publish all claims that are tested and all that are turned down?

If not, it seems that who/what is approved for testing could be arbitrary--subject to the whim of whomever reviews the applications.

Challenge Applications:
http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=43

[William Smith]

As for the meditating monks reference, check tinyurl DOT com SLASH y7u6yn
-sorry I don't have enough posts to post the link.

Now, such an example may be perfectly natural, but since it is uncommon, and unexplainable, does it qualify as paranormal?

This is why "paranormal" or "supernatural" needs to be better defined. If defining is too difficult, perhaps a list of specific examples should be given as paranormal, and worthy of the prize.

Have you read the FAQ? And this? (http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge/challenge-application.html)

Once the JREF accepts an application and the protocol is agreed upon, the applicant simply needs to successfully perform according to the agreed upon criteria. Definitions of "paranormal" or "supernatural" do not matter. Evidence does. Succeed in two controlled tests and you win the Prize.

Simple enough, right?

[Son of Rea]

Cool, Pantaz, thanks.

Yes, GzuzKyzt, I believe I get it now. Thanks.

[arthwollipot]

No, I don't have any intent of applying for the challenge, but it seems the rules are subject to interpretation. My inquiry is out of curiosity only.

By the answers received so far, it would imply that JREF need not pay the million dollars to anyone, because anything that is shown to them in a trial, is by definition, natural, since it exists in the first place.Ultimately, in the end, Randi has the final say on what qualifies for the Challenge and what doesn't. Basically, if Randi (and by extension, the JREF) declares that it's paranormal for the purposes of the Challenge, it's paranormal.

[The Professor]

Randi claims to have nothing to do with the Challenge!
I spoke with him myself.

[steenkh]

Randi claims to have nothing to do with the Challenge!
I spoke with him myself.
He can delegate, obviously. And he seems to have pulled out of the negotiations and testing, but we often enough hear that a final protocol has to be cleared with Randi.

[RoboTimbo]

He can delegate, obviously. And he seems to have pulled out of the negotiations and testing, but we often enough hear that a final protocol has to be cleared with Randi.

As evidenced in this post (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4341478#post4341478) from RemieV in the Pavel Ziborov $1 million challenge log of applicants.