CONNIE SONNE, Dowser

[chran]

Woo, I think this is the first applicant The Challenge has had from Denmark!

This seems like a pretty standard claim for a dowser, so I'm pretty sure all the bases regarding protecting the pieces of cardboard from manipulation.

And yes, Connie Sonne does have writings in news papers about her abillities, but they're mostly regarding her "predictions" about Madeleine McCann. She appeared on national TV in May of 2008 with a tape recording purportedly made outside a house in Portugal where Madeleine were being held at the time! :jaw-dropp

This is a translation of an article about Connie Sonne talking about a tape recording with Madeleine McCann's voice on it (http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=&hl=en&u=http://www.dr.dk/Templates/NewsArticle.aspx%3FNRMODE%3DPublished%26NRNODEGUID %3D{0D24B055-F08E-4F1B-BD14-A654C322F755}%26NRORIGINALURL%3D/DR1/Aftenshowet/Projekter/20080519140418.htm%253F%26NRCACHEHINT%3DGuest&sl=da&tl=en).

[CFLarsen]

For those with a Danish tongue, the discussion the Danish skeptics had with Connie Sonne and her claims about Madeleine McCann (https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=14810630&postID=8182895174476050061).

[William Smith]

Another dowsing claim. Edge, are you reading this?



I know this might sound overly pushy: Does the JREF follow up on those academic supports?

More precisely: Does the JREF ask for information on the test set-up, results and/or controls used?

And: After applicants have failed to demonstrate their ability in a controlled test for the MDC, does the JREF follow up on that by asking the academic for a statement?

[RemieV]

No, the JREF does not follow up on the academic supports.

No, though a description of the demonstration is usually given in the affidavit. The demonstration given to the academic is not supposed to be a test-run for the Challenge test. It is simply a quick demonstration to see if an individual with a background in critical thinking, science, or skepticism will also believe that the applicant has paranormal abilities.

No, we do not follow up with the academic by asking for a statement.

[William Smith]

No, the JREF does not follow up on the academic supports.

No, though a description of the demonstration is usually given in the affidavit. The demonstration given to the academic is not supposed to be a test-run for the Challenge test. It is simply a quick demonstration to see if an individual with a background in critical thinking, science, or skepticism will also believe that the applicant has paranormal abilities.

No, we do not follow up with the academic by asking for a statement.

Thanks for the quick response, RemieV.

[chran]

Some more information regarding Connie Sonne's claims about Madeleine McCann's abduction:


She believes that the government (presumably the British), top police officials, the prosecutor, the police in Leicestershire, and other top people are "in on it".

Madeleine's parents are forced to play along, but it has nothing to do with pedophilia.

We're being manipulated by the mass media.

A police officer in Portugal agreed with her about all her claims. Not named, of course.

Madeleine McCann is in South America and Connie Sonne has proof of this, along with proof of everything else.

Connie Sonne visited Madeleine McCann's god parents in Dumbarton in Scotland; Patricia and Sandy Cameron. Patricia is Madeleine's dad's sister. While there, Connie photographed some evidence proving that the whole family is involved in the abduction. Also, Sandy accidentally told something to Connie, which has been given to the police.

All this is taken from the page (https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=14810630&postID=8182895174476050061) that Claus gave the link to, and it's all written by Connie herself. I've taken the liberty of printing out the whole thing on PDF in case she goes ba-leeting. The post I've taken the above from, is posted on 28.10.08 (28th of October 2008).

[steenkh]

The dowsing claim is somewhat off from her other claimed abilities. I wonder what - or who - made her apply. After all, she must be pretty sure of her abilities, ... which is rather sad!

[RemieV]

She actually doesn't much want to perform the dowsing claim, and says she has much more to show. However, this is by far the easiest most streamlined way to test her claims.

[William Smith]

She actually doesn't much want to perform the dowsing claim, and says she has much more to show. However, this is by far the easiest most streamlined way to test her claims.

Could you please ask her to join the JREF forum?

If you have much more to show, well, show it, Ms. Sonne.

[RemieV]

Connie Sonne has been presented with a preliminary protocol. Check out her thread in the Challenge Applicants subforum for more information.

[jojonete]

From the proposed protocol:
If there is a setup or technological problem, or if for any reason the test must be halted due to extenuating circumstances rather than trickery, the test may fourth set of suit cards may be used to replace one of the original three. If there are further setup problems, the test may be rescheduled once. These re-test guidelines do not apply in cases of simple failure.
(bolding mine)

It looks like the two bolded words are a result of copying and pasting from other protocols, and they should not be there.

Also, I'm assuming Ms. Sonne will be allowed to check the contents of all the unopened envelopes after the test is finished, so she can be sure the envelopes actually contain what they're supposed to. If that's the case, I'd mention it explicitly in the protocol. If it's not, I'd ask why.

Otherwise, it looks like a very nice, clear and simple protocol for a very nice, clear and simple claimed ability.

[steenkh]

The open test is made with unenveloped card, whereas the closed test is made with double-enveloped cards. Ms. Sonne might afterwards claim that she cannot dowse through the envelopes.

Would it not be better to have a set of extra envelopes ready, and put the open cards into the envelopes without shuffling. Ms. Sonne can decide which cards to dowse for, and can afterwards not claim that the cards influence her magic powers, unless of course she even fails at the open test.

[yairhol]

The open test is made with unenveloped card, whereas the closed test is made with double-enveloped cards. Ms. Sonne might afterwards claim that she cannot dowse through the envelopes.

Would it not be better to have a set of extra envelopes ready, and put the open cards into the envelopes without shuffling. Ms. Sonne can decide which cards to dowse for, and can afterwards not claim that the cards influence her magic powers, unless of course she even fails at the open test.
Agreed.
Show her a card and place it in a double envelope. Ask her to dowse for it. If she is successful then all is fine and the closed test may begin. If not then she may have a problem with the double envelopes although this should be cleared at the protocol negotiation.

[jojonete]

Would it not be better to have a set of extra envelopes ready, and put the open cards into the envelopes without shuffling. Ms. Sonne can decide which cards to dowse for, and can afterwards not claim that the cards influence her magic powers, unless of course she even fails at the open test.
(bolding mine)

You mean envelopes, don't you? :)

However, your point is an important one. I had overlooked it.

[MRC_Hans]

For those with a Danish tongue, the discussion the Danish skeptics had with Connie Sonne and her claims about Madeleine McCann (https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=14810630&postID=8182895174476050061).Jesh! Barking mad, she is (well to be fair: Barking mad, she sounds).

Hans

[connie sonne]

This will be the only words from me here on this thread. About barking dear Hans....what about stop barking yourself until you see if I`m right?:D! And the question about the envelopes....I can dowse through envelopes or whatever...it dosn`t matter at all. You can even build the cards in a cementwall...I find them anyway.

And finaly about the question about dowsing....what about leaving the question for "how to do it" for JREF and myself? I know what I can do..and surely JREF know what they are doing to. It`s only "a matter " between me and them..noone else...yet!;)

best regards Connie

[yairhol]

Hi Connie, welcome to the forum :).
I wish you good luck on your test. I must say I'll be pretty excited if science uncovers a new discovery while I'm taking part (as an observer). I'll be able to say I was part of this in real time.
When is the preliminary test happening?

Best Regards...

[dann]

Connie, since you obviously (obvious to others, that is) have the power of self-deception (http://www.skepdic.com/selfdeception.html), I recommend that you read about dowsing (http://www.skepdic.com/dowsing.html), and also about the post-hoc fallacy (http://www.skepdic.com/posthoc.html) and the ideomotor effect (http://www.skepdic.com/ideomotor.html) associated with dowsing. In this YouTube clip you can see an actual example of dowsing: James Randi and a dowser (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOsCnX-TKIY)

Judging by your command of the English language, I think that your understanding of this field might also benefit from reading a couple of articles in Danish, in particular James Randi’s article Sådan virker ønskekvisten (http://www.skeptica.dk/2005/randi01.htm), but the following articles may also help you understand the delusion of dowsing: beviser for ekstraordinære påstande (http://www.skeptica.dk/1999/gracely.htm) and alternative energier (http://www.skeptica.dk/bibliotek/bav_bogen/bav_05.htm#Ydre%20p%C3%A5virkninger)
[/url]
Since you don’t seem to mind spending a lot of time and money travelling to other parts of the world, in this case Florida, to prove your alleged powers, I recommend that, at least to begin with, you save some money by restricting yourself to going to Fåborg next Tuesday, January 20, for this lecture by Ole J. Knudsen on [url=http://www.folkeuniversitetet.dk/Default.aspx?PageType=3&ID=532288]moderne overtro og myter ( http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kvistgang).

If you still decide to go ahead with your plans of having your dowsing powers tested, I think that you may receive help with your project from these guys, Dowsing Danmark (http://www.dowsing.dk/), but you should be aware that they appear to share your delusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusion)!

[connie sonne]

Thank you Yairhol, and maybe I see you there, it will be a pleasure to meet you. I don`t know yet when. I have just sent JREF a mail, telling them, that it`s ok with the protocol, and I asked for a time, so I can order my ticket for the flight.

Best regards Connie


Hi Dann, and thank you for your advices. But I don`t need anybody to help me, and I don`t have to read about this. I do know how to do, whom it is and why. But that will come later....after the test.

Best regards Connie

[MRC_Hans]

This will be the only words from me here on this thread. About barking dear Hans....what about stop barking yourself until you see if I`m right?:D!*snip*
best regards Connie

Yes, of course, Connie, my apologies for being so frank. But yes, let's see if you are right. :cool:

Hans

[CFLarsen]

Connie,

When you say you don't have to read about what Dann linked to, is that because you already know about these things and don't think they apply to you, or is it because you simply don't bother?

[connie sonne]

Hans, thank`s:) and the answer is yes to both :D!

[steenkh]

Hi Connie, and welcome to the forum! It is good to see that you are very confident. I hope you win the challenge, though I do not think you will.

Have you tried a similar test before you applied? If not, I would seriously suggest that you practise by putting cards into double envelopes, and shuffling them yourself, or even better, have somebody else shuffling them for you, and then dowse for the cards. In that way you can hone your skills, and perhaps recognise problems before you are at the actual test.

Besides, we would very much like to hear your success rate at such a test!

[William Smith]

This will be the only words from me here on this thread.
...

Another post

And yet another post.

QED.



Connie, if people criticise you here - like I did above - it is mostly because they want to point to technical flaws. It is not personal.

I hope the JREF and you can agree to a test.

[yairhol]

You can even build the cards in a cementwall...I find them anyway.

If this is the case then there's a much simpler protocol for the test.
You stand in one room and a tester stands in the adjacent room and holds up a card. You do the dowsing and guess the card. Results are written down and repeat.
Much simpler than using 40 envelopes and all that.

[CFLarsen]

Connie,

The answer to my question cannot be a mere "yes".

When you say you don't have to read about what Dann linked to, is that because:

a) you already know about these things and don't think they apply to you

or

b) is it because you simply don't bother?

Is it a or b?

[steenkh]

QED.
Well, we did try to entice a reply out of her, and I do not see any reason to criticise that she changed her decision. A reaction like yours could simply result in her sticking to the original decision, and what would be the advantage of this for any of us?

[connie sonne]

Hi Steenkh, and thank you. About winning the challenge, people can think what they want to think, I actually don`t care,:).We`ll see.
Thank`s for your advice, but as I wrote before, I do not have to practice, and I don`t have problems at all, :). And GzuzKryzt, I do know, that the criticising here on the forum it`s not about me personal, but people come further, if it`s "friendly" criticising, :D!

[chran]

Hello Connie, and welcome to the forum :)

It's good that you're confident, but I think the reason that people are advising you to make some tests by yourself beforehand, is because very many people have found out that they couldn't perform in the preliminary test for whatever reason.

We just want to see you succeed!

[connie sonne]

Yairhol, thank you for your tip, but I think JREF and I already has the protocol finished. It`s simple and straight, and it won`t take me longer than 1/2 hour, so I guess it`s ok. And I already confirmed the protocol.

CFLarsen, yes, the answer to both questions a and b are yes. I already knows about these things and it dosnt apply to me and yes, I don`t bother, :)

best regards COnnie

[Jackalgirl]

I'm with yairhol, et al. I think it would be best to have the open test be exactly like the clsoed test, with the only difference being that the card is shown to Ms. Sonne before it is sealed in a double-envelope.

I like the idea of someone holding the card up to a wall, too, but this protocol is fine the way it is -- if Ms. Sonne likes it, and it seems that she does.

I have a question for you, Ms. Sonne -- what will happen if you are not able to identify a sufficient number of cards? Will it have any effect on your opinion about your abilities? Will you continue to test yourself objectively, or will you disregard the results?

I don't mean to seem catty -- I'm honestly interested. Most challengers state that the results will have no affect on their beliefs about their abilities, which makes me sad.

[connie sonne]

Hi Chran and thank you,:).It`s ok. But I am serious when I say, that I do know what I can. Really...there is no problem, :). But I also know, that many people around have tried the challenge, but it did`nt work out. It will this time...when I am so sure, it`s because I know who my connections are, what they can and what they allow me to do, :). And there is a meaning about this, because afterwards....much more will come..the truth about everything, I promise,:).

[yairhol]

But suppose you fail (like Jackagirl stated). What then?
Will you keep your confidence about your abilities or will you question them and seek more tests?

[CFLarsen]

Connie,

Why doesn't it apply to you? It's not enough for you to just state that This Is So. You need to explain why.

This is a forum for skepticism and critical thinking. You can't expect people to just uncritically accept what you say.

Have you performed any tests on your own? If so, how did you do it?

Will you go to Ole Knudsen's lecture next Tuesday?

[dann]

Well, no. Connie Sonne does not need to explain anything, since she has a direct line to God ... or something:
much more will come..the truth about everything, I promise,:).
When you are on the brink of discovering the truth about everything, lectures are a waste of time, aren't they?
Connie Sonne appears to have one need above all others: the need to believe - beyond reason or common sense:
"Det er en beklagelig kendsgerning, at et ordentligt dobbeltblindt forsøg aldrig er i stand til at overbevise kvistgængere om, at de tager fejl. Deres behov for at tro er så stort, at de afviser et hvilket som helst bevis, der taler imod deres opfattelse, lige meget hvor godt det er. De har antaget en filosofi som beskytter dem imod virkeligheden." From the Danish translation of James Randi's article about dowsing and dowsers mentioned in post 18:
http://www.skeptica.dk/2005/randi01.htm

[dann]

”Jeg vil bede alle, der håber at vinde præmien på grundlag af deres evner som kvistgænger, om først at afprøve sig selv i et dobbeltblindt forsøg. Vi hos JREF kan give anvisninger på, hvordan man opstiller og gennemfører sådan et forsøg. Jeg kan forsikre Dem om, at den ovenstående beskrivelse af den ideomotoriske effekt vil vise sig at holde stik. Og jeg ved udmærket, at De som kvistgænger vil afvise dette råd og tro, at i Deres tilfælde er sådan en procedure unødvendig. Jeg bygger denne konklusion på de mange år, jeg har har testet kvistgængere.” http://www.skeptica.dk/2005/randi01.htm

And for the unfortunate readers who don't understand Danish:
”I ask all those who wish to claim the prize based upon their dowsing skills to first try a double-blind test of their abilities. We at the JREF can advise you how to design such a test protocol. You will find, I assure you, that the description above of the ideomotor effect will be proven valid. And I know full well that you, as a dowser, will refuse this advice and believe that, for you, such a procedure is not necessary. I base this conclusion on my many years of handling dowsing claimants.” http://www.randi.org/library/dowsing/

[connie sonne]

Jackalgirl and Yairhol, where it all comes from, there`s a lot of humor. If it will happen, that I fail the test..there`s a reason. Then I will make the new step afterwards, not by testing again, but something else..Yeah, no matter what is going to happen, I will never make a doubt about my abilities. In a year now, my life and the things I`m doing is like a puzzle, but ALWAYS I do the new step to go on...and I already have many evidences and more will come,:).

[steenkh]

Why doesn't it apply to you? It's not enough for you to just state that This Is So. You need to explain why.
Has she not already said that she is so sure of her abilities that mundane things that have confused every other dowser to be tested cannot possibly apply to her?

It is of course arrogant, but there you are.

This is a forum for skepticism and critical thinking. You can't expect people to just uncritically accept what you say.
Well, we can accept that those are her reasons. We do not have to be persuaded to believe that she will actually be able to perform when tested.

[Jackalgirl]

Jackalgirl and Yairhol, where it all comes from, there`s a lot of humor. If it will happen, that I fail the test..there`s a reason. Then I will make the new step afterwards, not by testing again, but something else..Yeah, no matter what is going to happen, I will never make a doubt about my abilities. In a year now, my life and the things I`m doing is like a puzzle, but ALWAYS I do the new step to go on...and I already have many evidences and more will come,:).

How very sad. I am always saddened by people who don't understand that the world is wonderful without being magical, and that people can be extraordinary and special without being magical. What a waste.

[William Smith]

Well, we did try to entice a reply out of her, and I do not see any reason to criticise that she changed her decision. A reaction like yours could simply result in her sticking to the original decision, and what would be the advantage of this for any of us?

If her original decision was that she would go and get tested after making her first and only post: Fine.

The advantage would obviously be saving bandwidth. And doing what one says one will do, thus creating credibility.

Alas, everything points to a Connie behaving like a True Believer (TM) with a knack for talking before she thinks. No offense intended.

[steenkh]

Jackalgirl and Yairhol, where it all comes from, there`s a lot of humor. If it will happen, that I fail the test..there`s a reason. Then I will make the new step afterwards, not by testing again, but something else..Yeah, no matter what is going to happen, I will never make a doubt about my abilities. In a year now, my life and the things I`m doing is like a puzzle, but ALWAYS I do the new step to go on...and I already have many evidences and more will come,:).
But the JREF Million Dollar Challenge is going to be terminated next year, so you will only get one more chance, although I am sure that if the challenge had continued, your world view would permit you to fail year after year without getting a dent.

[connie sonne]

And for Dann, God dosn`t excist...there is something else. It`s not about belief or faith, it`s about knowing, Our planet is ready for the truth only now, therefore other people couldn`t come through the challenge...they were not allowed to. And about the lectures...yes, a lot of it...it`s a waste of time, and some of it only contains "the half truth".

CFLarsen, no I won`t go for Faaborg, but thank you for your tip.

I do accept critical thinking, but it`s the way people pronounce it... As I wrote above, people can be critical in a friendly way..otherwise they will get it back in the same direction;)!
I did answer your questions, and I can`t see right now, that I have to write more about it, than I did. As I wrote earlier, there`s comming much more, and when that will take place, you wil get your answers,:).
And Dann...you mentioned my english, and I`m sorry that it`s not better than it is, but I`m 45 now, and it feels that it`s 100 years ago, since I last time went to school,:)
But as I can see...people do understand me, and I do understand them, that`s the most important thing, don`t you agree:)

[connie sonne]

And tó Jackalgirl...and I am very sad to know, how the world and many people are today,:eye-poppi

[dann]

But as I can see...people do understand me, and I do understand them, that`s the most important thing, don`t you agree:)
Yes, it is the most important thing, and yes, I do agree!

[Jeff Wagg]

Folks, let's give Connie a break here. She's had the courage to come forth and take the challenge, has treated the JREF very respectfully and straightforwardly, and so far is one our most agreeable applicants.

Of course we don't believe she can do what she says until she shows us.. that goes without saying, but let's give her the chance to show us.

[Klaymore]

Actually, I kind of dug the whole idea of Ms. Sonne just keeping mum (aside from the first post to let us know she was following the conversation). My anecdotal experience tells me that it's typically a hell of a lot easier to get claimants to talk than to actually take the tests.

Ms. Sonne doesn't have to explain anything to us to take the million dollars; all she has to do is come to the appointed time and place and then do what she says she can do.

The longer the chatter goes on, the less likely that Ms. Sonne will take the test. Someone will say something to offend her, or convince her that the JREF is going to rip her off, or just satisfy her in whatever way is necessary to prevent her from taking the test.

Ms. Sonne, I hope that you'll take the test according to the agreed protocol.

[dann]

Jeff, you seem to consider it a criterion of success that people go ahead and take the test. I don’t!

If Connie Sonne comes to her senses before going to Florida, she will save the money for airfare and accommodation.
Taking the test will add her name to the long list of dowsers who have failed to prove their (imaginary) powers. Do the skeptics really need any more of those?
I’d rather tell her in advance and have her test her alleged powers of dowsing – as recommended by Randi:
”I ask all those who wish to claim the prize based upon their dowsing skills to first try a double-blind test of their abilities. We at the JREF can advise you how to design such a test protocol. You will find, I assure you, that the description above of the ideomotor effect will be proven valid. And I know full well that you, as a dowser, will refuse this advice and believe that, for you, such a procedure is not necessary. I base this conclusion on my many years of handling dowsing claimants.” http://www.randi.org/library/dowsing/ - instead of hoping that she won’t and thus proceeds to go all the way to Florida to take the test.

Is that the purpose of skepticism?

By the way, I don’t think that anybody has called Connie Sonne a coward, so why do you praise her “courage”? Is it really the first word to occur to you as a description of her attitude? And since you also describe her as ”one our most agreeable applicants”, I find it obvious that she should be offered the chance of coming to her senses before she spends a lot of money on this futile endeavour: the chance of testing her ‘powers’ herself, at home, free of charge.

[chillzero]

dann,
There is nothing to be gained by subjecting a claimant to rudeness or abuse. If they decide not to take the test, it should be because - as you say - they have realised they cannot pass. It should not be because they were subjected to hostility, intimidation or rudeness.

As for courage, as an 'almost' claimant myself I can tell you that it takes a hell of a lot of nerve to walk in to the lion's den here. You know that the overwhelming majority of the membership believe you to be either deluded or fraudulent.

All that is required is a little respect for someone who has stepped up to put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. We regularly complain that believers will not subject themselves to appropriate testing. When they are treated harshly, would you blame them?

The success of the MDC is to be able to show that none of these things work under proper testing. Therefore it is a mark of success just to get people into the testing room. And if that testing takes place ahead of the MDC - in her own place and time - then that's just as good if we have a narrative of that testing. Beth did it before. I didn't because I was too intimidated at the time to document it here until I tried it for myself. Beth did more good for the MDC and skepticism by showing her self testing results and also her reasoning afterward, than I did by keeping it private until I realised it was all bunk.

The best environment for this is an open one with some respect shown from both sides for the other.

ETA: Claimants should feel comfortable enough to come here and share their journey as they apply and self test.

[MRC_Hans]

Well, I'll just chip in and wish Connie good luck.

Knæk og bræk!

Hans

[William Smith]

...
As for courage, as an 'almost' claimant myself I can tell you that it takes a hell of a lot of nerve to walk in to the lion's den here. You know that the overwhelming majority of the membership believe you to be either deluded or fraudulent.
...

That argument comes up a lot, I even used it myself in the past.

In all brevity, let me give you a comparable situation: I play the drums. Sometimes I have the chance to play a difficult song in front of other far more accomplished drummers. As I walk in the room where the others sit and wait, two things are important:

1. Do I know I can do what I want to do?
2. When I'm finished: Have I done what I claimed I could do?

Perhaps courage plays a secondary role. The primary role is the ability. Obviously.



I have always wondered if would-be applicants secretly knew they were unable to perform their claimed feats and thusly got offended by people calling them out beforehand.

Long story short: Good luck with your test, Connie Sonne.

[nathan]

Folks, let's give Connie a break here. She's had the courage to come forth and take the challenge, has treated the JREF very respectfully and straightforwardly, and so far is one our most agreeable applicants.

Of course we don't believe she can do what she says until she shows us.. that goes without saying, but let's give her the chance to show us.

seconded. I hope Connie maintains a positive attitude towards her test.

[chillzero]

That argument comes up a lot, I even used it myself in the past.

In all brevity, let me give you a comparable situation: I play the drums. Sometimes I have the chance to play a difficult song in front of other far more accomplished drummers. As I walk in the room where the others sit and wait, two things are important:

1. Do I know I can do what I want to do?
2. When I'm finished: Have I done what I claimed I could do?

Perhaps courage plays a secondary role. The primary role is the ability. Obviously.

I agree.
However, to extend your example, if you walk in and they are sitting waiting quietly and respectfully, that can be intimidating, but my point is that it is much more intimidating, and you may be more likely to turn and walk out without performing, should they be mocking and laughing before you even begin.

[William Smith]

I agree.
However, to extend your example, if you walk in and they are sitting waiting quietly and respectfully, that can be intimidating, but my point is that it is much more intimidating, and you may be more likely to turn and walk out without performing, should they be mocking and laughing before you even begin.

Wouldn't it be intimidating only if I was unsure - or dead-certain that I'd fail - about my ability to perform?

Wouldn't their mocking and laughing - dare I say: skepticism? - only reflect their attitude and in no way my ability to perform?

I do understand that my point might seem a tad high-horsy to some folks.

Everything comes down to this though: Can you do what you claim to be able to do?

[chillzero]

Wouldn't it be intimidating only if I was unsure - or dead-certain that I'd fail - about my ability to perform?

Wouldn't their mocking and laughing - dare I say: skepticism? - only reflect their attitude and in no way my ability to perform?

I do understand that my point might seem a tad high-horsy to some folks.

Everything comes down to this though: Can you do what you claim to be able to do?

I really feel that it is hugely intimidating, no matter how well you can perform, to be mocked before you begin - not to mention highly inappropriate.

In any case - to prevent this derailing - I feel it is encumbent on us to be welcoming to claimants, and encourage them in their endeavours, rather than hounding them out.

I hope that Connie Sonne will share her journey with us as she moves toward her claim.

[nathan]

I really feel that it is hugely intimidating, no matter how well you can perform, to be mocked before you begin - not to mention highly inappropriate.

Exactly, whether it's intimidating or not is irrelevant -- it's just rude.

[William Smith]

...
In any case - to prevent this derailing - I feel it is encumbent on us to be welcoming to claimants, and encourage them in their endeavours, rather than hounding them out.
...

Agreed. But I do not think they should be treated with kid gloves. They should be treated like adults who enter a skeptic forum with a paranormal claim.
In post #9 of this thread I expressed the wish that Connie Sonne joined this thread.

After seeing her contradict herself within two posts - yes: I think those small things count because if you have a strategy, a game plan, a foundation of evidence going in a challenge, you do not contradict yourself within two posts - and after her dismissing of CFLs questions I felt my need for discussion saturated and pointless, since one cannot argue with a believer.

But I will be convinced by evidence of Connie Sonne's ability in two controlled tests.

[connie sonne]

Hi again, and thank`s to all, who wished me good luck:)! You must also know, that NOTHING can keep me away from what I`m doing, eventhough someone are trying to convince me, that I`m wrong:D!

Dann...how the f... do you know about me and what I can do? Maybe you are playing "god" now, as you told me:D, for judging people, whom to fail or not?? Hmm...some people can`t see longer than their own nosetip:). I feel a little sorry for them..sorry! All you people out there must know...I AM glad to get tips from people who MEAN it...but I am sorry to say, that you Dann don`t mean it. The TRUTH sometimes hurts.....but it`s nessecary to know.
And for GzuzKryzt. I`m not contradicting myself...I know a lot....and you don`t know what I know:) So I appologize if you think I`m contradicting...but I`m not...I explain it afterwards the challenge.

Best regards Connie

[RoboTimbo]

Good luck, Connie! Glad to see someone able to follow through!

[dann]

dann,
There is nothing to be gained by subjecting a claimant to rudeness or abuse. If they decide not to take the test, it should be because - as you say - they have realised they cannot pass. It should not be because they were subjected to hostility, intimidation or rudeness.

You are right, of course. Do you read my comments as if I recommend rudeness, abuse, hostility or intimidation?

To some of the other comments:
MRC_Hans: "Well, I'll just chip in and wish Connie good luck."
GzuzKryz: "Long story short: Good luck with your test, Connie Sonne."
chillzero: "In any case - to prevent this derailing - I feel it is encumbent on us to be welcoming to claimants, and encourage them in their endeavours, rather than hounding them out."
RoboTimbo: "Good luck, Connie! Glad to see someone able to follow through!"

There are other alternatives to "hounding them out" than encouraging "them in their endeavours". As long as a claimant is friendly - and I notice that Connie Sonne has stopped being friendly to me, but still .... - I think that we should treat them as friends, which is what Randi does in the quotation I bring here for the third time:
”I ask all those who wish to claim the prize based upon their dowsing skills to first try a double-blind test of their abilities. We at the JREF can advise you how to design such a test protocol. You will find, I assure you, that the description above of the ideomotor effect will be proven valid. And I know full well that you, as a dowser, will refuse this advice and believe that, for you, such a procedure is not necessary. I base this conclusion on my many years of handling dowsing claimants.” http://www.randi.org/library/dowsing/

If friends of yours told you that they had the intentions that Connie has, I don't think that you would tell them to go ahead and wish them luck. If they appeared to be deluded, I think that you would tell them so. If you didn't, I would consider you very bad friends!

In spite of her rudeness and hostility - "Maybe you are playing "god" now, as you told me, for judging people, whom to fail or not?? Hmm...some people can`t see longer than their own nosetip." - I still hope for her that she'll see reason, test herself properly and discover her delusion instead of following through with her application.
Telling her to go ahead and wishing her luck is cynical!

[dann]

PS Do you guys actually believe in the good luck that you wish Connie Sonne? Or are you just putting a good face on it?

[chillzero]

You are right, of course. Do you read my comments as if I recommend rudeness, abuse, hostility or intimidation?
That's why I replied to the one I did.


There are other alternatives to "hounding them out" than encouraging "them in their endeavours".
Indeed - that's why I mentioned guidance through their self testing, rather than trying to put them off applying.

If friends of yours ....
Perhaps you missed my comment that I initially came here to apply myself.

Telling her to go ahead and wishing her luck is cynical!
I didn't say that was the only option.
I suggested giving guidance, and enough respect that she will feel comfortable undertaking some self testing, and revealing her results here as she moves along. This proved inredibly informative when Beth did it. I am often sorry I didn't do so myself, but I was subjected to particular bullying, and even without that felt too defensive about posting about my beliefs to actually engage in any meaningful discussion. I just hope for better for other claimants, that's all.



Connie, how would you feel about doing so? Would you discuss some protocols for testing yourself here, undertake the testing and report bak with your findings and conclusions?

[William Smith]

PS Do you guys actually believe in the good luck that you wish Connie Sonne? Or are you just putting a good face on it?

I simply tried to put a good face on it.

I should have said: Best wishes on your path to unbiased self-discovery. Not as catchy though.

[connie sonne]

Stop barking:D:D:D.....I will do that myself...right now, :). Bye bye, :)

best regards Connie

[dann]

Sorry, I forgot this one:
As for courage, as an 'almost' claimant myself I can tell you that it takes a hell of a lot of nerve to walk in to the lion's den here. You know that the overwhelming majority of the membership believe you to be either deluded or fraudulent.
I don't think that believe is the right word in this context. I think that the word know would be more appropriate.
(And, no, I'm not "playing "god" now". I don't have any supernatural powers at all! I don't need any to arrive at this conclusion.)

[Reno]

Connie, at the test, stay cool and calm. That way, when you fail, at least you'll retain some dignity.

[Gr8wight]

If this is the case then there's a much simpler protocol for the test.
You stand in one room and a tester stands in the adjacent room and holds up a card. You do the dowsing and guess the card. Results are written down and repeat.
Much simpler than using 40 envelopes and all that.

Unfortunately, Yairhol, this suggestion is counter productive, as it does not address Ms. Sonne's claim. The claim of a dowser is not that he or she can identify an unknown, hidden object, but that he or she can locate a known, hidden object.

The protocol Ms. Sonne has agreed to is an excellent one to test her claimed abilities. There really is no reason for her to engage in discussions here, as she needs no assistance or suggestions from us. Her next step is simply to take the test to which she has already agreed. Further conversation here can only muddy the waters.

Best of luck in your endeavour, Connie.

[Miss_Kitt]

Hello, Connie! Greetings from a former dowser.

I discovered that I was not able to do my thing in the absence of someone who knew where the desired object was hidden. From this, I concluded that I was very good at reading the non-verbal clues of the person(s) who were watching me, and that it was their behavior, not the actual object, that was impacting my perceptions--which, in turn, influenced the pendulum movement.

So I'd put myself into the, "Maybe you want to test at home first" group. Unless you are fabulously wealthy, flying from Denmark to the USA is a lot of money! Of course, it is a trip to sunny Florida from the cold and dark Danish winter, so there's that to be said for it. :)

I was absolutely certain of my ability prior to it being disproved by a fairly simple test that checked for one avenue of self-confusion. So I know how upsetting and unsettling that discovery can be. Hence I, personally, am very glad that my failed test happened among friends, with an absence of public attention.

You are welcome to do whatever makes you happy. Still, it seems to me that there is no cost to you in doing a screening test in Denmark. The folks here (in this thread) will be happy to help you put together a simple protocol that will eliminate some of the more common causes of "apparent dowsing" that proves not to be real.

Best wishes, Miss Kitt

[chillzero]

Is this:
Stop barking:D:D:D.....I will do that myself...right now, :). Bye bye, :)

best regards Connie

an answer to this:


Connie, how would you feel about doing so? Would you discuss some protocols for testing yourself here, undertake the testing and report bak with your findings and conclusions? ?

I'm a little confused as to who you are responding to.
(The button marked 'quote' at the bottom of each post will allow you to reply to that specific text, and the button with the " on will allow yuo to select multiple posts to respond to.)

[dann]

Stop barking:D:D:D.....I will do that myself...right now, :).

My guess is that "I will do that myself" means that Connie Sonne was persuaded that testing herself (and not "barking") might be a good idea. :)
Great post, Miss Kitt!

[William Smith]

Hello, Connie! Greetings from a former dowser.

I discovered that I was not able to do my thing in the absence of someone who knew where the desired object was hidden. From this, I concluded that I was very good at reading the non-verbal clues of the person(s) who were watching me, and that it was their behavior, not the actual object, that was impacting my perceptions--which, in turn, influenced the pendulum movement.

So I'd put myself into the, "Maybe you want to test at home first" group. Unless you are fabulously wealthy, flying from Denmark to the USA is a lot of money! Of course, it is a trip to sunny Florida from the cold and dark Danish winter, so there's that to be said for it. :)

I was absolutely certain of my ability prior to it being disproved by a fairly simple test that checked for one avenue of self-confusion. So I know how upsetting and unsettling that discovery can be. Hence I, personally, am very glad that my failed test happened among friends, with an absence of public attention.

You are welcome to do whatever makes you happy. Still, it seems to me that there is no cost to you in doing a screening test in Denmark. The folks here (in this thread) will be happy to help you put together a simple protocol that will eliminate some of the more common causes of "apparent dowsing" that proves not to be real.

Best wishes, Miss Kitt

Nicely put.

[steenkh]

So I'd put myself into the, "Maybe you want to test at home first" group. Unless you are fabulously wealthy, flying from Denmark to the USA is a lot of money! Of course, it is a trip to sunny Florida from the cold and dark Danish winter, so there's that to be said for it. :)
Thanks for reminding me of something I had wondered about: why should the test take place in Florida??

Normally, the JREF has taken great pains to locate a local skeptic group to conduct the test, in order to make the test as inexpensive as possible for the claimant. Why would this test be different?

[RemieV]

Thanks for reminding me of something I had wondered about: why should the test take place in Florida??

Normally, the JREF has taken great pains to locate a local skeptic group to conduct the test, in order to make the test as inexpensive as possible for the claimant. Why would this test be different?

We have not reached the point of setting a testing location. The protocol still has to be approved by Randi. The testing location is only decided after the protocol is complete and approved.

[dann]

why should the test take place in Florida??

I think that there is only one reason for that: When you know that the universe will help you win dKr. 5.000.000,-, spending dKr. 10.000,- going to Florida is not a problem.
Connie Sonne has already spent tens of thousands of Danish kroners in pursuit of the truth about the Madeleine case. It has now been 1½ days since she told us that she had taken our advice and was going to test herself.
I hope for her that it has made her realize that she doesn’t have any supernatural powers. I also hope that she will stay in contact with us so she can benefit from Miss Kitt’s and chilzero’s experiences, which may have been what made her ‘see the light’.
Connie Sonne, if you are reading this, I want you to notice that you can send private messages in the JREF forum. Not every discussion has to be public.

[William Smith]

...
I hope for her that it has made her realize that she doesn’t have any supernatural powers.
...

...
You must also know, that NOTHING can keep me away from what I`m doing, eventhough someone are trying to convince me, that I`m wrong:D!
...

(To the tune of "Blowin' In The Wind")

How many tests must an applicant fail
Before she considers the evidence?

[dann]

I guess that's up to the individual in question, but Connie Sonne may already be considering the evidence of her own private test.
We have to take into consideration that chillzero and Miss Kitt are exeptions among dowsers. The ideomotor effect (http://www.skeptics.org.uk/article.php?dir=articles&article=ideomotor_effect.php) is very convincing! I used to ask a now deceased colleage at my highschool, a physics teacher, for advice when I wrote articles for Dansk Skeptica/Para-nyt (http://www.skeptica.dk) that touched on the sciences of nature. (I'm an amateur in that field.) Still, he was able to convince himself that dowsing actually worked for him. He even had special dowsing rods custom-made! (Gold-tipped, I think).
However, since he was also partial to the methods of science, he had agreed in principle to making an informal test of his 'powers', but he was ill and died before we could put it into practice.
My guess is that Connie Sonne does not know a lot about the sciences of nature, and she has been on a spree of presenting herself as the mouthpiece of powers beyond our reality for some time. She managed to get herself on Danish TV (http://www.dr.dk/Templates/NewsArticle.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRNODEGUID={0D24B055-F08E-4F1B-BD14-A654C322F755}&NRORIGINALURL=%2FDR1%2FAftenshowet%2FProjekter%2F2 0080519140418.htm%3F&NRCACHEHINT=Guest) in May 2008 with her claims that she knew the location of the disappeared child Madeleine. Some of the Danish skeptics discussed that case with her here (http://para-nyt.blogspot.com/2008/10/vi-venter-stadig-connie.html) in October. She has discovered that Facebook is owned and controlled by the CIA (http://msnmand.dk/article/comments/24775#comments). And in this letter to the editor she worries about a conspiracy against the freedom of speech and all the downtrodden and writes that Sandheden kommer frem ... »Før eller senere«! (http://www.bhstid.dk/?Id=3793) ("The truth shall be revealed ...»Sooner or later«!") It appears to be a kind of Nazi/Marxist conspiracy.
And I cannot think of a way of blaming those on the ideomotor effect! :)

(However, she also has the time to tell newspaper readers about more mundane matters, e.g. the guys who have been stealing hydrangeas (http://www.bornholmstidende.dk/Print.asp?Id=4314) and other plants from her parents' garden for a number of years.)

This is why I think that you should not lead her on! Try to bring her back to reality instead, don't pretend that dowsing just might hold true in her case when you are all very well aware that it doesn't. She is not Sylvia Browne, she is not Uri Geller, so there is no reason why we should recommend that she go ahead and waste her money on being tested in Flordia. She is a believer, she is not a fraud - in spite of her fraudulent beliefs.
And, yes, Steen, it would be possible for her to make the same preliminary test in Denmark.

[connie sonne]

hi there, a quick answer, specially for Dann....First...you misunderstood about barking.... I will stop BARKING myself....not that I will do my selftest:). I know a lot lot more than you do...It`s not ONLY about dowsing...that`s only a little part of it- I havent told you anything about other things, and I will not do it now:). First the challenge, and again, as I told you....much more will come,:D! Think what you want....I don`t care at all,:)

Best regards Connie

[chillzero]

(off topic correction)
I wasn't a dowser. I believed I was a psychic.

[connie sonne]

and Dann....It was NOT me who contacted the televison....they contacted me, and so did the Magazine.....now you know:D

[dann]

hi there, a quick answer, specially for Dann....First...you misunderstood about barking.... I will stop BARKING myself....

You are right! I misunderstood that one!
not that I will do my selftest:).

No, I guess you won't. It was always up to you to do so!
I know a lot lot more than you do...It`s not ONLY about dowsing...that`s only a little part of it- I havent told you anything about other things, and I will not do it now:).

You are fooling yourself! Your knowledge is imaginary.
First the challenge, and again, as I told you....much more will come,:D! Think what you want....I don`t care at all,:)

I don't think that you care. Some of us do, however.
Best regards Connie

Best regards to you too, Connie. I think that you need more than best regards, though.

[dann]

(off topic correction)
I wasn't a dowser. I believed I was a psychic.

Well, the main thing is that you got better ... :)
And Connie Sonne appears to think that she has got all-round paranormal powers, not just dowsing.

[yairhol]

Hi Connie,
I would like to ask you a very simple question.
Have you ever asked a friend to place a small object under a sealed can (or a card inside a sealed envelope) and have a bunch more of these empty cans (or envelopes) and tried to dowse for that object having your friend out of the room or standing at the corner of the room behind you (so you don't see him/her)?
If so, how well did you do on this test? It's a very simple test to do and takes minutes at most.

Thank you.

[connie sonne]

Dear Yairhol....no, I did something much better for one year ago...in " the beginning". When I should show my parents for the first time ever...I placed the hole alphabet on cards on the table in front of me. My dad mixed the cards, And lying on the table with the backside up, I could`nt see anything. Without one failure...I wrote his name. I convinced my parents, and they have the connections too.
Best regards Connie

[dann]

Connie Sonne does not need to ask anybody and she doesn't need to test herself, yairhol! She has the "connections"!
I can dowse through envelopes or whatever...it dosn`t matter at all. You can even build the cards in a cementwall...I find them anyway.

And finaly about the question about dowsing....what about leaving the question for "how to do it" for JREF and myself? I know what I can do..and surely JREF know what they are doing to. It`s only "a matter " between me and them..noone else...yet!;)
But I don`t need anybody to help me, and I don`t have to read about this. I do know how to do, whom it is and why.
Thank`s for your advice, but as I wrote before, I do not have to practice, and I don`t have problems at all, :).
When you say you don't have to read about what Dann linked to, is that because:
a) you already know about these things and don't think they apply to you
or
b) is it because you simply don't bother?
Is it a or b?
CFLarsen, yes, the answer to both questions a and b are yes. I already knows about these things and it dosnt apply to me and yes, I don`t bother, :)
Hi Chran and thank you,:).It`s ok. But I am serious when I say, that I do know what I can. Really...there is no problem, :). But I also know, that many people around have tried the challenge, but it did`nt work out. It will this time...when I am so sure, it`s because I know who my connections are, what they can and what they allow me to do, :). And there is a meaning about this, because afterwards....much more will come..the truth about everything, I promise,:).
Jackalgirl and Yairhol, where it all comes from, there`s a lot of humor. If it will happen, that I fail the test..there`s a reason. Then I will make the new step afterwards, not by testing again, but something else..Yeah, no matter what is going to happen, I will never make a doubt about my abilities. In a year now, my life and the things I`m doing is like a puzzle, but ALWAYS I do the new step to go on...and I already have many evidences and more will come,:).
And for Dann, God dosn`t excist...there is something else. It`s not about belief or faith, it`s about knowing, Our planet is ready for the truth only now, therefore other people couldn`t come through the challenge...they were not allowed to. And about the lectures...yes, a lot of it...it`s a waste of time, and some of it only contains "the half truth".
(...)
I did answer your questions, and I can`t see right now, that I have to write more about it, than I did. As I wrote earlier, there`s comming much more, and when that will take place, you wil get your answers,:).
You must also know, that NOTHING can keep me away from what I`m doing, eventhough someone are trying to convince me, that I`m wrong:D!
(...)
And for GzuzKryzt. I`m not contradicting myself...I know a lot....and you don`t know what I know:) So I appologize if you think I`m contradicting...but I`m not...I explain it afterwards the challenge.
hi there, a quick answer, specially for Dann....First...you misunderstood about barking.... I will stop BARKING myself....not that I will do my selftest:). I know a lot lot more than you do...It`s not ONLY about dowsing...that`s only a little part of it- I havent told you anything about other things, and I will not do it now:). First the challenge, and again, as I told you....much more will come,:D! Think what you want....I don`t care at all,:)

[connie sonne]

For all people out there....about dowsing, it`s only a little part of it, as I told you before. Dowsing could be my first step to prove that I´m right. It`s NOT about faith or believing in "something". It`s much more simple than people think...and that`s very good:). It has never ment to bee religion in this...at all:).
When you don`t have the evidences of something...you are a "believer" or a "claimer". But when you have the evidences on what`s going on, I mean real evidences you really can hold in your hands....then you are a "knower". And a "knower" = science :). And now I`m talking about what`s going on in the world, the Madeleine Mccanncase, what`s behind us all and so on. I´t`s all connected.

Best regards Connie

[dann]

”Sagen er den, at alting hænger sammen, Maddie er blot en lille brik i denneher sammenhæng. Det jeg taler om er MEGA stort og berører rent faktisk folk globalt. Hvis jeg havde fået Maddie ud, hvilket jeg forøvrigt prøvede på alene nogle gange, så ville jeg ALDRIG have opdaget de andre ting.

Det er ligesom et puslespil, jeg skal gøre/opdage nogle ting, før nogle andre ting sker...for altså at komme videre. Ved godt, at det kan være svært at forstå. Maddie KOMMER ud, men først når rette tid kommer....så kan jeg love, at en "bombe" vil springe. Jeg har beviser for en hel masse, men tingene skal først samles, og det er det jeg er ved...så selv om der er tavshed....så vent blot...det kommer...verdens befolkning har ret til sandheden, sandheden omkring alt muligt...og den rigtige sandhed...ikke alle de løgne og fordrejninger vi alle bliver udsat for i hverdagen.”
http://para-nyt.blogspot.com/2008/10/vi-venter-stadig-connie.html

”The fact is that everything is connected, Maddie is just a small piece of the puzzle in this context. What I’m talking about is MEGA big and actually concerns people on a global scale. If I had managed to get Maddie out, which, by the way, I tried to do alone a couple of times, I would NEVER have discovered the other things.
It is like a puzzle, I have to do/discover certain things before other things happen … in order to get further. I know that it can be hard to understand. Maddie WILL come out, but not until the right time …. I can promise that a “bomb” will then go off. I have proof of a lot of things, but first they have to be put together, and that is what I’m doing…so even if there is silence….just wait and see…it will come…the population of the world is entitled to know the truth, the truth about all kinds of things…and the real truth…not all the lies and distortions that we are exposed to in our everyday lives.” October 27, 2008

[yairhol]

Dear Yairhol....no, I did something much better for one year ago...in " the beginning". When I should show my parents for the first time ever...I placed the hole alphabet on cards on the table in front of me. My dad mixed the cards, And lying on the table with the backside up, I could`nt see anything. Without one failure...I wrote his name. I convinced my parents, and they have the connections too.
Best regards Connie

Wow! that IS most impressive.
Simple math shows that the probability of doing that without any mistakes, given a 26 letter alphabet and an N letter name: (1/26)^N

if his name is made up of 2 letters -> 0.14%
if his name is made up of 3 letters -> 0.00569%
if his name is made up of 4 letters -> 0.000219%
if his name is made up of 5 letters -> 0.0000084%

Well done Connie.

Have you done more tests like that?

Thanks.

[Cavemonster]

Wow! that IS most impressive.
Simple math shows that the probability of doing that without any mistakes, given a 26 letter alphabet and an N letter name: (1/26)^N

if his name is made up of 2 letters -> 0.14%
if his name is made up of 3 letters -> 0.00569%
if his name is made up of 4 letters -> 0.000219%
if his name is made up of 5 letters -> 0.0000084%

Well done Connie.

Have you done more tests like that?

Thanks.

If she can do that with letter cards created and placed by the JREF examiner, then I think that's a protocol.

[CFLarsen]

The Danish alphabet has 29 letters.

[Cavemonster]

Even better!

[yairhol]

I agree.

Connie should have asked for this protocol since she already knows that she can succeed with such a test.

[yairhol]

The Danish alphabet has 29 letters.

Are you sure those extra 3 letters are not redundant? Don't be greedy. 26 letter should be more than enough for the Danish.

[connie sonne]

yairhol, I did wrote other possibilities, and I asked to do more than the protocoled test, but they told me, that if I got trough the test, I would have the chance to show more. So that`s ok:). And yes, I have done a lot more, but I dont have the time right now for telling about it, but it will co´me:)

[dann]

26 letter should be more than enough for the Danish.

Føj! Sådan noget ævl! :)
http://getsatisfaction.com/pingfm/topics/danish_characters_garbled_on_myspace_and_ping_fm

[steenkh]

One way of writing the Danish character 'ø' is by writing 'oe'. However, it fails with a word like 'sukkerroer', where 'sukkerrør' means sugar canes, whereas 'sukkerroer' means sugar beets. In a sentence like 'Denmark gets most of its sugar from ...', not even the context will be of assistance!

Nope, we need all our letters!

[dann]

And lying on the table with the backside up, I could`nt see anything.

You'll probably be able to see more if you turn around! :)

[William Smith]

Dear Yairhol....no, I did something much better for one year ago...in " the beginning". When I should show my parents for the first time ever...I placed the hole alphabet on cards on the table in front of me. My dad mixed the cards, And lying on the table with the backside up, I could`nt see anything. Without one failure...I wrote his name. I convinced my parents, and they have the connections too.
Best regards Connie

I do not believe you when you tell me that you wrote your father's name out of an alphabet of cards without one failure by using paranormal powers. There are a lot of possible mundane explanations which would be too long to list here.

Bottom line: I do not believe you can do this. I do believe though that you are very likely fooling yourself. But since you are unwilling to read up on the issues e.g. CFLarsen has suggested, you cannot be convinced of a possible mundane explanation for the phenomenon you claim.

You can convince me of your claim(s) by succeeding in a controlled test e.g. for the MDC.

[connie sonne]

hi Dann.....ohh humor, I love that:D!
And for GzuzKrytz.....I don`t care what you believe in:)..I just answered the question, that`s all...I have told you all the time....the test no more else right now:). It feels like you have some pain in your ash:D!

[Paul2]

Connie, we should all care what everyone believes. By that I mean that we should all be humble enough to think that anyone, no matter whether they seem kindly or angry, may be able to teach us something. We are all connected, and everyone has some wisdom, and we all have something to learn.

You should really look at what Gzuzkryzt has to say, and really take it to heart, and then you can responsibly accept it or reject it. Can you say that you have done that?

[connie sonne]

Yes Paul2...I have done that,:).

[MRC_Hans]

*snip*
Telling her to go ahead and wishing her luck is cynical!


PS Do you guys actually believe in the good luck that you wish Connie Sonne? Or are you just putting a good face on it?


Well, if nobody had tried to give her advice, it would indeed be cynical. However, advice has been offered (also politely), but Connie has waved it off (in a rather flippant way, if you ask me).

She has also stated her absolute determination with doing the trial, and sh has said that she can make the protocol with the JREF.

So, fine! All there is left is to wish good luck.

Yes, I certainly mean it. I don't mean that I wish she will succeed, because I find that very unlikely, but I wish her a good and constructive experience. (I doubt that also, but that's another matter)

Hans

[erlando]

Prediction: If or when Connie fails the test she will claim that the test was rigged / there was bad vibes from testers / she was feeling ill / <insert generic applicant excuse here>.

Judging by her replies up until now nothing will be learned.

Now prove me wrong.

Good luck with the test. (Yes, that is a sincere wish.)

[dann]

I don't mean that I wish she will succeed, because I find that very unlikely,

Isn't that an understatement? Do you actually only find it "very unlikely"?

but I wish her a good and constructive experience. (I doubt that also, but that's another matter)

For her it is bound to be a "constructive experience": She will interpret her failure as a step towards universal enlightenment. She already does:
"If I had managed to get Maddie out, which, by the way, I tried to do alone a couple of times, I would NEVER have discovered the other things."
"Yeah, no matter what is going to happen, I will never make a doubt about my abilities."

And you don't just doubt that Connie Sonne will be successful in the test! But, of course, wishing her a "good and constructive experience" is vague enough to mean almost anything.

[Pixel42]

Prediction: If or when Connie fails the test she will claim that the test was rigged / there was bad vibes from testers / she was feeling ill / <insert generic applicant excuse here>
I think it's pretty clear from what she's already said that she will claim that whatever cosmic power she thinks is the source of her powers has decided the time is not yet right for those powers to be revealed to the world.

[dann]

Exactly! Absolutely nothing is gained from this!

[chillzero]

ok, we get the point. You don't believe that the MDC will ever be won. You think people should just stop deluding themselves. You don't have to keep following this thread, you know.

I'd prefer to be able to discuss each step with each applicant, no matter what the outcome.
I'd prefer to read their viewpoints, and experiences, without all the sideline sniping which acheives nothing positive.

[dann]

ok, we get the point. You don't believe that the MDC will ever be won. You think people should just stop deluding themselves.
And my guess is that we don't even disagree about this, do we? I don't think that you expect the MDC to be won before its expiration date - or that it would have ever been won if it had continued indefinitely. I also don't think that you are in favour of people deluding themselves.

You don't have to keep following this thread, you know.

Yes, I know that I don't have to. Did I hint at any obligation to do so anywhere? I know that you are a moderator, but I don't know if that puts you under any obligation to follow it either. Does it?

I'd prefer to be able to discuss each step with each applicant, no matter what the outcome.

Nobody prevents you from doing so!

I'd prefer to read their viewpoints, and experiences, without all the sideline sniping which acheives nothing positive.

Well, nobody prevents you from reading their viewpoints and experiences, and if you would prefer not to read my posts, please don't!
I don't understand your reference to "sideline sniping".

[chillzero]

Nobody prevents you from doing so!
Actually, when people make it difficult for any claimant to participate in a thread with civility, they often do.


Well, nobody prevents you from reading their viewpoints and experiences, and if you would prefer not to read my posts, please don't!
Although I'm not contributing here as a moderator, but as a emember, I'm not permitted the luxury of putting anyone on ignore. However, it is not my eraction to your comments I was referring to, but the fact - as initially mentioned by Jeff - that people don't need to be so rude to claimants. It's the reaction of claimants when confronted by nastiness instead of people trying to patiently assist them through testing that bothers me. We'll never know if Ms Sonne's responses would be different if people hadn't been 'barking' at her from the outset.


I don't understand your reference to "sideline sniping".
It refers to making snarky comments, instead of focussing on advice about how best this claim could be tested, and the kinds of protocol that could be submitted with the JREF.

I created a thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=133521) for Connie Sonne so we don't unnecessarily pollute this subforum.
Thank you.
That saves the mod team from intervening to get people back on topic.


Connie,
I asked earlier if you were undertaking any self testing, and if so, would you please give us updates here on what you are doing, and theresults of the testing. I mentioned later that I was confused as to whether you had responded to me or not. It seems that you have said you don't need to do any testing until the MDC - is this correct?
If not, could you please respond to my question and let us know about any preliminary testing, or 'practice sessions' if you prefer?
If so, I would like to ask that you reconsider, and if you could do some practice runs for the MDC to try out your proposed testing protocol I would be very interested to read about them.

(It would be helpful if you could use the 'quote' function I mentioned earlier to clarify who you are responding to)

[chillzero]

Hi Agatha....it was NOT the Psychics who started with Maddie, it was the medias.
And for Chillzero... I`m sorry, that I did forget to answer you, but here it comes:).

It is right, what you mentioned...It`s all right going for the test without practice. As I told above(somewhere), dowsing is only a little part of it, so I do know what`s behind me and the pendulum.


Connie,
To keep this thread on topic to your proposed MDC claim for dowsing, could you please tell us what your protocol is?

I think you are saying here that you are not going to do any practice runs before testing with the JREF. I think that's an error, as people in any walk of life will usually practice before a major event - just to finely tune their skills, or at the very least to confirm that the test will go exactly as they expect because they've tried it out beforehand. However, it is certainly your choice to make.

Then, to enable this discussion to continue, could you please tell us what the test protocol is that you have defined with the JREF?

[CFLarsen]

In post #19, Connie Sonne agreed to the protocol proposed by JREF.

[dann]

Although I'm not contributing here as a moderator, but as a emember, I'm not permitted the luxury of putting anyone on ignore. However, it is not my eraction to your comments I was referring to, but the fact - as initially mentioned by Jeff - that people don't need to be so rude to claimants. It's the reaction of claimants when confronted by nastiness instead of people trying to patiently assist them through testing that bothers me. We'll never know if Ms Sonne's responses would be different if people hadn't been 'barking' at her from the outset.

It refers to making snarky comments, instead of focussing on advice about how best this claim could be tested, and the kinds of protocol that could be submitted with the JREF.

You can ignore me without putting me on ignore, can't you?
You now add "nastiness" and "snarky comments" to the accusations of rudeness, abuse, hostility and intimidation. I'm sorry, but rereading my posts in this thread I couldn't find any of those.
Could you be more specific, please?

[chillzero]

In post #19, Connie Sonne agreed to the protocol proposed by JREF.

I was hoping to try and engage Connie in a discussion of the protocol. Yes, I see she accepted it, I'd like to see what she believes she agreed to do for the test.

[CFLarsen]

Asking what the protocol is, and discussing it, are two different things.

The applicant in this case has already made it clear, in post #16, that she considers the test, and hence the protocol, a matter between her and JREF.

[chillzero]

Asking what the protocol is, and discussing it, are two different things.
Semantics. However, as I mentioned, I am interested in what Ms Sonne's perception of the protocol is. This thread is supposed to be disussing her MDC, and I would think it obvious that the protocol would form a major part of that discussion.


The applicant in this case has already made it clear, in post #16, that she considers the test, and hence the protocol, a matter between her and JREF.

Well, that's a shame, because it seems there's nothing more to be discussed in this thread, if we can't discuss the protocol. We'll just all have to wait and see the outcome when the JREF test her.

[CFLarsen]

We can discuss the protocol all we like. If some have chosen not to do it, that is their choice, and should be respected.

[Darat]

As far as I can tell discussions regarding "Maddie" are not part of the MDC so I'm moving posts about them to the thread that erlando started (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=133521). If you wish to continue to discuss those claims and related issues please do so in that thread.

[Marcus]

Good luck with your test, Connie. I hope you will discuss things with us here afterwards, whatever the outcome.

You might want to keep in mind that it won't be easy to find reasons if the test fails. Your powers will have to be functioning properly in the open test before the closed test can go forward.

[al_capone_junior]

PS Do you guys actually believe in the good luck that you wish Connie Sonne? Or are you just putting a good face on it?

Well I'm new here, but there are some who know me.

Overall, I tend to feel that as someone who's quite skeptical of extraordinary claims, I find the illogical and fallacious arguments of the uneducated or deluded to be quite frustrating. However, I've learned (albeit slowly, with many failings) that it's better to maintain one's cool, rather than get confrontational.

Even if someone's a complete jerk, you look better if you keep your cool. If they decide to get personal with you, keeping your cool is even better.

Image counts. It sucks, but it counts. For skeptics as well as anyone else.

"luck" is simply a word for the statistical measure of the standard deviation :D

so wishing someone good luck on the challenge is sort of like saying "I hope you win it by pure chance, as a statistical fluke/outlier rather than by your actual abilities" :D

So I do not wish connie "good luck" on the challenge.

[steenkh]

so wishing someone good luck on the challenge is sort of like saying "I hope you win it by pure chance, as a statistical fluke/outlier rather than by your actual abilities" :D
Well, chances are involved in more than one way. I am, for instance, perfectly able to ride a bike. Nevertheless, I had a nasty bike accident recently when one of my pedals broke of its own accord. This was a chance that was a statical fluke, particularly concerning the awkward moment when it happened.

If I was going to be tested for my ability to ride a bike, it would be a statistical fluke like this one that could prevent from passing the test.

This shows that there is nothing odd about wishing people good luck for showing their abilities, if they actually have the ability. :)

[dann]

It is not my impression that the MDC would give you just the one chance of proving your paranormal ability to ride a bike. However, if you fall off the bike ten times out of ten, it would probably be considered statistically significant.
If I had reason to believe that you tend to fall off your bike ten times out of ten, I wouldn't wish you good luck with the test. I might recommend that you use a helmet, though.

[steenkh]

If I had reason to believe that you tend to fall off your bike ten times out of ten, I wouldn't wish you good luck with the test. I might recommend that you use a helmet, though.
Quite :D

In a sense, it seems to me that Connie is already wearing a helmet. She has already declared that a possible failure will not shake her world view!

[Cavemonster]

so wishing someone good luck on the challenge is sort of like saying "I hope you win it by pure chance, as a statistical fluke/outlier rather than by your actual abilities" :D

So I do not wish connie "good luck" on the challenge.

I'm going to disagree with that. To me, wishing someone good luck is wishing them the best possible outcome, not necesssarily the outcome they would most like.

For MDC applicants, there are two best possible outcomes.
1) Despite everything we know, this ability does exist!
2) The applicant learns from the test and embraces critical thinking.

You have to admit that #1 would be great, if essentially impossible, and #2 has happened several times, even a moderator here originally came to take the test. Another prominent poster came as a dowser.

[Moochie]

I agree.
However, to extend your example, if you walk in and they are sitting waiting quietly and respectfully, that can be intimidating, but my point is that it is much more intimidating, and you may be more likely to turn and walk out without performing, should they be mocking and laughing before you even begin.

I've been watching the current season of American Idol. Plenty of parallels come to mind. But it is bloody good fun. :)


M.

[Moochie]

I guess that's up to the individual in question, but Connie Sonne may already be considering the evidence of her own private test.
We have to take into consideration that chillzero and Miss Kitt are exeptions among dowsers. The ideomotor effect (http://www.skeptics.org.uk/article.php?dir=articles&article=ideomotor_effect.php) is very convincing! I used to ask a now deceased colleage at my highschool, a physics teacher, for advice when I wrote articles for Dansk Skeptica/Para-nyt (http://www.skeptica.dk) that touched on the sciences of nature. (I'm an amateur in that field.) Still, he was able to convince himself that dowsing actually worked for him. He even had special dowsing rods custom-made! (Gold-tipped, I think).
However, since he was also partial to the methods of science, he had agreed in principle to making an informal test of his 'powers', but he was ill and died before we could put it into practice.
My guess is that Connie Sonne does not know a lot about the sciences of nature, and she has been on a spree of presenting herself as the mouthpiece of powers beyond our reality for some time. She managed to get herself on Danish TV (http://www.dr.dk/Templates/NewsArticle.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRNODEGUID=%7B0D24B055-F08E-4F1B-BD14-A654C322F755%7D&NRORIGINALURL=%2FDR1%2FAftenshowet%2FProjekter%2F2 0080519140418.htm%3F&NRCACHEHINT=Guest) in May 2008 with her claims that she knew the location of the disappeared child Madeleine. Some of the Danish skeptics discussed that case with her here (http://para-nyt.blogspot.com/2008/10/vi-venter-stadig-connie.html) in October. She has discovered that Facebook is owned and controlled by the CIA (http://msnmand.dk/article/comments/24775#comments). And in this letter to the editor she worries about a conspiracy against the freedom of speech and all the downtrodden and writes that Sandheden kommer frem ... »Før eller senere«! (http://www.bhstid.dk/?Id=3793) ("The truth shall be revealed ...»Sooner or later«!") It appears to be a kind of Nazi/Marxist conspiracy.
And I cannot think of a way of blaming those on the ideomotor effect! :)

(However, she also has the time to tell newspaper readers about more mundane matters, e.g. the guys who have been stealing hydrangeas (http://www.bornholmstidende.dk/Print.asp?Id=4314) and other plants from her parents' garden for a number of years.)

This is why I think that you should not lead her on! Try to bring her back to reality instead, don't pretend that dowsing just might hold true in her case when you are all very well aware that it doesn't. She is not Sylvia Browne, she is not Uri Geller, so there is no reason why we should recommend that she go ahead and waste her money on being tested in Flordia. She is a believer, she is not a fraud - in spite of her fraudulent beliefs.
And, yes, Steen, it would be possible for her to make the same preliminary test in Denmark.


Oh dann, dann! It's entertainment, at the very least. Let the lady have her 15 minutes. Who knows, maybe this will be The One!


M.

[Moochie]

”Sagen er den, at alting hænger sammen, Maddie er blot en lille brik i denneher sammenhæng. Det jeg taler om er MEGA stort og berører rent faktisk folk globalt. Hvis jeg havde fået Maddie ud, hvilket jeg forøvrigt prøvede på alene nogle gange, så ville jeg ALDRIG have opdaget de andre ting.

Det er ligesom et puslespil, jeg skal gøre/opdage nogle ting, før nogle andre ting sker...for altså at komme videre. Ved godt, at det kan være svært at forstå. Maddie KOMMER ud, men først når rette tid kommer....så kan jeg love, at en "bombe" vil springe. Jeg har beviser for en hel masse, men tingene skal først samles, og det er det jeg er ved...så selv om der er tavshed....så vent blot...det kommer...verdens befolkning har ret til sandheden, sandheden omkring alt muligt...og den rigtige sandhed...ikke alle de løgne og fordrejninger vi alle bliver udsat for i hverdagen.”
http://para-nyt.blogspot.com/2008/10/vi-venter-stadig-connie.html

”The fact is that everything is connected, Maddie is just a small piece of the puzzle in this context. What I’m talking about is MEGA big and actually concerns people on a global scale. If I had managed to get Maddie out, which, by the way, I tried to do alone a couple of times, I would NEVER have discovered the other things.
It is like a puzzle, I have to do/discover certain things before other things happen … in order to get further. I know that it can be hard to understand. Maddie WILL come out, but not until the right time …. I can promise that a “bomb” will then go off. I have proof of a lot of things, but first they have to be put together, and that is what I’m doing…so even if there is silence….just wait and see…it will come…the population of the world is entitled to know the truth, the truth about all kinds of things…and the real truth…not all the lies and distortions that we are exposed to in our everyday lives.” October 27, 2008

I think I'm about to have an orgasm.


M.

[rjh01]

What do you (CONNIE SONNE) do earn money? Is it related to your claim or powers in any way? Discuss.

Others above have said practice. I agree, but other reasons. It would be a pity for you to fail for some stupid reason like using the wrong colour of envelopes. Remember you only get one shot at this and then... you know the rest.

[elaine g]

Hi everyone,
Is there an english version of what chran posted:: Attached Files Connie Sonne - Madeleine McCann 002.pdf
I would love to read what connie has posted/written about Madeleine.

Thanks Elaine

[dann]

No, I don't think so, but I think that you get the general idea from chran's automatically translated version. (Easy for me to say, I know!)
If it still does not to make sense to you, it is not necessarily because anything was lost in translation! :)

[Klaymore]

This test is supposed to happen pretty fast, right? Ms. Sonne was going to fly into the States, and the protocol was already ready to go, as I understand it?

It's just that I love it when they actually take the test... I'm like a kid at Xmas...

[William Smith]

Any word from Ms. Sonne concerning the protocol? (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4343938#post4343938)

[Zim]

oh... oops never mind wrong person ;)

[connie sonne]

Nope Gzuzkrytz:)

[connie sonne]

Oh Zim...I`m sorry, you wrote it for the wrong person, because noone can beat her !;)

[chran]

Nope Gzuzkrytz:)

All right - and why not?

Is it not acceptable to you?

[connie sonne]

no...because it IS:)

[chran]

Cool - so does that mean that you have accepted the protocol without comments, and that we're ready for a test?

[connie sonne]

yes I agree, and soon I suppose I will be mentioned in the program of The Amazing Meeting. James Randi himself looked into the protocol lately, and had only a few comments, which is uninteresting for me, so it`s ok, and I bought the tickets for few days ago.

[jojonete]

Any word from Ms. Sonne concerning the protocol?
Gzuz, Connie completely agreed to the protocol (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4348294) more than two months ago. What other words concerning the protocol do you expect from her?

Also, the last words from JREF in this forum about protocol negotiations are also from more than two months ago, namely:
We have not reached the point of setting a testing location. The protocol still has to be approved by Randi. The testing location is only decided after the protocol is complete and approved.
So, my question is not what Connie has to say, but "has Randi approved the protocol?".

[William Smith]

Agreed.

I wanted to bump the thread and I have worded my inquiry sub-optimal. I apologize.

[steenkh]

It is a pity that these days the JREF cannot find the time to update the forum with the latest details of MDC applications.

[William Smith]

It is a pity that these days the JREF cannot find the time to update the forum with the latest details of MDC applications.

I have asked RemieV for an update. Unfortunately for the JREF - and fortunately for her - she seems quite busy these days.

[IMST]

Looks like there's some news now!

[dann]

Yes (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4558760#post4558760), and it is a big mistake to put her on display like this.

[William Smith]

At least Ms. Sonne indicated to put her money where her mouth is. How ever the test goes, it takes a lot to actually step up to the plate.

Kudos, Connie.

[dann]

A lot of what?

[IMST]

Guts, personal integrity, willingness to demonstrate what she thinks she can do.

[rjh01]

But will she turn up?

[IMST]

I'd have to retract a whole lot of attributes in my last post if she doesn't.

[William Smith]

A lot of what?

Courage.

[William Smith]

But will she turn up?

I did not want to be the ---- in the punchbowl to say that, but Dargo et al. surely made us, shall I say: skeptic?

Somehow, I think we will see her.

[connie sonne]

Hi all, of cause I will turn up. I bought my tickets and hotel for a while ago. And JREF have the copies, otherwise they would`nt put me into the program. Of cause they make sure that I will turn up, other people didn`t show up earlier....but I will... I`m NOT doing this for fun! And Dann, hopefully you have a very huge and long nose, because as I can see, you can`t look longer than your nosetip!!! :D

Connie

[erlando]

Connie, the question is still this: If you should fail the test are you prepared to at least consider that you might not have the powers you think you do?

If no, then why are you taking the test at all?

[rjh01]

You mean there exists something beyond my nosetip? That I would like to see evidence of.

[steenkh]

If no, then why are you taking the test at all?
For the money?

Connie, I am sorry that I cannot attend the TAM, but I will sure watch out for the video!

[Pixel42]

Connie, the question is still this: If you should fail the test are you prepared to at least consider that you might not have the powers you think you do?

She has already made clear what her explanation for failure will be (here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4348994#post4348994) and here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4349101#post4349101)). She will conclude that the mysterious powers with whom she is in contact have decided that the world is still not ready for the paranormal to be revealed.

[dann]

Which also puts the superlatives into perspective:Guts, personal integrity, willingness to demonstrate what she thinks she can do.You don't need to ascribe virtues such asCourage.to CS. A delusion (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4358406#post4358406) is all that it takes for her to go to TAM7.

[IMST]

Which also puts the superlatives into perspective:You don't need to ascribe virtues such asto CS. A delusion (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4358406#post4358406) is all that it takes for her to go to TAM7.

I'll take sincere delusion over an attempt at fraud any day. It's useful to have people that genuinely believe in such things to be willing to test themselves. Useful for that person in the long run if they think about what happened, and certainly useful to those that may be on the fence to see actual evidence. I'm NOT going to bad mouth this person for trying.

[William Smith]

I'll take sincere delusion over an attempt at fraud any day. It's useful to have people that genuinely believe in such things to be willing to test themselves. Useful for that person in the long run if they think about what happened, and certainly useful to those that may be on the fence to see actual evidence. I'm NOT going to bad mouth this person for trying.

And technically - technically - she could succeed, right?

[IMST]

And if she does, we'll learn something very interesting.

[dann]

I'll take sincere delusion over an attempt at fraud any day. It's useful to have people that genuinely believe in such things to be willing to test themselves. Useful for that person in the long run if they think about what happened, and certainly useful to those that may be on the fence to see actual evidence. I'm NOT going to bad mouth this person for trying.
Nobody's asking you to badmouth anybody. And CS is not one of those people who are "willing to test themselves". She goes to TAM7 with the delusion (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4358406#post4358406) that she'll convince everybody that she has the powers (or spirit guides ... whatever) and thus is entitled to receive 1.000.000 $$.

And technically - technically - she could succeed, right?

No, she couldn't! This is pure fiction, but it is the kind of fiction that goes into the preparations of an MDC test: That even though we all know that CS cannot possibly prove any paranormal powers since no such thing exists, the designers of the test have to pretend that it might exist. But it doesn't. So why do you pretend that you believe in it - "technically"?

And if she does, we'll learn something very interesting.

But she doesn't, so we won't.

[chillzero]

How about a bit of respect, and some patience, for someone who's stepped up to the mark that so many others run from?
I'd prefer that she felt welcomed to the event, than intimidated, or that she's being placed in a highly adverserial environment.

[chran]

Stuff

You must be real fun at parties. Rock on, dude.

[dann]

Yes, I have no doubt that I'm a party pooper in this case, but then again: I don't really approve of the party.
The contradiction in chillzero's attitude is that she is so keen on having CS perform at your 'party' that she tends to forget what is actually going on: CS goes there believing that she has powers (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4358406#post4358406), and a lot of people look forward to seeing her fail - which appears to be the reason why we should not point out to her the delusion but instead pretend that it isn't one, thus making her feel "welcomed".
And that's the 'party' that you don't want me to spoil.
In this discussion CS is not the one that I don't respect. You are!

[dann]

And what a wonderful party (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4342972#post4342972) it's going to be, right? Don't we have something to look forward to! We just can't wait to see her succeed (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4348572#post4348572)!

[connie sonne]

oh dann,:D....you are SO pathetic:D:D. NONE can give you respect at all !!!

[dann]

No, apparently not, but I'm not here for the respect.
Congratulations with your new allies.

[Gr8wight]

Dann, this seems to be very personal for you. You may be too close to the situation emotionally to be able to look at it rationally. The goal of the JREF is to demonstrate to the world at large that these abilities do not exist. They pursue many avenues to that goal, one of which is the Million Dollar Challenge. In order for the challenge to successfully communicate its message, it is necessary that challenges actually take place. No one here really believes that Connie will be successful in her challenge, but they wish the challenge to go forward for that very reason. Another failed challenge adds strength to the arguments put forth by the JREF. The JREF does not want us to scare off potential challenge participants by being rude and unwelcoming. That would harm the foundation in the long run.

So, we welcome Connie's challenge test, and look forward to seeing it played out.

[William Smith]

...
But she doesn't, so we won't.

It is a possibility. It is also a possibility she might succeed. The probability gap between those two seems wide.

If anyone considers only one possibility as being, well, possible, he might be more close-minded than he realises.

[The Professor]

Dann, this seems to be very personal for you. You may be too close to the situation emotionally to be able to look at it rationally. The goal of the JREF is to demonstrate to the world at large that these abilities do not exist. They pursue many avenues to that goal, one of which is the Million Dollar Challenge. In order for the challenge to successfully communicate its message, it is necessary that challenges actually take place. No one here really believes that Connie will be successful in her challenge, but they wish the challenge to go forward for that very reason. Another failed challenge adds strength to the arguments put forth by the JREF. The JREF does not want us to scare off potential challenge participants by being rude and unwelcoming. That would harm the foundation in the long run.

So, we welcome Connie's challenge test, and look forward to seeing it played out.

I thought that the JREF MDC was to help FIND something Paranormal?
But what you've stated is exactly the biased truth of the matter.
The JREF wants to prove that there isn't anything Paranormal, unlike their claim of neutrality :)

OPEN MOUTH INSERT FOOT ... LMAO

Hang in there Connie. The truth is coming out!!!!!!

Don't worry about them attacking you. They do it to all applicants :)

[steenkh]

Yes, I have no doubt that I'm a party pooper in this case, but then again: I don't really approve of the party.
So you think that the MDC should never have been set up, and nobody should ever be tested? Or that they should be taunted for all the time in the hope that they will give up being tested?

[steenkh]

I thought that the JREF MDC was to help FIND something Paranormal?
But what you've stated is exactly the biased truth of the matter.
The JREF wants to prove that there isn't anything Paranormal, unlike their claim of neutrality :)
What claim of neutrality? Last time when I looked at the FAQ it was explained that the Challenge started with James Randi putting his money where his mouth is. That is, James Randi does not think you can do a paranormal demonstration, and the JREF is willing to bet a million dollar on it.

You are not bringing new insights here.

[connie sonne]

The professor, thank`s, I will keep on, and yes, the truth will come out.

And for all people in here, I DO respect all other people, for what they are thinking or what they are, skeptic or whatever, it dosn`t mean anything, we are all different. But when people act very childish here, my respect is gone. Noone can say, what other people can do, before they have done it. Noone can judge other people without knowing them. So for all of you out there, it`s ok being skeptical and write it here, it won`t keep me away from anything:) .

And Dann, I think you have more than one reason to be here on this forum.

Connie

[dann]

You may be too close to the situation emotionally to be able to look at it rationally, Gr8wight, but consider this:
When you say thatIn order for the challenge to successfully communicate its message, it is necessary that challenges actually take place.you seem to forget that the MDC is being phased out because it never actually served the purpose that it was supposed to have, i.e. to expose people like Sylvia Browne, Uri Geller etc. (or in my country people like Marion Dampier-Jeans (http://www.skeptica.dk/2005/brevkassen.htm#Ingen%20forbindelse)). It never helped expose these people because they don't appear to be deluded at all - at least not to the extent that they are willing to risk being exposed as delusional. Instead it gave rise to a new delusion in a number of the deluded: that they actually have the chance of winning 1 mill. $, which we know that they haven't.

Now you are asking CS to go ahead, i.e. buy the ticket, get up in front of an audience at TAM7 where we know that she'll fail:No one here really believes that Connie will be successful in her challenge, but they wish the challenge to go forward for that very reason.and in spite of this knowledge (there is no reason the pretend that it is only a belief) that she'll fail,The JREF does not want us to scare off potential challenge participantsYou add: by being rude and unwelcomingbut that is really unnecessary since the truth is that you actually encourage people to pursue something that you know is a delusion, but they don't! Telling these people that they are delusional (i.e. telling them the truth) is therefore considered rude and unwelcoming, whereas wishing them luck with their pursuit of their delusional claims is considered polite and obliging!

So why go ahead with not only the MDC but also with putting a poor woman like CS on display at TAM7? Because telling her the truth would harm not her butwould harm the foundation in the long run.

So CS's (voluntary) sacrifice is considered to be educational: Another failed challenge adds strength to the arguments put forth by the JREF. even though the JREF knows that it isn't, which is why it's being phased out: CS will be just another one in the long line of delusional test subjects bound to fail, which does not "add strength" to any argument at all.

Good luck with your attempts at 'looking at the situation rationally' when you welcome Connie's challenge test, and look forward to seeing it played out.
I bet you do!

[erlando]

And for all people in here, I DO respect all other people, for what they are thinking or what they are, skeptic or whatever, it dosn`t mean anything

Yet you cannot be bothered to answer a simple sincere question asked directly to you? What kind of respect does that show?

Let me remind you:

Connie, the question is still this: If you should fail the test are you prepared to at least consider that you might not have the powers you think you do?

If no, then why are you taking the test at all?

[dann]

It is a possibility. It is also a possibility she might succeed. The probability gap between those two seems wide.

No, it's impossible, but to encourage CS you pretend that it isn't.
If anyone considers only one possibility as being, well, possible, he might be more close-minded than he realises.

That depends on the possiblities being discussed. If you jump off the roof of a very tall building expecting gravity to stop working at that very minute, the impossibility of your delusional claim should be pointed out to you.
I recommend that you consider why you start using one of the favourite arguments of the superstitious against the close-minded skeptics.

[dann]

So you think that the MDC should never have been set up, and nobody should ever be tested?

Well, the JREF has discovered that the MDC does not serve its purpose. It is being phased out, and I think that it is probably a good idea to get rid of it.

Or that they should be taunted for all the time in the hope that they will give up being tested?

Who is taunting anybody, Steen?! You and chillzero seem to have a problem with the word delusional, as if it were a term of abuse - as opposed to calling Connie Sonne's delusion "sad", I guess: After all, she must be pretty sure of her abilities, ... which is rather sad!

[dann]

If no, then why are you taking the test at all?

You don't really need to ask CS this question or to doubt her respect for the JREF or the forum and its participants:
Connie has made it very clear that to her the MDC is not a test. It is destiny's way of providing her with a million US dollars and of making the world recognize her.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4358406#post4358406

[dann]

You are not bringing new insights here.

Why don't you just relax and appreciate that The Professor has joined the ranks of people encouraging CS to go to TAM7?

At least I'm able to appreciate the irony if not the intention! :)

[Jackalgirl]

Congratulations, Ms. Sonne -- and THANK YOU for cooperating with the application and protocol process. I'm really sorry I can't be there and see the test -- good luck, and I'm looking forward to reading about the results. Again, thank you!

[steenkh]

Why don't you just relax and appreciate that The Professor has joined the ranks of people encouraging CS to go to TAM7?

At least I'm able to appreciate the irony if not the intention! :)
You are right, that it is ironic that TP encourages Connie Sonne to grab the million before he can do it himself!

I doubt that it is because he respects that she has the confidence to take the test when he himself weaseled out by producing protocols that he knew could not be accepted.

[chillzero]

I don't have a problem with the word delusionsal. I have a problem with people misusing this particular section of the forum and I don't really want to have to step in on this thread nad take action as a moderator.

Threads here are designed to assist claimants in reaching a protocol that can be tested, for them to undergo the MDC challenge. To mock claimants is unacceptable to me, as it does not help the JREF or the claimant acheive their goal of getting to a testing point. It allows claimants to claim they are being intimidated from taking the test. We should give absolutely no space for leeway there.

When we finally do get a claimant who has reached the point where a protocol has been agreed, then it is encumbent upon us to do nothing more than wait for that to play out. We have nothing additional to contribute to a protocol discussion that has been agreed, and we are merely waiting for the test to be undertaken. Anything negative said to the claimant between agreement and the test is fodder for bad publicity for the JREF and enabling the claimant (and other claimants with their own particular grudges to bear as seen above) to jump in and claim obstacles are being placed intheir way - they are beng intimidated or bullied, or the negative skeptic forces are working against their ability, or the nasty things being said are having a negative effect upon them.

I know from experience how intimidating it is to come to this forum and try to move toward a test for the MDC, and I think when someone sticks with it and gets to that point, they have earned some respect. We always tell them - put your money where your mouth is, so why on earth would we then be nasty to them when they do?

Do not give any claimant an easy excuse to walk away from the MDC.
Do not work against what the JREF are trying to acheive.

Now, as moderator:
Please - no more comments about The Professor. He has enough moderated threads of his own. Please keep to the topic in this thread, which is Connie Sonne and her protocol.
Also, no uncivil comments about anyone, or this thread also will be locked down to moderated status.

[dann]

Maybe I'm being delusional, but I just can't see anybody mocking, intimidating or bullying claimants or being nasty or saying nasty things to them.
Why the warnings against this kind of behaviour if it doesn't even take place??!
Why would a claimant be in need of "an easy excuse to walk away from the MDC"?
Are they under any obligation to go through with their claims if, for some reason, they decide that they no longer want to do so?
Does it "work against what the JREF are trying to achieve" if you try to convince somebody (e.g. a claimant) that his or her supernatural beliefs are delusional?

[chillzero]

Maybe I'm being delusional, but I just can't see anybody mocking, intimidating or bullying claimants or being nasty or saying nasty things to them.
Why the warnings against this kind of behaviour if it doesn't even take place??!
You think claiming someone has no courage - in the face of them agreeing to test themselves, not privately, or on their own grounds, but away from home and in front of a disbelieving audience of hundreds - and calling them delusional is civil? It's not particularly constructive, is it?

You may call it being a party pooper, however I see it as more than that, and I've explained in detail why I think your comments are out of place in a thread for a claimant who has stepped up to the mark. You don't approve of the party - that's fine. The JREF are the hosts here, and we don't really have the right to work against them. You've voiced your opinion, and I don't see that you need add to that unless you wish to dissuade a claimant from testing, and that is in direct contradiction to what the JREF are trying to acheive.


Why would a claimant be in need of "an easy excuse to walk away from the MDC"?
Are they under any obligation to go through with their claims if, for some reason, they decide that they no longer want to do so?
Think about it.
They don't need an easy excuse if they can do what they claim. Few of us here believe they can, and it is so often that claims do not even reach the testing stage. Sometimes that is blamed on the attitudes of members here, sometimes there are other excuses. The question remains - why hand them an excuse on a plate? We should do whatever we can to support the JREF in getting claimants to a test.


Does it "work against what the JREF are trying to achieve" if you try to convince somebody (e.g. a claimant) that his or her supernatural beliefs are delusional?
Continually insisting that a person is delusional, is not the same thing as trying to show them how their claims/beliefs are delusional. It is closer to name-calling.

If you wish to discuss any of this further there is a thread somewhere about 'welcoming MDC claimants'. I think this discussion will be more appropriately continued there. Let's keep this thread on topic to Connie's claim and protocol.

[rjh01]

connie sonne - My only advice to you is practice. Do this in front of strangers. Maybe go to a old people's home and entertain them with your abilities. Do the same as what you will do at tam 7. Not only will you be doing a public service, but you will learn about performing in public and developing your skills.

I would hate for you to fail because you suddenly got stage fright or some other minor issue.

Remember the $1m will be peanuts if you succeed. You will be able to earn that every year.

[chillzero]

I think that's very sound advice.
Seconded.

[dann]

connie sonne - My only advice to you is practice. (...) Do the same as what you will do at tam 7.

Since this implies testing yourself, I agree, but I would leave out the "in front of strangers" part of it.

[dann]

You think claiming someone has no courage - in the face of them agreeing to test themselves, not privately, or on their own grounds, but away from home and in front of a disbelieving audience of hundreds - and calling them delusional is civil? It's not particularly constructive, is it?

Nobody claimed that "someone has no courage"! But depending on your delusion and the strength of your conviction, courage is not necessarily required for a performance like this. I wouldn't do what CS intends to do, which has nothing to do with courage or cowardice.
And you know very well why I call the actual claim delusional, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the presence of absence or bravery, so please don't turn this into a question of me calling a courageous person delusional!
And, yes, I think that it is actually constructive to clarify the ideas mentioned in this thread. Maybe it took guts for you to do what you intended to do, chillzero, but I still don't see the need for courage in CS's case. She does not doubt her allegede powers!

You may call it being a party pooper, however I see it as more than that, and I've explained in detail why I think your comments are out of place in a thread for a claimant who has stepped up to the mark. You don't approve of the party - that's fine. The JREF are the hosts here, and we don't really have the right to work against them. You've voiced your opinion, and I don't see that you need add to that unless you wish to dissuade a claimant from testing, and that is in direct contradiction to what the JREF are trying to acheive.

I was not the one to introduce the party analogy; chran was. I don't see anybody working against the JREF in this thread, in as far as the JREF is supposed to be educational. However, trying to encourage CS to perform at TAM7 by implying that her claim is actually possible (and not simply: not excluded by the test design in case she actually had the alleged paranormal powers) is what is "in direct contradition to what the JREF are trying to achieve", unless I'm very much mistaken, and this is what some of the posts have been doing.

Think about it.
They don't need an easy excuse if they can do what they claim. Few of us here believe they can, and it is so often that claims do not even reach the testing stage.


And I don't think that's bad. I don't have the need to see more people fail at these tests.

Sometimes that is blamed on the attitudes of members here, sometimes there are other excuses. The question remains - why hand them an excuse on a plate? We should do whatever we can to support the JREF in getting claimants to a test.

Yes, many claimants are in need of excuses when they fail, because they need to believe in their delusion. They don't believe in it, as you may have done in yours, merely because of a blunder, an accidental misinterpretation of certain phenoma. They intentionally misinterpret them. So if there is one thing that is certain in a case like that, it is that they never lack excuses for why it went wrong! They don't need to have them served on a plate. They are fully capable of coming up with excuses of their own invention.
And if nothing else has become obvious to CS in this thread, I think that she must have understood at least this much:
I am the one who has been telling her that going to TAM7 is not a very smart move and I don't in any way whatsoever represent the JREF. And furthermore I would like to add that I won't be present at TAM7.
See, chillzero? Excuse removed from plate! :)

Continually insisting that a person is delusional, is not the same thing as trying to show them how their claims/beliefs are delusional. It is closer to name-calling.

If you wish to discuss any of this further there is a thread somewhere about 'welcoming MDC claimants'. I think this discussion will be more appropriately continued there. Let's keep this thread on topic to Connie's claim and protocol.

The necessity of "continually insisting that a person is delusional", in this case, arises because many posters, contrary to what they actually know about reality, insist on treating CS's winning the 1.000.000 $ as possible!
If they didn't, I wouldn't find it necessary to point out the mistake to them. And I don't even think that it's an honest mistake! But you are probably right: It would be better to keep this thread on topic to Connie's claim and protocol and keep it free from dishonest encouragements and the discussion of those.

[chran]

I was not the one to introduce the party analogy; chran was. I didn't mean to introduce a party analogy, I was merely making a comment on your perceived personality based on your posts and the PM's I've exchanged with you.

[William Smith]

No, it's impossible, but to encourage CS you pretend that it isn't.
...

It might come down to semantics, but it is not impossible. A couple millenia of data suggest though that it seems very, very, very unlikely. Do you realise that we are basically saying the same thing?

If you want to insist that it is impossible, we'll have to agree to disagree.


but to encourage CS you pretend that it isn't.
...

Please do not strawman me or put words in my mouth.



This is Connie's show. She said she can do something, now let's see if she can do it. Nothing more. Nothing less.

[Moochie]

Yes, I have no doubt that I'm a party pooper in this case, but then again: I don't really approve of the party.
The contradiction in chillzero's attitude is that she is so keen on having CS perform at your 'party' that she tends to forget what is actually going on: CS goes there believing that she has powers (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4358406#post4358406), and a lot of people look forward to seeing her fail - which appears to be the reason why we should not point out to her the delusion but instead pretend that it isn't one, thus making her feel "welcomed".
And that's the 'party' that you don't want me to spoil.
In this discussion CS is not the one that I don't respect. You are!

Yeah, it looks like some people are looking to be entertained by schadenfreude. Not terribly nice, is it?


M.

[dann]

It might come down to semantics, but it is not impossible. A couple millenia of data suggest though that it seems very, very, very unlikely. Do you realise that we are basically saying the same thing?

If you want to insist that it is impossible, we'll have to agree to disagree.
OK, we'll agree to disagree: You say very, very, very unlikely, I say impossible. The odds at the bookie's would be the same, though, wouldn't they? Please do not strawman me or put words in my mouth. It seems to be your intention. If it isn't, I apologize for misunderstanding you. This is Connie's show. She said she can do something, now let's see if she can do it. Nothing more. Nothing less. Well, she can't, and you know that she can't (or at least that it's very, very, very unlikely that she can), nothing more, nothing less.

I didn't mean to introduce a party analogy,But you did. I was merely making a comment on your perceived personality Let's try to avoid rule-12 breaches, OK?based on your posts and the PM's I've exchanged with you. Feel free to make public our four PMs from 19th to 20th of Jan. Since they were in Danish, they might help CS understand what's at stake.

Yeah, it looks like some people are looking to be entertained by schadenfreude. Not terribly nice, is it? Well, some people prefer Schadenfreude to no Freude at all, and in this case I find it important to point out that CS already went public with the Madeleine story on the largest TV channel in Denmark, so in that context very little Schade can be expected from her performance in front of the relatively small audience in Las Vegas. I also think that chillzero or somebody else from the JREF will do their utmost to avoid any kind of teasing or gloating at TAM7.
But let's move further discussions of this to the thread suggested by chillzero.

[connie sonne]

Erlando, I allready have answered that like Pixel42 told you. That must be enough :).

[connie sonne]

And Dann....eat grass :D!!!!

[dann]

I can't, sorry, I am allergic to grass.
I would have expected somebody with connections, somebody destined soon to reveal the truth about life, the universe and everything (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4348596#post4348596), to be more articulate, but what do I know ...

[petre]

Always so many different flavors of skeptics. I think dann just feels it's ingenuine to encourage the formality of a test if one actually believes it is destined to fail.

I've always encourage self-testing for the same reason. A skeptic of such a bent would expect a rational applicant willing to self-test will discover with proper controls nothing paranormal seems to happen, and then (with enough study to satisfy curiosity) will eventually come to the conclusion that other more mundane things are going on afterall.

Perhaps dann would be more comfortable if the focus of a failed test were agreed to be "Rats, we were hoping to find something unexpected, but alas we learned nothing new of the universe today. This is why we encourage lots of self-testing, things don't always work the way we expect them to. Feel free to study the matter further and let us know what you find someday!" rather than "Ha Ha! You were wrong!"

[Pixel42]

Erlando, I allready have answered that like Pixel42 told you.
Connie, do you understand why your answer is completely unacceptable to sceptics?

The whole point of this test is to establish whether or not you have the powers you claim to have. If you succeed you expect everyone (including dann) to acknowledge that you do indeed have those powers, and rightly so; but the quid pro quo is that if you fail we expect you to acknowledge that you do not have those powers.

If you are not prepared to acknowledge failure, if you already have your excuse prepared, then erlando is quite right: there is no point in you taking the test.

Suppose I made it clear before you even took the test that if you pass it I will simply assume that you cheated in some way, and would refuse to acknowledge that you do indeed have the powers you claim. Would you consider that an acceptable attitude? Because that is the equivalent of what you are expecting sceptics to accept.

[William Smith]

Let's not forget that no tested applicant ever walked away from a test saying, paraphrased: "I really learned something today. My abilities probably were imagined. Thank you JREF."

At the end (I think) in this video (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7461912885649996034) Randi says that despite their failure(s), most dowsers still believed they could do what they claimed.

Do not underestimate the power of belief.



One can only try to plant seeds. There are a lot of factors governing the growth. But sometimes seeds do grow, do they not? ;)

[Gr8wight]

I thought that the JREF MDC was to help FIND something Paranormal?

Well, then you thought wrong. Perhaps that is the basis of your problem here. You really don't have a clue what you are talking about.

But what you've stated is exactly the biased truth of the matter.
The JREF wants to prove that there isn't anything Paranormal, unlike their claim of neutrality :)

OPEN MOUTH INSERT FOOT ... LMAO

Hang in there Connie. The truth is coming out!!!!!!

Don't worry about them attacking you. They do it to all applicants :)

Please provide some documentation of the JREF's so-called "claim of neutrality." I am unaware they have ever made such a claim. They have always said, right up front, that they are an organisation whose goal is the promotion of skepticism and critical thinking. They are not a research organisation. The million dollars is not a reward for evidence of the supernatural. It is simply an enticement for the deluded and the fraudulent to come out of the woodwork in order to demonstrate that claims of the paranormal cannot be supported in the cold, clear light of rational examination.

Not that any of this refers to you, The Professor. We all know that you never actually made a testable claim.

[Gr8wight]

You don't really need to ask CS this question or to doubt her respect for the JREF or the forum and its participants:
Connie has made it very clear that to her the MDC is not a test. It is destiny's way of providing her with a million US dollars and of making the world recognize her.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4358406#post4358406

Dann, you don't actually believe that Connie believes everything she says, do you?

[connie sonne]

Gr8Wight, YES I DO. Don`t matter what other people says I believe in, but you must know. YES
Connie

[connie sonne]

Pixel42, as I told you, I have answered that. And I have a lot more to tell you, but it will come, I don`t have the time here, and it`s NOT the right place. I told you...more will come, the challenge is between me and JREF, not between me and you,:):D. And what I`doing.. about everything...No, I`m NOT cheating, I can`t...If this was not true, I would`nt have spent more than 200.000 danish crowns on this, it`s about 3400$.

[chran]

Just to clarify, 200'000 Danish Kroner is about 35'000 US Dollars :)

Source (http://www.google.dk/search?q=200000+DKK+in+USD).

[dann]

Dann, you don't actually believe that Connie believes everything she says, do you?

Yes, I think that she does. I have no other explanation for her behaviour, and even though chillzero does not seem to understand it, I don't use the word delusion lightly nor as a term of abuse. (I actually think that chill may be "too close to the situation emotionally to be able to look at it rationally". She seems to be unable to recognize the difference between herself and CS as applicants.)
This is why I stress that CS is not Sylvia Browne, she does not appear to have been earning money, US dollars or Danish kroner, deceiving the deluded. The first thing we ever heard about her was when she made her claims about Maddie, and that also does not appear to have been part of a moneymaking scheme.

Maybe her trip to TAM7 in Las Vegas actually is not even a bad thing. I don't know. Maybe somebody there will be able to have a serious talk with her. I have the impression that the Danish academic who supported CS's application is worthless when it comes to distinguishing between 'powers' and delusions. She appears to be the kind of anthropologist who finds it prejudiced even to consider making the distinction.
Compared to the money CS claims to have spent already - and chran is right about the amount in US $$ - going to Vegas isn't very expensive. (I was there for TAM2.)
I just want the JREF to be aware of the responsibility they take upon themselves when they ask Connie not only to do the MDC test but also to do it in front of an audience at TAM7.
I am not a psychiatrist and I don't have the competence to 'remote analyze' CS, but I have the impression that CS is not just an ordinary woowoo or believer, i.e. able to distinguish between the real world and her fantasies.
I do notice, however, that she bought a real ticket (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4563083#post4563083) to Las Vegas and did not ask her connections (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4348596#post4348596) to take her there. :)

[Pixel42]

Pixel42, as I told you, I have answered that.
Yes you have. And I'm just trying to help you understand why your answer is unacceptable to sceptics. Do you understand what I have explained?

No, I`m NOT cheating, I can`t
So you're saying it would be completely unreasonable of me (or JREF) to assume before you even take the test that if you pass it you must have been cheating, so passing it doesn't prove anything? I agree.

Likewise it is completely unreasonable for you to assume before you even take the test that if you fail it is must be because the mysterious entities responsible for your powers have decided not to reveal themselves, so if you fail it doesn't prove anything.

The test is to establish who is right, you (who claim you have these powers) or sceptics (who think you are inadvertantly fooling yourself, like so many have before). Both parties must agree beforehand that the test will indeed prove who is right, otherwise it is not worth running the test. At the moment only the sceptics and JREF have stated they will accept the result of the test; you have already specifically stated that you will not accept it.

[connie sonne]

I have agreed the protocol, and JREF knows what they are doing, :). I will not waste my time so NO more from me here on this forum. Just wait and see:)

Connie Sonne

[petre]

I have agreed the protocol, and JREF knows what they are doing, :). I will not waste my time so NO more from me here on this forum. Just wait and see:)

Connie Sonne

Fair enough, good luck! I'd like to see you succeed, paranormal or clever con it would be nice to shake things up a bit before the MDC ends.

[connie sonne]

I wrote before, that it was my last words here, but I have a comment:

Someone here knows I`m right what I`m saying, someone knows there is much more than you can see, someone here and in other forums on the internet act they are skeptics, eventhough they know...(but they don`t know WHAT or WHO it is !) . They act they are skeptics just for one thing....try to get people down in the mudd, not only people who actually can "do something", or have seen something they can`t explain, no also trying to make all other people thinking, that there`s nothing....only the human being!! These people are sometimes hired to do it. Believe it or not, the truth WILL come out:)

[William Smith]

I wrote before, that it was my last words here, but I have a comment:

Someone here knows I`m right what I`m saying, someone knows there is much more than you can see, someone here and in other forums on the internet act they are skeptics, eventhough they know...(but they don`t know WHAT or WHO it is !) . They act they are skeptics just for one thing....try to get people down in the mudd, not only people who actually can "do something", or have seen something they can`t explain, no also trying to make all other people thinking, that there`s nothing....only the human being!! These people are sometimes hired to do it. Believe it or not, the truth WILL come out:)

Well, Connie, in your test you will have to be a lot more precise than above.

Do not forget: It's all about the evidence. Simple evidence of you being able to do what you claim to be able to do.

[dann]

Well, I don't recognize myself in most of CS's latest post, but this part of it is to the point:

... trying to make all other people thinking, that there`s nothing....only the human being!!


Unfortunately I don't have room left in my sig line for "there`s nothing....only the human being!", but I like it! :)
And I wish somebody would pay me to spread the message, but if the Bavarian Illuminati (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuminati) actually exists, it hasn't proposed to put me on the payroll!
I do know a lot of Bavarian Marxists (http://www.gegenstandpunkt.com), though, but for some reason guys like that tend to have very little dough. :) Like me they tend to hate elitists and other aholes who "try to get people down in the mud".

[Gr8wight]

Gr8Wight, YES I DO. Don`t matter what other people says I believe in, but you must know. YES
Connie

I wasn't asking you. I already knew how you would answer.

[steenkh]

Someone here knows I`m right what I`m saying, someone knows there is much more than you can see, someone here and in other forums on the internet act they are skeptics, eventhough they know...(but they don`t know WHAT or WHO it is !) . They act they are skeptics just for one thing....try to get people down in the mudd, not only people who actually can "do something", or have seen something they can`t explain, no also trying to make all other people thinking, that there`s nothing....only the human being!! These people are sometimes hired to do it. Believe it or not, the truth WILL come out:)
Ah, a conspiracy! These false skeptics are surely lizardmen working for the evil government! :shocked:

[yairhol]

Suppose I made it clear before you even took the test that if you pass it I will simply assume that you cheated in some way, and would refuse to acknowledge that you do indeed have the powers you claim.

If I were Connie I wouldn't care what you or others think about my 'powers' as long as you pay me the million dollars I won after successfully passing the challenge.
It is possible to win the million even if not having any real powers but by a way to cheat that was overlooked in the protocol.

[Pixel42]

If I were Connie I wouldn't care what you or others think about my 'powers' as long as you pay me the million dollars I won after successfully passing the challenge.
I was trying to describe an attitude which would seem as unreasonable to Connie as her attitude is to sceptics, in order to help her to understand why we think it's unreasonable.

But you're right, and likewise JREF won't really care how Connie explains away her failure to herself when everyone else will take it as proof she does not have the powers she claims to have. I just think it's a shame that she's not going to learn anything from this exercise.

But I suppose that's why the challenge is being wound up: the intended targets (the fraudsters) refuse to take it and the unintended targets (the sincere, well meaning mistaken) don't learn anything from it.

[dann]

Ah, a conspiracy! These false skeptics are surely lizardmen working for the evil government! :shocked:

How could you know that I'm a government employee? What are your powers? :)

[steenkh]

How could you know that I'm a government employee? What are your powers? :)
I spotted you as a lizard a long time ago. It was easy to figure out that you must have been sent by the government, or even more likely, the UN! :eek:
:clap:

[Marcus]

I was trying to describe an attitude which would seem as unreasonable to Connie as her attitude is to sceptics, in order to help her to understand why we think it's unreasonable.

But you're right, and likewise JREF won't really care how Connie explains away her failure to herself when everyone else will take it as proof she does not have the powers she claims to have. I just think it's a shame that she's not going to learn anything from this exercise.

But I suppose that's why the challenge is being wound up: the intended targets (the fraudsters) refuse to take it and the unintended targets (the sincere, well meaning mistaken) don't learn anything from it.
As far as I know no challenger has ever admitted that their failure meant that they didn't have their powers, so I would be really, really, suprised if Connie was the first.

[petre]

As far as I know no challenger has ever admitted that their failure meant that they didn't have their powers, so I would be really, really, suprised if Connie was the first.

I would expect the common case such a rational person might engage in self-testing, get negative results when controls are in place, and eventually drop their claim and accept their initial hypothesis was incorrect.

[Garrette]

I spotted you as a lizard a long time ago. It was easy to figure out that you must have been sent by the government, or even more likely, the UN! :eek:
:clap:And you, sir, are another plant, an additional layer in the conspiracy if you will. Your mistake was simple but crucial: You misspelled "gubbmint."

[connie sonne]

StenKh No, lizardmen or whatever:D, doesn`t excist, but evil goverments YES! You will be surprised:).

[connie sonne]

Dann....maybe you will send me another private message later, but I feel this a little bit strange, because you haven`t answered me yet, instead you did had the time for write woohoo-things,:).

To people out there, I think you should know, I asked Dann, who writes several places, mostly skeptical forums for having a meeting. Him and other skeptical persons. It could be a possibility to be convinced that I`m right. Not only about dowsing but many other things. I don`t care if I have to travel, I will be GLAD to !! What about you StenKh and Chran....interested?????

[Marcus]

I would expect the common case such a rational person might engage in self-testing, get negative results when controls are in place, and eventually drop their claim and accept their initial hypothesis was incorrect.
This does indeed happen, some of the more rational claimants self-test and realize they are wrong. The ones who make it to the JREF test generally have too much faith in their beliefs to be swayed by evidence. It looks like Connie will be in this category

I don't recall if one has ever self-tested in the controled form of a JREF test. If you look at Edge's test, for example, he might say something like he knows dowsing works, he does it every day, so he has no need to waste time setting up a JREF type test. Afterwards came the excuses, of course, including the most creative one that he lied when he said the conditions were right for the test, even though he did perfectly in the open test.

[William Smith]

Dann....maybe you will send me another private message later, but I feel this a little bit strange, because you haven`t answered me yet, instead you did had the time for write woohoo-things,:).

To people out there, I think you should know, I asked Dann, who writes several places, mostly skeptical forums for having a meeting. Him and other skeptical persons. It could be a possibility to be convinced that I`m right. Not only about dowsing but many other things. I don`t care if I have to travel, I will be GLAD to !! What about you StenKh and Chran....interested?????

Connie, everyone concerned, if this results in a demonstration of the claim before the official preliminary at TAM, I am all for it.

A poster named SezMe has done a similar thing (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2684208#post2684208) with former claimant Mike Guska, who posts in this forum under the name "edge".

The controls were very limited - and this was visible from the get go - but it was an interesting and commendable experience from all parties involved.

[connie sonne]

Here you are guys, :D. Dann just wrote me a private message, which I will write here, wenn I got it translated. Shortly, I don`t even wanna read it all, because it`s ridiculous, it says that he is no doctor and can`t help me, :D. He just DONT wanna know and see the evidences of what`s between the earth and sky!!!! He is afraid, that I really can do, what I`m telling you, and therefore all he had said about many things is lies lies and lies. Don`t anyone want to meet me before the challenge :)

[IMST]

Here you are guys, :D. Dann just wrote me a private message, which I will write here, wenn I got it translated. Shortly, I don`t even wanna read it all, because it`s ridiculous, it says that he is no doctor and can`t help me, :D. He just DONT wanna know and see the evidences of what`s between the earth and sky!!!! He is afraid, that I really can do, what I`m telling you, and therefore all he had said about many things is lies lies and lies. Don`t anyone want to meet me before the challenge :)

Perhaps you should have the meaning of "private message" translated for you before you post said message here.

[connie sonne]

Yes, you are right, sorry.

[Pixel42]

Don`t anyone want to meet me before the challenge :)
I'd be happy to meet you before the challenge, and run through the test with you. I'm retired, so I have plenty of time, and I have a spare room you could stay in for a couple of days. I live near Malmesbury, a very pleasant part of the UK.

[chillzero]

Perhaps you should have the meaning of "private message" translated for you before you post said message here.

Additionally, this thread is specifically for the JREF MDC challenge, not sundry conversations.

[dann]

Here you are guys, :D. Dann just wrote me a private message, which I will write here, wenn I got it translated. Shortly, I don`t even wanna read it all, because it`s ridiculous, it says that he is no doctor and can`t help me, :D. He just DONT wanna know and see the evidences of what`s between the earth and sky!!!! He is afraid, that I really can do, what I`m telling you, and therefore all he had said about many things is lies lies and lies. Don`t anyone want to meet me before the challenge :)

I don't know what you claim to be able to do, Connie, so I cannot possibly be afraid of your alleged ability 'really to be able to do what you're telling us' since I don't know what it is. If you have actually told us what you were able to do, I'm afraid that I've missed it.
You also did not mention evidence of anything when you proposed a meeting with us.
So please tell us, in this thread or in a PM, what you would like to show us, what you claim to be able to do.

[connie sonne]

Dann...I have written in this thread and in danish Para-nyt, that I have evidences on what I´m saying, and in your PM that I could show you several things, also without dowsing....but you didn`t ask...only in your answer, where you used a lot of time to tell me, that I`m crazy, judge me to be someone I´m not. I told you that friends, my family and other people KNOWS what I can do, they have seen and heard !! Sorry Dann..I find another way. You lost your chance. I`m sick and tired of this forum, really(sorry to you, who are polite !!). So, you can just wait and see, no more or less.

And Pixel42, thank`s but I forgot to say: In Denmark, I can`t afford going out of DK, and I forgot to tell, that all the money I spent(wich I named ealier) is money I bought...not owned.

[connie sonne]

:) sorry....money I borrowed of cause,

[Marcus]

I don't know what you claim to be able to do, Connie, so I cannot possibly be afraid of your alleged ability 'really to be able to do what you're telling us' since I don't know what it is. If you have actually told us what you were able to do, I'm afraid that I've missed it.
You also did not mention evidence of anything when you proposed a meeting with us.
So please tell us, in this thread or in a PM, what you would like to show us, what you claim to be able to do.
I must have missed something, I admit I am not paying close attention. How could Connie have arranged a JREF test without revealing her claim?

[Pantaz]

I must have missed something, I admit I am not paying close attention. How could Connie have arranged a JREF test without revealing her claim?

From the Challenge Applications sub-forum:
Connie Sonne has applied for the Challenge with the claim that she is able to dowse for certain numbers when they are written on one side of a piece of cardboard and the other side is blank, and the cardboard is shuffled and placed on a table numbers-down.

Ms. Sonne has had interviews regarding her abilities printed in both newspapers and magazines in Denmark, and her academic affidavit came from an anthropology professor there.

We are currently beginning protocol negotiations with Ms. Sonne regarding her ability.

~Remie

[dann]

I have no idea which claims CS made to the JREF, but, yes, she must have made some before they agreed to make a kind of dowsing test for her.
To me she only wrote that she would like to show us (me and other Danish sceptics) other "things" than what she'll be showing at TAM7.
Now I’ve skimmed CS’s discussion with other Danish skeptics (http://para-nyt.blogspot.com/2008/10/vi-venter-stadig-connie.htm). The two concrete claims she made there was that she was able to grow tropical orchids in the frost and dip her foot in water without getting wet. Apart from that there was a lot of stuff like: ”Earth was NOT ready to hear the truths about everything until now.” “the population of the Earth was brainwashed/manipulated”, something about ethnic cleansing of Muslims, the sick, the elderly, the weak, some criminals and misfits and others who are deemed unsuited for ”the fourth Reich”. And somehow it’s all supposed to be connected with the disappearance of Maddie, and CS’s octogenarian parents also have some kind of contact to something. I don’t know what since I don’t understand half of it.
But the truth is supposed to be out there, everything will be revealed when the time is right, and I now appear to have lost my chance of the first glimpses of the revelations.
Somehow it doesn’t worry me that I may have wasted the opportunity to be among the first to witness the earth-shattering truth about Maddie and the rest of the universe (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4358441#post4358441).
I have advised CS to seek professional help since I don’t have the qualifications to give her the help I think she needs.

As for the rest of you: I hope that you are able to see that it is high time to give up the MDC. It was a fun idea to confront people like Sylvia Browne with a pretend ‘opportunity’ to win one million dollars – if only they had the powers they claim they have – but it makes some deluded people think that it is a present for them from the gods (whatever). And the delusions of people like this should not be encouraged.

[chran]

To people out there, I think you should know, I asked Dann, who writes several places, mostly skeptical forums for having a meeting. Him and other skeptical persons. It could be a possibility to be convinced that I`m right. Not only about dowsing but many other things. I don`t care if I have to travel, I will be GLAD to !! What about you StenKh and Chran....interested?????

I would certainly be interested in a demonstration of what you claim to be able to do. I've already been contacted by a member here regarding it and have expressed my interest :)

EDIT: Discuss Connie Sonne's demonstration here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4577567)!

[chillzero]

If it is not about this specific challenge, then please take it to a new thread in GS&P.

[Moochie]

I have no idea which claims CS made to the JREF, but, yes, she must have made some before they agreed to make a kind of dowsing test for her.
To me she only wrote that she would like to show us (me and other Danish sceptics) other "things" than what she'll be showing at TAM7.
Now I’ve skimmed CS’s discussion with other Danish skeptics (http://para-nyt.blogspot.com/2008/10/vi-venter-stadig-connie.htm). The two concrete claims she made there was that she was able to grow tropical orchids in the frost and dip her foot in water without getting wet. Apart from that there was a lot of stuff like: ”Earth was NOT ready to hear the truths about everything until now.” “the population of the Earth was brainwashed/manipulated”, something about ethnic cleansing of Muslims, the sick, the elderly, the weak, some criminals and misfits and others who are deemed unsuited for ”the fourth Reich”. And somehow it’s all supposed to be connected with the disappearance of Maddie, and CS’s octogenarian parents also have some kind of contact to something. I don’t know what since I don’t understand half of it.
But the truth is supposed to be out there, everything will be revealed when the time is right, and I now appear to have lost my chance of the first glimpses of the revelations.
Somehow it doesn’t worry me that I may have wasted the opportunity to be among the first to witness the earth-shattering truth about Maddie and the rest of the universe (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4358441#post4358441).
I have advised CS to seek professional help since I don’t have the qualifications to give her the help I think she needs.

As for the rest of you: I hope that you are able to see that it is high time to give up the MDC. It was a fun idea to confront people like Sylvia Browne with a pretend ‘opportunity’ to win one million dollars – if only they had the powers they claim they have – but it makes some deluded people think that it is a present for them from the gods (whatever). And the delusions of people like this should not be encouraged.



Well, geez...


M.

[chran]

If it is not about this specific challenge, then please take it to a new thread in GS&P.

I apologize, Chill. I've made a new thread.

Discuss Connie Sonne's demonstration here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4577567)!

[William Smith]

The date is set: 1pm, July 12, 2009.

Pitching for one side: The envelopes.
Batting for the other side: Connie Sonne.

One woman enters. One woman leaves.

[Tim Harrod]

Exciting!

Any chance of a webcast for those of us who won't be there?

Come to think of it, any chance of any of TAM being webcast?

[Jackalgirl]

Huzzah! Yaaaay, Connie! I'm really looking forward to this demo. Congrats to Connie for getting this far!

[Pantaz]

Well, I just watched the live video... she failed to get any of the cards right.

[Denver]

I thought the test went very well though, and Connie conducted herself very professionally. Congrats to Connie for taking this test.

[ohms]

I almost felt sorry for her checking all the other envelopes at the end of the failed (from her point of view) test. I wonder if she will give any reasons for her failure to get any right.

[William Smith]

Another controlled test of a paranormal claim is in the books.

Nice following through with your claim, Connie. How do you interpret the results?

[laca]

Too many negative energies in the room I suppose.

[Pixel42]

She said before she took the test how she would interpret failure - that the mysterious entities responsible for her abilities had decided that the world was not ready for them to be revealed after all.

[laca]

How convenient.

[rjh01]

Do not expect to see a response from her in this thread. She has not visited the forum since about 21 June 2009

[BayAreaGuy]

I hope Connie reads this!

I attended the preliminary test today in Las Vegas, and wanted to compliment you on your amazing courage in coming to be tested in front of so many of us who are skeptical of such "powers." You handled yourself with grace and decorum, and are to be commended, in my opinion, for doing so. I was sad to see that you did not pass the test, and felt very bad that the protocol made it necessary for you to cut open nearly 30 envelopes. That must have been tedious and boring, especially since you probably just wanted to get out of there as quickly as possible. (I do understand why it was necessary, as I'm sure you do).

Take care, and I wish you the best of luck in the future! : )

-- Sheldon W. Helms, San Ramon, California.

[BayAreaGuy]

I'd like to make a general comment about the lack of decorum in this thread. I'm surprised by the vitriol being shown in here. As I said in my earlier post, I attended the "Million Dollar Challenge" preliminary testing today with Ms. Sonne, and from what I saw, she really does not deserve the treatment some of you are dishing out. She handled herself very professionally, and was very graceful after failing the test.

In my opinion, each of you should take a long look in the mirror and ask yourself if you're showing that level of maturity and/or decorum in your positions as representatives of the Skeptic community. If the answer is no, you should begin to change your behavior, even when it is relatively anonymous and you're hiding behind a computer screen.

[steenkh]

It is quite convenient, but she is so convinced of her abilities that she is not merely deluded, but she has probably serious psychological problems.

I always found it strange how she headed directly for the disaster, refusing to make even the simplest self-test of something she admitted she had never tried before. It is as if she wanted to fail.