Could someone (hypothetically) "Win" the MDC, if they prove it is a fraud, in court?

[Wowbagger]

I seem to recall Randi once stated that if anyone could prove, in a court of law, that his Million Dollar Challenge was a fraud, they could then win the Millions dollars, even if they do not have a paranormal claim.

Could anyone confirm this, and point to any references, if possible?

Not that I plan to do that. I was just curious, 'cause the topic comes up every now and then.

[The Professor]

I also would be very interested if Randi made that claim.

[Chris H]

I also would be very interested if Randi made that claim.

Of course Dave you would have you actually provide proof of something to do that, and we all know that "proof" isn't one of your strong points.

Cheers,

Chris

[Wowbagger]

I also would be very interested if Randi made that claim.Of course you would. But, even if the answer is "No! He never said that. You must have been confabulating.", you could still build a legal case, I suppose, if you think he denied you had powers you clearly demonstrated, for the MDC.

[quixotecoyote]

I think I remember him saying that, but I don't have a source.

The more interesting question for me is whether he can still say stuff like that, because in the April 22 Swift he says
Moving along in this juvenile drama, here's the "journalist" again:

James Randi has said he aims to ruin Uri Geller's reputation.

Sir, and I use the term loosely, Geller doesn't have any reputation to ruin. He's looked upon as a clown by any and all serious - real - journalists, and as for that statement you attribute to me, I'll send you the JREF million-dollar prize, as soon as you provide the evidence for that claim

I didn't think he had the authority to make those offers anymore.

[Jackalgirl]

Of course you would. But, even if the answer is "No! He never said that. You must have been confabulating.", you could still build a legal case, I suppose, if you think he denied you had powers you clearly demonstrated, for the MDC.

Anyone who had actually gotten to the point at which there was a signed, mutually agreed protocol, could sue JREF for breach of contract if they demonstrated their ability and the JREF refused to pay up. They'd have to demonstrate (again) that they actually have said ability, I imagine.

Note my emphasis. People who didn't make it that far, especially people who entered into the process in bad faith to begin with, would not have this recourse, since there is no signed protocol (contract) to be broken.

Back to the OP, though, I'd be interested if Randi said this, but even if he did, I haven't the faintest idea how someone could establish that the MDC is a fraud. It is demonstrably not so. Anyone trying to prove this in a court of law has to be crazy - it would be a total waste of money. It'd be easier to just lift the damn bowling ball with telekenesis, already.

[jimtron]

Anyone who had actually gotten to the point at which there was a signed, mutually agreed protocol, could sue JREF for breach of contract if they demonstrated their ability and the JREF refused to pay up. They'd have to demonstrate (again) that they actually have said ability, I imagine.

Note my emphasis. People who didn't make it that far, especially people who entered into the process in bad faith to begin with, would not have this recourse, since there is no signed protocol (contract) to be broken.

Good point. Whenever I hear people claim that the MDC is bogus, I encourage them to carefully follow the rules and apply, carefully documenting the process every step of the way. If it was bogus, they would have evidence of that and could share it with the media etc. If it's not bogus, they can win a million bucks. Funny, still no winners of the million, and still no evidence that the MDC isn't legit.

[William Smith]

I seem to recall Randi once stated that if anyone could prove, in a court of law, that his Million Dollar Challenge was a fraud, they could then win the Millions dollars, even if they do not have a paranormal claim.

Could anyone confirm this, and point to any references, if possible?

Not that I plan to do that. I was just curious, 'cause the topic comes up every now and then.

I see two possibilities.

1. A claimant performs according to the protocol - twice. The JREF does not pay. The claimant goes to court. Contract law dictates the rules. The court orders the JREF to pay.

2. Anyone provides a sound abstract argumentation which would hold up in a court. The court orders the JREF to pay.

Possible? Yes. Likely?

[Cuddles]

2. Anyone provides a sound abstract argumentation which would hold up in a court. The court orders the JREF to pay.

I don't see how this one would even be possible. In order for a court to order the JREF to pay anyone, you would have to establish that the JREF actually owed them the money. Unless you actually take the challenge, it's impossible for the JREF to owe anything. It would certainly be possible for someone to sue the JREF for something and be awarded a million in damages, but that wouldn't be the same as winning the MDC.

[William Smith]

I don't see how this one would even be possible. In order for a court to order the JREF to pay anyone, you would have to establish that the JREF actually owed them the money. Unless you actually take the challenge, it's impossible for the JREF to owe anything. It would certainly be possible for someone to sue the JREF for something and be awarded a million in damages, but that wouldn't be the same as winning the MDC.

Sarcasm: "...sound abstract argumentation..." :D

Most critics of the MDC have enough trouble peeing a hole in snow, let alone formulate a highly-complicated argumentation that would convince a court to pay them any amount of money.

But if someone put it forth, I'd listen.

[Cuddles]

But if someone put it forth, I'd listen.

Oh, I'd certainly listen. However, no matter how sound or abstract their argumentation might be, it's impossible for anyone to get the MDC money if they don't actually take the MDC. No matter how conclusively you prove the JREF and MDC to be frauds, you're still not owed any money if you never had a contract.

[Wowbagger]

2. Anyone provides a sound abstract argumentation which would hold up in a court. The court orders the JREF to pay.

Perhaps this would be more like winning only the "MD" portion of the "MDC". But, to the winner, I think that would hardly make a difference.

Theoretically, if someone could prove, in court, that the MDC was always promoted in bad faith, and never intended to be awarded, could they acquire the million dollars that way?

[The Professor]

Wowbagger is correct.

If several Challengers got together and showed "problems" with the MDC, they would have a "Class Action" Lawsuit.

They would receive "Punative Damages" probably taken from the estate of the JREF.

And Jackalgirl..
"Anyone who had actually gotten to the point at which there was a signed, mutually agreed protocol, could sue JREF for breach of contract if they demonstrated their ability and the JREF refused to pay up. They'd have to demonstrate (again) that they actually have said ability, I imagine."

I've been told that Randi, in all these years, has NEVER signed such an agreement.
Please show me where he has and I'll stand corrected.

[NoZed Avenger]

Perhaps this would be more like winning only the "MD" portion of the "MDC". But, to the winner, I think that would hardly make a difference.

Theoretically, if someone could prove, in court, that the MDC was always promoted in bad faith, and never intended to be awarded, could they acquire the million dollars that way?

I don't see this speculation going anywhere, frankly. If the purported Plaintiff doesn't have a paranormal ability that could have acquired the million, how has he or she been harmed?

It *might* be possible -- theoretically -- to win some kind of a fraud case in the event that you could prove absolute fraud, but I doubt it. A normal requirement for any such case is that you relied on the alleged misstatements to your detriment. Even without that, you are unlikely to get to a million dollars in damages, even using punitives.

Caveat: I am not conversant with Florida law. But the generally accepted essential elements that most (if not all) states require for a fraud case are typically:

(1) Defendant made a false statement regarding a material fact;
(2) Defendant knew or should have known the representation was false;
(3) Defendant intended that the representation induce plaintiff to act on it; and
(4) Plaintiff suffered damages in justifiable reliance on the representation.

So a plaintiff would have to show that he or she acted to his/her detriment in relying on the information. I just don't see any "there" there.

If someone had any true abilities, it would be far easier to simply perform as advertised (and as agreed), then sue for breach of contract if the funds were not paid as promised.

[Darat]

Perhaps this would be more like winning only the "MD" portion of the "MDC". But, to the winner, I think that would hardly make a difference.

Theoretically, if someone could prove, in court, that the MDC was always promoted in bad faith, and never intended to be awarded, could they acquire the million dollars that way?

Only if they had entered into the MDC i.e. into the contract. Otherwise what would they be suing the JREF for?

[Wowbagger]

Some vague recollections are coming back to me, of Randi stating, during one of the TAMs, that if you could prove the challenge is a fraud, you can get the million dollars.

But, perhaps he was referring to those who applied the challenge, and therefore had a contract.

[Darat]

That would seem to be more likely, if someone passes the tests agreed in the MDC they should receive the money so if the JREF didn't pay up in that situation then I'd say the JREF would have acted fraudulently and should be sued.

[The Professor]

The MDC is the "Cash Cow" of the JREF. Because of it they receive donations and lecture fees. Several hundred thousand a year.

If it is proven a "Sham" as some have stated, then taking money for it would be Fraudulent.

[Darat]

But that is not the subject of this thread.

[jimtron]

Wowbagger is correct.

If several Challengers got together and showed "problems" with the MDC, they would have a "Class Action" Lawsuit.

They would receive "Punative Damages" probably taken from the estate of the JREF.

And Jackalgirl..
"Anyone who had actually gotten to the point at which there was a signed, mutually agreed protocol, could sue JREF for breach of contract if they demonstrated their ability and the JREF refused to pay up. They'd have to demonstrate (again) that they actually have said ability, I imagine."

I've been told that Randi, in all these years, has NEVER signed such an agreement.
Please show me where he has and I'll stand corrected.

I hear a lot of hot air about how the MDC is bogus, but no evidence. Dave, if you think a class action suit is doable, then go for it. IF (and this is a big "if") the MDC is not legit, then alert the media and sue. Or have someone with paranormal ability take the challenge, and carefully document each step; they'll either win the million, or have evidence that the MDC is fraudulent. Unless of course, the MDC is legit, and the challenger doesn't actually have a testable paranormal ability.

[MattC]

The MDC is the "Cash Cow" of the JREF. Because of it they receive donations and lecture fees. Several hundred thousand a year.

Welcome to my world.

You may find the JREF's 990 form here: http://www2.guidestar.org/ReportNonProfit.aspx?ein=65-0649443&Mode=GxLite&lid=523196&dl=True

Line 96 is particularly interesting:

96. Dividends and interest from securities: 69,400

Any attempt to suggest that the million dollars invested is responsible for more than that is not idle fact, but cold-hearted speculation.

~ Matt

[Tricky]

The MDC is the "Cash Cow" of the JREF. Because of it they receive donations and lecture fees. Several hundred thousand a year.

If it is proven a "Sham" as some have stated, then taking money for it would be Fraudulent.
No money goes to the MDC fund. That fund has been established and in escrow for many years now. People may give money to the JREF because they like the MDC, but they dont' give money to the fund itself.

In my experience though, the MDC is just one of may things that attract people to the JREF.

Now if a person sued the JREF for fraud and won, he would certainly be entitled to some damages. But such a path would be fraught with danger, as he could potentially be countersued and wind up with a large settlement against him. And it should also be noted that Randi has been fending off lawsuits for many years now with no financial judgments ever made against him. A person might want to consider this before they bet their wad on an expensive legal team.

[NoZed Avenger]

Wowbagger is correct.

If several Challengers got together and showed "problems" with the MDC, they would have a "Class Action" Lawsuit.

They would receive "Punative Damages" probably taken from the estate of the JREF.

I'll put up my law degree against yours that this analysis is, to use a term of art, crap.

[Doubt]

I'll put up my law degree against yours that this analysis is, to use a term of art, crap.

Well the professor did git his legal information from his staff or writers.

[NoZed Avenger]

Well the professor did git his legal information from his staff or writers.

Are these writers the "People" who Think that random (and Usually inappropriate) "Capitals" and quotation Marks make things more "Impressive"?

[Wowbagger]

Wowbagger is correct. Honestly, when The Professor says this, it only makes me want to look into the possability that I was wrong.

[drkitten]

I'll put up my law degree against yours that this analysis is, to use a term of art, crap.

I quite agree that the Professor's innovative use of terms like "Class Action" do not inspire confidence. And I wouldn't put my law degree up against your prize for spelling from third grade.

But my understanding is that fraud is grounds for a civil suit and can include punitive damages. Stipulating for argument that the MDC is offered in bad faith (and that Randi knows it), I think one has a passable fraud case there (I'm using the California framework):
Misrepresentation (by assumption)
Knowledge that the representation is false (by assumption)
Intent to deceive (inferrable from his repeated offers)
Justifiable reliance (duh...)
Resulting damages (literally, anything I did in furtherance of an MDC challenge, or anything said about me on the forum.)


What am I missing?

[Azrael 5]

Are these writers the "People" who Think that random (and Usually inappropriate) "Capitals" and quotation Marks make things more "Impressive"?

Also the ones who say the MDC is a "sham". :rolleyes:

[not daSkeptic]

One of the most common arguments I've heard against the MDC is that the money does not exist. This seems to be a fairly easy one to test. Anyone who wants proof can ask and JREF will send them a copy of the latest statement from Goldman Sachs. "Oh, well, that statement is bogus," some might argue. If one truly feels this is the case, they are free to contact the various government authorities that handle such matters.

[The Professor]

http://law.freeadvice.com/general_practice/legal_remedies/damages_punitive.htm

http://www.web-access.net/~aclark/frames45.htm

I've never claimed to be a Lawyer like so many here on this forum do, but I do believe the terms are correct.

[The Professor]

I quite agree that the Professor's innovative use of terms like "Class Action" do not inspire confidence. And I wouldn't put my law degree up against your prize for spelling from third grade.

But my understanding is that fraud is grounds for a civil suit and can include punitive damages. Stipulating for argument that the MDC is offered in bad faith (and that Randi knows it), I think one has a passable fraud case there (I'm using the California framework):
Misrepresentation (by assumption)
Knowledge that the representation is false (by assumption)
Intent to deceive (inferrable from his repeated offers)
Justifiable reliance (duh...)
Resulting damages (literally, anything I did in furtherance of an MDC challenge, or anything said about me on the forum.)


What am I missing?

So if there is a system in place to discredit, deny or inhibit applicants from getting a fair shot at the Million, then fraud may exist?

[William Smith]

So if there is a system in place to discredit, deny or inhibit applicants from getting a fair shot at the Million, then fraud may exist?

Possibly. Do you intend to demonstrate these cases?

[drkitten]

So if there is a system in place to discredit, deny or inhibit applicants from getting a fair shot at the Million, then fraud may exist?

Not if Randi has not (knowingly) made any false statements upon which applicants have relied.

In fact, I'm fairly confident that there is such a system in place. It's called Reality. That's also the system in place to discredit people who think that leprechauns live in their sock drawer and that the dishwasher works because magic unicorns come in and pee all over the dirty dishes to make them sparkly clean.

I'm afraid that in any system where Reality exists you will not have a fair shot at proving that unicorn pee is the secret to Whirlpool's success.

But since Randi states, truthfully, that he doesn't believe that it's possible for you to prove that unicorn pee makes dishes clean but will pay you a million dollars if you can demonstrate him to be wrong,.... no, there is no fraud.

[drkitten]

I've never claimed to be a Lawyer like so many here on this forum do, but I do believe the terms are correct.

Yes. Like so many of your other beliefs, this one is also entirely unsupported.

Why bother with a class action suit when you can just win directly as an individual plaintiff? A single plaintiff who showed that Randi acted fraudulently could sue and win.

[The Professor]

Yes... The terms are correct. A class action suit would be fair to all those involved and not just one person. I think that's why the allow them.

[drkitten]

A class action suit would be fair to all those involved and not just one person.

Nonsense.

Class action suits are appropriate when the number of affected people is too large for individual resolution. How many applicants do you think there have been?

There is no reason to go for class action certification; it would be much "fairer" for the applicants to sue as individuals -- they'd get much more of the money that way because of the reduced legal expenses.

Except for the fact that they haven't got a marshmallow's chance in Hell of actually winning a dime, because they have no case.

[NoZed Avenger]

I quite agree that the Professor's innovative use of terms like "Class Action" do not inspire confidence. And I wouldn't put my law degree up against your prize for spelling from third grade.

But my understanding is that fraud is grounds for a civil suit and can include punitive damages. Stipulating for argument that the MDC is offered in bad faith (and that Randi knows it), I think one has a passable fraud case there (I'm using the California framework):
Misrepresentation (by assumption)
Knowledge that the representation is false (by assumption)
Intent to deceive (inferrable from his repeated offers)
Justifiable reliance (duh...)
Resulting damages (literally, anything I did in furtherance of an MDC challenge, or anything said about me on the forum.)


What am I missing?

Justifiable reliance/taking action to your detriment and damages.

This is beside the point that the funds have been shown to exist, and I cannot frankly believe anyone thinks they'll be able to offer enough evidence to get around summary judgment on the other elements.

And there would never be a class action with so few (and potentially dissimilar) claimants, regardless.

Let's just say I'll be happy to take the other side of this hypothetical case ten times out of six.

[jimtron]

Yes... The terms are correct. A class action suit would be fair to all those involved and not just one person. I think that's why the allow them.Prof: why don't you contact a lawyer and take action then?

[fromdownunder]

I've never claimed to be a Lawyer


And you have provided absolutely convincing evidence of the fact that you are utterly ignorant of the most simple concepts of law from the following statement you made

probably taken from the estate of the JREF.



Oh well, it is the sort of error a 10 year old may make. Perhaps you are the one who should learn what some simple leagal concepts actually mean.

Norm

[shadron]

The MDC is the "Cash Cow" of the JREF. Because of it they receive donations and lecture fees. Several hundred thousand a year.

If it is proven a "Sham" as some have stated, then taking money for it would be Fraudulent.

Ooooooh, at that rate there are a lot of people who should be ducking right about now. Shams, it seems, are a dime a dozen. Don't ask for whom the bell tolls...

The fact that the MDC is established by the JREF has no bearing on the JREF's earnings; the contracts signed for such earnings (speaker agreements and so forth) do not include any assumptions about the the MDC as part of the agreement, I'm absolutely sure. Without that there is no case of such as you mention.

Fraud is a criminal tort with a set definition in law and considerable (to put it mildly) case law backup. If you (as a prosecutor of standing of some kind) can prove it, then the penalties in law apply: fines, imprisonment, etc.

A civil case based on a finding of misrepresentation (not fraud per se, but a breach of equity) might be a possibility, but the burden of proof, while perhaps milder than that of a criminal case, will still rest upon the plaintiff, and judgements would be up to the court.

A finding of breach of contract is not possible until a contract exists. That is what happens when both parties agree to a protocol. Without the agreement, this is not a possible path of assault.

[Jackalgirl]

I've been told that Randi, in all these years, has NEVER signed such an agreement.
Please show me where he has and I'll stand corrected.

Who told you that Randi has never signed an agreement? Who specifically? What exactly did this person say?

Are you honestly suggesting that those applicants who actually were tested did so without an accepted, signed application and protocol? That's quite a claim. Do you have any proof? Such as a scan of such an application -- one that made it through the entire claim and protocol process and one belonging to someone who was actually tested -- lacking a signature?

I'm not talking about your application. You failed to provide an adequate application, and your application was rejected. I'm talking about one that was accepted, including the protocol.

[Azrael 5]

Who told you that Randi has never signed an agreement? Who specifically? What exactly did this person say?

Are you honestly suggesting that those applicants who actually were tested did so without an accepted, signed application and protocol? That's quite a claim. Do you have any proof? Such as a scan of such an application -- one that made it through the entire claim and protocol process and one belonging to someone who was actually tested -- lacking a signature?

I'm not talking about your application. You failed to provide an adequate application, and your application was rejected. I'm talking about one that was accepted, including the protocol.

Asking for proof is rather ridiculous of The PRofessor. Of course he doesn't have any. It's just more of his "belief" that the MDC is a sham, purely based on the fact no-one has yet won it. Including him.;)

[MattC]

The fact that the MDC is established by the JREF has no bearing on the JREF's earnings;

Yes and no.

The Challenge proper has no bearing at all on the JREF earnings - it's a program that does not itself garner revenue, so really it's a money and time sink for the JREF. The million dollars itself, on the other hand, very much has a bearing on the JREF earnings, as it generates capital for the organization.

~ Matt

[Limbo]

What happens years down the road if and when parapsychology is vindicated and psychic functioning is accepted by the establishment and by culture? People are going to wonder how Randi managed to keep his million for so long.

That will be when the challenge is investigated, and true colors will be revealed.

[Pogo]

What happens years down the road if and when parapsychology is vindicated and psychic functioning is accepted by the establishment and by culture? People are going to wonder how Randi managed to keep his million for so long.

That will be when the challenge is investigated, and true colors will be revealed.Investigated by time travelers?

[Limbo]

lol

[Cavemonster]

Yes and no.

The Challenge proper has no bearing at all on the JREF earnings - it's a program that does not itself garner revenue, so really it's a money and time sink for the JREF. The million dollars itself, on the other hand, very much has a bearing on the JREF earnings, as it generates capital for the organization.

~ Matt

Well, to that extent, the only person who could bring a fraud charge would be whoever donated the money for the prize fund.

[Gr8wight]

What happens years down the road if and when parapsychology is vindicated and psychic functioning is accepted by the establishment and by culture? People are going to wonder how Randi managed to keep his million for so long.

That will be when the challenge is investigated, and true colors will be revealed.

And we can all make up our own minds whether or not to hold our breath waiting for that eventuality. Count me on the 'I'll keep breathing, thank you" side of the issue.

[Wowbagger]

What happens years down the road if and when parapsychology is vindicated and psychic functioning is accepted by the establishment and by culture? If we assume that would be the case, we would also assume that parapsychology could produce results that are self evident of the phenomena.

That has not happened, yet. So, that is why Randi has kept the Million Dollars, so far.

(My soon-to-be-revealed book review will get into more of the details. I am writing the final draft during parts of this weekend, so expect it sometime during the next week.)

[jimtron]

What happens years down the road if and when parapsychology is vindicated and psychic functioning is accepted by the establishment and by culture? People are going to wonder how Randi managed to keep his million for so long.

That will be when the challenge is investigated, and true colors will be revealed.

If these things are real and testable, I sincerely believe someone could win the MDC. And regardless of the Challenge, they could be tested and demonstrated elsewhere.

It's pretty simple: If the MDC is fraudulent, let's see the evidence. If someone really has paranormal abilities, they should apply for the MDC and/or demonstrate the abilities elsewhere for the world to see. For some reason, despite all the hot air, the evidence has not been forthcoming.

[William Smith]

If these things are real and testable, I sincerely believe someone could win the MDC. And regardless of the Challenge, they could be tested and demonstrated elsewhere.

It's pretty simple: If the MDC is fraudulent, let's see the evidence. If someone really has paranormal abilities, they should apply for the MDC and/or demonstrate the abilities elsewhere for the world to see. For some reason, despite all the hot air, the evidence has not been forthcoming.

Excellent post.



Slightly OT: Dr. Sandro de Rosa has claimed he can demonstrate the benefits of EFT. Limbo and others, I invite you to the discussion in this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=138360) and help Dr. de Rosa move to a preliminary test.

Because that we be something we can achieve now.

[Limbo]

If these things are real and testable, I sincerely believe someone could win the MDC.


Why?

Read The Trickster and the Paranormal (http://www.amazon.com/Trickster-Paranormal-George-P-Hansen/dp/1401000827/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1240680655&sr=8-1)

[jimtron]

Why?

Read The Trickster and the Paranormal (http://www.amazon.com/Trickster-Paranormal-George-P-Hansen/dp/1401000827/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1240680655&sr=8-1)

I'll consider reading that. Are you making the point that paranormal powers aren't testable?

[hcmom]

What happens years down the road if and when parapsychology is vindicated and psychic functioning is accepted by the establishment and by culture? People are going to wonder how Randi managed to keep his million for so long.

That will be when the challenge is investigated, and true colors will be revealed.

What true colors? Randi isn't saying that the powers don't exist. He's offering a million dollars for proof that they do.

[Moochie]

Are these writers the "People" who Think that random (and Usually inappropriate) "Capitals" and quotation Marks make things more "Impressive"?

The writing style is redolent of the writing in those hilarious emails I get from time to time, inviting me to help someone liberate a fortune from some African country in return for a big slice of the pie. There are apparently hundreds if not thousands of such captive fortunes in Africa, just waiting for a greedy bastard volunteer to help free them.

The claims made in those emails are about as reliable as the notion that the MDC is a sham.


M.

[Limbo]

I'll consider reading that. Are you making the point that paranormal powers aren't testable?


The introduction to the book might help you consider whether to read it or not.

http://www.tricksterbook.com/Intro.htm

As for your question, I think it may very well be that paranormal powers aren't testable in the way Randi and his challenge wants. I think he may very well know that. If he does, then he is dishonestly presenting the challenge as something significant, something definitive, something relevant, something more than a mere publicity stunt and rhetorical device.

If he doesn't know that, then he is ignorant. Either way, his challenge can't serve as any sort of paranormal litmus test. I don't know whether he realizes this or not. It seems like he talks out of both sides of his mouth. He admits his challenge is meaningless when his back is against the wall:

"I agree, the million-dollar challenge is not, in any way, a "meaningful test," nor have I ever represented that it is." -James Randi (http://monkeywah.typepad.com/paranormalia/2008/12/reply-to-james-randi.html#comments)

Yes it isn't a meaningful test. But I think he has indeed presented it as meaningful, perhaps fraudulently? Either way, his fans sure seem to think it is meaningful. You guys are being accidentally mislead or intentionally deceived. One of the two.

You guys really need to turn your skepticism toward Randi for a change.

[jimtron]

The introduction to the book might help you consider whether to read it or not.

http://www.tricksterbook.com/Intro.htm

As for your question, I think it may very well be that paranormal powers aren't testable in the way Randi and his challenge wants. I think he may very well know that. If he does, then he is dishonestly presenting the challenge as something significant, something definitive, something relevant, something more than a mere publicity stunt and rhetorical device.

If he doesn't know that, then he is ignorant. Either way, his challenge can't serve as any sort of paranormal litmus test. I don't know whether he realizes this or not. It seems like he talks out of both sides of his mouth. He admits his challenge is meaningless when his back is against the wall:

"I agree, the million-dollar challenge is not, in any way, a "meaningful test," nor have I ever represented that it is." -James Randi (http://monkeywah.typepad.com/paranormalia/2008/12/reply-to-james-randi.html#comments)

Yes it isn't a meaningful test. But I think he has indeed presented it as meaningful, perhaps fraudulently? Either way, his fans sure seem to think it is meaningful. You guys are being accidentally mislead or intentionally deceived. One of the two.

You guys really need to turn your skepticism toward Randi for a change.

I can't speak for Randi, but my impression is that he's making an offer: demonstrate the paranormal under test conditions, and I'll give you a million dollars--take it or leave it. AFAIK he hasn't made the claim that because no one has won it, he's positive that paranormal abilities don't exist.

Also: if paranormal abilities can't be tested, how do you know they don't only exist in your imagination--how do you know they are real?

[Limbo]

I can't speak for Randi, but my impression is that he's making an offer: demonstrate the paranormal under test conditions, and I'll give you a million dollars--take it or leave it. AFAIK he hasn't made the claim that because no one has won it, he's positive that paranormal abilities don't exist.


Be skeptical of your impressions.

Also: if paranormal abilities can't be tested, how do you know they don't only exist in your imagination--how do you know they are real?


I didn't say they can't be tested. Parapsychologists manage to test them all the time, under psi-conducive conditions.

I suspect that Randis challenge is designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible.

[William Smith]

...
I suspect that Randis challenge is designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible.

Can you point to more than your suspicion, Limbo?

Preferably to one of the - mutually and individually agreed upon - conducted tests?



Mods: Please allow the drift for now.

[Modesty78]

I didn't say they can't be tested. Parapsychologists manage to test them all the time, under psi-conducive conditions.

I suspect that Randis challenge is designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible.
So have any of these parapsychologists managed to detect paranormal abilities? If yes, what are they? And howcome we only hear of the deluded ones?

[Limbo]

Can you point to more than your suspicion, Limbo?

Preferably to one of the - mutually and individually agreed upon - conducted tests?



Mods: Please allow the drift for now.


Point to more than my suspicion? Sure. Can I point to something a skeptic would probably accept? No.

I point to variables that parapsychological research suggests can impact psi performance. Psychological, physiological, and environmental variables. These variables can be manipulated, and would-be applicants are probably unaware of them.

I point to the the experimenter psi effect - if psi is real then the unconscious psi of anyone and everyone involved in a procedure or challenge or experiment (even people who only read about it, and yes even the skeptics) can influence the results in a way consistent with their desire and expectations, the influence can even be retro-causal. There have been parapsychological experiments designed to test the impact of the experimenter psi effect.

[shadron]

Yes and no.

The Challenge proper has no bearing at all on the JREF earnings - it's a program that does not itself garner revenue, so really it's a money and time sink for the JREF. The million dollars itself, on the other hand, very much has a bearing on the JREF earnings, as it generates capital for the organization.

~ Matt

That is true, but it is implicit - it raises interest in the organization, but it is not an explicit requirement of that interest, a least not one recognized by law.

I also contradict your first assertion as well - it is in an interest bearing account, and the interest does support JREF programs. That, too, however, is not an explicit component of any promise.

In short, it has PR value to the JREF, but that doesnt make the JREF liable for fraud just because of that value.

[Limbo]

So have any of these parapsychologists managed to detect paranormal abilities? If yes, what are they? And how come we only hear of the deluded ones?


Yes parapsychologists have managed to detect paranormal abilities.

Where are they? Parapsychological journals, books, articles, lectures, text-books, etc.

How come you only hear of the deluded ones? I guess that might be because you guys get your info from Randi, skeptical sources, ect. Do you think sources like that are going to tell you about it? No frakking way. We're in an ideological war here. They aren't going to tell you anything they don't want you to know. They aren't going to encourage you to listen to both sides. That's just human nature.

[Moochie]

If these things are real and testable, I sincerely believe someone could win the MDC. And regardless of the Challenge, they could be tested and demonstrated elsewhere.

It's pretty simple: If the MDC is fraudulent, let's see the evidence. If someone really has paranormal abilities, they should apply for the MDC and/or demonstrate the abilities elsewhere for the world to see. For some reason, despite all the hot air, the evidence has not been forthcoming.


Yeah, this is what I find ridiculous: No one is stopping anyone from freely displaying their supernatural powers anywhere. So why aren't the worldwide media deluged with reliable evidence of this?

I am reminded of the lovely old poem:

How do I con thee?
Let me count the ways...



M.

[shadron]

I think it may very well be that paranormal powers aren't testable in the way Randi and his challenge wants. I think he may very well know that. If he does, then he is dishonestly presenting the challenge as something significant, something definitive, something relevant, something more than a mere publicity stunt and rhetorical device.

No. Randi has no need to prove one way or the other what he knows or believes. He places the bet; it is up to others to meet it or leave it. Most apparently choose to leave it - their choice, not Randi's. You need to demonstrate that inability to be tested is real before you even begin to have an argument here.

If he doesn't know that, then he is ignorant. Either way, his challenge can't serve as any sort of paranormal litmus test.Bull. Paranormal powers either exist as a reality or they don't. If you can't prove it scientifically given a $1M incentive, then it it doesn't exist; the only alternative is that you (as a challenger) are incompetent.

I don't know whether he realizes this or not.

Assuming you are right, which you've only asserted and haven't demonstrated, let alone proven...

It seems like he talks out of both sides of his mouth. He admits his challenge is meaningless when his back is against the wall:

"I agree, the million-dollar challenge is not, in any way, a "meaningful test," nor have I ever represented that it is." -James Randi (http://monkeywah.typepad.com/paranormalia/2008/12/reply-to-james-randi.html#comments)

Yes it isn't a meaningful test. But I think he has indeed presented it as meaningful, perhaps fraudulently? Either way, his fans sure seem to think it is meaningful. You guys are being accidentally mislead or intentionally deceived. One of the two.

You guys really need to turn your skepticism toward Randi for a change.Sophistry will get you nowhere. In the words of Hughie, "Put up or shut up."

[not daSkeptic]

We're in an ideological war here.

We are? Pray tell, what is the ideology of science?

[Modesty78]

Yes parapsychologists have managed to detect paranormal abilities.

Where are they? Parapsychological journals, books, articles, lectures, text-books, etc.

How come you only hear of the deluded ones? I guess that might be because you guys get your info from Randi, skeptical sources, ect. Do you think sources like that are going to tell you about it? No frakking way. We're in an ideological war here. They aren't going to tell you anything they don't want you to know. They aren't going to encourage you to listen to both sides. That's just human nature.

How dare you assume what I do or do not listen to? I have yet to see anything from any psychic, dowser, EFT-practitioner etc, which I would accept as being incontrovertible evidence of paranormal abilities.

That does not mean I deny the possibility of someone actually having such abilities, I just think they should step up and show'em off. No one with any sort of credibility or for that matter accuracy has done that.

[Limbo]

We are? Pray tell, what is the ideology of science?


Your question is flawed.

[Limbo]

How dare you assume what I do or do not listen to? I have yet to see anything from any psychic, dowser, EFT-practitioner etc, which I would accept as being incontrovertible evidence of paranormal abilities.


Looks to me like you might be looking in the wrong places. You're listening to psychics, dowsers, practitioners, etc. You should be listening to researchers instead and reading books like this:

The Trickster and the Paranormal
The Parapsychology Revolution
An Introduction to Parapsychology
Outside the Gates of Science
Irreducible Mind
Entangled Minds
The End of Materialism
Extraordinary Knowing

For starters.

That does not mean I deny the possibility of someone actually having such abilities, I just think they should step up and show'em off. No one with any sort of credibility or for that matter accuracy has done that.


You think that because you don't fully see the relationship between the psi of the individual and society. The variables that influence the psi of the individual are many and some of it comes from ALL OF US, at the unconscious collective psychic level and at the cultural level. No one persons psi is an isolated island. No one has full control of their psi. That's why it's sporadic and unpredictable. Everyone and everything is connected like a web.

[not daSkeptic]

Your question is flawed.

Care to elaborate?

[Limbo]

Care to elaborate?


No.

[not daSkeptic]

No.

In that case, I must assume you just don't want to answer it.

ETA: See, this is what skepticism is all about. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that my question was indeed flawed. I was skeptical of myself. Are you willing to do the same?

[Limbo]

I'm sure one of your fellow skeptics could answer it for you, better than I could. Is there a skeptic volunteer who will point out his flaw?

I want to devote my time to other lines of conversation, daSkeptic.

[Moochie]

It seems to me that it is all too easy to fall into the traps set by the woo economy, whereby accredited researchers produce whispers of evidence for the existence of the paranormal with a felicity that would make one's head spin.

Alas, when pressed, those so hoodwinked by practitioners of the green (as in money) arts resort to the time and tried fall-back of asserting that the paranormal exists outside the realms of space and time, and are therefore well outside the reach of our mundane minds and measurability, just like God.


M.

[zooloo]

I'm sure one of your fellow skeptics could answer it for you, better than I could. Is there a skeptic volunteer who will point out his flaw?

I want to devote my time to other lines of conversation, daSkeptic.
Obviously the flaw was expecting a straight answer from you.

Glad to help.

[William Smith]

Point to more than my suspicion? Sure.

Do it. Remember, we were talking about the MDC and the respective tests that were done. You said those tests were "[...]designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible."

Can I point to something a skeptic would probably accept? No.

Your question is flawed. Invalid assumption. Please try again.


I point to variables that parapsychological research suggests can impact psi performance. Psychological, physiological, and environmental variables. These variables can be manipulated, and would-be applicants are probably unaware of them.

I point to the the experimenter psi effect - if psi is real then the unconscious psi of anyone and everyone involved in a procedure or challenge or experiment (even people who only read about it, and yes even the skeptics) can influence the results in a way consistent with their desire and expectations, the influence can even be retro-causal. There have been parapsychological experiments designed to test the impact of the experimenter psi effect.

You do remember we were talking about the MDC and the respective tests that were done.

Please refrain from using strawmen and simply explain to us where the JREF MDC tests (plural) were "[...]designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible."

Please also do remember that said tests were mutually agreed upon. All applicants have considered these tests a fair evaluation of their claims.

[fromdownunder]

The writing style is redolent of the writing in those hilarious emails I get from time to time, inviting me to help someone liberate a fortune from some African country in return for a big slice of the pie. There are apparently hundreds if not thousands of such captive fortunes in Africa, just waiting for a greedy bastard volunteer to help free them.

The claims made in those emails are about as reliable as the notion that the MDC is a sham.


M.

[Off Topic]

What makes you think that those offers are fake? Look what I go just the other day, and yes it is a genuine currency note.


http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg10/tonyevans1/Zin100Tnote.jpg

[/off topic]

Norm

[Limbo]

This is a little OT but do you guys want to know how I would beat the million dollar challenge? I would gather together hundreds of experienced long-term meditators. I would house them all in the same custom-built facility and I would staff the facility with scientists in various fields and all the equipment they would need. Including parapsychology. The meditators would practice meditating together and thus learn to combine their psychic strength in experiments and tests. Groups of long-term experienced meditators, working individually and collectively, would serve as test subjects for parapsychological experiments in the facility. Non-meditators would serve in control groups.

Then I would simply invite Randi and JREF over and ask him to work with the staff on designing a test for the challenge. There would be no money on the line, if the challenge was beaten it would go to charity. Randi could chose the charity. That way the pressure of money doesn't factor in. The meditators would ideally remain anonymous, so the pressure of fame can't factor in either.

[William Smith]

This is a little OT but do you guys want to know how I would beat the million dollar challenge?
...

Perhaps at some other point.

Now, I would want to know your explanation to this though: Where the JREF MDC tests (plural) were, as you said "[...]designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible."

[Limbo]

Perhaps at some other point.

Now, I would want to know your explanation to this though: Where the JREF MDC tests (plural) were, as you said "[...]designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible."


I suspect that Randis challenge is designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible. What I mean is, having money and world-wide fame on the line is likely to psychologically inhibit the psi of the applicant.

That's why I think the scenario in post 78 is a better way to go.

[William Smith]

I suspect that Randis challenge is designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible. What I mean is, having money and world-wide fame on the line is likely to psychologically inhibit the psi of the applicant.

That's why I think the scenario in post 78 is a better way to go.

You simply repeated your opinion. That is not good enough.

I'll ask again: Can you show us where your suspicion - "[...]Randis challenge is designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible.[...]" - has any foundation in reality? Which tests in particular do you mean?

[Limbo]

You simply repeated your opinion. That is not good enough.

I'll ask again: Can you show us where your suspicion - "[...]Randis challenge is designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible.[...]" - has any foundation in reality? Which tests in particular do you mean?


If you can direct me to detailed reports of each and every test JREF has ever done, I'll see if I can spot and point out anything that might be psi-inhibitive.

Until then, why don't you comment on my idea in post 78. Would you oppose or support such an effort? Why or why not?

[William Smith]

If you can direct me to detailed reports of each and every test JREF has ever done, I'll see if I can spot and point out anything that might be psi-inhibitive.

No. the onus of proof is on the one who makes the statement. I should not do the research for you.


Until then, why don't you comment on my idea in post 78. Would you oppose or support such an effort? Why or why not?

Strawman. And OT.

[Limbo]

No. the onus of proof is on the one who makes the statement. I should not do the research for you.


Proof? I never said I had proof. I said I have suspicions.

Strawman. And OT.


Fine. I'll make a thread about it.

:D

[William Smith]

If you can direct me to detailed reports of each and every test JREF has ever done, I'll see if I can spot and point out anything that might be psi-inhibitive.
...

I also point you to the fact that none of the actually tested claimants have reported anything remotely fitting your suspicion.

Off the top of my head:

Rosemary Hunter.
Mike Maggio.
Achau Nguyen.
Hans-Peter Borer.
Angela Patel.
Carina Landin.

[MattC]

Well, to that extent, the only person who could bring a fraud charge would be whoever donated the money for the prize fund.

Not precisely.

There is a difference, for financial purposes, between the Million-Dollar Challenge (referencing the program built around testing applicants) and the million dollar prize money (the actual winnings to be awarded to a successful applicant).

The program itself (meaning the various applications, filing, processing, researching, and so on) makes the JREF no money at all, and indeed costs them money (for filing, processing, etc). However, the million dollar prize money is an asset to the foundation proper. It has been invested (and rather well I must admit) and generates a certain sum of revenue (I believe without checking the 990 that it earned $69,400 in the 2007-2008 fiscal year).

So, to answer the original question, no one could not 'win' the challenge proper by suing in court. This really wouldn't be your goal however, you would want to sue the JREF and acquire the prize money - regardless of winning the challenge. To actually sue, you would need to have very solid answers to the four points that drkitten posted.

~ Matt

[William Smith]

Proof? I never said I had proof. I said I have suspicions.
...

OK.

Would you consider to look at the actual facts of the tests along with the statements of the tested applicants and measure them against your suspicions or should I just make your quote my new sig?

[Darat]

I suspect that Randis challenge is designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible. What I mean is, having money and world-wide fame on the line is likely to psychologically inhibit the psi of the applicant.

That's why I think the scenario in post 78 is a better way to go.

Yet in no other human endeavour does such pressure inhibit human achievement - strange that. Indeed in many other endeavours it would seem to be a boast to human achievement.

[The Professor]

Who told you that Randi has never signed an agreement? Who specifically? What exactly did this person say?

Are you honestly suggesting that those applicants who actually were tested did so without an accepted, signed application and protocol? That's quite a claim. Do you have any proof? Such as a scan of such an application -- one that made it through the entire claim and protocol process and one belonging to someone who was actually tested -- lacking a signature?

I'm not talking about your application. You failed to provide an adequate application, and your application was rejected. I'm talking about one that was accepted, including the protocol.

A HUGE LIE !!!!

My application WAS accepted.( I had thought more of you jackalgirl)

So OK ... Show me ONE TIME that Randi signed such an agreement.

You say he has ... Then prove it.

Do it Please !!!!

[drkitten]

My application WAS accepted.


The official correspondence (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=122607) says otherwise.

[fromdownunder]

A HUGE LIE !!!!

My application WAS accepted.( I had thought more of you jackalgirl)



Let's look at the record

Mr. Koenig has applied for the Challenge with the claim that he will be able, on October 31st, 2008, to record instances of Electronic Voice Phenomenon (the voices of the dead) in Lake Helen, Florida.

I have reviewed your Challenge application and, from what I am seeing, your claim would not qualify for the Challenge as yet.


http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=122607

See, TP. unlike the Magic Cafe, threads do not simply get disappeared when they become too embarrasing to somebody. The record of your attempts to apply, including your marathon thread on the Forum will be here for a long, long time as will the memories of those who participated in it.

You have got to stop thinking with a Magic Cafe mentality where things that you don't like simply become Orwellian un-threads.

Norm

[Jackalgirl]

A HUGE LIE !!!!

My application WAS accepted.( I had thought more of you jackalgirl)

So OK ... Show me ONE TIME that Randi signed such an agreement.

You say he has ... Then prove it.

Do it Please !!!!


<sigh> Dave. Dave Dave Dave Dave Dave. Once again, you show that you do not understand the process, which anyone capable of reading should be able to comprehend. I think it's obvious by now that you do not want to understand, because understanding would obviate your argument, which you hold precious. You are willfully ignorant. I also knew that you would deliberately misunderstand what I said.

I said:

Are you honestly suggesting that those applicants who actually were tested did so without an accepted, signed application and protocol?

Emphasis mine, since you are dead set on only picking out what you want to see instead of actually reading (or are just simply incapable of basic comprehension).

The process goes like this:

1) You send in an application.
2) JREF accepts the application as testable, or rejects it as untestable (or rejects it because it does not apply according to the rules, or you didn't follow the rules to begin with). This part of the process often includes some attempt to nail down what the actual claim is -- and a clear understanding by both parties of what the claim is is crucial to the rest of the process. The JREF will not accept the application without a clear statement of the claim. You'll remember that the JREF did not accept your application until you came up with a clear claim (that I, in fact, helped you with).

Here's the part that you don't want to understand, and I know you'll refuse (or be unable) to understand it, so I'll write it in bolding. Mind you, I'm not writing this for you, because you're unwilling or capable of comprehending this part. I'm writing this for other members of the viewing audience, who have actual comprehension skills and/or are functioning without the pathetically obvious ulterior motive that drives you:

At this point, the JREF has simply accepted your claim, and has provisionally accepted your application. They will not sign the application at this point because THE PROCESS IS NOT COMPLETE. ACCEPTED APPLICATION != SIGNED AGREEMENT (aka CONTRACT)

3) JREF now begins to negotiate with you regarding any details that need hammering out. In particular, this phase usually is the part where the details of the protocol are worked out (in detail).
4) If you and the JREF cannot come to a mutually agreeable understanding of exactly what the protocol will entail, as well as the standards of success/failure, your file is closed.
5) If, and only if you CAN come to an agreement, and both are completely clear upon and agree to both a protocol (including steps, participants, recording method[s], location and time, etc) and the standards of success/failure, the JREF will sign the application and formally accept it.

Your application was provisionally accepted. Then, during the protocol phase, it became patently obvious that you were only involved in order to use the MDC to gain fame, and that you were clearly, obviously not interested in any protocol that would not allow you to cheat. In short, your whole involvement in the process was in bad faith, and the JREF closed your file. Your application was never signed because the entire process was never even close to being complete, and in fact could never BE complete because you were willfully and purposefully sabotaging the effort from the very beginning.

You keep making these claims about the JREF as if EVERY claim was handled in the same way YOURS was*. Look at Gzuz's list. That is a list of people who, unlike you, were not obvious con artists and fraudsters from the get-go. THEY managed to actually negotiate through the entire process, and in fact should possess fully signed and accepted applications (and protocols). It's up to YOU to prove that they participated in the demonstration without one, since that is in fact YOUR CLAIM.

*Every fradulent claim should, however, be handled like yours was. Only I imagine the JREF will (or I hope they will) show a great deal less patience with obvious con men such as yourself in the future.

[The Professor]

Let's look at the record






http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=122607

See, TP. unlike the Magic Cafe, threads do not simply get disappeared when they become too embarrasing to somebody. The record of your attempts to apply, including your marathon thread on the Forum will be here for a long, long time as will the memories of those who participated in it.

You have got to stop thinking with a Magic Cafe mentality where things that you don't like simply become Orwellian un-threads.

Norm

Looks like you don't know the difference between the word CLAIM and APPLICATION!!!!

And actually my CLAIM was even accepted ...

So you are TOTALLY WRONG (On BOTH counts :))!!!!!

[Wowbagger]

Didn't we settle this question on page 1?

[jimtron]

Prof: a friendly suggestion: how about a little less talk, and a bit more walk? Why don't you sue the MDC, if you think it's fraudulent. Also, put us skeptics in our place by proving your paranormal ability. Forget about taking the MDC. Go to a university or media outlet and demonstrate talking to the dead or whatever, only here's the key thing: do it in a way that rules out magic tricks or other non-paranormal methods. That would impress up and show that us skeptics were wrong.

It's up to you, but the posts you're making here are thoroughly unconvincing, in terms of your paranormal ability, and demonstrating that Randi and/or the MDC is bogus.

[The Professor]

I seem to recall Randi once stated that if anyone could prove, in a court of law, that his Million Dollar Challenge was a fraud, they could then win the Millions dollars, even if they do not have a paranormal claim.

Could anyone confirm this, and point to any references, if possible?

Not that I plan to do that. I was just curious, 'cause the topic comes up every now and then.

Bottom line. No one can win THE MILLION until it has been absorbed into the JREF itself. At that time a court case/ monetary decision, could be levied against the entire property of the JREF including the million.

[jimtron]

Professor: Do you truly have a paranormal ability? Can you communicate with the dead, for real? Can you record the voices of people who have deceased?

[The Professor]

Professor: Do you truly have a paranormal ability? Can you communicate with the dead, for real? Can you record the voices of people who have deceased?

To answer your question ....

I, like millions of others here on planet earth, believe that EVP's may be REAL!!!!

Many people claim to actually hear voices (EVP's) that are not scientifically explainable.

I associate myself with them.

That is why I am upset that the MDC may be a fraud as the thread starter brings into question.

[RoboTimbo]

Many people claim to actually hear voices (EVP's) that are not scientifically explainable.

I associate myself with them.

You aren't scientifically explainable?

[jimtron]

To answer your question ....

I, like millions of others here on planet earth, believe that EVP's may be REAL!!!!

Many people claim to actually hear voices (EVP's) that are not scientifically explainable.

I associate myself with them.

That is why I am upset that the MDC may be a fraud as the thread starter brings into question.

EVP exists, however it is not evidence of the paranormal. You can play a recording that may sound like voices to some people. There are scientific explanations for that. Where is the evidence that EVP has anything to do with the paranormal?

From the Wikipedia EVP article: Electronic voice phenomena (sing. electronic voice phenomenon), abbreviated as EVPs (sing. EVP), are electronically captured non-vocal sounds that resemble voices. Some people claim these sounds are of paranormal origin[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voice_phenomena#cite_note-0). Others claim there are natural explanations such as apophenia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia) (finding significance in insignificant phenomena), auditory pareidolia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia) (interpreting random sounds as voices in their own language), equipment artefacts, and simple hoaxes. Recordings of EVP are often created from background sound by increasing the gain (i.e. sensitvity) of the recording equipment.If you or someone else could go into a controlled environment (not a graveyard at midnight), and cause voices to appear on a blank tape--then you might have a protocol.

Also from the EVP Wikipedia article--gosh, this is intersting:
Natural explanations

There are a number of straightforward scientific explanations that can account for why some listeners to the static on audio devices may believe they hear voices, including radio interference and the tendency of the human brain to recognize patterns in random stimuli.[32] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voice_phenomena#cite_note-skepdic1-31) Some recordings may be hoaxes created by frauds or pranksters.[32] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voice_phenomena#cite_note-skepdic1-31)

[The Professor]

Wiki is written by folks like you and me ... Perhaps you should find a better source?
Don't worry ... I've made the same mistake before. :)

EVP is a Paranormal Event, as I've stated.
Thanks
Dave

That is one reason they say the MDC is a fraud ... They change the true meaning of words.

[jsfisher]

That is one reason they say the MDC is a fraud ... They change the true meaning of words.


Innuendo much?

[Wowbagger]

Wiki is written by folks like you and me ... Perhaps you should find a better source? The article is sourced. Read some of those.

The point is: How can we know EVP is really paranormal, and not the result of other, well-understood phenomena, such as audio paredolia, etc.? What test would you propose to rule all those other ideas out?

[William Smith]

The article is sourced. Read some of those.

The point is: How can we know EVP is really paranormal, and not the result of other, well-understood phenomena, such as audio paredolia, etc.? What test would you propose to rule all those other ideas out?

Discussing The Professor's claim is OT.

His claim, his actions and his application have been discussed - at great length.

Result. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4240606#post4240606)

[Wowbagger]

Discussing The Professor's claim is OT.
Yeah, fine.

But, if he had such a test, it could be evidence of fraud on Randi's part, and something The Pro could build a case on. And, that would be on topic!

So, I guess you're right: No test means no claim of fraud. And, the discussion would have to continue on some other thread.

[Here_to_learn]

That is why I am upset that the MDC may be a fraud as the thread starter brings into question.How do you get that out of the OP? I can't see anyway to read that post in the way you indicate.

[drkitten]

How do you get that out of the OP?

It's easy enough to get out of a question what you yourself bring to it.

[Wowbagger]

Just to be clear, the opening post was not meant to call the legitimacy of the challenge into question. It was a purely hypothetical question.

I doubt anyone could effectively build, let alone win, such a case. The only people who seem to be crying "fraud", right now, are the folks who can't even explain what they can do with their paranormal powers!

[jimtron]

Wiki is written by folks like you and me ... Perhaps you should find a better source?
Don't worry ... I've made the same mistake before. :)


Which parts, if any, did the Wikipedia article get wrong? Could you recommend a better source for accurate EVP info?

[MattC]

Bottom line. No one can win THE MILLION until it has been absorbed into the JREF itself. At that time a court case/ monetary decision, could be levied against the entire property of the JREF including the million.

This is a financial question, and therefore it is beneficial to direct a viewer to the JREF's financial reports (the 990 form) found here: http://www2.guidestar.org/ReportNonProfit.aspx?ein=65-0649443&Mode=GxLite&lid=523196&dl=True

You'll need to register an account, however this is free and is actually a very helpful service if you (like I) donate to a few non-profit organizations.

The quoted claim is worded in the language of the uncertain and the uninitiated besides, so far as I can make it out you seem to be alleging that the million dollars is technically not JREF property and therefore cannot be considered part of the JREF's asset base.

This is an inaccuracy and can be proven very simply by line 68 in the 990 form, this line contained within a section entitled "Net Assets or Fund Balances:"

68 Temporarily Restricted: 1,000,000

Now, this in no way means that the million dollars so restricted cannot be won through court order - it means that the Foundation is legally obligated not to use this million dollars save for the purpose to which it is restricted, e.g. to be given to a challenge winner.

Therefore, it is still a JREF asset in the financial sense of the term and therefore they can be forced to pay it in a court of law.

I normally add in a rider here about asking me if further questions are had, but historically you do not bother asking questions so much as you make grandiose statements that fail under the most basic of scrutinies. I would suggest you question the veracity of these voices you claim to hear.

~ Matt

[drkitten]

Bottom line. No one can win THE MILLION until it has been absorbed into the JREF itself. At that time a court case/ monetary decision, could be levied against the entire property of the JREF including the million.

Wrong. Again. It's already the property of the JREF.

Of course, money is fungible. The court doesn't care which pile a fine of million dollars is taken from -- so if a judge levied a million dollar judgment against the JREF, Randi could simply phone a wealthy friend (Penn Gillette?) and ask-pretty-please-with-cream-and-sugar. Or he could sell the house in Ft. Lauderdale and his valuable collection of French postcards. Or he could just hand over the million to satisfy the court judgment.

But, of course, what would really happen is that the court would hear your complaint, dismiss it out of hand and issue punitive sanctions against you for filing a frivolous and meritless lawsuit with no legitimate purpose except to harass and defame.

I don't know what the Florida equivalent of FRCP Rule 11 is, but if you persist on this line of behavior, you should definitely check it out. Because, by the time the dust settles, it's much more likely that you will owe a million than be owed it ....

[The Professor]

So I stand corrected if what you say is true. Are you saying that a lawsuit now could attach itself to the million? Is that what you are claiming?

[jimtron]

So I stand corrected if what you say is true. Are you saying that a lawsuit now could attach itself to the million? Is that what you are claiming?

Prof: If you think there's a legal case here, then go ahead and sue.

Dave: We seem to be going around in circles with your posts here. You're welcome to post as much as you like, but you're not convincing anyone here, as far as I know. If you really want to accomplish something, why not try one of these:

1) Take legal action against the JREF, if you think such a thing is warranted and winnable.
2) If you sincerely believe that you have paranormal abilities, demonstrate them (in a way that rules out magic tricks and mentalism effects etc) to the media, to scientists, to universities. When the world sees that you have supernatural abilities, your criticisms of Randi will mean quite a bit more.
3) Have someone you know with paranormal abilities apply for the MDC, but instead of doing it the way you did it, have them VERY CAREFULLY FOLLOW THE RULES, and look at prior applicants who have mutually agreed upon a protocol (I've heard MDC critics state or imply that it's impossible to come up with a protocol that the JREF will agree to, but that's demonstrably false--there are many examples here on the forums of applicants who have come up with accepted protocols). Then they either win the million, which would be awesome, or if the JREF pulls a fast one you can alert the media. If you have actual evidence of actual foul play that is...

As I said before, for your own sake as well as ours, how about a little more walk and a bit less talk?

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

I suspect that Randis challenge is designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible.

"Be skeptical of your impressions suspicians."

I'm sure one of your fellow skeptics could answer it for you, better than I could. Is there a skeptic volunteer who will point out his flaw?

I want to devote my time to other lines of conversation, daSkeptic.

What other conversations? His question is directly relating to a statement you made concerning the current discussion. That, good sir, is the conversation. Is it really that difficult and time-consuming to answer the question? I dare-say in the time you've spent dancing around actually having to answer the question you could have already answered the question.

I suspect that Randis challenge is designed to be as psi-inhibitive as possible. What I mean is, having money and world-wide fame on the line is likely to psychologically inhibit the psi of the applicant.

How?

[The Professor]

I do not need to take civil action against the JREF if someone else beats me to it or the government takes some kind of action if this is a Sham or Fraud as stated in the opening post.

All I have to do is get on the bandwagon after all of the challengers that feel they've been mistreated unite.

(Wonder how may times the JREF Forum has called Challengers Delusional, Stupid, or worse ... all paid to be published by the JREF itself)

I'm just waiting :)

HOWEVER .... I may apply for the JREF MDC once again :)

[jsfisher]

I do not need to take civil action against the JREF if someone else beats me to it or the government takes some kind of action if this is a Sham or Fraud...

There is certainly no basis for the government to intervene. What were you thinking?

...as stated in the opening post.

Which, of course, the opening post didn't do. What were you thinking?

All I have to do is get on the bandwagon after all of the challengers that feel they've been mistreated unite.

And who would those be?

HOWEVER .... I may apply for the JREF MDC once again :)

I'll bet you won't, at least not in any serious way.

[MattC]

So I stand corrected if what you say is true. Are you saying that a lawsuit now could attach itself to the million? Is that what you are claiming?

Yes and no.

The original question posed in the thread made no difference, or seemed confused by the differences, between the challenge proper and the million dollars behind it. Technically speaking, the Challenge can only be 'won' (using the gamesmanship sense of the word) by someone passing their final test. The million dollars behind it, on the other hand, is an asset of the JREF and can therefore be used to pay any judgment levied against them.

~ Matt

[RoboTimbo]

I do not need to take civil action against the JREF if someone else beats me to it

It doesn't appear anyone else is in the running. So you go ahead.

or the government takes some kind of action if this is a Sham or Fraud as stated in the opening post.

Anyone who thinks it was shown in the OP is delusional, stupid, or worse.

All I have to do is get on the bandwagon after all of the challengers that feel they've been mistreated unite.

You're the only one who even thinks there is a bandwagon.

(Wonder how may times the JREF Forum has called Challengers Delusional, Stupid, or worse

I'm thinking it's only the ones who are.

... all paid to be published by the JREF itself)

Well, they are a non-profit, after all.

I'm just waiting :)

For your team of writers to finish your protocol?

HOWEVER .... I may apply for the JREF MDC once again :)

Look up the words PERMANENTLY CLOSED FILE.

[William Smith]

I do not need to take civil action against the JREF if someone else beats me to it or the government takes some kind of action if this is a Sham or Fraud as stated in the opening post.

Does that mean you are too lazy to take action or that you do know you have no case? It's an Honest Question.

All I have to do is get on the bandwagon after all of the challengers that feel they've been mistreated unite.
...

Name one claimant who feels s/he has been mistreated and show us the place where s/he said so.

Note: A claimant is someone who had their application accepted and proceeded to a test.

[drkitten]

I do not need to take civil action against the JREF if someone else beats me to it or the government takes some kind of action if this is a Sham or Fraud as stated in the opening post.

All I have to do is get on the bandwagon after all of the challengers that feel they've been mistreated unite.

That's not going to happen. If someone else beats you to it, you can't get on the bandwagon (you can't join a suit in progress based on completely separate actions). And the government is not going to take any action, because there's no evidence whatsoever that it's a sham or fraud.



(Wonder how may times the JREF Forum has called Challengers Delusional, Stupid, or worse ... all paid to be published by the JREF itself)

Doesn't matter. People's comments on the JREF are their own, not the JREF's. No cause of action there.


I'm just waiting :)

I thought so. All talk, no action.


HOWEVER .... I may apply for the JREF MDC once again :)

No, you may not. Apparently you don't read the correspondence from the Foundation any more than you read the forum posts or the Challenge rules.

[DevilsAdvocate]

I do not need to take civil action against the JREF if someone else beats me to it or the government takes some kind of action if this is a Sham or Fraud as stated in the opening post.No. You don't. Just be quiet and let someone else or the government take some kind of action if this is a sham or fraud.

Shhhhhh…..

Wait…..

Quiet…..

:boxedin:

[Azrael 5]

Edited for Rule 11. The topic is whether or not someone can successfully sue the JREF for the MDC.

[The Professor]

No. You don't. Just be quiet and let someone else or the government take some kind of action if this is a sham or fraud.

Shhhhhh…..

Wait…..

Quiet…..

:boxedin:

Yes ... You are correct!!!!!!

[petre]

Yes ... You are correct!!!!!!

And if the MDC continues on without ever seeing government action or being sued as a fraud...then that would be some sort of implied endorsement from the government and general sue-happy populous that it is not a fraud?

Just how long would the MDC have to stand unaccosted before such an assumption could be made, 10 years? 20 years?

[The Professor]

Look around. People are making accusations on a daily basis.

[remirol]

Look around. People are making accusations on a daily basis.

And none of it matters in the slightest. If you think you can win, sue! If you admit you can't, then sit and wait for someone else to sue, and in the meantime post a lot on webforums. :oldroll:

[The Professor]

There is another way.

[jsfisher]

There is another way.

You mean to win the $1,000,000? Sure. That way is well documented in the MDC rules. Most people with the inclination and an appropriate claim seem able to comply with the rules. Most people.

As for the law suit, I don't see that happening.

[BTMO]

There is another way.

True enough - an applicant could demonstrate what they claim they can do, in a fair and open demonstration.

[petre]

Look around. People are making accusations on a daily basis.

I was perhaps unclear in my use of the term unaccosted. I did not mean to imply that no person had questioned the validity in the many, many years the MDC has been around. I was refering to the specific actions mentioned in my prior sentence (it was several words before the question you were answering, so it may not have been fresh in your mind). That is, specifically, that in the decades the MDC has been running, I'm unaware of any government or litigious action that has ever suggested it is anything less than an honest and legal offer of $1 million for any agreed self-evident paranormal demonstration.

I may well be in error and in my limited experience could have missed such government or litigious action against the MDC should it have occurred. Given your rather shy and introverted nature I will not be surprised if you should decline to confirm my understanding on this matter is the same as your own, so the absence of any reply to this point along with your continued participation in the forums should suffice in demonstrating your acquiescence of this point.

Additionally, it is already clear you find other evidence more compelling than the currently-unchallenged observation that no government or litigious action has ever cast the slightest doubt that the MDC adheres fully to its contractual obligations. However, my first question was not releated to this other evidence, but inquires directly to your reasons for discounting the absence of legal action against the JREF in its long history as evidence that such legal action would be unlikely to succeed. Especially given the rather large potential reward for such success.

Truely, a description of why you feel a long-standing potential for huge monetary gain given an unproven assumption is not strong evidence that said assumption is indeed false would be enlightening.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Yes ... You are correct!!!!!! Even though, as a skeptic, I base my beliefs on evidence and logic and not popular opinion, it is always comforting to hear agreement from a fellow JREF forum member, even on the most obvious of claims. :)

[The Professor]

So is the answer to this question YES or NO?
Can a civil suit for fraud win the million?

[William Smith]

So is the answer to this question YES or NO?
Can a civil suit for fraud win the million?

The answer to the 63 cent question is:

No.

Your consolation prizes are an inflatable gas oven, a bucket of anvil grease and a bottomless coffee mug. Tune in again next week for another installment of "ME ME ME".

[remirol]

So is the answer to this question YES or NO?
Can a civil suit for fraud win the million?

Civil suits are not paranormal. :oldroll: That's a "no".

[petre]

So is the answer to this question YES or NO?
Can a civil suit for fraud win the million?

I'm willing to believe it is possible. That no one has done so yet, despite the incentive of all that cash, seems to strongly suggest that it is not though. To date I don't think anyone has so much as filed a claim, much less gotten a ruling or even passing a preliminary hearing.

[MattC]

So is the answer to this question YES or NO?
Can a civil suit for fraud win the million?

I have answered this question several times in the various forms with which you have presented it.

If you are referring to a million dollars that the JREF possesses, obtained from any source they see fit, then yes - you could conceivably sue them for a million dollars.

If you are referring to the million dollar challenge, then no you could not win it by suing in court.

~ Matt

[Wowbagger]

So is the answer to this question YES or NO?
Can a civil suit for fraud win the million?

I figured out the answer was "no", right from the first page of responses. Not unless you had a contract, i.e. application, signed and accepted.

I am almost sorry I asked. But, at least many of us learned many things, along the way.

[Wowbagger]

I should probably clarify something, based on something someone PMed to me.

It is always possible for someone to win a million dollars, from the JREF, in civil court.

However, if you want to win THE Million Dollars, you need to go through the challenge procedures.

[petre]

Hrmn, perhaps we should take his question literally. I don't see any real limiting factor that would prevent the professor (or anyone else) from winning the million dollars with a civil suit.

Perhaps a protocol along the lines of, "I will sue the JREF for fraud and present no real evidence. Since I had no contractual agreement with the JREF my argument will be nothing but weakly-supported accusations. I will submit to the court long-winded documents with little to no relavance to the case (much less specific inquiries made to me). When asked for clarification, I will restate whatever I had said before as though illumination flows from repetition. Despite this sad display, I will still be granted judgment and the JREF will be found guilty of fraud. Your appeal will suffice as a final test".

JREF might just agree that'd be pretty paranormal. It could be kind of a double-or-nothing gambit, win $1 million from the civil suit and another $1 million from the challenge.

[remirol]

Hrmn, perhaps we should take his question literally. I don't see any real limiting factor that would prevent the professor (or anyone else) from winning the million dollars with a civil suit.

Perhaps a protocol along the lines of, "I will sue the JREF for fraud and present no real evidence. Since I had no contractual agreement with the JREF my argument will be nothing but weakly-supported accusations. I will submit to the court long-winded documents with little to no relavance to the case (much less specific inquiries made to me). When asked for clarification, I will restate whatever I had said before as though illumination flows from repetition. Despite this sad display, I will still be granted judgment and the JREF will be found guilty of fraud. Your appeal will suffice as a final test".

JREF might just agree that'd be pretty paranormal. It could be kind of a double-or-nothing gambit, win $1 million from the civil suit and another $1 million from the challenge.

Can't see what part of this is paranormal, though. This is all just "hoping the judge is dumber than a box of rocks", which is well within the natural state of affairs for a judge -- just ask any lawyer. :D

[Wowbagger]

Can't see what part of this is paranormal, though. This is all just "hoping the judge is dumber than a box of rocks", which is well within the natural state of affairs for a judge -- just ask any lawyer. :DThe applicant could claim to have paranormal abilities over court room decisions. Maybe.

[wackyvorlon]

Seems untestable to me. You couldn't know whether the judge would rule differently:)

[NoZed Avenger]

Seems untestable to me. You couldn't know whether the judge would rule differently:)

No, it's perfect!

You predict a courtroom loss.

[Timothy]

The speculation rampant in this thread seems strangely familiar.

Despite what anyone claims or references or promises or asserts, there is one way, and one way only to determine if the MDC can be awarded in court by proving it to be fraud.

1. Apply, following all the rules of the established procedure. (File a lawsuit against JREF.)
2. Have the application be accepted. (Have the suit be brought to court.)
3. Demonstrate what you claim. (That you can successfully sue the JREF and be awarded the MDC.)

You can argue incessantly and show whatever precedent you want over what "should" happen. But until you bring suit and win, you cannot show that you can bring suit and win. 'Nuff said.

[The Professor]

I seem to recall Randi once stated that if anyone could prove, in a court of law, that his Million Dollar Challenge was a fraud, they could then win the Millions dollars, even if they do not have a paranormal claim.

Could anyone confirm this, and point to any references, if possible?

Not that I plan to do that. I was just curious, 'cause the topic comes up every now and then.

So according to Riley G what you've heard was true. randi did say it ... but he refused to pay up.

[Here_to_learn]

So according to Riley G what you've heard was true. randi did say it ... but he refused to pay up.Are you saying that someone has proved in a court of law that the MDC is a fraud but didn't get the money?

That would be a very simple thing to supply documentation for, wouldn't it? I think that with the name of the court, the case and the date the information would be available. Surely someone that claims this would include this information, so that everyone can check it out?

Could you point me to it?

[William Smith]

So according to Riley G what you've heard was true. randi did say it ... but he refused to pay up.

What are you Trying to Say?

[fromdownunder]

So according to Riley G what you've heard was true. randi did say it ... but he refused to pay up.

Poor TP. You go to parties and people break up into little groups to chat, and you are always the only one in yours.

And judging from your posts, I can see why.

Norm

Please keep in mind the Membership Agreement and do not use personal attacks to argue your point.

[Wowbagger]

So according to Riley G what you've heard was true. randi did say it ... but he refused to pay up.
I am leaning towards mishearing Randi on that point, now-a-days.

This thread is a tad obsolete, now.

[The Professor]

This thread is just getting to the Truth and now you want to end it.
Pretty strange. Not really Critical thinking in my mind :)
Has evidence shown that randi had been told by his own lawyers to pay Riley G and he didn't?
Looks like it.

[remirol]

Has evidence shown that randi had been told by his own lawyers to pay Riley G and he didn't?

Citations?

[drkitten]

This thread is just getting to the Truth

Yes, it has been. Unfortunately, it gets farther from the truth every time you post.

The "Truth," no matter how you try to snow this issues, is :

The challenge is legitimate
Randi is acting properly, in good faith, and in accordance with the law
You are either delusional, a fool, or a poor attempt at a fraud.
Randi recognized this, which is why your application/file was closed.
Like many other failures who have attempted to defraud Randi of his money, you are now making unabashed smear attacks on Randi.
You have no legal basis for your criticism of Randi, which is why....
You almost certainly have not even consulted with a lawyer regarding the validity of your claims.

[Wowbagger]

This thread is just getting to the Truth and now you want to end it.
We got to the truth (regarding the original topic of this thread) within the first page of posts.

[MattC]

The challenge is legitimate
Randi is acting properly, in good faith, and in accordance with the law
You are either delusional, a fool, or a poor attempt at a fraud.
Randi recognized this, which is why your application/file was closed.
Like many other failures who have attempted to defraud Randi of his money, you are now making unabashed smear attacks on Randi.
You have no legal basis for your criticism of Randi, which is why....
You almost certainly have not even consulted with a lawyer regarding the validity of your claims.


Unless I'm mistaken, Mr. Wagg was the one who had the file closed. Judging by Mr. Koenig's history with the JREF, I do not see it being reopened by administrative decree.

~ Matt

[William Smith]

This thread is just getting to the Truth and now you want to end it.
Pretty strange. Not really Critical thinking in my mind :)
Has evidence shown that randi had been told by his own lawyers to pay Riley G and he didn't?
Looks like it.

What are you Talking about? :) Show us the Evidence. It's only Fair to demand This.

[Azrael 5]

Surely if lawyers say someone has to pay(Randi)then they have to! But then Riley G is a nutcase who was never taken seriously. Like someone else I can think of. :)

[remirol]

Surely if lawyers say someone has to pay(Randi)then they have to!

Not at all. If _courts_ say someone has to pay, they have to.

So, I am interested in hearing which court case was decided against Randi.

[Azrael 5]

Not at all. If _courts_ say someone has to pay, they have to.

So, I am interested in hearing which court case was decided against Randi.

Ah yes my mistake. I hope you like long waits;)

[The Professor]

Yes, it has been. Unfortunately, it gets farther from the truth every time you post.

The "Truth," no matter how you try to snow this issues, is :

The challenge is legitimate
Randi is acting properly, in good faith, and in accordance with the law
You are either delusional, a fool, or a poor attempt at a fraud.
Randi recognized this, which is why your application/file was closed.
Like many other failures who have attempted to defraud Randi of his money, you are now making unabashed smear attacks on Randi.
You have no legal basis for your criticism of Randi, which is why....
You almost certainly have not even consulted with a lawyer regarding the validity of your claims.


Your post is inundated with LIES!

randi did not close my application .. Jeff Wagg did ... Lie number one!
It's not randi's money ... Lie number 2!
My brother is a lawyer and we speak almost daily .. Lie number 3!
I'm not Smearing randi .. I'm just asking for answers ... Lie number 4!

Seems like you have a problem with the truth!

But you won't acknowledge your obvious lies will you?

[chillzero]

Your post is inundated with LIES!
um... no.

randi did not close my application .. Jeff Wagg did ... Lie number one!
drkitten never claimed randi closed your application. Try reading.

It's not randi's money ... Lie number 2!
drkitten never claimed that it is randi's money. Try reading.

My brother is a lawyer and we speak almost daily .. Lie number 3!
Good for you. If he's the one advising you about the MDC though, I think you should look elsewhere for legal advice. Point 7 was connected to point 6, which is absolutely not a lie.

I'm not Smearing randi .. I'm just asking for answers ... Lie number 4!
We can all read what you've written, here and elsewhere, and see what you post on YouTube.

I do notice though that you declined to respond on point 3. That's quite telling, particularly given the tone of your response. Not exactly rational.

[remirol]

Seems like you have a problem with the truth!


So which court case was decided against Randi again? You seem to have skipped over that. Inquiring minds want to know!

[Wowbagger]

I see a fun, yet disturbing pattern in this thread:
1. Person #1 asks a question.
2. Person #2 mentions that they would also like to see and answer to that question.
3. Persons #3, #4, and #5 answer Person #1's question adequately.
4. Person #2 still wants to know what the answer is, anyway.
5. Persons #1, #3, #4 and #5 repeat the answer.
6. Repeat from Step 4.

[realpaladin]

Surely if lawyers say someone has to pay(Randi)then they have to! But then Riley G is a nutcase who was never taken seriously. Like someone else I can think of. :)

No, you don't have to pay if lawyers tell you to. You *have* to if the judge says so. Not before that.

Edit: sorry, jumped the gun. Has already been said.

[realpaladin]

Your post is inundated with LIES!

randi did not close my application .. Jeff Wagg did ... Lie number one!
It's not randi's money ... Lie number 2!
My brother is a lawyer and we speak almost daily .. Lie number 3!
I'm not Smearing randi .. I'm just asking for answers ... Lie number 4!

Seems like you have a problem with the truth!

But you won't acknowledge your obvious lies will you?
Why would you care what is on a forum? If it is obvious(!) lies then the court will justify you and we will all stand ashamed and stfu.

Has your brother warned you that IP numbers being used to post messages on a forum can be used as legal evidence?

Has your brother told you that until you can substantiate your allegations you might be held responsible for slander?

So, spit out the court case or run like hell dude.

[Lrrr]

Your post is inundated with LIES!

randi did not close my application .. Jeff Wagg did ... Lie number one!
It's not randi's money ... Lie number 2!
My brother is a lawyer and we speak almost daily .. Lie number 3!
I'm not Smearing randi .. I'm just asking for answers ... Lie number 4!

Seems like you have a problem with the truth!

But you won't acknowledge your obvious lies will you?

So you addressed points 4 through 7 (and have been refuted). Because you don't claim that points 1 through 3 are lies then they must be true. So to recap:

1. The challenge is legitimate -TP does not deny the challenge is legitimate so he must believe it to be true
2. Randi is acting properly, in good faith, and in accordance with the law - TP does not deny that Randi is acting properly, in good faith and in accordance with the law so he must believe to be true
3. You are either delusional, a fool, or a poor attempt at a fraud - TP does not deny he is delusional, a fool or a poor attempt at a fraud so it must be true

The only question remaining is:

[ ] delusional
[ ] fool
[ ] poor attempt at a fraud

Don't delay. Vote now and vote often!

ETA: cleaned up scattered thoughts.

[William Smith]

...
The only question remaining is:

[ ] delusional
[ ] fool
[ ] poor attempt at a fraud
...

Under the corollary "Every Forum Member Gets The Responses He Deserves" or "What TP Wants, TP Gets" (Think Lethal Weapon), how about:

All of the above?



I think most of us try to work with forum members who we disagree with. While that trying does not work out in all cases, I think it safe to assume that - for whatever reason - TP is unwilling to discuss in a friendly and lively way.

If this were a pub, Dave, you'd have been told to leave by now.

If this were an MLB team, you would have been kicked off the farm team by now.

If this were American Idol

...the Gong Show...

...Survivor...

...the Senate...



...what I'm trying to say is: Can a brother get some evidence in this bitch?

[William Smith]

[Jon Stewart]
Du Musst Machen Mit Die Evidence. Ja! Ja!
[/Jon Stewart]

[Azrael 5]

Prof's brother a lawyer, his friend worked for NASA(and communicated after death!)I guess having clever friends and relatives failed to rub off.

Lrrr: I vote Delusional. :)

[Azrael 5]

*snip*
If this were a pub, Dave, you'd have been told to leave by now.


If it were a BRitish pub he would have been thrown thorugh the window :D

[jsfisher]

If it were a BRitish pub he would have been thrown thorugh the window :D

Given the notice over in Forum Management / Public Notices, I'd say this pub now needs a new window.

[desertgal]

drkitten never claimed that it is randi's money.


Um...in fairness, drkitten did say "Like many other failures who have attempted to defraud Randi of his money". I think that could be correctly interpreted as claiming it is Randi's money.

If not...well, maybe we can give Proffy that one as a "Don't let the door hit you on the way out" gift? :D

[petre]

Darn, and he was just about to share some evidence to back up his claims to, I just KNOW it.

Rats. Well hopefully others will learn from this and present their evidence sooner, or they could miss their chance and leave their assertions forever unsupported.

[MattC]

Darn, and he was just about to share some evidence to back up his claims to, I just KNOW it.

Rats. Well hopefully others will learn from this and present their evidence sooner, or they could miss their chance and leave their assertions forever unsupported.

Surely he offered enough hot air to get off the ground at least a little bit.

~ Matt