I AM NOT HUMAN

[jmercer]

Interesting claim. KRAMER, if I were you, I'd not use any of those home testing labs. I'd go with a full forensic lab, or perhaps a University - and specify what you're testing for.

I suspect that the low-end commercial labs he's referencing are heavily automated. If, for some reason, his samples fall far enough outside the "norm", the sample will be rejected - and depending on the lab chosen, you might get a different reason.

[Beleth]

Maybe use a home testing lab for the preliminary, and a full forensic lab for the final?

I'd suggest using more than one home testing lab, and more than one body material to test (cheek scraping, blood, urine, etc.).




PS - Someone needs to tell him that "human" and "Cro-Magnon" are not synonymous.

[Hastur]

Originally posted by Beleth
Maybe use a home testing lab for the preliminary, and a full forensic lab for the final?

I'd suggest using more than one home testing lab, and more than one body material to test (cheek scraping, blood, urine, etc.).


I also would like to see the samples go under an analysis to make sure he isn't sending out DNA samples from, say, his pet hamster.

[Brian]

I know this is a weird claim, but is it paranormal? I have 2 rabbits in my bedroom, neither of them are human either. Even if this guy is from another planet, it would be an amazing discovery, but it wouldn't be paranormal.
All that aside, is the claim being accepted with the "contaminated sample" condition? What's paranormal about a lab tech accidentally dropping something into the petri dish?

Just my 2 cents.

[jmercer]

Well, he'd have to repeat it - this is only the preliminary. What are the chances of two contaminations?

Regarding him being from another world not being paranormal... well, I opened my big mouth on Homeopathy and found out that it met the criteria for paranormal. Since Kramer is apparently willing to consider this guy for the test, I would assume that he meets Randi's criteria in one way or another. :D

If a JREF witness is there to see the sample taken, then (barring sleight of hand), the sample should be from him and not from his hamster. The whole thing is intriguing... but personally, I think I smell a scam coming on.

[CptColumbo]

At least he got most of the paperwork right. That has too count for something. Like allowing a monkey in the room during the testing, or an actual alien.

[Dogwood]

Howdy,

As a Forensic Analyst, I'd like to throw out a few caveats. I have no idea how these home testing kits work, but if it requires him to provide his own sample, then obviously, it's a waste of time. If you're going to do this, then send the claimant to a proper lab where a licensed phlebotimist will take the sample and maintain a proper chain of custody from the beginning. It won't be cheap either. A standard profile for one person will cost around $200. Cost will vary with location and state-run vs. private labs. You'd probably have results in one to two weeks.

There are also some people (humans even) that have primer binding area mutations that prevent proper reporting of some loci. But if this guy had such mutations for every loci tested, he would be a rare individual indeed.

It is also possible to do simpler and cheaper testing for human verification on blood alone. Takes about 15 minutes once the blood has been drawn.

If a full DNA profile is to be taken, I'd recommend at least two sources as Beleth said. Saliva and blood, or blood and hair to prevent any monkey business. Say, like coating his mouth with wax or something in order to interfere with a cheek swabbing. (This would cost more of course and with hair would take longer.)

For what it's worth

[KRAMER]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by jmercer
Since Kramer is apparently willing to consider this guy for the test, I would assume that he meets Randi's criteria in one way or another. :D

Sadly, he does. Although he hasn't used the word, he is definitely claiming to be extraterrestrial. That's a paranormal claim, as Randi defines it.

[KRAMER]

Originally posted by jmercer
[B... but personally, I think I smell a scam coming on. [/B]

I don't smell a scam. I smell garden-variety self-delusion.

The poor guy thinks he's from another planet. Even the dumbest scam artist can be more creative than that.

This is loony tunes, pure and simple.

[jmercer]

Originally posted by KRAMER
I don't smell a scam. I smell garden-variety self-delusion.

The poor guy thinks he's from another planet. Even the dumbest scam artist can be more creative than that.

This is loony tunes, pure and simple.

Maybe. You have a lot of experience, so you're probably right... and that was exactly my reaction when I first read his application. (Heck, that's my first reaction after reading MOST of the applications! :D )

Then I got to thinking... why propose a "home" analysis? Why not simply leave it up to JREF to decide how the samples were tested? And he found you 5 possible services to use. Pretty helpful. It got me to thinking that maybe he'd found a way to beat these kinds of basic tests or something.

Well, you're probably right... although I'd almost prefer a con artist to someone so badly self-deluded. At least a con artist has a rational motiviation.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by KRAMER
I don't smell a scam. I smell garden-variety self-delusion.

The poor guy thinks he's from another planet. Even the dumbest scam artist can be more creative than that.

This is loony tunes, pure and simple. I strongly disagree. People that are deluded into thinking they are aliens will usualy claim that they are aliens and are usually happy to tell you about what planet they are from and thier extraterresterial experiences, etc. (and usually go on and on without much coherence). As deluded as this guy gets is: "The special ability I will demonstrate is that I am "not human" and possibly of alien origin." Which he will do by getting a DNA sample rejected for a shot at $1 million.

I think it is a guy that either works in the DNA testing industry or knows a lot about it. He probably knows the limitations of the methods and stardards used for home-based DNA kits has even found specific companies that use those methods and standards.
From that, he has figured out something that he can do (I don't know-eat a can of green olives or something) that will cause a DNA test under those limited methods and conditions to usually not return a postive identification. It seems that these DNA test companies would have procedures such that some samples would result in "unable to identify" or "contaminated" without them going bonkers and jumping up and down yelling, "We found an alien!!!"

After all, he doesn't claim to be an alien and his test protocol doesn't prove that he is an alien. The only thing his test protocol proves is that he is able to cause certain home-based DNA analysis companies to reject his sample. Maybe a neat trick. But proof of paranormal? :(

[Beady]

Originally posted by DevilsAdvocate
The only thing his test protocol proves is that he is able to cause certain home-based DNA analysis companies to reject his sample. Maybe a neat trick. But proof of paranormal? :(

So, reject the "home-based" part of it. I can tell you definitely that the US Government wouldn't accept DNA analysis from a home test and, since $1 million is at stake, I see no reason to lower the bar.

And why the hell would a result of "contaminated" be considered proof of anything at all?

BTW, it's been a couple of years since I've been involved with DNA test results, but I seem to recall that they cost ~$175 from a government-acceptable lab, and the results are typically either 99.n% positive or 0%. That's to prove relationship; I imagine just to differentiate between human and nonhuman the possible results would be even more definitive.

Also BTW: Of what use would a home-test DNA kit be? It wouldn't be accepted for any legal purpose.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by Beady
So, reject the "home-based" part of it. I can tell you definitely that the US Government wouldn't accept DNA analysis from a home test and, since $1 million is at stake, I see no reason to lower the bar.

And why the hell would a result of "contaminated" be considered proof of anything at all?

BTW, it's been a couple of years since I've been involved with DNA test results, but I seem to recall that they cost ~$750 from a government-acceptable lab, and the results are typically either 99.n% positive or 0%. That's to prove relationship; I imagine just to differentiate between human and nonhuman the possible results would be even more definitive. The point is that the protocol should not be accepted at all (and KRAMER is saying tha it is). The proposed protocol is that if a sample is rejected for any reason ("contaminated" "not identifyable", etc.) it means the guy is alien.

To prove that someone is "not numan" the DNA test should not jst be rejected as inconclusive or untestable within a certain comapny's limited capabilitied, but should return results that no DNA testing las can explain.

As I said, this is just some guy that knows how the selecting testing companies work and what their limitations are and what types of samples under those limitations and procedures and methods will (most likely) result in a reject of the sample.

A proper protocol would require a much more sophisitcated (and much more expensive) test so that if the sample is "unidentifyiable" or "other", the lab could tell your exaclty why it could not identify the DNA. It could also tell you whether it is the result of someone manipulating the tisues or whether the tissues are OK for testing but unknown. It could also tell you how many other "unknown" results have occured and possible explanations.

[Dogwood]

Profiles generated by DNA testing will not provide information for anything other than human. The primers we use are legally required to be specific to human DNA. That's to prevent accidentally amplifying cat hairs, bacteria, other primates, etc.

If this person wasn't human, or rather, if this persons DNA differed significantly from human, then the results would be blank (reported as inconclusive). It's not all that unusual to see one or two loci out of 14 come back as inconclusive, but the only reasons the whole profile would be inconclusive would be due to insufficient or badly degraded DNA.

A contaminated result would be defined as one having an additional (whole or in part) profile present. The company would probably retest from the original sample provided two or three times (for free) before reporting a contaminated sample, which would also be compared to all of their employee profiles, and other recently tested samples.

However, if this guy really wasn't human at all, then the testing wouldn't even get that far. Human verification is a required part in the quantification step. If this came out negative, the testing company probably wouldn't bother going any further unless requested specifically to do so.

[Beady]

Originally posted by Dogwood
Human verification is a required part in the quantification step. If this came out negative, the testing company probably wouldn't bother going any further unless requested specifically to do so.

Then that should be part of the protocol. It's not JREF's problem if this turns out to be more expensive, since the applicant is paying for it. And he shouldn't mind paying for it; after all, what's a $couple-hundred extra, when it'll be immediately repaid with $1 million?

[Dogwood]

Now that I think about it, this whole idea is kind of silly. The lab is either going to return a profile or come back as inconclusive. A profile means he's human, but an inconclusive result will not mean that he's not human. The official report would only say "inconclusive due to insufficient or degraded DNA" There is no "other" option.

Instead of requesting a profile, you should go for sequencing. Sequencing will either provide a known sequence (human), an unknown sequence (very strange human) or be inconclusive. If inconclusive, it means he doesn't have DNA (now that'd be worth a million bucks).

[jmercer]

However Randi and Kramer proceed, I hope it's very, very carefully. That was a great point about the non-specifics of the results being proof - it's not, really.

[KRAMER]

Originally posted by DevilsAdvocate
The point is that the protocol should not be accepted at all (and KRAMER is saying tha it is).

Sorry, but you are incorrect on this point.

I never accepted the protocol, and I wouldn't. In fact, I never even accepted the claim, as we have yet to receive a notarized application. The email came in so complete, with attachments and other official-looking stuff, that I chose to assume that the application itself had been mailed (as the email stated it had been).

If you read my response to him again, you will see that I told him that we could "proceed once we have his notarized application in hand".

I have no intention of accepting his protocol proposal. It's totally funky. And I'm no longer convinced that he's deluded. Some comments here in the forum have led me to suspect that there just might be some kind of scam at work.

We'll see. It's Monday afternoon here, and still no application.\

Assuming we do actually receive one, though, what would be the best way to verify his claim, which is quite simply, "I AM NOT HUMAN."

If we toss out DNA testing entirely, which I am poised to do, what are our alternatives?

[jmercer]

Originally posted by Beady
BTW, it's been a couple of years since I've been involved with DNA test results, but I seem to recall that they cost ~$175 from a government-acceptable lab, and the results are typically either 99.n% positive or 0%. That's to prove relationship; I imagine just to differentiate between human and nonhuman the possible results would be even more definitive.

I don't think you can throw out DNA testing without losing public crediblity, because it would be (if done properly) highly credible.

The above from Beady seems like a good idea. I'd contact a lab and discuss what you're doing and what the claim is. Let them tell you what they can do and how much it'll cost. (They might even tell you how the basic home stuff can be beaten.)

Or if you have a good relationship with a law enforcement agency, you can discuss it with them. The larger ones have forensic labs that handle blood, salivia, semen, etc. for dna profiling... plus they have to be able to test blood for basic properties, such as identifying human blood vs. animal blood. (I know the FBI has an extensive lab.)

In fact, the law enforcement idea might be a bit more interesting than just lab work. If this guy's worked out a way to beat a home test and is trying to defraud you out of a million dollars, I suspect someone, somewhere in law enforcment would be interested...

Obviously, this is all premature stuff. Unless the guy completes his application, it's just a mental exercise.

[KRAMER]

Well, why would we need to go through the expense and hassle of locating a DNA testing lab when (according to what I have read here) a simple blood test would be much quicker and equally as definitive?

A blood test would conclusively show whether or not the sample was from a human source, correct?

This is like the whole hi-energy scientist deal, I think. Why do we need an expensive DNA test when all we really need to do to test this claim is take a blood sample?

The blood is either human, or it isn't. The applicant is either human, or not. Done deal.

It seems to me that having our investigators accompany this woman (yes, the application just came and it's a woman) on a brief visit to a local clinic would be all that is needed in verifying this claim. Her demands for a DNA test are entirely unwarranted, and accepting such demands seem to me to be little more than courting her beliefs and her delusions, which the JREF endeavors NOT to do.

First, though, let's see if she deigns to respond to my emails, which she has threatened to not do, insisting that she will "only respond to Randi".

Yeesh.

[Dogwood]

Originally posted by KRAMER



If we toss out DNA testing entirely, which I am poised to do, what are our alternatives?

I dunno. What defines humanity (in a non-philisophical context)? The problem is in proving a negative. Any number of medical tests will undoubtably demonstrate that this guy is human, but in the off-chance that the tests come back as negative or inconclusive that will not be evidence of non-humanity.

I suggest forcing this guy to make a claim as to what he is instead of what he is not.

[Dogwood]

Originally posted by KRAMER

A blood test would conclusively show whether or not the sample was from a human source, correct?

The blood is either human, or it isn't. The applicant is either human, or not. Done deal.


I just found out today that the test I was referring to has recently been found to produce a positive result in blood taken from parrots. Go figure. So it's no longer considered confirmatory for humans. There are undoubtably many other tests available, I'll ask around.

But the problem still exists. Is the JREF prepared to give this person a million bucks because of an inconclusive lab test? Because, it does happen. Out of a 1000 samples I finished analyzing recently, 5 of them produced no result whatsoever. Another 4 produced incomplete profiles. There was probably a problem with the samples themselves, but those individuals will have to be resampled. It doesn't make them inhuman however.


"Not-human" is just too broad a category.

[jmercer]

Originally posted by KRAMER
Well, why would we need to go through the expense and hassle of locating a DNA testing lab when (according to what I have read here) a simple blood test would be much quicker and equally as definitive?

A blood test would conclusively show whether or not the sample was from a human source, correct?

This is like the whole hi-energy scientist deal, I think. Why do we need an expensive DNA test when all we really need to do to test this claim is take a blood sample?

The blood is either human, or it isn't. The applicant is either human, or not. Done deal.

It seems to me that having our investigators accompany this woman (yes, the application just came and it's a woman) on a brief visit to a local clinic would be all that is needed in verifying this claim. Her demands for a DNA test are entirely unwarranted, and accepting such demands seem to me to be little more than courting her beliefs and her delusions, which the JREF endeavors NOT to do.

First, though, let's see if she deigns to respond to my emails, which she has threatened to not do, insisting that she will "only respond to Randi".

Yeesh.

The real problem (IMHO) is that she's claiming that her DNA won't match human DNA. You can't prove/disprove that via a simple test, AFAIK. Like I said earlier, she's willing to give you 5 home testers, which might mean that she's figured out a way to beat those tests... or maybe she naturally falls out of an acceptable range for those kinds of tests and knows it.

There's been so much in the news lately about DNA matching freeing convicts, the Human Genome Project eventually leading to a new generation of medicine, etc., that the public now views DNA analysis as a definitive resolution to a lot of questions. I find it worrisome that she specifically picked a protocol that included a procedure currently enjoying a great deal of public confidence.

A refusal to perform DNA testing against a claim like this might damage JREF's credibility in the public eye - which may be the whole point of this idiocy. If it's not an intentional effort to discredit JREF on her part, others may still capitalize on a refusal regardless.

Maybe I'm overreacting and reading too much into this. I'm not trying to add to your troubles, Kramer, and I'm sorry if my comments are doing so... but given the vehemence of some of JREF's detractors, I don't think that this is a possiblity that should be overlooked. Maybe this whole thing will fall apart, or maybe she'll accept a simple "human/not human" straight blood test as a preliminary without all the DNA stuff.

[KRAMER]

Well, she doesn't seem to know what she really is (and at this point, neither do I), so it seems unfair to base our acceptance or denail of her claim upon JREF's insistence that she state what she IS, as opposed to what she ISN'T. I don't think that's the way to go with this one.

And, rest assured that the JREF is NOT prepared to "give out a million bucks for an inconclusive lab test". Hell no.

She says she's not human. I cannot believe that there isn't a simple way to test this and acheive conclusive results within minutes.

X-ray? Blood test? I suppose that if she states that it is only her DNA that makes her "non-human", there may be no other waym, and I suppose that if she agrees to adhere to the Challenge rules (particularly rule #6), she'll just have to be DNA-tested, under the most stringent scientific conditions, of course.

I guess this one won't be easy.

[Dogwood]

If she insists on a DNA test then fine. I'm not trying to say that they're unreliable, only that one cannot infer any meaning from a negative or inconclusive result. I'd suggest a proper profile for the preliminary test. No home test kits, even if a JREF rep is there to watch it, unless they're a licensed health professional. (The cost will probably be about the same anyway.) And get two sources, blood and cheek swabbing.


Here's a link (http://www.cacnews.org/labs.htm) to a list of every forensic laboratory in the State of California including a few in SF.

I don't know what to suggest for the final test, but if she can't be drowned then she's a witch.

[c4ts]

Or if she floats she's a duck, or at least made of wood!

But seriously, this guy should say what he is first, and then try to prove it.

[jmercer]

Kramer,

In addition to sending a notarized application, she put her thumbprint on it?

Whoa. Something about that is sending my alarm bells ringing... I just don't know if they're "woo-woo" bells or "watch your wallet" bells. Clearly she wants to make 100% sure that JREF knows that she was the one who sent in the notarized application. Seems like this Jill person is absolutely convinced she's going to win this money.

[Ashles]

jmercer is, once again, spot on.
Whoa. Something about that is sending my alarm bells ringing...
There's something about this whole claim that doesn't seem right.

Firstly there's the immediate problem that something that looks easy (confirming human DNA) appears to be more complicated than at first glance.

Secondly there is a real unusual confidence in the claim (seemingly addressing all the usual legal problems straight off the bat).

No offense KRAMER, but so many repeated failed claimants might allow an unscrupulous trickster to pull a fast one. You tend to end up looking so constantly in certain directions that the possibility of someone using a new trick (especially one using new technology) could blindside the JREF.

I know you know what you are doing but this particular scenario is a really concerning one. I doubt you or Randi could be tricked by any possible standard method of magical trickery, but science advances so rapidly that a technological trick is always possible.

As Dogwood mentions above:
I just found out today that the test I was referring to has recently been found to produce a positive result in blood taken from parrots.
And this is from a forensic analyst, an expert in the field.

This is an area where new discoveries are being made every day.

My gut feeling is there is a trick here, possibly a really good one.

[misawafan]

Originally posted by KRAMER
I don't smell a scam. I smell garden-variety self-delusion.

The poor guy thinks he's from another planet. Even the dumbest scam artist can be more creative than that.

This is loony tunes, pure and simple.

Could it be this person is friends with Daevid Allen?

[KRAMER]

Originally posted by misawafan
Could it be this person is friends with Daevid Allen?

Uh-oh. I've been found out. Camambert, anyone?

p.s. Daevid's pretty emabarrassed about those days now, you know. With about a dozen kids around the globe, half of whom are still minors in need of support, he is VERY grounded these days...I can assure you.

[KRAMER]

Originally posted by Ashles
jmercer is, once again, spot on.

There's something about this whole claim that doesn't seem right.
My gut feeling is there is a trick here, possibly a really good one.

I'm keeping my eyes wide open on this one, folks, due almost entirely to the warnings I've seen here in the forum, which has become an indispensable tool in such matters.

I doubt that I'll ever look at another claim again with anything less than suspicious eyes. I guess that's kind of sad, but so is a good 50% of the rest of reality (as I see it), so what the heck.

Please keep in mind that I have accepted the claim, but not the protocol. With your astute assistance, I'm still working on it.

[MESchlum]

Random thought: this person has documented legal existence, correct? ID papers, etc.

Hence a birth certificate can be pulled up, and (if still alive) parents.

Compare paretal DNA to applicants'. Should answer a few questions.

[jmercer]

How would this prove/disprove her claim? I don't see the connection...

[Bandersnatch]

I did a google seach for Jill ENQUIST, and came up with nothing of much use.

However, googling for 1 Duschampes comes up with this (http://www.wahalan.com/), a site which (coincidently?) conserns Aliens, space travel, etc...

BTW, the signed name on the letters may actually be "L Duschampes" instead of 1 duschampes, I found that on the site. the site resolves to an owner in San Fran, which is the same city as Ms. Enquist.

ETA: Confusing language about the 1 duschampes name.

[Bandersnatch]

Okay, I read a bit more on the site, and found this (http://www.wahalan.com/id46.html).

then this happened: at the request of the san francisco office of the u.s. secret service, sometime between august 1-10, 2003 an individual walked their office (located at 345 spear street, suite 530, san francisco, california, 94105) and, in the presence of several u.s. secret service agents, snipped a lock of her hair and put it in a plastic bag, then put the bag in an envelope and sealed the envelope shut. then she wrote a name on the envelope, dated and fingerprinted it, then slid the sealed envelope through the slot in the thick bulletproof glass.

......

the purpose of all this drama was to obtain a hair sample for DNA analysis. much to the utter and shocked amazement of the united states government scientists, the DNA results from the hair were always the same no matter how many times they ran them: not Cro-Magnon.


So, unless someone's pulling your leg, and simply copying her claims, I would think that this is it.

[jmercer]

Originally posted by Bandersnatch
I did a google seach for Jill ENQUIST, and came up with nothing of much use.

However, googling for 1 Duschampes comes up with this (http://www.wahalan.com/), a site which (coincidently?) conserns Aliens, space travel, etc...

BTW, the name may actually be "lomep duschampes ", the site resolves to an owner in San Fran, which is the same city as Ms. Enquist.

Great detective work!

I'm reading the website now - the "Start Here" page has text in it that reads:


we are sorry for the terror these pages will cause by bringing this terror to your attention. we come in peace.


And this woman Jill (duschampes?) ended her original email as:


We come in peace.

l duschampes


And here's the probable basis for the claim with JREF, including the bizarre carbon copy to the Secret Service:


until august 2003 TYI (in your time), no national government anywhere on this planet had even a suspicion there were two Alien Races from other worlds here (except possibly this government) and NOBODY had proof that there might be aliens from other worlds on this planet. then this happened: at the request of the san francisco office of the u.s. secret service, sometime between august 1-10, 2003 an individual walked their office (located at 345 spear street, suite 530, san francisco, california, 94105) and, in the presence of several u.s. secret service agents, snipped a lock of her hair and put it in a plastic bag, then put the bag in an envelope and sealed the envelope shut. then she wrote a name on the envelope, dated and fingerprinted it, then slid the sealed envelope through the slot in the thick bulletproof glass.

(this same individual had been in the same office with a friend of hers in july, 2003.)

(anyone wishing to verify the above event is welcome to phone the san francisco office of the u.s. secret service during regular office hours.)

the purpose of all this drama was to obtain a hair sample for DNA analysis. much to the utter and shocked amazement of the united states government scientists, the DNA results from the hair were always the same no matter how many times they ran them: not Cro-Magnon.
more information about this particular individual can be found in 'Hijacked Ship Pt. 1-3'.


I won't bore anyone with the rest of the drek on the website, which reads like a poorly written (or I should say, re-written) version of many sci-fi books, movies and tv shows. Ugh!

The good (but sad) news is that it now looks like Jill is deluded instead of a scam artist.

[Dogwood]

O-kayyyyy. Nice work guys.

So she thinks she's a Neanderthal?

Assuming these events happened at all, (And I can't imagine the Secret Service would waste time analyzing some loony off the street's hair, or if they did; bother to inform them of the results.) but if they did, cut hair can only be used to test Mitochondrial DNA, not nuclear. All modern humans have it of course, (so would-have Neanderthals, natch) but it's not the first choice for identification purposes because it's so highly conserved. (It's also more expensive than profiles generated from nuclear DNA).

But I can assure all, that no forensic report ever lists results in terms of "Cro-Magnon" or "non-cro-magnon".

[KRAMER]

So my intuition was correct.

Garden-Variety Loony Tunes.

And there I was, looking for the good fight.

I'm so disappointed.

p.s. she just replied. go to the Challenges to see...

[Beleth]

What a great setting for a science-fiction show!

Kind of like Sliders meets Babylon 5.

[Dogwood]

What a strange person.

[Powa]

Originally posted by Dogwood
What a strange person.
Well duh, she's not human.

[Kimpatsu]

When I wake up first thing in the morning, I neither look nor feel human, either.
Do I qualify for the $1 million? :p :D

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Powa
Well duh, she's not human.
No, she's woman. :p :D

[jmercer]

Originally posted by Kimpatsu
No, she's woman. :p :D

Heh - that's an assumption on your part, based on her name. Maybe "Jill" in her native alien language means "Big, Hairy MALE!". ;)

Someone should keep an eye on her website - her last email to Kramer looks like she's asking skeptics (I assume she means JREF) to contact the Secret Service and verify that she had a DNA test done by them and what the results were. It wouldn't surprise me to see something at some point claiming that JREF verified her claims with the Secret Service.

It might actually be appropriate to contact the the Secret Service office she identified, and inform them of the situation. They may or may not be interested (or aware!) of her activities, but they probably should be told about her claims since she's citing them as a part of it.

[Orangutan]

I can't belive no one has pointed this out yet.

HAIR Does not contain DNA!

Hair Folicles do, so if you need a DNA sample you have to >PULL< some hair out by the roots.

Mayby the USSS was really just stuffing a mattress when they "Clipped a sample" for DNA testing.

U.

[KRAMER]

Just so you all know...I'd sooner be tortured to death by a wild band of Sioux than call the US Secret Service and ask them if they've ever heard of Jill Enquist, 1 Duschampes, or hair samples pushed through a security slot at their SF offices.

[Dr Adequate]

In the revised page, I will be asking the skeptical community to tell me exactly how the San Francisco office of the U.S. Secret Service communicated their invitation to me to come into their office to obtain a lock of my hair for DNA analysis (That is, was it by letter? email? phone? etc...
This is weird.

Why is she asking us that? Doesn't she know? Why does she want us to guess?

Is there a prize?

OK, Ms Enquist, my bet is that you took your tinfoil hat off to have a shower and they beamed the invitation into your head. How close am I?

[Dogwood]

Originally posted by Orangutan
I can't belive no one has pointed this out yet.

HAIR Does not contain DNA!

Hair Folicles do, so if you need a DNA sample you have to >PULL< some hair out by the roots.

Mayby the USSS was really just stuffing a mattress when they "Clipped a sample" for DNA testing.

U.

Actually, cut hair does contain mitochondrial DNA which can be tested and profiled, it's just not as varied as nuclear DNA.

[Dogwood]

Originally posted by KRAMER
Just so you all know...I'd sooner be tortured to death by a wild band of Sioux than call the US Secret Service and ask them if they've ever heard of Jill Enquist, 1 Duschampes, or hair samples pushed through a security slot at their SF offices.

I can't imagine they'd tell you anything even if you did. Not that I'm about to waste my minutes finding out.

[jmercer]

Originally posted by KRAMER
Just so you all know...I'd sooner be tortured to death by a wild band of Sioux than call the US Secret Service and ask them if they've ever heard of Jill Enquist, 1 Duschampes, or hair samples pushed through a security slot at their SF offices.

In retrospect, I can understand that. :D

[Atlas]

Originally posted by Dogwood
Actually, cut hair does contain mitochondrial DNA which can be tested and profiled, it's just not as varied as nuclear DNA. Would dyes or bleach render the sample "contaminated" or otherwise unable to classify?

[Dogwood]

Originally posted by Atlas
Would dyes or bleach render the sample "contaminated" or otherwise unable to classify?

Not contaminated, but very possibly unable to analyze. Many synthetic dyes used in clothing are known to act as inhibitors during the amplification process. Hair dye may fall into this category as well. And bleach is what we use to clean our countertops. Degrades DNA quite nicely.

[jmercer]

Originally posted by Dogwood
Not contaminated, but very possibly unable to analyze. Many synthetic dyes used in clothing are known to act as inhibitors during the amplification process. Hair dye may fall into this category as well. And bleach is what we use to clean our countertops. Degrades DNA quite nicely.

Well, well. I wonder if that's exactly the reason her hair sample (if ever really taken) came back as "non-human". Things that make you go "hmmmmm..."

[Beady]

Originally posted by KRAMER
Just so you all know...I'd sooner be tortured to death by a wild band of Sioux than call the US Secret Service and ask them if they've ever heard of Jill Enquist, 1 Duschampes, or hair samples pushed through a security slot at their SF offices.

Doesn't sound half as weird as calling a hospital director and asking if anyone's died recently.

;)

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Beady
Doesn't sound half as weird as calling a hospital director and asking if anyone's died recently.
Kramer didn't need to do that; he just had to look in the obits and find people who'd died at the hospital during the "Angel's" period of operation.

[Beady]

Originally posted by Kimpatsu
Kramer didn't need to do that; he just had to look in the obits and find people who'd died at the hospital during the "Angel's" period of operation.

Maybe you'd better go back and reread that thread.

[jmercer]

Kramer - in answer to your question in the Challenges thread, I'd say you should advise her to seek psychiatric help if - in her next email - she does anything other than simply withdraw her application.

(Especially if she reiterates her demand that JREF contact the Secret Service.)

[Lisa Simpson]

I agree. This woman is delusional. It's very sad and I hope she gets the help she needs, although I doubt it will happen.

[Gr8wight]

I'm confused. Is there a reason why Kramer does not want to call the US Secret Service and ask if this woman is known to them? She gives him the phone number, and the name of a specific agent to ask for. What the heck! What harm could it do? What are they gonna say? Maybe:

1) We have never heard of this person.

2) We have heard of this person and she is a nutcase.

3) We have heard of this person and that is all the information we will give you.

4) We will not disclose if we have heard of this person or not.

Or are Americans just naturally gunshy when it comes to having dealings with the S.S. (I mean secret service)? Kind of a don't call their attention to yourself for no reason thing?

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Beady
Maybe you'd better go back and reread that thread.
Please explain...?

[jmercer]

You know, I originally suggested that - but now I agree with Kramer's position. (Probably for a different reason, though.)

The one thing you DO NOT want to do is to get your name linked in any way with the lunatic fringe by involving US Security Agencies. Those lists, reports and memo's have a nasty way of floating around and being quoted out of context.

[Beady]

Originally posted by Kimpatsu
Please explain...?

[sigh]

Kramer *did* contact the hospital.

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Beady
[sigh]

Kramer *did* contact the hospital.
Theatrical sighing aside, what relevance does that have to my statement?
I never said he didn't contact the hospital; I said he didn't need to contact the hospital, as any obituary from the hospital during the specified time period would be enough to invalidate the claim.
What was that you said earlier? Something about actually reading other peoples' posts...?
:rolleyes:

[Rob Lister]

Originally posted by Gr8wight
I'm confused. Is there a reason why Kramer does not want to call the US Secret Service and ask if this woman is known to them? She gives him the phone number, and the name of a specific agent to ask for. What the heck! What harm could it do? What are they gonna say? Maybe:

1) We have never heard of this person.

2) We have heard of this person and she is a nutcase.

3) We have heard of this person and that is all the information we will give you.

4) We will not disclose if we have heard of this person or not.

Or are Americans just naturally gunshy when it comes to having dealings with the S.S. (I mean secret service)? Kind of a don't call their attention to yourself for no reason thing?

On the other hand, how could it help? Even if they somehow 'validated' her claim it would mean nothing with regard to the application. Randi is not going to award the prize based upon a phone call to the secret service.

I too would be reluctant to call the secret service and ask such questions. Not because I fear them but because they have real jobs to do and probably don't need the interruptions. Plus, even asking such questions makes you look like some kind of kook because only a kook would attempt to validate a kook's claims (no offense to Randi and Krammer).

[steenkh]

She apparently wants confirmation that she is a neanderthal. But even if she is, there is no way a DNA test can prove it, because there is no neanderthal DNA with which it can be compared, right?

[Kimpatsu]

I would definitely consider her thinking to be Neanderthal, so...

[IXP]

Originally posted by Gr8wight
I'm confused. Is there a reason why Kramer does not want to call the US Secret Service and ask if this woman is known to them? She gives him the phone number, and the name of a specific agent to ask for. What the heck! What harm could it do? What are they gonna say? Maybe:

1) We have never heard of this person.

2) We have heard of this person and she is a nutcase.

3) We have heard of this person and that is all the information we will give you.

4) We will not disclose if we have heard of this person or not.

Or are Americans just naturally gunshy when it comes to having dealings with the S.S. (I mean secret service)? Kind of a don't call their attention to yourself for no reason thing?

Actaully I think there are only two possibiliies, number 4 is most likely, but there is an off chance that this person is on their lists and considered a threat. In which case you might just end up on the terrorist watch list and be stopped next time you tried to board an airplane. In a country where one of our most prominent politicians (Sen. Edward Kennedy) ended up on that list and it took weeks of phone calls to clear it up, I think it is entirely reasonable to be gunshy about calling the secret service to enquire about a strange unknown person (or non-person), and risk the guilt by association.

[jmercer]

Originally posted by IXP
Actaully I think there are only two possibiliies, number 4 is most likely, but there is an off chance that this person is on their lists and considered a threat. In which case you might just end up on the terrorist watch list and be stopped next time you tried to board an airplane. In a country where one of our most prominent politicians (Sen. Edward Kennedy) ended up on that list and it took weeks of phone calls to clear it up, I think it is entirely reasonable to be gunshy about calling the secret service to enquire about a strange unknown person (or non-person), and risk the guilt by association.

I agree. Pre-9/11 (and Patriot Act, etc.), I think that this wouldn't have been a big consideration. Things are (sadly) different these days.

[Winterfrost]

It's sad to say, but this mass-in-the-brain-transgendered-non-human is obviously delusional.

I'm troubled by just how often she suggests that someone contact the Secret Service. It would definitely be good website-fodder for her to be able to write "skeptics from JREF investigated and confirmed the encounter with the Secret Service." (Omitting the details that that contact was likely: "Oh that loon? Yeah, she did some weird hair-clipping ritual in our lobby.") Perhaps that's all she's looking for as some half-truth "confirmation" of her claim...


Did anyone else get that "tongue-in-cheek" feeling while reading:

(For your information, the same agent later asked me how I would feel if the test came back Cro-Magnon. "Relieved," I said.)

If there is any shred of truth to this event, I have to wonder if the agent wasn't openly mocking her as badly as it sounds. ;)

[Dogwood]

I can't believe it took me so long to consider this possibility....



wig.

[Beady]

Originally posted by Winterfrost
It would definitely be good website-fodder for her to be able to write "skeptics from JREF investigated and confirmed the encounter with the Secret Service."<snip> Perhaps that's all she's looking for as some half-truth "confirmation" of her claim...

Here's a question about delusion that I honestly don't know the answer to: Does a deluded person base their version of events on reality, or do they make it up out of whole cloth? Did the meeting(s) with the Secret Service actually take place, and does this person need JREF to contact the Service before she can claim that both events occurred?

[jmercer]

I'm not a mental health professional, but I think that depends on the severity of their illness. There's no doubt that some mentally ill people can't distinguish between fantasy and reality, but I assume those are extreme cases that can't function in the real world.

And I know there are deluded people that do things to support their delusions.

[Gr8wight]

Has anyone actually read her website all the way to the end? I think she's just writing a really bad science fiction novel.

[Kimpatsu]

Originally posted by Gr8wight
Has anyone actually read her website all the way to the end? I think she's just writing a really bad science fiction novel.
But she's living it, too, like those "Choose Your Own Adventure" books I had as a child...

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally posted by Kimpatsu
But she's living it, too, like those "Choose Your Own Adventure" books I had as a child... Well, she's just being weird. The Secret Service asked for hair samples and came back Not Cro-Magnon? Whatever. She dreamed it up, or it wen6t down something like this:

Her: I'm an alien, test me!
SS: Please leave. [She refuses to leave. Several hours later...]
Her: If you test a hair sample you will see that I'm not human.
SS: OK, whatever. Give us a hair sample.
Her: [snip] Here.
SS: OK. [Goes to back room. Dumps hair in waste basket.]
SS: OK. So what was this supposed to show?
Her: That I am not Cro-Magnon.
SS: Yep. OK. It showed that you are not Cro-Magnon. Will you leave now?
Her: Yes. I have proof.

--A very possible scenario. Of course she could just be making it up. Or it may have gone down in a similar but slightly different way. :)

[jmercer]

Personally, I think it's just an attention-getting device being used as a cry for help. I hope I'm wrong, because if I'm not, then she needs help, and badly.

[Gr8wight]

Originally posted by jmercer
Personally, I think it's just an attention-getting device being used as a cry for help. I hope I'm wrong, because if I'm not, then she needs help, and badly.


I don't think there's any question that she's in need a significant psychiatric help.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Kramer, you have asked for three statements of confirmation of the propsed paranormal ability before, why not do it now? It sounds like she has never even bothered to do a home DNA test. Just yet another case of someone that alpies for the challenge to do "research" of their claim rather than "prove" a claim. Seems to happen a lot. She shoud do at least three tests herself of home DNA testing and see what she gets. Possibly she hould ask freinds or maybe some local university to help her make sure the samples are taken correctly. If she gets back negaive results and then is STILL convivnced, then she should provide the results and documentations and THEN talk about a test protocol.

Sheesh. Its like saying I can make 100 free throws in a row--but I've never made a free throw, or tried, or made a basket, or been on a basketball court, or held a basketball, or ever actually seen one--but I'll apply for the challenge because once I threw a piece of paper up in the air and it happened to land in the waste basket--at least someone told me that it did, or they told me it was close.

The JREF Challenge is not "research". It is a challenge of proof. She should do her own "research" and "experiments" before applying for the challenge. This is the way critical thinking works--research and experiment. If you haven't done that, then you have no business applying for the challenge. So go do that first.

[jmercer]

I just caught up on Jill's correspondence with Kramer. Apparently she's a transgender individual. From what I understand, these people usually experience traumatic identity-related issues until they sort things out. (If they ever do.)

It sounds to me like Jill is still having difficulties in that area, given her claim of being not-human. How sad... I hope she gets help, and soon.

[BPSCG]

I'm still not convinced it isn't an attempt at a scam.

I used to work for the Social Security Administration, taking, among other things, applications for disability benefits. I saw a fair number of seriously delusional people, people who would take a great deal of time and energy corresponding with their congressman about... whatever.

The one that sticks most clearly in my mind was a former university professor. He was soft-spoken, polite, and articulate. He was also convinced the government was plotting to have him killed, because he had the "smoking gun" on Nixon and Watergate.

He showed me a letter he'd written to his congressman, and from his demeanor, appearance, and general apparent clear-headedness (apart from his delusion), I expected his letter would be more or less coherent.

I was wrong. It was a rambling, disjointed mess, full of wild accusations and logical inconsistencies. It was consistent with correspondence I'd seen from other delusional Social Security disability applicants.

Jill's initial Randi correspondence is completely unlike anything I ever saw at Social Security. She has clearly read and understood the challenge rules, and wrote what I thought was a coherent claim letter.

Does it mean she's not a loon? Of course not. But if she's a loon, then she's the first one I've heard of who could write as coherently as she did, without letting her delusion swamp her expository abilities.

Maybe she's a loon. But don't let your guard down against a possible scam.

[Gr8wight]

Originally posted by DevilsAdvocate
Kramer, you have asked for three statements of confirmation of the propsed paranormal ability before, why not do it now? It sounds like she has never even bothered to do a home DNA test. Just yet another case of someone that alpies for the challenge to do "research" of their claim rather than "prove" a claim. Seems to happen a lot. She shoud do at least three tests herself of home DNA testing and see what she gets. Possibly she hould ask freinds or maybe some local university to help her make sure the samples are taken correctly. If she gets back negaive results and then is STILL convivnced, then she should provide the results and documentations and THEN talk about a test protocol.

Sheesh. Its like saying I can make 100 free throws in a row--but I've never made a free throw, or tried, or made a basket, or been on a basketball court, or held a basketball, or ever actually seen one--but I'll apply for the challenge because once I threw a piece of paper up in the air and it happened to land in the waste basket--at least someone told me that it did, or they told me it was close.

The JREF Challenge is not "research". It is a challenge of proof. She should do her own "research" and "experiments" before applying for the challenge. This is the way critical thinking works--research and experiment. If you haven't done that, then you have no business applying for the challenge. So go do that first.

DA, that was very nicely stated. I have my nomination for the next forum language contest.

[BPSCG]

Originally posted by DevilsAdvocate
Sheesh. Its like saying I can make 100 free throws in a row--That wouldn't be paranormal anyway... (http://www.freethrow.com/FreeThrow/Results.htm)

[KRAMER]

But there is no paranormal phenomenon to observe. The 3 notarized affadavits is designed for those who have suspect claims (like making lights appear, causing noise, gaseous balls, streaks of light) regarding observable phenomenon. This is a different type of claim altogether.

[Metullus]

Dumb question: As I understand it the claimant is saying she is not human, that she is neanderthal. If this is the case, the problem is that last I checked Neaderthals were likely a sub-species of Homo Sapiens - homo sapiens neaderthalis (we being, at least most of us anyhow, homo sapiens sapiens). In that case no test will ever differenciate between us and them.

But then , I have been out of the loop vis-a-vis human evolution for a good while, so I might well be off base...

[jmercer]

I might be wrong about this, but I thought that Cro Magnon man was on a different branch than Neanderthal man... and that we aren't really descended from to Neanderthals.

Don't know where it rests at this point, but there used to be a big debate about how Cro Magnon appeared on the scene at one point... it was like he just "appeared" from nowhere. That might be resolved, though.

[Metullus]

No, we are not descended from neaderthal. All indications are that neaderthal was a dead-end branch of homo sapiens that died off perhaps as recently as 50,000 years bp. We are likely direct lineal descendants of cro-magnon, and almost certainly of the same species.

That we are not descended from neaderthal is not the same thing as not being closely related to them. I am not descended from my cousin Hiram, but I am, unfortunately related to him closely enough that we share both a middle name and a surname. (Hiram, too, is an evolutionary dead-end, a fact for which we should all be gratefull.)

In fact, there has been considerable (tho to my mind, poorly supported) arguement that modern man (us) and neaderthal both coexisted (in Isreal / Palestine) and might have interbred. See above in re: cousin Hiram.

[jmercer]

Hmm... well, dna testing is capable of distinguishing between lions and tigers, and they're probably even more closely related than we are to neanderthals.

I think the biggest issue would be proving the neanderthal aspect of the claim. It's not like we have any real dna samples around to test it against.

Cro magnon we've got tons of.

[Metullus]

Actually, the more appropriate analogy would be to differentiate between wolf and dog DNA - neandethal & h. sapiens sapiens are far more closely related than are lions and tigers. Likely closer even than bonobos and chimpanzees.

Neanderthal is human, albeit not as we know it.

[jmercer]

Ok. I like your analogy better than mine. :) Wolf and dog it is, then.

However - here's an article that indicates we can identify differences within ourselves at a level much more refined than I would expect neanderthal vs. cro magon to be at:

http://www.benecke.com/popscidna.html

We may not be able to tell German from French," says Chakraborty, "but we can place individuals in major continental groups."

Whatcha think? Valid? Not?

(Edited to add quote)

[Dogwood]

Originally posted by jmercer



Whatcha think? Valid? Not?



Which part?

[Metullus]

Yeah, we can trace marker genes through known populations; gene "x" is common in people of north european descent, gene "y" is most common in sub-saharan africa, etc.. It is the commonality of the marker genes to specific
populations in certain specific locales that makes this type of analysis possible (I hesitate to say "usefull".)

This is sort of a macro-level of the Jerry Springer "Metullus & Hiram are both related to Aunt Eugenia" type of analysis.

Problem is, you need known populations. More than likely, if a neaderthal (I guess I should say, an identified h. s. neaderthalis) were to knock on our door and offer us a blood sample, it would still not be adequate to identify other neaderthal DNA from an unknown sample.

Upon consideration, there is one test for a living neaderthal is available: can the subject talk? If so, ain't no neaderthal. No capacity for speach.

[Metullus]

Originally posted by Metullus
Upon consideration, there is one test for a living neaderthal is available: can the subject talk? If so, ain't no neaderthal. No capacity for speach.

Boy, that was dumb. My bias got in the way.

It is unlikely tha neaderthal could speak, but not, of course, either definate or provable.

[KRAMER]

Well, back to the matter of the actual "claim", I've rejected it for reasons detailed in my most recent email to this applicant.

I mean, really, trans-gender matters aside, what are the chances that Jill is "Not Human"?

Exactly. That's my point.

Go to the corresponding thread in the Challenge Applications section, and read.

[Dogwood]

Originally posted by KRAMER
Well, back to the matter of the actual "claim", I've rejected it for reasons detailed in my most recent email to this applicant.

I mean, really, trans-gender matters aside, what are the chances that Jill is "Not Human"?

Exactly. That's my point.

Go to the corresponding thread in the Challenge Applications section, and read.

???????????????????????????

What are the chances that any of the applicants can do what they say they can do?

[Metullus]

Well, you have not seen my application yet, have you?

[Dogwood]

Originally posted by Metullus
Well, you have not seen my application yet, have you?

Maybe I have. After all, you haven't seen my application.

[KRAMER]

Originally posted by Dogwood
What are the chances that any of the applicants can do what they say they can do?

Certainly far, far greater than the chances that Jill isn't human.

Yes, I would categorize this claim in the UNNERVINGLY CLOSE TO ZERO column.

[Beleth]

Originally posted by KRAMER
Well, back to the matter of the actual "claim", I've rejected it for reasons detailed in my most recent email to this applicant.

Go to the corresponding thread in the Challenge Applications section, and read. I just want to say, amidst all the KRAMER-bashing I do here, that this latest message from you to Jill was absolutely the Right Thing To Do.

It wasn't the Easy thing to do, it wasn't the Ego-Boosting thing to do, it wasn't the Foundation-Furthering thing to do. It was the Moral, Humane, Clean-Conscience thing to do.


Considering that, plus some of the things you said in the Sean "$$$$$$" thread, my opinion of you has gone up three sizes today.

Bravo.

[Metullus]

Originally posted by Dogwood
Maybe I have. After all, you haven't seen my application.

Wow! I'll sign yours if you'll sign mine.

[jmercer]

Well, maybe I've remote viewed both of your applications and maybe my clairvoyant powers tell me that neither of you will ever submit those applications...

Then again, maybe not. :D

[Bandersnatch]

I should note, the website I referenced earlier has dissappeared. I went to check if there was any reponse to KRAMER's reply, and the site returns a 410 gone code. Wierd.

[Metullus]

Originally posted by jmercer
Well, maybe I've remote viewed both of your applications and maybe my clairvoyant powers tell me that neither of you will ever submit those applications...

Then again, maybe not. :D

Darn. I was gonna apply, but if you say I won't, well I guess I won't.

Wow! You are good! Randi can color his $1 million gone...

[Winterfrost]

Originally posted by Bandersnatch
I should note, the website I referenced earlier has dissappeared. I went to check if there was any reponse to KRAMER's reply, and the site returns a 410 gone code. Wierd.

Given Kramer's last reply to her, I doubt this is coincidental.

[jmercer]

Hmm... the site was pretty shoddy, and the story-line was sort of childish thrown-together mish-mosh of a variety of sci-fi themes, including the Battlefield Earth stuff.

You think the whole thing was thrown up as a scam or as troll-bait?

[Bandersnatch]

Personally, I do think they were of...unsoud mind. But BPSCG does have a good point about the emails themselves.

The page itself was cached by google in April 04, so it existed for about nine months before she got in touch with KRAMER. So this doesn't seem to be a quickly thrown together trollish thing.

[jmercer]

Good point. The timing is odd, though.

[DanishDynamite]

Originally posted by KRAMER
Well, back to the matter of the actual "claim", I've rejected it for reasons detailed in my most recent email to this applicant.

I mean, really, trans-gender matters aside, what are the chances that Jill is "Not Human"?

Exactly. That's my point.

Go to the corresponding thread in the Challenge Applications section, and read.
Here is a copy of what you wrote:
Jill, you're human. There is simply no alternative conclusion.

After much consideration and many email axchanges with you, we are wholly convinced that the true source of your confusion regarding the question of your identity is not paranormal in nature, but physiological. The answer to the questions you seek do not lie within the results of any DNA test, and we humbly implore you to seek psychiatric attention at the earliest possible convenience.

We cannot in good conscience continue to engage you in your delusions in this matter, and we feel both professionally and morally compelled to reject your claim at this time.

We wish you only the best in your search for your true identity, but we cannot assist you any further in this matter, other than to sincerely offer you the aforementioned advice.

All Best,
Kramer, JREF Paranormal Claims Dept.
I'm curious. Do the rules of the challenge allow that the JREF rejects a claim solely on the basis that the claimant, in the JREF's inexpert opinion, has psychological problems?

As far as I understand the history here, the claimant had, up until this weird rejection, done everything according to the rules.

I have to admit that this, in my eyes, severely undermines the importance of the JREF Prize remaining unclaimed.

[KRAMER]

We consult experts. All of them agreed that this applicant is more than likely to be suffering from schizophrenia. At that point, our obligation is to the applicant's well-being. To further her illness by engaging her in her delusions would be arrogant and dangerous.

There are more important things than the JREF Paranormal Challenge. The Challenge does NOT constitute a green light for the JREF to exploit people who have shown signs of mental illness.

Most of our tests involve applicants who are "unbalanced', at best, yet we test them. Only when the red flags go up and down with each correspondence do we discuss the possibility of whether or not a claim should be rejected. Then and ONLY then.
It's happened less than 5 or 6 times in my 12 months here.

We won't test anyone we sincerely believe may be harmed in the process. You see it as an excuse used at whim for our convenience. We see it as a moral and professional directive.

Believe what you feel you must, but you are terribly wrong.

[tamiO]

Originally posted by KRAMER
We won't test anyone we sincerely believe may be harmed in the process. You see it as an excuse used at whim for our convenience. We see it as a moral and professional directive.

Believe what you feel you must, but you are terribly wrong.

I think you are misunderstanding Danish. He never accused you of using anything as an excuse for your convenience.

[tamiO]

I certainly hope that the names have been changed in these posts about the person who thinks they may not be human.

I bet I have enough information to contact this person.
That's not right.

I bet a person could contact a lot of the applicants, based on what is posted here.

How do you know which applicants are going to "lose it" when they see their emails here and all the public humiliation that goes along with it?

I know the rules say you can use the emails as you see fit. Is it fit? I don't think so.

[Pyrts]

Speaking as a Junior Anthropologist (anthropology grad student), I'd like to offer some insights, here:

Firstus, "Cro-Magnon" is simply "people from a region and time period in France." It's really goodole Homo Sapiens, and beyond cultural material, we can't look at a bone and go "Whoa! Cro-Magnon!"

However, there ARE ways to tell a Neanderthal from Homo Sapiens. The DNA material is questionable, but there are certain points about skull shape and the length of the arm and shin bones, a lack of a "chinned jaw bone," presence of an "occipital bun" and so forth that would be VERY evident with a set of x-rays.

Honestly, a first year forensic anthropologist could tell the difference, as could any dozen archaeologists that you wished to consult. Heck, *I* could probably do it myself.


(good image here that gets rid of the "hairy like a chimpanzee" concept: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Neanderthaler.JPG )

Good article mentioning the basic differences:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_neanderthalensis