A million ain't much anymore.

[mayday]

I think Mr. Randi will have to raise the stakes a bit to keep up with inflation.

[Jess]

Personally, I think a million dollars is pretty generous. Although, I guess all the psychics could take a shot at guessing some lottery numbers instead. I wonder why none of them thought to do this before? :rolleyes:

[Zep]

It's a lot if you ain't got it.

You got a million US, mayday?

[Errata]

Well considering all those psychics that charge people $100 here, $100 there for their services, clearly they still need to make a living. Any one of those people, if they had any genuine talent, could win the million. Then if they wanted they could use the million to give out their services free for the good of humanity instead of charging the very people who need them most.

[sophia8]

I've often wondered - is the million dollars a US million or a British million? That is, $100,000 or $1,000,000?

[aargh57]

Didn't Randi start his prize at 10,000 USD? I would say a 990,000% increase has kept up with inflation. Besides, the big payoff would be the money that you could make afterward by having your claim be validated by scientific methods. Besides, just think of all the woo you could by with that mil.

[William Smith]

This has been discussed at least once before: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=11311&highlight=million or http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=41433

Do you intend to apply for the Challenge, mayday? Or only in case the old miser pushes up the ante?

[Blue Bubble]

I've often wondered - is the million dollars a US million or a British million? That is, $100,000 or $1,000,000?

I don't know if this was meant as a joke ...

A million in both the USofA and the UK is 1,000,000.

[Thing]

It's still considerably more than you get for a Nobel prize. Need anyone say more?

[Mr. Scott]

It's in the FAQ here (http://www.randi.org/research/faq.html#1.1).

[Ririon]

It's in the FAQ here (http://www.randi.org/research/faq.html#1.1).
IIRC, the Goldman Sachs bonds are worth significantly more than $1M. Unless somebody passes the challenge, it will continue to grow. It can't be used for anything else, so when it is significantly more than another round number, the prize amount will probably increase. That way it will keep up with inflation. NP. :)

[JohnF_73]

I don't know if this was meant as a joke ...

A million in both the USofA and the UK is 1,000,000.

I think it was caused by some misremebered conception that a Billion was not the same in the US as in the UK.

Historically, there were two different kinds of billions. There is an American billion which is 1,000,000,000 = 10^9

and a British billion which is/was
1,000,000,000,000 = 10^12 (Or what the Americans would call a Trillion)

I am uncertain if/when they finally adopted the US definition.

[drkitten]

I've often wondered - is the million dollars a US million or a British million? That is, $100,000 or $1,000,000?

Neither. Both the US and British million are actually 1,000,000. But what Randi is offering is a Ruthenan million, which is actually 4,365,813,542.678. Not to be confused with the North Ruthenian million, which is 4,365,813,546.507, because that's a silly unit that I just made up to be sarcastic about.

[drkitten]

IIRC, the Goldman Sachs bonds are worth significantly more than $1M. Unless somebody passes the challenge, it will continue to grow. It can't be used for anything else, so when it is significantly more than another round number, the prize amount will probably increase. That way it will keep up with inflation. NP. :)

My understanding is that the JREF uses the interest on the million for operational funding.

[mayday]

You know, most of the people who apply for this million are kooks ;ooking to get rich quick. Truly talented people who have established careers of their own don't need to prove anything to Randi or the skeptimaniacs.

[Ririon]

You know, most of the people who apply for this million are kooks ;ooking to get rich quick. Truly talented people who have established careers of their own don't need to prove anything to Randi or the skeptimaniacs.
I know a few truly talented people with established careers who would not say no to a quick million dollars by demonstrating that they can actually do their job. Unfortunately, there is no "Mayday $1M nurse/eingineer/teacher/whatever challenge"

[Ririon]

My understanding is that the JREF uses the interest on the million for operational funding.
That is possible, I guess. The FAQ states that: "The JREF prize money is being held separately from the general operating funds of the organization. This prevents the JREF from accidentally spending the prize money." That does not say explicitly that the interest can not be used. "Accidentaly" or not.

Maybe the FAQ needs a FAQ. Who said skeptics would not nitpick at every detail of a skeptic's claim. ;)

[Darat]

I think Mr. Randi will have to raise the stakes a bit to keep up with inflation.

Really? How many TV shows give out more then a million as a top prize?

Seems to be a sum of money many, many people are willing to humiliate themselves to try and win, never mind giving up months of their life to do so.

[Darat]

I've often wondered - is the million dollars a US million or a British million? That is, $100,000 or $1,000,000?

A British million is the same as a USA million, are you getting confused with a British billion which is a million times a million and a USA billion which is "only" a thousand times a million?

[drkitten]

You know, most of the people who apply for this million are kooks ;ooking to get rich quick.

Oddly enough, this is correct.

The reason, mayday, is because most of the people who believe that they have superpowers are kooks. Almost by definition.

Normal people don't apply for the Randi challenge.

On the other hand, any "normal" person who actually had superpowers would be delighted to apply.

Because although it's possibly true that:

Truly talented people who have established careers of their own don't need to prove anything to Randi or the skeptimaniacs.

none of the truly talented people that I know would turn down a quick million dollars simply for demonstrating something easily within their competence.

[drkitten]

It's still considerably more than you get for a Nobel prize. Need anyone say more?

It's also more than the MacArthur Foundation "genius grants," too. And yet top-flight people slaver for those....

[TheBoyPaj]

I am uncertain if/when they finally adopted the US definition.

I'm British and I don't know what the current definition is in this country. I certainly think of a billion as a million million (the British version). It seems silly to jump to billion when "a thousand million" is perfectly acceptable.

After all, why stop there? Why not shout "billion" when you reach a hundred million. Or ten million?

As for the OP: Do you get a kick out of making yourself look foolish?

[Darat]

Oddly enough, this is correct.

...snip...

As they say even a broken clock is right twice a day (well unless it's a digital one and then who knows?)

[Bob Klase]

Truly talented people who have established careers of their own don't need to prove anything to Randi or the skeptimaniacs.

That's true. A couple other truisms:

-Truly talented people can quite often use an extra million dollars, and often do things that they *can* do to get money even thought they don't *need* to.

-Charlatans, fakers, liars and thiefs have more to lose by failing to prove anything than they do by winning a million dollars- therefore their claim that they don't need to prove anything is true- they can lie, cheat and steal without ever proving anything to gullible suckers.

[Hastur]

That is possible, I guess. The FAQ states that: "The JREF prize money is being held separately from the general operating funds of the organization. This prevents the JREF from accidentally spending the prize money." That does not say explicitly that the interest can not be used. "Accidentaly" or not.

As I recall, Randi did explicitly say that the interest from the bonds was used to pay JREF operating costs a couple years back in the commentary when Sylvia Browne's excuse du jour for not fulfilling her promise to take the challenge was that Randi wouldn't put the money in escrow.

[bjb]

When Charles Lindbergh flew from New York to Paris, he won a $25,000 prize offered by a New York hotel owner. The idea was to promote travel between New York and Paris and increase the tourism business. Aside from the money, Lindbergh became incredibly famous. Anyone who won the JREF challenge would be set for life, and the other paranormals would be eternally grateful for the promotion they would recieve from the prize having been won. Until then, the prize serves as a reminder that psychics can't perform under controlled conditions, and the failures of those who do apply reinforce this fact.

Mayday, you don't actually believe there are psychics out there who could win the prize if they felt like it, do you? And by the way, although I disagree with everything you've ever posted here, I have no objections to your signature.

[CFLarsen]

You know, most of the people who apply for this million are kooks ;ooking to get rich quick. Truly talented people who have established careers of their own don't need to prove anything to Randi or the skeptimaniacs.
Perhaps not. But, with that million dollars, they could (among other things):


Feed almost 40,000 people with rice for one year.

Keep 10 hospitals, each with 100 beds, operational for one year, saving countless of lives.

Buy 65,000 pairs of crutches for people with their legs blown off by landmines.

Buy water purification tablets, supplying 100,000 people with clean water for a year.

Buy 20 million packets of Oral Rehydration Salts to treat diarrhea, a leading cause of death among children.


Perhaps they don't need to prove anything, but they sure could help a lot of people.

Don't you think that is a worthy cause in itself? All they have to do is do what they claim. It will take less than a day, for most of the claimants.

Less than a day's work, mayday, and 100,000 people have clean water for a year.

[William Smith]

That's true. A couple other truisms:

-Truly talented people can quite often use an extra million dollars, and often do things that they *can* do to get money even thought they don't *need* to.

-Charlatans, fakers, liars and thiefs have more to lose by failing to prove anything than they do by winning a million dollars- therefore their claim that they don't need to prove anything is true- they can lie, cheat and steal without ever proving anything to gullible suckers.

Perhaps not. But, with that million dollars, they could (among other things):


Feed almost 40,000 people with rice for one year.

Keep 10 hospitals, each with 100 beds, operational for one year, saving countless of lives.

Buy 65,000 pairs of crutches for people with their legs blown off by landmines.

Buy water purification tablets, supplying 100,000 people with clean water for a year.

Buy 20 million packets of Oral Rehydration Salts to treat diarrhea, a leading cause of death among children.


Perhaps they don't need to prove anything, but they sure could help a lot of people.

Don't you think that is a worthy cause in itself? All they have to do is do what they claim. It will take less than a day, for most of the claimants.

Less than a day's work, mayday, and 100,000 people have clean water for a year.

(Thanks, guys.)

Eat phacts, mayday. Pheast your eyes on this.



Do you intend to apply for the Challenge, mayday? Or only in case the old miser pushes up the ante?

[Thing]

It's still considerably more than you get for a Nobel prize. Need anyone say more?
Yes, now I come to think of it, though not much. The amount is large enough that anyone claiming it's not enough to make it worth their while applying looks ridiculous. And that's that.

[Darat]

Perhaps not. But, with that million dollars, they could (among other things):


Feed almost 40,000 people with rice for one year.

Keep 10 hospitals, each with 100 beds, operational for one year, saving countless of lives.

Buy 65,000 pairs of crutches for people with their legs blown off by landmines.

Buy water purification tablets, supplying 100,000 people with clean water for a year.

Buy 20 million packets of Oral Rehydration Salts to treat diarrhea, a leading cause of death among children.


Perhaps they don't need to prove anything, but they sure could help a lot of people.

Don't you think that is a worthy cause in itself? All they have to do is do what they claim. It will take less than a day, for most of the claimants.

Less than a day's work, mayday, and 100,000 people have clean water for a year.


It's interesting isn't it that this point is one many of the people who claim these sort of superpowers can never answer.

I remember Lucianarchy with his claims regarding being able to predict the lottery numbers. He was another one who claimed he was so certain he had such a power and yet he choose (rather then prove it) to let hundreds of thousands of children die.

Nasty people these super-people. :(

[brodski]

I'm British and I don't know what the current definition is in this country.
While there are no "official" definitions for English words, these days if you hear the government talking about spending "billions of pounds", they tend to talk about thousands of millions, which is possibly as "official" as you're going to get.

[CFLarsen]

It's interesting isn't it that this point is one many of the people who claim these sort of superpowers can never answer.

I remember Lucianarchy with his claims regarding being able to predict the lottery numbers. He was another one who claimed he was so certain he had such a power and yet he choose (rather then prove it) to let hundreds of thousands of children die.

Nasty people these super-people. :(

"Nasty" doesn't even begin to describe them.

Never have I encountered such hatred, spite and venom as in superstitious people. Their veneer is the thinnest imaginable, despite their claims of Enlightenment and Illumination.

[sophia8]

A British million is the same as a USA million, are you getting confused with a British billion which is a million times a million and a USA billion which is "only" a thousand times a million?
Yes, Darat, you're right! Gah... Billions, billions, billions, billions......

[Abdul Alhazred]

Only kooks apply?

No charlatans who think they can fool Randi et al?

[TheBoyPaj]

Then, of course, there's the Carl Sagan BILLyon. As in "the galaxy is home to BILLyons of planets."

[Spektator]

Only kooks apply?

No charlatans who think they can fool Randi et al?
Well, the risk is very high for a charlatan who is making money from his or her performances. Let's say a scam artist can, I don't know, let's say fool people into thinking that he or she can bend quarters double just by concentrating on them. Actually, the scammer merely uses sleight of hand to substitute a pre-flattened coin for the mark's coin. The act is fleshed out by cold reading, "black-thread" levitation of playing cards, and other conjuring and mentalist tricks. Now, this scammer is making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year appearing on stage, on TV, and so on.

So if the charlatan in question takes the challenge and is exposed as a trickster...well, there goes a lot of future earning potential.

OTOH if a kook really believes he or she can, I don't know, let's say transmit thoughts to a confederate by telepathy, then the sincerely-deluded kook would have no trouble applying to take the challenge. Designing and agreeing to an effective protocol and actually showing up to take the challenge, now, is a different matter--few do that, and I respect the ones who do, because they at least show the depth of their commitment (and sometimes delusion).

[Abdul Alhazred]

Well, the risk is very high for a charlatan who is making money from his or her performances. ...

What of a new charlatan just starting out? Worth the shot to make a name using a relatively unusual trick?

Has it not happened even once in the entire 40 years or so since the challenge existed?

[bjb]

What of a new charlatan just starting out? Worth the shot to make a name using a relatively unusual trick?

Has it not happened even once in the entire 40 years or so since the challenge existed?

You seem to be describing the early career of Uri Geller. His spoonbending really did fool a lot of smart people into believing he had psychic powers. I'm pretty sure he has been avoiding the challenge, though.

[prewitt81]

I think Mr. Randi will have to raise the stakes a bit to keep up with inflation.

Shouldn't you be holding a crystal over a lotto ticket or something?

[Dave_46]

With regard to the British billion usage, I think that the word billion was used instead of milliard for 10^9 by a chancellor of the exchequer in the early days of the Thatcher administration, so its been in use here for about twenty five years.

Dave

[LostAngeles]

...

Normal people don't apply for the Randi challenge.
...

Does everyone forget that I did, or is it just because it was a product that needed to be tested and didn't require the kook who orginally applied to run the test that I get left out?

*sulk*

[CFLarsen]

Does everyone forget that I did, or is it just because it was a product that needed to be tested and didn't require the kook who orginally applied to run the test that I get left out?

*sulk*
You're not normal. You're very special. :)

[osmosis]

I finally figured it out a few months ago. This paranormal stuff has nothing to do with actually knowing anything or having any real powers, it's about pretending to be superior.

The paranormalists are mainly condescending and essentially elitist. That is the point, not the million bucks, or anything else that goes along with blowing the lid off of the scientific/skeptical "dogma".

It's all about the smug assumption that one is superior, that one knows something that most other people are too ignorant to discover.

[William Smith]

Welcome to the JREF Forum, osmosis.

[LostAngeles]

I finally figured it out a few months ago. This paranormal stuff has nothing to do with actually knowing anything or having any real powers, it's about pretending to be superior.

The paranormalists are mainly condescending and essentially elitist. That is the point, not the million bucks, or anything else that goes along with blowing the lid off of the scientific/skeptical "dogma".

It's all about the smug assumption that one is superior, that one knows something that most other people are too ignorant to discover.

That's how I see a lot of them. Sure, someone may be able to lift weights by telekinesis or send thoughts, but so far, all the applicants and the people making these claims seem to fall under osmosis's description.

Oh, and welcome.

[CFLarsen]

I finally figured it out a few months ago. This paranormal stuff has nothing to do with actually knowing anything or having any real powers, it's about pretending to be superior.

The paranormalists are mainly condescending and essentially elitist. That is the point, not the million bucks, or anything else that goes along with blowing the lid off of the scientific/skeptical "dogma".

It's all about the smug assumption that one is superior, that one knows something that most other people are too ignorant to discover.
Bingo.

[7th sextile]

Does everyone forget that I did, or is it just because it was a product that needed to be tested and didn't require the kook who orginally applied to run the test that I get left out?

*sulk*

It would be an egregious tu qouque for old 7th to call anyone abnormal,
but have you or have you not:

*given astrological advice to earthquakes

*refused to complete the Ammonite Saga despite popular demand

* adopted nicole spiese as your graduate degree role model

* readily assented to being Suezoled's Princess Rose Bride

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

[Nucular]

I think Mr. Randi will have to raise the stakes a bit to keep up with inflation.
First imagine mayday: someone asks you to do something you can do very easily - say, drive your car to the end of the road - and as long as you don't cheat (say, by getting someone else to do it), they'll give you a whole year's worth of your salary. Would you say yes?

Now ask how many people you know who earn a million dollars a year. If you'd do it, they'd do it, right? And everyone who earns less than them.

Personally, call me strange, but for one day's worth of my pay, at a stretch I'd actually do a whole day's work. Like every working day.

So a million dollars for a day's work I would think would be considered by pretty much everyone on earth a fairly reasonable offer.

Would you not say?

[Jon.]

Didn't Randi start his prize at 10,000 USD? I would say a 990,000% increase has kept up with inflation. Besides, the big payoff would be the money that you could make afterward by having your claim be validated by scientific methods. Besides, just think of all the woo you could by with that mil.

It's actually a 9900% increase (over $10,000). If it actually started at $1000, as noted above, it's a 99,000% increase.

Still well outstrips inflation, though.

[macgyver]

Not to gloat, or anything, but I'll have you all know that I am a thousandaire!

However, if I find some way to convert sarcasm into folding money I'll soon be able to put up my own million dollar prize....

As for all the wonderful things you could do for the children of the world, is somebody (ie Oprah Winfrey) actually doing this? I would think that she could generate a tax write off larger than my yearly salary by donating a fraction of her disposable income to just such causes...

Which brings us to the final question. Is there actually enough money just "lying around" to significantly reduce/eliminate such things as starving sick children in the world?

[Beleth]

So a million dollars for a day's work I would think would be considered by pretty much everyone on earth a fairly reasonable offer.

Would you not say?
Well...

At the risk of sounding like I'm defending mayday, there's really a lot more work that goes into a Challenge application than just one day's worth.

The test itself might just take a day, but the application process itself usually takes a few months. Not a few solid months, of course, but far more than just 8 hours of work.

[Nucular]

Well...

At the risk of sounding like I'm defending mayday, there's really a lot more work that goes into a Challenge application than just one day's worth.

The test itself might just take a day, but the application process itself usually takes a few months. Not a few solid months, of course, but far more than just 8 hours of work.
Weeeeell - go on then, I'll grant you. Though the point stands, I think.

Though saying that, a few emails back and forth to design a protocol (not much time), a preliminary test (half a day? A whole day?), then the actual test (a whole day, or even two!)... let's say three days, then. I don't earn a million dollars in three days, but I sure would if I was psychic.

Bear in mind, I'm not thinking of endless obfuscating wrangling in the protocol design, I'm thinking of someone who can do what they say they can do. And obviously with the proviso that it's a quick and easy talent, not "over six months of concentrating very hard for 10 hours a day I can cause world peace" or something.

God I love sceptics, even when we broadly agree we can still find something to bicker about :)

[Beleth]

Indeed. And even if it took three solid days, I wouldn't mind earning a million bucks for three days' (legal) work.

[LostAngeles]

Answers in bold:

It would be an egregious tu qouque for old 7th to call anyone abnormal,
but have you or have you not:

*given astrological advice to earthquakes
No. They were hurricanes.
*refused to complete the Ammonite Saga despite popular demand
No. What popular demand?
* adopted nicole spiese as your graduate degree role model
I refuse to answer on the grounds that I may incriminate myself.
* readily assented to being Suezoled's Princess Rose Bride
Being the Rose Bride isn't exactly a choice...
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????

[Flange Desire]

I think Mr. Randi will have to raise the stakes a bit to keep up with inflation.

Absolute twaddle and humbug!
Just ignore the money if you think it trivial.
Worldwide acclaim and Nobel prizes should be ample incentive
for one to demonstrate their paranormal claim.

Add this pathetic one to the ever growing list of excuses for not doing so.

[H3LL]

Mayday, How's your plan going to switch vaccines for children with something useless?


.

[thatguywhojuggles]

Indeed. And even if it took three solid days, I wouldn't mind earning a million bucks for three days' (legal) work.

If I worked for 10 years, 5 days a week, 8 hours a day, it would be awesome to make a million dollars.

Though, I would need to be paid as I went. Say $8,333 a month?

I'm ready to start today!

[aargh57]

It's actually a 9900% increase (over $10,000). If it actually started at $1000, as noted above, it's a 99,000% increase.

Still well outstrips inflation, though.


Ooops.

[William Smith]

Mayday, any comments on the responses to your thread?

What prompted you to start the thread in the first place?

[kalen]

Perhaps not. But, with that million dollars, they could (among other things):

Feed almost 40,000 people with rice for one year.
Keep 10 hospitals, each with 100 beds, operational for one year, saving countless of lives.
Buy 65,000 pairs of crutches for people with their legs blown off by landmines.
Buy water purification tablets, supplying 100,000 people with clean water for a year.
Buy 20 million packets of Oral Rehydration Salts to treat diarrhea, a leading cause of death among children.
Perhaps they don't need to prove anything, but they sure could help a lot of people.

Don't you think that is a worthy cause in itself? All they have to do is do what they claim. It will take less than a day, for most of the claimants.

Less than a day's work, mayday, and 100,000 people have clean water for a year.

See, if all these truly gifted psychics don't come forward to claim the prize, they're actually letting people die!

[LeCynthia]

Personally, I think a million dollars is pretty generous. Although, I guess all the psychics could take a shot at guessing some lottery numbers instead. I wonder why none of them thought to do this before? :rolleyes:

They've been asked: http://rebeccab.home.mchsi.com

[NobbyNobbs]

I'm British and I don't know what the current definition is in this country. I certainly think of a billion as a million million (the British version). It seems silly to jump to billion when "a thousand million" is perfectly acceptable.




Well, if that's the case, then it's silly to jump to a million when "a thousand thousand" is perfectly acceptable.

Hell, why jump to 100 when "ten tens" will do just as well?

[TheBoyPaj]

Well, if that's the case, then it's silly to jump to a million when "a thousand thousand" is perfectly acceptable.

Hell, why jump to 100 when "ten tens" will do just as well?

But at least that's a rule that's easy to remember. When you end up repeating yourself ("ten tens"), you invent a new term. I know it's all arbitrary.

[Errata]

But at least that's a rule that's easy to remember. When you end up repeating yourself ("ten tens"), you invent a new term. I know it's all arbitrary.

You wouldn't have to repeat yourself for a thousand. You could just say "ten hundred". If the rule is what you say it is, then 10000 would be a "thousand" and 100000000 would be a "million". Thats evidently not how it works. Yes the system is somewhat arbitrary, but you really have no basis for claiming that one definition of billion is more consistent than another.

[William Smith]

Wow, this "lull in paranormality" does reveal a lot of "interesting" posts, duzznt it?

[thaiboxerken]

You know, most of the people who apply for this million are kooks ;ooking to get rich quick.

I agree, completely. However, most people who claim to have superpowers are also kooks. Those who refuse the challenge are probably kooky frauds that know they don't have superpowers.

[William Smith]

I agree, completely. However, most people who claim to have superpowers are also kooks. Those who refuse the challenge are probably kooky frauds that know they don't have superpowers.

You most likely do not agree that "A million ain't much anymore". do you, thaiboxerken? (Would you be miffed if I replaced your avatar with the "Ken" of "Street Fighter II" in my mind? [Tatsu-maki-sen-pu-kyaku])



Hello mayday, where are you?

[thaiboxerken]

A million dollars is something I'd like to have. I just need to find a psychic to partner up with. Alas, such people don't exist.

[T'ai Chi]

See, if all these truly gifted psychics don't come forward to claim the prize, they're actually letting people die!

Hey, feel free to just donate the million $ right now.

No need to shift the blame to people with odd claims.

[thaiboxerken]

What makes you think Kalen has a million dollars?

[William Smith]

Hey, feel free to just donate the million $ right now.

No need to shift the blame to people with odd claims.

"The World According To T'ai Chi."

[mayday]

My brother-in-law is a self-made millionaire who sold his company a few years back for 172 million dollars.
So I think a million dollars would be pocket change to him and probably not really worth his time.

Money isn't everything.

[thaiboxerken]

So your brother-in-law has superpowers to test?

[William Smith]

My brother-in-law is a self-made millionaire who sold his company a few years back for 172 million dollars.
So I think a million dollars would be pocket change to him and probably not really worth his time.

Money isn't everything.

Anecdotal evidence, at best. And representing less than 0,0001% of the world's population.

If he had a "paranormal, supernatural or occult power", he still might pick up the JREF Million in a jiffy. And donate it to charity. Or blow it on crack and hookers.

[William Smith]

...
Money isn't everything.

Also, does this statement not kind of contradict your thread theme?

[T'ai Chi]

0nce you do something it would be part of the natural world, hence no longer supernatural/paranormal.

Second, it is well-knwon that science is not determined by a single experiment.

But most importantly, people have the right to proceed via the common channels of the scientific process rather via challenges from skeptic clubs.

[Doubt]

0nce you do something it would be part of the natural world, hence no longer supernatural/paranormal.

If they could do it at all it would not be paranormal to start with. But The definition of what is paranormal is worked out long before the challenge. All they have to do is perform what they agreed to. Success won’t invalidate the protocol.


Second, it is well-knwon that science is not determined by a single experiment.

Where is it claimed that the challange is the be all, end all proof?


But most importantly, people have the right to proceed via the common channels of the scientific process rather via challenges from skeptic clubs.

To bad we don't see real progress. Could it be that most of what is considered paranormal is not real?

[joller]

They've been asked: http://rebeccab.home.mchsi.com
Common misconception: frequency analysis and statistics do not help you to guess what the next powerball draw will be.
You can use it to validate wether the process is truly random, but not to predict what the next draw will be, unless it's not really random, of course, and nothing really is - although I exclude quantum effects from this statement, for the time being. It's just random to a suficient extent.

[joller]

And representing less than 0,0001% of the world's population.

cool! Have you got a source for that sort of statistics?
BTW. I couldn't help but notice you're using a comma instead of a point for decimal point - where are you from?
EDIT: forget it! looks like the comma for a decimal point is a widespread plague after all.
Also, does this statement not kind of contradict your thread theme?
Good find. I thought about it myself.
0nce you do something it would be part of the natural world, hence no longer supernatural/paranormal.
As Doubt said - that doesn't matter, you get your money anyway. Which as you said is not everything, but, as you said, it's also not that much anymore. For your brother in law that is.

Second, it is well-knwon that science is not determined by a single experiment.
No one said it's science.

But most importantly, people have the right to proceed via the common channels of the scientific process rather via challenges from skeptic clubs.
Yes- the world of 'real science' responds really well to people claiming all sorts of weird stuff. I can almost guarantee you though (which means that I really can't, but i think it's highly likely) that a lot of scientists would jump at a chance to validate sciantifically someone who would have become the first JREF prize winner.

[TheBoyPaj]

You wouldn't have to repeat yourself for a thousand. You could just say "ten hundred".

Hey, you've got a point there. Thanks.

[Thing]

My brother-in-law is a self-made millionaire who sold his company a few years back for 172 million dollars.
So I think a million dollars would be pocket change to him and probably not really worth his time.


You think? Haven't you asked him?

[Ririon]

...
BTW. I couldn't help but notice you're using a comma instead of a point for decimal point - where are you from?
EDIT: forget it! looks like the comma for a decimal point is a widespread plague after all...
Evidence? I thought I was alone in the world. Or at least part of a 0,1 % minority who uses a comma for a decimal point and enjoys derails. :)

[Dustin Kesselberg]

There seems to be 3 different accounts from the JREF on the GoldmanSacs.

What does this mean?

[Darat]

There seems to be 3 different accounts from the JREF on the GoldmanSacs.

What does this mean?

Link?

[Darat]

Evidence? I thought I was alone in the world. Or at least part of a 0,1 % minority who uses a comma for a decimal point and enjoys derails. :)

Decimal_separator


Dot countries

Countries where a dot is used to mark the radix point include:
Australia, Botswana, Canada (English-speaking), China, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Hong Kong of the People's Republic of China, India, Ireland, Israel, Japan, Korea (both North and South), Malaysia, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, New Zealand, Pakistan, Panama, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, United Kingdom, United States (including insular area of Puerto Rico),


Comma countries

Countries where a comma is used to mark the radix point include:
Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada (French-speaking), Croatia, Cuba, Chile, Colombia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, Faroes, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Greenland, Hungary, Indonesia, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg (uses both separators officially), Macedonia, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zimbabwe


Momayyez countries

Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, UAE

[William Smith]

cool! Have you got a source for that sort of statistics?
...


Yes, my gluteus maximus.

I only did a rough estimate: 6,000,000,000 people on the planet, so 0.0001% (please excuse my comma mishap from before) equal 6,000 people with a fortune of 172,000,000 buckaroos or more.

There may actually be more.
My point was to illustrate the amount of people mayday's brother-in-law represent vis-à-vis the amount of people to whom a million clams does mean a lot of money.

[Paul2]

0nce you do something it would be part of the natural world, hence no longer supernatural/paranormal.

So any supernatural event that occured would be not supernatural? That's a strange way to craft a definition.

A better understanding of the supernatural would be an event that is (in part) unexplainable by *current* scientific understanding. Also, certain topics (ESP, telekenesis, etc.) are commonly understood to be paranormal by convention (nuttin' wrong with that). The definition of paranormal or supernatural may have some operational or structural aspects to it, but it may also define subjects or areas by convention.

[Ducky]

My brother-in-law is a self-made millionaire who sold his company a few years back for 172 million dollars.
So I think a million dollars would be pocket change to him and probably not really worth his time.

Money isn't everything.



You are so full of s**t.

[joller]

My point was to illustrate the amount of people mayday's brother-in-law represent vis-à-vis the amount of people to whom a million clams does mean a lot of money.
I know! I know! She's all BS anyway. The thread got so boring though, that I thought maybe at least I'll learn something useful.
I know there's only about a couple hundred 'billionaires' (in the 10^9 sense) around the world, I thought you might have found a website that has got a statistics for what percentile of people earn within specific brackets around the world.

[DrDave]

There's a site (www.globalrichlist.com) which takes your annual income and tells you what percentile you fall into. It takes surprisingly little (under £30,000) to fall into the top 1% biggest earners on the planet.

On the subject of $1,000,000 being not worth it for rich people, then why do the CEOs of the major companies still work? Some of those are easily worth upwards of say $50m but they still work for less than $1m per day. So evidently they feel like a million would be worth their time.

To paraphrase someone else on this forum, most people on the planet are prepared to work a full day for just a single day's wages, and for almost all this will not even come close to $1,000 never mind $1,000,000.

Dave

[maatorc]

....The definition of what is paranormal is worked out long before the challenge....

Hi Doubt -

The challenge in principle is a great idea. I have some reservations about the setup.
I have carefully examined the Rules and FAQ's and cannot see any definition of paranormal which is what the Formal Test is supposed to decide on. There is the clear given from the Rules that it is "...paranormal, supernatural, or occult power..." that is to be demonstrated.
FAQ 2.2 only discusses dictionary definitions which explain our commonly held and generally agreed understanding of what might or might not be normal.
The mechanically objective challenge Formal Test protocols quite rightly say in effect: "You claim, we accept, you demonstrate, we pay".
What is missing are equally mechanically objective standards for what constitutes "...paranormal, supernatural, or occult power...". Remember, it is this and nothing else the Formal Test is offered for.
In the Rules and FAQ's there is no explanation of any scientific, empirical, phenomenological, experiential, repeatable experiment or demonstration of any instance of any event being or not being a "...paranormal, supernatural, or occult power...".
Thus the Rules and FAQ's are seen to express a clearly subjective and speculative presumption of the all-inclusve universality of material perception, a presumption which must by definition be beyond it's capacity to know, explain, or demonstrate.
In effect, the Rules and FAQ's are offering no more than an opinion of "...paranormal, supernatural, or occult power..." as the criteria on which to base a 'conclusion' in the Formal Test.
On the face of it the JREF Formal Test would not and could not know a "...paranormal, supernatural, or occult power..." if it fell over one: It has no known measurable means of knowing.
The Rules and Formal Test may still be valid, but there is no way the Rules and Formal Test can know if they are valid.
The ostensible objectivity of the Formal Test rests on the subjective and unverifiable presumptions underlying the Rules, as given in the FAQ's.
The challenge, by definition, in it's present form, cannot ever find anyone to pass the Formal Test.

maatorc.

[nathan]

What is missing are equally mechanically objective standards for what constitutes "...paranormal, supernatural, or occult power...".

Can you suggest a definition?

The paranormal claims people make are fuzzy. The protocol negotiation firms up whatever the claim happens to be. Sometimes at that point it becomes clear the claim is not paranormal at all, but something well understood.

[Darat]

Can you suggest a definition?

The paranormal claims people make are fuzzy. The protocol negotiation firms up whatever the claim happens to be. Sometimes at that point it becomes clear the claim is not paranormal at all, but something well understood.

maatoric's points were all addressed in this thread: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1616755#post1616755

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Link?


http://tfcny.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/esearch.php

Type in "randi"


James Randi Education Foundation Inc. FL 2004 $2,168,624 990 18 65-0649443
James Randi Education Foundation Inc. FL 2003 $1,878,457 990 18 65-0649443
James Randi Education Foundation Inc. FL 2002 $1,733,446 990 18 65-0649443

[Darat]

http://tfcny.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/esearch.php

Type in "randi"


James Randi Education Foundation Inc. FL 2004 $2,168,624 990 18 65-0649443
James Randi Education Foundation Inc. FL 2003 $1,878,457 990 18 65-0649443
James Randi Education Foundation Inc. FL 2002 $1,733,446 990 18 65-0649443

Ah right - you've got a bit confused, that's not "... the GoldmanSacs." that's on line copies of the JREF's annual return for it's charity status (990). It has to submit one of those every year.

Goldman Sachs (http://www.gs.com/) is the investment banking and securities firm that in effect holds the million dollar worth of bonds that guarantees the JREF has the funds to pay out if the Challenge is ever won.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Ah right - you've got a bit confused, that's not "... the GoldmanSacs." that's on line copies of the JREF's annual return for it's charity status (990). It has to submit one of those every year.

Goldman Sachs (http://www.gs.com/) is the investment banking and securities firm that in effect holds the million dollar worth of bonds that guarantees the JREF has the funds to pay out if the Challenge is ever won.


Where do I see how much is currently in their Sachs bond account?

[Darat]

Where do I see how much is currently in their Sachs bond account?


You write to the JREF:

http://www.randi.org/research/faq.html#3.1


...snip...

3.1. Does the prize money really exist?

The short answer: Yes.

The medium-length answer: The money is held in the form of immediately negotiable bonds held by Goldman Sachs, a highly respected investment firm. Anyone can verify that the money exists by requesting the information in writing from the JREF. They will in turn forward you the most recent account statement from Goldman Sachs.


...snip...

[maatorc]

Can you suggest a definition?

nathan -

No: A definition is not what is needed. To empirically test for a psychical event we need an established empirical model of the demonstration that a corresponding psychical event has previously been empirically proven to have occured.

This is not to say that psychical events actually happen, but that the challenge is incapable of demonstrating the truth or falsity of any claimed psychical event.

How, for example, could an empirical test experientially prove or disprove that someone actually did or did not experience remote viewing? A simultaneous realization on the part of the one conducting the test of the claimed remote viewing experience is the one and only possible proof to the one conducting the test, but that realization would by definition be psychical and not proof to anyone else.

It is not good enough to say that a particular type of claimed power is accepted, defined, categorised, or nominated as "...paranormal, supernatural or occult power..." by the Rules, without definitive proof that it is so.

Just as empirical tests cannot prove or disprove psychical events, so psychical events cannot be empirically proven by those who experience them, if they should actually occur, and I am not saying that they do.

maatorc.

[Doubt]

nathan -

No: A definition is not what is needed. To empirically test for a psychical event we need an established empirical model of the demonstration that a corresponding psychical event has previously been empirically proven to have occured.


The Challange is not intended to be the ultimate proof. It is a chance for those who make paranormal claims to stand and deliver. And they have yet to deliver.


This is not to say that psychical events actually happen, but that the challenge is incapable of demonstrating the truth or falsity of any claimed psychical event.

How, for example, could an empirical test experientially prove or disprove that someone actually did or did not experience remote viewing? A simultaneous realization on the part of the one conducting the test of the claimed remote viewing experience is the one and only possible proof to the one conducting the test, but that realization would by definition be psychical and not proof to anyone else.


This is not an issue for the challange. The person who thinks they have such an ability states what they can do and under what condtions they can do it. If they fail then either they cannot do what they claim or they don't understand their own situation.

In many cases there is an open trial before any testing starts. If the open trail fails then no test takes place. This works well for Dowsing. In other cases all that can be done is to encourge the applicant to test themselves before agreeing to a protocol. Such suggestions are often ignored.

In any event, the burden of proof rests on the applicant. If they cannot deliver on their claim then the default assumption is that they are wrong. Just how wrong and why is outside the scope of the challange.


It is not good enough to say that a particular type of claimed power is accepted, defined, categorised, or nominated as "...paranormal, supernatural or occult power..." by the Rules, without definitive proof that it is so.


Not good enough? If it contradicts the body of knowledge collected by science, then it is paranormal. All the remains is working out if it is practical to test.

Nobody is claiming that the challange is the ultimate proof for or against any given ability. It is only a practical chance for someone to demonstate their claim without cheating or getting lucky. Given that the applicant has to pay for the expenses, it is a good place to start for someone who can deliver. So far no such person has turned up.

Serious scientific testing would most likely follow a winner. All that is needed is someone who can do what they claim.

[TheBoyPaj]

There's a site (www.globalrichlist.com) which takes your annual income and tells you what percentile you fall into. It takes surprisingly little (under £30,000) to fall into the top 1% biggest earners on the planet.

You found a calculator but didn't bother to work out if GzuzKryzt's maths* was correct?

170 million dollars, invested in a really average savings account earning, say, 10% provides an income of... let's see..... 17 million dollars a year which, according to that website equates to the top 0.001%

Just one decimal place out. Nice.

Nevertheless, I concur with the previous poster about what mayday is full of.



*Yeah. "Maths". Suck it up.

[petre]

nathan -

No: A definition is not what is needed. To empirically test for a psychical event we need an established empirical model of the demonstration that a corresponding psychical event has previously been empirically proven to have occured.

This is not to say that psychical events actually happen, but that the challenge is incapable of demonstrating the truth or falsity of any claimed psychical event.

How, for example, could an empirical test experientially prove or disprove that someone actually did or did not experience remote viewing? A simultaneous realization on the part of the one conducting the test of the claimed remote viewing experience is the one and only possible proof to the one conducting the test, but that realization would by definition be psychical and not proof to anyone else.

It is not good enough to say that a particular type of claimed power is accepted, defined, categorised, or nominated as "...paranormal, supernatural or occult power..." by the Rules, without definitive proof that it is so.

Just as empirical tests cannot prove or disprove psychical events, so psychical events cannot be empirically proven by those who experience them, if they should actually occur, and I am not saying that they do.

maatorc.

Perhaps you do not like that the challenge does not cover all paranormal claims. It is a known failing. The challenge has no way to test paranormal events that occur anywhere in the universe except on Earth, and even then in a fairly limited number of locations (only where humans go). Similarly, it has no means to test anything that is not observable from outside the test subject.

Also, as you note, a single failure of the challenge does not constitue "proof" that the claimed paranormal phenomenon does not exist at all (nor is it designed to prove such). Indeed, JREF is often (if not always) clear to note only that the result proves the claim did not hold true for that particular attempt.

The challenge allows any believer of the paranormal to make any testable claim and attempt to prove it under controlled conditions. It is up to those that examine the challenge to decide for themselves what conclusions can be drawn from the results. It appears you have decided the results do not clearly indicate anything to you, because no test of any kind could ever indicate anything to your desired level of certainty. That is your choice. Perhaps the next time a protocol negotiation is begun, you will join a message board discussion and suggest ways the protocol might be improved to your satisfaction. I doubt you will choose to add anything constructive to such a conversation, instead opting only to identify items you feel are flaws and never offering any alternative you feel would be an improvement, but I will await the chance to be pleasantly surprised.

[William Smith]

Petre and Doubt made some good points in their respective last posts. And did it quicker than I could.

Maatorc, you probably have productive intentions. Although I feel surprised about your return with the same claim as in this thread http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=53213 where you left the discussion saying:

"Darat-
I have all along understood exactly what the challenge is. I may be wrong in seeing it as flawed. I agree this conversation can achieve nothing. Thanks to you and others for replying to me.
maatorc."

I propose you start a new thread and choose a title according to your ideas. We may understand you better if you do not attach yourself to an existing thread.
However, you might choose to browse or search the Challenge Forum first to find out if your ideas have already been discussed.

Perhaps the Challenge benefits most if you laid down specific improvement suggestions to the whole process, i.e. what could get done better at which point.

We listen.

[TjW]

nathan -

No: A definition is not what is needed. To empirically test for a psychical event we need an established empirical model of the demonstration that a corresponding psychical event has previously been empirically proven to have occured.

This is not to say that psychical events actually happen, but that the challenge is incapable of demonstrating the truth or falsity of any claimed psychical event.

How, for example, could an empirical test experientially prove or disprove that someone actually did or did not experience remote viewing? A simultaneous realization on the part of the one conducting the test of the claimed remote viewing experience is the one and only possible proof to the one conducting the test, but that realization would by definition be psychical and not proof to anyone else.

It is not good enough to say that a particular type of claimed power is accepted, defined, categorised, or nominated as "...paranormal, supernatural or occult power..." by the Rules, without definitive proof that it is so.

Just as empirical tests cannot prove or disprove psychical events, so psychical events cannot be empirically proven by those who experience them, if they should actually occur, and I am not saying that they do.

maatorc.
You've been told this before, and didn't listen, so I don't really suppose this will help, but here goes anyway:

The challenge is not a proof. It's a challenge. It's a bar bet. "I can stuff fifteen peanuts up my nose!" "Five bucks says you can't -- or won't".

Stuff fourteen up there, and remarkable as that may be, you'll pay out five bucks. The bar bet need prove nothing about human physiology in general.

[Doubt]

You've been told this before, and didn't listen, so I don't really suppose this will help, but here goes anyway:

The challenge is not a proof. It's a challenge. It's a bar bet. "I can stuff fifteen peanuts up my nose!" "Five bucks says you can't -- or won't".

Stuff fourteen up there, and remarkable as that may be, you'll pay out five bucks. The bar bet need prove nothing about human physiology in general.

Oh sure. Now you have me thinking how to write up a protocol for that......

:D

[LostAngeles]

My brother-in-law is a self-made millionaire who sold his company a few years back for 172 million dollars.
So I think a million dollars would be pocket change to him and probably not really worth his time.

Money isn't everything.

Sweet. May I have a few grand to give to UC, please?

[mayday]

Anecdotal evidence, at best. And representing less than 0,0001% of the world's population.



Yea, and your chances of winning powerball are even less than that.

But it doesn't stop you from standing in the lotto line with the rest of the losers, does it?

[mayday]

You are so full of s**t.

Afraid not. He is a big fat ugly jacka$$ who doesn't like anyone or anything but his stupid airplanes. He is also one of the most successful (edited for privacy purposes) people in the country.
To look at him on the street you would never guess. He wears the same clothes he wore ten years ago. Dorky skips, nerdy white socks, he has dozens of (blank) Marketing Services t-shirts with the logo on them which he wears all the time. Drives a 1990's Ford Ranger pick up to the airport where he owns several hangers. Keeps the Lexus he used to entertain clients with parked in a garage.
I don't see a penny of that money. This old (blank) wouldn't give you air if you were in a jug.
In his defense (this is the only time I would ever stick up for the old...), he doesn't feel the need to wear his wealth. When you wave your money all over the place it is usually because you really haven't got any and you are trying to impress someone. Looking good, up to your neck in debt with no money and a paycheck away from bankruptcy.
Sure, I wish I was the one who sold my company for 172 million, then I wouldn't have to be messing with filthy disease ridden people.

But my brother-in-law aside.

Most people (this includes most of you) live a desperate existence. You're broke and you are in debt. Your financial situation is not unlike most of the schmucks who apply for the "challenge". You have credit cards out the butt and probably have bill collectors calling, half your annual income tied up in things that go down in value as I speak (cars, boats) and other junk you can't afford. You live paycheck to paycheck (those of you who work) and you can't manage one of the single most important things in your life (your money) but you come on the JREF forum and pretend to be the big bad KIA when you are more full of crap than the people with no dignity who apply for that challenge.
The challengers are full of crap? I think some people need to look in the mirror and stop fooling themselves.

One thing I am not in is debt. I make my own money, live within my means. I know the value of a dollar and I save. I don't borrow money and I don't buy things I can't pay cash for. This includes my house, fuzzball. I'm 31 yrs. old with three kids and I live in a paid for house. I'm not stupid enough to go into debt to buy new cars that depreciate in value the moment you drive it off the floor. I know the value of a dollar. I know about the wisdom in long term mutual funds. I will retire with a good sized inheritance to leave my relatives.

[maatorc]

Maatorc, I feel surprised about your return with the same claim as in this thread http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=53213

Gzuzkryzt -
It is not quite the same claim. You can see in the above thread the concern is about the Formal Test being able to determine what is or is not "...paranormal, supernatural, or occult...", (hereinafter 'p-s-o').
In my response to 'Doubt' I was picking up on "...The definition of what is paranormal..." as the comment on which to make my point. I had not considered my concerns as warranting a separate thread, and am quite surprised at the number and types of responses.
To be frank, I begin to detect a sensitive nerve, an "I don't want to know about this", that I have entered forbidden territory, almost a whiff of paranoia.
Here the concern rests on the other end of the process, which you can see from my reply, that there is an inconsistency between an unverified subjective notion of 'p-s-o' and the ostensible objectivity of the Formal Test.
This inconsistency would appear to render the challenge Formal Test as to whether any demonstration is or is not 'p-s-o' undecideable.

The challenge may be paraphrased as;
(1) There is a claimed class of events designated 'p-s-o'.
(2) There is no known evidence that any event of this claimed class of events has ever occurred.
(3) There is no known material-physical procedure able to conclusively decide whether or not any event of any class of events is or is not an event of the claimed class of events designated 'p-s-o'.
(4) If, in the Formal Test, a claimant performs an event of that class of events designated 'p-s-o', whether or not it is 'p-s-o', the Rules of this challenge stipulate that the event is an event of the claimed class of events designated 'p-s-o', and the JREF will pay the claimant $1 million.

It is highly unlikely there will ever be a Formal Test of the Challenge.

maatorc.

[Ducky]

Most people (this includes most of you) live a desperate existence. You're broke and you are in debt. Your financial situation is not unlike most of the schmucks who apply for the "challenge". You have credit cards out the butt and probably have bill collectors calling, half your annual income tied up in things that go down in value as I speak (cars, boats) and other junk you can't afford. You live paycheck to paycheck (those of you who work) and you can't manage one of the single most important things in your life (your money) but you come on the JREF forum and pretend to be the big bad KIA when you are more full of crap than the people with no dignity who apply for that challenge.

One thing I am not in is debt. I make my own money, live within my means. I know the value of a dollar and I save. I don't borrow money and I don't buy things I can't pay cash for. This includes my house, fuzzball. I'm 31 yrs. old with three kids and I live in a paid for house. I'm not stupid enough to go into debt to buy new cars that depreciate in value the moment you drive it off the floor. I know the value of a dollar. I know about the wisdom in long term mutual funds. I will retire with a good sized inheritance to leave my relatives.

:rolleyes:

Methinks the lady doth protesteth too much.

Hey tell you what, go whack some snakes and you'll feel better.

Ps. you don't have any clue what my life is like.

ETA:

PS, both my car and my boat are paid for, moron.

[The_Fire]

broke? Nah....Far from it.

[Darat]

Gzuzkryzt -
It is not quite the same claim. You can see in the above thread the concern is about the Formal Test being able to determine what is or is not "...paranormal, supernatural, or occult...", (hereinafter 'p-s-o').
In my response to 'Doubt' I was picking up on "...The definition of what is paranormal..." as the comment on which to make my point. I had not considered my concerns as warranting a separate thread, and am quite surprised at the number and types of responses.
To be frank, I begin to detect a sensitive nerve, an "I don't want to know about this", that I have entered forbidden territory, almost a whiff of paranoia.
Here the concern rests on the other end of the process, which you can see from my reply, that there is an inconsistency between an unverified subjective notion of 'p-s-o' and the ostensible objectivity of the Formal Test.
This inconsistency would appear to render the challenge Formal Test as to whether any demonstration is or is not 'p-s-o' undecideable.

The challenge may be paraphrased as;
(1) There is a claimed class of events designated 'p-s-o'.
(2) There is no known evidence that any event of this claimed class of events has ever occurred.
(3) There is no known material-physical procedure able to conclusively decide whether or not any event of any class of events is or is not an event of the claimed class of events designated 'p-s-o'.
(4) If, in the Formal Test, a claimant performs an event of that class of events designated 'p-s-o', whether or not it is 'p-s-o', the Rules of this challenge stipulate that the event is an event of the claimed class of events designated 'p-s-o', and the JREF will pay the claimant $1 million.



Dealt with and answered in previous threads.


It is highly unlikely there will ever be a Formal Test of the Challenge.

maatorc.

If by that you mean no one will ever move to the Challenge phase then you are wrong - it has happened at least once.

(That does not mean that anyone has ever passed the preliminary test just Randi has several times waived the requirement for the preliminary test.)

[rjh01]

... I make my own money, live within my means. I know the value of a dollar and I save. I don't borrow money and I don't buy things I can't pay cash for. This includes my house, fuzzball. I'm 31 yrs. old with three kids and I live in a paid for house. I'm not stupid enough to go into debt to buy new cars that depreciate in value the moment you drive it off the floor. I know the value of a dollar.

How can you own a house and have three kids and only 31 years old? Either the house is not worth much or your income is very large or you have a spouse with money.

Is your house called fuzzball?

[maatorc]

Darat -

[QUOTE](That does not mean that anyone has ever passed the preliminary test just Randi has several times waived the requirement for the preliminary test.)


Agreed: Allowing that Mr. Randi has several times waived it,
FAQ 1.4 states:
Q. How many people have passed the preliminary test?
A. None. Most applicants........never tested.

If by that you mean no one will ever move to the Challenge phase then you are wrong - it has happened at least once.
FAQ 1.5 states:
Q. How many have passed the formal test?
A. No one has ever taken the formal test, as one must first pass the preliminary test.

maatorc.

[Darat]

[QUOTE=Darat;1647979]

Darat -



Agreed: Allowing that Mr. Randi has several times waived it,
FAQ 1.4 states:
Q. How many people have passed the preliminary test?
A. None. Most applicants........never tested.


FAQ 1.5 states:
Q. How many have passed the formal test?
A. No one has ever taken the formal test, as one must first pass the preliminary test.

maatorc.
See: http://www.randi.org/jr/112902.html

and http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2002/homeopathytrans.shtml

(Empahsis me.)
NARRATOR (NEIL PEARSON): This week Horizon is doing something completely different. For the first time we are conducting our own experiment. We are testing a form of medicine which could transform the world. Should the results be positive this man will have to give us $1m.

JAMES RANDI (Paranormal Investigator): Do the test, prove that it works and win a million dollars.

...snip...

NARRATOR: As part of his campaign to test bizarre claims Randi has decided to put his money where his mouth is. On his website is a public promise: to anyone who prove the scientifically impossible Randi will pay $1m.

JAMES RANDI: This is not a cheap theatrical stung. It's theatrical, yes, but it's a million dollar's worth.

NARRATOR: Proving the memory of water would certainly qualify for the million dollars. To win the prize someone would simply have to repeat Ennis's experiments under controlled conditions, yet no-one has applied.

JAMES RANDI: Where are the homeopathic labs, the biological labs around the world, who say that this is the real thing who would want to make a million dollars and aren't doing it?

NARRATOR: So Horizon decided to take up Randi's challenge. We gathered experts from some of Britain's leading scientific institutions to help us repeat Ennis's experiments. Under the most rigorous of conditions they'll see whether they can find any evidence for the memory of water. We brought James Randi over from the United States to witness the experiment and we came to the world's most august scientific institution, the Royal Society. The Vice-President of the Society, Professor John Enderby, agreed to oversee the experiment for us.

[geoman]

Yea, and your chances of winning powerball are even less than that.

But it doesn't stop you from standing in the lotto line with the rest of the losers, does it?

Yes.

[TheBoyPaj]

Yep, me too.

[Gr8wight]

Yea, and your chances of winning powerball are even less than that.

But it doesn't stop you from standing in the lotto line with the rest of the losers, does it?

Wait. Weren't you the one trying to divine lottery numbers using a pendulum? How did that go, anyway?

[TheBoyPaj]

Yea, and your chances of winning powerball are even less than that.

But it doesn't stop you from standing in the lotto line with the rest of the losers, does it?

How is that relevant to the point of the post? You stated that people won't enter the challenge because a million isn't much, and you supported this by mentioning someone who is not representative of the average person's financial status.

The fact remains that, to the huge majority of people, a million is a lot of money and an ample incentive to do what they already claim to be able to do. And that includes you, "fuzzball".

[fuelair]

Since paranormal / supernatural mean we have not seen verifiable - by the best standards we have - examples of the skill/performance/function and they do not fit the laws of "nature" as we currently know/understand them, winning the JREF challenge - without trickery - would not move them out of the paranormal/supernatural category. Only determining how/why they worked would do that.

[mayday]

How can you own a house and have three kids and only 31 years old? Either the house is not worth much or your income is very large or you have a spouse with money.

Is your house called fuzzball?

He he he, that's cute. No, I don't have an outrageous income (I make right now right at $63,400) but I did have some help buying a house. My father-in-law donated $180,000 and that is how we bought the house. But I know a lot of people you could give $180,000 to and they would blow it in no time. At least I bought something good.

[William Smith]

Yea, and your chances of winning powerball are even less than that.

But it doesn't stop you from standing in the lotto line with the rest of the losers, does it?

What does winning powerball have to do with your statement "A million ain't much anymore"?

I do not play lotto.

[William Smith]

Afraid not. He is a big fat ugly jacka$$ who doesn't like anyone or anything but his stupid airplanes. He is also one of the most successful (edited for privacy purposes) people in the country.
To look at him on the street you would never guess. He wears the same clothes he wore ten years ago. Dorky skips, nerdy white socks, he has dozens of (blank) Marketing Services t-shirts with the logo on them which he wears all the time. Drives a 1990's Ford Ranger pick up to the airport where he owns several hangers. Keeps the Lexus he used to entertain clients with parked in a garage.
I don't see a penny of that money. This old (blank) wouldn't give you air if you were in a jug.
In his defense (this is the only time I would ever stick up for the old...), he doesn't feel the need to wear his wealth. When you wave your money all over the place it is usually because you really haven't got any and you are trying to impress someone. Looking good, up to your neck in debt with no money and a paycheck away from bankruptcy.
Sure, I wish I was the one who sold my company for 172 million, then I wouldn't have to be messing with filthy disease ridden people.

But my brother-in-law aside.

Most people (this includes most of you) live a desperate existence. You're broke and you are in debt. Your financial situation is not unlike most of the schmucks who apply for the "challenge". You have credit cards out the butt and probably have bill collectors calling, half your annual income tied up in things that go down in value as I speak (cars, boats) and other junk you can't afford. You live paycheck to paycheck (those of you who work) and you can't manage one of the single most important things in your life (your money) but you come on the JREF forum and pretend to be the big bad KIA when you are more full of crap than the people with no dignity who apply for that challenge.
The challengers are full of crap? I think some people need to look in the mirror and stop fooling themselves.

One thing I am not in is debt. I make my own money, live within my means. I know the value of a dollar and I save. I don't borrow money and I don't buy things I can't pay cash for. This includes my house, fuzzball. I'm 31 yrs. old with three kids and I live in a paid for house. I'm not stupid enough to go into debt to buy new cars that depreciate in value the moment you drive it off the floor. I know the value of a dollar. I know about the wisdom in long term mutual funds. I will retire with a good sized inheritance to leave my relatives.

How does this relate to the JREF Challenge and you claim from your OP "A million ain't much anymore"?

Or to the inquiries from posters concerning your OP?

[William Smith]

...
almost a whiff of paranoia.
...


...too many jokes...too many jokes...too many jokes...too many jokes...too many jokes...too many jokes...

[William Smith]

Gzuzkryzt -
It is not quite the same claim. You can see in the above thread the concern is about the Formal Test being able to determine what is or is not "...paranormal, supernatural, or occult...", (hereinafter 'p-s-o').
In my response to 'Doubt' I was picking up on "...The definition of what is paranormal..." as the comment on which to make my point. I had not considered my concerns as warranting a separate thread, and am quite surprised at the number and types of responses.
To be frank, I begin to detect a sensitive nerve, an "I don't want to know about this", that I have entered forbidden territory, almost a whiff of paranoia.
Here the concern rests on the other end of the process, which you can see from my reply, that there is an inconsistency between an unverified subjective notion of 'p-s-o' and the ostensible objectivity of the Formal Test.
This inconsistency would appear to render the challenge Formal Test as to whether any demonstration is or is not 'p-s-o' undecideable.

The challenge may be paraphrased as;
(1) There is a claimed class of events designated 'p-s-o'.
(2) There is no known evidence that any event of this claimed class of events has ever occurred.
(3) There is no known material-physical procedure able to conclusively decide whether or not any event of any class of events is or is not an event of the claimed class of events designated 'p-s-o'.
(4) If, in the Formal Test, a claimant performs an event of that class of events designated 'p-s-o', whether or not it is 'p-s-o', the Rules of this challenge stipulate that the event is an event of the claimed class of events designated 'p-s-o', and the JREF will pay the claimant $1 million.

It is highly unlikely there will ever be a Formal Test of the Challenge.

maatorc.

I think we are starting to tread water here.

A lot of posters - including this house's admin/lackey, Darat - tried to explain how to understand the Challenge Rules, including the definition of "evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event" and how "paranormal" gets defined here http://www.randi.org/research/faq.html#2.2 for the purpose of testing Challenge Applicants and their claims.

[geoman]

I think we are starting to tread water here.

I think drowning again is closer to it tbh :(

[thaiboxerken]

A million dollars isn't that much, the JREF challenge should offer more.
My brother is a multimillionaire, money isn't everything.
I don't care about money.
I wish I had a million dollars.
The JREF should give me a million dollars.


Mayday, you're position changes more than the star of an adult film.

[mayday]

A million dollars isn't that much, the JREF challenge should offer more.
My brother is a multimillionaire, money isn't everything.
I don't care about money.
I wish I had a million dollars.
The JREF should give me a million dollars.


Mayday, you're position changes more than the star of an adult film.

Thai, you aren't very good at reading comprehension. It is my brother-in-law, not my brother.

[thaiboxerken]

Thai, you aren't very good at reading comprehension. It is my brother-in-law, not my brother.

It doesn't make a freaking difference. The point is, your position is a flexible as Gumbi in a porn movie.

[William Smith]

Back from lurking, mayday?
All right then, what does your big rant - post #107 - have to do with the thread title?
Show your skills at reading comprehension and respond to this, please.

[mayday]

Wait. Weren't you the one trying to divine lottery numbers using a pendulum? How did that go, anyway?

Hasn't gone too well, so far. But at least I'm making an attempt.
It's something that will take some perfecting. I'm going to try to get three out of 5 numbers tomorrow night. I have to take call this weekend but if I can handle business over the phone instead of having to go in to see a patient I should be able to handle it.

[William Smith]

Back from lurking, mayday?
All right then, what does your big rant - post #107 - have to do with the thread title?
Show your skills at reading comprehension and respond to this, please.

Hasn't gone too well, so far.
...

;)

[maatorc]

[QUOTE=maatorc;1648025]
See: http://www.randi.org/jr/112902.html and http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2002/homeopathytrans.shtml

Darat -

Thanks for the references. I have no problem with this. Mr. Randi was a guest at a test conducted by Horizon, not the JREF.
Does this mean that the FAQ's are not up to date, or merely that FAQ 1.5 refers only to tests under JREF's control, and would therefore discount the Horizon test? I was relying on the FAQ's.

The Horizon test was not about anything paranormal-psychical, supernatural or occult in the accepted sense, but concerned a material, physical, medical, chemical, medicinal claim for a material substance that is unacceptable to current material science. There is absolutely nothing paranormal about Homeopathy. It simply remains unexplained, may sometimes work, may sometomes not work, or it is nonsense: take your pick.

If, by 'paranormal', the JREF means phenomenological-material-physical and/or noumenal-psychical-supernatural-occult events, it should say so, then everyone would clearly understand that, yes, the formal test would be able to decide a material event which it has the means to measure, like Homeopathy; and, no, it can not decide an immaterial event which it has no means to measure, like remote viewing.

An example of the ambiguity involved here is that there is absolutely no event of any kind involved in Astrology which is simply a traditional symbolic knowledge system: nowhere does anyone ever say 'Astrology' actually does anything.

This problem could be overcome by the JREF offering the challenge exclusively for phenomenological, material, empirical, physically measurable events as yet outside understanding and explanation by orthodox science. Material, empirical, physical testing for supernatural, occult, and the whole range of noumenal reality is a bottomless well of undecideability.

maatorc.

[Darat]

Darat -

Thanks for the references. I have no problem with this. Mr. Randi was a guest at a test conducted by Horizon, not the JREF.


Which is what happens for nearly all the preliminary tests. It is in fact rare that the JREF (and its staff) directly carry out the testing.

Again I ask you to actually read what is available on line here about the Challenge, the Challenge is Randi's challenge, the JREF administer it on his behalf. i.e.

"I, James Randi, through the JREF, will pay US$1,000,000 to any person who can demonstrate any psychic, supernatural or paranormal ability under satisfactory observing conditions. Such demonstration must take place under these rules and limitations.[/b]"


Does this mean that the FAQ's are not up to date, or merely that FAQ 1.5 refers only to tests under JREF's control, and would therefore discount the Horizon test? I was relying on the FAQ's.



Contact Randi at randi@randi.org - he I'm sure will be able to answer your specific question.



The Horizon test was not about anything paranormal-psychical, supernatural or occult in the accepted sense, but concerned a material, physical, medical, chemical, medicinal claim for a material substance that is unacceptable to current material science. There is absolutely nothing paranormal about Homeopathy. It simply remains unexplained, may sometimes work, may sometomes not work, or it is nonsense: take your pick.



You are again misinformed - homeopathy is a treatment based on a system of sympathetic magic, it is based entirely on principals that people throughout the world refer to as "paranormal" and "supernormal" i.e.magic spells. Therefore a test of homeopathy is a test of a paranormal claim (according to how the word paranormal is commonly used).


If, by 'paranormal', the JREF means phenomenological-material-physical and/or noumenal-psychical-supernatural-occult events, it should say so, then everyone would clearly understand that, yes, the formal test would be able to decide a material event which it has the means to measure, like Homeopathy; and, no, it can not decide an immaterial event which it has no means to measure, like remote viewing.


The Challenge uses words with the meanings that have been understood by all the applicants to the challenge and hundreds of millions of people worldwide. It would seem to be that you must be in a very small minority of people who use words such as "paranormal" in an unusual and non-standard way. For Randi and the JREF to change the wording for the small minority who use English in the non-standard way you do would more then likely increase the chances of it being misunderstood by people who use standard English meanings for words.


An example of the ambiguity involved here is that there is absolutely no event of any kind involved in Astrology which is simply a traditional symbolic knowledge system: nowhere does anyone ever say 'Astrology' actually does anything.


Again let me remind you the Challenge is not about the "how" but what someone claims they can do. It matters not one iota why someone thinks they can do something or how they believe the world works, if they can do whatever that paranormal something is they will get a million dollars.




This problem could be overcome by the JREF offering the challenge exclusively for phenomenological, material, empirical, physically measurable events as yet outside understanding and explanation by orthodox science. Material, empirical, physical testing for supernatural, occult, and the whole range of noumenal reality is a bottomless well of undecideability.

maatorc.

As I said you are the one in the minority - the Challenge is worded in such a way to be easily understood by anyone who uses standard English definitions for words such as paranormal.

[CFLarsen]

Where do I see how much is currently in their Sachs bond account?
Here's a copy from 2003. (http://www.skepticreport.com/psychics/dodgeball.htm)

[maatorc]

I think we are starting to tread water here.
A lot of posters - including this house's admin/lackey, Darat - tried to explain how to understand the Challenge Rules, including the definition of "evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event" and how "paranormal" gets defined here http://www.randi.org/research/faq.html#2.2 for the purpose of testing Challenge Applicants and their claims.

You are on the right track: I am skirting the concept of internal inconsistency and undecidability. The trivia from 'geoman' is not unexpected

Although I have engaged in some word-play I am not actually interested in any "I'm right-You're wrong" tit-for-tat which tends anyway to be or become self-referencing.

Opinion is the name of the game, and honest dissent focusses the mind.

An example of self-reference is that Homeopathy, deemed to be 'paranormal', is said to be based on Sympathetic Magic, which in the lexicon of the JREF must be 'paranormal' by definition. Homeopathy is actually based on the possibly incorrect or unfounded notion that certain chemicals can have a medicinal or healing effect on certain illnesses based on symptomatic likeness and dilution.

Here the notion of paranormal seems to be employed in the same sense that paramedical and paralegal are used for the medical and legal professions. If this is what the JREF means by 'paranormal' it is inconsistent to associate it with the 'supernatural and occult', which are entirely different notions.

maatorc.

[Flange Desire]

snip ...
Homeopathy is actually based on the possibly incorrect or unfounded notion that certain chemicals can have a medicinal or healing effect on certain illnesses based on symptomatic likeness and dilution.

Here the notion of paranormal seems to be employed in the same sense that paramedical and paralegal are used for the medical and legal professions. If this is what the JREF means by 'paranormal' it is inconsistent to associate it with the 'supernatural and occult', which are entirely different notions.

Beg to differ.
It is consistant - they are all 'incorrect or unfounded notions'.

[William Smith]

You are on the right track: I am skirting the concept of internal inconsistency and undecidability. The trivia from 'geoman' is not unexpected

Although I have engaged in some word-play I am not actually interested in any "I'm right-You're wrong" tit-for-tat which tends anyway to be or become self-referencing.

Opinion is the name of the game, and honest dissent focusses the mind.

An example of self-reference is that Homeopathy, deemed to be 'paranormal', is said to be based on Sympathetic Magic, which in the lexicon of the JREF must be 'paranormal' by definition. Homeopathy is actually based on the possibly incorrect or unfounded notion that certain chemicals can have a medicinal or healing effect on certain illnesses based on symptomatic likeness and dilution.

Here the notion of paranormal seems to be employed in the same sense that paramedical and paralegal are used for the medical and legal professions. If this is what the JREF means by 'paranormal' it is inconsistent to associate it with the 'supernatural and occult', which are entirely different notions.

maatorc.

Maatorc, please start a new thread and choose a title which describes your point(s).
After all, nobody wants to derail this valuable thread, n'est-ce pas?

[maatorc]

Maatorc, ....nobody wants to derail this valuable thread, n'est-ce pas?

GzuzKryzt -

Good point.
No more posts here.
Will consider a separate thread.

maatorc.

[Almo]

As they say even a broken clock is right twice a day (well unless it's a digital one and then who knows?)

Imagine two clocks: One stopped, and one that loses a minute per day. The stopped clock is correct more often, but on average they are equally inaccurate.

I've always found this thought interesting...

:boxedin:

[Lamuella]

Thai, you aren't very good at reading comprehension. It is my brother-in-law, not my brother.

congratulations on leaping straight on the cogent point of what he was saying.

[Roadtoad]

Afraid not. He is a big fat ugly jacka$$ who doesn't like anyone or anything but his stupid airplanes. He is also one of the most successful (edited for privacy purposes) people in the country.
To look at him on the street you would never guess. He wears the same clothes he wore ten years ago. Dorky skips, nerdy white socks, he has dozens of (blank) Marketing Services t-shirts with the logo on them which he wears all the time. Drives a 1990's Ford Ranger pick up to the airport where he owns several hangers. Keeps the Lexus he used to entertain clients with parked in a garage.
I don't see a penny of that money. This old (blank) wouldn't give you air if you were in a jug.
In his defense (this is the only time I would ever stick up for the old...), he doesn't feel the need to wear his wealth. When you wave your money all over the place it is usually because you really haven't got any and you are trying to impress someone. Looking good, up to your neck in debt with no money and a paycheck away from bankruptcy.
Sure, I wish I was the one who sold my company for 172 million, then I wouldn't have to be messing with filthy disease ridden people.

But my brother-in-law aside.

Most people (this includes most of you) live a desperate existence. You're broke and you are in debt. Your financial situation is not unlike most of the schmucks who apply for the "challenge". You have credit cards out the butt and probably have bill collectors calling, half your annual income tied up in things that go down in value as I speak (cars, boats) and other junk you can't afford. You live paycheck to paycheck (those of you who work) and you can't manage one of the single most important things in your life (your money) but you come on the JREF forum and pretend to be the big bad KIA when you are more full of crap than the people with no dignity who apply for that challenge.
The challengers are full of crap? I think some people need to look in the mirror and stop fooling themselves.

One thing I am not in is debt. I make my own money, live within my means. I know the value of a dollar and I save. I don't borrow money and I don't buy things I can't pay cash for. This includes my house, fuzzball. I'm 31 yrs. old with three kids and I live in a paid for house. I'm not stupid enough to go into debt to buy new cars that depreciate in value the moment you drive it off the floor. I know the value of a dollar. I know about the wisdom in long term mutual funds. I will retire with a good sized inheritance to leave my relatives.

Well, let's take a look at this remark from Ms. Mayday.

Her brother-in-law made a hefty chunk of change from his company when he sold it off. He worked hard, earned the money, and by not squandering his money, he's able to indulge in his hobby, which seems to be his aircraft. And while Mayday has managed to live within her means, (quite an accomplishment, actually, and should be respected), her attitude towards her BiL is, to say the least, hateful.

Got a flash for you, girl. He EARNED it. It's his to do with as he pleases. He dresses badly, drives funky vehicles, and lives pretty quietly? Good. I've about had it with folks like "The Donald." I would hope that if I were in trouble I'd have friends and family who could help me out, but if one chose to not do so, I don't think I could hold it against them. It's THEIR money!

Yup. The challengers are full of crap. And a lot of us live pretty desperately. We were promised one thing, but something else was delivered. And there are unexpected expenses that happen to a lot of us. That's life. We try to deal with it as best we can. Sometimes, we fail. That's why we try to stand with one another, rather than looking down on them.

Wow, so you would rather not deal with filthy, disease ridden people? Why are you involved in the medical profession? Especially when you've made it clear you have no respect for the profession, and are willing to use a placebo instead of an actual vaccine to prevent disease? You are willing to risk people's lives, and for what? You have no compassion, obviously, so I have no problem understanding why your BiL would deny you a dime. Frankly, I have relatives who are just like you, and if I had that kind of scratch, I'd keep my spare change to myself, too. Why reward that sort of hateful attitude. (God help your kids; you're passing those sick attitudes on to them. I only hope they learn better once they're on their own.)

[Tricky]

For those who don't know the history of Mayday/Bigfig, she pretty much hates anybody doing better than her. She has previously related her animosity with her sister, mostly because she is "rich". She also doesn't like that doctors get all the credit while nurses slave in obscurity. She doesn't like it that she can't win the lottery or Randi's million. She hates it that some other person won the Miss Trim-Spa title (for which she blames us cupcake losers).

Nothing is ever her fault. Everyone is against her (except God, who thinks she's keen, but won't do a damn thing for her).

Yeah, I'm being mean to her, but she needs something to kick her tail into the real world. Being sweet and understanding won't do it. Wake up Mayday. Quit blaming others and do something good with your life.

[maatorc]

Beg to differ.
It is consistant - they are all 'incorrect or unfounded notions'.
Flange Desire -
Thanks for replying. Could discuss your point as I seriously disagree with you; but, as said to GzuzKryzt, I have moved on.
Incidently, do you live in Melbourne-USA or Australia?
I Live in Sydney-Australia.
I've been promoted: I'm now a student!
maatorc.

[CFLarsen]

For those who don't know the history of Mayday/Bigfig

...can read it here. (http://www.skepticreport.com/mystics/jolene.htm)

[roop laew]

a million is nothing it should be 100 million or at least 10m by now

[Jeff Wagg]

a million is nothing it should be 100 million or at least 10m by now

If you'd like to make a donation, please get in touch with us.

[William Smith]

a million is nothing it should be 100 million or at least 10m by now

Please donate a couple of nothings, roop laew. Thank you in advance.

[Hawk one]

Let's see... If I had the equivalent of one million dollar, how long could I live comfortably on that...

Well, I am single and without any commitments. Assuming I spend about 200 k right away on a new place to live and the big toys (TV, stereo, PC, furniture, etc), I reckon that about 40 000 dollars a year will make me live like a bloody king. And then some. In other words, I'll have a comfortable life-style for at least 20 years without having to do a day of work, and I'm not even counting how I'd probably invest it in something that is secure, yet has at least 5% interest. In other words, it'll basically be paying for itself.

(Of course, parenting and the likes will increase the cost dramatically, but at least they'll get rid of any mortgage, as well as having the opportunity to send the kids to college and university... Assuming you live in a country where you don't get the education itself for free or little cost, that is).

Now, if someone told me I'd be guaranteed to have a financially comfortable life for AT LEAST the next 20 years (and quite likely the rest of my life) simply by doing something that takes 2 days to demonstrate (preliminaries included)... I have no idea why anyone would say no to that alone, unless they're already so filthy rich from scamming people that it doesn't really mean much with another million.

[SirPhilip]

Let's see... If I had the equivalent of one million dollar, how long could I live comfortably on that...$1,000,000 US, put in a bank, probably equals out to roughly $6000 in interest monthy - enough to live very comfortably even in South Florida. Most people in the US live like kings (in comparison to other countries with the exception of the U.K) anyway, even if they make $25,000 a year.

[Roadtoad]

Let's see... If I had the equivalent of one million dollar, how long could I live comfortably on that...

Well, I am single and without any commitments. Assuming I spend about 200 k right away on a new place to live and the big toys (TV, stereo, PC, furniture, etc), I reckon that about 40 000 dollars a year will make me live like a bloody king. And then some. In other words, I'll have a comfortable life-style for at least 20 years without having to do a day of work, and I'm not even counting how I'd probably invest it in something that is secure, yet has at least 5% interest. In other words, it'll basically be paying for itself.

(Of course, parenting and the likes will increase the cost dramatically, but at least they'll get rid of any mortgage, as well as having the opportunity to send the kids to college and university... Assuming you live in a country where you don't get the education itself for free or little cost, that is).

Now, if someone told me I'd be guaranteed to have a financially comfortable life for AT LEAST the next 20 years (and quite likely the rest of my life) simply by doing something that takes 2 days to demonstrate (preliminaries included)... I have no idea why anyone would say no to that alone, unless they're already so filthy rich from scamming people that it doesn't really mean much with another million.

It helps, Hawk, to remember who it was who started this thread.

Besides, the primary problem with your plan is that you're speaking as a rational person, someone who would play by the rules and work at it honestly. (The Language Award notwithstanding: Hey, I sent the bunnygirls! What's up with May!?!?) You're not thinking like someone like Sylvia Browne or Carla Baron. You're not dishonest enough.

[Hawk one]

It helps, Hawk, to remember who it was who started this thread.

Besides, the primary problem with your plan is that you're speaking as a rational person, someone who would play by the rules and work at it honestly. (The Language Award notwithstanding: Hey, I sent the bunnygirls! What's up with May!?!?) You're not thinking like someone like Sylvia Browne or Carla Baron. You're not dishonest enough.
I was mostly responding to the latest person (roop laew) who claimed it was nothing, though I should have made that clear.

And the bunnygirls weren't redheads. I specifically ordered redheads. They weren't much good at the things a bunnygirl's supposed to be good at either, if you catch my drift. Let that be a lesson for the future.

[Roadtoad]

And I sent blondes... D'OH!!!

[Yahzi]

For those who don't know the history of Mayday/Bigfig
I remember Bigfig. I didn't know Mayday was the same person.

Thanks for the tip.

[ImOne]

Where I live if I paid the taxes and bought a nice house I would be broke.

[Pinocchio]

If you'd like to make a donation, please get in touch with us.
It would be better if there was some sort of donation corner at randi.org, where people could donate money for the JREF $1 million prize. I know you can donate money to the JREF as it is, but you don't know what your money will be spent on, so most people are not too enthusiastic about it. A section on the site, being visible where anyone can donate any amonut towards the JREF PRIZE exclusively, with an up-to-date counter, and a history of donations, for those not wishing to remain anonymous, would be a good idea, I think. You can't convince a lot of people to donate gozillions of dollars, true, but even $1 per person would go a long way here [tens of thousands [if not hundreds of thousands] of people visit randi.org]. If it was well put forward, many folks, even non-skeptics, would get sucked right into it.

Further, it would be a good idea to have a list of OFFICIAL PLEDGES, so that people wouldn't have to google for hours to maybe find out that there are a few individuals offering pledges... it would be all here and official - and regularly updated. Of course, as we know the JREF does not GUARANTEE anything other than its own million, which could be added as a disclaimer.

And perhaps on top of that, adding a page with all the skeptics challanges in existence, simply so that everyone is well informed and updated on the subject and as somewhat of a defense against folks who think one million just ain't enough anymore...:)

[Spektator]

Ya know, if Duke Ellington had been a dowser--

Missed the James Randi prize,
Couldn't dowse through the floor,
Won't be takin' the million--
A million's not much anymore.

Thought I'd make an excuse--
Then I asked, "Oh, what for?"
I never wanted the money--
A million's not much anymore.

[Jeff Wagg]

I know you can donate money to the JREF as it is, but you don't know what your money will be spent on, so most people are not too enthusiastic about it.

Considering that this server costs about $4200 a year, that's a shame. (yes yes, we've looked at all the other options)

[Rustle]

a million is nothing it should be 100 million or at least 10m by now

...by sort of logic? Where do you think this money is coming from? Would that we could conjure money for the challenge....

The money has exploded upward from the original $5,000 dollars that Randi put up. That is, before the JRE Foundation even existed, he put up $5,000 dollars of his own hard earned money. I would guess that was money that he could ill afford to lose.

In one of the videos of Randi in Australia, you can see Randi pull out his check- then for $10,000 dollars, and pool it with I believe 3 other people, each of whom put up their own $10,000. So if you feel that $1M is "nothing", by all means, put up your own matching $1M dollars. We can put the money in a trust, and from now on the challenge can be known as the TWO million dollar challenge.

[Rasmus]

...by sort of logic? Where do you think this money is coming from? Would that we could conjure money for the challenge....

If somebody actiualyl did that, he would walk away with the original million and everything that they conjured. Seems a bit pointless, really ...

... other than that, I couldn't agree with you more, of course.

[Roadtoad]

It would be better if there was some sort of donation corner at randi.org, where people could donate money for the JREF $1 million prize. I know you can donate money to the JREF as it is, but you don't know what your money will be spent on, so most people are not too enthusiastic about it. A section on the site, being visible where anyone can donate any amonut towards the JREF PRIZE exclusively, with an up-to-date counter, and a history of donations, for those not wishing to remain anonymous, would be a good idea, I think. You can't convince a lot of people to donate gozillions of dollars, true, but even $1 per person would go a long way here [tens of thousands [if not hundreds of thousands] of people visit randi.org]. If it was well put forward, many folks, even non-skeptics, would get sucked right into it.

Further, it would be a good idea to have a list of OFFICIAL PLEDGES, so that people wouldn't have to google for hours to maybe find out that there are a few individuals offering pledges... it would be all here and official - and regularly updated. Of course, as we know the JREF does not GUARANTEE anything other than its own million, which could be added as a disclaimer.

And perhaps on top of that, adding a page with all the skeptics challanges in existence, simply so that everyone is well informed and updated on the subject and as somewhat of a defense against folks who think one million just ain't enough anymore...:)

A lot of this has been covered before, Pinocchio, in other threads. However...

Quick and dirty answer: Because JREF is a non-profit, EVERY CENT that is spent must be accounted for, as required by IRS regulations, and by Federal Law. Many organizations do allow directed donations, (I can't speak for JREF on that one, so maybe Jeff or Linda can). Perhaps if you'd like to donate a buck or two to the prize, that could be arranged. As it happens, though, there's other expenses involved in the Foundation, some that go way beyond the prize, such as paying for the electricity, postage to send lengthy explanations to would-be applicants as to why their "abilities" cannot be tested, making sure Linda and Jeff get paid, (and both are seriously within the "Under-" category.) All of this has been covered in the FAQs. (Which, for the most part, is where I got my information. You might want to read that when you have a moment.)

[TheFeds]

Quick and dirty answer: Because JREF is a non-profit, EVERY CENT that is spent must be accounted for, as required by IRS regulations, and by Federal Law. Many organizations do allow directed donations, (I can't speak for JREF on that one, so maybe Jeff or Linda can). Perhaps if you'd like to donate a buck or two to the prize, that could be arranged. As it happens, though, there's other expenses involved in the Foundation, some that go way beyond the prize, such as paying for the electricity, postage to send lengthy explanations to would-be applicants as to why their "abilities" cannot be tested, making sure Linda and Jeff get paid, (and both are seriously within the "Under-" category.) All of this has been covered in the FAQs. (Which, for the most part, is where I got my information. You might want to read that when you have a moment.)And, of course, if it costs more to process the donation (in terms of labour costs, etc.), than the actual value of the donation, it might become a bit of a problem.

[valis]

I think Mr. Randi will have to raise the stakes a bit to keep up with inflation.

Yes but.....

You can take the money and bankroll a run at the Dr.Mas challenge.
When you win that you will have a total of two million.

[valis]

...can read it here. (http://www.skepticreport.com/mystics/jolene.htm)

Thank you for the link and allow me to add; HOLY CRAP!

She throws away peoples medicine, denies pain medication....

Has anyone ever reported this woman to the appropriate regulatory board?

Oh well, I'm off to Tuscany to open my kitten ranch!

[DevilsAdvocate]

My brother-in-law is a self-made millionaire who sold his company a few years back for 172 million dollars.
So I think a million dollars would be pocket change to him and probably not really worth his time.

Money isn't everything.As I've seen it, Randi posed the challenge for ANYONE to demonstrate ANYTHING paranormal under a controlled test. Passing this challenge would itself be HUGE for anyone promoting anything paranormal. But, as expected, the usual suspects of charlatans would object to the challenge because there is nothing in it for them. So Randi put up ONE MILLON dollars of his money to the JREF to offer the JREF challenge for ANYONE that could demonstrate ANYTHING paranormal under a controlled test. He put his money where his mouth was, and a fair good amount of money at that.

There is no reason for money to be involved at all in the JREF challenge. It is simply a challenge to anyone claiming paranormal abilities or experiences to demonstrate them. The one million bucks is simply there to silence any objections to not taking the test and give a reasonable incentive to all of these charlatans to simply DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY CLAIM THEY CAN DO.

If you say you can do it, then prove it! Why should I? I’ll give you one million dollars!If I could get $1 million for showing that I can actually do my job, I'd jump on it and have no problem proving it.

[keyeri]

I don't see a penny of that money. This old (blank) wouldn't give you air if you were in a jug.

You are contradicting yourself all over the place. You sound so resentful of his money - why does it concern you exactly? At the risk of sounding obtuse, is it really any of your business?

Oh, and I'm new, hello :)

[politas]

I'm not going to say that Randi should increase the prize, after all, it's a nice round figure that sounds good. But people do need to stop referring to the JREF challenge as a way to become a "millionaire".

To be a "millionaire", you need at least five million dollars these days, and about twenty million to be a "multi-millionaire".

[William Smith]

You are contradicting yourself all over the place. You sound so resentful of his money - why does it concern you exactly? At the risk of sounding obtuse, is it really any of your business?

Oh, and I'm new, hello :)

Hi keyeri, welcome to the JREF Forum.

For a quick & informative overview of mayday's oeuvre, check out the link in this post from Mr. Larsen http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1668882#post1668882

Enjoy.

[thaiboxerken]

To be a "millionaire", you need at least five million dollars these days, and about twenty million to be a "multi-millionaire".

Nope, just one is enough to be a millionaire. More than one is a multi-millionaire.

[keyeri]

Hi keyeri, welcome to the JREF Forum.

For a quick & informative overview of mayday's oeuvre, check out the link in this post from Mr. Larsen

Enjoy.

Thank you for your welcome and the link. I've tried to reply a couple of times so I apologise if several replies show up.

After reading about this woman, my stomach is now on a mission to stop flipping - I am intrigued as to where her prejudices come from.

[politas]

Nope, just one is enough to be a millionaire. More than one is a multi-millionaire.

Well, there was an article I saw recently which disagrees.

Sorry, don't have a link, it was in a dead tree magazine.

[Rustle]

Well, there was an article I saw recently which disagrees.

Sorry, don't have a link, it was in a dead tree magazine.

I saw an article that said you are a bowl of jello with spaghetti on top.

Sorry no link.

[Rasmus]

Well, there was an article I saw recently which disagrees.

Sorry, don't have a link, it was in a dead tree magazine.

Main Entry: mil·lion·aire
Pronunciation: "mi(l)-y&-'nar, -'ner, 'mi(l)-y&-"
Function: noun
Etymology: French millionnaire, from million, from Middle French milion
: a person whose wealth is estimated at a million or more (as of dollars or pounds)
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/millionaire

Frankly, I don't see how any other defiintion could possibly be making any sense. Just how much money does "Who wants to be a Millionaire" pay out wherever you live?

I can't access the definition for multimillionaire on websters; there is a definition of -multi that would indicate that you might have a point:

1 a : many : multiple : much <multivalent> b : more than two <multilateral> c : more than one <multiparous>
2 : many times over <multimillionaire>

However, it's a stretch, and it's a far cry from "at least twenty", and "two or more" would be equally valid according to that particualr dictionary.

Do you recall why that maagzine reasoned you would need so much money to be a millionaire?

[nathan]

Do you recall why that maagzine reasoned you would need so much money to be a millionaire?
I recall this, probably from the BBC. The thesis was 'to live like a millionare used to back in the 19xx's, one now needs at least 3.5M$' or something like that. Whoop de woo, money ain't what it used to be :)

[Darat]

What a silly article it must have been - I mean that's like saying to be a millionaire in 1965 all you needed was £100,000! :)

(ETA)

Aha! Found it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4351880.stm

[Rustle]

It still wouldn't change the language. If you don't have a million, you're not a millionaire.

Why isn't this thread dead yet?

[Roadtoad]

Considering the number of threads that have been set up specifically to be killed and yet keep getting resurrected, are you surprised that this one is still around?

[Hawk one]

You know, I find that I totally agree with nathan. Obviously, a million isn't what it used to be. This means I have to review my brib-- Ehh, administrative fees for conducting the TLA. I can't suddenly have a lapse in my style of living, can I?

Road, I'll send you the updated price list next week, OK?

[Roadtoad]

Geez, has EVERYONE forgotten what it costs for a bunnygirl these days?

[Hawk one]

Well, if I'm to be a -real- millionaire (as per nathan's description), then I obviously need more bunnygirls as well. Bunnygirl inflation and all that.

[CFLarsen]

Just how much money does "Who wants to be a Millionaire" pay out wherever you live?

Not a lot in Italy, before they converted to the Euro... ;)

[drkitten]

Not a lot in Italy, before they converted to the Euro... ;)

And even less in some places. One million Vietnamese dong is worth about $65 US or 50 Euro. A million Romanian lei is worth even less.

[Jekyll]

However, they've nearly finished converting their money now, 10,000 old lei = 1 new Lei=$0.36.

[Fidelio]

Ya know, if Duke Ellington had been a dowser--

Just so ya know, this did not go unnoticed. :)

[Spektator]

Just so ya know, this did not go unnoticed. :)
(eeyore voice)Thanks fer noticin me.(/eeyore voice)

[Meffy]

Why isn't this thread dead yet?
So I can post a response to the following bit of excellence.

Ya know, if Duke Ellington had been a dowser--Missed the James Randi prize,
Couldn't dowse through the floor,
Won't be takin' the million--
A million's not much anymore.

Thought I'd make an excuse--
Then I asked, "Oh, what for?"
I never wanted the money--
A million's not much anymore.

With apologies to lyricist Yip Harburg and composer Jay Gorney, not to mention you the victims:

I used to tell folks I interpreted dreams
And so a mob followed me.
When there were saps to con or johns to fleece,
I was always there, yessiree.

I used to tell 'em I could read all their dreams,
See Heaven's glory ahead.
Why should they wonder 'bout the afterlife
When I can talk to the dead?

Once I fooled the rabble, tricked the woo,
With my earphone and shill.
Once I've fooled great Randi, and all of you,
Brother, can you spare a mil?

Once I fooled the media, Montel and King,
My bank accounts ate their fill.
Once I charged a c-note for a magnetic ring...
Brother, can you spare a mil?

[Spektator]

Bravo, Meffy!

[Meffy]

Right back atcha. Us filkers gotta stick together.