Feet In Both Camps? Psychic Challenger

[Psychic Physicist]

Hi All,
Having for years admired the work of James Randi with his logical and well thought exposures of the varied shysters and fraudsters of the psychic world, I decided it was time that I joined this forum.
I am unfortunately standing with my feet in either camp on the question of the existence of real psychic phenomena. On one side I realise only too well that there are a lot of clever conmen and women who walk the psychic plank. I have had unfortunate dealings with some and know only too well the lengths that these individuals will go to in their quest for personal or financial gratification.
I hold no subscription of belief in any of the established or `new age` religions, and in fact view the majority as being created by the same type of individuals who now adorn many mystic mags and TV programs as `mystics` or `mediums`.
To me, religion is all about mind control, with the imposition of a minority viewpoint upon a gullible majority.
However I digress. On the other foot, I know that all life and our existence are not plainly and easily explainable with quick scientific fixes.
An easy illustration is the age old mind bender which asks, `Where does the universe end or begin – in terms of size and distance?` Because logically, if there is no comprehendible end or beginning, how can we exist?
Not even a sceptic can answer that one.
Another problem I have to contend with rails firmly against sceptical opinion or indifference. That simply is the fact that I have a `gift` or ability that allows me to `heal` or improve peoples physical ailments by the action of simply touching their fingers on point of contact.
I have been aware of this ability for some considerable time and have much anecdotal evidence which I gathered over the years to satisfy my own scepticism.
I have to tell you that I am a retired cop with 28 years service in the British Police. A number of those service years were spent as a detective and later as a police crime analyst and researcher. That type of work involved intelligence scepticism until I could finalisemy investigations by producing hard facts which could be used in police operations against organised or local criminal activity. So there is the sceptic in me. Until I can satisfy any claim, I have to have hard facts.
That’s where Mr Randi`s challenge intrigues me.
I am not drawn by financial reward to his challenge, but am motivated simply by the fact that not all alleged psychic phenomena are false. To dismiss this entirely is not scepticism but ignorance.
A true sceptic keeps an open mind, and I have always endeavoured to adhere to that notion.
I first discovered this ability around 10 years ago when a partner complained of a re-occurring pain in her knee joint. On one occasion I placed my hand over the knee to rub it, and she reported that energy from my hand had travelled to the affected area and had warmed an area deep inside her knee which completely removed the pain.
I naturally thought it pure chance but decided to follow through by testing this ability on other people’s ailments. Within a year, I had managed to work with 10 people from work to friends who although at first sceptical stated that a warm energy had travelled through their bodies to soothe away muscular pains or swellings.
The strangest experience was a woman police officer with a badly swollen hand which literally disappeared after five minutes. That in a way shocked me as I (despite evidence to the contrary) still didn’t fully believe in my own ability!
Anyway, after satisfying my own curiosity, I didn’t return to healing until very recently when a guest speaker at a conference I was attending didn’t show.
I volunteered to talk about healing to a fifty plus adult audience to entertain them. I was approached by five volunteers, four women and a man.
The first was complaining of a long term pain in her swollen wrist and shoulder.
After literally a few seconds of finger contact she reported the same healing energy moving up her hands and into her shoulder. She claimed that the pain her gone. Also her wrist had returned to normal from its swollen state.
The second volunteer – the man had a sharp pain in his shoulder allegedly from an old motorcycle accident. On point of contact he exclaimed the pain had disappeared. I found that implausible from previous experience but not impossible.
The third had pain under her right arm which had persisted for some months. That too went after a few seconds. By the time I started on the 4th – a lady with a stomach ulcer, the others I had previously dealt with claimed that as I touched a new volunteer, they could feel the healing energy return as though I was touching them again. This was something very new to me. - This lady’s pain incidentally, went as quickly as the others. The last volunteer was a lady with short rasping breath who was emotionally upset and complained that diagnosed growths or `polyps` in her throat was impeding her breathing and that she awaited an operation to remove them. As I touched her, she exclaimed that the energy was in her throat having travelled up her arm from finger contact, and that she `felt` her throat being widened to a degree that she could now breath clearly. To date, I none have reported a relapse with the exception of the lady with the wrist injury who informed me that although her shoulder was fine, some pain had returned to her wrist – but not as painfully as before. She explained further that she had engaged in heavy work with her hands that involved bending her wrist whilst holding heavily weighted items. I am certain that had she allowed her hand to recuperate properly, the pain would have gone.
So to round things up, Where does this lead me? Am I deluded, are were they deluded? Was it as they say, a `placebo effect`, or is it genuinely possible that this healing is real, and more importantly, another natural aspect of the human process?
I can add that since I first started healing, my palms are permanently red, and they feel incredibly hot. When measured by a thermometer, they are registered at normal body temperature. As I type this open response they still feel very hot indeed.
So, should I take up the Randi challenge? If I did it would not be simply a quest for a million bucks, but an illustration that not all life on this planet is without some form of `spiritual` - call it what you will, experience.
Your thoughts please would be appreciated. I am quite willing to demonstrate this process. Whether I `win` or `lose`, is quite immaterial to me, but even if I could demonstrate this process I doubt whether I would succeed - after all, no one else has..

[Loss Leader]

Your thoughts please would be appreciated. I am quite willing to demonstrate this process. Whether I `win` or `lose`, is quite immaterial to me, but even if I could demonstrate this process I doubt whether I would succeed - after all, no one else has.

PP, I assure you that if you can demonstrate this process, you will indeed succeed. Not only will you win a million dollars but you will help usher in an entirely new understanding of medicine and physics.

It is usually impractical to create a protocol where you actually heal people, however. Do you think that if you held your hand behind a screen, a friend of yours could determine whether your hand was there or not? If you are giving off energy, this might be possible. Then it would be simple to place you behind a screen, have it randomly determined whether you place your hand out or not, and then ask your friend if it is there or not. I am sure something along the lines of 9 right guesses out of 10 would be sufficient to guarantee you a million dollars.

Let's see what others think.

[Steven Howard]

The strangest experience was a woman police officer with a badly swollen hand which literally disappeared after five minutes.

How terrible for her.

[Psychic Physicist]

Hi Loss Leader,
Thanks for your response. If (by a miracle) I could succeed in a controlled demonstration, the money would be given to charity. I am more interested in opening awareness that some psychic ability is real. I know it works, but the public need to be assured that it is possible, and not ridiculed by the idle ramblings of lunatics and opportunists.

[Thinktoomuch]

Steven Howard: is comments like yours that debase discussion. I had a chuckle also, but what purpose does your comment serve?

As regards the protocol: what if the ailment is actually a requisite to perceive the healing? It would appear to me that Loss Leader's proposed protocol would be inconclusive. Maybe 10 or possibly more patients touched at random by the claimant and a control person in a setting able to exclude other sensory clues (heath, sight etc.) would be more decisive. You can work out the statistics.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

You should absolutely take up the Randi challenge. Read and learn about how the challenge works and how you can contact the JREF (Jeff Wagg apparently) and start discussions on a meeting and a challenge. You will likely be directed to one of the local British skeptic groups that works closely with the JREF for a preliminary challenge. (Which no one has ever passed).

Do you know a lot about how the challenge works? How the procedure of applying works? The rules for applying? If not then you should read up on it from the randi.org main page which links to info about the challenge including FAQ's and whatnot.

[CLD]

The presence or absence of pain can be highly subjective. Perhaps as ThinkTooMuch suggests, a protocol might be designed like a small scale "clinical trial". X number of subjects suffering from headache (or similar noncritical ailment) X number of controls, and a double blind methodology?

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Though I may disagree with the assertion that the supernatural must exist because science cannot easily answer everything, I think you should take the challenge. As for the exact circumstances of the test, it would depend on if you need to physically touch people, but Loss Leader's idea is good, and you would be able to agree on the specifics of the challenge.

[Dogdoctor]

Something occurred but the question is did you actually heal anyone? To define this you would need to have a specific diagnosis and then specific proof they were actually healed. I think the majority of healers are like you who think they are doing something but once studied will be shown to not be doing anything other than making people feel better about themselves.

[Ladewig]

Though I may disagree with the assertion that the supernatural must exist because science cannot easily answer everything, I think you should take the challenge.

My sentiments exactly.

Follow the advice that previous posters have given and come up with a precise description of what you can and cannot do.

[Jeff Corey]

...An easy illustration is the age old mind bender which asks, `Where does the universe end or begin – in terms of size and distance?` Because logically, if there is no comprehendible end or beginning, how can we exist?Not even a sceptic can answer that one...

Sure I can. When I read a load of gibberish like your post, I stop when it meets my bull manure threshold and say to myself, "This cretin knows nothing about logic or presenting an arguement."

[Jeff Corey]

How terrible for her.
Losing a hand like that must have been horrible, indeed

[Thinktoomuch]

Jeff, since when insulting is a knowledgeable way of presenting an argument? This appears to me as the pot calling the kettle black. Are all your >4000 posts of this quality?

[Flange Desire]

... I know that all life and our existence are not plainly and easily explainable with quick scientific fixes....
Where does the universe end or begin – in terms of size and distance?` Because logically, if there is no comprehendible end or beginning, how can we exist?

Hi and welcome to the forum Psychic Physicist.

Yes, many things are currently unexplained,
but this is not a reason to invent weird explanations, you see ...
I exist; and "We don need yer stinkin universe!"
Regardless of our comprehension or definition of the universe, we exist.

LossLeader proposes an excellent test.
What do you think about it PP?
Lets get focussed on that easy million.

[hellaeon]

First off welcome to the forum!
Your on a wild world of discovery and great discussion here.

However I digress. On the other foot, I know that all life and our existence are not plainly and easily explainable with quick scientific fixes.

But remember science is constantly refining itself. It evolves as we evolve and discover new ways to measure and record more accurate and reliable data. You must remove thoughts that science is some evil big brother, arrogant and ignorant. Science is completely and utterly neutral. Its not something with feelings or morals, its a method to understand things. I dont like this sentence because most people who say it repeat this mantra because they dont understand and appreciate the real method behind science and how important the method is.


An easy illustration is the age old mind bender which asks, `Where does the universe end or begin – in terms of size and distance?` Because logically, if there is no comprehendible end or beginning, how can we exist? Not even a sceptic can answer that one.

Its not so simple. There is evidence that suggests things started at a specific point. How that became to start with and how it progressed further is beyond my understanding, but that does not mean the information is non existant. What you dont know is what you dont know, not what no one else knows. I think I just confused myself.

Another problem I have to contend with rails firmly against sceptical opinion or indifference. That simply is the fact that I have a `gift` or ability that allows me to `heal` or improve peoples physical ailments by the action of simply touching their fingers on point of contact...have much anecdotal evidence...

Anecdotal yes, factual it is not. It's a bold claim that you posess an ability that will rewrite the science books. But im all eyes and ears.

I have to tell you that I am a retired cop with 28 years service in the British Police. A number of those service years were spent as a detective and later as a police crime analyst and researcher. That type of work involved intelligence scepticism until I could finalise my investigations by producing hard facts which could be used in police operations against organised or local criminal activity. So there is the sceptic in me. Until I can satisfy any claim, I have to have hard facts.

This does suprise me. One of the appealing things I find with this line of work is to get to the facts. However I think your trying to appeal to authority to add weight to your arguement. Its going to hit a brick wall under scientific scrutiny. Check out what einstein himself said was his biggest blunder, and thats einstein - and he would have thanked science for showing him.

...but am motivated simply by the fact that not all alleged psychic phenomena are false. To dismiss this entirely is not scepticism but ignorance. A true sceptic keeps an open mind, and I have always endeavoured to adhere to that notion...

I dont like these grey lines people like to blur in order to make a claim sound more credible. Evidence not philosophy. Im completely open but after 60 years of research, im starting to wonder why people persist.


I first discovered this ability around 10 years ago when a partner complained of a re-occurring pain in her knee joint. On one occasion I placed my hand over the knee to rub it, and she reported that energy from my hand had travelled to the affected area and had warmed an area deep inside her knee which completely removed the pain.

If I said you rubbing my knee made me feel some sort of sexual advance, would that be your healing power or some other weird power. This is completely vague evidence explainable is many mundane and unfortunately boring ways. I have seen elsewhere on here about tests using prayer etc and how a nice voice and soothing touch can make a big difference.

...<stories of healing>...So to round things up, Where does this lead me? Am I deluded, are were they deluded? Was it as they say, a `placebo effect`, or is it genuinely possible that this healing is real, and more importantly, another natural aspect of the human process?...So, should I take up the Randi challenge? If I did it would not be simply a quest for a million bucks, but an illustration that not all life on this planet is without some form of `spiritual` - call it what you will, experience...I am quite willing to demonstrate this process. Whether I `win` or `lose`, is quite immaterial to me, but even if I could demonstrate this process I doubt whether I would succeed - after all, no one else has..

I have a proposal.

1) 20 volunteers. They are told and are believers in faith healing.
you and someone else - like me (I think its just emotion and a kind heart that is helping)

2) the 20 dont see each other but are told a faith healer will come in and help them with their various ailments.

3) We would take it in turns to approach the people. one at a time, no one repeated - so I would take 1, you 2, me the third, you the 4th etc, so we get 10 each, making sure none of the volunteers can give away anything about their suspicions by...using seperate rooms? They should not have any idea if its done properly and well out of sight, in a good test they will think you or I are the person they want to heal them.

4) We both use a same method - whatever that is - perhaps pretend to pray to god or whatever. A touch on the knee etc. Be sure its exactly the same.

5) Record results. Have a results grading sheet (level of healing felt), same for every person on test.

6) Now do the same for 20 more this time, you give them what they believe is a healing device. Lets say a simple iron rod. We will need 20 of these to ensure there is no mixing of 'powers' For each second person you get, you touch this device, the other time its left alone. Every person is told the iron rod has been touched by a healer.

7) Record results. Have a results grading sheet (level of healing felt), same for every person on test.

8) Another 20 people. Given an iron rod again, this time Neither of us touch it. They people are all told the rods are bestowed with magic healing powers.

9) Record results. Have a results grading sheet (level of healing felt), same for every person on test.

The only hassle is the amount of people :(

My thoughts
Cheers

[hellaeon]

Hmmm I just thought of an easier way.
20 people all believers

Frist run of 20, you touch and heal. Second run of the same 20, given untouched iron rods, told that you enforced some powers of yours onto it during some amazing ritual. See if they feel your presence.

I know someone will think of a better way. Perhaps this thread should be in the million dollar challenge?

Compare results.

[Apathia]

PsyP,

Your talent is in a difficult place for testing. A bit in the gray area due to the subjective elements of it. I lot of it is relational in nature, having to do with the interpersonal elements between you and the person you are touching.
Touch when given with confidence, care, and a nonjudgemental acceptance of the other, engages the parasympathetic nervous system to varying degrees. The nervous system opporates in two complementary fuctional areas: The Sympathetic and the Parasympathetic. The Sympathetic controls stress functions such as fight or flight in danger, and exertion. The Parasympathetic controls relaxation, sleep, digestion, intimacy, and the release of endorphins that block pain and some cases create feelings of euphoria.

This adds up to what I call a "heightened placebo effect." It's not merely that the individual believes you are helping him or her, but you have a charisma about you and your touch that relaxes, sooths, resolves painful tension. When the body isn't in fight or flight, it puts more attention on recovery.

As I said, it's touchy to test this, because we are dealing with individual emotional responses. Tests on this in regard to Theraputic Touch have shown merely that peole tend to react positively to nice personal contact. Beyond that results have been marginal.

This subject usually gets sidetracked by talk of mysterious "energies."
People do have feelings that they describe as electric like or heat like. These are subjective experiences. One person will describe the touch as electric, another as warm, another as a kind of pressure or movement. Some even go into more relaxed states and see or hear things. Never mind that sort of stuff for now. Testing for mysterious energies misses what's actually afoot.

What you are doing is great. Keep it up. Just understand that it's not actually something paranormal or supernatural.

[hellaeon]

PsyP,

Your talent is in a difficult place for testing. A bit in the gray area due to the subjective elements of it. I lot of it is relational in nature, having to do with the interpersonal elements between you and the person you are touching.
Touch when given with confidence, care, and a nonjudgemental acceptance of the other, engages the parasympathetic nervous system to varying degrees. The nervous system opporates in two complementary fuctional areas: The Sympathetic and the Parasympathetic. The Sympathetic controls stress functions such as fight or flight in danger, and exertion. The Parasympathetic controls relaxation, sleep, digestion, intimacy, and the release of endorphins that block pain and some cases creta feelings of euphoria.

This adds up to what I call a "hightened placebo effect." It's not merely that the individual believes you are helping him or her, but you have a charisma about you and your touch that relaxes, sooths, resolves painful tension. When the body isn't in fight or flight, it puts more attention on recovery.

As I said, it's touchy to test this, because we are dealing with individual emotional responses. Tests on this in regard to Theraputic Touch have shown merely that peole tend to react positively to nice personal contact. Beyond that results have been marginal.

This subject usually gets sidetracked by talk of mysterious "energies."
People do have feelings that they describe as electric like or heat like. These are subjective experiences. One person will describe the touch as electric, another as warm, another as a kind of pressure or movement. Some even go into more relaxed states and see or hear things. Never mind that sort of stuff for now. Testing for mysterious energies misses what's actually afoot.

What you are doing is great. Keep it up. Just understand that it's not actually something paranormal or supernatural.


I take back that its explained in mundane and boring ways!
Is this an evident nervous system effect?

[Apathia]

I take back that its explained in mundane and boring ways!
Is this an evident nervous system effect?

Indeed mundane. It happens all the time between mothers and children, friends and lovers. Massage Therapists use this all the time. Some people inspire more confidence with their touch, and people who make it an intent touch others in a "healing" way have more stories and experiences to share. You could do this yourself. It's really not that special.
Just that our culture isn't touchy-feely.

NB I'm not talking about miracle healing here. This is common garden variety ease of aches and pains brought on by muscle tension and contraction, and other things the body does when it is in trama.

This is a simplification, but do a little online research about the parasympathetic nervous system and endorphins.
As I said, all this gets mystified. All we need here is some dimystification.

[Jeff Corey]

Jeff, since when insulting is a knowledgeable way of presenting an argument? This appears to me as the pot calling the kettle black. Are all your >4000 posts of this quality?

Yes and yes.

[Flange Desire]

... I know that all life and our existence are not plainly and easily explainable with quick scientific fixes....
Where does the universe end or begin – in terms of size and distance?` Because logically, if there is no comprehendible end or beginning, how can we exist?

Hi and welcome to the forum Psychic Physicist.

Yes, many things are currently unexplained,
but this is not a reason to invent weird explanations, you see ...
I exist; and "We don need yer stinkin universe!"
Regardless of our comprehension or definition of the universe, we exist.

LossLeader proposes an excellent test.
What do you think about it PP?
Lets get focussed on that easy million.

[steve s]

]An easy illustration is the age old mind bender which asks, `Where does the universe end or begin – in terms of size and distance?` Because logically, if there is no comprehendible end or beginning, how can we exist?[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]
Not even a sceptic can answer that one.


The surface of a sphere has no beginning or end. Does that mean the sphere doesn't exist?

Steve S.

[Questioninggeller]

Losing a hand like that must have been horrible, indeed

Guys, play nice. New people who feel welcomed will stay, read, and learn.

[Psychic Physicist]

Hi Again,
Some interesting comments and suggestions but also some very puerile remarks which are totally unnecessary in an arena supposedly based on intelligent thoughtful debate.
Firstly, (to reiterate for those sexually focused on touching knees or swollen hands) I am not interested in making this challenge for the money. Yes, I know others have said that before, and they were no doubt unable to make the challenge or had failed miserably. All I would ask for as payment, is James Randi`s original check (cheque) for $10,000 which has been signed `cancelled` by the said James Randi. The money should be distributed equally to 5 hospices in Britain, Europe and America.
Secondly, I am not a fool making wild or irrational claims. My ability - call it what you will, is not delusional. It has worked and continues to work for me. I sincerely do not think, nor would I be foolish to think that I am the only person in the world that can do this. I suspect that some potentially genuine challengers may have been dissuaded previously by some of the vitriolic commentators on this forum. If you view my offer as an excuse to point ridicule at me, then you have defeated your own argument, surely?
Thirdly, my method of working involves making fingertip contact with a subject. Being behind a curtain, or whatever means may look impressive, but that is outside the realms of experience for me. That kinda strikes me more as a showmanship demonstration rather than as an example of my alleged ability. - I say `alleged` because that is all it is to any rational `open`mind at this stage. If we can keep the debate open-minded and impartial I am prepared to take it further. As I have stated originally, I am a sceptic regarding many outrageous claims on paranormal matters debunked in the past, and commend anyone like Randi that can expose them.
How should the test be performed?
Well, believe it or not, I actually feel drained and very tired after a period of time when performing this ability. It is visually evidenced by very dark rings that appear around my eyes which illustrate this fatigue. - Please no sarcastic one liners!
I can work per session for around 30 minutes, no more. I don`t set the rules, I become very tired and emotionally drained after this period.
I would respectfully suggest 10 volunteers, all chosen impartially by a third party not associated with me or with any sceptics group.
The volunteers should be open minded individuals who (despite previous mainstream medical treatment) are still suffering with pain or some form of discomfort.
The 10 volunteers should be divided into two groups. One group should be assigned to a `placebo healer`, i.e a person with no history or claim to be a healer. Preferably, a total sceptic or avowed non-believer. The other group are then assigned to me. Both groups are placed in separate rooms with the placebo group and `healer` having no direct knowledge of me and my group, or the true reason of the experiment. The placebo healer is instructed to try and heal these peoples ailments following the same procedures in my group. At the end of the experiment - 30 mins, - no more, the results from both groups are compared. There should I hasten to add, be a medical doctor present to evaluate the subjects before and after each demonstration.
Caveat - I would also request that I choose discretely the placebo healer to eliminate the possibility that this person may have the same abilities as me. Why? Well, if he or she is not be a placebo, that would invalidate this experiment totally. Lastly, both groups should be filmed during the process as a matter of public record to show complete rigidity to the governing rules of this demonstration to remove from the most ardent sceptics mind any suggestion of trickery or malpractice by the Randi organisation or those nominated by the said Randi organisation.Conversely, that too would also apply to me.
I would also suggest that this same experiment is repeated on separate occasions 3 times using different volunteers and placebo healers in three different locations across (preferably) the U.K.
At the end of this `trial`, the results can be compared.
If, out of 15 people, 10 state a removal of pain or major reduction during the demonstrations then I feel vindicated. I personally am aiming at 15/15, but can say through experience that it does not work for everybody. I believe the figure of 10 to be a good pass rate as an average would be around 40 to 60%.
So there are the suggested rules for this challenge. I believe them to be completely fair and totally above board in establishing whether the phenomenon of contact healing works. I don`t presume this ability to be a miracle, its simply an ability outside the norms of conventional medical science.
Please leave sensible comments.

[Mojo]

It is usually impractical to create a protocol where you actually heal people, however. Do you think that if you held your hand behind a screen, a friend of yours could determine whether your hand was there or not? If you are giving off energy, this might be possible. Then it would be simple to place you behind a screen, have it randomly determined whether you place your hand out or not, and then ask your friend if it is there or not.
There's a description of just such an experiment here (http://www.ukskeptics.com/documents/EmilyRosa_paper.pdf), showing how simply and cheaply something like this can be set up.

[Mojo]

The 10 volunteers should be divided into two groups. One group should be assigned to a `placebo healer`, i.e a person with no history or claim to be a healer. Preferably, a total sceptic or avowed non-believer. The other group are then assigned to me. It is important, though, that the "placebo healer" is able to convince the patient that they are a real healer, otherwise it wouldn't be an adequate control. In a test featured in a recent BBC series about alternative medicine, they used an actor, who studied the healer's technique and accurately reproduced it.

[KarlQuigley]

Hi Again,
Some interesting comments and suggestions but also some very puerile remarks which are totally unnecessary in an arena supposedly based on intelligent thoughtful debate.
<snip>
If we can keep the debate open-minded and impartial I am prepared to take it further. As I have stated originally, I am a sceptic regarding many outrageous claims on paranormal matters debunked in the past, and commend anyone like Randi that can expose them.
How should the test be performed?
Well, believe it or not, I actually feel drained and very tired after a period of time when performing this ability. It is visually evidenced by very dark rings that appear around my eyes which illustrate this fatigue. - Please no sarcastic one liners!
<snip>
Please leave sensible comments.

Hello and a warm welcome to you,

I cannot comment on your suggestion for the test, I will leave this to others with more experience in such matters.

I can tell you that when I joined this forum, I was quite shocked and annoyed by those who were downright rude to anyone suggesting that they had any belief considered paranormal.

Although I have only been here a short time, I have discovered the majority to be intelligent, polite, patient and accommodating. Unfortunately, I suspect that you will have to endure the minority who think a smart quip adds to debate and those that are just insulting.

Please be open to harmless humour designed to illustrate an opinion and please ignore humour designed to ridicule (like the "losing a hand" jokes).

Thank you for your courage. Please stick around.
Karl Quigley

[Psychic Physicist]

Hi Mojo and Karl Quigley.
Firstly Mojo. I am quite happy to perform, as it were, behind a screen. But therein for me lies a problem. I view the energy subject of this controversy like a spark between a battery and a terminal. If my hand is too far from the subjects hand then the likelihood of it working could be rendered ineffective. I would need to ensure that it is just above the subjects hand. I cannot see the point of whether my hand is behind a screen or not. Why not simply blind-fold the subject and allow me to position my hand at a distance comfortable with what I do? Equally, what`s wrong with simple finger contact? I think in fairness to myself and the James Randi Foundation the experiment group should be doubled to encompass contact and non contact healing. If necessary, I have no objections to either experiment participants being blindfolded or not.
Secondly regarding the placebo healer. Yes, of course why not allow the placebo to convince them he is a healer. The proof is in the pudding as they say. Sorry, I should have covered that in my outline - that`s why I welcome suggestions from forum members.
If at the end of the day people view my ability as a `soothing placebo effect and nothing more` - as I suspect it will be, why am I rendered so tired and visibly weakened? Surely, there must logically be more to this.
Lastly, if I am imagining my ability through sub-conscious psychology and it works in making peoples lives a little more comfortable then what`s the harm in that? However, I don`t feel the latter to be a true reflection of this type of ability.

Karl, Thanks also (as with other forum members) for your support and encouragement.

[Psychic Physicist]

Just one final point. On the subject of volunteers. Surely they can be raised with the participation of press involvement?

[Mojo]

Firstly Mojo. I am quite happy to perform, as it were, behind a screen. But therein for me lies a problem. I view the energy subject of this controversy like a spark between a battery and a terminal. If my hand is too far from the subjects hand then the likelihood of it working could be rendered ineffective. I would need to ensure that it is just above the subjects hand. I cannot see the point of whether my hand is behind a screen or not. Why not simply blind-fold the subject and allow me to position my hand at a distance comfortable with what I do? Equally, what`s wrong with simple finger contact? Ah. I think we were a bit at cross purposes. It appears from your O/P that it is the patient rather than the "healer" who feels the "energy". I first discovered this ability around 10 years ago when a partner complained of a re-occurring pain in her knee joint. On one occasion I placed my hand over the knee to rub it, and she reported that energy from my hand had travelled to the affected area and had warmed an area deep inside her knee which completely removed the pain.
I naturally thought it pure chance but decided to follow through by testing this ability on other people’s ailments. Within a year, I had managed to work with 10 people from work to friends who although at first sceptical stated that a warm energy had travelled through their bodies to soothe away muscular pains or swellings.

Are you saying that they will only feel the "energy" when you are touching them and not when anyone else is? If that is the case. what I would suggest is that, rather than a test involving a degree of subjective judgment, like pain relief, you blindfold the subjects, and get them to tell whether it is you or somebody else that is touching them. This is a test that gives a simple yes/no result: either they correctly identify you or they don't.

[Mojo]

Secondly regarding the placebo healer. Yes, of course why not allow the placebo to convince them he is a healer. He has to convince them that he is a healer, otherwise there will be no placebo effect acting on the control group, and therefore no way of knowing that any positive results in the group you treat over the results for the control group are not a result of the placebo effect.

If at the end of the day people view my ability as a `soothing placebo effect and nothing more` - as I suspect it will be, why am I rendered so tired and visibly weakened? Surely, there must logically be more to this. Again, this could well be the placebo effect: you think you have done something strenuous, so you feel tired. Do you remember feeling tired in a similar way before peiople reported to you that you were transmitting a "warm energy" to them (i.e. when you might have done this without being aware that it was happening)?

Lastly, if I am imagining my ability through sub-conscious psychology and it works in making peoples lives a little more comfortable then what`s the harm in that? What if the pain you treat is an early symptom of some potentially serious underlying problem that you are not able to diagnose or treat?

[Thinktoomuch]

Mojo expressed better and more simply what I tried to say before: the yes/no test cuts through all the other difficulties. Either your touch is "different" in whatever way or it is not. What could be simpler?

[Dr Richard]

It is important, though, that the "placebo healer" is able to convince the patient that they are a real healer, otherwise it wouldn't be an adequate control. In a test featured in a recent BBC series about alternative medicine, they used an actor, who studied the healer's technique and accurately reproduced it.

I would also suggest that 10 people is way too low for a definitive test. Ok for a pilot maybe, but I would suggest that the placebo response rate would likely be 20-30% anyway, making an effect difference hard to pick up in a sample of 10, unless you cured 90%+ of the subjects in your healing group.

[Ladewig]

Hi Again,
Some interesting comments and suggestions but also some very puerile remarks which are totally unnecessary in an arena supposedly based on intelligent thoughtful debate.

Just ignore them. If you feel compelled to respond to them, then please consider opening another thread (perhaps in the religion/philospher sub-forum) to talk about those issues.

Well, believe it or not, I actually feel drained and very tired after a period of time when performing this ability. It is visually evidenced by very dark rings that appear around my eyes which illustrate this fatigue. -
I can work per session for around 30 minutes, no more.

How long does it take you to "recharge" and heal other people?

There should I hasten to add, be a medical doctor present to evaluate the subjects before and after each demonstration.

Why is a medical doctor necessary in a test where people describe their pain as reduced or not reduced? Can you reduce or eliminate physical symptoms that a doctor would recognize? If so, then that might be a better topic for the test.

Caveat - I would also request that I choose discretely the placebo healer to eliminate the possibility that this person may have the same abilities as me. Why? Well, if he or she is not be a placebo, that would invalidate this experiment totally.

How are you able to tell if another person does or does not have the power you claim?

[Psychic Physicist]

Hi again,
Let me try to address some of your concerns or questions.
Regarding the `energy` disclosure.
I feel it, and hopefully so does the subject. I never contradicted myself. Without sounding inflammatory, some of you are `nit-picking` portions of what I have written as literal or definitive responses without thoroughly taking in what I am saying. Mojo, I`m sorry, but you are the worst offender in that department! :-) Further Mojo it logically goes without saying that the placebo has to convince them. It would be pointless otherwise.
The reason that I feel tired is simply that when I touch a subject - and depending on their symptom's I feel literally drained of energy after a while. I realise that concept seems incredulous with some of you, but that`s what happens. Causation and effect. In a day, I can normally work with two people in total of sessions (per individual) ranging from 30 minutes to an hour. I need at least 3 hours in between to recuperate. That normally involves sleep and rest.
A doctor should be present to note any obvious change to a persons condition. This generally involves observations in reduced swellings, or for example someone that had earlier difficulty bending a limb and so forth. The mere observation of an untrained non-medical eye would not be sufficient particularly if the doctor had some record of the patients prior medical state. Surely that seems logical?
With regard to the question of whether I can tell if someone is a healer or not is acceptedly difficult, and here you can jump all over me when I say that I can sense it. Don`t ask me how or why, I really don`t know, I have no way of showing or illustrating this point, but I can feel it, like a third sense.
With regard to `Dr Richard`s` comments. For me in any one session 5 people are as many as I can work with. The reasons have been described previously. I will be too tired. That`s why I suggested three sessions involving 15 people for me, and 15 people for the placebo.
In general there have been some good responses here from you, and I appreciate that. Many points raised have been helpful to me immensely and I thank all of you for that.

Just one final point. I have been reviewing the alleged abilities of some claimants for the money prize. I can now understand why you are very suspect of anyone who claims to perform something which is outside the realms of normal science. Some of these `claimants` are completely bonkers! I sincerely hope that you do not place me in that category, although I feel a minority here do. I am perfectly sane and quite rational, I don`t hear voices, I am not an emissary of god, and I don`t believe in devil`s, goblins or black magic spells, et al. As I said twice earlier, I am a sceptic in all matters until I can experience it myself, and commend the sceptics viewpoint in challenging for the truth. But at some-point you really have to concede that I am genuine and sincere with my own beliefs, and perhaps I can prove I am not deluding you or myself.
It has taken a lot of courage for me to sit on this forum and talk about this subject. I knew that I would be subject to some indifference and ridicule, but I feel compelled to try and show that life is not black and white. It is very often tinged with shades of grey. As I have said, if I could win the challenge then perhaps the money on offer could be used to make less fortunate peoples lives a little more comfortable. But for the challenge to succeed I feel would itself be a minor miracle.
I`m sure that if you really wanted to, you too could achieve what I claim to achieve, I believe it exists in everybody. Just lighten up a little, and peer outside the metaphorical box. You never know what you might find out there.
I now have printed off the entry form, no doubt my real name will soon appear in your chamber of horrors!

[Mojo]

Without sounding inflammatory, some of you are `nit-picking` portions of what I have written as literal or definitive responses without thoroughly taking in what I am saying. Mojo, I`m sorry, but you are the worst offender in that department! :-) What I'm trying to do is to take a claim from your O/P (that people you treat can feel the energy flowing into them) and point you towards a test that might be more acceptable in a challenge application than the one you are proposing. Note that the challenge requires a test giving a self-evident positive or negative result, with no judging required on the part of any participant. Further Mojo it logically goes without saying that the placebo has to convince them. It would be pointless otherwise. OK, fine. I just wasn't sure if you appreciated that (you wouldn't be the first...)

[Cuddles]

But at some-point you really have to concede that I am genuine and sincere with my own beliefs, and perhaps I can prove I am not deluding you or myself

I doubt any of us believe you are not sincere in your beliefs, or that you are trying to delude us. The question of whether you are deluding yourself is an entirely different matter however, and I expect most of us believe this is the case, as it has been for every test so far.

On a different note, there are major changes happening to the challenge, to be announced shortly - see this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=64917). It may be worth holding off from applying until we see where Randi is going with this.

[Psychic Physicist]

Hi Mojo,
Well Cuddles has a point there on test aspects. I`ve posted the application so I`ll wait and see what cooks.
I cannot be deluding myself when in the case of swellings I have seen them disappear or reduce in size. If it were a delusion or surely, an `illusion` then that made two of use - both myself and the subject.
Regarding every test, yes you are right, and yes you are also right to remain sceptical.
Anyway, back to the real world! I might forward an interesting photo at some point for comments. I`d rather not continue with this debate as my application is pending. But I`ll be there for other discussions and probably taking your viewpoints - but with an open mind in view of my experiences.
See you all later, I have enjoyed this discussion.

[Apathia]

PsyP,

I want to again encourage you to continue your practice, though a controled test may yield only marginal results, due to, as I pointed out before, the very subjective, personal, and individual thing you are doing. Unless, that is, you are wanting solid evidence that Therapeutic Touch, Reiki, Craniosacral Threrapy, and the like are therapeutic to the same degree and in the same catagory as medicine, so that a practicioner of these arts can claim the titile "Healer" and enhance a professional practice of them.

It is possible though, that a controled study would show the benifits of touch, as I indicated in a previous post. Indeed there is already a consensus out there in the medical world that touch and personal attention are benificial, and its one of the reasons Concord Hospital (in Concord NH) still provides Reiki (from volunteer practitioners) to patients who ask for it as a service.
I'm not sure then, that this would be paranormal enough for the Challenge. But if your agreed on results were relief from pain and swelling it would be doable.

But people are looking for something flashier than feel good touch to make a paranormal challenge over. Most of the respondents this thread don't have any experience of what you are talking about, so they frame it as energies that can be detected behind curtains and blinds. All tests of that sort that I've read of have come up blank. Also tests involving subjects with specific medical conditions to be healed, don't make a good show. Say we chose breast cancer. I think you understand how your assitance would be benificial in the contect of ordinary medical treatments and the patient's recovery, as an outright cancer cure, it would make no showing at all.

As for a "placebo control guy" who would mimic what you do, the chances are very good that he would be doing what you do.
Our culture is so removed from gentle attentive touch or interpersonal touch in most any circumstance except in sexual intimacy, that what ordinary happens between individuals looks mysteriuos and supernatural.

Here's something for the readers of this thread to do to get a little experience of what this feels like. Set down, count your out breaths for a little while to relax. Then hold your palms facing each other about six inches or a third of a meter apart. On inbreath focus on center of your palms and imagine you are breathing in through them. On outbreath imagine you are breathing out them.
Do this for a while, thenbegin to slowly move your palms toward each other.
Move them toward and away again and agiain maintaining your focus on your palms and what you feel between them. Practice this a few times on your own and explore the sensations you experience. Then get a friend or family member, or a stranger if you like. "Charge" up your palms again and do the same motions with their palms or foreheads or at chest level. Ask them what they feel. This engagges the parapympathetic nervous systems of both yourself and the other and we get sympathetic and in deep attention empathetic feelings.

Let me repeat. There isn't some mysterios energy that we ought to be able to detect by some instrumentation. These are subjective feelings associated with being in a light altered state of consciouness. And there's nothing wrong with being in such a relaxed and receptive place provided you aren't driving a car at the same time.

This is an anybody can do thing, Though some folks are more tactile oriented, and have more body awareness, and naturally exude more of a calming presence.

PsyB,

Regarding feeling drained after giving sessions:
I suggest you learn to meditate. This will help you contain yourself and maintain yourself. There are a lot of way woo-woo books on this subject but they do contain workable excercises of intent that you can do to avoid getting whacked out. Look into the woo-woo subject of "energetic boundaries." It's natural that after three or more sessions, you'd begin to feel tired, but one session as a stand alone should be invigorating as opposed to draining.

Confessions from my woo-woo past:
I'm a Reiki master. I've practiced "healing" touch for years. (It's not the sort of thing you admit on a skeptics board for reasons evident in this thread.) I don't do much of it these days, because I tend to "mesmerize" people a tad more than they are comfortable, especially in staid New England. As you can read in my posts, I've come to a perspective of this that recognizes why people like giving and recieving the so called "energy" modalities and feel its a good thing for themselves and others. It really is a nice thing to do and has its place in the human experience. However, it becomes bunk when exagerated claims are made about healings and cures.

[Dogdoctor]

If you are going to just be relying on the subjective opinion of a doctor it would probably be better to have the subjective opinion of 3 or more to try to control the subjectiveness of the evaluation. All patients should be examined before and after the treatment by the same doctors who have been blinded as to which treatment group each patient is in. A doctor, no matter how skilled still is making a subjective evaluation without objective data collection. You opinion of "healing" that occurs is a subjective evaluation as is the opinion of the subject who were "healed". In addition why is it not appropriate just to pick someone who claims not to have any healing powers? There should be no connection between you and the second person.

[RSLancastr]

Psychic Physicist, perhaps it has already been mentioned here, but I find your posts very difficult to read.

You might consider spacing in between your paragraphs. Otherwise, it's just page after page of dense text, which is hard for many (like myself) to read.

Just a thought.

[Jeff Corey]

... On the other foot, I know that all life and our existence are not plainly and easily explainable with quick scientific fixes.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]
An easy illustration is the age old mind bender which asks, `Where does the universe end or begin – in terms of size and distance?` Because logically, if there is no comprehendible end or beginning, how can we exist?
Not even a sceptic can answer that one.

I still can't believe that only two posts have addressed this silly statement, which was part of the OP.
A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

[RSLancastr]

I still can't believe that only two posts have addressed this silly statement, which was part of the OP.
A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.It is indeed silly and pointless, but I don't know that it is truly a link in the "chain."

The guy either has "healing powers" or he doesn't. Any pseudo-philosophical statements he makes are beside the point.

[Jeff Corey]

But they are as indicative of a certain mindset as quantum qi energy healing can be.

[RSLancastr]

Agreed.

[Jeff Corey]

Thank you. Certain others here didn't seem to get it.

[Thinktoomuch]

Let us forget for a moment all the side issues about what healing principle is involved, what is normal or not, what is acceptable for the challenge or not etc. and take this as an exercise in basic logic.

A person claims to be able to produce beneficial effects to another person who displays a physical ailment just by touching the affected part. The most effective results are obtained in series of 5 sessions or less of up to 60 minutes each.

Therefore if:

· A suitable number of patients in groups <= 5 is selected on the basis that they state their belief in touch healing;
· each patient is told that a test is being conducted to check the effectiveness of various healers and they will be touched by a healer or a non-healer, but they will not be told which;
· the claimant touches all patients;
· after the session, unbeknown to the claimant, each patient states whether he/she felt the healing power or not;
· the number of patients who felt “healed” is significantly above placebo

then the claimant has a healing power.

Is there any fault in this logic?

[Jeff Corey]

Yes, if you are going to use a statistical test to evaluate the results, you need more participants (formerly called "subjects"). At least 10 in each group to give it a fair test. And if the claimant touches all, where's the placebo?

[Ladewig]

I still can't believe that only two posts have addressed this silly statement, which was part of the OP.


When newer posters consider making claims for the JREF prize, they often have philosophies or beliefs that seem to lack critical thinking. Engaging such posters in discussions about such beliefs (in a thread devoted to testing procedures) really slows down discussion of test design.

I think everyone noticed the observations and the faults with them. Perhaps the best solution would be to move this thread to the Challenge sub-forum and ask P.P. if he has time to outline his beliefs in a new thread in the Religion/Philosophy sub-forum.

[Jeff Corey]

Sorry, I didn't know this thread was only about testing procedures. I thought it was about the OP, which evolved into issues about how to test the extra-ordinary claim.

[Thinktoomuch]

Yes, if you are going to use a statistical test to evaluate the results, you need more participants (formerly called "subjects"). At least 10 in each group to give it a fair test. And if the claimant touches all, where's the placebo?

I am starting to think that my English is the problem here.

"suitable number" = N adequate to produce statistically significant results

N is the population (10, 20, 30, whatever, tested in s sessions where N/s <= 5 as requested by the claimant)

X patients (subjects) blindly evaluate the claimant as "healer", N-X as "non-healer"

P subjects (20-30% has been suggested) may feel "healed" because of placebo anyway.

If X significantly >P the claim is proven.

Clearer?

[Pup]

X patients (subjects) blindly evaluate the claimant as "healer", N-X as "non-healer"

P subjects (20-30% has been suggested) may feel "healed" because of placebo anyway.

If X significantly >P the claim is proven.

You're saying that the real healer touches all the subjects, correct? Then how do you determine what P would normally be?

It's necessary to run a trial on similar subjects, duplicating the treatment as closely as possible but without the "active ingredient" (in this case, the actual healer's touch). That's the only way to establish accurately what P would be. Otherwise, there's no way of telling whether X is significantly greater than P, because you don't know what P would be.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding?

[Thinktoomuch]

maybe I have misunderstood a previous post as suggesting that P could be given on the basis of previous studies. Assuming that this is a red herring, let say that the claim is proven if X is significantly larger than N-X. Even more stringent.

[Ladewig]

Sorry, I didn't know this thread was only about testing procedures. I thought it was about the OP, which evolved into issues about how to test the extra-ordinary claim.

I was just making a suggestion. If you feel the need to address the ridiculousness of the philosophical assertions, have at it.

[Jeff Corey]

I thought I did.This guy is an idiot.

[JLam]

PsyPhy,
It would make things very easy for everyone to understand if you answered these three simple questions in one or two sentences:

1) What do you claim to do?

2) Under what circumstances are you able to do it? (for example, "I can only do it on Thursdays after having eaten a turkey sandwich" or something like that.)

3) What degree of success do you claim?

Two sentences maximum for each answer...that will really help us boil down what, exactly, we're talking about here.

[Psychic Physicist]

Hi,
This is the man that Corey refers too as an `idiot`. Also the same person that `lacks critical thinking`. Also the same person `that writes bunched up` or whatever, obviously making his claim too difficult for minds the size of Einstein to understand.

Your perception of me clearly speaks volumes. I don`t think that I am an idiot, but then I don`t claim to `think too much` either.

J Lam is so intelligent that despite the copious amounts of text, he/she still cannot understand what I claim to do.
Even better, having left some of you for a period on your own, you tear into each other! Obviously, my absence makes the heart grow fonder.

I am not going to fuel some of your prejudices by repeating everything I have said. I personally don`t feel I am an idiot, but like my healing claims, it all boils down to belief and opinion.

What a bland empty life-scape some of you must dwell in. A world of black and white, a world where everything is rationally understood (according to your own rules) and any challenge to your beliefs is treated with the same zeal and hysteria as the the Spanish inquisition?

Because I claim something that is beyond your personal understanding of the world in which you exist, does it mean therefore that it cannot exist?

Does it also give you the right to rubbish this persons opinion because you feel so smugly right?

I on the contrary am open minded, I do not discount everything out of hand because I haven`t experienced it personally, but instead try to seek answers rather than dismiss everything.

As I have said, I respect people like Randi who expose liars and fraudsters because of the damage that some of these people cause to other peoples lives. But equally, I have had experiences in my life that have no predetermined logical explanation, and am therefore trying to seek the truth about these things. Does that make me a complete fool because it is outside your own terms of reference?

To conclude, I really don`t give a toss what you think, I suggest that you show respect for others that don`t subscribe to your alleged empirical assertions of anything you really don't understand. That is made plainly obvious by the manner under which you feel these tests should be made.

So much for thoughtful debate. I`ve obviously arrived at the wrong forum!

PS: I haven`t referred to it, but the statement made concerning the universe - that was a deliberate red herring. You certainly passed the test and satisfied my own curiosity. Thankyou..

[Psychic Physicist]

Just a final thought.. Try to get out more. You might find that the outside world is more challenging than you think.

[StewartP]

Hmmm. This thread seems to have followed EXACTLY the same life cycle as the "Pink Lady (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=1819124#post1819124)" thread. Linda left the forum in a huff and it was decided that it was because JREFrs had been too rude to her.

Now Psychic psychiatrist is getting miffed too, and so far he has had quite a gentle ride.

I can't find the post, but someone once described the life cycle of these posts, going something like:
1. Person makes a vague claim of abilities
2. JREFrs try and condense this to a few simple testable sentences
3. Person leaves in a huff

[Ladewig]

Hi,

I am not going to fuel some of your prejudices by repeating everything I have said. I personally don`t feel I am an idiot, but like my healing claims, it all boils down to belief and opinion.

See, right here is the problem. You say that your healing claims boil down to belief and opinion. We say healing claims should never consist of belief and opinion but rather should always consist of evidence and properly conducted trials. Many of your posts indicate that you, too, see the usefulness of a properly-controlled study.

What a bland empty life-scape some of you must dwell in. A world of black and white, a world where everything is rationally understood (according to your own rules) and any challenge to your beliefs is treated with the same zeal and hysteria as the the Spanish inquisition?

If you feel that what you were exposed to is somehow akin to the Spanish inquisition, I would suggest that it is you and not us that needs to experience more of the outside world.

Because I claim something that is beyond your personal understanding of the world in which you exist, does it mean therefore that it cannot exist?

No. Because you claim a power that, if true, would start a scientific revolution as far-reaching as Copernicus's or Einstein's, we ask for evidence. At the beginning of the thread when we talked about what specific kind of evidence is required, you seemed to agree that carefully controlled evidence was necessary. Now you seem to have switched you position.

I on the contrary am open minded, I do not discount everything out of hand because I haven`t experienced it personally, but instead try to seek answers rather than dismiss everything.

And,like you, the majority of posters in this thread "tried to seek the answers" by helping you design a protocol for a JREF Challenge test.



- [more angry accusations snipped for length] -

Of course, the best possible way to give us our comeuppance would be to take the test and pass it. That will really show us how right you are and how wrong we are. I do hope you'll apply.

[Mojo]

I do hope you'll apply.Actually, he did say that he'd applied, and would therefore "rather not continue with this debate". Then made two more "farewell" posts, including the one you replied to.

[Mojo]

I haven`t referred to it, but the statement made concerning the universe - that was a deliberate red herring. You certainly passed the test and satisfied my own curiosity. Thankyou..What were you trying to test? The proposition that if you deliberately and prominantly included a piece of utter bollocks in your first post on the forum some people might not take you seriously?

Perhaps the fact that you admittedly started this thread with a post that was not in good faith tells us more about you than people's reactions to it tells you about "skeptics".

[Psychic Physicist]

Hi Ladewig,

No, I`m not angry, just saddened by some of the rude responses of the forums contributors. Is there a need to trade insults?? That doesn`t strike me as a logical response?
I realise that my claims need to be properly analysed, but there has to be a measure of understanding of how I can best demonstrate it, and the suggestions I have detailed here ( seem to me), to best cover that. I don`t think them unreasonable and they can be tailored to suit some aspects of what has been proposed.
It seems perfectly fine to be rude and insulting by some of the sceptic contributors, but if I offer a robust defense, I am the one who is out of line. An example of your post - `more angry accusations snipped for length` Huh? Was I shouting and banging my fists?
Another observation of mine is that there is a tendency to place some contributors into pre-defined boxes by comparing me, for example, to other previous contributors rather than to accept that we as humans are all individually dfferent.
That is the fundamental flaw with some scientific doctrine. Rather than open minds to new arguments or views, it is easier to pre-categorise everything and everyone.

As I have said, I am only too happy to take part in a test but it has to be in an acceptable format to both parties.
I used this forum as a soundboard, and I am satisfied with what I have learnt. But as you and the others here won`t individually be testing me on the big day, any argument over the criteria laid down for evaluating my claims is as they say, quite academic.
The point of my challenge is not to give a two fingered salute to academic opinion, but to open up the possibility that there are other facets to our existence rather than a bland boring ideological view point that there isn`t.
I will say Ladewig that your opinions have generally been well balanced and impartial, but the comments of some others here have been insulting and exhibiting extreme prejudice. Anyway, I must move on and await what happens further on this proposition.

[Psychic Physicist]

To Mojo.

I found this thread from another forum on existence. More enligtening than your response of `bollox`.

Ask yourself this question. Why does anything exist at all? Since we exist, was there ever a point where it didn’t exist? In other words, was there a point where nothing existed at all? If that is so, why and how did something ever come about? In other words if it is truly absolute nothingness, how could something ever come about? For something to come about there would seem to have to be some kind of burbling causation, a vortices or minimal 'something' that gave rise to further complexity, ultimately yielding the complex universe we have today. The question can be summed up as this:

How do we get something from nothing?

Part of the problem with the above thinking is that it implies the existence of time. Yet, we know that time, as least as we understand it is a function of space. According to the big bang/inflationary theory of the origin of our universe, both time and space were created simultaneously with the big bang. This of course always brings up the question, of what happened before the big bang? If time was created at the big bang, then there was no ‘time’ before the big bang. If that is the case, then what that implies is that the big bang is an extrusion out of an always existent, simultaneous, no-time (eternity) super-space. Or we could say that the big bang simply popped out of void. So did it either pop out of Void, or did it pop out of eternal everythingness? Either way, we are still caught in this ‘time’ thing. And that is the trap that we must transcend. So what are we left with? No time.

Therefore if the underlying meta-reality is that there is no time, then concepts like beginning and end have no meaning. Time is something that pops in and out of existence. Existence then is grounded in no time. Without time, what you are left with is something that has always existed and always will. It is the eternal now.

Now to our next topic – the laws of the universe. We again start with the same question. Why does anything exist at all? Since it does exist, why does it have the shape and form it does? Why not a different shape? We can of course say these shapes and forms are determined by physical law. But then the question becomes where did these physical laws come from? Why did our universe with all of its complexity come out of the big bang exactly as it did, and not some way else? When you examine in detail our physical laws, it quickly becomes apparent just how damn arbitrary it all is. For example, why is it that the electron to proton mass ratio is 1836, and not 1835, or 478? For one thing, if it weren’t exactly that ratio, matter as we know it would fly apart, and we would not have the periodic table of elements. No carbon, no humans. No humans, we don’t exist to even ask these questions. In other words, only those universes in which intelligent life can evolve, exist in the first place to even ask themselves how amazingly fine-tuned the constants are for them to exist! What this implies is that there billions, trillions of other universes where intelligence never evolves. Where the constants are arranged in such a way, that complexity can never emerge. This line of thinking is what is called The Anthropic Principle. I recommend reading up on it – it’s fascinating.

The opposite of this is that only those universes that evolve complex life exist? Why? Is there some greater intelligence guiding or designing it that way? Perhaps. But then where did that intelligence come from? Either way we are back to the utter arbitrariness of anything existing at all. So what we are left with, since we have ‘no time’ as a backdrop, is that everything already exists, has existed and will always exist.

[wombatwal]

Psychic Physicist
I don't know if you are genuine or not, but we should give you a fair go.
I do find unfortunately some skeptics are as dogmatic and close minded as any believer in superstition, Creationist, fundamentalists etc, etc.

[KarlQuigley]

I thought I did.This guy is an idiot.

This is the man that Corey refers too as an `idiot`.


This is exactly why Psychic Physicist went off in a huff. I don't blame him, I would do the same.

As soon as PsyP read this comment, then all other comments /debates appeared hostile.

I thought for one moment that we may have a thread that was unique from the normal sceptic arguing with sceptic.

We all have a right to an opinion and to voice that opinion. We do not have the right to insult someone just because their beliefs differ from ours - whatever we think of that belief.

I know that it was just one insult from one person but that's all it takes.

What happens to Jeff Corey? Anything or nothing? Is the forum policy to tolerate different beliefs or to tolerate the intolerant? I just want to know whether I should find somewhere else to hang out.

The proposition that if you deliberately and prominantly included a piece of utter bollocks in your first post on the forum some people might not take you seriously?

Mojo, you know as well as I that PsyP is upset. PsyP is just angry and reacting angrily. If he wasn't so angry he might have said something like "On second thoughts maybe I could have used a better example." Just read his reaction to the request to space out his paragraphs. The guy is just pissed.

I can't find the post, but someone once described the life cycle of these posts, going something like:
1. Person makes a vague claim of abilities
2. JREFrs try and condense this to a few simple testable sentences
3. Person leaves in a huff

Stewartp, this is not what happened. The guy was insulted and reacted like a person who had been insulted. And you know this!
He was called an idiot and had to suffer niggling comments like
for example, "I can only do it on Thursdays after having eaten a turkey sandwich" or something like that.

This is the reason for the short life cycle, perhaps the same happened on previous occasions.

He has been pissed off and he has pissed off.

Whatever my personal opinions, I was hoping to learn something from PsyP. Now I cannot.

So now what can I learn? Nothing.

Karl Quigley

[KarlQuigley]

Oh hang on PsyP's back. Perhaps I was somewhat hasty.

[StewartP]

Stewartp, this is not what happened. The guy was insulted and reacted like a person who had been insulted. And you know this!
He was called an idiot and had to suffer niggling comments like

This is the reason for the short life cycle, perhaps the same happened on previous occasions.

He has been pissed off and he has pissed off.

Whatever my personal opinions, I was hoping to learn something from PsyP. Now I cannot.

So now what can I learn? Nothing.

Karl Quigley
Karl, perhaps you are right. We went thru the same autopsy and analysis after the PinkLady thread. People would have liked to have had a longer and deeper dialogue to find out more about her beliefs and thoughts and processes. We went through much soul searching and chest beating about how we could have better responded. believe me, this thread has been positively ladies tea party in comparison.

Perhaps it is the insult that the cause, or perhaps it is the insult that is gratefully taken as an excuse to leave in high dudgeon when as the logical application of test protocals start to make it apparant that reality is drawing too close.

I too think it would be helpful if diologue was continued in a civilised, calm and respectful manner.

But I suspect we could get to the same conclusion, only it would take 200 posts instead of 30

[Apathia]

But I suspect we could get to the same conclusion, only it would take 200 posts instead of 30

And in the 200 posts, we'd have the opportunity to get over the sound bytes and misleading frames.
In the case of this subject, ordinary human psycho-somatic effects that could use a lot more investigation are paranormalized or chalked up as mere delusion.
"Paranormal" is more sensational. "Delusional" is more sensational. People get excited with the frames. A Skeptic wants to know, "What's really going on here?"

[KarlQuigley]

Psychic Physicist, I think you should know that there are going to be changes in the acceptance of the applicants for the challenge. As I understand it (someone correct if I'm wrong) the applicants are going to be chosen based on their public profile. The more in the public eye the applicant is, the more chance of acceptance.
If I am right about this, you may find that you are not accepted for the challenge. Although, as you have applied before the changes have been announced, this might not apply.

My point in telling you this is that should your application not be accepted (or if you decide not to take the challenge after all), I would like you to keep a presence here for further discussions.

One other thing I thought about was, as you seem quite sceptical in other matters; had you thought about actually testing yourself? You seem clear as to the necessary procedures required to give a fair result. If you could find someone to act as placebo and found some volunteers who did not know you. It's just a thought, especially as you agree that there might be "conventional" reasons for your healing abilities. Should you find that your abilities are not actual healing powers you would save yourself the hardship and scrutiny (and listing in the "chamber of horrors"). If your self testing reaffirmed your belief in your healing abilities, you may find this beneficial to your confidence when facing the challenge (if accepted).

Kind regards

Karl Quigley

[tsig]

First off welcome to the forum!
Your on a wild world of discovery and great discussion here.



But remember science is constantly refining itself. It evolves as we evolve and discover new ways to measure and record more accurate and reliable data. You must remove thoughts that science is some evil big brother, arrogant and ignorant. Science is completely and utterly neutral. Its not something with feelings or morals, its a method to understand things. I dont like this sentence because most people who say it repeat this mantra because they dont understand and appreciate the real method behind science and how important the method is.



Its not so simple. There is evidence that suggests things started at a specific point. How that became to start with and how it progressed further is beyond my understanding, but that does not mean the information is non existant. What you dont know is what you dont know, not what no one else knows. I think I just confused myself.



Anecdotal yes, factual it is not. It's a bold claim that you posess an ability that will rewrite the science books. But im all eyes and ears.



This does suprise me. One of the appealing things I find with this line of work is to get to the facts. However I think your trying to appeal to authority to add weight to your arguement. Its going to hit a brick wall under scientific scrutiny. Check out what einstein himself said was his biggest blunder, and thats einstein - and he would have thanked science for showing him.



I dont like these grey lines people like to blur in order to make a claim sound more credible. Evidence not philosophy. Im completely open but after 60 years of research, im starting to wonder why people persist.



If I said you rubbing my knee made me feel some sort of sexual advance, would that be your healing power or some other weird power. This is completely vague evidence explainable is many mundane and unfortunately boring ways. I have seen elsewhere on here about tests using prayer etc and how a nice voice and soothing touch can make a big difference.



I have a proposal.

1) 20 volunteers. They are told and are believers in faith healing.
you and someone else - like me (I think its just emotion and a kind heart that is helping)

2) the 20 dont see each other but are told a faith healer will come in and help them with their various ailments.

3) We would take it in turns to approach the people. one at a time, no one repeated - so I would take 1, you 2, me the third, you the 4th etc, so we get 10 each, making sure none of the volunteers can give away anything about their suspicions by...using seperate rooms? They should not have any idea if its done properly and well out of sight, in a good test they will think you or I are the person they want to heal them.

4) We both use a same method - whatever that is - perhaps pretend to pray to god or whatever. A touch on the knee etc. Be sure its exactly the same.

5) Record results. Have a results grading sheet (level of healing felt), same for every person on test.

6) Now do the same for 20 more this time, you give them what they believe is a healing device. Lets say a simple iron rod. We will need 20 of these to ensure there is no mixing of 'powers' For each second person you get, you touch this device, the other time its left alone. Every person is told the iron rod has been touched by a healer.

7) Record results. Have a results grading sheet (level of healing felt), same for every person on test.

8) Another 20 people. Given an iron rod again, this time Neither of us touch it. They people are all told the rods are bestowed with magic healing powers.

9) Record results. Have a results grading sheet (level of healing felt), same for every person on test.

The only hassle is the amount of people :(

My thoughts
Cheers



Take 20 people and whack em in the knee with an iron rod, but tell them that the rod is a rod of god's power and they will be better for it in the end.


Now take 20 people and touch them on the knee and tell them that the warmth they feel is the breath of satan.


Who will walk away without a limp?

[tsig]

Just a final thought.. Try to get out more. You might find that the outside world is more challenging than you think.

condescend much?

arrogance and ignorance

are mached in perfect harmony

(ebony and ivory)

[KarlQuigley]

Take 20 people and whack em in the knee with an iron rod, but tell them that the rod is a rod of god's power and they will be better for it in the end.


Now take 20 people and touch them on the knee and tell them that the warmth they feel is the breath of satan.


Who will walk away without a limp?

condescend much?

arrogance and ignorance

are mached in perfect harmony

(ebony and ivory)

PsyP, you can see by the above quotes that unfortunately there are the few who hop from thread to thread, sprouting out inane comments in the belief that they are contributing. They believe that they can throw out one-liners all over the forum in the belief that we will gasp at their comprehension and deep knowledge in every subject. They believe we are in awe of their fast thinking meaningful abilities. They believe we do not think they are full of it.

...and these very same people will criticise your beliefs.

Mind you, anyone who does not take the time to read over what they have typed, or knows how to use a spell-checker, does not really deserve much attention. And that is exactly my advice, ignore the few and concentrate on those with intelligent input.

We feel the same way as you do about them.

Kind Regards

karl Quigley

[Jeff Corey]

...Mind you, anyone who does not take the time to read over what they have typed, or knows how to use a spell-checker, does not really deserve much attention...

You might want to read that over again.

[Thinktoomuch]

Yes, Jeff, we are all human. Ask yourself this, though, and be honest: would the forum be better without Karl or without you?

[Mojo]

Mojo, you know as well as I that PsyP is upset. PsyP is just angry and reacting angrily. If he wasn't so angry he might have said something like "On second thoughts maybe I could have used a better example." Just read his reaction to the request to space out his paragraphs. The guy is just pissed.But what reason did he have to be pissed off with me? I have no control over what anyone else posts. Until he became actually hostile, all I did was to try to suggest ways he could present an acceptable challenge, based on what he had posted. When I realised I had misread what he had posted, I admitted this, and changed my suggestion accordingly. I assumed that he was sincere, and responded accordingly.

What else can you do?

[Mojo]

Who will walk away without a limp?A limp what? :boggled:








:D

[Jeff Corey]

Yes, Jeff, we are all human. Ask yourself this, though, and be honest: would the forum be better without Karl or without you?

I don't know, but anyone who fails to see the irony of making a mistake while criticizing others for making the same mistake is incredibily dense.

[Thinktoomuch]

Absolutely true. But most people who see the irony do not feel the need to prove to themselves how smart they are by making an unproductive sarcastic comment.

[The Atheist]

I personally don`t feel I am an idiot, but like my healing claims, it all boils down to belief and opinion......

........To conclude, I really don`t give a toss what you think, I suggest that you show respect for others that don`t subscribe to your alleged empirical assertions of anything you really don't understand. That is made plainly obvious by the manner under which you feel these tests should be made.

So much for thoughtful debate. I`ve obviously arrived at the wrong forum!

PS: I haven`t referred to it, but the statement made concerning the universe - that was a deliberate red herring. You certainly passed the test and satisfied my own curiosity. Thankyou..(Bolding mine)

Ok, Mr. Pommy, ex-Cop Psychic Healer bloke.

You come into a sceptics' forum, start off by telling us you're a psychic healer, make idiot statements about the universe, slag off all the "fraudulent psychics" and then expect to gain respect? I thought you were psychic! (joke, mate!)

Only one way to gain respect around here - take and pass the challenge. I'll leave it with JREF for now as you've already completed an application, but I have my doubts that it will ever be sent in. If it is, and you have trouble sorting out protocols, I'm sure we can overcome them, so let me know.

Meanwhile, my reading shows:
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/10377451f74d05e792.gif (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=1714)

but I'll give you a fair go. Being a pom, you'd have heard the old expression about enough rope? I'll make damned sure you have plenty!

[KarlQuigley]

But what reason did he have to be pissed off with me? I have no control over what anyone else posts. Until he became actually hostile, all I did was to try to suggest ways he could present an acceptable challenge, based on what he had posted. When I realised I had misread what he had posted, I admitted this, and changed my suggestion accordingly. I assumed that he was sincere, and responded accordingly.

What else can you do?

I did not detect any real hostility from either of you. My intention was to try to calm the situation, or to prevent it from worsening. I apologise, I probably overreacted to the situation.
I wonder if you can help me out here, I feel I may have made a fool of myself.

“Mind you, anyone who does not take the time to read over what they have typed, or knows how to use a spell-checker, does not really deserve much attention.”

What is wrong with this sentence? I’ve looked and I’ve looked, but I cannot see the mistake(s).

All the best

Karl Quigley

[StewartP]

“Mind you, anyone who does not take the time to read over what they have typed, or knows how to use a spell-checker, does not really deserve much attention.”

What is wrong with this sentence? I’ve looked and I’ve looked, but I cannot see the mistake(s).



Should be:
"Mind you, anyone who does not take the time to read over what they have typed, or does not know how to use a spell-checker, does not really deserve much attention.”

[KarlQuigley]

Got it thanks. That'll teach me.

Thanks

Karl Quigley

[KarlQuigley]

(Bolding mine)

Ok, Mr. Pommy, ex-Cop Psychic Healer bloke.

but I'll give you a fair go. Being a pom, you'd have heard the old expression about enough rope? I'll make damned sure you have plenty!

(Bolding mine)
The world holds two classes of men -- intelligent men without racism, and rascist men without intelligence.

Actually, I thought slagging of "fraudulent psychics" DID gain you respect round here.

Oh well, I tried my best but it just gets worse. In future, I'll keep quiet and see if this helps.

My apologies to everyone if this is all my fault.

Karl Quigley

[Apathia]

When whacking woo's isn't an outlet for anger or an expression of disgust and frauds, it's just one of those things some people do to show they belong in this community. In the heat of the whacking there is no listening.
True we get some people who have nothing coherent to listen to (OP not an example) but you can ignore them unless you are looking for someone to kick in the teeth.

PsyP,

If you are still following, this forum has a feature called Ignore. You can make unhelpful person's posts and threads invisible, so you can focus on posts that are giving you practical and helpful information.
Expect, of course, that people won't for the most part take to what you are saying about this subject. The main function of a skeptic is to call stuff into question and ask for substanial evidence. Sometimes it's like a skeet shoot here, but just take the good criticism and ignore people who aren't listening and are just rude.

I'm still not seeing the path to a clear testing of your ability. I think I'll go back and dig around for some of the TT studies that were done in the past.
As for testing to see who felt or didn't feel sensations upon your touch,
Most people will. Most of the time we aren't paying attention to the sensations that are occuring in our bodies. Set down for a moment and begin paying attention to how your body feels in various places, and you'll find some intersting sensations. Here's someone with little body awareness and who is usually oblivious to how their body feels except in pain. Along comes a Reiki practioner who calls their attention to a place on their body and asks what they feel. Amazing! They do feel stuff. Is it "Healing Power" that they feel?
And there's even more stuff to feel in the context of human contact and the intimacy of trusting someone's touch (and yes it is a touch, even though a l skin to skin contact isn't made. Are these sensations and psychological responses "Healing Power?" Just what is the Healing Power as opposed to feeling? It takes amuch more complex study with many participants involving many research hours tracking the recovery of sick and injuired patients who have recieved so-called "Energy Work."
In my opinion it's a more involved investigation than suitable for the simple demonstration approach the $1 million challange is seeking.
Now if you were claiming to be able to make chronic illnesses vanish on contact without any other medical attention or treatments, that would be game.

[The Atheist]

(Bolding mine)
The world holds two classes of men -- intelligent men without racism, and rascist men without intelligence.

Actually, I thought slagging of "fraudulent psychics" DID gain you respect round here.

Oh well, I tried my best but it just gets worse. In future, I'll keep quiet and see if this helps.

My apologies to everyone if this is all my fault.

Karl Quigley
Karl. You live in England and therefore you are probably a pom. You should know very well that "pom' and "pommy" are NOT terms of abuse in any way. It's exactly the same as "Aussie" or "Kiwi".

Sorry to burst your bubble.

[KarlQuigley]

Karl. You live in England and therefore you are probably a pom. You should know very well that "pom' and "pommy" are NOT terms of abuse in any way. It's exactly the same as "Aussie" or "Kiwi".

Sorry to burst your bubble.

Go to Google.com, type in define: pom and then define: pommy

Find a definition that doe not include the word "derogative" or "disparaging".

Also, try and convince anyone,after reading your post, that you did not mean to use this expression in a disparaging or derogative way. I know you will fail.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

Karl Quigley

[The Atheist]

Go to Google.com, type in define: pom and then define: pommy

Find a definition that doe not include the word "derogative" or "disparaging".

Also, try and convince anyone,after reading your post, that you did not mean to use this expression in a disparaging or derogative way. I know you will fail.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

Karl QuigleyOh, Google says it - it must be true! I suppose you believe everything you see on tv as well.

Let me quote from a DICTIONARY. The Oxford one, that is. The definitive authority on the English language:

pom, pommy, Pommy. n NZ & Austral. sl. British person, esp. recent immigrant. [shortening of pommygrant, obs. var. of (after IMMIGRANT) of POMEGRANATE + -Y]

Now, you tell me how there's anything abusive in that!

Have no fear, Karl, when I abuse someone, I don't hide behind euphemisms, I come right out with it - go check my other posts if you doubt me.

Since I was offering the aforementioned pommy the opportunity of claiming a Kiwi Million as well as the JREF Million, I think I'd know what I meant. Bubble completely intact.

[KarlQuigley]

Oh, Google says it - it must be true! I suppose you believe everything you see on tv as well.

Let me quote from a DICTIONARY. The Oxford one, that is. The definitive authority on the English language:

pom, pommy, Pommy. n NZ & Austral. sl. British person, esp. recent immigrant. [shortening of pommygrant, obs. var. of (after IMMIGRANT) of POMEGRANATE + -Y]


Now read the rest of the definition, the bit you deliberately omitted. - "Often used derogatory."

Or Oxford Online (for an up to date definition)
Pommy


(also Pommie)
• noun (pl. Pommies) Austral./NZ informal, derogatory a British person. — ORIGIN said by some to be short for pomegranate, as a near rhyme to immigrant

Let's try Collins "...offensive word used by Australians..."

For your information, Google is a SEARCH ENGINE and not a dictionary. It SEARCHES for definitions. Get it?

You ignored my second suggestion; have you tried to convince anyone yet?

Karl Quigley

[The Atheist]

Now read the rest of the definition, the bit you deliberately omitted. - "Often used derogatory."Oh, the tedium.

Here, Karl, is the actual page of the Oxford dictionary. Find the term "derogatory" in it! Sorry to not need to use descriptions via the internet, but I prefer to use an actual dictionary - you may have heard of them.
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/10377452043683071c.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=1723)

As to convincing anyone, I don't need to. Take it as you wish - I repeat, when I abuse people, they know they've been abused.

[KarlQuigley]

Oh, the tedium.

Here, Karl, is the actual page of the Oxford dictionary. Find the term "derogatory" in it! Sorry to not need to use descriptions via the internet, but I prefer to use an actual dictionary - you may have heard of them.
As to convincing anyone, I don't need to. Take it as you wish - I repeat, when I abuse people, they know they've been abused.

I took it as it was intended. Your manner was abusive. Your dictionary is out of date. Oxford online is up to date- you cannot dispute that.

The Internet,as you are no doubt beginning to discover, is a wonderful source of accurate information providing you look in the right places. You'll get the hang of it.

As it now seems obvious that you did not fully understand the terms "Pom" or "Pommy", I'll move on to more intellectual discussions.

Karl Quigley

[Brainache]

I took it as it was intended. Your manner was abusive. Your dictionary is out of date. Oxford online is up to date- you cannot dispute that.

The Internet,as you are no doubt beginning to discover, is a wonderful source of accurate information providing you look in the right places. You'll get the hang of it.

As it now seems obvious that you did not fully understand the terms "Pom" or "Pommy", I'll move on to more intellectual discussions.

Karl Quigley

Just to continue the derail here, I was quite surprised the first time I heard an Englishman describe the word Pommie as racist.

I was working on a broadcast of the last Ashes cricket series. Our two resident experts (Dean Jones and Greg Matthews) kept referring to the English team as "The Poms" and during the break our English presenter said Pom was a racist term equivalent to calling someone from Pakistan a "Paki" or an Aboriginal an "Abo".

We all laughed at him and called him a stupid whingeing pommy b*stard.

When I was a kid my dad called the English "Chooms" an extinct term now which was derived from "New Chums" referring to recently arrived fellow convicts.

Either way the word Pommy is not usually used in an agressively derogatory fashion. It is used in the same sense that we call New Zealanders Kiwis, Americans Yanks and Canadians Yanks( we can't tell the difference). If it was a racist term we would, I assume, be of a different race. Given that the term is used mainly by people of European descent we would be being racist towards our own race.

[Dogdoctor]

Isn't posting a picture of a page from a dictionary a violation of rule 4?

[The Atheist]

I took it as it was intended.Oops! No, you mean that you took it as you assumed it was meant.Your manner was abusive. Wrong. Belittling; sure, abusive; not even close. Maybe you can look the difference up online!Your dictionary is out of date. Oxford online is up to date- you cannot dispute that.:dl:
Mate - don't you think those of us who use Antipodean colloquialisms might best know what they mean? The Aussie who posted next certainly did, and so does my totally up-to-date dictionary. And, sorry to burst another bubble of yours, but the online Oxford is by no means definitive. The NZ/Australian versions are, as regards local colloquial usage.The Internet,as you are no doubt beginning to discover, is a wonderful source of accurate information providing you look in the right places. You'll get the hang of it.Is that right? Maybe that will happen some time after you realise that just because a web site says so, it isn't necessarily true or correct. As it now seems obvious that you did not fully understand the terms "Pom" or "Pommy", I'll move on to more intellectual discussions.

Karl QuigleyYou mean like the first thread you started? Yessiree, highly intellectual!

Mate, you must be fair dinkum short of bubbles at this stage!

[The Atheist]

Isn't posting a picture of a page from a dictionary a violation of rule 4?Nope, not even close. Go read it (rule 4, rather than the dictionary - I'll leave that to Karl!)

[The Atheist]

And a final thought regarding the "pommy" saga - I use the exact same term with both andyandy and brodski, and they are both people whose opinions I am on record as respecting.

[Thinktoomuch]

So you respect them and do not abuse them but you are happy to belittle them. "Oh, the tedium!"

[Flange Desire]

derail
Yes, down here many of our ancestors are poms from the 'old country'.
We love em all - except for the winging pommy barstarges!
It is true that the term may come across as a bit derogatory,
but it is not really meant that way
- because we tend to diss everybody equally - especially ourselves!
btw, dictionaries are alway playing 'catch up' with language evolution. They are not definitive of a live langauge - they are a snapshot of a language at a particular time and place.

back on track
I hope Psychic Physicist returns to the thread.
I doubt that any protocol will be developed, when it becomes more evident to PP that the so-called healing touch is in fact a combination of placebo, warm fuzzies and delusion.
PP could speed this along by reading some good stuff available on this.

By the way PP, some of the rudeness you will see around here is directed at the false use of the word 'healer', which is seen as a serious matter by many here. A common theme heard from 'healers' is that it is no big deal - if people get some good out of it then that is great - not hurting anybody - etc, etc.
But it is seen by many (including me) as plain fraud. No offence intended PP.

[The Atheist]

So you respect them and do not abuse them but you are happy to belittle them. "Oh, the tedium!"Well, honey, when you start putting up a million, you'll be able to belittle the frauds who attempt to take it, too!

Respect - no.

[The Atheist]

.....But it is seen by many (including me) as plain fraud....Ditto that from me, in spades.

[Thinktoomuch]

I am totally confused:

"And a final thought regarding the "pommy" saga - I use the exact same term with both andyandy and brodski, and they are both people whose opinions I am on record as respecting.

"... frauds ...! Respect - no."

WTF?

Well ...when you start putting up a million, you'll be able to belittle...

Even more confusing. Are you putting up a million?

..., honey,...

I sure hope you are female and good looking... your place or mine?

[The Atheist]

I am totally confused:
I can see why - you're getting two separate statements mixed up. I have respect for brodski and andyandy, but not for nutters who think they can heal people with the power of their [whatever it is it comes from].

Even more confusing. Are you putting up a million?Yes (http://www.atheist.co.nz)

I sure hope you are female and good looking... your place or mine?Nope. On both counts.

[Thinktoomuch]

P.S.
I have looked at the web page. Your organisation does put up a million. No mention of where the money is though. And in any case, you are not really worried that anybody could take it, so what is the justification of your "risking money entitles me to belittle" statement?

My apologies to all other readers, my love for logic has got the best of me. I will try to restrain myself.

[The Atheist]

P.S.
I have looked at the web page. Your organisation does put up a million. No mention of where the money is though. And in any case, you are not really worried that anybody could take it, so what is the justification of your "risking money entitles me to belittle" statement?We run a different system to JREF, mainly because nobody's given us a mio to play with, so we have an arrangement with a consortium of bookmakers at odds ranging between 1,000:1 and 10,000:1. That's why I suggested earlier making the JREF challenge $10M instead of the measly $1M.

Actually, I don't need any reason to get stuck into frauds, but I thought it sounded like a good excuse! :) (My other name is Arrogant_B_Stard, but they won't let me use it in here) But hey, I did offer him a crack, do I need to patronise him as well?

My apologies to all other readers, my love for logic has got the best of me. I will try to restrain myself.Nah, don't do that, derailing threads is excellent, especially when they're as dead as this one appears to be.

[Azrael 5]

Whats with all the bitching in here today? Play nice children. ;)

[Thinktoomuch]

The Atheist: this is great idea!

We run a different system to JREF, mainly because nobody's given us a mio to play with, so we have an arrangement with a consortium of bookmakers at odds ranging between 1,000:1 and 10,000:1. That's why I suggested earlier making the JREF challenge $10M instead of the measly $1M.

If 100 JREF members put up $100 each with 100 bookmakers at 10,000 to 1 odds we would have $100 million to play with! I have heard a (Oz?) saying that "if the price of eggs is high enough even the roosters will start laying"... we might get some real scientists (yes, some do believe in supernatural things) doing real research of the type advocated by Hyparxis here to sort the sheep from the goats (just keeping the Oz/NZ flavour...) in the hope to get it. It would be all a different ball game, possibly in line with the "watch this space" changes afoot, and cut across many of the excuses for refusing to play.

We have to be honest with ourselves though. Is this what we want or is exposing small time charlatans just too much fun to give up?

[Thinktoomuch]

The Atheist: this is great idea!

We run a different system to JREF, mainly because nobody's given us a mio to play with, so we have an arrangement with a consortium of bookmakers at odds ranging between 1,000:1 and 10,000:1. That's why I suggested earlier making the JREF challenge $10M instead of the measly $1M.

If 100 JREF members put up $100 each with 100 bookmakers at 10,000 to 1 odds we would have $100 million to play with! I have heard a (Oz?) saying that "if the price of eggs is high enough even the roosters will start laying"... we might get some real scientists (yes, some do believe in supernatural things) doing real research of the type advocated by Hyparxis here to sort the sheep from the goats (just keeping the Oz/NZ flavour...) in the hope to get it. It would be all a different ball game, possibly in line with the "watch this space" changes afoot, and cut across many of the excuses for refusing to play.

We have to be honest with ourselves though. Is this what we want or is exposing small time charlatans just too much fun to give up?

[Apathia]

A red flag goes up when anyone claims to be a "Healer." And this red flag attracts some bullish responses. Even when I was active in Reiki, TT, Shiatsu, etc., I refused to call myself any kind of healer, not because of potential bull horn gorings, but because it's just wrong. Healing is something the body does, not someting done to it. Doctors proper only facilitate a recovery from an injury or disease.

A former boss of mine was getting sessions from an "energy/psychic healer." He marketed himself as such. He told her her breast cancer was in complete remission and she believed him. That cost her her life. I don't mind at all belittling and more, frauds like that.

Unfortunately its hard to keep this word "healing" out of a discussion about Therapeutic Touch, because there is a claim that these modalities facilitate, and hasten recovery and healing. And then most practitioners, especially th