Some Standardization of the Challenge

[ernestocastillo]

I have great respect for Randi's "Million Dollar Challenge" and certainly understand the importance of the qualifying process. On more than one occasion I have had the pleasure of referring a self proclaimed psychic or 'true believer of the paranormal' to this website. However, it has occurred to me that there may be a better way to promote and execute the Challenge. All too often, we hear a Sylvia Browne (or someone like her) take defense in the "vagueness" or complexities of the rules. It may make sense to develop some type of Standardization and post it for all to see.

Most of the paranomaral claims fall into easily testable categories. If someone claims to have ESP, how about a simple test (double blind ofcourse) such as picking 1 of 4 possible colors for each card from a deck of say 100 cards. In order to win the prize you would have to perform at some astronomical level. Perhaps 80-90/100 correct guesses (this may not seem so monumental a task to the typically innumerate psychic). Similar simple tests could be created for other claims.

Standardization of the testing procedue provides a clear and understandable path to the entrants. In effect, something they can get their hands around. Every time I hear Randi go into an explanation of the testing procedure on national television, it makes me cringe. I understand exactly where he is coming from but it often provides far too easy a graceful exit for those challenged. While not all claims will be a perfect fit for standardized tests, most probably will. For each paranormal category, a corresponding standard test could be listed and explained on the website.

I believe this would go a long way in supporting the credibility of the challenge. Having recently joined the forum, I am not sure if this has been previously discussed. Others thoughts??

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by ernestocastillo

Most of the paranomaral claims fall into easily testable categories. If someone claims to have ESP, how about a simple test (double blind ofcourse) such as picking 1 of 4 possible colors for each card from a deck of say 100 cards. In order to win the prize you would have to perform at some astronomical level. Perhaps 80-90/100 correct guesses (this may not seem so monumental a task to the typically innumerate psychic). Similar simple tests could be created for other claims.

Standardization of the testing procedue provides a clear and understandable path to the entrants. In effect, something they can get their hands around.

You underestimate the ability of your average paranormal believer to squirm away from hard questions.

Pick one of 4 possible colours? They'll claim that their powers don't work with colours, only with words, or symbols. And only when done in the dark. Or with the lights on. Whichever stipulation isn't in the rules.

Unfortunately, there are so many different types of claims, and so many minor variations, that creating standardized tests might be a waste of time.

[Beleth]

This does indeed get mentioned fairly often.

The short answer is that standardizing the challenge would be tantamount to testing an applicant for a power they are not claiming to have.

Say I claim to have ESP, but I'm colorblind. Or that I only have ESP with dead people. If the only ESP test available is a standardized colored-card test, I will not be able to prove I have the ability I claim I have.

This isn't just a problem with the specific standardized test you mentioned. It would be a problem with every conceivable standardized test.

It is far more beneficial to the applicant for there not to be standardized tests. The applicant and the JREF must sit down and tailor a test to the applicant's claimed power. This way, the applicant gets tested on exactly the power they are claiming to have.

[JimTheBrit]

Welcome to the forums, ernestocastillo. Standardisation of protocols has already been discussed by Randi, here:

Correspondent:
I'd like to see certain protocols in your JREF million dollar challenge be pre-defined in such a way that you can say: "Here is the specific test you have to pass if you make this claim...."

Randi:
Not possible. Every claimant has a different claim, different parameters, different needs, varying conditions under which they say they can operate. No claim is quite like any other claim. This is what decades of this business have clearly shown me. That's why the terms of the challenge are so clearly drawn up.

Correspondent:
..... as many tests as possible should be pre-defined and outlined in specific terms on your website."

Randi:
Ridiculous! We have hundreds of different sorts of claims being made. That would require an entire book! Dowsing, healing, speaking to the dead, levitation, diagnosing illness, ESP, predicting, you name it. And each one has dozens of varieties, special needs, forbidden procedures, special times/temperatures/locations. This cannot be done.

Source (http://www.randi.org/jr/06-22-01.html)

[roger]

It has been discussed in this forum many times, and by Randi in his commentaries.

If Randi offered "standarized" tests, than the contestest would claim, and rightly in this case, that the tests are unfair because they are testing a skill they don't have.

The rules are entirely fair, and it is very clear that they are fair to any reasonable person.

Plus, Randi is very quick, vocal, and public to describe a very specific testing procedure for people who duck his challenge, such as Sylvia. All he hears in return is silence.

He describes his proposed fair test, in public, on TV, radio, whatever. What more can we reasonably expect from the man? I think he is doing a wonderful job of showing what con artists these people are.

If _I_ had paranormal powers, and he announced on TV a test I could pass, you'd better believe there'd never be a "roger" clock on the front page of this site - I'd be on the next plane to FL! :)

Oh, and welcome to the forums. Hope you stick around.

roger

[Brown]

I sympathize with ernestocastillo's view, to a degree. Some claims seem to be pretty standard, and there ought to be some sort of standard tests. For example, transcendental meditators claim to be able to levitate. A standard test might be to say that a levitator would need to be able to levitate for ten seconds in order to win the prize. What would be the harm in that?

On the other hand, I understand Mr. Randi's position as well. The claimant has to be tested based upon what the claimant says s/he can do. It is not really fair to test the claimant for a "power" that is similar to what the claimant says s/he has. The claimant could complain (perhaps with some justification), "They tested me on something I never said I could do! So of course I failed!"

Many of the claims sound similar at first, but upon close examination are different. Different dowsers, for example, will say that they can only detect certain substances, and that they can be hampered by interfence from wildly different sources. The test needs to be geared to the abilities a particular claimant says s/he has.

Standarized tests may also open the door to fraud.

In addition, there are legal benefits to customizing each offer of the prize, rather than having a standardized offer.

Browne and others complain that the rules are vague or complex, but this is a load of fertilizer. If I were in their shoes and I really had the powers that they say they have, I couldn't wait to take the challenge. I'd love to take the million bucks. I'd love to make Mr. Randi look foolish, and I'd love to publicly rub his nose in his own arrogance. I'd love all the extra publicity and all the benefits that flow from it. I'd love to have the public vindication of my abilities.

Yeah, I'd be the first one in line to take that challenge if I really had the ability that these folks claim to have.

[roger]

p.s.

For an instructive example, look in the archives for the poster Edge, who was tested by Randi for dowsing and failed. Randi wrote about the test in his commentary, and a year or more of posts ensued by Fade and the other posters on the forum.

Edge made many claims about how he thought the test was fair when he agreed to it, but felt that the conditions at the office where he was tested were not optimal (I'm simplifing enormously - it was quite a saga). He claims that by being tested "in the field" he will succeed.

Reading just that one example makes it clear that Randi could not create a standarized test for something as specific as dowsing gold indoors.

Edited to add: somehow I wrote the username Fade instead of Edge in this response!!! Sorry, Fade! Anyway, I have corrected it. Thanks for catching this, Skeptoid.

[Skeptoid]

roger, you're thinking of Edge (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7679) are you not?

[ernestocastillo]

All of the arguments opposing standardization of the testing procedure are quite valid. Most claims are indeed unique and may require more specialized testing. However, I fail to see the harm in providing an outline for some standard tests. Imagine the next time someone starts backpeddling about the rules, how nice it would be to just simply refer them to one of several pre-approved tests and say...

"You are ofcourse free to choose from one of the following if you don't want a more customized examination of your skills. If you can do what you claim, you should certainly have no problem passing this straightforward test!"

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally posted by ernestocastillo
I have great respect for Randi's "Million Dollar Challenge" and certainly understand the importance of the qualifying process. On more than one occasion I have had the pleasure of referring a self proclaimed psychic or 'true believer of the paranormal' to this website. However, it has occurred to me that there may be a better way to promote and execute the Challenge. All too often, we hear a Sylvia Browne (or someone like her) take defense in the "vagueness" or complexities of the rules. It may make sense to develop some type of Standardization and post it for all to see.

Most of the paranomaral claims fall into easily testable categories. If someone claims to have ESP, how about a simple test (double blind ofcourse) such as picking 1 of 4 possible colors for each card from a deck of say 100 cards. In order to win the prize you would have to perform at some astronomical level. Perhaps 80-90/100 correct guesses (this may not seem so monumental a task to the typically innumerate psychic). Similar simple tests could be created for other claims.

Standardization of the testing procedue provides a clear and understandable path to the entrants. In effect, something they can get their hands around. Every time I hear Randi go into an explanation of the testing procedure on national television, it makes me cringe. I understand exactly where he is coming from but it often provides far too easy a graceful exit for those challenged. While not all claims will be a perfect fit for standardized tests, most probably will. For each paranormal category, a corresponding standard test could be listed and explained on the website.

I believe this would go a long way in supporting the credibility of the challenge. Having recently joined the forum, I am not sure if this has been previously discussed. Others thoughts??

I have a simpler solution - why don't the woo-woo's just do what they say they can do?

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer

I have a simpler solution - why don't the woo-woo's just do what they say they can do?

Simple questions require simple answers: Because most of them, the ones who want to be analyzed anyway, want to be analyzed scientifically. I don't blame them.

[JimTheBrit]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi


Simple questions require simple answers: Because most of them, the ones who want to be analyzed anyway, want to be analyzed scientifically. I don't blame them.

Either way, they'll have to demonstrate their abilities. One way they get to contribute to our knowledge about the world, the other way they get to contribute to our knowledge about the world and pocket $1,000,000.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi

Because most of them, the ones who want to be analyzed anyway, want to be analyzed scientifically.

Actualy, they don't.

[Lord Kenneth]

There's a specific reason the test is not made that way: Both parties agree to EXACTLY what the claiman claims to be able to do. That way they cannot make an excuse for their failure. A psychic who doesn't deal with picking a color-type deal obviously shouldn't be tested for that.

Standardization is the exact opposite of the test's goal.

JimTheBrit (and of course Randi) explained it best.

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer


Actualy, they don't.

I disagree. I feel that some people who claim to have powers not recognized by science see the situation as

1. getting tested by scientific departments of well-knwon universities by professors with serious credentials

or

2. getting tested by a magicians foundation with the prize money being $1,000,000.

[BillHoyt]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi


I disagree. I feel that some people who claim to have powers not recognized by science see the situation as

1. getting tested by scientific departments of well-knwon universities by professors with serious credentials

or

2. getting tested by a magicians foundation with the prize money being $1,000,000.

Ha ha ha. We can always count on T'ai to try to almost sound scientific and logical. I wonder if we can count on him to try harder? Can we also count on T'ai to marshall some evidence for the claim that these people want to be tested scientifically by "serious credentials" cats at well-known universities?

How about it, T'ai. Give us just five examples of serious papers from serious researchers at well-known universities with unquestionably positive results or with unquestionably stringent test protocols. All the papers must test, of course, people who had previously claimed paranormal powers.

Cheers,

[69dodge]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi
I disagree. I feel that some people who claim to have powers not recognized by science see the situation as

1. getting tested by scientific departments of well-knwon universities by professors with serious credentials

or

2. getting tested by a magicians foundation with the prize money being $1,000,000.If it were me, I'd do both.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Oh for crying out loud, you annoying claimants! Come get tested at the JREF and pocket the million. Donate it to your favorite charity if you don't want it. Then announce it all over hell and gone. Sit back and wait for the real scientists to scramble on over and ask to test you. There's gotta be two or three of 'em who want the Nobel prize. Meanwhile, appear on every TV show on the planet and talk it up. Sign an exclusive book deal for a few extra million. Make a movie. Sell the technology to some huge corporation for a few more million (actually, if it's really good, for a billion or two).

Piece of cake.

~~ Paul

[Clancie]

Posted by Lord Kenneth

Both parties agree to EXACTLY what the claiman claims to be able to do. That way they cannot make an excuse for their failure.
Right. Only in the case of the Yellow Bamboo group they stated their claim and actually did make the JREF tester fall down.

Pretty self evident results, just as the Challenge rules state they should be, "no judging required".

But....Is the Yellow Bamboo group getting credit for passing the preliminary test (and being the first challengers ever to do so)?

It certainly doesn't sound like they are in "Swift". :(