Michael Fremer?

Zalbik · 13th December 2007, 09:54 PM

Ok, that's pretty sad.

Randi comes across a post of a cable test in the AV forums, and immediately jumps on the guy assuming its Michael Fremer.

Geez, Randi must be some kind of skeptic to assume that there is only one Michael in the world.

The guy he jumps on mecilessly in the latest SWIFT is Michael Lavigne. He is a completely seperate audiophile who has never to my knowledge corresponded with Randi, but has followed the cable challenge with some interest as he has a pretty sweet audio system.

Out of his own pocket, time, and expense, he decided to try a cable test on his own, and post the results both here and on the AV forums.

Posts describing the whole event are here on the JREF forums:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=97675

and here on the AV forums:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=941184

It wasn't the best setup, and yes, the grammar describing the result could have been better, but Michael wasn't out to prove or disprove anything. He thought he would be able to tell the difference, but still approached the test completely openly.

After a few trials (I believe it was 8), it was obvious to the testers that he could not distinguish between the two cables with any degree of accuracy. They unfortunately chose to halt the test, but keep in mind this was his OWN test, not for the benefit of the general skeptic community.

And what does he get for his time and effort? And for posting his somewhat embarrassing result openly on the forums? Spite and mocking from the ever so gracious "Amazing" Randi.

Well Randi, you may be "Amazing", but at your age I thought you would have at least learned to do some basic fact checking before posting.

Or at least learned not to be such a jerk.

Seriously, my four year old has better manners that Randi. If this is what it means to be a skeptic your whole life, then maybe I should join the woos. They may be idiots, but at least they aren't a--holes

volatile · 14th December 2007, 01:25 AM

I agree that this is a pretty sad blunder, and more ammo the woos can use against him.

An easy mistake to make, but one that should never have made it to Swift. Hopefully enough people will have contacted him that it will be retracted as quickly as possible.

alfaniner · 14th December 2007, 10:07 AM

I guess I didn't understand the mea culpa. Is the article about Fremer or Lavigne? If not Fremer, then his name should have been changed and not left intact. Anyone copying the text would most likely not do a Find/Replace.

Rrose Selavy · 14th December 2007, 10:35 AM

I couldn't quite workout what the "apology" was for when the entire original article was reproduced for something called "full disclosure". Surely an "I jumped the gun, made an assumption and goofed, here's the link to the original Swift report." might have sufficed.

Is it me or is Swift getting more and more incomprehensible at times ? Even on recent issues, I can't see the relevance or significance of the re: Geller section. Is the implication from Geller's followers somehow that he "predicted" 911 - er..six years after the event or is Geller's usual tedious numerology games that are being alluded to. Even so , it's hardly rivetting stuff to read. Feels very much like filler material.

-

Zalbik · 14th December 2007, 11:01 AM

I was overly zealous in my original posting. I apologize for the harshness of the original post.

Obviously mistakes happen, and SWIFT has done the appropriate thing here. An apology was issued and the article corrected.

If anyone is confused as to the events that occurred, here's a basic summary:

Originally Randi offered a $1million challenge to the manufacturers of Pear cables to prove that their were human detectable differences between their (very expensive) cables and standard Monster cables.

Michael Fremer expresses some interest in the challenge.

Pear backed out of the challenge

Fremer and Randi had some discussions over alternative cables, but no agreement was reached (as far as I can tell) as to any acceptable alternatives. One of the discussed alternatives was Opus MM cables.

Independently, Michael Lavigne decided to attempt his own ad-hoc blind test. He posted his intentions on these forums and on the AVS forums.

After the test, Michael Lavigne posted the results. They chose to halt the test partway through once it was obvious he could not detect the difference. It was quite interesting, as when doing sighted test, Michael was certain he could detect the difference.

Somebody found the AVS posting & forwarded it to Randi, assuming (mistakenly) that the Michael in question was Michael Fremer. As far as I know, Fremer has had no further contact with Randi after their inconclusive discussion of alternate cables.

Randi posted it, indicating that Fremer had done his own testing.

The mistake was realized & and apology issued.

At this point, I hope somebody does a FULL A/B double blind test of the high-end cables so we can put this issue to rest. It's getting more and more obvious that there is no discernible difference between high end cables and medium end monster cables.

I'd also be interested if the results of a test against similar guage lamp wire. I'd do it myself, but I have neither the equipment (nor the ears) required...

volatile · 14th December 2007, 11:04 AM

Why leave it up? It's wrong - period. Correct it fully or delete the offending section, with a disclaimer that an error had been made in previous versions. I can't see how it helps anyone to leave a blatantly false article on the site, even with the correction.

volatile · 14th December 2007, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by alfaniner

I guess I didn't understand the mea culpa. Is the article about Fremer or Lavigne? If not Fremer, then his name should have been changed and not left intact. Anyone copying the text would most likely not do a Find/Replace.

Agreed, and heartily.

T'ai Chi · 14th December 2007, 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy

Even on recent issues, I can't see the relevance or significance of the re: Geller section. Is the implication from Geller's followers somehow that he "predicted" 911 - er..six years after the event or is Geller's usual tedious numerology games that are being alluded to. Even so , it's hardly rivetting stuff to read. Feels very much like filler material.

Prolonging a silly 20+ year fued usually results in boredom from both sides. It is nice, actually, to see Geller not respond to him.

Curnir · 15th December 2007, 12:54 AM

Originally Posted by T'ai Chi

Prolonging a silly 20+ year fued usually results in boredom from both sides. It is nice, actually, to see Geller not respond to him.

-this response is intentionally left black-

Gr8wight · 15th December 2007, 06:16 PM

Originally Posted by Zalbik

I hope somebody does a FULL A/B double blind test of the high-end cables so we can put this issue to rest.

A nice sentiment, but the truth is that full, properly controlled A/B double blind tests of high end speaker wire have already been performed. Many times, in fact. The past tests did not put the issue to rest, so why would you think another one would? This is why the audiophile accessory market is considered 'woo' by the JREF. They behave like woos, refusing to accept the truth, even after it has been definitively demonstrated to them. Even Mike Levigne, having experienced it first hand, is not prepared to accept the reality that his investment in multi-thousand-dollar audio cables was foolhardy.

BillyJoe · 16th December 2007, 03:24 AM

Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy

I couldn't quite workout what the "apology" was for when the entire original article was reproduced for something called "full disclosure". Surely an "I jumped the gun, made an assumption and goofed, here's the link to the original Swift report." might have sufficed.

Randi needs a KISS: keep it simple s.....!

Quote:

Is it me or is Swift getting more and more incomprehensible at times ?

I still read it, but only out of habit. Maybe we should both stop?

Quote:

Even on recent issues, I can't see the relevance or significance of the re: Geller section....it's hardly rivetting stuff to read. Feels very much like filler material.

Yeah, I got sucked into reading this boring item as well.

Quote:

Is the implication from Geller's followers somehow that he "predicted" 911 - er..six years after the event or is Geller's usual tedious numerology games that are being alluded to.

Apparently Geller's supporters think he guessed what Chris Angel had written on the piece of paper in one of the envelopes.
Chris Angel had written 911
Geller pulled some numbers out of his ass and didn't even realise he had inadvertantly included the numbers in the envelope.
Geller had already conceded defeat about guessing what was in the envelope.

13th December 2007, 09:54 PM	#1
Zalbik Scholar Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 83	Michael Fremer? Ok, that's pretty sad. Randi comes across a post of a cable test in the AV forums, and immediately jumps on the guy assuming its Michael Fremer. Geez, Randi must be some kind of skeptic to assume that there is only one Michael in the world. The guy he jumps on mecilessly in the latest SWIFT is Michael Lavigne. He is a completely seperate audiophile who has never to my knowledge corresponded with Randi, but has followed the cable challenge with some interest as he has a pretty sweet audio system. Out of his own pocket, time, and expense, he decided to try a cable test on his own, and post the results both here and on the AV forums. Posts describing the whole event are here on the JREF forums: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=97675 and here on the AV forums: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=941184 It wasn't the best setup, and yes, the grammar describing the result could have been better, but Michael wasn't out to prove or disprove anything. He thought he would be able to tell the difference, but still approached the test completely openly. After a few trials (I believe it was 8), it was obvious to the testers that he could not distinguish between the two cables with any degree of accuracy. They unfortunately chose to halt the test, but keep in mind this was his OWN test, not for the benefit of the general skeptic community. And what does he get for his time and effort? And for posting his somewhat embarrassing result openly on the forums? Spite and mocking from the ever so gracious "Amazing" Randi. Well Randi, you may be "Amazing", but at your age I thought you would have at least learned to do some basic fact checking before posting. Or at least learned not to be such a jerk. Seriously, my four year old has better manners that Randi. If this is what it means to be a skeptic your whole life, then maybe I should join the woos. They may be idiots, but at least they aren't a--holes
Zalbik Scholar Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 83

14th December 2007, 01:25 AM	#2
volatile Scholar and a Gentleman Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The Uncanny Valley Posts: 6,322	I agree that this is a pretty sad blunder, and more ammo the woos can use against him. An easy mistake to make, but one that should never have made it to Swift. Hopefully enough people will have contacted him that it will be retracted as quickly as possible.
	__________________ - ""My tribe has a saying: 'If you're bleeding, look for a man with scars'" - Leela, Doctor Who 'Robots of Death'.

14th December 2007, 10:07 AM	#3
alfaniner Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Sorth Dakonsin Posts: 7,648	I guess I didn't understand the mea culpa. Is the article about Fremer or Lavigne? If not Fremer, then his name should have been changed and not left intact. Anyone copying the text would most likely not do a Find/Replace.
	__________________ It's pronounced "alpha-nine-er".

14th December 2007, 10:35 AM	#4
Rrose Selavy Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: UK Posts: 1,156	I couldn't quite workout what the "apology" was for when the entire original article was reproduced for something called "full disclosure". Surely an "I jumped the gun, made an assumption and goofed, here's the link to the original Swift report." might have sufficed. Is it me or is Swift getting more and more incomprehensible at times ? Even on recent issues, I can't see the relevance or significance of the re: Geller section. Is the implication from Geller's followers somehow that he "predicted" 911 - er..six years after the event or is Geller's usual tedious numerology games that are being alluded to. Even so , it's hardly rivetting stuff to read. Feels very much like filler material. -
	Last edited by Rrose Selavy; 14th December 2007 at 10:36 AM.

14th December 2007, 11:01 AM	#5
Zalbik Scholar Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 83	I was overly zealous in my original posting. I apologize for the harshness of the original post. Obviously mistakes happen, and SWIFT has done the appropriate thing here. An apology was issued and the article corrected. If anyone is confused as to the events that occurred, here's a basic summary: Originally Randi offered a $1million challenge to the manufacturers of Pear cables to prove that their were human detectable differences between their (very expensive) cables and standard Monster cables. Michael Fremer expresses some interest in the challenge. Pear backed out of the challenge Fremer and Randi had some discussions over alternative cables, but no agreement was reached (as far as I can tell) as to any acceptable alternatives. One of the discussed alternatives was Opus MM cables. Independently, Michael Lavigne decided to attempt his own ad-hoc blind test. He posted his intentions on these forums and on the AVS forums. After the test, Michael Lavigne posted the results. They chose to halt the test partway through once it was obvious he could not detect the difference. It was quite interesting, as when doing sighted test, Michael was certain he could detect the difference. Somebody found the AVS posting & forwarded it to Randi, assuming (mistakenly) that the Michael in question was Michael Fremer. As far as I know, Fremer has had no further contact with Randi after their inconclusive discussion of alternate cables. Randi posted it, indicating that Fremer had done his own testing. The mistake was realized & and apology issued. At this point, I hope somebody does a FULL A/B double blind test of the high-end cables so we can put this issue to rest. It's getting more and more obvious that there is no discernible difference between high end cables and medium end monster cables. I'd also be interested if the results of a test against similar guage lamp wire. I'd do it myself, but I have neither the equipment (nor the ears) required...
Zalbik Scholar Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 83

14th December 2007, 11:04 AM	#6
volatile Scholar and a Gentleman Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The Uncanny Valley Posts: 6,322	Why leave it up? It's wrong - period. Correct it fully or delete the offending section, with a disclaimer that an error had been made in previous versions. I can't see how it helps anyone to leave a blatantly false article on the site, even with the correction.
	__________________ - ""My tribe has a saying: 'If you're bleeding, look for a man with scars'" - Leela, Doctor Who 'Robots of Death'.

14th December 2007, 11:07 AM	#7
volatile Scholar and a Gentleman Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The Uncanny Valley Posts: 6,322	Originally Posted by alfaniner I guess I didn't understand the mea culpa. Is the article about Fremer or Lavigne? If not Fremer, then his name should have been changed and not left intact. Anyone copying the text would most likely not do a Find/Replace. Agreed, and heartily.
	__________________ - ""My tribe has a saying: 'If you're bleeding, look for a man with scars'" - Leela, Doctor Who 'Robots of Death'.

14th December 2007, 03:11 PM	#8
T'ai Chi Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 11,233	Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy Even on recent issues, I can't see the relevance or significance of the re: Geller section. Is the implication from Geller's followers somehow that he "predicted" 911 - er..six years after the event or is Geller's usual tedious numerology games that are being alluded to. Even so , it's hardly rivetting stuff to read. Feels very much like filler material. Prolonging a silly 20+ year fued usually results in boredom from both sides. It is nice, actually, to see Geller not respond to him.
	__________________ http://www.statisticool.com

15th December 2007, 12:54 AM	#9
Curnir Ninja Wave: Master of disguise Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: The cold north. Posts: 1,609	Originally Posted by T'ai Chi Prolonging a silly 20+ year fued usually results in boredom from both sides. It is nice, actually, to see Geller not respond to him. -this response is intentionally left black-
	__________________ Let us Pray to Aphrodite. Though we know she's kinda flighty. In her light blue see through nighty. She's good enough for me. http://www.craigminstrel.com/audio/easyBeing/mp3/18.mp3 Last edited by Curnir; 15th December 2007 at 12:55 AM.

15th December 2007, 06:16 PM	#10
Gr8wight red-shirted crewman Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,423	Originally Posted by Zalbik I hope somebody does a FULL A/B double blind test of the high-end cables so we can put this issue to rest. A nice sentiment, but the truth is that full, properly controlled A/B double blind tests of high end speaker wire have already been performed. Many times, in fact. The past tests did not put the issue to rest, so why would you think another one would? This is why the audiophile accessory market is considered 'woo' by the JREF. They behave like woos, refusing to accept the truth, even after it has been definitively demonstrated to them. Even Mike Levigne, having experienced it first hand, is not prepared to accept the reality that his investment in multi-thousand-dollar audio cables was foolhardy.
	__________________ Aurora Walking Vacation "A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight and understanding."--Marshall McLuhan

16th December 2007, 03:24 AM	#11
BillyJoe Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: MOOROOLBARK Posts: 11,759	Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy I couldn't quite workout what the "apology" was for when the entire original article was reproduced for something called "full disclosure". Surely an "I jumped the gun, made an assumption and goofed, here's the link to the original Swift report." might have sufficed. Randi needs a KISS: keep it simple s.....! Quote: Is it me or is Swift getting more and more incomprehensible at times ? I still read it, but only out of habit. Maybe we should both stop? Quote: Even on recent issues, I can't see the relevance or significance of the re: Geller section....it's hardly rivetting stuff to read. Feels very much like filler material. Yeah, I got sucked into reading this boring item as well. Quote: Is the implication from Geller's followers somehow that he "predicted" 911 - er..six years after the event or is Geller's usual tedious numerology games that are being alluded to. Apparently Geller's supporters think he guessed what Chris Angel had written on the piece of paper in one of the envelopes. Chris Angel had written 911 Geller pulled some numbers out of his ass and didn't even realise he had inadvertantly included the numbers in the envelope. Geller had already conceded defeat about guessing what was in the envelope.
	__________________ A secular society is one in which no one loses any liberty as a consequence of someone else's religious beliefs. NB Last edited by BillyJoe; 16th December 2007 at 03:26 AM.