Rosemary Hunter...

[WillM]

Ok, I'll bite (pun intended) did she make the one person cry uncontrollably by eating onions and breathing on them or does she just smell bad? If the ability to make people urinate themselves or cry uncontrollaby by paranormal means exists, it would not be an ability I would brag about.

[Kimpatsu]

One other point occurred to me: how long does she have to focus her "power" before it kicks in? I mean, if I'm sitting as her subject for three or four hours, I might well need to go to the toilet; is she then going to claim victory for herself?

[fuelair]

I have no idea what is spoken of her - but I will assume that this is not in reference to either (?)(given time-frame between references could be same Rosemary Hunter) Rosemary Hunter of literary or legal situation in Australia.

[OXEL]

I'm fine with it but her explanation seems somehow strange. I wonder where she got the idea that as one of God's angels, you can make people cry and/or urinate. But maybe she serves another God than the one most people would think of... The God of Bodyfluids. Hm. That could be a great title for a porn movie.

[Alice Shortcake]

I can assure you that Rosemary's powers are 100% genuine. Merely reading about her claims caused the tears to trickle down my face AND my legs.

[rjh01]

Making people cry is hardly paranormal. That can be done by using certain scents. Onions come to mind for one.

[petre]

Out of curiosity, I wonder if she's ever attempted the result on a person with renal failure. That would be impressive.

[Cuddles]

I would just like to express my admiration for RemieV for continuing Kramer's difficult job of thinking up titles for threads about people like this. So far "paranormal urination" has to be one of my favourites.

[Pup]

I think it's a simple misunderstanding. Her doctor actually said, "You're a diabetic." Not "you're a diuretic."

[RemieV]

Ms. Hunter says that she will need one-half hour with each of the volunteers.

And, in the case of the crying phenomenon, it is uncontrollable sobbing. Not just tears on one's cheeks

[Cuddles]

I don't like the idea of randomising what she will try to do. You should pick one, preferably one that isn't too uncomfortable for the victims volunteers, and stick with it. You don't necessarily have to tell the participants what she will be trying to do if you are worried about them actively trying to avoid it. I would recommend putting them to sleep as the best choice.

[SezMe]

I talked about this person's claims in a phone conversation with Jim Underdown of the IIG. It is anecdotal, so discount it accordingly.

Jim had a phone conversation with her in which she said she could make him cry profusely, pee in his pants or fall asleep within five minutes of starting the trial. Jim agreed to wave all protocols and said the IIG prize was hers if she could do it. They set up a time and place to meet.

Jim said he made sure to whiz a half hour ahead of time and awaited her arrival. The test was on.....






















....she did not show up.

[Normal Dude]

Well that wasnt very nice of her.

[GzuzKryzt]

Originally Posted by SezMe

I talked about this person's claims in a phone conversation with Jim Underdown of the IIG. It is anecdotal, so discount it accordingly.

Jim had a phone conversation with her in which she said she could make him cry profusely, pee in his pants or fall asleep within five minutes of starting the trial. Jim agreed to wave all protocols and said the IIG prize was hers if she could do it. They set up a time and place to meet.

Jim said he made sure to whiz a half hour ahead of time and awaited her arrival. The test was on.....






















....she did not show up.

Thanks, SezMe.

Do you know if she has offered an explanation for her no-show? And when did this happen?

[SezMe]

Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt

Do you know if she has offered an explanation for her no-show?

When I spoke with Jim he had had no further contact with her as far as I know so the answer for now must be "no".

Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt

And when did this happen?

It happened when I called Jim to talk about Guska's (edge's) application for the IIG prize. So that makes it in the late July time frame. Sorry, can't nail it down any closer than that.

[GzuzKryzt]

Originally Posted by SezMe

When I spoke with Jim he had had no further contact with her as far as I know so the answer for now must be "no".


It happened when I called Jim to talk about Guska's (edge's) application for the IIG prize. So that makes it in the late July time frame. Sorry, can't nail it down any closer than that.

Late July, that's close enough.

You probably would have done it anyway without me asking, but for the sake of letting the readers know: When you have a chance, please ask Jim Underdown for a follow-up on Ms. Hunter's contact status. I'm pretty sure she still hasn't contacted him or came up with some lame excuse. It's anecdotal at best but provides an impression we so often encounter with these folks, doesn't it?

[SezMe]

Thanks for the reminder, GzuzKryzt. I tentatively plan to attend the IIG meeting this coming Saturday (Aug 18) and I'll raise the Hunter contact status at that time.

[GzuzKryzt]

In regards to RemieV's updates on Ms. Hunter possible test I'd like to say:

1. Take one claim. Why not stick with the urination?
2. Five to ten subjects, let her decide if gender and age, medical history, etc. are relevant.
3. Go with diapers or bathing costumes.
4. 30 minutes, to pee or not to pee. (Hey, it's for science, right?)

Piece of urinal cake.

[IXP]

If this one get to a test, I think it should be filmed as an episode of MythBusters.

IXP

[SezMe]

RemieV, I'm not sure why the 30 minute requirement. She told Underdown she'd have him hosing his drawers in 5 minutes. See if you can negotiate the time span down.

[hoemaco]

Urinating sure sounds to be a somewhat humiliating experience. Won't be easy to get volunteers.

Also, it greatly depends on their a priori conditions. If someone was drinking water all day, has more chance, while someone suffering dehydration won't.

It seems better to me to use the other features - crying/sobbing, for example (most people are capable of that, and in any time of day).

Laughter is also a nice one, but personally I'd be tempted to laugh on my own if i had to be in front of a 'psychic', wearing black glasses and knowing she's concentrating on me

30 min does sound too long to me also. According to teaching experiences, hard to sit for so long silently

(But she won't show up, will she? Still, i'm eeevil, but i suddenly envisioned an old respected prof peeing in his pants, shown on tv... worth a million bucks )

[rtalman]

I would be willing to volunteer to resist urinating. Since I take a diuretic daily, I would be more apt to have the urge to void than the average person, but I am 100% certain I can resist Ms. Hunter's 'power'.

[Seventhsally]

I suggest a protocol involving a catheter, whereby an individual, or groups of individuals, is 'hooked up' so to speak, and we establish a baseline flow rate, and suggest a modification of that rate. Assuming a properly functioning kidney, and a pre determined consumption of liquids prior to the test, I think God's hand on the bladder of the subject should be easily quantified, though one has to ask what incentives could be provided to get volunteers...

Does anyone else ever wonder who God's marketing agent is? I mean really. He could vastly swell the ranks of his followers if only he would take some small portion of his divine awesomeness and confer upon his Earthly messengers some more practical super-powers. Proper analysis would normally involved studies and test groups, but I should think a Supreme Being could forego all that nonsense and just read everyone's mind. I would not be surprised to find that making people urinate, or perform other natural body functions on command, is near the bottom of a very large list which would include invisibility, flying, curing disease, transforming into a giant squirrel with laser eyes, and regenerating severed limbs among other more desirable talents. Even that walking on water thing could come in handy, and we've already established a precedent that a lot of people would be very impressed..
.. And I'm not even a marketing guy...

[roger]

How does the randomization of the effect help in testing the claim.

If I claim that I can jump 1 foot high, I expect to be tested whether I can jump 1 foot high. If I also happen to claim to be able to touch my elbow to my knee, it doesn't add anything to the test to also test that. I can either jump the 1 foot or not. Adding in the elbow touching in no way enhances the test.

[SezMe]

Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt

You probably would have done it anyway without me asking, but for the sake of letting the readers know: When you have a chance, please ask Jim Underdown for a follow-up on Ms. Hunter's contact status. I'm pretty sure she still hasn't contacted him or came up with some lame excuse. It's anecdotal at best but provides an impression we so often encounter with these folks, doesn't it?

Bingo. She never contacted him again.

[Miss Anthrope]

Originally Posted by Seventhsally

I suggest a protocol involving a catheter, whereby an individual, or groups of individuals, is 'hooked up' so to speak, and we establish a baseline flow rate, and suggest a modification of that rate. Assuming a properly functioning kidney, and a pre determined consumption of liquids prior to the test, I think God's hand on the bladder of the subject should be easily quantified, though one has to ask what incentives could be provided to get volunteers...

Typically catheters need to be emptied manually, don't they? If that's the case, it would be impossible to know if she was causing one to lose one bladder function.

[Seventhsally]

Agreed- My assumption was that the hand of God was creating the urine through a process of divine intervention, not merely releasing it from its bodily constraints. I will await further clarification on whether the power works on empty bladders- causing them to fill, or on full bladders, causing them to empty. So my question would be" Do we know that this power works on the bladder muscles, or ar we talking about the spontaneous creation of miracle pee from Heaven? I rather thought this latter possibility more interesting as just making someone lose bladder function can be done with a good joke, a well placed kick, or as previously mentioned, the mere disclosure of this talent to the forum. I think the marketing possibilities of miracle pee are self evident, and I would encourage this line of testing, if only for the opportunity of ready the marketing copy on her future web site.

[Seventhsally]

sorry- meant 'reading'.. Bad poster, no cookie

[RemieV]

Ms. Hunter has not specified whether the person needs to have an empty or full bladder. To my knowledge, it doesn't matter.

Any protocol involving catheters is going to be too much for the JREF to do. We simply do not have access to that kind of equipment, or the medical personnel required to set up such a study.

~Remie

[SezMe]

Or, I would assume, want to take the risk of health complications by the participants.

[RemieV]

Originally Posted by SezMe

Or, I would assume, want to take the risk of health complications by the participants.

Most health complications from catheters are a result of long-term use, such as in patients with comas. But yes, that does factor in as well

~Remie

[Seventhsally]

maybe we could combine this with the Edge thread about dowsing.. we could bury various participants with varying degrees of bladder content in a field in California.. Oh wait... let me think some more about this..

[hoemaco]

I can't believe someone takes this urination and catheters etc seriously...
I mean, making someone urinate with an empty bladder, now that would involve the attention of the Pope himself, not only JREF. Even with telepathic or similar abilities we can't expect her to do that, even though she does not say so. And it's also bad on patients. Total nonsense. Next time someone will make people create a sandcastle from their bottom parts (and it'll have arbitrary color and odor). Surely would make a South Park episode.
Btw, of the few episodes I've seen, there were many trying to unveil woowoos and other stupidities. Maybe making an own cartoon would be a nice outreach (as i've already suggested elsewhere in the forum). yes, i know,it takes lots of money and expert personnel... though south park was also started in a garage, wasn't it? (no, i don't mean we have to be so rude as in that cartoon, though it seems to have an impact...)

[Kimpatsu]

Originally Posted by RemieV

Ms. Hunter says that she will need one-half hour with each of the volunteers.

And, in the case of the crying phenomenon, it is uncontrollable sobbing. Not just tears on one's cheeks

Watching Court TV's "Psychic Detectives" frequently reduces ME to uncontrollable sobbing...

[rjh01]

I can see problems with this claim. If the volunteer is meant to urinate, how would anyone know if this has happened? Would an inspection of clothing be required? Or would the volunteer be asked which one of these did Rosemary try to make you do?

What I have said for urination goes for everything else.

[GzuzKryzt]

Originally Posted by rjh01

I can see problems with this claim. If the volunteer is meant to urinate, how would anyone know if this has happened? Would an inspection of clothing be required? Or would the volunteer be asked which one of these did Rosemary try to make you do?

What I have said for urination goes for everything else.

Originally Posted by GzuzKryzt

...
3. Go with diapers or bathing costumes.
...

Results are as self-evident as can get.

[rjh01]

Problem. Diaper is handed over for inspection for urination. The applicant says he can see and smell urine present. The others in the room cannot detect it. James Randi says no judging allowed. Find some other method.

No. The answer is to get the volunteers to say which one of several effects the applicant was trying to induce. If the volunteer has wet pants then the answer is simple. If he feels 100% fit then again the answer is simple.

As a control send the volunteers to see two people. One the applicant the other a control. The volunteer must work out who is who. Then you get double your money per volunteer.

[petre]

Originally Posted by rjh01

Problem. Diaper is handed over for inspection for urination. The applicant says he can see and smell urine present. The others in the room cannot detect it. James Randi says no judging allowed. Find some other method.

No. The answer is to get the volunteers to say which one of several effects the applicant was trying to induce. If the volunteer has wet pants then the answer is simple. If he feels 100% fit then again the answer is simple.

As a control send the volunteers to see two people. One the applicant the other a control. The volunteer must work out who is who. Then you get double your money per volunteer.

Here's my suggestion

[Professor Yaffle]

Adult versions of those training pants where the pattern disappears when it comes into contact with moisture.

[RemieV]

Within Ms. Hunter's proposed protocol, she states that there will be no diapers. Hopefully no one is wearing black pants.

Just in case, I suppose it would be prudent to suggest that any volunteers bring a spare set of clothing and some trash bags.

Update on the two protocols, by the way:

The second protocol was proposed because Ms. Hunter said, within her own suggested protocol, that she may need to touch the volunteer on the hand during the test. Obviously, if the setup involved a group of people with blacked out sunglasses in the room simultaneously, the one who was being touched on the hand would know she was attempting to make them urinate and defeat the purpose of the sunglasses.

The second protocol idea was developed so that the volunteers would be one-on-one in the room with Ms. Hunter, and she could touch them on the hand as much as she liked. Because of the list of abilities given out beforehand, the volunteer would know that Ms. Hunter was attempting to do something, but wouldn't know which off the list it was.

The list, therefore, had within it powers that Ms. Hunter claims to be capable of mixed in with ones she is incapable of. Since no one knew, at the time, exactly what things Ms. Hunter was capable of aside from the JREF representatives who have been working with her, the protocol might've been sound. Ms. Hunter cannot, for example, really make someone vomit. She can, however, make them laugh uncontrollably.

However, that idea was made null and void the moment that it was posted, within this thread, the list of abilities Ms. Hunter actually does claim to have.

I know that might've not made sense. I'm kind of tired and distracted.

In summary: Go ahead and forget that second possible protocol. It will no longer be a viable option.

So now the question becomes this: Ms. Hunter may need to touch the volunteer. How can we allow that to happen if the volunteer will therefore know that she is working her powers on him/her?