Why has no one claimed the one million dollars?

[Narz]

Originally Posted by yossarian

you were the one who made the statement that intuition is actually rationality, so the burden of proof is on the person who makes the positive statement

Prove that anything is rational. Prove you exist. Reductum ad absurdum. From my experience (and my common sense) intuition is rational. IMO, everything is rational therefore intuition is also.

Originally Posted by yossarian

i was making the negative statement by pointing this out - pointing out that you have supplied no evidence.

I thought you don't believe in evidence or the sceintific method.

[QUOTE=yossarian;41613What is your evidence for this? Certainly not science..[/quote]
It is not possible to study an event that by it's very nature requires no observer be present.

[QUOTE=yossarian;41613The I-M model is the intention-manifestation model you were criticizing when you asked why I-M people don't just eat carpet instead of food.[/quote]
Why can't they?

[QUOTE=yossarian;41613The intuitive brain is based on fuzzy evolved heuristics which provided for the propagation of various genes. The intuitive brain is irrational because I can observe it behaving irrationally. For instance my intuitive brain right now is telling me to find some fattening greasy chips and swallow them down so I can survive the winter, but my rational brain knows there is no scarcity of food and that eating greasy chips will actually make me more unhealthy. There are countless examples of this both in the brain and in the body.[/quote]
That's not your intuitive mind, that's your rational mind (both arguments). I think you're confusing your reptilian brain with intuition.

[QUOTE=yossarian;41613The conscious part is only rational because we have defined it to be rational. Human beings noticed that the conscious brain could do this thing called "reason" and that in simple situations, reasoning can get very precise and exact answers to questions. When multiple people reason on the same problem, they tend to get the exact same answer, and in cases where there is dissent, people can often be made to find consensus after debate. [/quote]
Fortunatly that's not true in all cases (people studying the same problem getting the same answer) or the world would be a far less interesting place.

[QUOTE=yossarian;41613We noticed this ability and decided to give it a name. We called it reason, rationality. We also noticed various impulses and thoughts that seemed to have no premises, we called them intuitive. [/quote]
I don't think you know what intuition is. Intuition is (IMO) nothing more than lighting fast reason. Just because you don't know what hit you or how it hit you doesn't mean it's supernatural or beyond explination.

[QUOTE=yossarian;41613One might argue that it is rational to trust your intuition, but that does not mean that intuition is rational. It's a different process.[/quote]
I disgree (though I agree it's rational to trust your intuition).

[QUOTE=yossarian;41613Of course it's also true that our rationality can drive our intuition. We know that by consciously focusing on something we can change the core behavior of our intuition. But intuition is still an irrational process because when the intuition comes into play we cannot trace the premises, deductions, syllogisms, inferences, and so on that make up the rational argument in favor of that particular behavior.[/quote]
Just because you can't trace it back doesn't mean it's not rational. Just because you can't understand electricity doesn't mean it's not rational. It's very rational otherwise we wouldn't have been able to harvest it for use.

By calling it irrational you put yourself in a place of powerlessness and subserviance.

[QUOTE=yossarian;41613And btw I'm a math & physics major so I'm generally pretty ok at math. I don't really use the I-M model but I do understand it. My intellect is a prison cell and the guards rarely open my cage for outdoor recreation.[/QUOTE]
If you view the intellect as a prison I feel sorry for you. I love my mind.

[yossarian]

we don't agree on the definitions of rational and intuitive

to me those don't describe things they describe internal processes of arriving at thought and behavior

to you, rational/intuitive can describe objects. Like you might say, "electricity is rational"

but for me, electricity is neither rational or intuitive. electricity is a thing, and only my understanding of electricity can be rational or intuitive. What determines the rationality/intuitiveness to me is the thought process used to arrive at an understanding of the phenomenon.

So that's the fundamental disagreement. Your other points i've already addressed in my original response to you.

[Susanpsychic]

Heck, I am getting the 1 million question at least every other day on youtube for only bending a spoon! I even put up my worst spoon bending video, to show what happens when you lose focus. I have received so much ridicule and hate comments that I had to block the comments for approval. I considered taking down the video but then figured "I'll show them" and bent a better bigger one and still the skeptics write to tell me how I am defrauding the public. I am good at what I do. Those who want to have an open mind will and that is a good thing. I decided to keep the video and my other ones up for those who wish to have an open mind. I have had people try to debunk me before, it hasn't made me less great at what I do. To some degree or another I have been tested all my life so why do I continue to try to teach and help people become all they truly are? The answer to that is "How can I not?

[Narz]

So Susan why don't you go for the million dollars?

[Susanpsychic]

I recently found out about Randi, on another forum I watched his videos most of them are not impressive and do not prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that someone was faking. Randi then shows how he can reproduce the act. He is totally against anyone who may be real. I went to his web site to check it out as well. I was not impressed.

You ask why don't I take the test. It is because if Jesus came back to earth and raised the dead Randi would say it was inconclusive and that the person wasn't really dead but was just pretending. He makes his living doing this and it wouldn't matter if anyone had true abilities he would find a way for them to fail.

Even his staff is biased against the client. How does that set the intuitive up to succeed? It doesn't it just makes them feel like they are on the hot seat and have to defend themselves. It is important to feel relaxed at least to some degree or another when using your ability. Yes, I want to become well known, aking money doing what I love is great too, and yes, I am willing to be tested for free. I just want it to be done in such a way that is fair to all parties concerned.

Randi and his staff in my opinion will not do that. If you know of a scientist who can do this please refer them to me, I also have the desire to test my abilities to their limits, can I levitate? No, I haven't worked that part of my psychic muscle yet! Can I bend spoons using my hand and gentle thought?yes. Do I have spirit pictures yes, do I help people? Yes. Do non believers get good readings from me yes. Is it harder to give them an accurate reading? Sometimes yes but most of the time no. Is it easier to read for someone who is open to receiving? oh yes that creates flow.

[Narz]

Still, 1 mil is a lot of money, you should at least try.

And if you're truly a powerful spirit, maybe you can change his mind and make him see the light.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by KellyM

I could find no evidence of Matthew Manning’s experiments at the Cambridge Psychical Research Society having been reported in any non-parapsychology peer-reviewed scientific journal.

Goodness!

Is it surprising that Matthew Manning's experiments are not reported in any non-parapsychology scientific journal?

Albert Einstein's experiments probably wouldn't be reported in any non-physics scientific journal.

[dor]

Originally Posted by Susanpsychic

Heck, I am getting the 1 million question at least every other day on youtube for only bending a spoon!

the one where the video stops working? then there's a jump cut?

Stage magic trick

Other people, including many scientists and professional stage magicians believe that spoon-bending demonstrations are nothing more than stage magic tricks.[2]
Spoiler warning: The following section reveals a magic secret.

In most cases, the trick could be accomplished simply by misdirection, a basic tool of the stage magician. Namely, the performer draws the audience's attention away from the spoon during the brief moment while he is actually bending it with his hands. The typical bend, where the bowl meets the handle, requires relatively little force. Another possible method is to use a metal spoon that has been previously doctored so that a simple flick will cause it to bend. This can be done, for instance, by repeatedly bending the spoon at the desired spot, until the metal cracks and weakens. One other method is to grip together two halves of an already-broken spoon, and then slowly relax the grip - giving the impression the spoon is bending in the middle before finally splitting into two halves
Spoon bending - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Susanpsychic]

There were no jump cuts, I did not notice the video hesitating so maybe you didn't let the video load fully?Maybe you need a faster cpu or video processor, which is what my computer guy told me to suggest.

During the spoon bending part of the video there were no jumps, no misdirection, and the focus stayed on the spoon at all times.

I guess tho, people will see as they will. Its too bad people are so closed minded. I wonder what would have happened if our great grandfathers said there would never be telephones without wires, there was a time when people didn't believe the horseless carriage would ever exist, but enough of them must have at least thought it was possible because we have cell phones all because of Star Trek which helped to create the vision of wireless communicators. Only a few people who can envision the future. Most of the masses are skeptical and say, "Nope, never gonna happen!"

If you say something is impossible and you have a closed mind how can you ever accomplish anything except for what you already know? Thank god there have been visionaries throughout every age.

If you can believe in spoon bending, I believe that you too can bend a spoon easier than you would use with physicial strength alone and without doing any of the tricks you talk about. Hundreds and hundreds of people have reported being able to do this after seeing it done.

Bottom line is I know what I can do because I have proved it to the most important person, me. That being said, I have no need to prove anything to anyone. Believe it or NOT! I would hope that you keep an open mind and demonstrate it to yourself.

[dor]

Originally Posted by Susanpsychic

There were no jump cuts, I did not notice the video hesitating so maybe you didn't let the video load fully?Maybe you need a faster cpu or video processor, which is what my computer guy told me to suggest.

During the spoon bending part of the video there were no jumps, no misdirection, and the focus stayed on the spoon at all times.

i am not close minded, I just don't think what you demonstrated proves psychic ability anymore than a magic trick and/or karate chopping a piece of wood in half with your bare hand.

In fact it is fraud like geller that makes people rightfully skeptical of such claims.

SkepticReport * Uri Geller & Spoon-bending - How He Really Does It

The Spoon Bend

A conjuror can create the appearance of a spoon bending while it is gently stroked. A momentary misdirection by the conjuror, such as moving position to show the spoon to other people, allows the conjuror to bend the spoon physically. He or she can then disguise the bend with a hand and slowly reveal it at the appropriate moment. The effect is so convincing to most observers that they believe the spoon is bending before their eyes. There are many ways by which an observer can be misdirected. For instance, when Geller performs metal bending, he often moves the item toward other metallic objects in the room, which he claims enhances the effect. He also frequently fails in his initial attempts to bend the metal but returns to the object a short time later (after trying other psychic effects) and achieves the bend. This again provides the opportunity for misdirection.

An alternative nonpsychic technique, which often causes the spoon to break, requires the conjuror or an accomplice to have prior access to the cutlery. The conjuror or another individual prestresses the spoon by carefully bending it back and forth until it reaches the point of breakage. The stress point is not readily visible. The conjuror then picks this item apparently at random and subjects it to gentle rubbing, causing "plasticity" followed by complete fracture. Prior to some of his television appearances, Geller has been known to have had access to the cutlery that he later broke in front of the cameras. Some critics have accused Geller of using chemicals on his hands to soften the metal, but since there is no such chemical that could be used safely, this explanation can be discounted.
Uri Geller : The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience

[Liara Covert]

What if true, ethical, psychic intuitives weren't interested in money. I've known of talented psychics who have proven their skills to have turned down big money-making ventures because their goal is to help people personally.

If the above was true, wouldn't this million dollar challenge be mis-directed and interpretations of current "results" misleading? For a skeptic to say true psychics don't exist unless they prove powers on his terms, and following this route would go against what they stand for or believe in, that may be a stalemate. If someone doesn't wish to believe in psychic ability, then no effort might be enough to convert his mindset anyway.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Liara Covert

What if true, ethical, psychic intuitives weren't interested in money. I've known of talented psychics who have proven their skills to have turned down big money-making ventures because their goal is to help people personally.

If the above was true, wouldn't this million dollar challenge be mis-directed and interpretations of current "results" misleading? For a skeptic to say true psychics don't exist unless they prove powers on his terms, and following this route would go against what they stand for or believe in, that may be a stalemate. If someone doesn't wish to believe in psychic ability, then no effort might be enough to convert his mindset anyway.

The psychic who won the million could donate it to charity, then it would be doing far more good than it is now.

Lack of greed is hardly a good reason for turning down money, since money can do a lot of good if one gives it away.

[Logicseeker]

I love the way Susanpsychick is implying that the spoon bending crowd will be the same persons making future inventions. Even if one theoretically could bend a spoon its just so lame. No one needs it. Grow some food in Africa using thought instead...

Also, I believe there is a giant apple behind the planet of Saturn. If you dont think so it is because you are not open to fruit. Open yourself to fruit and you can actually catch a glimpse of the great apple. I am also able to predict the future using conversation with carrots.

Notice how similiar my argumentation is to the ones preaching para psych...

[sourceofmiracles]

Stephen and others,

Rico Kolodzey applied for Randi's challenge and was DENIED because he (Randi) is completely bias and absolutely unscientific.

Given his dogmatic (dare I say 30+ year RELIGIOUS FANATICAL) lean toward psychic skepticism, I would say that the test is rigged.

My guess is that Randi "challenge" is a publicity stunt.

Originally Posted by Stephen

Hi Rob

What a great question! Treading carefully in answering this, I also dont want to offend anyone, but the reason why no one has claimed the $1m is because it is impossible to, because it is all hocus pocus.

The great late Alfred Wallace, co-founder of the theory of evolution, destroyed not only his career but his reputation by being taken in by bogus so-called supernatural communicatyors in 'seances', and left his scientific principle behind in favour of moving glasses on table tops and flickering lights in shady back room parlours of the deluded or plain criminal.

A sad loss of a great mind.

What I do not deny however, is that people can hear voices in their heads!

It always tickles me how skeptics and scientism extremists selectively rule out all phenomenological experiences that has been happening for HUNDREDS of years and pee there collective pants at exciting ten years old hypothesis and theory come out of nowhere.

I.E.:

Hundreds of years worth of documented cases of psi phenonenon
vs.
The new "God Particle"

[David1]

Originally Posted by Narz

Whatever you believe, objectively a million dollars could really help some people in need (unless you don't believe anyone is really in need or hungry or in pain, etc. etc.).


If there's only one consciousness, than connect with the part of you that is James and have him give you the money. Now that'd knock his socks off!


So it's an exclusive club then, eh?


Hmm, who's to say you're not sticking your head in the sand when it comes to critical thought?


Yet it is how scientific progress is born and how trust is formed.


What you turn a blind eye to will probably come back to hurt you in the future. That's like ignoring climate change because you don't approve of it or neglecting to bring water on your trip to the desert because that represents "scarcity consciousness".

If I thought you were really devoid of critical thought I would just shake my head but I highly doubt you're not (you don't get to be this successful without it) so I imagine you are either not being fully honest with the people here or perhaps not with yourself. You don't just sign up for every business deal you come across. You don't join every pyramid scheme that you get spam e-mail about. Obviously you are skeptical and obviously you use critical thinking. If there's no objective reality why buy food, why not just eat your carpet and hold the intention that it will nourish you?

I'd really like to see how Steve responds to this.

[mind-energy]

Although a little late to the boat of this thread, there's are some good points about Randi's challenge available at About the James Randi Million dollar challenge, including a story of guy who applied and got very negative responses and a serious analysis by Michael Prescott.
There's also a lot of discussion in the comments, made mostly by Randi's supporters to counter the claims of this post.

Worth a read.

[One]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Heck, Erin does this nearly every day. Psychic and paranormal experiences are have become a fairly routine part of our lives.

Skepticism is the psychic equivalent of colorblindness. Skeptics don't have such experiences because they tune them out, just as my (colorblind) eyes tune out certain colors. In my opinion anyone who perceives the color purple must be a total loon.

Hi Steve, I don't quite understand. Couldn't a colorblind person be taught that color is variations in electromagnetic frequency and that each color corresponds to a frequency which can be displayed on a spectrum analyzer for even the colorblind? Or if they don't trust the machine, couldn't they use an Ishihara test on people who claimed to be colorsighted?

For example, you should see nothing but spots bellow, (if I choose the right test) while all your colorsighted friends would agree on the number displayed.

I'm not quite up to date on your writings. Did I misunderstand you?

[Erki]

Originally Posted by One

For example, you should see nothing but spots bellow, (if I choose the right test) while all your colorsighted friends would agree on the number displayed.

Hmmm, I'm not sure infinity is a number.

[One]

Originally Posted by Erki

Hmmm, I'm not sure infinity is a number.

It's not. But turn your head, that's an eight.

[Dan.Linehan]

One,

What test could Randi do that measure intuition? Imagination? Channeling?

If you read a few pages of ACIM does your intuition tell you that it was written by an associate professor of medical psychology, or by someone or something greater?

Is there a way to prove where thoughts come from, or where our consciousness resides?

“I was in my thirteenth year when I heard a voice from God to help me govern my conduct. And the first time I was very much afraid.” - Joan of Arc

[One]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

One,

What test could Randi do that measure intuition? Imagination? Channeling?

If you read a few pages of ACIM does your intuition tell you that it was written by an associate professor of medical psychology, or by someone or something greater?

Is there a way to prove where thoughts come from, or where our consciousness resides?

“I was in my thirteenth year when I heard a voice from God to help me govern my conduct. And the first time I was very much afraid.” - Joan of Arc

Oh, I wasn't saying anything about Randi or even psychic phenomena, I was just saying the analogy didn't seem to work.

Yes, in my mind pure consciousness (qualia) is one of the most truly mysterious things. Thoughts however seem to be neurological phenomena as they can be modified, changed or even destroyed by stroke or other brain damage.

Thanks for the link, looks interesting.

[One]

To reply more completely, I'll say that I don't understand the stigma many people seem to have with science and its validity. Most of science is just careful measurement. Think of it this way: If something is real, it has an effect. I mean effect in the most general way possible, don't think of it in terms of lifting cars with your mind or predicting the future on demand. If I ask you about anything you tell me by it's effects. Even if it's the wall in front of you and it's effects on your pressure sensitive hands and the light it bounces into your eyes. Even if it's your intuition and the statistically improving effect it has on your decision making.

When you experience psychic phenomena, you are in effect measuring it. It has an effect on you. Scientific measurement is the same measurement. It exists in the same world, only with science the effect is measured in controlled situations where other variables are removed. You've probably done something like this as well. If have a medical problem and want to find an effective medication you use only one at a time. If you used multiple medicines at the same time you wouldn't know which was having what effect.

[Liara Covert]

Why does it really matter so much whether or not someone wins this contest? Whether or not someone ventures forward doesn't have to change your belief system unless you permit that. I would think we have more meaningful ways to expend energy, wouldn't you?

[One]

Originally Posted by Liara Covert

Why does it really matter so much whether or not someone wins this contest? Whether or not someone ventures forward doesn't have to change your belief system unless you permit that. I would think we have more meaningful ways to expend energy, wouldn't you?

It matters because it poses an interesting question about the validity of psychic experiences. The human brain is a very complex and counter-intuitive tool capable of "fooling" it's user in many ways. If no one can show psychic phenomena to exist outside of personal experiences that are unrepeatable in controlled situations where other factors are removed then what does that say about them?

doesn't have to change your belief system unless you permit that.

I think this is interesting. Seems like you're suggesting that evidence has nothing to do with how you choose your belief system.

[nara]

There is a good podcast up on Skeptico that sort of deals with this subject. The discussion continues for a good 40 minutes. It talks not about the Randi experiment but more about the problems with parapsychology.

Skeptiko - Science at the Tipping Point

Don't be turned off by the name of the website. The host of the podcast is very open minded and has guests from both sides of the fence on to discuss their research.

Quote from the current podcat: "Guest: Dr. James Alcock explains why he remains skeptical of parapsychology research, and why parapsychologist don’t garner attention from academia: "… if one could come up with good data that showed there’s something to it, the parapsychologists would be trampled by psychologist and physicists rushing to the study of it.""

[One]

Originally Posted by Liara Covert

I would think we have more meaningful ways to expend energy, wouldn't you?

Also, I find this sort of comment disingenuous. I think a high standard study of reality is a very meaningful way to expend energy.

[Yukio]

It was proved to be very hard or even near impossible for normal people to reach the technical level for scientific achievement. In other words , it was/is easier to just won in the Lottery than prove anything like this.

For example , the odds of winning into a "easy" type of game like the Brazilian "Lotofácil" is only 1/3.268.760.
Probabilidade

This is like a " 5 Sigma" , the minimum for a scientific achievement.
Read something like this:
http://mason.gmu.edu/~rehrlich/skeptic.pdf

Ok, not everybody will like a simple game like a 15/25 lottery.
This without even talking about combinations for harder games ...

[Yukio]

This could be another problem!

Without Access to spiritual guides , blessing and elemental powers it is difficulty to make something work for the "New Age" ...

Imagine trying to make something move without Hydrokinesis , Aerokinesis , Static Electricity or Spiritual Guides ... A hermetic vacuum.

[Dive Bomb]

Plus imagine if you did get the million dollars, you'd be publicly outed. Who knows what reaction you might garner from people, especially if you can't defend yourself with your abilities. They may try to run tests on you and all that.

I definantly can see why no one would publicily go for the million dollar challenge. If I had powers I'd be like "Screw that, I'll make a million dollars on my own"

[Believer]

I'd take the million dollars out of his sweaty little hands if I could.

To answer the question in the title of this thread, I guess it's because no one can.

I don't care if people say he's bias or not, if people had such abilities then they would be able to prove it.