Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
Originally posted by crankyoldman
Every test of this sort will always fail, but not for the reason people think.
What credible, skilled individual would go and sign up for some lame "prove it or your a fraud" test, with, most likely, young know nothing
Think about this, where is it written that if you have a skill, you MUST prove it to science people who don't believe you have the skill. To do this,
you have to be either foolish, or without the skill, as this just makes no sense.
The world is full of frauds, there are COUNTLESS fraudulent doctors, lawyers (nearly all) politicians, even gardeners. Finding a fraud isn't hard,
finding a fraud with something as esoteric as using other senses is easy, but it does NOT negate the skill associated with seeing things in a
different way for those who simply wish to do what they do without some lab coated doubting thomas poking and prodding them.
Studies are largely nonsense, especially these type as the all reek of Dr. Venkman or that cartoon villain James Randi. The conclusions are just
preposterous: five people failed so there is no such thing! Good lord, what kind of simpleton decides all of reality is "just so" because the see a
headline like that?
There is no way, no way at all, ever, a skilled "psychic" (however you define that) would ever subject themselves to some college kid's study to
prove they are a fraud - which is really the basis of the study as it has been determined all are frauds already. But there are, many, many foolish,
unskilled, maybe fraudulent, surely simpleminded folks who will answer an add posted on a lamppost, but that does not mean they are indicative of
anything other then themselves.
Your assertions on the topic are profound; but they are immediately false when we realize that this whole thread is about "skilled psychics"
subjecting themselves to some college kid's study. So, indeed, there is a way, a way after-all, and there is documented evidence in the OP.
If you have evidence to support your claims that no skilled psychic would ever submit to such a test, then by all means....
skilled based on what criteria? Self defined. There are people out there who will define themselves as Angina Jolie if asked to do so - it has to be
self criteria as the whole study suggest there is no objective definition by which to determine who's psychic and what it is - hence the study.
further the study only shows that these folks, whatever skill level - can't pass THIS test and only that. So what? As history as shown, a great many
people can't pass tests for whatever reason. Great actors didn't audition well - test, for some of the parts they have won awards for.
Testing in general only provides that people can pass THAT test, but in most cases it means nothing more then that, in fact, all studies of this sort
should say only that: subjects past this test. In most cases the test and in particular the questions are a problem, yet most studies assume their
criteria are perfect and the subjects are the problem. As for testing consider this: A test question that all participants must answer to pass is: If
you enter an ice cream shop, which are you likely to choose: A. Vanilla. B. Chocolate. C. None of the above. I can't answer the question as C is not
an answer that makes sense. The average person will "assume" what is being asked, C=another flavor, but for me the answer is "No ice cream at
all," the question is flawed, yet for most people they do not examine the language, they go by what they think is the intent. A guy taking a company
survey asked me, "what's your preferred drink: juice, soda, milk, tea, coffee and a few others. I said, "water," which wasn't on the list, he
says, "why" and said, "because it is necessary for life." He was confused, the survey was to help open a new juice stand, the question was
irrelevant to me in its form. He thought my answer made no real sense and I was being funny - I failed the questioning process at some level.
The nature of other ways of seeing things, often called psychic, is not about seeing things in black and white scientific terms. That's the whole
point! So to reduce such matters to overly simplistic questions/answers testing etc. is is akin to demanding LeBron James be good at Playstation
basketball to prove his is good a real basketball. To ask a real "psychic" to sit in a ridiculous "science" setting and perform like a trained
chimp under circumstances they do not work in is beyond silly, it is foolish and frankly, beneath the skill. Those who can do, and they don't care
what others think about it - that is the key component in the process of seeing things beyond what the average person sees. When you reach the level
at which this skill, and it is a skill, exists, you are at a level where you will never perform for lab coats to prove anything: their hand in hand.