🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.skeptic
Article #5437

Re: PARANORMAL TEST PROTOCOL (FINAL DRAFT) - WORD GUESSING WITH A RANDOM QUOTE CLUE

#5437
From: Graham Cooper
Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 06:10
87 lines
4425 bytes
On May 2, 2:06 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...@ratbags.com> wrote:
> Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On May 1, 8:21 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...@ratbags.com> wrote:
> >> Graham Cooper <grahamcoop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >then a few more subjective goes, don't know if it's working good
> >> >enough yet to proceed to the guessing stage.
>
> >> What? You want "subjective goes", but you haven't even started
> >> guessing yet? Doesn't sound very psychic to me.
>
> >Yep,  GUESSING is OBJECTIVE if you get them right!  ;)
>
> No, it isn't.


Yes it is!  If I can guess which number comes up on roullette every
time,
or even just above expected average, I could win $1,000,000 very
quickly
every gambling session!



>
>
>
> >Brad's teleasking skill is yet to be confirmed.  He seems to be
> >getting some paranormal channels going:
>
> >BUCK - FRUIT
>
> Pardon? In what way is the word "buck" related to "fruit"?
>


it doesn't have to be, although they both suggest PRIZE!




>
>
>
>
>
>
> >His words were very closely tied to the channels.  But both channels
> >were META-CHANNELS.
>
> >CHANNEL 1 - BUCKED OFF HIS HORSE  ( Brad couldn't master doing a
> >channel )
> >CHANNEL 2 - MISSING CRITICAL ELEMENT  ( Brad forgot to use the POST
> >TEMPLATE )
>
> >These 2 channels seem quite Expected for someone like Brad and his
> >lack of Positive Aptitude in conducting the test.
>
> >If he changes tune and starts doing the protocol, remembering the post
> >template, remembering the word, I think he'll make the biggest
> >discovery in science of all time!
>
> >Right here and right now!
>
> >Until then, more subjective demos....
>
> Translation: Until then, no evidence of any psychic or paranormal
> powers.
>


practically true!


Do ANY skeptics follow my suggestion of just doing channels until I'm
happy
with that part of the protocol, and THEN doing the objective test?

How many times are skeptics going to whinge about a subjective demo =/
= proof?

Why doesn't someone just teleask me a few words as the protocol
dictates?

You won't do a telepathy trial with me, demand I prove paranormal, and
complain doing a demo won't prove anything!

Yeh alright - TELEPATHY TAKES TWO - GOT THAT ANYONE?
Technical Details
Message-ID: <c4ff4817-7a43-4d90-89c0-b8e1320046a8@h36g2000pro.googlegroups.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!h36g2000pro.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
References: <3cde8596-9d67-4841-beee-2c55ecd51d00@k3g2000prl.googlegroups.com> <9746d1a5-0a3d-4c1b-b7d6-96bee039ab86@i39g2000prd.googlegroups.com> <bd060817-0b63-439e-a593-b8052f88a8ec@r27g2000prr.googlegroups.com> <80c25fdb-e04e-4c31-a8ae-89ef1ecb7142@f15g2000pro.googlegroups.com> <8c588cb5-3ee1-4d7d-b1aa-897830e8e42b@d19g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <7vcqr6ps627kaq2tg6dgoncovumki4i3j5@4ax.com> <abf3276b-082f-4f1d-b198-d360c8c06e3b@x8g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <mabsr69383to6lql7omr850v7rrj4dbote@4ax.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: f44bc,30e33fee7f2a6b67
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 106b5d,30e33fee7f2a6b67
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 10a774,30e33fee7f2a6b67
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: fe15b,30e33fee7f2a6b67
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: giddc1377d6e,gid3b9c5691a5,gid3ac807a62f,gidf090d44e1a,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!h36g2000pro.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Graham Cooper <grahamcooper7@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,rec.org.mensa,aus.tv,alt.astrology
Subject: Re: PARANORMAL TEST PROTOCOL (FINAL DRAFT) - WORD GUESSING WITH A
 RANDOM QUOTE CLUE
Date: Sun, 1 May 2011 23:10:07 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 87
Message-ID: <c4ff4817-7a43-4d90-89c0-b8e1320046a8@h36g2000pro.googlegroups.com>
References: <3cde8596-9d67-4841-beee-2c55ecd51d00@k3g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
 <9746d1a5-0a3d-4c1b-b7d6-96bee039ab86@i39g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
 <bd060817-0b63-439e-a593-b8052f88a8ec@r27g2000prr.googlegroups.com>
 <80c25fdb-e04e-4c31-a8ae-89ef1ecb7142@f15g2000pro.googlegroups.com>
 <8c588cb5-3ee1-4d7d-b1aa-897830e8e42b@d19g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
 <7vcqr6ps627kaq2tg6dgoncovumki4i3j5@4ax.com> <abf3276b-082f-4f1d-b198-d360c8c06e3b@x8g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
 <mabsr69383to6lql7omr850v7rrj4dbote@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 120.23.180.26
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1304316607 16308 127.0.0.1 (2 May 2011 06:10:07 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 06:10:07 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: h36g2000pro.googlegroups.com; posting-host=120.23.180.26; posting-account=EsDGawkAAAAN6xcF2fi-X0yb3ECD-3_I
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1;
 Trident/4.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR
 3.0.30729; HPMTDF; BRI/2; .NET4.0C),gzip(gfe)