Page 1 of 2

Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 04 Mar 2010, 12:53
by Nostradamus
It's easy to commit a fraud. All you need to do is type.

Frauds come in all forms. The easiest to do is the fraud in which the least effort is required.

Take the though dialing fraud. What was needed: 1 person and an internet connection.

That's a difficult one to do - NOT.

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 04 Mar 2010, 13:26
by Kevin Kane
I'm listening.

Image

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 04 Mar 2010, 13:33
by Nostradamus
The only thing we know is that 6 people agreed to say the same thing given a choice of A or B.

Odds of that 50%.

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 04 Mar 2010, 13:54
by ciscop
yes it was that easy..
the funny thing is he thinks he is fooling somebody

you know what roshambo is?
is a trick koenig created and uses simple Equivoque,
pretty unimpressive, like this stunt

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 04 Mar 2010, 21:16
by Nostradamus
oh man you guys keep me busy looking up interesting stuff. Well thought dialing was completely boring, but I know what you're turning me onto csicop is probably going to be interesting.

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 04 Mar 2010, 22:26
by Nostradamus
No evidence presented yet that the paranormal was involved.

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 06 Mar 2010, 11:43
by Nostradamus
Still no answers to the protocol questions.

What are you trying to hide? So far as best can be determined the odds are 50%. Unless the results were faked then they drop to 0. Still we are willing to give you the better flip of a coin probability until you can show that the protocol support the independence requirement.

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 06 Mar 2010, 12:18
by Nostradamus
Seven people out of seven predicted the outcome of the Super Bowl using Paranormal Methods ... 100% !!!!

All done in the OPEN and BEFORE the SUPERNATURAL BOWL !!!!!!

The names of all the participants and their interviews will be released soon to the public as proof once again of the validity of this demonstration.


The odds you posted are the pay off odds, not the odds used to test for scientific merit.
The number of people is immaterial unless the mathematical requirements of independence are met.
The names are immaterial.

Answer the protocol questions. Simple questions are simple to answer.

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 06 Mar 2010, 15:30
by tiger
Nostradamus wrote:Still no answers to the protocol questions.

What are you trying to hide? So far as best can be determined the odds are 50%. Unless the results were faked then they drop to 0. Still we are willing to give you the better flip of a coin probability until you can show that the protocol support the independence requirement.


Odds of zero? That would mean The Professor can do the impossible. Odds of 100% = certainty.

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 06 Mar 2010, 22:17
by Nostradamus
The odds have been shown to be 2,186 to 1 and that stands !!!!
The volunteers weren't lying and neither were the TV channels that broadcast the Colts Losing the Game!


The odds that the professor continues to dance with are the payoff odds. They are of no interest in an experiment to discern the event from random chance. These odds are miniscule compared to the winner of any lottery. Winners there are chosen before the game, and the winners aren't liars, and those odds are huge and say nothing about the means the winner used to choose the numbers.

I can agree that the volunteers were not lying. I can agree that the outcome of the game really isn't important here. What's funny is that the outcome of the game is not important at all as far as I can see. If team A won ro team B won it doesn't really matter.

What is so strange is that the professor refuses to assure us that he used a protocol that ensure the mathematical requirements of the formula he touts. I think it is getting more assured that he has something to hide.

Please tell us your protocol.

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 06 Mar 2010, 22:37
by Craig Browning
QUESTION: Are we speaking of Slim & Jim's Thought Dial thingy from Dark Radio?

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 07 Mar 2010, 00:11
by ProfWag
Craig Browning wrote:QUESTION: Are we speaking of Slim & Jim's Thought Dial thingy from Dark Radio?

Probably, though he brought his thought dial here after the fact and all we're doing is trying to get him to explain what happened and what would happen if attempted again. Most of us don't listen to his radio shows I don't believe...

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 07 Mar 2010, 03:20
by Nostradamus
Craig I have asked a number of simple questions and all have gone unanswered.

For example, I asked where he got the odds. I was shown the answer from a math professor that had been contacted. The answer does not tell me what question was posed to the math professor. So far there has been a steadfast refusal to provide even the simple request to show us what had been asked.

I pointed out that the math answer provided by the professor used language that was a mathematical qualification of the answer. I don't think that was realized. It certainly isn't obvious to anyone out of the field that certain words have important meanings. Instead of seeing if the protocols met the requirements of the math there has been a stubborn silence.

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 07 Mar 2010, 11:20
by Nostradamus
We Predicted the Outcome of the Super Bowl BEFORE it Happened!!!!!
Seven volunteers all using paranormal methods. All proven BEFORE the game !!!!
The odds of that happening are 2,186 to 1.
$20,000.00 if you can prove it's a FRAUD in any way !!!!!!


Millions of people predicted the outcome of the game.
You have never demonstrated that you used paranormal anything.
The odds of that happening are 1 : 1.

You refuse to answer the protocol and scream nonsense because you are a fraud.

Re: Thought dialing - the fraud

PostPosted: 09 Mar 2010, 22:18
by Nostradamus
No the odds of the last one were 2,186 to 1 ... Provided by an EXPERT in the field !!!!

It must be difficult to live in Denial when the REAL Professors destroy your one to one assumption. Even the worst thinkers know that's a farce
So I guess your willingness to remain in the dark and try to perpetuate a lie is evident by your above statement ... So obvious


This continued charade is dull. It has changed from a possible misunderstanding into a lie that is a blot on the professors character.

At first I thought the professor didn't know the difference between payoff odds and his claim that the experiment could be compared to winning the JREF prize. The professor has not signed up for the JREF prize because he knows that his charade is phony. He repeats his nonsense because he can and apparently feels no remorse at being dishonest.

I had previously given the professor the benefit of the doubt and suggested a 1:1 odds for his experiment. I see that being generous was wrong. Clearly, this is a hoax, a fraud, and the odds were 0.