View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Discussions about the James Randi Educational Foundation and its Million Dollar Challenge.

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby NinjaPuppy » 11 Oct 2009, 10:05

brett wrote:ah but come now NP - can you honestly say you don't find the skeptics amusing at times ?? :D :lol:


Yes.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44






Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby brett » 11 Oct 2009, 23:30

NinjaPuppy wrote:
brett wrote:ah but come now NP - can you honestly say you don't find the skeptics amusing at times ?? :D :lol:


Yes.


is that yes you do or yes you can honestly say you don't ?? - i find them hilarious at times myself ;) ( sorry having an attack of the denseness today )
LIFE - just filling the bits between birth, death and taxes
User avatar
brett
 
Posts: 436
Joined: 06 Aug 2009, 22:23
Location: Plymouth UK

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby NinjaPuppy » 12 Oct 2009, 00:25

brett wrote:is that yes you do or yes you can honestly say you don't ?? - i find them hilarious at times myself ;) ( sorry having an attack of the denseness today )


Personally, I prefer good, light hearted wit as my chuckle of choice. However, the subject matter here doesn't allow that sort of thing as the topics are rather jammed packed with emotional opinion and facts. As it should be really. I tend to find almost all of the members input rather interesting. Everyone here has something to offer, so it certainly does make me question my own thoughts on much of the subject matter.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby ciscop » 12 Oct 2009, 08:16

i also enjoy good light hearted exchanges

i just find it annoying
to found believers bashing jref and randi
instead of building a case for its own
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby The Warrigal » 12 Oct 2009, 09:24

Bashing is unfortunately something resorted to by some characters on both sides of the debate and is both unecessary and unproductive.

And yes. - People who take themselves too seriously are always a bit funny.

I am a believer, - (but not a blind one), - in certain forms of paranormal phenomena but I am still no wiser than anyone else as to precisely what the cause of those unexplained phenomena might actually prove to be.

The paranormal is very interesting and when the debate and banter between believers and sceptics is good natured it is also great fun.
The Warrigal
 
Posts: 119
Joined: 22 Jun 2009, 11:44

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby ProfWag » 14 Oct 2009, 02:27

Don wrote:
4. Applicant agrees that all data (photographic, recorded, written, etc.) gathered as a result of the setup, the protocol, and the actual testing, may be used freely by the JREF.


So you're free to edit, manipulate, misinterpret, and lie about anything and everything that happens. That doesn't seem right. If I were a "psychic" I'd want to sue you for doing this.

Curious, how do you come up with "free to edit, manipulate, misinterpret, and lie..." from the JREF statement "data...may be used freely by the JREF?" Sounds to me like you have an agenda and a preconceived opinion of them. Editing, manipulating, and lying about the results of a contractual experiment would be fraud which is quite illegal.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby Mistislav D'ralle » 14 Oct 2009, 06:50

ProfWag wrote:
Don wrote:
4. Applicant agrees that all data (photographic, recorded, written, etc.) gathered as a result of the setup, the protocol, and the actual testing, may be used freely by the JREF.


So you're free to edit, manipulate, misinterpret, and lie about anything and everything that happens. That doesn't seem right. If I were a "psychic" I'd want to sue you for doing this.

Curious, how do you come up with "free to edit, manipulate, misinterpret, and lie..." from the JREF statement "data...may be used freely by the JREF?" Sounds to me like you have an agenda and a preconceived opinion of them. Editing, manipulating, and lying about the results of a contractual experiment would be fraud which is quite illegal.


I agree. The clause is simply like a "television release" document. It grants the right for JREF to show the experiment in any format but does not grant them the right to modify, falsify, manipulate or change the experiment as there is no "moral rights" waiver allowing this in the JREF offer document. I assume the intent is to allow JREF to reproduce all the failed experiments in their compilation books so they can prove they use the scientific method ( and make money from book sales). If this clause was not included then people applying to the JREF MDC would be able to prevent JREF disclosing the details of the experiments and allow them to complain that JREF is not being honest through being "secretive".

In the unlikely scenario that an applicant will prove they have paranormal powers JREF will want the rights to publish this significant experiment in the world's press. This is logical as JREF is conducting the experiment.
Mistislav D'ralle
 
Posts: 38
Joined: 17 Aug 2009, 10:46

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby Don » 17 Oct 2009, 14:45

ProfWag wrote:
Don wrote:
4. Applicant agrees that all data (photographic, recorded, written, etc.) gathered as a result of the setup, the protocol, and the actual testing, may be used freely by the JREF.


So you're free to edit, manipulate, misinterpret, and lie about anything and everything that happens. That doesn't seem right. If I were a "psychic" I'd want to sue you for doing this.

Curious, how do you come up with "free to edit, manipulate, misinterpret, and lie..." from the JREF statement "data...may be used freely by the JREF?" Sounds to me like you have an agenda and a preconceived opinion of them. Editing, manipulating, and lying about the results of a contractual experiment would be fraud which is quite illegal.



What part of "may be used freely by the JREF" didn't you understand? The rules clearly say the JREF can use it any way they like.
Don
 
Posts: 52
Joined: 31 Aug 2009, 08:02

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby Don » 17 Oct 2009, 14:58

JREF:
4. Applicant agrees that all data (photographic, recorded, written, etc.) gathered as a result of the setup, the protocol, and the actual testing, may be used freely by the JREF.


DON:
So you're free to edit, manipulate, misinterpret, and lie about anything and everything that happens. That doesn't seem right. If I were a "psychic" I'd want to sue you for doing this.


>Curious, how do you come up with "free to edit, manipulate, misinterpret, and lie..." from the JREF statement "data...may be used freely by the JREF?" Sounds to me like you have an agenda and a preconceived opinion of them. Editing, manipulating, and lying about the results of a contractual experiment would be fraud which is quite illegal.

>>>I agree. The clause is simply like a "television release" document. It grants the right for JREF to show the experiment in any format but does not grant them the right to modify, falsify, manipulate or change the experiment as there is no "moral rights" waiver allowing this in the JREF offer document. I assume the intent is to allow JREF to reproduce all the failed experiments in their compilation books so they can prove they use the scientific method ( and make money from book sales). If this clause was not included then people applying to the JREF MDC would be able to prevent JREF disclosing the details of the experiments and allow them to complain that JREF is not being honest through being "secretive".

In the unlikely scenario that an applicant will prove they have paranormal powers JREF will want the rights to publish this significant experiment in the world's press. This is logical as JREF is conducting the experiment.


RESPONSE: On the contrary. The wording clearly allows them to use it any way JREF likes. You may THINK that's what they've written, but legally, you can only go by the actual words, and the words show that if someone agrees to the rules there is nothing they can do about misrepresentation by JREF.

However, you could be right. Perhaps that was the intent of JREF. As I wrote, I can only go by what's in writing, not what I think might have been on their minds.

If JREF were composed of real skeptics and not debunkers, they could have made it into a media release by making their rule: "Applicant agrees that all data (photographic, recorded, written, etc.) gathered as a result of the setup, the protocol, and the actual testing, may be reproduced by the JREF in any form of media, including but not limited to audio, video, film, digital records, word-for-word reporting, etc., as long as it is used in context and the version reproduced does not modify or change the context. Should the JREF in any way misrepresent any of the data, intentionally or unintentionally, they agree to pay claimant $100,000 for each instance of such misrepresentation.

If they did that I would be more inclined to believe them. However considering all of the other bogus aspects of these "rules," a subject who agrees to them would still have to be an idiot. Everything, including the current form of this clause, is set up against them.
Don
 
Posts: 52
Joined: 31 Aug 2009, 08:02

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby ProfWag » 17 Oct 2009, 19:38

If that is the way you would like to read their contract, then it's a free country and you can go with that interpretation.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby NinjaPuppy » 18 Oct 2009, 05:44

Since I'm not a lawyer, I can't really say for sure what any of that contract means. However, common sense and many years of reading contract negotiations says that yes, it can be interpreted that way and I will venture to guess that if you bought it to an attorney who specializes in media law, they might advise you to not sign it without changes. If I recall correctly, the JREF says that the contract is not negotiable, so it's a mute point.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby highflyertoo » 18 Oct 2009, 08:27

NinjaPuppy wrote:Since I'm not a lawyer, I can't really say for sure what any of that contract means. However, common sense and many years of reading contract negotiations says that yes, it can be interpreted that way and I will venture to guess that if you bought it to an attorney who specializes in media law, they might advise you to not sign it without changes. If I recall correctly, the JREF says that the contract is not negotiable, so it's a mute point.


The better thing to do is bypass Randi's competition, and explain one's experiences to others who have ears for thought.

The competition is all about Randi. How boringly bland.
Randi was no researcher of the paranormal even though he tried half heartedly.... Shows over.
highflyertoo
 
Posts: 400
Joined: 26 Jul 2009, 09:57

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby highflyertoo » 18 Oct 2009, 08:28

And who is mere James Randi ? ZZZzzzzzzzzz :)
Randi was no researcher of the paranormal even though he tried half heartedly.... Shows over.
highflyertoo
 
Posts: 400
Joined: 26 Jul 2009, 09:57

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby NinjaPuppy » 18 Oct 2009, 08:54

You know something HighFlyerToo, you might be on to something here. James Randi had a pretty nice early career in entertainment but his real notoriaty started with his challenge. It has kept him in the public eye now for decades. Everytime someone takes him up on his challenge, he winds up back in the public eye. Good catch.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Randi's Flim Flam Rules

Postby ProfWag » 18 Oct 2009, 21:42

Does anybody have a better idea as to how to expose fake people who proclaim paranormal abilities? Should experiments in paranormal abilities have lax rules? Just curious what those who dislike the challenge actually pose as an alternative.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

PreviousNext

Return to JREF / Randi Challenge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest