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

Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

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

Re: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby quantumparanormal » 11 Sep 2009, 04:12

Frank Lee wrote:I doubt very much that James Randi knows, and he certainly wouldn't care, that some nutcase on a tiny backwater internet forum thinks he should take a lie detector test. This topic is absurd.

Frank Lee


It's absurd of you to presume I even care whether or not Randi thinks of me as some nutcase on a tiny backwater internet forum.
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby soldiergirl » 11 Sep 2009, 05:43

quantumparanormal wrote:
soldiergirl wrote:Highondrugs,

Exactly work place agreement which is the only way I would take one because they are not very accurate and only as good as the polygraph examiner. People are human and err. Its absurd to expect Randy to take one about the MDC.


If Randi isn't lying and lie detectors are not accurate (which I agree with, by the way), what does he have to lose? If he passes, yay! If he fails, he can blame it on the lie detectors not being accurate. Either way, it's a win-win for him, correct?


What he has to lose is wasted time. Just because a person or a small group of people want you to take a polygraph is hardly a reason to waste your time especially when they are inaccurate. If Professor wanted me to take one to prove that i'm in the ROK and not stateside it would be a waste of time and I would decline also. I know i'm stationed in ROK and Randy knows there is a valid MDC so why bother. Like I said before I would only bother taking one for a job i wanted and only because if i really wanted the job I would have no choice but to comply with their hiring process.
soldiergirl
 
Posts: 61
Joined: 08 Sep 2009, 13:40

Re: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby quantumparanormal » 11 Sep 2009, 05:59

soldiergirl wrote:What he has to lose is wasted time. Just because a person or a small group of people want you to take a polygraph is hardly a reason to waste your time especially when they are inaccurate.


"What he has to lose is wasted time" is just one possibility. Another possibility is that he's afraid he might not pass it and, consequently, open himself up to even more skepticism about the validity of his MDC, regardless of whether or nor not lie detectors are accurate. Which possibility is true? We simply don't know.

soldiergirl wrote:I know i'm stationed in ROK and Randy knows there is a valid MDC so why bother.


How do you know Randi knows there is a valid MDC? Faith? Evidence? The purpose of the lie detector would be to "prove" to others whether or not he's lying, so of course it wouldn't make sense for Randi to take a lie detector test to prove it to himself. That's a given.
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby ciscop » 11 Sep 2009, 08:20

quantumparanormal wrote:
soldiergirl wrote:What he has to lose is wasted time. Just because a person or a small group of people want you to take a polygraph is hardly a reason to waste your time especially when they are inaccurate.


"What he has to lose is wasted time" is just one possibility. Another possibility is that he's afraid he might not pass it and, consequently, open himself up to even more skepticism about the validity of his MDC, regardless of whether or nor not lie detectors are accurate. Which possibility is true? We simply don't know.

soldiergirl wrote:I know i'm stationed in ROK and Randy knows there is a valid MDC so why bother.


How do you know Randi knows there is a valid MDC? Faith? Evidence? The purpose of the lie detector would be to "prove" to others whether or not he's lying, so of course it wouldn't make sense for Randi to take a lie detector test to prove it to himself. That's a given.


if you already know the polygraph doesnt have validity
why you keep insisting? is it only for arguing?
i have a better idea, why dont we waterboard randi? lets make him confess everything!

radin, swartz, sheldrake
all those quacks were on your myspace page
no wonder why you are siding with the professor a themepark mascot and highflyer a guy that has been in a mental institution
you know how to pick them quantum
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: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby highflyertoo » 11 Sep 2009, 11:20

Maybe this ''science machine'' will work wonders?

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/03/noliemri/
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: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby soldiergirl » 11 Sep 2009, 11:31

Quantum,

On another post somewhere here i used an example of snow which I will retype now so you can see how I make judgements on what to believe. If i wake up one morning and my yard is covered in snow, my neighbors yard is covered in snow, the streets are covered in snow and the weatherman on the news channel says its snowing outside I'm gonna believe it freakin snowed. Now is it possible my neighbors are playing a cruel hoax on me with a snow machine, well i suppose there is a slight possibility. Is it possible that an alien in a UFO dumped the snow in my neighborhood, I guess there is a slight possibility (how can i really prove it wasn't so). Now I like to think of myself as a reasonable prudent person (RPP) so I come to the logical conclusion that it snowed given the facts and information I can gather. You will say but yes it might have snowed but the alien might have dumped the snow too. Prove it wasn't an alien. Scecop would say a friend of my cousins great aunt said it was dumped by an alien and threfore it was a fact because she was on my mailing list plus has 6 degrees of separation from me. This is where we so called skeptics will always differ from believers such as you (ones who look at other possibilities) and especially from zealous believers such as professor and scecop who have no logical and deductive reasoning at all. Anyways this is why I believe th MDC is real is just based off of the information that I have gathered and analyzed.

1 more point to make is who would pay for this polygraph? I assume it would be the professor or whoever wants him to take it cause why in the hell should he pay. Any idea how expensive it is for a good professional polygraph examiner? There are preliminary questions before you even get hooked up and then all the control questions after you start. Not cheapo.
soldiergirl
 
Posts: 61
Joined: 08 Sep 2009, 13:40

Re: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby highflyertoo » 11 Sep 2009, 12:00

soldiergirl wrote:Quantum,

On another post somewhere here i used an example of snow which I will retype now so you can see how I make judgements on what to believe. If i wake up one morning and my yard is covered in snow, my neighbors yard is covered in snow, the streets are covered in snow and the weatherman on the news channel says its snowing outside I'm gonna believe it freakin snowed. Now is it possible my neighbors are playing a cruel hoax on me with a snow machine, well i suppose there is a slight possibility. Is it possible that an alien in a UFO dumped the snow in my neighborhood, I guess there is a slight possibility (how can i really prove it wasn't so). Now I like to think of myself as a reasonable prudent person (RPP) so I come to the logical conclusion that it snowed given the facts and information I can gather. You will say but yes it might have snowed but the alien might have dumped the snow too. Prove it wasn't an alien. Scecop would say a friend of my cousins great aunt said it was dumped by an alien and threfore it was a fact because she was on my mailing list plus has 6 degrees of separation from me. This is where we so called skeptics will always differ from believers such as you (ones who look at other possibilities) and especially from zealous believers such as professor and scecop who have no logical and deductive reasoning at all. Anyways this is why I believe th MDC is real is just based off of the information that I have gathered and analyzed.

1 more point to make is who would pay for this polygraph? I assume it would be the professor or whoever wants him to take it cause why in the hell should he pay. Any idea how expensive it is for a good professional polygraph examiner? There are preliminary questions before you even get hooked up and then all the control questions after you start. Not cheapo.


Randi could pay for the '' Lie Detector Test'' with the annual interest that comes from the Million Dollars.
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: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby highflyertoo » 11 Sep 2009, 12:03

Face it soldiergal, you're defending a lost cause.

Randi's MDC is a gimmick to draw you wannabe debunkers into his pied piper persona.
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: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby ciscop » 11 Sep 2009, 14:07

yes yes
how's your experiment going on??
did the cups moved a little?
make a new video

i love christian nuts

and i applaud you highflyer
you should be embraced and supported by radin
you are the dream come true of all those quacks
you actually move stuff with your mind
thats awesome
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: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby soldiergirl » 11 Sep 2009, 15:11

Highflyer,

Answer one thing. Are you psychic? Simple yes or no will suffice.
soldiergirl
 
Posts: 61
Joined: 08 Sep 2009, 13:40

Re: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby soldiergirl » 11 Sep 2009, 15:24

Highflyer,

Why should Randi pay from the interest? Its his interest so it is still coming out of his pocket. You think you are so sure he is lying so why don't you pay for it. Do you see cops charging the criminals for the polygraph bill? Its always the person wanting to give the polygraph that pays for it. You see the CIA, FBI, CID, NSA, Border Patrol recruits paying for their polygraph exams and for their background invesigations? Fair is fair. Why do you think agencies and civillian military contractors swoop up ex military with TS clearances? It is because they save money cause you are a sure bet. These things are not cheap. I'm not referring to the bottom of the barrell polygraph examiners like you will find on smut tv talk shows where they administer the test to see if trailer trash cheated on his wife. I'm talking about top law enforcement polygraph examiners.
soldiergirl
 
Posts: 61
Joined: 08 Sep 2009, 13:40

Re: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby quantumparanormal » 11 Sep 2009, 23:29

ciscop wrote:if you already know the polygraph doesnt have validity
why you keep insisting? is it only for arguing?


When you "speak," you really demonstrate how your emotions get the better of you, resulting in your logical and critical thinking faculties becoming less functional. Who's insisting? Where did I say Randi should take a lie detector test? All I was saying was that it wouldn't hurt. If he passes or fails, he can't lose either way. If he passes, he looks good (or at least more credible than before), and if he fails, he can blame it on the inaccuracy of the detector. I'm not saying he should take the test or insisting on it. Read carefully, and think critically and logically!

And talk about arguing--you are famous for this, especially in an emotional, illogical way. Shall I give you some examples?

ciscop wrote:i have a better idea, why dont we waterboard randi? lets make him confess everything!


Now you're just exaggerating. Exaggerations never prove anything. They simply show one's emotional immaturity and instability.

ciscop wrote:radin, swartz, sheldrake
all those quacks were on your myspace page
no wonder why you are siding with the professor a themepark mascot and highflyer a guy that has been in a mental institution
you know how to pick them quantum


I base my opinions base on empirically obtained data. You base your opinions on bias and prejudice. I'd like you to point out which experiments and what data are invalid, and please refer to published research, not forum posts or opinion articles.

You do a lot of talking, but you never seem to have any knowledge of the actual empirical psi related data obtained. All you know what to do on these boards is 1) call the people with which you don't agree names (e.g., "wackos") and 2) exaggerate your unsubstantiated opinions, not having reviewed, seemingly, any of the actual psi research data nor having any empirical data to support your emotionally charged opinions.
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby quantumparanormal » 12 Sep 2009, 00:10

soldiergirl wrote:Quantum,

On another post somewhere here i used an example of snow which I will retype now so you can see how I make judgements on what to believe. If i wake up one morning and my yard is covered in snow, my neighbors yard is covered in snow, the streets are covered in snow and the weatherman on the news channel says its snowing outside I'm gonna believe it freakin snowed. Now is it possible my neighbors are playing a cruel hoax on me with a snow machine, well i suppose there is a slight possibility. Is it possible that an alien in a UFO dumped the snow in my neighborhood, I guess there is a slight possibility (how can i really prove it wasn't so). Now I like to think of myself as a reasonable prudent person (RPP) so I come to the logical conclusion that it snowed given the facts and information I can gather. You will say but yes it might have snowed but the alien might have dumped the snow too. Prove it wasn't an alien. Scecop would say a friend of my cousins great aunt said it was dumped by an alien and threfore it was a fact because she was on my mailing list plus has 6 degrees of separation from me.


I'm not sure what your point is exactly, but your snow example is empirically testable. If it's indeed snowing, you can walk outside your home and see and feel the snow directly. This is "objective reality." There's no escaping it. If it were a hoax, you'd most likely know it, as you'd probably see some type of snow-blowing machine(s) placed at some considerable height above the ground. Additionally, you have the empirical data obtained via weather satellites and news weather reports. You can furthermore obtain witness testimony from others who have actually observed the snow falling from the sky. You have a bunch of data to assess and with which to conclude with a very great degree of accuracy that it actually snowed. Could it have been aliens that caused the snow to form in the first place? Well, this is highly improbable given the empirical data just discussed which counters such a claim. Unless you have empirical evidence to show aliens are the cause, you shouldn't believe it. I don't understand why, given I've shown in detail how I think (i.e., logically), you would believe I think illogically.

So, that's not a good comparison to, or analogy of, what I'm talking about when I refer to the MDC's validity.

soldiergirl wrote:You will say but yes it might have snowed but the alien might have dumped the snow too.


I will? How do you know this? On what evidence do you base this presumption? If there were no empirical evidence to demonstrate aliens caused the snow, I would not believe such a thing to be true, a fact, or reality. You are presuming too much. I'm much more logical than this. Have you even read the many posted I've written?

soldiergirl wrote:Prove it wasn't an alien.


That's not a logical argument because you can't prove such a negative. That's like asking to prove God doesn't exist or that psi doesn't exist. There's empirical evidence psi most likely does exist, however. There's no empirical evidence God exists. I've read on these boards some pseudo-skeptics saying, "Psi doesn't exist." How can they prove this? They can't!

soldiergirl wrote:This is where we so called skeptics will always differ from believers such as you (ones who look at other possibilities) and especially from zealous believers such as professor and scecop who have no logical and deductive reasoning at all.


I was once a die-hard skeptic like Randi. This is no lie. It took many years of researching and reading the outstanding various literature consisting of empirically obtained data to come to my conclusions and beliefs. Once again, I don't base my beliefs on bias or prejudice, or even emotions, I base them on the critical analysis of empirical data with the objective aid of logic.

Unless there is no or insufficient empirical data to demonstrate claim A, for example, is true, and there is empirical data to demonstrate claim B might be possible, then I would consider claim B to be a possibility, yes. That's how I think! Isn't that logical? I wouldn't use absolute terms, such as claim B is a "fact" or "reality," but a "possibility?" Yes.

soldiergirl wrote:Anyways this is why I believe th MDC is real is just based off of the information that I have gathered and analyzed.


Now this is where the debate actually initiated. I was asking how you could know, empirically, that the MDC is valid. Do you have physical evidence that shows he has the money in a bank account? Don't get me wrong. I'm not denying the money is there or that the MDC is valid. I have no bias or prejudice that will incline me to dismiss outright the possibility of this evidence existing or not existing, but I'd like to see it so that I can prove it to myself either way, which is why I asked. Maybe you know something I don't. You see, I haven't really investigated the whole MDC-not-valid claim because I simply haven't cared to know either way. It's not empirical research. I'm into actual research, not claims that the MDC is not valid. So, I simply want to know how it is you came to the conclusion that the MDC is legit. Simple.

soldiergirl wrote:1 more point to make is who would pay for this polygraph? I assume it would be the professor or whoever wants him to take it cause why in the hell should he pay. Any idea how expensive it is for a good professional polygraph examiner? There are preliminary questions before you even get hooked up and then all the control questions after you start. Not cheapo.


OK.
Last edited by quantumparanormal on 12 Sep 2009, 00:32, edited 4 times in total.
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby quantumparanormal » 12 Sep 2009, 00:13

highflyertoo wrote:Face it soldiergal, you're defending a lost cause.

Randi's MDC is a gimmick to draw you wannabe debunkers into his pied piper persona.


What evidence do you have the MDC is not legit?

And please note I didn't ask, "What evidence do you have the MDC does not exist?" ;)
Last edited by quantumparanormal on 12 Sep 2009, 00:17, edited 1 time in total.
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: Would Randi take a Lie Detector Test?

Postby quantumparanormal » 12 Sep 2009, 00:15

soldiergirl wrote:Highflyer,

Answer one thing. Are you psychic? Simple yes or no will suffice.


You shouldn't believe weather or not he's telling the truth based on his answer alone (unless you want to be biased). You should base your belief on empirical, controlled, blinded experiments conducted and designed to test his hypothesis. Only then can you come to a truly, very well-informed conclusion, one based on empirical data, not presumptions.
Mike G.
Quantum Paranormal
Image
quantumparanormal
 
Posts: 276
Joined: 24 Aug 2009, 05:09
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

PreviousNext

Return to JREF / Randi Challenge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest