The James Randi 1 Million Dollar Challenge Finally Terminated

The James Randi Million Dollar Challenge for proof of psychic phenomena has been terminated. The JREF page indicates that it is no longer accepting applications from the general public (celebrity psychics still welcome with TV crew). The foundation is going to be converted into a grant-making fund, however a review of the protocols will be done next year when the application process may be reinstated. Even if the James Randi Prize is permanently terminated,  I don’t need to be psychic to know that pseudo-skeptics will continue to use it as a club to beat up believers for the foreseeable future.

From their site:

Over the years, we have spent a great deal of time dealing with claims ranging from yet another dowsing claim to some VERY eccentric and untestable claims. The overwhelming majority refused to fill out the application or even state a claim that can be tested. Some of them show up in person and demand to be tested while they wait. We can no longer justify the resources to interact with these people.

Effective immediately, JREF will no longer accept applications directly from people claiming to have a paranormal power. Previously available Application Forms shall not be used and will be rejected without any review of the contents. We anticipate providing minimum required protocols for the preliminary test early next year. No one should make any effort to pursue the Challenge until those minimum required protocols are issued. The only exception is that any established psychic may contact JREF via email to be tested directly (preferably with an independent, third party TV crew.)

I’ve heard it a million times on youtube videos, skeptical forums, TV shows, magazine articles..

“If [psychics, mediums, telepathy, ghosts, etc] are real, then why hasn’t anyone won the James Randi 1 million dollar prize?

James Randi, or The Amazing Randi (as he is known professionally) was a magician before he became a closed-minded zealous skeptic and avowed debunker of all things paranormal. He began his challenge in 1964 with a $1,000 dollar prize to anyone who could demonstrate proof of paranormal abilities.  By 1996, the James Randi Educational Foundation accepted a donation that raised the prize amount to 1 million dollars.  The JREF has stated that over 1,000 people have been tested since 1964. To date, no one has been awarded the money – a fact used by skeptics everywhere to debunk all evidence of the paranormal or psychic phenomena. As you’ll see, however, the Randi prize was never intended to be a fair, scientific measure of paranormal claims.  James Randi designed the ‘challenge’ to ensure victory in any circumstance through a variety of ways that we will explore in this post.

Honestly, I don’t know who decided that James Randi of all people should be judging claims of the paranormal; that’s like expecting a fair trial in North Korea.  He was quoted as saying “Concerning the challenge, I always have an ‘out’: I’m right!”

To be fair, James Randi is correct in his assumption that there are liars, frauds and charlatans out there claiming to be psychic and I share his rage that they are preying on vulnerable and grieving people.  No one gets more angry than I do when I spot these fraudsters making millions exploiting grieving people with fishing techniques, cold and hot reading, and even bullying tactics. They are ruining the reputation of the truly gifted, honest mediums who don’t crave fame and attention.  James Randi makes the assumption, however, that because there are some fraudulent psychics and mediums, that all psychics and mediums are frauds.

There have been many people who have looked closely at this challenge and written excellent articles and critiques on it.  I don’t want to reinvent the wheel, so please read Michael Prescott’s excellent, in-depth supported article on his own investigation of the JREF challenge.  Also, read this one from the weilerpsiblog  which has both facts and real examples which show why the JREF challenge is a scam and a trap.   Here’s one more by Daily Grail called “The Myth of the One Million Dollar Challenge” which sums it up pretty nicely as well.

No self-respecting medium or psychic would ever submit themselves to such an egregiously slanted, fraudulent and corrupted display of mockery such as the JREF challenge, and yet skeptics continue to use this straw man argument as a way to flag-wave their own prejudices. 

Just in case you aren’t familiar with what the JREF 1 Million Dollar Challenge is really about, here’s a little summary:

The JREF 1 Million Dollar Challenge was offered to anyone who could prove via testing protocols set up in advance by the JREF claims of the paranormal.  Anyone who bothered to look closely at the rules by which the contestants were bound could see right away that they were designed to ensure that no one ever won the prize.

First, the James Randi Educational Foundation and the challenge committee themselves are the kind of biased, hard-nosed skeptics that have already made up their mind that evidence of the paranormal doesn’t exist and that’s hardly a good starting point when claiming that such a test is fair to begin with.  But beyond that, there’s a lot of other reasons why the JREF should have never been touted as “THE TEST” for psychic phenomena in the first place, based on the way the test is set up/designed for failure.

The JREF is not a scientific organization, and they never intended to do real scientific tests.   The JREF test doesn’t allow repeated trails that can’t be accomplished in the 8 hour time limit.  In addition, the JREF can arbitrarily reduce the number of repetitions allowed without any explanation.  Repetition is a cornerstone of the scientific method, especially to determine the statistical results against chance.  Consider the number of trials any pharmaceutical drug must undergo before the results can determine efficacy.  Forcing a person to demonstrate an effect, especially a psychic effect, without allowing repeated trials is simply as unscientific as it gets.

Secondly, the application process is also designed to eliminate actual competition or make it impossible for people with real abilities to demonstrate them properly.  The foundation ignores or rejects most serious applicants, and yet allows the testing of the frauds and quacks for the sole purpose of public mockery.

Applicants also have to sign away their rights to an attorney, and allow James Randi to use the data any way he wishes (this means he can outright change the results or lie about them) and the applicant has no recourse to prove the deception either in a court of law or the court of public opinion.

JREF controls everything – the protocols (which may be changed at any time, even during the test itself), the location, the test design, witnesses, participants, and finally even the results.  There are no independent controls to ensure honesty and fair play on the part of the JREF.

The sole purpose of the JREF Million Dollar Challenge was always to mock and humiliate applicants.  There was never any intention to test applicants fairly, and anyone with half a chance to actually win was simply ignored or refused on a technicality.  The JREF designed an unscientific, closed contest with constantly changing rules, no oversight and absolutely no legal contracts or obligations except to give the JREF all of the power and rights. Do you think James Randi EVER intended to lose that million?  Not a chance!

Evidence of the paranormal does exist, despite James Randi and his bogus foundation.  PSI has been proven and published in real peer-reviewed journals.  See these posts on the Global Consciousness ProjectDr. Sheldrake’s Telepathy Experiments and Dr. Julie Beischel’s triple-blind test proving mediumship is accurate.

All of the above are real, scientific studies done using the scientific method and published in real scientific journals, and yet none would have been accepted by the James Randi Educational Foundation based on their protocols for “testing”.

The only thing James Randi has ever accomplished with this so-called ‘challenge’ was to draw attention away from real scientific research.

Advertisements

191 thoughts on “The James Randi 1 Million Dollar Challenge Finally Terminated

  1. I’ve watched plenty of these challenges on TV and one thing is made clear: both parties agree to the terms in advance. Very simply, they must show that they produce a result that is significantly different than chance. What is controversial about that?

    One lady had to read cards with her mind: 5 possible basic shapes with 250 cards, no time limit. She had to get only 82 correct! You can guess how that turned out.

    Bottom line is this: unfalsifiable claims, that is claims that always have a long line of excuses for why they fail so often, are to be treated as what they are: wild claims. What Randi only ever wanted to show was that the same effect that professional psychics deploy are more easily and believably achieved through magic and people should use critical thinking instead of delusional thinking.

    Like

  2. I can prove It.
    I am a medium, don’t want to be. But I have to live with it.
    Have never read anyone.
    But I can prove the spirit world is real.

    Like

  3. Looks like science is finally starting to move away from materialism, and leaning more towards panpsychism. I think that’s a great start. Even Sam and Annaka Harris are saying that hard materialism is ridiculous.

    I came across this article and I find it ridiculous. But the comments on the article about how “women are more likely to believe in New Age woo and experiences” are even sadder”. https://www.psychologytoday.com/za/blog/psychology-yesterday/201306/why-people-believe-weird-things

    But this comment is crazy.

    Take a look at this comment. It’s ridiculous

    ”…the most popular authors and researchers of the New Age concepts are:
    Robert Monroe (OBEs, who funded the Monroe Institute as well),
    Thomas Campbell (My Big TOE),
    William Buhlman (OBEs),
    Robert Bruce (OBEs),
    Dean Radin (ESP, Institute of Noetic Sciences),
    Rupert Sheldrake (Morphic Resonance),
    Mario Beauregard (The Spiritual Brain, NDEs),
    Sam Parnia (NDEs),
    Bruce Lipton (Biology of Belief),
    Joe Dispenza (Placebo based on Quantum Mysticism),
    Graham Nicolls (OBEs),
    Nassim Haramein (Resonance Foundation, UFOs and Sacred Geometry),
    Jim Sparks (UFOs),
    Stuart Hameroff (Quantum Consciousness),
    Deepak Chopra (Quantum Mysticism),
    Pim van Lommel (NDEs), Peter Fenwick (NDEs),
    Dr. Jeffery Long (NDEs),
    Gary Schwartz (the Soul Phone! Did you know that? A Doctor at the University of Arizona claims to have developed a phone so you can call deceased people and he is funded!)…
    …majority of presenters who attend yearly Tucson Conferences are males (google consciousness. arizona. edu) ,
    …the speakers in ‘What the BLEEP do we know?’ a film that contributed to the New Age movement to a large extent particularly in regards to rise to ‘Quantum Mysticism’ based on misinterpretation of the double slit experiment are (google whatthebleep . com and go under ‘interviews’) as you see, majority of males…
    …all the major podcasts presenters supporting New Age concepts and ideologies are males such as:
    Alex Tsakiris (Skeptiko),
    Jeffrey Mishlove (Thinking Allowed),
    George Noory (Coast to Coast),
    …the entire ‘Remote Viewing’ industry has been dominated by males such as:
    Ingo Swann,
    Pat Price,
    Joseph McMoneagle,
    Courtney Brown,
    David Marks,
    Uri Geller
    …I could seriously keep going with this…

    The difference is that when males give into cognitive biases, fears of nihilism and own meaningless mortality people actually let them do it and spread the misinformation because we, in the West (other cultures are even worse at that) still live in a very patriarchal society where when the women believe in New Age or spiritual concepts she is labeled as gullible but when the male does it, well, he may have a point! For the record, I am a female, I have exposed myself to all of the above mentioned and I strongly believe these are individuals on the spectrum of schizotypy who really want to believe there is more to life than there is due to basic human fears and it so happens that males are much worse at self-awareness and emotional intelligence than females therefore they engage in intellectual escapism, dissociation and self-serving empowering theories.

    * OBEs – Out of Body Experiences
    * NDEs – Near Death Experiences
    * ESP – Extrasensory perception”

    So it seems like whenever someone looks beyond materialistic explanations for things or questions materialism, that person automatically has schizotypy, is afraid of nihilism, afraid of death, and desperately wants an afterlife and a world beyond the physical to exist. And anyone who agrees that materialism is reality are on the right track.

    I’m a woman who has had OBEs too many times to call it a fluke. And I find that comment offensive.
    I’m tired of denying them as a result of schizotypy, mental illness, and hallucinations, when I’m really okay.
    Monroe thought he was seriously mentally or physically ill when he first started having them, before accepting them, after applying skepticism. It took me 3 years to finally accept them. That’s long enough.
    And the association with belief in the paranormal and afterlife, being linked to poor education, unemployment, schizotypy, mental illness, and lack of understanding in science, has got to stop. That accociation has been popping up from materialists and research papers.

    Do I use OBEs as an ‘escapism’? No. Is fear of death and oblivion what drove me to question materialism? No. I wouldn’t believe in an afterlife, or any of the paranormal, if there were ZERO evidence for it, just because it makes me feel better. I would accept that reality no matter how depressing.

    Too many atheists and former skeptics/materialists are saying the materialistic view is silly. So we can no longer keep calling post materialism fear-driven, comforting fantasies, escape from reality, blind faith-based. Nor can we call it something only “gullible women who have very little interest in science” believe in, or a belief for “fantasy prone, schizotypy, and people with cognitive bias, who escape reality with self-serving empowering theories and dissociation.”

    I also own a few books by a few of the authors on that list… And I will NOT throw them away. In fact, I plan on buying more when I can.

    Like

    1. I hear you! Someone once told me that women have a harder time dealing with the fear of death so that’s why we delude ourselves with “quackery”. I didn’t waste any more time with that person.

      Like

    2. I also want to endore your statement that you are going where the evidence goes. If there were no good evidence for the the afterlife, you would certainly not believe just because. I have often said that if there were no evidence for life after death, I would be an atheist and that’s that. Gotta go where the evidence takes you and keep your own wants and desires out of it.

      Like

  4. Here is the exchange between Randi and me WRT the Million Dollar Challenge. I’ve removed unneeded repetition, like quoted and requoted text of the emails, and my sig. And I can’t post links yet, so they have been removed or modified.

    Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 20:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
    From: “Pepper”
    Subject: Would this count for the million bucks?
    To: jref

    If I could demonstrate that EFT (Emotional Freedom
    Technique) works, would I win the million bucks? It
    involves tapping on points while focusing on a
    problem.

    www emofree com

    Pepper

    From: “James Randi” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    To: “‘Pepper'”
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 09:20:10 -0400

    What “points,” what “problem”?

    James Randi.

    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 09:19:25 -0700 (PDT)
    From: “Pepper” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    To: randi

    Thank you for your quick reply.

    There are various points on the body, the top of the
    head, near the eyebrow, the side of the eye, near the
    collarbone. They are listed in detail in the manual on
    the site. The problem can be emotional, like a phobia,
    or physical, like pain.

    Best wishes,
    Pepper

    From: “James Randi”
    To: “‘Pepper'”
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 12:27:58 -0400

    I don’t understand, and I’, not going to take a course in understanding
    what you’re trying to get at.

    What’s the claim, and who’s making it?

    James Randi.

    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 10:10:32 -0700 (PDT)
    From: “Pepper” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    To: randi

    I’m making the claim. I’ll use a headache as an
    example of a “problem”. You rub a spot on your chest
    as say, “Eventhough I have this headache, I totally
    accept myself.” Then you tap on the top of your head
    with your fingers and say to yourself, “this
    headache”. Then you tap near your eye, nose, collar
    bone, under your arm, on your fingers, and then a
    point on your hand. This will get rid of the headache.

    Pepper

    From: “James Randi” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    To: “‘Pepper'”
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 13:59:10 -0400

    This is a silly game. I’m not interested. Grow up.

    James Randi.

    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:52:34 -0700 (PDT)
    From: “Pepper” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    To: randi

    Gee, now I know why nobody has won the million bucks!
    Somebody makes a claim, and you just call it a silly
    game and say you’re not interested! Everyone else I’ve
    explained EFT to understands it. And I even gave you a
    link to the site that has a manual to download that
    gives all the details, instructions and claims. I’ve
    read claims and counter claims on the net WRT your
    challenge. Now I know the truth, you are just plain
    full of it!

    And you still didn’t answer the question. IF I could
    demonstrate EFT works, would I get the million bucks?

    Pepper

    From: “James Randi” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    To: “‘Pepper'”
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 15:24:14 -0400

    The answer is still yes. That hasn’t changed.

    I’m not about to read any manual! I’m far to busy for that, and it’s
    YOUR job to tell me what you’d do to “prove” this idea.

    Try thinking, just for a change:

    1. I’ll use a headache as an example of a “problem”.

    What “headache”? WHO has the headache? How will you establish that
    the
    person — whoever — has a headache?

    2. You rub a spot on your chest as say [sic] “Eventhough [sic] I have
    this headache, I totally accept myself.”

    Why am I saying this? Does the person with the headache have to be in
    the room?

    3. Then you tap on the top of your head with your fingers and say to
    yourself, “this headache”.

    Whether I have the headache, or someone else does, either in the room
    or
    at a remote location? Does the person with the headache have to know
    that I’m saying this?

    4. Then you tap near your eye, nose, collar bone, under your arm, on
    your fingers, and then a point on your hand. This will get rid of the
    headache.

    How will you establish this?

    YOU HAVE GIVEN A FUZZY DESCRIPTION OF A SILLY, MAGICAL, SONG_AND_DANCE.
    Answer the questions above, and we’ll go from there.

    And, if I am the “subject” with the headache, how do you know whether
    (a) I have or don’t have a headache, or (b) that it’s gone away, or is
    still there.

    THINK!

    James Randi.

    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 14:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
    From: “Pepper” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    To: randi

    — James Randi wrote:

    > The answer is still yes. That hasn’t changed.

    Still? This is the first time you’ve said “yes”.

    > I’m not about to read any manual! I’m far to busy
    > for that, and it’s
    > YOUR job to tell me what you’d do to “prove” this
    > idea.

    I first wanted to know that IF I could prove it works,
    if would get the million bucks or not. I can prove I
    can pass gas, but I assume I wouldn’t get a million
    bucks for that.

    > Try thinking, just for a change:

    I am thinking. Again, I was just trying to establish
    if EFT would qualify for the challenge! That’s it.

    > 1. I’ll use a headache as an example of a
    > “problem”.
    >
    > What “headache”? WHO has the headache? How will
    > you establish that the
    > person — whoever — has a headache?

    And you claim I just want to play games? Anybody on
    earth could have the headache, and you’d establish
    that the same way one always does, by asking. That is
    how it’s established, no?

    >
    > 2. You rub a spot on your chest as say [sic]
    > “Eventhough [sic] I have
    > this headache, I totally accept myself.”

    OooOooooOoooo, spelling flames. You must be so much
    smarter than me!

    > Why am I saying this?

    It’s the EFT protocol.

    > Does the person with the
    > headache have to be in
    > the room?

    Yes.

    >
    > 3. Then you tap on the top of your head with your
    > fingers and say to
    > yourself, “this headache”.
    >
    > Whether I have the headache, or someone else does,
    > either in the room or
    > at a remote location? Does the person with the
    > headache have to know
    > that I’m saying this?

    Yes.

    >
    > 4. Then you tap near your eye, nose, collar bone,
    > under your arm, on
    > your fingers, and then a point on your hand. This
    > will get rid of the
    > headache.
    >
    > How will you establish this?

    How do they do it will all other headache treatments?
    Don’t they just ask?

    > YOU HAVE GIVEN A FUZZY DESCRIPTION OF A SILLY,
    > MAGICAL, SONG_AND_DANCE.

    When I point you to a step by step detailed
    description of the process, you say you don’t have
    time to read it. When I try to give a quick overview,
    you say the description is “fuzzy”.

    > Answer the questions above, and we’ll go from there.
    >
    > And, if I am the “subject” with the headache, how do
    > you know whether
    > (a) I have or don’t have a headache, or (b) that
    > it’s gone away, or is
    > still there.
    >

    I had always assumed when they do studies for headache
    medicines, they just ask the people if they have a
    headache or not.

    > THINK!
    >
    > James Randi.
    >

    I am thinking.

    Pepper

    From: “James Randi” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    To: “‘Pepper'”
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 18:06:10 -0400

    Bottom line:

    Describe to me an experiment that would show this idea curing a
    headache. Certainly, if you suggest to someone that they no longer
    have
    a headache, that is open to the person being affected by pure
    suggestion, since headaches are subject to suggestion.

    I can’t imagine a proper test of the claim. If you can, tell me about
    it.

    The ONLY kind of test that could be done, is to not tell the person
    when
    the “magic” is being applied, or not applied — but you say that they
    have to be aware of it, so suggestion is always there.

    This cannot be tested. If you think it can, describe the test.

    James Randi.

    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 15:32:21 -0700 (PDT)
    From: “Pepper” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    To: randi

    — James Randi wrote:
    > Bottom line:
    >
    > Describe to me an experiment that would show this
    > idea curing a
    > headache. Certainly, if you suggest to someone that
    > they no longer have
    > a headache, that is open to the person being
    > affected by pure
    > suggestion, since headaches are subject to
    > suggestion.

    So you use a placebo to control for suggestion. Maybe
    a phrase like “Alakazam you’re cured”, or a “sugar
    pill”.

    You have one group of people get the EFT treatment,
    and one get the placebo. Compare results.

    > I can’t imagine a proper test of the claim. If you
    > can, tell me about
    > it.
    >
    > The ONLY kind of test that could be done, is to not
    > tell the person when
    > the “magic” is being applied,

    But the procedure involves TAPPING. What you’re asking
    for is like asking someone to prove acupuncture works,
    but they aren’t allowed to use needles.

    > or not applied — but
    > you say that they
    > have to be aware of it, so suggestion is always
    > there.

    Yes, suggestion is always there. It’s there with EFT,
    aspirin, and chemotherapy. So, you control for
    suggestion with a placebo.

    Pepper

    From: “James Randi” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    To: “‘Pepper'”
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 19:13:14 -0400

    I can see this will take a long time to get through to you….

    For a control, simply arrange to have the “tapping” done in the wrong
    way — just as acupuncture test controls are done by inserting the
    needles in the wrong spots….

    “So you use a placebo to control for suggestion. Maybe a phrase like
    “Alakazam you’re cured”, or a “sugar pill”. You have one group of
    people
    get the EFT treatment,
    and one get the placebo. Compare results.”

    But since you say that the subjects have to know what you’re saying,
    they would have to be unaware of what the correct “magic words” are
    supposed to be: “”Even though I have this headache, I totally accept
    myself.” Would “Though I actually have this headache, I absolutely
    accept myself” be a “control” because it’s not the same words?

    If, instead of “tapping” near the eye, nose, collar bone, underarm, on
    the fingers, and a point on the hand, we tapped near the eyebrow, lip,
    neck, and elbow — would that be a satisfactory “control”?

    (Aside: I’m suspecting that this is a joke, though April 1 has passed.
    That anyone who can spell and operate a computer, actually believes
    that
    just saying magical words and tapping can cure a headache, has to be
    unbelievable.)

    (Also aside: If the magic words were spoken in French, and the person
    wore gloves or “tapped” using a stick, would it still work? I’m trying
    to find out just how silly this can get.)

    I’m also trying to imagine how one would find a group of people with
    simultaneous headaches, and I’m unable to….

    This is going to be a hoot when it runs on the web page. I just hope
    the readers will believe that I didn’t make it up….!

    James Randi.

    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 16:48:58 -0700 (PDT)
    From: “Pepper” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    To: randi

    — James Randi wrote:

    > I can see this will take a long time to get through
    > to you….
    >
    > For a control, simply arrange to have the “tapping”
    > done in the wrong
    > way — just as acupuncture test controls are done by
    > inserting the
    > needles in the wrong spots….

    Fine.

    >
    > “So you use a placebo to control for suggestion.
    > Maybe a phrase like
    > “Alakazam you’re cured”, or a “sugar pill”. You have
    > one group of people
    > get the EFT treatment,
    > and one get the placebo. Compare results.”
    >
    > But since you say that the subjects have to know
    > what you’re saying,
    > they would have to be unaware of what the correct
    > “magic words” are
    > supposed to be: “”Even though I have this headache,
    > I totally accept
    > myself.” Would “Though I actually have this
    > headache, I absolutely
    > accept myself” be a “control” because it’s not the
    > same words?

    The exact words are not important. It’s the focusing
    on the problem and accepting yourself while tapping
    that’s important.

    > If, instead of “tapping” near the eye, nose, collar
    > bone, underarm, on
    > the fingers, and a point on the hand, we tapped near
    > the eyebrow, lip,
    > neck, and elbow — would that be a satisfactory
    > “control”?

    I’d have to see where.

    > (Aside: I’m suspecting that this is a joke, though
    > April 1 has passed.
    > That anyone who can spell and operate a computer,
    > actually believes that
    > just saying magical words and tapping can cure a
    > headache, has to be
    > unbelievable.)

    Not a very scientific approach.

    > (Also aside: If the magic words were spoken in
    > French, and the person
    > wore gloves or “tapped” using a stick, would it
    > still work? I’m trying
    > to find out just how silly this can get.)
    >
    > I’m also trying to imagine how one would find a
    > group of people with
    > simultaneous headaches, and I’m unable to….

    How do they test headache cures?

    > This is going to be a hoot when it runs on the web
    > page. I just hope
    > the readers will believe that I didn’t make it
    > up….!
    >

    Just don’t forget to post the web site
    so people can read the manual
    and get the full explanation of how to use the
    technique. Then they can judge for themselves.

    Pepper

    From: “James Randi” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    To: “‘Pepper'”
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 19:59:43 -0400

    Oh, depend on it! The webpage WILL be published! I wouldn’t deprive
    my
    readers of such a hoot!

    I’m tired of this now. I want you to get crazy and start claiming that
    I won’t test this claim, so I’ll have the background to ask my readers
    whether I should have even entered into a discussion with you….

    Please….

    James Randi.

    Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 17:30:01 -0700 (PDT)
    From: “Pepper” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    To: randi

    — James Randi wrote:
    > Oh, depend on it! The webpage WILL be published! I
    > wouldn’t deprive my
    > readers of such a hoot!

    Good. Please let me know when you do it.

    >
    > I’m tired of this now. I want you to get crazy and
    > start claiming that
    > I won’t test this claim,

    Are you going to test the claim?

    so I’ll have the background
    > to ask my readers
    > whether I should have even entered into a discussion
    > with you….
    >
    > Please….
    >
    > James Randi.

    It’s become clear to me that you’re not really
    interested in what is right or true.

    Pepper

    From: “James Randi” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    To: “‘Pepper'”
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 10:16:48 -0400

    Probably next week it will appear on the web page — the 15th.

    James Randi.

    Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 09:46:24 -0700 (PDT)
    From: “Pepper” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    To: randi

    Good. From the start you tried to make this a
    personality contest between the two of us, just
    putting me down. Yawn. I’m just interested in the
    truth. I don’t care if those who read your site think
    I’m the stupidest thing to ever walk the Earth, or
    even if I AM the stupidest thing to have ever walked
    the Earth, I am not the topic, EFT is. I just hope
    they go to the site, read the info, and test the
    technique for themselves.

    And now I know why nobody has won the million bucks.

    Pepper

    From: “James Randi” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    To: “‘Pepper'”
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 13:20:27 -0400

    Enjoy your delusions.

    James Randi.

    Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 10:38:01 -0700 (PDT)
    From: “Pepper” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    To: randi

    And they would be what, exactly?

    Pepper

    From: “James Randi” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    To: “‘Pepper'”
    Subject: RE: Would this count for the million bucks?
    Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 13:51:52 -0400

    Your choice…. That you now “know why nobody has won the million
    bucks,” or that saying magic words and tapping will cure headaches….

    James Randi.

    Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 12:45:28 -0700 (PDT)
    From: “Pepper” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    Subject: Your basic dishonesty
    To: randi

    From your site:

    Ms. Wagner of Whole Foods says:
    “For balance, I also looked at the National Center for
    Homeopathy’s website
    , which gave the
    obviously differing view.”

    You said:
    “”Differing,” yes, but no proof other than anecdotal,
    Ms. Wagner. No number of stories will make up for a
    good set of scientific data.”

    WTF!? Just click on the link, it shows controlled
    studies in peer reviewed journals. Including Lancet!

    Why go after Whole Foods? Homeopathy is approved by
    the FDA. Why shouldn’t they sell FDA approved
    treatments? If you don’t think they are useful, don’t
    buy them. Duh. But why shouldn’t other people have the
    option?

    Pepper

    From: “James Randi” View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
    To: “‘Pepper'”
    Subject: RE: Your basic dishonesty
    Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 09:05:20 -0400

    Again, another delusion of yours — that you obviously enjoy.

    If ANY homeopathic claim were demonstrated for us, we’d give the
    million-dollar prize. NO HOMEOPATH has ever applied. Why do you
    suppose….?

    “Pepper,” I’m busy getting the material together that we exchanged
    during the week, to use on my web page next week. You’re trying to get
    off the subject now, so our correspondence is at an end.

    ‘Bye. You’re blocked.

    James Randi.

    Like

  5. This is another example of how some people react to others questioning or moving away from the materialist paradigm: https://www.csicop.org/si/show/post-materialist_science_a_smokescreen_for_woo
    You can’t just throw the words woo and pseudoscience every time something or someone contradicts materialism.
    And “scientists shouldn’t be hired, or even scientists, if they believe in remote viewing” is not going to cut it.
    https://forbetterscience.com/2015/11/09/frontiers-in-paranormal-activities/#comments
    https://forbetterscience.com/2018/04/03/michael-persingers-crank-magnetism/
    Yes, while I agree that belief in the paranormal gives one a sense of control when life gets hard, and the belief that mental and physical pain/suffering has meaning, I still wouldn’t believe in any of it with zero evidence, just because it gets me out of bed in the morning, and lets me sleep at night.
    But the whole believing in paranormal phenomena, and accepting/trusting OBEs being linked to “poor education, pseudoscience, fantasy proneness disorder, unemployment, lack of critical thinking, Schizotypy, etc“ has got to stop.
    That association has been popping up on research papers and Skeptical Inquirer. And it still is.
    btw, more and more universities are actually being more OPEN to the paranormal. Not discouraging it or calling people who accept it wishful thinkers, uneducated, and poor critical thinkers who need a dose of “reality and a mental hospital/medications”.
    I’m just learning to trust my own experiences ( OBEs ). I’m not going back to denying them as neurons misfiring, mental illnesses, or trauma when in reality I’m okay, just because it’s not accepted by ‘mainstream science, doing science a disservice, pseudoscience,’ or they think it’s all fairy-tale nonsense and new-age mystic woo. I’ve been dismissing it as a mental illness for 3 whole years. I’m tired of doing that and I want to stop. I think 3 years is long enough.
    And it’s funny when some materialists ask for a peer-reviewed paper on paranormal it’s automatically “Peer-review weakness, broken system, pseudoscience can slip in, be given credibility, and disguise as science, peer reviewers were fooled and we shouldn’t always trust peer-reviewers.”:
    I’ve got news for you, materialists: I don’t really trust the peer-review system. I think a lot of people don’t trust the peer-review system.
    Some seem to only trust it when it’s materialistic. I don’t trust it whether it’s paranormal, ‘pseudoscience’, or materialistic.

    Like

  6. This article and its author are a joke. Talk about having a chip on your shoulder! Randi proved everything you believed to be true, a joke! Rather than accept it, grow yourself intellectually, you decide instead to lash out like a scolded child.

    Like

  7. I think you have reported an extreme one side blurred truth. both jref and the subject being tested agree on the test. also as for repeating it. they have repeated it for years outside of the JREF so no additional chances are required. Give any person unlimited chances, they will eventually get LUCKY. He has offered and was accepted from Sylvia Browne, but whom never contacted him to arrange the test.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s