IIG Public Update #3

October 2007

Fall has fallen, and we are enjoying the cool weather. One of our fondest memories of Summer was the Sylvia Browne piñata, which may not have been the most intellectually rigorous attack on pseudoscience, but the kids enjoyed it . . . and by kids I mean those aged 8 to 47.

Well, applicants have been coming out of the woodwork, and they dominate the September report.

ANTO KIZIRIAN

Mr. Kizirian claims to be able to heal through quantum touch, and participated in a preliminary demonstration of his powers, which was less than stellar.

He wanted to test his powers by changing the angle of a test subject’s hipbone. Okay, that sounds good, but he claims that he will change the height of the hipbone by half an inch! We rejected that measurement as negligible, and he blasted back:

“ . . . this idea that "eye-balling" the level of the hips is meaningless, it's not. Hips that are not even by over half an inch can be very easily observed and confirmed . . . arranging such a demonstration is easy and something that can be confirmed over and over by anybody even though we are only "eye-balling" it and not measuring it precisely.”

Sorry, Anto, we put a high premium on precision around here.

We have been unable to come to an agreement about a scientific test of his powers, and, in a typical attempt at role reversal, he questions our credibility:

“By the way, I still want to know what your scientific connections are. These are going to be needed if any meaningful and tightly controlled experiment is going to be done in the future.

Well, if Anto will accept our shoddy credentials, we will be happy to conduct a scientifically rigorous test of his powers.

FIELD TRIP TO THE CREATIONIST MUSEUM

Did you know that Noah’s Ark was not only big enough to hold two of every animal in the world, but that those animals only filled 36.5% of the ark? Did you know that Isaac Asimov, The United Nations, and Adolph Hitler are all involved in . . . some kind of conspiracy?

Well, you would know all these things if you had checked out the Museum of Creation and Earth History. A complete report on the museum’s intellectual integrity will be posted soon.

GOLD DOWSER

Mike G. believes that he can detect gold using paranormal means. We are currently designing a protocol for a test. More to come.

MISSOURI DOWSER

The latest from official IIG $50,000 challenge applicant Carl David Ritchie:

“[T]he dowsing test works but just for a certain amount of time . . . [I]t’s like you're working with a battery that is draining itself, it works for 5 to 10 minutes and then it may stop working or reverses itsself [sic] giving false readings. I'm not saying dowsing doesn't work, I'm saying at this time I can't get it to work long enough to go through a scientific test . . .”

A complete report, including the test protocol will soon be posted.

DON’T TEASE ME, BROUGH

Brough Perkins sent us the following e-mail:

I have been doing psychic readings for nearly ten years, since I was fifteen and I believe in psychic ability and the afterlife . . .

I do not claim to have any powers or paranormal/supernatural abilities. I do experience a very unusual and rare event when I sit with someone who has come to me seeking counsel. All I know of each client of mine is their first name. And within moments I will start talking about exactly why they have come. They do not speak nor do they even have to confirm. In some cases they are even on the telephone. I do not ask questions. And when I hear or see names in my mind I usually always get them around the subject at hand. IE: I may say "Your father is a very nice man", then the next statement I make is "I see the name John there". Later my client explains their father's name is John.

I personally feel that you would call anything cold reading. You would go to great lengths to explain away the 100% accurate hits simply because in your model of the world, there can be no such a thing as psychic ability. So therefore your challenge is simply a challenge of how many different ways you could reject the evidence of Psychic ability and the Afterlife.

Give me an example of what a positive hit would be in a practical setting. Tell me what Subject A: The psychic would have to say to subject B the sitter, in what scenario that would qualify as a hit to you.

A bit of our response:

. . . Brough, if the way you do your readings are as you describe, where you tell them the name of their father and this ISN'T the same type of "fishing" questions that are so obvious in a "cold reading," then we would be VERY interested in meeting with you. This is actually to our benefit too, as we would be the FIRST group to scientifically discover and document true "paranormal" (or whatever you would want to call it) powers. It is NOT in our interest to see you fail, as that does not expand the frontiers of science and knowledge. The $50,000 prize paid to you would be FAR surpassed in income from our own publishing rights, speaking tours, and of course, the $1,000,000 honorarium from the Nobel Prize!

. . . Are you REALLY saying, "Your father's name is John" as a statement, or are you asking, "I see a John in your life" and letting the subject fill in the blanks? As I said, we would be interested in meeting you, and testing you under controlled conditions. We will create a protocol that is comfortable to both you and us, but we will need you to STATE the name of the parents (or whatever information is agreed upon) of our subjects, and not ask Cold Reading type questions.

Mr. Perkins response was quite lengthy. Suffice to say, he is so upset by the adversarial nature of our challenge that he won’t accept it. I guess the joke’s on us.

That’s it until November.

- IIG