June 22, 2001

Some E-mail Exchanges, Satan Gets Naughty, Numerology Rules, Bell/Dames, and a BIG W!

I re-print here excerpts from a posting received last week from Nathan Clark, of Phoenix, NY. We see here an excellent case of how some folks so easily invent statements, opinions, and attitudes for those they oppose. I have it done to me all the time, and it is most irritating. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to respond to most of the e-mail I receive, but I took certain glaring examples from this posting, and I responded to Mr. Clark:

You begin:

I note that on your website you call for tight anti-fraud security in science experiments involving "paranormal" phenomenon. I was wondering why you do not extend this admonition to all areas of scientific endeavor.

Because I don't specify that I have a wooden leg, does not mean that I don't have a wooden leg. I have pointed out that data-fudging and data-inventing occur in "legitimate" sciences, frequently, and I have never espoused a double standard.

Miracles exceed natural laws, and violate laws of physics.

By definition, just as a "flying pig" would exceed natural laws, and would violate the laws of physics, I agree.

By scientific definition, they [miracles] are impossible. This does not mean they do not occur, it merely means that if they do, no human can explain how they did.

Agreed, enthusiastically. But that's if they do occur. We at the JREF are looking for the occurrence. I would differ, however, with your use of "no human can explain how they did [happen]." I would use, rather, "no human has yet explained how they did [happen]." We are dealing here with the difference between "unexplained" and "unexplainable." The latter term cannot be applied to any actual phenomena of which I am aware.

[Quoting an imagined statement by an evolutionist] "If [a fossil showing an intermediate version of the horse between eohippus and equus] in fact doesn't exist, all that means is that not a single one of these intermediates got fossilized, even though the species on either side of them in the evolutionary tree did."

No, I don't believe that any evolutionist would make such a statement. He/she might say, "If [a fossil showing an intermediate version of the horse between eohippus and equus] in fact isn't available for display, all that means is that if any of them got fossilized, none of these intermediates has been found, to date." Or, more likely, "We suspect that an intermediate version of the horse between eohippus and equus probably did exist, and that fossils of these intermediates probably do, in fact, exist. We are searching to find these fossils, since the species on either side of them in the evolutionary tree, did get fossilized and have been found."

Mr Clark later wrote asking, "How is that any different from someone saying that the only reason no proof exists of Noah's Ark is that it just hasn't been found yet?"

No different at all, Mr. Clark. I invite you to find Noah's Ark. We hear reports of it every year, all of which fizzle out, but you should have as good a chance of not finding it, as anyone else.


Earlier this week I made my annual appearance at the Arkansas Governor's School in Conway, AR. This engagement is something I always look forward to with great enthusiasm. I get to meet a group of new students who are exciting, fresh, and willing to listen. This year's crop blew me away with their open attitude, enthusiasm, and eagerness to ask questions. We had vivid exchanges, challenges, and both agreements and disagreements. Each year, I perform a "Brainbuster" routine for them, and the go through the "Randibuster" project, in which they analyze the performance among themselves, and get to ask via e-mail any number of yes-or-no questions, to which I agree to respond directly and honestly. Their record is impressive; they've always managed to solve the problem given them. John Walchak runs the Randibusters program, and always gets a kick out of the strange theories that are produced. But the end result has always been victory.

This encounter with the Arkansas Governor's Schoool is an experience I won't forget. It makes it all worthwhile, and Arkansas must be lauded for its willingness to reach out to these kids.


If you don't look in on Bob Park's weekly "What's New" feature at whatsnew@tron.aps.org, you miss good stuff. Go there and sign up! We recently became aware of astrology courses being offered at universities, and this item from Bob's news column points up just how serious this is:

ASTROLOGICAL STUDIES? CLUELESS IN SEATTLE. I'm not making this up. The Higher Education Coordinating Board of the state of Washington has authorized Kepler College of Astrological Arts and Sciences in Seattle to issue BA and MA degrees in Astrological Studies. According to Kepler's web site, "No other degree-granting college or university in recent centuries has offered an academically sound approach to the study of astrology." I wonder why that is? Seattle, of course, is also the home of Bastyr University, a school of Naturopathy that "integrates modern science with the wisdom of ancient healing practices," and home of the Discovery Institute, http://www.discovery.org/." Okay, admit it, gang. You'd love to be the job recruiter who sees that on someone's resume. "I see you have a background in astrology. A Bachelor's degree. Listen, I'm a Pisces, so can you tell me if I'm likely or not to misfile your application?"

Preacher Pat Robertson has told his "700 Club" TV audience about the time he had to perform an exorcism on his own daughter. He says that some witches put a curse on his youngest daughter, causing her to have bad headaches. At first he assumed his daughter was just sick but then he recovered from his attack of rationality and decided it was much worse than that. "By the pricking of my thumbs," he perhaps said? Pat ran to his daughter and said to her and the assorted demons that were running amok in her body, "In the name of Jesus, you foul spirit of witchcraft, I command you, loose this child and go back where you came from."

Robertson commanded those things to go back and "cause trouble down there." Well, that seemed to do it. Says Robertson, "They will obey you, they'll go back and give those little witches a bit of the taste of their own medicine."

During a recent crusade by Robertson titled, "Road to Victory," Satan was blamed for everything from broken photocopiers to bad public schools and news media bias. Carolyn Kunkel, an official of the Florida Christian Coalition affiliate, told folks that their prayers are needed because their Orlando headquarters is under attack by "the Enemy," a fundamentalist term for Satan. She noted that for the past month or so, the photocopier and fax machine have been "acting up" and said the office had inadvertently sent an e-mail alert that contained a computer virus to 5,000 people. Now we know who to blame for such troubles. It's old Beelzebub. Who you gonna call?

But there's even more exciting news. Activists also pledged to "expose the sale of baby body parts in Florida." So there goes that lucrative market. In New Mexico, director Paige McKenzie quoted a Biblical passage that says that Satan is the "Prince of the Air," which can only mean that Satan controls the radio and television airwaves. "He's got the main way people get information in our country," she said. She implied that Satan also has influence over public schools, and told a series of stories about students allegedly being denied the right to pray and having their Bibles confiscated. She also told a story about a teacher who was fired for mentioning God to his sixth grade class, more than half of whom, McKenzie asserted, "were heroin addicts." No specific details were given about any of these alleged incidents.


Believe it or not, "numerology" is back. Here's an example of how precise and logical this notion is: "Bill Gates" is the owner of "Microsoft." If we add the numbers represented by the letters in these two names, B-i-l-l-G-a-t-e-s adds to 6 and so does M-i-c-r-o-s-o-f-t. Now — HEY! Pay attention! No dozing off! — the number 6 signifies the planet VENUS (of course, because it's the second planet) which stands for Luxury and Material success on the Positive side. We all knew that. See how well this works?

Among the rules of numerology: After the name of your business has been selected one has to look for the Perfect Location, Harmonious Business Address, Bank, Checking Account Number and the Telephone number for the Business. How could we not have known that? The numerologist has to look for the Auspicious Date and Time for "starting" the Business. Just to show you how careless some people can get, here's a perfect example of choosing the wrong business name. In the name "Value Jet" we obviously have only disaster. The letter V has been assigned the number 4 in numerology, which stands, dont'cha know, for Rahu in Vedic Astrology. The purpose of Rahu is to be cruel and kill in a mysterious way. Not just that the airline code for Value Jet is "J7," but "J" has been assigned the number 1 in numerology and if we add 1+7 we get 8, which is the number of Death and belongs to the planet Saturn who is the King of Darkness. Is it clear now? Finally, here is the height of ignorance: Value Jet is an air company and their symbol is a cartoon airplane which looks like a fish. The jet went down in a swamp. We certainly don't have to explain the rest.


Again, in responding to an e-mail correspondent, I'll give you this exchange, some of the comments and my analysis of them:

I'd like to see certain protocols in your JREF million dollar challenge be pre-defined in such a way that you can say: "Here is the specific test you have to pass if you make this claim...."

Not possible. Every claimant has a different claim, different parameters, different needs, varying conditions under which they say they can operate. No claim is quite like any other claim. This is what decades of this business have clearly shown me. That's why the terms of the challenge are so clearly drawn up.

I'm uneasy with the "shifting goal posts" claim psychics make about the challenge.

The claim is quite untrue. Ask them for ONE example of where this has been done. They can't provide it, because it never happened. The rules change only if the conditions change, and then only with the approval of all concerned. It's the psychics who move the goalposts around, not I.

I'd like to know that claimants don't have to trust JREF to be honest and that your honesty can be demonstrated and there are goal posts that will not be shifted.

Read rule 4. It's all clearly stated. There's no "trust" involved. It's all delineated in advance, for all parties concerned.

The "shifting goal posts" claim carries some weight with me. I looked at the challenge page and read this: "Since claims vary greatly in character and scope, specific rules must be formulated for each applicant." This is NOT completely true for the claims of remote viewers and mediums like John Edward are known to us and they do NOT vary in "character and scope."

Really? Then tell me what John Edward will agree is a proper test of his powers. You can't, because you don't know, and I don't know. He says he just repeats what he's told by the "spirits," so he's sometimes wrong. This cannot be tested, this way, but there are ways that he can be tested. And, if he were to agree to be tested, we would discuss those methods. But he will not apply, and I think I know why. I haven't done this sort of thing for 50 years without getting some experience of these matters....

Edward and Van Praagh are similar (and similar to all mediums) and a specific test protocol could be formulated and posted on the net.

That's right! And as soon as they apply, and tell us what they can do, under what circumstances, and with what accuracy, we can do that. But they will not apply!

They make their claims in the media and protocols can be pre-designed based on those claims.

Show me where they have made these claims "in the media." That's an easy statement for you to make, but not so easy to provide evidence for. You have the usual conviction that you've seen such statements, but the claims don't exist. Prove me wrong.

If the protocol is set up in advance then the psychics can't claim you have "shifting goal posts."

Exactly! Read rule 4.

The psychics could still ask for specific type of tests, but as many tests as possible should be pre-defined and outlined in specific terms on your website.

Ridiculous! We have hundreds of different sorts of claims being made. That would require an entire book! Dowsing, healing, speaking to the dead, levitation, diagnosing illness, ESP, predicting, you name it. And each one has dozens of varieties, special needs, forbidden procedures, special times/temperatures/locations. This cannot be done.

It does not violate your claim that you will not design protocol independently of the claimant because the claimant can still ask for a different type of test.

The claimant "asks for" nothing. The claimant tells us what can and cannot be done. We, in co-operation with the claimant, design a proper test that is approved by all concerned.

All you're saying is: "if you can pass this specific test you get some money."

Please read the rules.

Maybe only ten thousand or a hundred thousand and call it a preliminary test.

No, I will not re-write the rules to make them more complex and thus invite more criticisms and discussion such as this. It's our offer, they adhere to the rules, or they are not accepted.

After all, a million bucks could inspire expensive and creative cheating.

Let them try. We're ready. Hey, I didn't fall off an apple tree yesterday.....

As it is the psychics have to trust you to come up with fair tests and they don't trust Randi or JREF.

Read the rules. There's no "trust" involved! Where do you get this strange notion?

If you leave it open you ignore all the tests you've already devised and used and that have something very specific to say about real human capacities: No human being can do this specific task, and if they could they'd have some of our money.

No claims are the same. The dowsing test we did on the "$100,000 Challenge" program for the dowser, was designed and approved by him — and by us. We've NEVER had another dowser agree to try that test. They all describe it as "stupid," then they tell us what they think they can do. And they fail.

There are several groups this should be done for: 1) Remote Viewers 2) Mediums who Talk to the Dead 3) Everyone who has been tested already, like dowsers and psychometrists.

No. It can't be done. They're all different!

There was a TV special done many years ago with Randi where dowsers, aura readers and psychometrists were tested. Those tests were good enough to foil some claims and there is no reason to say those specific testing protocols can't be used again. They define a limit to our human capacities. Post all those old protocols and keep them active as specific challenges and claim no human being has demonstrated that specific capability.

Sure. And no one will respond, because each one says he/she can't do it that way. They all need to design their own tests, and then they fail. I'm repeating myself, I know, but it's hard to get across!

Let's take as an example Ed Dames for a protocol for remote viewers: Dames has claimed that Randi's backers pulled out . . .

A lie, and Dames and Bell know it's a lie. I don't have "backers" behind the challenge. The money is in the bank, the "pledges" are retained, but we don't intend to go there. We depend upon the money in the bank. It's specifically given to us for that purpose and that purpose only. It can't be borrowed or drawn on. We have no control over that money except to award it as forfeit of the challenge. That's the legality of it, and we're bound by that. This is something that Bell and Dames know full well, but they choose not to know, and repeat their lies.

I think you should set up a protocol for testing Dames and challenge him to remote view something you've got locked in a safe. Challenge all remote viewers with same test. One made on Art Bell's show.

Already been done, and rejected by all the remote viewers. Not a safe, just a locked closet here at the JREF. Read up on it. And Art Bell doesn't design my tests. I'm not playing with radio shows here. I have a serious challenge. I will not play the Art Bell game. Dames will follow the same procedure as anyone else. He has refused to fill out the form and go along with the rules. Therefore, he's never been tested. It's that simple. I won't cater to his whims.

Do you think Art Bell will not deal with you fairly?

What's this "deal with" business? I didn't invite a talk-show host to be involved in a scientific procedure. What does he know about all this? He can't get the basic facts right, so how could he handle the truth? I have no interest in helping Art Bell's ratings. I'm only interested in establishing facts. Fiction is Bell's field.

I think this protocol would work: A double blind method to test remote viewing:

[An overcomplicated, melodramatic, overdone, scenario is described here. Very naively designed, and inadequate. Example: the "psychic" must say "only the specific name for that object." Get real. No pro psychic is going to go along with being "specific"!] Let ME suggest this:

(1) We at the JREF chose — by random means we already use — an object with specified limits of size and weight. Between 20 grams and 1000 grams, and can fit into a container 40 cm. square, for example. A light-bulb, a butter-knife, an egg, sunglasses, a hammer, book, etc., would fit those parameters and 50 such would constitute our target-pool.

(2) We list all the items in our target-pool, and supply that list to the "psychic."

(3) We package the chosen item in a box which has been weighted — if needed — so that the package weighs 1000 grams or more. The "viewer" is informed what that weighting might consist of, if used.

(4) The "remote viewer" and the JREF agree on an independent person/party who will hold the exhibit. The packaged selected object is given to that trusted individual to retain.

(5) The "psychic" makes his/her guess and declares it in written form, signed and sealed, without revealing the guess to any other person.

(6) The person holding the packaged item meets with the "psychic" and the package and the sealed guess are placed in full view of approved witnesses.

(7) The sealed guess is opened and revealed, and then the package is opened. A comparison is made, with the target-pool list being displayed.

(8) The results are obvious and evident. (Rule #4: "Tests will be designed in such a way that no "judging" procedure is required.") The test is repeated as often as needed. Our statistician would decide that.

(Please don't give me the "x-ray" or the "sonogram" warnings. We're aware of all that.)

Your suggestion for the "contacting the dead" test cannot be applied. The "readers" all say they only repeat what they hear. What can be done is to have a "blind" (no feedback, no contact, no visuals) reading done, then ask 12 persons — one of whom actually is the person the reading was done for — to score the reading. We've already done this. Each person, if they believe they are the one being read for, gives a very high score.... It's not possible to determine, from the data, which one was being read for..... But no "reader" will take this test! They know better.....

Here endeth the lesson. To the correspondent, I say: I've had decades of experience in this field. You're just at the stage I was when I started about 55 years ago. You are producing naive versions of tests that have already been tried and discarded.

I just wanted you folks to see what I have to go through trying to handle such inquiries. People don't seem to want to read and understand the published rules, and they often think they have instantly solved problems that I've been wrestling with for decades.


Well, I had no idea that the triangle puzzle of last week would produce such remarkable results! That was one devised by the late Kobon Fujimura, who was one of Japan's leading designers of puzzles and the author of many puzzle books. Martin Gardner was aware of only one solution to this figure, but my readers — much to Martin's delight — have come up with ten unique answers! They appear here. There's some question about "J," though.....

The triangle-count in these figures is not always easy. I've taken answer "B" and laid out the triangles clearly. The other ones you'll have to do for yourself! "B" is the solution most readers came up with, while "A" is the one that's been published as the standard. For all we know, there just might be others, but an analysis of these ten would indicate that there are no more. Note, too, that numbers "E" through "J" have mirror-images, but we don't count those. Stuart Armstrong commented:

. . . . your question should more aptly be "how do we get less than 10 triangles," as any pair of lines neither parallel to the others nor going through any of the crossings seem to do the trick (assuming the blue lines go on for ever, of course).
Gee, is that true....? I don't think so, since if we place the red lines in figure "C" going from the bottom up, to intersect outside of the triangle beyond the apex, I don't think that works... Incidentally, I'm proud of you all. None of you were distracted by my sneaky move of putting in the degrees in the angles of the opening triangle. I'll have to get sneakier...... But I must make one point here: none of you even suggested that there might be more than one correct solution! In fact, there were several responses that ran, "This was a cinch! Very easy!" True, perhaps, but we should all be aware (I'm included!) that a solution is not necessarily the solution...... In any case, try this one: add three straight lines to this figure to get nine triangles. This time, no triangles can overlap in any way.....