Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

the place to post any media reports about dowsers and dowsing .

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Ian Pegler » Thu Mar 14, 2013 6:55 am

latest YouTube comment...

KCRyder wrote:I would have picked the same square - just because of the map. Looks like there is a city of some kind indicated at the left top - so naturally the monument will be found near that location...


Wrong, for same reason given before, there is no "naturally" about it, the selection of the monument by the testers was non-random and there are plenty of ancient monuments in rural locations. The abbey is in an urban setting because that's the abbey they chose.

Even if they had chosen it by throwing a dart at the map, there are quite a few other squares which could have done the job just as well.

Feels like I'm repeating myself now. I did notice that a couple of weekends ago, this video started trending, it wend from 2600 views to roughly 4000 over the course of a weekend.

Ian
Ian Pegler
BSD member
 
Posts: 4060
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Aberystwyth, Mid Wales

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby ledgehammer » Thu Mar 14, 2013 5:39 pm

Ian Pegler wrote:latest YouTube comment...

KCRyder wrote:I would have picked the same square - just because of the map. Looks like there is a city of some kind indicated at the left top - so naturally the monument will be found near that location...


Wrong, for same reason given before, there is no "naturally" about it, the selection of the monument by the testers was non-random and there are plenty of ancient monuments in rural locations. The abbey is in an urban setting because that's the abbey they chose.

Even if they had chosen it by throwing a dart at the map, there are quite a few other squares which could have done the job just as well.

Feels like I'm repeating myself now. I did notice that a couple of weekends ago, this video started trending, it wend from 2600 views to roughly 4000 over the course of a weekend.

Ian


Ian,

I did link it to the blog, perhaps that gave a few more (nothing like the numbers recorded), I do tend to use it as a link for folk asking about dowsing If I am unable to get to them, or recommend someone :-)

Best

Tom
The universe is a soul, trying to understand itself.... We each have the power to look inward at its immense beauty....
User avatar
ledgehammer
 
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 7:49 pm

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Ian Pegler » Thu Mar 14, 2013 8:21 pm

If people could "Like" the youtube video on Facebook and Share it around also, now would be a really good time.

Ian.
Ian Pegler
BSD member
 
Posts: 4060
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Aberystwyth, Mid Wales

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby arthur hamlin » Thu Mar 14, 2013 9:19 pm

I just feel that it was a pity Clive went in for that test.
Also wonder whether he went without protection etc as I believe with an audience that size it does not take much for thoughts to be interfered with, and that relaxation may not have been what it should have been.
arthur hamlin
 
Posts: 711
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 8:37 pm

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Ian Pegler » Sat Mar 23, 2013 8:39 am

arthur hamlin wrote:I just feel that it was a pity Clive went in for that test.
Also wonder whether he went without protection etc as I believe with an audience that size it does not take much for thoughts to be interfered with, and that relaxation may not have been what it should have been.


Or there could have been lumps of metal ore secreted in those podiums?

Of course I have no evidence for this whatsoever, but that's never stopped the skeptics from making similar insinuations towards the late Michael Cook - again, with no evidence.

Ian
Ian Pegler
BSD member
 
Posts: 4060
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Aberystwyth, Mid Wales

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Ian Pegler » Sun Mar 31, 2013 9:27 am

Just noticed ledgehammer's conversation with "KCRyder" (whoever this person is) on the YouTube page.

I note that he is fond of accusing Tom of logical fallacies, whilst at the same making one or two of his own:

KCRyder wrote:I would have picked the same square - just because of the map. Looks like there is a city of
some kind indicated at the left top - so naturally the monument will be found near that location...


The logical fallacy here is sometimes termed "false cause" because the proponent KCRyder is assuming a correlation between
the clustering of monuments around urban areas on the one hand and the selection process of the test-designers on the other.
Since we know nothing about this selection process, such a correlation cannot be proven. The assumption being made is
that the selection process is entirely random. If this were the case, then perhaps an urban monument would perhaps be more
likely (but still not inevitably) chosen. However, this would make life extremely difficult for the test-designers given how many
ancient monuments there are in the entire world. I suppose one could feed all the data into a computer and program it to
select one at random, but this would take an absolute age! It is extremely unlikely that they did it this way.

The argument quoted above by KCRyder can be effectively rebutted by a simple counter example. If Randi had selected Castle Campbell
(the mediaeval castle in square C6) then KCRyder would have picked the wrong square. Reductio ad absurdum. Monuments in other
squares on Randi's map could be used if the skeptic chooses to redefine the meaning of "ancient monument".

The skeptic-controlled Wikipedia has a list of "logical fallacies" a mile long but the skeptics are guilty of quite a few of these on a
regular basis.

P.S. correcting someone's spelling or grammar does not constitute an ad hominem because poor grammar says nothing about a person's
character. It is on the other hand a bit of a red herring (and I note that skeptics do it all the time).

Ian
Ian Pegler
BSD member
 
Posts: 4060
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Aberystwyth, Mid Wales

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Grahame Gardner » Sun Mar 31, 2013 9:59 am

Ian Pegler wrote:The logical fallacy here is sometimes termed "false cause" because the proponent KCRyder is assuming a correlation between
the clustering of monuments around urban areas on the one hand and the selection process of the test-designers on the other.
Since we know nothing about this selection process, such a correlation cannot be proven. The assumption being made is
that the selection process is entirely random. If this were the case, then perhaps an urban monument would perhaps be more
likely (but still not inevitably) chosen. However, this would make life extremely difficult for the test-designers given how many
ancient monuments there are in the entire world. I suppose one could feed all the data into a computer and program it to
select one at random, but this would take an absolute age! It is extremely unlikely that they did it this way.
...
The skeptic-controlled Wikipedia has a list of "logical fallacies" a mile long but the skeptics are guilty of quite a few of these on a
regular basis.

Image

Well said, Ian; and kudos to Tom for tackling the YouTube sceptics.
Grahame
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it - Terry Pratchett.
User avatar
Grahame Gardner
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1499
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 4:52 pm
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby ledgehammer » Mon Apr 01, 2013 12:02 am

Ian Pegler wrote:Just noticed ledgehammer's conversation with "KCRyder" (whoever this person is) on the YouTube page.

I note that he is fond of accusing Tom of logical fallacies, whilst at the same making one or two of his own:

KCRyder wrote:I would have picked the same square - just because of the map. Looks like there is a city of
some kind indicated at the left top - so naturally the monument will be found near that location...


The logical fallacy here is sometimes termed "false cause" because the proponent KCRyder is assuming a correlation between
the clustering of monuments around urban areas on the one hand and the selection process of the test-designers on the other.
Since we know nothing about this selection process, such a correlation cannot be proven. The assumption being made is
that the selection process is entirely random. If this were the case, then perhaps an urban monument would perhaps be more
likely (but still not inevitably) chosen. However, this would make life extremely difficult for the test-designers given how many
ancient monuments there are in the entire world. I suppose one could feed all the data into a computer and program it to
select one at random, but this would take an absolute age! It is extremely unlikely that they did it this way.

The argument quoted above by KCRyder can be effectively rebutted by a simple counter example. If Randi had selected Castle Campbell
(the mediaeval castle in square C6) then KCRyder would have picked the wrong square. Reductio ad absurdum. Monuments in other
squares on Randi's map could be used if the skeptic chooses to redefine the meaning of "ancient monument".

The skeptic-controlled Wikipedia has a list of "logical fallacies" a mile long but the skeptics are guilty of quite a few of these on a
regular basis.

P.S. correcting someone's spelling or grammar does not constitute an ad hominem because poor grammar says nothing about a person's
character. It is on the other hand a bit of a red herring (and I note that skeptics do it all the time).

Ian


Thanks for the info! :-)

I think he moved onto me as his point disappeared with the application of a little logic,

and thanks Graham, I think I got fed up with the armchair attempts to refute. These people that are self acclaimed skeptics are little more than folk with too much time on their hand, the fact he didn't respond to any of my points says it all... I did wish I didn't let it get so far though, I was a little smart arse in places ;-)

Best

Tom
The universe is a soul, trying to understand itself.... We each have the power to look inward at its immense beauty....
User avatar
ledgehammer
 
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 7:49 pm

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Mick » Sat Jul 12, 2014 10:45 pm

Dowsing only seems to work for me when I am in a relaxed /carefree mood. I suspect that's why dowsers usually fail dismally under test conditions, ( when they really want to be able to show that it works ) Michael Cooks demonstration was the exception to the rule, I'm not 100% sure but I think I know how he did it.
Mick
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:09 pm
Location: Saskatchewan Canada

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Ian Pegler » Mon Jul 14, 2014 5:40 am

Mick wrote:Dowsing only seems to work for me when I am in a relaxed /carefree mood. I suspect that's why dowsers usually fail dismally under test conditions, ( when they really want to be able to show that it works ) Michael Cooks demonstration was the exception to the rule, I'm not 100% sure but I think I know how he did it.


I'll try to enumerate the possibilities:

1) He dowsed it correctly
2) He cheated (NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER!!)
3) He got lucky

I can't think of any others. Specifically, intelligent guesswork - consciously or unconciously - is not possible, for the reasons I've given before.

Ian
Ian Pegler
BSD member
 
Posts: 4060
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Aberystwyth, Mid Wales

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Mick » Mon Jul 14, 2014 5:50 am

Ian Pegler wrote:I'll try to enumerate the possibilities:

1) He dowsed it correctly
2) He cheated (NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER!!)
3) He got lucky

I can't think of any others. Specifically, intelligent guesswork - consciously or unconciously - is not possible, for the reasons I've given before.

Ian


I have no doubt that he dowsed it 100% correctly. But I suspect it was more than just plain dowsing.
Mick
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:09 pm
Location: Saskatchewan Canada

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Ian Pegler » Mon Jul 14, 2014 5:52 am

I have no doubt that he dowsed it 100% correctly. But I suspect it was more than just plain dowsing.


Please explain. :shock:

Ian
Ian Pegler
BSD member
 
Posts: 4060
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Aberystwyth, Mid Wales

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Mick » Mon Jul 14, 2014 6:01 am

Ian Pegler wrote:
I have no doubt that he dowsed it 100% correctly. But I suspect it was more than just plain dowsing.


Please explain. :shock:

Ian


I suspect he was in a much deeper hypnotic state than needed for normal dowsing.
Mick
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:09 pm
Location: Saskatchewan Canada

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Ian Pegler » Mon Jul 14, 2014 6:31 am

This was posted by the late Dan Wilson in 2005...

Dan Wilson wrote:Remember the successful TV trial of dowsing in 1992 which had Randi muttering he didn't know how the dowsers had been able to cheat was presaged by an affirmation by Michael Cook and Bob Harris invoking "protection from Randi and his powers".


Michael was apparently in his younger days a member of a reknowned body of men whose motto is "Who dares wins" [Dowsing Today, July 2010, p.16].

Ian
Ian Pegler
BSD member
 
Posts: 4060
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Aberystwyth, Mid Wales

Re: Michael Cook (and Randi "Psychic Investigator" TV show)

Postby Mick » Mon Dec 01, 2014 5:38 pm

I would hazard a guess that the "Skeptics" dismiss all forms of hypnotism. :roll:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0q2KGGMc1EM :lol:
Mick
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:09 pm
Location: Saskatchewan Canada

PreviousNext

Return to Dowsing in the Media

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron