[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

If he has the emails to back it up it would seem Randi is much more a sensationalist than a scientist.

 
Trust me, he has them. And they were posted on one of the JREF forums. Randi never denied them.
 
se

 

[xnor]

C'mon, stop the quote mining.
 
Quote:

What I said was, Randi declared the challenge over once Pear withdrew their offer to provide some cables. "Third – and most interesting – this retreat by Adam Blake effectively closes the current challenge, much to the relief of both Fremer and Blake, of course."

You have to understand that Randi has been doing this for years, and sometimes it took him years to negotiate test protocols just to find out that the person making the claim declined or just vanished from earth in the end.
He wasn't wrong in assuming that Fremer wouldn't use his own money to buy either of those cables.

Well, Adam, since you won’t provide a set of your marvelous cables for the test, and I’m sure that Fremer isn’t going to provide them, that closes the matter. Now, Fremer may decide to invest $7,250 in a set of these cables. Or, the Transparent people may send in a set of $42,000 wires for the test, but I’m damn sure not going to supply them…!

 
 
Quote:

At the time Randi did this, there were still two other cables on the table. The Transparents and Fremer's own Tara Labs cables. Early on, Fremer told Randi via EMail that before he agreed to the Pears, he wanted to get them and listen to them before agreeing to proceed. And it was at that time that Fremer made the suggestion that he use his own Tara Labs cables which he was already intimately familiar with. Randi told Fremer that he would actually prefer that option, but that he had to check with this advisors first. However at the time Pear withdrew and Randi declared Fremer's challenge over, he had not consulted with his advisors and had not taken Fremer's Tara Labs cables off the table. So as I said, at the time Randi declared the challenge over and disingenuously pulled the rug out from under Fremer, there were still two other cables on the table.

Again, the challenge had two clearly specified cable options, Fremer's "reference" cable wasn't one of them. According to Randi Framer had already agreed to the challenge with Pear providing the cable (source). After Pear withdrew Fremer still could have provided either of them on his own.
 
As for Randi checking with his advisors:

No. The use of Fremer’s “reference cables” was a matter that I could not bring to the attention of my advisors due to the interference of the weekend and to the fact that on Friday I was rushed to the local emergency hospital with what turned out to be a false alarm. And – since the grubbies will quickly and eagerly brand that as a “lie,” I post here the wrist-band that was attached to me on that occasion. I did not “suggest” that Fremer use these wondrous “reference” cables; it was his idea, and I opted to refer the suggestion to my advisors.

source
 
 
Quote:

No. Randi declared Fremer's challenge over the moment Pear withdrew their offer to supply cables, adding "We’re now looking at the list of others who have expressed interest in taking the challenge."

You sure are picking and choosing. There's a follow up news article. "The challenge is set forth, above, once more."
 
 
Quote:

No, Fremer did not change the parameters of the challenge which he had already agreed to. There was never an agreement at the time Randi pulled the rug out from Fremer. At that time, Fremer and Randi were negotiating an agreement, i.e. Fremer using his own Tara Labs cables pending approval of Randi's advisors. And even if they had not agreed to Fremer's cables, the Transparent cables were still on the table.

Again, you may be right, but where are you getting this from ("there was never an agreement")?
Fremer: "I AM USING MY REFERENCE CABLE IN THIS TEST BECAUSE PEAR/BLAKE BACKED OUT." is not changing the parameters of the clearly defined challenge with Pear/Transparent cables?
 
 
 
Quote:

Again, Randi jumped the gun and disingenuously pulled the rug out from under Fremer just so he could impugn Pear and Fremer, "Actually, I must admit that this was a rather clever way of squirming out of the huge dilemma in which these two blowhards found themselves."

Again picking from that first news article found on JREFs website. Randi's used to the guys making claims eventually withdrawing even though they could win 1 million dollars ... and he was right.
 
 
Quote:

Fremer didn't squirm out of anything. At the time Randi wrote that, the last thing Fremer had heard from Randi was that he would prefer that Fremer use his own cables pending approval of his advisors. And at the time Randi wrote that, he had NOT consulted his advisors about Fremer's cabels. And again, the Transparents were still on the table.
 
As I said, Randi was shameless.

Fremer's "reference" cable was just a suggestion but never part of the challenge. Fremer would have done the test with the provided Pear cables. In the end he never did, although he could have just provided either cable.
 
 
edit:
Anyway, I've seen enough in this old thread. Ad hominem attacks and such.. sorry, I'm not going to play this game. Back to topic.

 

[radiofrog]

(Pardon my break into the current discussion)
 
[size=small]Nice post, elsdude.  [/size]
[size=small]And I agree, our emotions seem to be the crux of the problem with any of these devices.  You can be an extremely logical person, science-minded even, but toss in a bit of emotional content and all that logic can potentially go right out the window.[/size]

 

[xnor]

Can any of you come up with good reasons why one shouldn't just reject claims until there's sufficient scientific evidence for it?
 
 
The ADE651 buyers could have conducted a test for maybe a few thousand dollars, they even could've sent one of their "trained" operators to the JREF to just take the challenge but instead they succumb to their own biases thinking the device works and go on spending millions ... on dowsing rods ... to detect bombs.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

You have to understand that Randi has been doing this for years, and sometimes it took him years to negotiate test protocols just to find out that the person making the claim declined or just vanished from earth in the end.
He wasn't wrong in assuming that Fremer wouldn't use his own money to buy either of those cables.

 
And you know this how, exactly? First, where did Fremer say he wouldn't buy them? Second, who said he would have had to buy them? He's a top reviewer for a top high-end audio publication.
 
What are you saying? That Randi is... psychic?
 
Quote:

Again, the challenge had two clearly specified cable options, Fremer's "reference" cable wasn't one of them. According to Randi Framer had already agreed to the challenge (source).

 
Please note that Randi conveniently leaves out the fact at the time of his posting the "BLAKE WITHDRAWS" piece, that he and Fremer were negotiating the use of Fremer's cables pending the approval of his advisors.
 
Randi opens by saying "It appears that Michael Fremer took exception to our just-posted assumption that the Fremer/Blake acceptance of the JREF challenge was now moot, since Blake had refused to put a set of Pear cables into the mix, as had previously been agreed."
 
Why would there be an assumption that the challenge was now moot when there were two other possible cable alternatives?
 
Quote:

As for Randi checking with his advisors:

 
And that's just Randi trying to cover his ass after the fact.
 
What's it matter that he wasn't able to bring it to the attention of his advisors that Friday because he had to to to the hospital or over the weekend because it was the weekend? There was no rigid time limit as to when he had to bring it to the attention of his advisors. You say yourself that he's sometimes taken years to negotiate protocols, etc. Why couldn't he have brought it to the attention of his advisors the following week?
 
This is ultimately the most damning evidence against Randi. Because he had not consulted with his advisors at the time of writing the BLAKE WITHDRAWS piece, there were, as I have been saying, two other cables on the table at the time. The use of Fremer's cables had not been ruled out.
 
Quote:

Again, you may be right, but where are you getting this from ("there was never an agreement")?

 
I'm getting it from the fact that at the time, Fremer and Randi were negotiating. Can't very well have an agreement if you're still negotiating now can you?
 
Quote:

Fremer: "I AM USING MY REFERENCE CABLE IN THIS TEST BECAUSE PEAR/BLAKE BACKED OUT." is not changing the parameters of the clearly defined challenge with Pear/Transparent cables?

 
Please read what I wrote. I said Fremer did not change the parameters of the challenge that he had already agreed to.
 
Randi put forth the challenge. But before Fremer would agree to it, he wanted some clarification first. So to that end, he sent Randi this via EMail:
 
1) Please identify which of these constitutes a "good" set of Monster Cables so I understand which you intend to use as a baseline for the comparison:

http://www.monstercable.com/home_av/...d_surround.asp

Since I have not heard either the Pear Anjou or the Transparent Opus, and since I don't necessarily think that "expensive equals better," there are three options:

1) I request a set of Pear Anjou cables to hear what they sound like and then decide whether i can hear the difference between them and whichever set of Monster cables you identify as "good."
2) request a pair of Transparent Orpheus cables to hear what they sound like and then decide whether i can hear the difference between them and whichever set of Monster cables you identify as "good."
3) have you sign off on okaying me to use my reference TARA Labs Omega cables ($16,000 pr.) versus whichever set of Monster cables you identify as "good."

Once this is clarified we will take it the next step and I will state clearly what abilities I intend to demonstrate.
 
Please note that in his second option, he states that he would request a pair of cables from Transparent (again, he's a top reviewer with Stereophile).
 
This is Randi's reply:
 
I think I?d go with option 3, for simplicity, but I?ll have to consult with my advisors, first?

And perhaps the Z2R ML 10/10 ? if a 10? cable is okay with you.

All subject to advisors?
 
And THAT is where things stood before Randi disingenuously pulled the rug out from under Fremer with the BLAKE WITHDRAWS piece.
 
Quote:

Again picking from that first news article found on JREFs website.

 
Yes, I am.
 
Quote:

Randi's used to the guys making claims eventually withdrawing even though they could win 1 million dollars ... and he was right.

 
No, he wasn't, as Fremer never withdrew. Instead, Randi disingenuously pulled the rug out from under him as they were still in negotiations as to the conditions of the test. A fact that Randi conveniently leaves out of his side of the story.
 
Quote:

Fremer's "reference" cable was just a suggestion but never part of the challenge.

 
But could have been part of the challenge. In fact, it was Randi who said his preference was for that option pending approval of his advisors. Again, at the time of the BLAKE WITHDRAWS peice, Fremer and Randi were negotiating.
 
Quote:

Fremer wanted to do the test with Pear cables.

 
It wasn't Fremer who brought the Pear cables into the challenge. He'd never even heard them before. It was Randi who did that. And Fremer wouldn't even agree to accepting the challenge using the Pears until he'd had a chance to try them and see if he could hear a difference between them and the unspecified Monster cables.
 
By the way, it's worth noting that this began with Fremer looking at taking up the "official" JREF $1 million paranormal challenge. However Fremer had a problem with the "paranormal" part of the challenge because he wasn't claiming any sort of supernatural or paranormal abilities. So instead of the official challenge, it became a "special" challenge that Randi would handle himself. So throughout the whole ordeal, the conditions were being negotiated. Nothing had been carved in stone and Fremer had not agreed to any specifics at the time Randi tried smearing Fremer with his BLAKE WITHDRAWS hit piece.
 
se

 

[xnor]

SE, go open your own Randi bashing / Fremer worship thread if you feel the need. The latter sure would be fun, but this is not the right place, thanks.

 

[dvw]

It is not anti-science. It is fake science with no regulatory oversight. I thought we spent a ton of money in qualifying military equipment
 
Here's a case that the fake science killed at least one person.
 
http://newsone.com/2466886/dr-christine-daniel-fake-cancer-cure/
 
The drug cost $100K for 6 months. At least she gets 11 years in jail.
 
If FTC start checking false advertising, half the cable companies will be out of business.If Department of ??? start checking UL listing, boutique power cable will be out of the market. Or we can wait for the day the $1,000 power cable accidentally started a fire. If FDA start checking claimed benefits, nutritional supplement will not be a billion dollar business. Folks, it is not anti-science that victimize people. People that are anti-science are the actual victims except for the anti-climate change guys. They made the earth the victim.
 
Ah yes, victims don't want people to think they're stupid. So they get very defensive when you tell them they're wrong.
 
My mother-in-law was selling this nutrition supplement that will cure cancer, AIDS etc. We kept telling her it's fake. There is no FDA approval, no test. She kept telling me; "but the inventor is a PhD". I replied; "So am I. But that doesn't mean I can cure cancer. And if I can, I will not be selling a nutritional supplement"

 

[anetode]

Quote:

As only the Gizmodo article has been linked, here's Fremer's side of the story.  If he has the emails to back it up it would seem Randi is much more a sensationalist than a scientist.

I expected more integrity from a world famous magician.

 

[Happy Camper]

lol.......the topic sure has changed to a more user friendly one.

I think of our scientists and your scientists like govt lawyers and industry lawyers. If truth was absolute, there'd be no debate (SE said as much). Science establishes rules to fit the desired outcome as much as subjectivists wax poetic about new found discoveries. But I know our esteemed participants stayed at a Holiday Inn sometime.

 

[xnor]

Quote:

It is not anti-science. It is fake science with no regulatory oversight. I thought we spent a ton of money in qualifying military equipment
 
Here's a case that the fake science killed at least one person.
 
http://newsone.com/2466886/dr-christine-daniel-fake-cancer-cure/
 
The drug cost $100K for 6 months. At least she gets 11 years in jail.
 
If FTC start checking false advertising, half the cable companies will be out of business.If Department of ??? start checking UL listing, boutique power cable will be out of the market. Or we can wait for the day the $1,000 power cable accidentally started a fire. If FDA start checking claimed benefits, nutritional supplement will not be a billion dollar business. Folks, it is not anti-science that victimize people. People that are anti-science are the actual victims except for the anti-climate change guys. They made the earth the victim.
 
Ah yes, victims don't want people to think they're stupid. So they get very defensive when you tell them they're wrong.
 
My mother-in-law was selling this nutrition supplement that will cure cancer, AIDS etc. We kept telling her it's fake. There is no FDA approval, no test. She kept telling me; "but the inventor is a PhD". I replied; "So am I. But that doesn't mean I can cure cancer. And if I can, I will not be selling a nutritional supplement"

Well I really agree with most of what you wrote. It is antiscience in the sense that these guys reject (real) science to gain knowledge. If they feel something works, it works, even if in reality it fails miserably. This attitude in itself could be called antiscience, imho.
 
As for them being victims, it depends. Sure someone spending all his money on cables instead of more useful audio upgrades could be labeled a victim, but someone else who's inability to do proper tests gets other people killed is an accomplice.
 
And as disrespectful as it may sound, which I apologize for in advance, even if your mother-in-law didn't get it at the time it is kinda 'ruthless' to sell 'magic potions' to desperate people.

 

[anetode]

A few other thoughts on this topic. The anti-science described in the first post has been termed pathological science. I like this description better than anti-science or even pseudoscience as it gets to the heart of the matter. Pathological science is inspired first and foremost by a motive backed by relentless narcissism. If there's one thing the scientific community has it is plenty of egos, specialists in one field may presume their method applies to another and proceed to calamitous research.
 
Take the example of Linus Pauling. He was a brilliant chemist with a strong background in physics who could have beat Watson & Crick to determining the double helix structure of DNA. His downfall came later in his career when he decided to generalize principles learned from organic chemistry to medicine with an incomplete hypothetical basis and without the proper testing. This decision was influenced mainly by his struggle to deal with kidney disease. It blinded him to methodological flaws in his attempts to prove that vitamin C was a miracle cure and when further research dispelled his notions he rebelled against it. All throughout the rest of his life he championed his purported breakthrough to countless doctors and to the general public. While his efforts weren't as actively harmful as Wakefield's vaccine research, they were successful in wasting time and money following a dead end.
 
It's this romantic notion of a lone researcher struggling against all odds can pry open the eyes of the scientific community to the truth that is responsible for the majority of quackery out there. This is where activists like Randi come in. Randi's efforts to challenge not only naive scientific misconduct but the psychological basis for entreprenurial quackery have been successful for the most part. With regard to the Fremer fiasco I think that Randi simply didn't care enough to dig deeper and carry through on the test. On the one hand this is absolutely deplorable, after all, the world must know that cables are a cynical sham!! On the other, he receives many proposals for tests and few of them ever materialize or are even written up. Audiophoolery is a largely benign phenomenon which doesn't cause injuries, deaths or defraud families out of their livelihoods (I hope).

 

[xnor]

I'm not sure there even was science involved in the buyers decision making "processes". Remember:
Quote:

using the device properly is more of an art than a science

 
If anything it was pseudoscientific marketing speak.
 
And the guy behind it all when challenged over the device's effectiveness supposedly said:
Quote:

the device did "exactly what it's meant to ... it makes money."

 

[anetode]

Simple fraud then. I'm glad that guy wound up in prison.

 

[xnor]

Me too, but it's shocking that it took so many years.

 

[billybob_jcv]

My father-in-law was really into dousing. He would do it all the time and with several different devices. He had two favorites, both homemade from long acetylene welding rods. One was simply two "L" shaped rods, the short legs about 6 inches and the long legs about 12 inches. He held the rods loosely in each fist with the long leg pointed forward. He would then walk around the property, and when he crossed over the edge of an underground aquifer (he claimed it worked best with moving water), the two rods move would and cross each other in-front of him (X marks the spot!). The second "device" was REALLY weird - he would wind the welding rod around a dowel to make a "bob" at the end. He would keep a "handle" of wire that was about 18 inches back from the "bob". He would then hold the handle with the "bob" out in front of him, and when he walked over the underground water, the "bob" would begin bouncing - sometimes quite vigorously.

Now - here's were it gets REALLY weird...

He did not just douse for water. Just like the OP's story, he claimed he could douse for darn near anything. He would hold a glass of water is one hand, and his dousing bob in the other, and he could find water. If he held a jar of oil, he would find oil. A jar of gold - well you get the idea...

Now being the skeptical engineer that I am, I tried a few experiments with him. I had him switch hands. I had him close his eyes. I held the dousing bob and had him put his hand around mine. I didn't try to do a real scientific trial - but I couldn't get him to obviously fail. I just laughed and let it go - he was a kooky old redneck that also happened to own a lot of guns, so I decided not to try very hard to make him look foolish.

Of course, I don't believe it - but I will say that someone that has a practiced schtick - and more importantly - actually believes in his own powers, really is quite entertaining!