http://web.randi.org/the-million-dollar-challenge.html
1.1 How long has this Challenge been open?
The Challenge was first introduced in 1964 when James Randi offered
1,000 to anyone who could demonstrate paranormal powers in a controlled test. The prize has since grown to One Million Dollars.
1.2 How many people have applied for the Challenge?
Between 1964 and 1982, Randi declared that over 650 people had applied. Between 1997 and 2005, there had been a total of 360 official, notarized applications. New applications for the Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge continue to be received every month.
1.3 Has anyone ever passed the preliminary test?
No.
1.4 Has anyone taken a formal test?
Yes. However, the vast majority of applicants and claimants for the Million Dollar Challenge have not taken a formal test, because none of them have passed the preliminary phase of the Challenge.
![1,000 of his own money to the first person who could offer proof of the paranormal. During a live radio panel discussion, James Randi was challenged by a parapsychologist to "put [his] money where [his] mouth is", and Randi responded by offering to pay](http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/wp-content/ql-cache/quicklatex.com-ec92d1d7fdf8658bb2bb4d7995abaab6_l3.png "Rendered by QuickLaTeX.com")
1,000 to anyone who could demonstrate paranormal powers in a controlled test. The prize has since grown to One Million Dollars.I would generally think in light of this, paranormal phenomenon are mostly non-existent. I have a lot of skilled gambling friends (some have made millions) and the question of prayer or paranormal phenomenon occasionally comes up when they consider it as a possible angle to make more money. The consensus is that no skilled gambler made money using the paranormal or prayers.
Nevertheless, there are surprisingly modest numbers of Christians who are skilled gamblers who use mathematics to extract advantage in the gambling world. Perhaps the most known names are Doyle Brunson (became a Christian after miraculous healing) and Kevin Blackwood, the others are anonymous for good reasons.
It doesn’t seem that miracles follow any formula, but it seems there are events way out of expectation which some could call miraculous, imho. There was some paranormal phenomenon in my family. I don’t like to talk about it too much because it was creepy. Materialism was in many ways a safer place to be psychologically for me, and hence my interest in science rather than seances, but I think there is a sinister spiritual realm out there for sure which generally eludes the scientific method.
If there is an active spiritual realm out there, it is taking great pains to elude James Randi’s challenge, otherwise James Randi is right, there is no paranormal realm. Analogously, if there is an Intelligent Designer, like paranormal phenomenon, He is avoiding direct means of communicating His existence and has chosen to leave designs and remain mostly out of notice ever since the act of creating the designs. If the Intelligent Designer communicated through the heavens as in the account of Moses, we might not be having the debates we’re having…
I think highly of James Randi’s challenge and for its exposure of many charlatans. I think most religious beliefs are rooted in superstition, coincidence, irrationality and gullibility. I especially saw the casinos profiting from these human weaknesses, and I admit I indirectly profited by other people’s gullibility since I preyed on the casinos who preyed on the gullible.
That said, neither can I run away from personal experience or observation. I briefly met astronaut Charles Duke when he spoke at Campus Crusade for Christ. He walked on the moon, was an Annapolis Naval Academy and MIT Engineering graduate. He was a skilled fighter pilot and then found fame and fortune before becoming a Christian. After his conversion, he testifies of having his prayer for a blind girl answered by when her sight was restored. He probably wouldn’t pass the James Randi challenge either, but neither, given Duke’s career accomplishments, does he have much incentive to be making up fanciful stories, especially in an increasingly anti-Christian climate.
The most successful gamblers I know hate superstition and use of intuition, they love cold hard numbers and rationality. But still, many of the highly successful professional gambler’s I know are split over whether they believe in the paranormal or not. It seems this question is something all their high powered math cannot conclusively answer given the little evidence we have in hand.
Sometimes absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
Sal,
Even more oddly, he designs in a way that mimics unguided evolution.
If there is a Designer, he’s either hiding or else has some unknown reason(s) for acting in a way that makes him appear to be absent.
Disagree.
Agree!
In a Bayesian or Laplacian framework it is. Even Hempel’s paradox ( don’t make me do the limerick) can be used to show every natural thing can support an absence of the supernatural.
Sal,were you following “Barry’s bomb”?
Rich,
No, sorry. You know me better than that, I follow only my writings (just kidding). 🙂
Sal
stcordova,
In it, KeithS brings up Theobald’s statistical congruence argument. I think that definitively shows that a designer must behave as we would expect evolution to.
Rich:
Sal,
In that thread (and in ten or so subsequent threads at UD) I argued that unguided evolution fits the evidence of the objective nested hierarchy literally trillions of times better than ID — even ID in its guided evolution form.
Rich:
Though Theobald himself did not draw that conclusion, for unknown reasons. He was merely arguing for common descent and against separate creation.
Keiths,
Here are arguments by a tenured associate professor of biology at a secular university who got her PhD at an Ivy League School (UPenn). She argues against bacterial to eukaryote evolution and acharial to eukaryote evolution.
https://answersingenesis.org/biology/microbiology/information-processing-differences-between-bacteria-and-eukarya/
and
https://answersingenesis.org/biology/microbiology/information-processing-differences-between-archaea-and-eukarya/
She’s probably the next runner up for getting expelled for what she said. Her co-author, Jeff Tomkins already left his job as a secular geneticist.
Anyway thanks for your response about the Designer hiding. I actually agree that if the Intelligent Designer exists, He is hiding. I’d go so far to say, He’s really enjoying playing a game of hide and seek (so to speak).
There’s no shortage of explanations as to why people think they have had supernatural/paranormal experiences that don’t invoke supernatural/paranormal phenomena.
Sal,
Even if she were correct, it wouldn’t affect my argument. The bacteria are only one branch of the phylogenetic tree in question.
Sal,
Doesn’t that create some cognitive dissonance for you? As a Christian, you believe that God wants us to find him, correct?
I call bullshit. You say “next runner up for getting expelled for what she said”, but there can’t be a ‘next’ unless there was already a ‘first’. So who is that ‘first’? Tomkins? If you are indeed saying that Tomkins is the ‘first’ you implicitly referred to, how the heck would you know why he “left his job as a secular geneticist”? Alternately, if the ‘first’ you’re implicitly referring to is, in fact, not Tomkins, care to name any specific names?
You know, Cordova, the invisible and the nonexistent look awfully similar…
He may be hiding, but he must also have a wickedly cruel sense of humour. How else would you explain placing an internal organ (testicles) on the outside of the body? Unless it was just to increase the viewership of America’s Funniest Home Videos.
Indeed: http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/?p=27224
It’s relatively easy to find out what’s wrong with the Randi challenge on the internet. He’s a stage magician with a huge personal and financial interest in the outcome of his “tests”, none of which are even claimed to be scientific in nature. Nor does he claim to have an impartial panel of judges competent to judge the results. Indeed, Randi can sweep away any applicant he wishes simply by dismissing their initial claim. When the contest says that “mutual protocols” are agreed to, what that means is that if the applicant wishes to move forward, they agree to the protocols JREF establishes or they can go home. The applicant has no say-so in establishing the protocols; they can either agree to them or go home.
http://newsvoice.se/2010/05/02/james-randi-and-his-one-million-dollar-challenge-fraud/
The million-dollar challenge accomplishes exactly what it was set up to accomplish – proivde a vehicle for Randi’s publicity and personal gain, and to serve as a rhetorical device for anti-psi, anti-supernatural materialists – exactly as it has apparently done in stcordova’s case. “If there is such a thing, why hasn’t anyone collected Randi’s million dollars?” … as if it has been established that the Randi challenge is fair, competently judged in a non-biased manner, and in any remote way scientific.
Randi’s challenge is a rhetorical, materialist meme. Nothing more.
Tthe challenge is not set up to be an honest judge of anything. If it were, there would be an insistence on transparency, scientific protocols and a mutually-agreed panel of neutral judges.
Psi and what has been commonly referred to as the supernatural has been scientifically studied at least since the time of William Crookes in the 1870’s. There has been ongoing scientific research into psi, and the “supernatural”, such as mediumship, ever since and is currently ongoing.
Why would anyone care what a self-serving, self-promoting stage magician with a vested interest in the outcome of his rigged “tests” says, when there’s plenty of scientific research available? Why would anyone advance such hucksterism as anything of merit when making up one’s mind, when there is plenty of scientific research to examine?
Complete and utter bullshit. Anyone who wishes to challenge Randi is free to demonstrate their powers in any forum of their choosing. If anyone manages to put on a convincing show in a controlled venue, Randi would be forced to give them a public trial.
The terms have to be agreed on by both parties.
The simple fact is that spoon benders and others cannot survive a test. Particularly in an age when everyone carries a video camera.
If I could bend spoons for real (without, obviously, just grabbing each end and yanking), or reliably read minds, I’m sure I’d be more than happy to just do it, under whatever conditions he likes, for an easy million. He might renege, but so what? Still worth a punt.
It does not require onerous conditions to test spoon bending. Just a simple vertical stand to hold the spoon so no one can touch it. A glass or plastic bell jar over it to prevent cheating.
No go for it. Bend it with video cameras rolling, and Randi would not be able to deny it.
No, not everyone. He’ll harden some hearts soften others.
and
It surely seems there are mysteries in the universe, but the universe is optimized for scientific discovery if society is persistent.
But, in terms of what I believe, I’ve said it before, when making life choices we often make the most important choices with incomplete, uncertain information. We are in effect wagering we are right.
My estimate of the data says Pascal’s wager is favorable. You may interpret otherwise, and I respect that, but I really really don’t think life is a mindless accident. Maybe if the Origin of Life were the only miracle that humans might deduce via inference, then it would be enough for me to believe there is a God.
I don’t mean to be harsh, and I’ve always been somewhat a closet materialist, but how much better would my life be if there is no God and I were a convinced atheist like PZ Myers who calls himself “The Happy Atheist”? He doesn’t strike me as being happy, generous and caring.
James Randi might be right most of the time, but if astronaut Charles Duke’s prayer for that blind girl resulted in a real miracle, then I might be missing out if I were an atheist. I think I’ve seen some prayers answered myself. If I’m interpreting things wrong, how much will I really lose out on? I’d be 100% with the atheists if OOL were the expected outcome of natural processes, but it is not. It looks like a miracle, and until proven otherwise, I prefer to cast my lot and wager with God.
We don’t even need James Randi. A gambler playing poker with psychic ability would obliterate the poker tours. A blackjack player would no longer have to count cards or shuffle track etc. A stock market trader could use clairvoyance to place huge derivative bets on the market and clean it out, etc.
Sal,
You OP seems a triffle naive. I could offer a million dollars to anyone who can prove that gravity is real. And no one will ever claim the prize, so is gravity not real?
Randi foundation decides who gets to be tested, who passes the initial phase, and who he “just doesn’t have time for.” Why would you assume he is sincere? Have you ever read about how for Rupert Sheldrakes experiment on dogs knowing their owners are coming home, Randi claimed one of the cameramen for the 60 minutes episode told him personally that he was was tipping off the experimenter. The cameraman completely denies this, and says they were all stunned by the experiment.
This isn’t the only record of dishonesty from Randi.
Furthermore, its doubtful that his foundation even has a million dollars to give if someone could get past his screening, as was discussed in another thread (Keiths poor understanding of financial statements notwithstanding).
So anyone really giving credence to Randis challenge is simply being played by a con artist. He is a phony science skeptic, no different than Dawkins, SGU, guerilla skeptics, Lawrence Kraus, Jerry Coyne,…..these people care nothing about truth.
stcordova,
And how much money could a dog which knows his owner is coming home earn?
You must watch a lot of television if you think the only way some physic cognition could work, is being able to tell who is going to win a poker hand. This is not Bewitched.
Allan Miller,
Ok, you can bend spoons let’s say, and you do it under any conditions he likes, fine.
First condition, you write to me five times, and each time I say, sorry, you have to wait in line, might be a few years.
Next, ok, I need you to send me a video of you bending spoons to show me what your technique is.
Next I tell you that video is not clear enough, make another.
Wait another year.
Ok, I finally agree to let you past the next step, fly to Detriot on your own dime, during my conference and I will give you ten minutes to discuss the proposal further.
Ok, sorry, didn’t like your proposal, send a new one. I am James Randi, I am a busy man, but I will try to get to it.
Ok, I am ready to talk to your staff now, how many do you have? Oh, none, well, then you are going to need to pay my assistants to set-up the experiment. Please send deposit.
Ok, here is how it is going to work. You can’t be in the same room as the spoons. But you need to be in the same room as the spoons, Oh, no I am sorry that is unacceptable. You might touch them when no one is looking.
Did you send that deposit again? No no, I am sorry, we are going to have to meet in Sao Paulo Brazil to discuss this again. And I am going to need another video, please do one with 4 camera angles instead of three, I couldn’t see clearly…..
What, you can’t make it to Brazil?
Oh look, Allan is just another phony who claims they can bend a spoon, what do you know.
Phoodo, one does not have to go through Randi to demonstrate psychic powers. But now that everyone has a video camera, the powers have dried up.
stcordova said:
Or, such capacities and commodities don’t operate the way stcordova happens to think they should work. You know, like anti-theists who think god ought to behave a certain way, and if that behavior is not expressed they way they think it ought be visible in the world, then it is safe to conclude that no god exists.
stcordova, have you read any of the research on psi or other “supernatural” commodities?
Elizabeth,
There are no shortage of explanations for why people think accidental Darwinian evolution is true, without Darwinian evolution being true.
WJM,
I believe there is a paranormal realm, I just don’t think it can be accessed on our whims, and that’s why James Randi succeeds in his test, and that’s why, even though I’ve had paranormal experiences, I still had to use statistical methods in casinos rather than trying to use psychic powers that seem to have been in our family.
I believe God answers prayers. I’ve prayed in a casino, but it didn’t seem to do much over expected value. There is a joke, “what’s the difference between praying in church and in a casino? When you pray in a casino, you really mean it!” 🙂
Sal
petrushka,
Wait, so now you have just moved the goalpost, and accepted that Randi can easily bullshit people into believing his little hoax. I am glad we got past that first lie.
Now, how did the dogs know when their owners were coming home, its on film? Oh, but they didn’t bend a spoon the way Petrushka says they should, so look, its been proved once again its fake!
Do you know the Mexican government hired Uri Geller to spy on enemies, and to use his mind to analyze suspected targets against the government?
How much effort should someone go to, to convince you? What is the payoff exactly, to get you to say, Oh, now I believe?
stcordova said:
So, blind faith in your personal view, thus no reason to even look for the psi/supernatural research or to actually look into JREF, Randi and the challenge. Check.
stcordova,
But that’s not why Randi succeeds in his test! You don’t even know about the standards of his test!
His million dollar challenge is for exactly the purpose of making people like you believe that he has shown something. Its a fake ad campaign. Do you believe in gravity? I will give you a million dollars to prove it.
Oh, gravity isn’t real!
He never accepted any such things. Try and be more truthful, Phoodoo. You have a bad habit of misrepresentation.
Isn’t it funny how back in the day when there were very few people and no reliable recording devices miracles were all over the place with monks flying and what-not, but nowadays with dense populations with on-demand digital memorialization capabilities they’ve all gone away? HmmmMmmmmmm.
I’ll bet you’ve read the summary of them before the paywall, Phoodoo?
Richardthughes,
I bet you can’t read.
Do you phoodoo? How much?
*moving threads*
Phoodoo: “You OP seems a triffle naive. I could offer a million dollars to anyone who can prove that gravity is real. And no one will ever claim the prize, so is gravity not real?
Let’s flip your offer on its head. I will offer $1,000,000 for anyone to prove that gravity is NOT real. All they have to do is jump off the CN tower and not die.
Arcatia said:
And there is the point, exactly. You aren’t asking them to prove that gravity isn’t real, you’re asking them to jump off the CN tower and not die. The two are not remotely the same thing.
The challenge doesn’t ask for anyone to scientifically demonstrate a psi or supernatural capacity; the challenge is for them to demonstrate it in whatever manner Randi sees fit, as if Randi knows how best to test a commodity he claims doesn’t even exist!
The challenge is a blatant, self-serving fraud run by a huckster stage magician serving his own interests.
Acartia,
Great, except that is in no way comparable to the offer Randi makes, so you miss the point. Randi’s offer is totally insincere. As William said, if he was sincere, then let an impartial third party decide the criteria, and who gets accepted to try.
Of course he won’t do that.
Edit: I wrote this at the same time as William, we both noted the same point. I think it should have been obvious to Arcatia that if someone wants to prevent someone from proving something, and they make the rules, its pretty easy to do.
William, you are hopelessly naive. They get to choose what “supernatural” thing they do. If they started flying around the room, what would he do? How would he spin that?
It would be trivially easy for a flying person to take Randi’s money. The special pleading for something that isn’t there is precious, though boys.
William is simply lying. The person gets to choose what supernatural thing they can do. Randi negotiates the controls required to prevent cheating.
Anyone having actual powers is free to go on any local or national TV show to demonstrate their powers. Anyone who can put on a good show will get Randi’s attention.Why do you suppose, in this age of cell phone video, people are not uploading videos of flying priests or people who can bend spoons without touching them?
Why is it that the more ability we have to record such phenomena, the less of them we have to record?
Strange, because we have almost unlimited videos of police taking video cameras from people filming police taking video cameras from people recording police taking video cameras.
Odd things that actually exist get recorded all the time. But supernatural shit has gone the way of Nessie and UFOs.
petrushka:
Silly petrushka. Everyone versed in psychic phenomena knows it’s because recording devices nullify the levitational force field. It’s science.
keiths,
Fortunately the designer made it kind of obvious…he made atoms, and gravity, and electromagnetism, and light photons, and centrifugal force, ….
It is kind of strange though that he never anticipated that there would STILL be humans stupid enough to not see all these things.
phoodoo,
Your comment is incoherent. What were you trying to say?
Why doesn’t the designer pop in any more. Is it because he’s embarrassed by his followers and their very low honesty levels?
keiths:
Sal:
Doesn’t that create even more cognitive dissonance for you? A God who hardens Pharaoh’s heart and then punishes him for it is not acting lovingly. A God who then inflicts plagues upon Pharaoh’s innocent subjects is even worse.
Do you believe that God is perfectly loving, or do you believe that he’s the douchebag depicted in the Bible?
keiths,
Here we go, another keiths hates baby Jesus rant. He never misses an opportunity.
I’ve started a new thread in response to Sal’s comment concerning Pascal’s Wager.