James Randi gets clarified on audio biz

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

>
> Under these circumstances, would you take up the challenge?
>

Yes! If I was certain of my claim.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"(In the case of the Bedini Clarifier, one might argue that the company
behind it isn't making paranormal claims, but from Randi's point of view
-- and mine -- such a device would have to have true paranormal aspects
to actually do anything other than lighten buyers' wallets, and
therefore it is appropriate for Randi to make noise about the $1M being
available to anybody who can actually demonstrate that the gadget works.)"

Which is also the case with various expressions of perpetual motion
machines with which he applies the pledge also, no paranormal claims, only
pseudoscientific claims as to mechanism of explanation.

In another of his pieces, stereophile was said to have entered into talks
to test the claims for the Tice clock for which they had reviewed it as
having made a positive audible effect. They abruptly withdrew from the
process. The pseudoscientific claims as to mechanism of explanation were
likewise at issue there also, not paranormal powers.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 9/14/04 7:43 PM, in article ci7vml012n3@news2.newsguy.com,
"outsor@city-net.com" <outsor@city-net.com> wrote:

> "(In the case of the Bedini Clarifier, one might argue that the company
> behind it isn't making paranormal claims, but from Randi's point of view
> -- and mine -- such a device would have to have true paranormal aspects
> to actually do anything other than lighten buyers' wallets, and
> therefore it is appropriate for Randi to make noise about the $1M being
> available to anybody who can actually demonstrate that the gadget works.)"
>
> Which is also the case with various expressions of perpetual motion
> machines with which he applies the pledge also, no paranormal claims, only
> pseudoscientific claims as to mechanism of explanation.

So, if you were to say "boy 'item X' seems to work but I have no idea how"
Randi's callenge would not apply to you?


>
> In another of his pieces, stereophile was said to have entered into talks
> to test the claims for the Tice clock for which they had reviewed it as
> having made a positive audible effect. They abruptly withdrew from the
> process. The pseudoscientific claims as to mechanism of explanation were
> likewise at issue there also, not paranormal powers.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"So, if you were to say "boy 'item X' seems to work but I have no idea
how"
Randi's callenge would not apply to you?"

He doesn't test for the validity of the claimed cause, only that the
claimed result can be demonstrated. For a perpetual motion machine that
energy in is less then energy out, that a tice clock can be heard when in
the circuit, that keys can be bent without explanation, that obvious
physical disorders healed, or any number of such things. The test is
designed to maximise every opportunity for the effect to be demonstrated.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

outsor@city-net.com wrote in message
news:<ci7vml012n3@news2.newsguy.com>...
> In another of [Randi's] pieces, stereophile was said to have
> entered into talks to test the claims for the Tice clock for which
> they had reviewed it as having made a positive audible effect.

This is not correct. James Randi didn't contact anyone at Stereophile
about testing the Tice TPT Clock (which on his website he originally
referred to as the "Tate" Clock). You can find my comments on the Tice
Clock and the Peter Belt devices at
http/www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/787/ and Stereophile's review
coverage at http/www.stereophile.com//accessoryreviews/784 , while
J. Gordon Holt's report on the Belt devices is published at
http/www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/110/ .

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

 

[lasse]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Stereophile_Editor@Compuserve.com (John Atkinson) wrote in message news:<ciaghl0mgm@news3.newsguy.com>...
>
> This is not correct. James Randi didn't contact anyone at Stereophile
> about testing the Tice TPT Clock (which on his website he originally
> referred to as the "Tate" Clock).

I suppose that you are right since the quote from Randi.org says that
Tice Clock was not mentioned when Randi contacted you:

"Please refer to www.randi.org/jr/073004an.html#3 and go to the item
"THE JREF MILLION IS SURELY WON" to learn of the items — the "Shakti
Stones" and P.W.B. Electronics' "Electret Foil" and "Red X Pen" — that
I am referring to here."

So, we can probably assume that Randi has contacted your magazine about
these other products including Shakti Stones?

Lasse Ukkonen

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Stereophile_Editor@Compuserve.com (John Atkinson) wrote in message news:<ciaghl0mgm@news3.newsguy.com>...
> outsor@city-net.com wrote in message
> news:<ci7vml012n3@news2.newsguy.com>...
> > In another of [Randi's] pieces, stereophile was said to have
> > entered into talks to test the claims for the Tice clock for which
> > they had reviewed it as having made a positive audible effect.
>
> This is not correct. James Randi didn't contact anyone at Stereophile
> about testing the Tice TPT Clock (which on his website he originally
> referred to as the "Tate" Clock).

Maybe the messages were lost. In any event, now's your chance to get
in touch with Randi, and arrange to collect your million bucks.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

lasse_ukkonen@hotmail.com (Lasse) wrote in message
news:<cid6ch06os@news4.newsguy.com>...
> "Please refer to www.randi.org/jr/073004an.html#3 and go to the item
> "THE JREF MILLION IS SURELY WON" to learn of the items ? the "Shakti
> Stones" and P.W.B. Electronics' "Electret Foil" and "Red X Pen" ? that
> I am referring to here."
>
> So, we can probably assume that Randi has contacted your magazine about
> these other products including Shakti Stones?

James Randi hasn't contacted me, or anyone else at Stereophile about these
so-called "tweaks," which is confirmed when you look at the published list
of writers Randi _has_ contacted. Yes, Wes Phillips who occasionally
contributes to Stereophile is on Randi's list, but Wes hasn't actually
written about any of these tweaks" for Stereophile.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile