I do still love how this is basically a continuation of the ‘Randi has no intention of letting anyone win/doesn’t have the money/etc’ argment used by so many to explain why they haven’t claimed the prize.

The man has posted the rules, clearly and for anyone to see. If he were to violate those rules, someone could sue the foundation.

The money exists, and isn’t even in his hands, but rather is being held by the foundation. Yes, it’s a bond, held by a financial institution, but that’s the way foundations hold money, rather than stuffin the entire million under their mattress.

Theoretically, the chalenge could be won without Randi being in any way, shape or form involved. His opinion of someone or somethign makes no difference.

Meh.. Dunno why I bother. Everyone here already knows how it’s set up and the nutters won’t listen. They’d much rather rant and froth from the safety of their own world where they’re always right.

um....."sept" means “seven” in french, not september. “Neuf” is nine. “Septembre” is September.

Just saying. :roll

Well, according to information on the Main Page here, the Million-Dollar Challenge will be discontinued in March 2010.  The money in the trust fund will then revert to the people who set up the fund, for them to do whatever they decide with it.

So not only has James Randi and the rest of them not “lost control” of the thing (if he had, he wouldn’t be able to plan out when to end it and what to do with the money and to continue the thing for several more years), but they’re not losing the money either.

Meh. It’s not like it has to make sense, Acci.. The nutter has decided that this is proof of their end time predictions, and nothing short of a crowbr to the skull is gonna change that..

Nutters jut don’t shift views, despite proof.

But people who are undecided can shift to one view or the other.  By us showing how Drmabus is in error, that makes those undecided people less likely to follow in his errors.

Besides which, it’s fun. 

True. I’d like to hope that there wouldn’t be anyone undecided between reality and raving luncacy, but I suppose there are.

I sometimes imagine some little guy off in the middle of the Kalahari Desert who just got a new computer for his hut from his nephew who went to the Big City a few years ago.  And a power generator.  And a satellite Internet connection.

He logs on for the first time, and is lost in awe and wonder as he discovers the amazing wealth of knowledge that is online.  Naturally, he proceeds immediately here to the MoH, since this place is obviously the highlight of the Internet (and has all the good-lookin’ girls).  And the first thing he sees here is “How we stopped James Randi’s Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge”.  So he wonders to himself, is it true that these people stopped that?

Personally, I’d be responding to the ‘how to get sand out of your crack’ emails first, if I was in the middle of the desert.

It’s interesting that drmabus has a point, though not the one he thinks.

Randi’s already pointed out that the constant need to defend the MDC against throngs of people who think they can just pick out the right card or make a pair of sticks cross over a glass of water and walk off with the money is a contributing factor to his decision. As are the constant rebuttals that must be put out to the very vocal accusations that are made as excuses for why someone did not take/pass the challenge.

Clearly, if any of the loons could demonstrate their ‘gifts’ under controlled conditions they would probably have done so and won the money. It’s the fact that they can only make their ‘powers’ work when there is insufficient care taken against (self)deception that is so telling.

The self-deceiving won’t understand this of course, and either excuse their failures or argue that the controls interfere, the deliberately deceitful will catch on more quickly that their usual trickery is unlikely to pass unnoticed. Hence the cries of fraud are usually loudest from the fraudulent.

Good point DB. Of course, one of my favorite lines from Randi concerns those who claim that their powers won’t work under observation or in the presence of skeptics.

“The ability to detect the presence of observers or skeptics is itself a valid claim.”

Robin Bobcat - 23 January 2008 06:29 AM

Good point DB. Of course, one of my favorite lines from Randi concerns those who claim that their powers won’t work under observation or in the presence of skeptics.

“The ability to detect the presence of observers or skeptics is itself a valid claim.”

Damn, I can point out skeptics all over the place here.  I guess thats why my psychic powers don’t seem to work when anyone else is around.  I guess I’ll retire to my room where I can sit in the dark and manifest $1000 bills. *insert deranged laughter*