E-mail Exchange with Rechey Davidson
Back to Challenge Activity
We were alerted by the James Randi organization that Rechey Davidson wanted to contact us. After some false starts we finally made e-mail contact.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:28:29 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>Thanks for your response. Sorry for having a "bad" subject line. I was just told to contact you. Mr. Kramer has my application and letter of explanation of what ability I have. His letter said the application was accepted for preliminary testing. His letter seemed to indicate he was forwarding you the necessary information. Am I just needed to contact you to arrange for testing. What is the next step now? Do we meet or what? From the Challenge Instructions, it sounds like you want me to resubmit my description to you. If so, do I just e-mail you or mail you a letter? Do I tell you what I can do and you draft something back?
Briefly, I have been able to dowse maps of people's homes (Or other locations) where they have lost specific items and have been able to tell them where the item is. They have, so far, been able to verify they found the item where I said it was. This has happened even if I have never been to their home. Do I just need to submit more detail and suggest how to test this or what? Thanks. Rechey Davidson
We responded
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 05:27:28 -0500 From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org> To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net> CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
Thanks for the additional information. This helps a lot toward getting things moving.
First: We are not in any way associated with the James Randi organization. We don't exchange information with them on a regular basis. Anything you send to us will likely never find its way into their hands. We have our own prize, and we will work with you individually.
You seem to be saying you can find things by dowsing maps. Is that what you want to claim? If so, we can test that. Do you want us to set up a test to have you locate some hidden object? We can do that quickly. Can you come to Dallas for a test?
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:15:15 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>Yes, I can come to Dallas easily, just about anytime. I live in Quinlan which is between Greenville and Terrell, some 25 miles from Rockwall. My telephone number is 903-356-0429 if you need to talk direct. When someone has lost an item at home (sometimes even years before) I have them draw a floor plan of their house and a complete description of the item (For example, "find a ring" is not a good description, it has to be something like "the one-carat diamond gold wedding band that Grandpa John gave to Grandma Mary" etc.) The more detailed the description the easier it is to locate. I have found items with less detail though. At times people have not believed me, so I have found things for them that they knew where the item was and just wanted to test me. I have had times when someone didn't believe me and never went and even looked, but later told me one day they were looking for something else where I had indicated and found the item originally dowsed exactly where I said. I have a couple of written comments if you are interested.
The test could be for something actually lost if someone is missing something (since that's what I have ACTUALLY done,) and/or it could be a floor plan of someone's house and I could try to dowse for known items. Like I said above, I have done that, also. Just tell me what to do next. I am available most anytime, except tomorrow (Tuesday). The test should probably be of a "small" area, such as a house, rather than a "large" area such as a park or field since that seems to be harder to verify how close I mark the item. I have located a ring in someone's back yard, although the yard was no larger than the house. Awaiting further instructions. Rechey
A further question, if you are not associated with "Randi" and don't supply them with information, how does your testing me relate to their "Challenge"? Do you just tell them I passed (or failed, of course) your test and they go from there? Thanks again. Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up) Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 19:35:46 -0500 From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org> To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net> CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
Yes, we can set up a test. I had in mind something larger than a house, just to make it interesting. I will consult with the other underwriters and see what we can do.
There is a problem with "something lost." If it's really lost, we may never be able to prove it ever existed. I am going to propose that you be required to find something we have hidden.
Testing with us has nothing to do with the Randi challenge. I am sure they referred you to us just to lighten their load. Specifically, I don't think they want to even bother with you unless you can pass our test. As to how Randi will know if you passed our test, it will be easy. All he has to do is pick up the following issue of the New York Times. It will be on the front page. You will have accomplished the impossible, something that has never been done in all the history of the world.
Please let us know if you are willing to locate a hidden object. Also, let us know your claimed degree of success. If you claim 100% success, we can be finished quickly. If you claim only about 1%, then be ready to stay for the long haul.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 23:41:59 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>Okay. I have found "placed" items before. I was stressing "lost", because that is how my ability seems to work best. But if one part of the tests is a lost item, we wouldn't have to prove it ever existed if I missed would we? Finding it is what would be the proof of an ability, wouldn't it? ("Scientifically", I guess, is what you are referring to.) What I meant was like for instance, you or one of the other underwriters have something YOU know you had, but can't find. We all would have to believe that the person really had the item being searched for and if I found it, that should show my ability. I would like to try to find something lost for one or more of you even if you can't use it for the official testing (unless, of course, I surprise you by what I find!) -- just to show you! My main success has been in house-size areas. The only problem I see with a "much" larger area is being able to pinpoint the spot I mark. If there is enough "landmarks," it would probably be easy to verify. I probably can show and tell you better what I mean whenever we do meet. As far as my success level, it is hard to tell exactly because some people I have dowsed for, never told me whether they found the item or not even though I agreed to try again if they wanted. Of the ones that have responded, I would say I have been very successful, maybe even 85% or better (I've never kept "stats"). Overall, allowing for non responders as misses, it would probably be closer to 70%+.
We responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:53:20 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
The problem with "lost" items is I don't have any, and I don't know of anybody who does. I know where all my stuff is. So, it's going to have to be some concealed object.
Can you dowse over a city map? There would be no problem finding the object. You would identify the street intersection where we have placed the object. There would be no searching for the object once you arrived at the correct location. It would be in plain view.
For a house search we would provide you with a plan view of the house. All you would have to do is tell in which room the object is located. The object would be in plain view. Since you claim 75% accuracy, we would, perhaps, allow you 60 tries, and you would have to be right at least 45 times.
Be very sure of your claimed accuracy. That is what will be tested. If you claim 75% and you only score 74.99%, that's a failure.
I have had some response from the other underwriters, so we may be able to set up a test in short order. Please state your claim in concrete and unambiguous terms to get us started. Once you have done that, we will write up the test protocol.
All pertinent correspondence related to this test will be published on our Web site and in our newsletter.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:28:18 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>I have never dowsed a city map as such, but it would seem possible. I guess since I haven't done that before, I would want to claim a slightly less accuracy rate, say, 70%. What I would have to do probably is locate an "area" on the city map, then make a close up map of that area and redowse it to insure which interesection. I'll practice on that aspect while waiting to hear from you. For the house it would be no problem I'm sure. When you talk about the items being in plain sight, do I go pick up the object or do you go with me to the site, or what ???? Do you "hide" an object and tell me to find out what it is, or tell me what object to find and me tell you where it is? The second example is what I have been able to do. I usually determine what a person wants to find and then tell them where to look. I usually don't go to the site, but I have a couple of times. Thanks again. Rechey Davidson.
We responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 20:35:50 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
I have received additional feed-back from the other underwriters.
We will let you decide which you want to do. I will advise you to practice whatever method you choose before coming for a real test.
In the case of a house, the object would be in plain sight, in a box that's in the middle of the floor. You would stand outside the house and tell us which room. We will mark that room on the map then go inside together. We will look in the box to see if you scored a hit or a miss. Please practice this to make sure you can do it.
If you don't need to be near the house, then you may not need to come to Dallas. I will make a map of my house and send it to you by mail. You then tell me which room the object is in, and I will let you know whether you have a hit or a miss.
There is an additional item we need to clear up before we go any further. You must be of legal age, able to enter into a contract on your own. Please let us know your age or other circumstances (married, etc.) that will qualify you as able to enter into a contract.
All pertinent correspondence related to this test will be published.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 11:03:12 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>I believe the house search idea would be a better test of what I "do" than a city search. I usually dowse someone's floor plan for the "lost" (hidden) object. I've never tried an "intersection" test. I'd be glad to try a sample test of that, but I can't help but think the house floor plan test is a much more accurate test of my ability. Can you give me an example (as if we were starting the testing) of what you would do for the "intersection" test? Would you physically place some large/small object at a location and then say find the "object" we "hid" or would you maybe say we "hid" a white 2004 Ford Probe (or whatever) at some intersection in Plano, can you find it? I'm kind of interested in maybe trying that once out of curiousity just to see if I can do it, but dowsing houses/buildings is actually what I do. Is the "percentage" amount more important the higher the test or do you normally test for "low" percentages? You mentioned a 1% test would be a "long haul". Wouldn't any real test of ability have to be for more than a 50% rate to avoid lucky guessing? Sorry for all the questions, but I'm just trying to learn what all is involved. I hope I don't bother you too much. Thanks again Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 18:10:06 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
For a city map test we might tell you "Somebody wearing a red jacket is standing on a street corner in Dallas. He has your check. He will be there for the next hour, after that he's going to tear the check up and go home."
The percentage is what you claim. Suppose the house has 9 rooms. There's a 1/9 chance you will be right by pure luck. So, if you say you will score 0.12, slightly better than chance, we will have to run a large number of tests to verify you aren't just getting lucky. We will configure the test so you will have to be lucky to the tune of 1 in a billion to win by chance alone. You can see, that will take a large number of tests to demonstrate your ability if you only claim slightly better than chance.
However, if you say you can do it 100% of the time, then you would have to go maybe 15 hits in a row without missing. We can be done before lunch.
So, what do you claim? You have to tell us before we can get started. Don't use any words like "maybe." You have to be certain. You will define the test. Run some tests on your own to be sure you can do it.
All pertinent correspondence related to this test will be published.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 18:40:28 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>The way I have done this before for others is to have a reasonably accurate map of their house on a single sheet of paper. They ask where a "specific" item is. I then dowse the floor plan and mark the location. I would say I have been successful 70% of the time. I would prefer then to try the test in that manner. You could mail the map or I could meet you somewhere. My address is 10040 Private Road 3814, Quinlan, TX 75474. My number is 903-356-0429. I would simply need to know exactly what I'm looking for. For example, rather than a "ring", I would need to know I'm looking for a "gold wedding band with two diamonds", etc., etc. The better the description of the object, the easier it seems to be found.
I am 60 years old, Married for 37 years, have two children and one grandchild. I retired from IRS after 32 years service December 30, 1997. I have been dowsing since about 1985, when I learned how from a speaker at my metal detecting club. By dowsing, I have found such different things as a $5.00 gold coin, a 2 karat ring valued at (supposedly) $10,000; a "Gameboy", multiple jewelry items together (such as in a jewelry box), a single lost ear-ring, a "retainer" for braces, etc. I hope this is the information needed.
I do not know "HOW" this works, but I have been able to find lost items for people by this method without ever going to their homes (and, on occasion, not even knowing where they live). I've been told it is everything from reading minds to demon possession (Ha)! It seems to be most accurate when helping others, or showing others how to dowse themselves. I am more interested in just trying these test than trying to prove "how good I am". I KNOW something works, because of how many times I've done it, regardless of what you can prove or disprove. I just appreciate the chance to try this under controlled conditions. For my own curiosity as well. "Randi" has said many people become embarrassed after failing these tests. That doesn't concern me. I know what I know. It works! Whether "on demand" or not. I hope I can at least make you think it might be possible.
How and where will the results be published?
Thanks, again. I'm ready when you are. Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 20:56:37 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
If you think you are ready to assess your abilities, we are interested in helping. If you can convince us you have something to demonstrate we will enter into a formal agreement.
These first trials will not count for anything. The only way to win the prize is to perform under controlled conditions after we enter into a formal agreement, which will require both our signatures.
I will send you a map of my house. Note:
1. My house is multi-level (two story). Is this a problem?
2. I will scan the map and send you the drawing as an image file by e-mail. Is there any problem with this?
3. I will make sure the object I have you dowse for is unique within my house. It will be a Nikon digital camera, which I will describe in more detail later.
4. I will give you the street address of my house, so you will know which house you are dowsing.
5. The object will not be in the specified location all the time. It will be there at an agreed time for a specified period of time. We can coordinate by telephone. Please tell me now how long the object needs to remain in place once a test starts.
6. You have to send your answers by e-mail.
7. I do not plan to provide instant feedback to you. If you need instant feedback let me know now.If you are not successful with this series of trials, we will be willing to discuss with you what you think the problem might be. If you decide to proceed at that point we will work with you to devise a new test.
Correspondence related to this test will be published.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 22:06:42 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>Yes, I'm ready to dowse a map. A two-story house is no problem as long as there is a map or layout of each floor. The e-mail maps will be fine as for as I know. If I have any trouble printing off a copy, I'll let you know. The camera should be a good target. The address is okay, but I have found items without even knowing the address if you want to make the trial a little harder and save the address for a later trial. Objects I have found have been lost for years down to almost "overnight" so I know of no minimum required time for the item to remain in one place. It should be no problem as long as we are on the same timeframe. As long as the item is in the location long enough for me to dowse it, should be sufficient. If you call me at say 5:00 and I say I will start dowsing by 6:00, I would think if it remained in one spot until at least 6:30, that would work. Email responses are okay and I would not need immediate feedback for this to work. So if you tell me later that is fine.
How quick do you need responses? If I start dowsing at 6:00, do you need an answer before a certain time or does it matter?
What I did one time was dowse a person's house to locate a particular item. As a further test, since I surprised her by being correct, she agreed to "move" the object at a certain time that night after she got home from work. After the agreed upon time, I redowsed her house and found the object. The next day, she was surprised because I had found it again. She then, while at work, called her mother and told her to move the object again. She watched while I redowsed again, and still found the object. So if you want to try something like that where I redowse the house within certain time ranges, I believe that would work, based on past experience. Just give a long enough timeframe in case something came up unexpectedly and I could not dowse immediately. Once every two hours should work.
I'm just thinking again. "Randi's" test is to be for "any" proof of paranormal ability. What is your test? Just whatever percent I suggest? The reason I'm wondering is because of you comment about "74.99% is a failure of 75%". Wouldn't that really just be a failure of my "estimate" rather than a failure of some paranormal event? For example, if the true odds of "lucky guesses" was only 15%, but I found the object 74 out 100 trials, why wouldn't that be a sample of a true paranormal event??? The fact I thought that with my skill I could hit it 75 out of 100, just means my "math" was wrong -- Not that I had NO paranormal skill. How do you rate the likelihood of an event being "paranormal"? I'm sorry about so many questions, but I am interested in this and just trying to find out what I can about this is done and tested. Thanks for you tolerance and answers.
Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 22:48:21 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
I will prepare the map and send it to you this weekend. I have a full work load the remainder of this week (that's Friday) so nothing much is going to happen until work lets out.
I will just be brief here:
The reason 74.99% fails if the claim is 75% is just that. If you can do 74.99%, then you have to say 74.99%. However, it you are sure you can do 75% it's OK to say you can only do 50%. We will test you for 50%, and if you get 74%, then you pass. You have to tell us what you can do. That is the claim we are testing.
Thanks much, and I will get back to you tomorrow.
Best regards,
John Blanton
I prepared a house floor plan and alerted Rechey Davidson
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2004 12:53:32 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
As I mentioned earlier this week, I have now prepared a drawing of the floor plan of my house. You may obtain the drawing through the link below:
http://www.ntskeptics.org/challenge/graphics/house.gif
The lower floor is on the left, and the upper floor is on the right. The drawing is the builder's plan, and there are a number of notations on the map that we do not need to be concerned with. I have labeled 12 of the rooms with large capital letters, "A" through "L", for easy identification. I have included two of the baths plus the main bedroom walk-in closet. The kitchen and breakfast areas are combined under one letter, "I". Particularly excluded are the stairs and the garage.
The object we will ask you to locate by dowsing the map is my camera. It is a Nikon Coolpix 800 digital camera. The link below is a picture of a camera like mine. It is not a picture of my camera, but my camera is the same model and is identical in all respects.
http://www.ntskeptics.org/challenge/graphics/camera.gif
I will place the camera within one of the areas I have identified on the house plan. The camera will remain there for the remainder of today, and then I will put it back in its case. Your task is to dowse the map and tell me by e-mail where the camera is. You will identify the location by the capital letter on the house plan. Please use wording of this form:
"The camera is in the room labeled x."
Of course, use the correct letter you come up with.
Also, please tell me what degree of success you claim. If, for example, you claim 100%, then we will expect you to be right all of the time. We will run several trials to eliminate chance success. You can't miss. If you claim 50% success, then we will have several tests, and you must be right 50% of the time or better. Anyhow, tell us what success rate you claim.
Remember, there are 12 identified areas, so you will be correct about 8% of the time by chance, alone. You need to claim significantly better than 8% success rate for this to be a meaningful test.
Also, keep in mind this is not an official test under controlled conditions. Also, we have not yet signed an agreement regarding this particular protocol, so the $12,000 prize is not at stake in these preliminary trials.
If there are any problems with the floor plan or the identification of the object (camera), the let me know immediately. We will address all your concerns, and we will not start until you are satisfied.
Best regards,
John Blanton
--
The North Texas Skeptics
http://www.ntskeptics.orgRechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up) Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 23:44:27 -0500 From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net) To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>Just got your email, it's 11:30 Sat. Night, so you have probably moved the object. and since I was unable to begin earlier in the day, I'll wait until we can "start" together. I will be out of town until Monday night late, so if it is okay, we can begin sometime Tuesday. Email or call me sometime Tuesday, or Monday evening as to when to start, and just let me know when you have placed the Camera and I'll try to continually watch the e-mail starting Monday night when I get back. I'll wait a little while before I begin in order to make sure the item has been there for at least a short while -- if that is all right with you. I can e-mail you to confirm I got your e-mail before I start if you want. Otherwise I will e-mail as soon as I get a "dowsing answer."
The map seems to be fine. For some reason, though, only half of "J, K, & L" printed and "I" did not print at all. This is no problem however, since I will make a hand drawing of that half and I have worked with hand-drawn maps before. The camera description seems fine, also.
As for the accuracy rate, I get the impression, that at least for the trial, I should use a lower percentage than I really believe I can do, SO I'll say, "I can be right '50%' of the time" to get this started. I "believe" higher, but I'll just claim 50% for now.
For repeat tests, will you just e-mail me each day to re-dowse, or what? Thanks again. I hope I'm not dragging this out too long for you, but we ended up at a holiday weekend. After this weekend, I probably can do daily tests if you like. Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2004 00:39:18 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
I will make sure the camera is in place all day Tuesday. Please feel free to dowse any time Tuesday.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 01:57:54 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>I'm back now. I'll dowse for the camera shortly after I get up. I'll e-mail you shortly thereafter along with the time I actually did the dowsing. Should I just e-mail you, or should I also include the people below that you keep "cc:ing"? I'm not sure what your plans are, but I would just as soon not know my success or failure rate until I have dowsed for the object a few times. Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 05:07:06 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
The camera has been in place since the beginning of the day (Central Standard Time) and will be in place all day. Please e-mail your response some time today. Let's also run another test tomorrow. I will make sure the camera is in place for tomorrow's test.
After tomorrow I will be involved in something else, so I will not be able to participate again until Monday.
Please, just copy back to me only. I always make sure the other underwriters get a copy of what you send.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 14:27:45 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>Finally got a chance to dowse.
The camera is in the room labeled "E". I dowsed your floor plan at 2:15 p.m. Sept 7.
I will dowse again sometime tomorrow and respond after the dowse. Monday for further tests is fine. I will wait for instructions as to when to dowse again. Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 19:30:31 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson
Again thanks. I have recorded your response. I am now ready for test number 2.
I have drawn a random letter from a container after mixing all the letters from the set. I have placed the camera in that room. You may now begin to dowse for the camera again.
As soon as you send me your response by e-mail I will conclude the second test and start the third test.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 13:21:48 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>The camera is in the room labeled "G". I dowsed the map today, Wednesday Sept 8 at c. 1:00 p.m. Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:44:16 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
As promised, I am back on line today. I will place the camera in a randomly selected place for all day tomorrow (Monday, 13 September).
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: NTS Paranormal Challenge (follow-up)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 16:58:47 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>Hi, again. The camera is in the room labeled "L" on Monday Sept, 13. I dowsed this at c. 2:00 p.m. and redowsed a couple of times because I did not seem to get as strong a signal this time as the other two times. Since it repeated, I have to assume "L" is probably correct.
We responded.
Subject: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 3)
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 20:41:18 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
Again, thanks for continuing to participate. I will perform another random pick and place the camera in the chosen location. I will ensure it is in place from 7 a.m. tomorrow (14 September) until 5 p.m. tomorrow.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 3)
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 11:14:58 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>The camera is in the room labeled "F" on Tuesday Sept 14. I dowsed this map at 10:45 a.m.
Just a quick question. I don't remember you saying, but approximately how many of these tests will be required before you consider doing the test "for real"? I know it will also depend on the success rate, but is there a planned minimum of this type? Thanks, Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 4)
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 18:19:58 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
Again, thanks.
Let's now begin round 5. Please notify me when you have made your selection.
Regarding how long we continue these tests: For this informal evaluation, there is no set schedule. In a formal test we will specify exactly how many trials, and the test will stop when those trials are complete. This evaluation sequence is for your benefit. If, after we reach a certain point, you are satisfied with the results, then we will make the decision whether to proceed with a formal test. My plan is to continue until Wednesday next week if that is OK with you.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 4)
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 11:19:04 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>The camera is in the room labeled "H" on Wednesday Sept, 15. I dowsed this at approximately 11:00 a.m.
Another week is fine. In the earlier emails you referred to some tests could run 60 trials, etc. and I wasn't sure if that applied to these "samples" or just the "tests."
We responded.
Subject: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 5)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 04:28:04 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
Again, thanks. Let's start round 6. Starting this morning at 7 a.m. the camera will be in position.
Prior correspondence related to these tests has been posted:
http://www.ntskeptics.org/challenge/davidson/davidson.htm
Please examine these postings and let me know immediately if there is anything that is not consistent with your records.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 5)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:50:59 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>The camera is in the room labeled "E" on Thursday Sept 16. I dowsed this at 12:45.
We responded.
Subject: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 6)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 18:29:14 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
Thank you. The camera is in position for round 7. I will leave it there until I receive your next e-mail.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 5)
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 13:01:57 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>After reviewing the posted correspondence, I noticed an apparent error. On your posting of 9-4 in discussing the floor plan and how it was labeled, you state the breakfast and kitchen were labeled together as "I"! The map I received shows the Breakfast and Kitchen as "F"!! "I" is the large upstairs room that did not print off as I told you before. There are two bedrooms labeled "J" and "L", a bath labeled "K" and the large room was "I". "A" is a WIC; "B" master Bath; "C" Master BR; "D" Utility; "E" Family Room; "F" Breakfast/Kitchen; "G" Living Room and "H" Dining Room. That is the map I received and have been dowsing. Please send me the correct labeling and/or confirm the above labeling is what you have been rating me on.
Thanks Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Paranormal challenge, discussion of map labeling
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 18:12:29 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
The map at the following URL is the one we have been using all this time. You are correct to have been following this map. The map shows the kitchen and breakfast are labeled as F, just as you found on the map. No other labeling has been used.
http://www.ntskeptics.org/challenge/graphics/house.gif
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 6)
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 14:03:36 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>The camera is in the room labeled "H". I dowsed this at c. 1:30 p.m. Sept 17. Did you get my other e-mail about the labeling? Did I get the rooms labeled correctly?
Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 7, starting round 8)
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 18:24:42 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>, skeptic@ntskeptics.org, Greg Aicklen <aicklen@ieee.org>,
Prasad Golla <golla@ieee.org>, Mike Selby <mselby@ntskeptics.org>, Mike Sullivan <MikeSullivan@Mac.com>, "John A. Thomas" <jathomas@gpm-law.com>Mr. Davidson,
Thank you. Let's begin round 8. The camera is in position.
And, yes, your labeling is in accordance with the map.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Rechey Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 7, starting round 8)
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 22:25:53 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>The camera is in the room labeled "B" on Friday Sept 17 at 10:20 p.m.
We responded.
Subject: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 8, starting round 9)
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 06:55:01 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
Thank you. Let's begin round 9. The camera is in position.
John Blanton
Mr. Davidson responded.
Subject: Re: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 11, starting round 12)
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 12:37:42 -0500
From: recheyd@hawkpci.net (recheyd@hawkpci.net)
To: "John Blanton" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>The camera is in the room labeled "D" on Mon Sept 9. I dowsed this at 12:30 p.m..
When the test is complete, just tell me my hit and miss rate first, and I'll e-mail back which times I feel I missed before you tell me as an extra test. I've been keeping a list as to when I feel like I probably missed due to slight differences in response, etc. This way maybe I can also tell "when" I miss in the future. It seems like the first instinct is usually correct, but if I have a "feeling" about the search first, it does seem to affect the answer and that seems to usually be the time I am likely to miss. Thanks,
Rechey
We responded.
Subject: Re: Paranormal Challenge (conclusion of round 11, starting round 12)
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 20:12:50 -0500
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: "recheyd@hawkpci.net" <recheyd@hawkpci.net>
CC: (Challenge underwriters)Mr. Davidson,
Again thank you for your participation in this project. I will interpret your most recent e-mail to mean 20 September instead of 9 September (see below).
I need to shut down this series of tests for now, at least temporarily. I need to go out of town for a few days again, and, besides, a previous mail by Mr. Golla has revealed the results of the tests so far.
Please find below a list of the test results. Please take the time for now to compare this list with your own records, and let me know immediately if I have made any mistakes.
Obviously this has been a very informal test. Most important of all, you have no way of verifying our own account of the test. Nobody but me knows where the object (camera) was placed each day, and everybody has to rely on my honesty if they are to trust the results.
However, providing I have been honest with my part the results are:
1. You failed to score any hits in 12 trials.
2. If your method were 50% successful, it would be expected (expected value) you would predict correctly 6 times.
3. Again, if your method were 50% successful, the probability of a score of zero is 1/4096.
4. From that we can reasonably conclude your method is probably much less than 50% successful on average.
5. You had to 12 rooms to choose from, so in 12 trials there is about a 50% chance you would score zero if you just picked rooms at random. Other mathematicians on this distribution, please let me know if this is not correct.
Therefore, before we go forward into a formal test that costs everybody a lot of time and trouble, we need to figure out if there is anything wrong with this test or with the assumptions we made going into it. If the other underwriters are agreeable, I would like to open this discussion up to all. Please feel free to contribute comments and to make suggestions.
For example, there are aspects of this test that seem to me would make it unnecessarily difficult for you. The main part is your being a hundred miles away from the test site. Also, for the test to be fair to you, you need to be on hand to observe and to make sure we are carrying out the test in a fair manner (correctly recording the score).
Also, let me suggest you conduct some tests similar to this one and convince yourself you can successfully score 50% or higher. You might also determine whether your success rate is lower than 50% and what your actual success rate is.
Of course, I don't speak for the other underwriters, but due to the conditions of this experiment I will not consider it a legitimate test of your dowsing, and I will not declare your methods invalid based on this test alone. The results of the test will be posted on our Web site in the usual place with these comments.
I would like to go forward if you are willing. Again thank you for participating.
Best regards,
John Blanton
Test 01: 7 September 2004
Camera placed in B
Davidson called ETest 02: 8 September 2004
Camera placed in A
Davidson called GTest 03: 13 September 2004
Camera placed in D
Davidson called LTest 04: 14 September 2004
Camera placed in D
Davidson called FTest 05: 15 September 2004
Camera placed in F
Davidson called HTest 06: 16 September 2004
Camera placed in J
Davidson called ETest 07: 17 September 2004
Camera placed in G
Davidson called BTest 08: 18 September 2004
Camera placed in A
Davidson called BTest 09: 18 September 2004
Camera placed in F
Davidson called ETest 10: 18 September 2004
Camera placed in E
Davidson called JTest 11: 19 September 2004
Camera placed in E
Davidson called BTest 12: 20 September 2004
Camera placed in E
Davidson called D--
The North Texas Skeptics
http://www.ntskeptics.orgOur initial evaluation of Rechey Davidson has concluded. Stand by for more in the future.
Back to Challenge Activity
