E-mail Exchange With Greg Nichols and Greg Willis
Back to Challenge Activity
This one started like so many others, an e-mail out of the blue:
Subject:skeptic test
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:19:27 -0600
From: "Greg Nichols" <nichols@www.com>
To: <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>I have an interesting test for your group. Please call or e-mail for details.
Sincerely,
Greg Nichols
nichols@www.com
Mckinney, Texas [phone number]We responded. (First impression was this was going to be very dull.)
Subject: Re: skeptic test
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:15:42 -0600
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: nichols@ont.com
CC: [NTS board and the Challenge underwriters]To: Greg Nichols
We are interested in hearing your proposal. Please provide information.
Best regards,
John Blanton
--
The North Texas Skeptics
http://www.ntskeptics.orgGreg Nichols responded promptly (Oh, good. It's starting to get weird.)
Subject: RE: skeptic test
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 01:03:57 -0600
From: "Greg Nichols" <nichols@www.com>
Reply-To: <nichols@ont.com>
To: "'John Blanton'" <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>You passed step 1.
You replied to the e-mail, thus you are a real person.
I am prepared to attend your Saturday meeting. Prior to that, I will be willing to "demonstrate" an interesting "effect" that will cause you to "re-evaluate" your "skepticicism."
Ha! You reply.
I fully expect you to remain "skepical."
I would like to arrange a meeting with a few of your officers before Saturday's meeting (at least 1/2 hour) so that I can demonstrate an effect that will completely "blow your minds."
Sincerely,
Greg Nichols,
McKinney, TX 75071We responded.
Subject: Re: skeptic test
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 18:37:55 -0600
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: nichols@ont.com
CC: [The board, etc.]Greg,
I can promise to be there 30 minutes in advance tomorrow. That's at 1:30 p.m. on 14 February. We are meeting at 2900 Live Oak Street in Dallas. The place is called Center for Non-Profit Management.
I am forwarding this to others in the group.
Best regards,
John Blanton
--
The North Texas Skeptics
http://www.ntskeptics.orgWe met with Greg Nichols on 14 February. Our meeting was snowed out so we all got together at a local Taco Bell, and Greg showed us his stuff.
I sent the following later that day:
Subject: North Texas Skeptics Paranormal Challenge
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:39:22 -0600
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: nichols@ont.com
CC: (etc.)Greg,
I have sent off a note to the other underwriters about our conversation this afternoon. In the mean time, here is what is required:
Before we can consider your challenge we must have your proposal in writing. Will you please respond by e-mail outlining your claims for the homeopathic water product you told us about. We would most likely be interested in the scenario you mentioned involving the wine tasting. In your reply just describe your claims for the product with respect to the effect on wine in wine glasses.
After we receive your e-mail we will propose a test that addresses your claim. As I mentioned today, we have a previously had experience with at least one other claimant. We required a demonstration before we would proceed with a formal test. We will also require a demonstration from you.
Please read the protocol description on the Challenge page (see the URL). Make sure you understand it and that your are agreeable to doing all that is required. We will not have a test unless you are agreeable to our conditions. This saves everybody a lot of otherwise wasted time.
Particularly pay attention to this statement on the Challenge page:
"All agreements, protocols, correspondence, data, audio or video recordings, photographs or results made or obtained by either party during the challenge or negotiations leading up to the challenge may be used by either party in any way he or she may choose, including publication, and challengers and claimant both waive all exclusive rights to such information."
We always exercise our rights under this clause, and we do publish all correspondence.
Challenge URL: http://www.ntskeptics.org/challenge/challeng.htm
Best regards,
John Blanton
--
The North Texas Skeptics
http://www.ntskeptics.orgThen we received an e-mail from Greg Willis.
Subject: Re: North Texas Skeptics Paranormal Challenge Date:
Sun, 15 Feb 2004 09:41:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Willis <agwriter123@yahoo.com>
To: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
CC: nichols@ont.com, jathomas@gpm-law.com, aicklen@ieee.org, MikeSullivan@Mac.com, golla@ieee.org <p>Dear Mr. Blanton,
With regard to your email to my business partner Greg Nichols which we received this morning, we are in agreement with your protocol entitled "The North Texas Skeptics Paranormal Challenge Instructions", specifically clause seven beginning "All agreements, protocols, etc."
We assume that this clause addresses a legitimate concern of yours and is not an attempt to gather serious or proprietary scientific information and data for the purpose of publicly ridiculing, defaming, libeling or slandering us or our work. We are proceding under the assumption that you are serious scientific investigators not in pursuit of grandstanding or dispoiling serious work for your own entertainment. We would need your written assurance that this is not the purpose of this clause before we begin any relationship with you and your group.
Secondly, we want written assurance that the money is there. We will not begin until we get written assurance that the $10,000 prize exists and what steps you will take to pay the prize should it be awarded to us.
Please understand that we have published our findings so we have no problem having a legitimate scientific test published again. We have been manufacturing and selling this product throughout the United States for over 3 1/2 years. We have a track record of achievement and a legitimate business. We have invested 10 years time and over $750,000 in the development of our product. It performs as described or we would not be in these negotiations with you in the first place.
You have made a public offering in which we are interested. However, as I said above, we are not discussing your Challenge with you for use as your personal amusement. We are only interested in furthering the frontiers of science and will only proceed on that basis.
We await your reply.
Sincerely Yours,
Greg Willis/Greg Nichols
We responded.
Subject: Re: North Texas Skeptics Paranormal Challenge
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 13:10:56 -0600
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: Greg Willis <agwriter123@yahoo.com>
CC: nichols@ont.com, jathomas@gpm-law.com, aicklen@ieee.org, MikeSullivan@Mac.com, golla@ieee.orgTo: Greg Willis
The money is put up by the five underwriters individually. Each of us has pledged $2000. At the time of a formal test we will bring a check or checks totaling $10,000 made out to the individual making the claim.
So far in our past dealings we have never gotten to that stage, because no claimant has provided an adequate demonstration that there is anything to test. Until such time, said money will continue to reside in our individual bank accounts. If you want some written statement that we have money in our bank accounts we may consider providing such a letter. We the underwriters will address that among ourselves.
Best regards,
John Blanton
--
The North Texas Skeptics
http://www.ntskeptics.orgGreg Willis responded
Subject: Re: North Texas Skeptics Paranormal Challenge
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:27:58 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Willis <agwriter123@yahoo.com>
To: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
CC: (etc.)Dear Mr. Blanton,
Thank you for your prompt reply.
You have only addressed one of our two concerns. You have not addressed the first one we raised, that we want a written assurance that you are not using the Challenge and the lure of $10,000 to create a situation where you can use us and/or our product for your own amusement and entertainment or to ridicule, libel, defame or slander us and our our product.
Inasmuch as you and your associates declined several opportunities, yesterday, at the restuarant, to informally test our product on your food or drink, though offered to do so by Mr. Nichols at least four times, it would appear to us that you are not really serious about this despite what you have written below and previously.
Therefore, until you provide us with the written assurances we requested and we hear from you that you are serious and not wanting to amuse yourselves at our expense, in writing, and, can show that you actually have the money in a holding account that some reputable third party can varify, we remain skeptical as to your motives and your ability to create or conduct an objective, unbiased protocol or test.
When you are ready to conduct a serious scientific investigation, please get back to us.
Sincerely Yours,
Greg Willis/Greg Nichols
We responded.
Subject: Re: North Texas Skeptics Paranormal Challenge
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 21:34:59 -0600
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: Greg Willis <agwriter123@yahoo.com>
CC: (etc.)To: Greg Willis
I did not address your concern about "using the Challenge and the lure of $10,000 to create a situation where you can use us and/or our product for your own amusement...," etc., because that statement is rather ambiguous. Who is to say when one is amused and when is one not amused, for example. If you will, however, I assure you personally we are serious about testing your claims of the paranormal, and we seriously intend to pay the prize in the event proof of the paranormal is demonstrated. That's all you are going to get from us on that (or at least from me, because I have not consulted the other underwriters on this). It that is not enough for you at the present, then we will just say "good day" to you and see you off on your way.
Actually, at the NTS meeting yesterday, there was only one of the underwriters present. I was the only underwriter present. The others there were visitors from off the street (not members of the NTS) plus various members of the NTS. In any test, only underwriters of the NTS Challenge will be participating. Additionally, Greg Nichols, who was there, never gave me a sample of the product to experiment with. Finally, the plan is to test using wine, and we had no wine available at the meeting for a test.
If you would care to provide me with a sample of your product we may be able to save everybody a lot of time and trouble. I will get together with one or more of the other underwriters and test the product using some fine Texas or French wine. If we can't identify any paranormal properties of your product we will just return it to you with our thanks, and that will be the end of the matter.
If you want a rigorous test, then you will need to follow the protocol and submit a proposal in writing. E-mail will do for now, but prior to any formal test we will require signed agreements as spelled out in the protocol. Also, prior to any formal test and before we go to the trouble drawing any money from our bank accounts we will want a demonstration of what you claim. If this is not agreeable with you, then we will just say good day to you, and the best of luck with your future ventures.
Best regards,
John Blanton
[This correspondence will be published on our Web site.]
---
The North Texas Skeptics
http://www.ntskeptics.orgAfter an internal e-mail not complimentary to the claimants was inadvertantly copied to them, we received this reply:
Subject: Fwd: North Texas Skeptics Paranormal Challenge
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 00:31:46 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Willis <agwriter123@yahoo.com>
To: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
CC: (etc.)Dear Mr. Blanton,
Yesterday, we received this email (below) from your lawyer.
Explain yourselves.
Greg Willis
So, I had to smooth some ruffled feathers:
Subject: North Texas Skeptics Paranormal Challenge
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 06:09:11 -0600
From: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
To: Greg Willis <agwriter123@yahoo.com>
CC: (etc.)Mr. Willis,
Obviously there is nothing to explain. Mr. Nichols was inadvertently copied on a private correspondence among the underwriters. In this missive Mr. Thomas expressed our private thoughts on this matter, which, unfortunately, are not very complimentary to your enterprise. Of course, these thoughts are not for public consumption and will not be distributed publicly.
Allow me to add: In the business you are in you have to be prepared for some adverse reaction. And you do know what business you are in. I apologize if you have taken offense.
Mr. Thomas has expressed the collective thoughts of all the underwriters. Namely, you are to send your claims for the paranormal to us by e-mail or by post at your earliest convenience, or we are going to conclude this matter. Now is the time for you to make your move. What is it going to be?
With best regards,
John Blanton
--
The North Texas Skeptics
http://www.ntskeptics.orgNichols and Willis moved quickly to put us straight:
Subject: Re: North Texas Skeptics Paranormal Challenge
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:42:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Willis <agwriter123@yahoo.com>
To: John Blanton <skeptic@ntskeptics.org>
CC: (etc.)Dear Mr. Blanton,
Just exactly what business do you think I am in? Look, my friend, these continuing ad hominem slurs make you appear unprofessional, prejudiced and predisposed to fix the outcome. Inadvertent or not, they are still part of the record, as you know. They also make you appear to be desperately fearful of losing your Challenge and the $10,000 you proffered. You don't want to make that impression. Do you?
You and your friends have an opportunity to be part of one of the greatest discoveries in modern science. Don't throw it away.
As you requested, here is our claim. Our homeopathically prepared, water based spray of herbs and mineral compounds, when applied to the outside of a closed glass container of any food or drink, can change the taste of that food or drink inside the container.
It does the same if applied directly to food or wine. The test for this is simple, and obvious.
This discovery has enormous implications and consequences for science, medicine, agriculture, construction, metallurgy, computer chip manufacturing, national defense and a myriad of other applications that will benefit humanity and economies all over the world. As product, it is worth millions. We are well aware of its value as I am sure you will be once you consider it more carefully.
We understand that it also has enormous implications for your paradigm with regard to science in general and quantum physics specifically. This discovery, of course, proves that the theories of quantum physics are, in fact, provable and useful on a commercial level.
We can well understand your reluctance to go forward with this test, to back out of the deal, so to speak. Inasmuch as it apparently is not an issue of money for you, we can only conclude that it is more a matter of you having to admit that what you believe to be true is not, and what you do believe will now and forever be changed. Resistance to change is a powerful force in many people, especially when one is so heavily invested in one's own view of the world that, given your history of debunking as recounted on your website and your claim that you have never had to pay the $10,000 prize, it might, in your minds, prove embarrassing for you to lose this Challenge. You need to put that fear aside.
We have conducted this test thousands of times and it never fails. Winemakers in California and Texas are already using this product in their wine and on the outside of their corked bottles to improve the taste of the wine inside. That's only one of millions of potential applications.
Here are the results of one such test. The values listed below come from the ETS Laboratories, St. Helena, CA, report #10536 dated 16 Noember 2001. The wine tested was Andretti Winery Claret. The control was untreated, the sample was treated. The results of the Phenol Panel were as follows:
Untreated Control Treated Sample
gallic acid (mg/l) 51 48
catechin (mg/l) 28 25
epicatechin (mg/l) 9 6
polymeric phenols (mg/l) 872 830
caftaric acid (mg/l) 11 9
caffeic acid (mg/l) 19 17
total anthocyanins (mg/l) 111 101
malvidin glucoside (mg/l) 29 27
monmeric anthocyanns (mg/l) 53 47
polymeric anthocyanins (mg/l) 58 54
quercetin glycosides (mg/l) 28 27
quercetin aglycone (mg/l) 26 25catechin:epicatechin ratio 3.1 4.2
catechin:polymeric phenols ratio 0.03 0.03In prosaic terms, the phenolic compounds, components of the tannins in wine, were lowered in this wine about 10% on average. Values vary from wine to wine and food to food. What this test shows is that the molecular structure of the phenols was changed. This means our homeopathically prepared product definitely works on the molecular level and probably on the atomic level as well, which would explain why it works through glass. Every scientist knows that at the atomic level, glass is porous, or sunlight would not go through it.
Science does not move forward without open minds to guide it. If the opposite was true, we would still believe that the Sun rotates around the Earth and that electricity is evil.
I wish to impress upon you the seriousness of your Challenge and the likelihood that in a fair and objective test, you will be obligated to award the prize to us. You need to get past that. You and your friends have a choice to make, to wit: either you can fight the inevitable, or, take a positive and helpful approach wherein you can share in a discovery that one person from the University of California, Berkeley, has already called Nobel Prize calibre.
Please consider that should you back out of this Challenge, or you rig the Challenge, and we go forward and prove to some other panel of experts that our product performs as stated, that this has serious implications for you and your nonprofit society as the negative publicity alone might be difficult for you to handle.
We're giving you a rare and unique opportunity to be at the forefront of science. What you do with that choice will have an impact on your lives forever. We can only say that we hope it is a positive impact and that you join us in the furtherance of science.
Just think. You will be able to say that as skeptical as you are, "you never would have believed it to be true, but it is." That way, you can save face and be heroes all at the same time. Everybody wins. Isn't your fame alone worth a paltry $2,000 apiece? I'm sure the media would agree. Don't you?
We will send a proposed protocol by certified mail to your Carrollton address.
Sincerely Yours,
Greg Willis
Greg NicholsWe received this note from Nichols and Willis:
Dear Mr. Blanton, et al,We are in receipt of your email below which we have read and discussed carefully. Your exuberance, we think, betrays your underlying motivation and determination to make absolutely certain that this test fail.
The most blatently biased and egregious demand that you make is that you "will provide all the tasters".
The way we read this statement is that you will provide all YOUR prescreened tasters who will then dutifully report that they cannot taste any difference after treatment. What if WE demanded that WE set up all the samples and WE provide all the tasters? Would YOU agree to that or do you believe that would bias the test in OUR favor?
We have read every report that you have published on your internet site. We understand your modus operandi and your clever, and sometimes not so clever, techniques for setting up your subjects to fail your "tests".
In the spirit of the advancement of science, and not in the spirit of providing amusement for you, may we suggest a modus vivendi that begins with ALL of us selecting a panel of professional tasters and ALL of us agree on the beverage to be tasted? That would be a good start toward a fair and objective test, free from controversy or recriminations, possibly legal, don't you agree?
There are other serious flaws with your proposal but we cannot move forward until this particular issue is resolved. Then, and only then, will we address the others.
You know, we are wondering if you are negotiating in good faith or just trying to play us for suckers. We are giving a demonstration to a large group of winemakers next week. Every one of them is a highly qualified taster and they are eagerly awaiting our presentation since some of them are already using our product. The media's next. It's a simple test. Anyone can do it. Just noodling here but we want you to know that you're hardly the only game in town.
We prefer to deal with serious, reputable people who will give our product an objective and fair evaluation. When they do, they buy it because they like it.
For the next six days, we will be tied up preparing for and giving a presentation on our research to a group of truly interested people. Thus, we will be unable to continue these exciting negotiations until next Monday or Tuesday. We apologize for the hiatus.
We keenly await your comment.
Sincerely Yours,
Greg Willis
Greg NicholsWe sent this note to Nichols and Willis:
Mr. Willis,Thanks for your prompt reply. Allow me to address the issue you have raised about the tasters.
The stipulation that we supply the tasters is based on the original statement of your claim. Please re-read your previous e-mail. In your statement you did not say anything about your having to select the tasters. You seemed to leave open the possibility your preparation would still work properly if we selected the tasters, and that is the way we prefer to do it.
Regarding whether the test is biased or not, you have our assurances we will not attempt to influence the tasters in any way. We will not prescreen the tasters. We will not coach them, for example, to say they can't tell any difference between the two sample beverages. We will not ask them to deliberately give wrong answers. That's about all you can hope for.
As for any consideration of professional tasters, that is out of the question. We plan conduct this test with almost zero expense to ourselves. We have no way of making money off this enterprise, so our budget for it must be, of necessity, just pocket change.
Remember, we are putting up $10,000. You are putting up nothing. If the proposition does not interest you, then I advise you to walk away now and save yourselves a lot of needless hassle. If you want to proceed you should immediately address the other points in our proposed protocol.
Once again, I have not consulted the other underwriters regarding the selection of tasters. I will listen to them in case they have other ideas.
I am blind copying this to the other underwriters, so there is no need for your to send a copy of this message to them. This correspondence and all pertinent correspondence related to The North Texas Skeptics Challenge will be posted on our Web site.
Best regards,
John Blanton
The North Texas Skeptics
Nichols and Willis got back to us later.
Subject: Re: The North Texas Skeptics Paranormal Challenge
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 09:11:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Willis <agwriter123@yahoo.com>
To: John Blanton
CC: (etc.)Dear Mr. Blanton,
We're not walking away from anything. And your suggestion that we "are putting up nothing" presumes that our reputation is not on the line. Presumption appears to be a pattern with you.
Given that you refuse to guarantee the money by placing it in the hands of an uninterested third party, have refused to address our concerns about paragraph seven, that you are incapable of constructing an objective, unbiased test with qualified tasters, called me a "snake", and so on, we have sought the advice of a local attorney who is familiar with you and your tactics.
(Of course, we all thought it was hilarious that a lawyer would call anyone a "snake". I wouldn't trust him with my intellectual property.)
Among other things, our attorney wants to review and approve any proposed contract, wants the taste test video taped and eyewitnessed by reputable third partys, wants a list of all the participants in this test and all the members of your Society, including addresses, telephone numbers, current employment information and backgrounds, wants a list of the tasters and their qualifications and wants to see the IRS 990 returns for the past three years for your 501(c)(3) North Texas Skeptics Society before we can go any farther.
Your attorney will advise you that this last "request" is not a request. It is a demand.
We believe you have conclusively demonstrated that you are incompetent, biased, amateurish, self-styled "scientists", frauds and James Randi Wannabes. Our counsel has advised us protect ourselves from your spurious tactics and disingenuous statements and claims as he believes that you have absolutely no intention whatsoever of parting with the $10,000 prize, which you have not provided proof that you even have, no matter what the outcome. He says it sounds like a con-game on your part inasmuch as any reputable organization and "underwriter" would be anxious to prove that their motives and offers are "pure", bona fide, that is, offered in good faith, and true. You have not done this.
May we suggest that you comply immediately with these demands or walk away quietly.
If any of our correspondence ends up on your website or any website under your control or influence, you will guarantee legal action against you on our part.
We await your timely reply.
Greg Willis/Greg Nichols
We sent the following:
Mr. Nichols and Mr Willis,Thanks for getting back to me on this. I am copying the other underwriters on this e-mail. I have not consulted all the other underwriters, but I will respond briefly for now. I have switched to an e-mail account based on Yahoo so I can continue the correspondence while I am away from my office.
Our intention is to go with our normal procedure as stated in the description of the Challenge on our Web site. We cannot accommodate you beyond that.
We intend to carry through with a scientific test with respect to any paranormal properties of your preparation. Specifically, we will test the ability of your preparation to have a material effect on a beverage when the two substances are separated by the glass wall of a container.
To this end, we will devise a test, and we will obtain your approval before performing the test. That is to say, if our test does not meet your approval, then we will not proceed, or else we will not consider the results of the test to be valid. In the end, you will agree that it is a fair test.
Regarding the availability of the prize ($10,000) you have our promise that it will be paid on completion of a successful test that demonstrates the claimed paranormal property under scientifically controlled conditions. If this is not sufficient for you, then you need not continue this collaboration.
Prior to our proceeding any further, we will require a demonstration of the claimed paranormal property. We can do this a number of ways:
You can lend us a sample of your preparation, and we can test it on our own, at no inconvenience to you.
You can meet with us and demonstrate the paranormal properties of your preparation.
There may be other approaches, so please feel free to make suggestions.
This e-mail and all pertinent correspondence related to the Challenge will be posted on our Web site.
Best regards,
John Blanton
The North Texas Skeptics
http://www.ntskeptics.org
Nichols and Willis were prompt and polite:
Subject: Re: The NTS Fraudulent Challenge
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:36:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Willis
To: John Blanton (etc.)
CC: (etc.)Dear John,
I guess I have to talk to you like you're a moron. Either you and your buddies can't read, won't read, are stupid, ignorant, or all of the above.
When you get the information we want to us, we can talk. When you are ready to comply with our demands, requests and concerns about the fairness of your so-called "Challenge", we can talk.
You are obligated by law to provide us with your IRS Form 990's for the past three years if we demand them. You WILL want to comply and do it in a timely manner. If you do not, we will contact the IRS and inform them of your noncompliance. At that point, your nonprofit status may be reviewed by the IRS, which has the power to revoke it.
In the mean time, I remain convinced that you are frauds and con artists and I am loath to do business with you. You can't prove you have the money. You won't address paragraph seven. You can't construct an unbiased, objective test. You won't provide us with a list of names of tasters or their qualifications. You won't agree to having the test video taped. You won't reply to any or our concerns, requests or demands.
If you had any brains at all, which you obviously do not, YOU would demand a double blind test on no less than 30 samples, tasted by no less than 5 people of only the highest qualifications and to prove that there was a chemical change in the liquid, you would demand that a chemical analysis be performed before and after application. You didn't do any of this which shows just how incompetent and biased you are. You're amateurs, son. You're in way over your head. We don't have time for amateurs - and frauds.
You DO NOT have our permission to put this email or any of our previous correspondence with you up on your website or any other public site. If you do, we will sue your organization and you personally. That you CAN take to the bank. If that happens, I am sure employer and the I.E.E.E. would be interested in reading every email. Don't you?
None of this conversation means that our product does not perform as we state it does. We've already proven that in other forums with the lab analyses to prove it.
What this means is that you have demonstrated bad faith and that you are incapable of testing it fairly and openly. We can only surmise that through your truculence and refusal to comply with our demands, requests and concerns about the fairness of your "test", you are scared to death that you will have to cough up the ten grand and you are going to do anything, and everything, to avoid payment. In other words, you're a bunch of weasels and losers. Pearls before swine. You have so much invested in proving us wrong, and you're right, that you will do anything to make that happen. So on that basis alone, you have disqualified yourselves.
Until you comply with our demand for your IRS 990's for the years 2003, 2002 and 2001, or 3004, 2003 and 2002 if your return for 2004 is complete, as well as our numerous other demands, requests and concerns recapitulated herein, this conversation is closed.
Greg Willis/Greg Nichols
We followed up with a note acknowledging their reluctance to participate. We advised them to contact our attorney regarding any IRS 990 forms.
Mr. Nichols and Mr. Willis:Your last email of February 25, 2004 at 7:36 PM stated "...this conversation is closed." Given that, and the the hostile tone of your recent correspondence, we assume that negotiations concerning your participation in the North Texas Skeptics challenge are now terminated. Accordingly, we will not engage in further discussions with you.
If you wish to communicate with us for some reason, please do so though our legal counsel:
Mr. John A. Thomas
Glast, Phillips & Murray, P.C.
13355 Noel Road, Suite 2200
Dallas, Texas 75240Mr. Thomas will respond to your request for copies of tax documents.
Best regards,
John Blanton
We have now received yet another note from Nichols and Willis:
Subject: North Texas Frauds, oops! Cynics, oops!, Skeptics "Challenge"
Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:28:14 -0800 (PST)
From: Greg Willis
To: John Blanton (etc.)Dear John and Friends,
Since you and the North Texas Incompetent Cynics Society want to back out, we could accept that. If anyone is hostile, it is you, not us. If you call being descriptive and revealing "hostile", you need to go back to high school and learn your lessons again. You did graduate from high school, didn't you?
Your accusation is typical of the kind of tripe we expect from lowlife like you who make sport out of ruining other people's lives.
Here's the really, really funny part. You all started out with the clear intent of denigrating and destroying us, our product and our work. What actually happened was we exposed you as incompetents, frauds, charlatans, hypocrites and pseudoscientists. This has been great fun.
We encourage you to tell all your friends that you pulled out of this deal. Of course, we don't expect that you will do this publicly as you are all clearly immature and dishonest, and, I quote, "snakes". (Called this by an ATTORNEY no less! Whose thoughts are "pure"? This is hysterical. You can't make this stuff up! The one professsion - second only to prostitution - that is and has been held in the lowest esteem by EVERYONE since recorded history began - calling me a "snake"? Reality is so much better than fiction.)
I am sure you'll agree that this has been a great learning experience for all of us.
We'll let you know about your 990's. And we'll be checking your website from time to time.
In the mean time, we're selling all the product we can make - because it works. The Free Market is the Final Arbiter of Truth. Not you. Not me. This is a lesson you need to learn or you've wasted a perfectly good life.
Grow up. Have a good time. Do something positive for a change. You'll all be happier and you might even improve the world instead of tearing others down to make youselves look taller.
We'll be in touch.
Greg Willis/Greg Nichols
We received this from Greg Nichols.
Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 19:25:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Greg Willis"
Subject: I accept your challenge
To: skeptic@ntskeptics.orgDear Mr. Blanton,
I am now ready to take you up on your challenge at http://www.ntskeptics.org/. As you recall, my company makes a homeopathically prepared remedy made from minerals and herbs in water that you can spray on the outside of a corked wine bottle and change the chemistry of the wine inside the bottle.
We contacted you about this approximately 2 1/2 years ago but you refused to put your [then] $10,000 prize money in a escrow account to prove your offer was legitimate. I see that you now are offering $12,000.
To prove this claim, there is a very simple test that anyone can do and anyone can follow, under controlled laboratory procedures or on the street. We'll allow you to take some tap water and any other water you wish and fill as many bottles as you want with spray tops or whatever, then spray a bottle of wine, or a glass of wine if you like. Then we'll let you take our stuff and spray a bottle of wine. Very simple. Take a sample before and a sample after. Send them to a qualified wine lab such as ETS Laboratories in St. Helena, Napa Valley, CA and have them tested and certified. If the chemistry is not different, then you win. If it is, I win the $12,000. This can easily be done as a controlled double-blind study on as many samples as you like.
Now, if you are truly legitimate, this time you WILL put your $12,000 in escrow and make it legally available to be paid to the completion of this test. If you accept my challenge, and AFTER you put your money in the hands of a third party, through my attorney, we will begin making the necessary arrangements for the test starting with a written legal agreement detailing the conditions signed by both parties.
Since you still have a website and appear to be in business, I assume that THIS TIME you will make a legitimate offer and will not, as before, back out.
The favor of your reply is requested.
Greg Willis
McKinney, TX
We responded.
Mr. Willis,
It is so good to hear from you again. Your proposal sounds interesting, and I am eager to work with you on it. I will forward this to the other underwriters. I am sure they will be eager, as well.
Yes, we still offer the prize, and it is at $12,000. We are still willing to pay for a successful test.
We will not be putting the prize in escrow. Escrow is typically employed when both parties have something at risk. E.g., if I were buying a house, and I had to put up a deposit. The seller would be at risk (he is taking his house off the market), and my deposit would be at risk. Hence the escrow.
Since you are not at risk, there is no requirement we put $12,000 in escrow. The $12,000 is in our bank accounts, and I am willing to write a check for $12,000 at the start of a formal test. I will hold the check in my pocket during that time if it's all right with you.
I regret we cannot afford to pay for a laboratory analysis of the wine (or other liquid). As we originally discussed this, the difference should be apparent to the drinker. However, if you can propose some other kind of test we will be willing to entertain your suggestion.
Please send us a sample of your product in the mean time. Also, send instructions on how to use it.
Again review the NTS Challenge protocol at the following link:
http://www.ntskeptics.org/challenge/challenge.htm
We will follow this process, including some preliminary examinations to determine whether there is anything to test. We will determine when and if a test is due. All correspondence involving the NTS Challenge is subject to publication in our newsletter and on our Web site. This correspondence will be published.
Thank you for your consideration,
John Blanton
Greg Willis responded.
Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 14:12:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Greg Willis"
Subject: Re: I accept your challenge
To: skeptic75287@yahoo.comDear Mr. Blanton,
Before we start, your record of being disingenuous and dishonest guides me to do the following before we begin:
First, you will put your prize money, if it indeed does exist, in the hands of a third party or it ends there. I don't trust that you have the money, all your assurances aside.
Secondly, this test will be performed in the presence of me and my associates, yourselves plus any responsible third party or parties we both agree on. This will keep you honest, which as I said, has been a problem for you.
Third, the ONLY way we will conduct this challenge is to have the chemical analysis, preferably a phenolic panel, performed by a reputable laboratory, before treatment and after treatment. That way, we are both assured that an objective third party has analyzed the results and they can be certified and verified.
If you and your associates are legitimate and not frauds, if you are not dishonest, you will agree to this proposal.
Fourth, NOTHING gets done until my attorney has contacted you and he is satisfied that the test will be honest, legitimate, performed by an objective third party (not you or your associates at the North Texas Skeptics Society), the money actually exists and the contract is signed by all parties.
And last, YOU will pay for the tests. It's YOUR challenge, not mine. You pay the Piper if you want to dance. The cost about $150 each. I'm sure that anyone who can afford to put up $12,000 can afford a measly $300 to prove themselves right. Right?
This is not what we talked about originally specifically because (a) your drinker's taste buds are not "educated" in the sense that they are not experienced or professional wine tasters, making the test suspect since it could be subjectively skewed your way, that is, you and your friends could lie about it and (b) in the past two years, we have learned a great deal more about our products and they are now sold and consumed worldwide. We know exactly what tests must be performed by a qualified laboratory, not you since you are NOT qualified, that will guarantee objective and accurate results.
Our claim is that our homeopathically prepared sprays will alter the chemistry of red wine in the bottle if sprayed on the outside of a corked bottle of red wine.
If you won't agree to this, then clearly, you are all frauds and your "challenge" is likewise a fraud. In which case, we will report you to the proper authorities for prosecution.
Greg Willis
We responded.
Mon, 8 May 2006 14:50:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John Blanton" <skeptic75287@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: I accept your challenge
To: "Greg Willis"Mr. Willis,
Allow me to respond to only one or two of your points:
1. We will not pay for any tests. The NTS Challenges is set up so we don't have to spend a lot of money. In the best of worlds we would not spend any money at all. Out claim is that the prize is not at risk, because in order to win the prize the claimant will have to do the impossible. That's the point. We assert that what you claim for your product is not possible. So far we have spent small amounts of money and days of our time. In point, a few years back we tested a guy named Russell. I purchased a plastic case to use in the test, and Prasad Golla and I spent the greater part of a Saturday afternoon doing the test. We are willing to do that for you.
2. You mention our taste buds. We are willing to use your taste buds. We will let you determine which wine (water, cool-aide, or whatever) has been treated. That should satisfy you, and it will save everybody a lot of money.
3. I appreciate being called a fraud by you. I don't know whether to be honored or not.
Best regards,
John Blanton
We have heard nothing since from Nichols and Willis.