Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DMScott" data-source="post: 1783216" data-attributes="member: 11734">This and similar criticisms of JREF challenge posit two hypotheticals that have not yet occurred: one, that the JREF would require an unreasonable test beyond what the subject claims to be able to do, and two that someone might succeed but have the JREF say they failed. In the former case, the subject agrees to the test conditions, so they are by definition reasonable. For the latter case, the tests are always set up so that some clearly defined event represents success, and the prize is held by a trustee with a signed letter instructing them to hand the prize over if the success condition occurs regardless of what the JREF representatives say. No-one has yet achieved the prize.In the case of Mr. Kolodzey specifically, neither the JREF nor any other researcher can legally or ethically enforce the conditions necessary to test his claim (that he can exist only on water), so no test is possible. Similarly, if someone claimed they could survive a gunshot to the temple or some other event very likely to harm themselves or others if the claim was not true, no test would be conducted.</blockquote>