From my blog...

What do these results from Anita's test with the IIG actually mean? Here's a quick look inside the numbers.

Each trial had six people, one of whom was missing a kidney. Anita's job was to detect which person was missing a kidney and which one was missing. That means 12 possible kidney locations for 11 kidneys. If you start thinking about this in terms of individuals, you shouldn't. Think 12 slots and 11 kidneys, period. Anita knew exactly where each slot was and was to simply look for the presence of a kidney. This is something she could practice on every person she ever met.

The table below shows the chances for each possible outcome with three trials of 1 in 12 chance:Num Correct Chance 1 in X Odds
0 77.03% 1 in 1.2
1 or more 22.93% 1 in 4.3
2 or more 1.96% 1 in 51
3 0.057% 1 in 1,728

So, what Anita accomplished at the IIG test would be expected to happen about once every four times such a demonstration is conducted. Ever guessed two coin tosses in a row? Same thing. Well, almost the same thing - coins are not living, breathing creatures show might accidentally leak some information.The odds given above are for the worst case scenario for Anita. The reality is that being able to stare at people for 27 minutes bettered her odds to an incalculable degree.

But She Detected Two People Missing a Kidney!

Yeh, so? That wasn't the test. In each trial she was given 12 possible locations for 11 kidneys. If you think about it, her goal was to detect the locations of the 11 kidneys and by doing so "know" in what position was the missing kidney. Still, I'm sure you are wondering what the odds were of her picking two people with missing kidneys. She had a 7.35% chance, which is about 1 in 13.6, of guessing two people in three tries. Again, that's the worst case scenario.

Remember, she could see everyone for nearly half an hour. She got to move around behind them, and they could hear her moving above and could quite possibly see shadows. We cannot assume there was no information leakage one way or another. If we figure that she was able to eliminate two people per trial due to astute observational skills (who knows if she could?), then it's a 15.6% chance or 1 in 6.4.

Hedging Her Bets Hurt Her

Though I have not yet seen the forms she filled out, I know Anita hedged her bets. In the first trial she noted that she could not detect a kidney in two different people, both of whom had both kidneys. In a third person she detected a kidney, which was in fact not there. She was hoping, of course, that at least one of the two guesses was right.

What's fascinating is what happened when she was sharing this information with the audience. She seemed to believe that the actual target was one of the two she thought was missing a kidney. She was all prepared to show us how she really, really did detect it. It was her bad luck that neither of the two people she marked as missing a kidney was the target.

This one exchange pretty much tells the whole story about Anita's claims of accuracy in the past. She also guessed "left" three times, which is statistically the most likely kidney to be missing. Coincidence? I don't think so.

So, What's It Mean?

The meaning of these tests should be determined in advance. Anita refused to do that. She wanted to see what happened and find a way to spin it. The fact remains, however, that what she accomplished could be done by 1 in 4 people pulled off the street at random. Once again, every single time Anita has undergone some type of experiment with just rudimentary documentation, she has failed to perform beyond chance. I doubt that will mean much to her.

You know who impressed me? The lady running the sonogram machine. She examined a total of 8 locations for kidneys and did so with 100% accuracy. She had a 0.39% chance of guessing randomly, which is about 1 in 256. She totally blew Anita out of water, yet she only claims to be able to see down to a few millimeters while Anita claims to be able to see down to the atomic level. She also took a lot less time.

Anita updated her website.

On her page: paranormaltest.html
"Less than a week away. And then it's either all over, or really begins, depending on the outcome."
 

It says "outcome", not "spin I will apply"
It should be all over now.

Posted By UncaYimmy on 22 Nov 2009 06:51 PM

 In a third person she detected a kidney, which was in fact not there.

And vice versa: she also detected the absence of a kidney that was actually there. Two errors in the third trial, not just one.

Some of the subjects had long hair that was hanging down their backs. And it was distracting to me. They also had their own choice of pants, which were all a bit different for each person. And at least for several of them, their bare arms were visible. After the demonstration, audience members noted that the man I had chosen in trial 2 had tattoos on his arms and were suggesting to discredit my choice based on that somehow being a clue. That made me very unhappy, because it indicates to a flaw in procedure. When ever results end up being questioned like this, it indicates a flaw in procedure. The results would be more reliable if less visual information were available.

She claims she can't use her sooper dooper x-ray vision through a thin screen or a thin cloth, so now she wants to complain because the people she was "reading" didn't have a "uniform" with long sleeves and short hair? If this was a "flawed procedure" then why did she sign off on it? Could it be because she had already started to make up excuses? She totally and utterly failed the demonstration and this has been said before but I'll say it again. ANITA, THIS DEMONSTRATION WAS TO SEE YOU DETECT MISSING KIDNEYS AND TO SAY WHICH KIDNEY WAS MISSING it shouldn't matter what the people looked like. You failed horribly, and you were guessing with the little added benefit of knowing that most kidney doners have their left kidney removed. You saw a kidney where there wasn't one and vice versa. Your 15 minutes (or 1 1/2 hours) of fame are over. I doubt that any organization will re-test you on your kidney claim. The only way to salvage some dignity from this debacle would be to admit, gracefully, that your claim was falsified, but you won't do that and that makes you look like the liar and fraud that you are.

Posted By Daylightstar on 23 Nov 2009 06:26 PM
Three posts later (days after the claim is falsified at the IIG West) VfF posts:
"According to me, the claim is not falsified. Yet."

She also said, in the very same post: "I do not expect there to be any paranormal explanation".

Forget being unable to keep her story straight from post to post - she's contradicting herself in the same posts now.

Yep, and if she wanted "less visual information," why did she reject the idea of a screen? All the things that were "distractions" to her could have been easily solved by having the volunteers covered from head to toe with shrouds or simply by sitting behind a screen.
There has been a lot of talk about her possible motivations, and after reading all of  her threads,  I am convinced that she knows she's a liar and a fraud and that she plans to enter a career in which she'll make money off of gullible believers.

What Anita consistently fails to grasp is that she has already practiced as a psychic. How many anecdotes of "medical diagnosis" has she described - 8? 9? If any of those are true, then she has practiced as a psychic.

She repeatedly justifies this by saying she has never charged money for her "diagnostic ability". So what? The potential for harm isn't any less because she didn't get paid.

She also justifies it by saying that she only utlizes her 'ability' on 'family and friends'. Again, so what? Her family and friends (the Earthly, non Arcturian ones, anyway) are still human beings. The potential for harm still exists.

One 'friend', she diagnosed after having just met him that day. She justified THAT by saying he "became" a friend. Again, so what? As I recall, that was the one she gave completely erroneous infiormation to by telling him that the tissues around his heart were "saturated with peanut oil", and if he would simply cut peanut oil out of his diet, he would be fine in the future. What the hell kind of advice is that to give to anyone?

"I'm sorry, Bob...Joe...Hal...whatever your name is. My spidy sense tells me that you are at risk for a myocardial infarction. Don't worry, though.  It's cool. Just cut peanut oil out of your diet. You'll be fine. But don't take me seriously, even though I just told you you could be dead in a week...and if you do take me seriously, remember that I'm not a 'practicing' psychic, I didn't charge you for this advice, and we've been 'friends' for half an hour, so you can't sue me."

Not to mention that she offered her 'services'-of an untested, unproven, imprecise 'ability',  to an online migraine group. She's expressed interest in having her own radio show and 'diagnosing' celebrities and call ins. She's advertised giving paranormal 'readings' on her website in exchange for 'expenses'. She's offered  to draw babies in the womb, among other things, in exchange for a small fee. She repeatedly references the amount of money that Brent Atwater makes and suggests that she could be making the same. She has announced plans to start a paranormal investigation website. Most significantly,  when she first came to the JREF forum, she specifically asked members how to write a waiver to relieve herself of legal culpability when, not if, she took her show on the road (a debate that quickly died when she realized that wasn't a kosher question to pose on the JREF forum.).

Her claim that she will never become a practicing psychic is meaningless, when she herself  has already  revealed for the lie that it is.

The party is over- the guests have gone home, the place is awash with wine spills and reeks of stale cigarette smoke.
The stage is empty, bereft of the people, lights and cameras crowding it. As I stumble around the half dark theatre looking for my dignity, my mind races to come up with the solution to the particular problem I now face.

Although I held the charade all the way through the performance, it was a dismal flop in this neck of the woods.
As I am pondering my dilemma, it becomes clear to me what must now be done.
The caravan should be packed tightly and neatly, supplies gathered for an extended journey, fresh spiels designed and practised. I am ready.

The creaking wheels turn slowly, and as I travel further away from this place, with it's glittering lights and broken dreams, I sit up front with my chin lifted in defiance.
For I know where I must go- without shame or embarrasssment as my companions.
The well paved road of delusional dishonesty will lead me to the kingdom of woo, where I shall find the believers.
I shall sit on the ruby encrusted throne as queen, while my subjects kneel before me. The helpless ones grovel in gratitude at my all knowing, all mysterious, one of a kind powers.

I shall rule the universe with confidence and supreme arrogance as the show that flopped fades away to a never remembered dream.

Posted By bookitty on 23 Nov 2009 09:46 PM
I completely support her in this and was very proud of her for bending even that much. Sadly, it was mostly ignored.

Not really ignored as much as heard before. She's been suggesting that most of her medical claims "might" be cold reading after she was pinned down about the possibility not long after she came to the JREF. Unfortunately, she hasn't further pursued that possibility to either verify or eliminate it. Any more than she has further pursued-or eliminated-the possibilitiy that her 'abilities' might be due to false memory or mental illness, etc.

'Cold reading' is a term she throws out there as a sop to skepticism. I'll commend her if she ever truly explores the possibility, but I'm not holding my breath for that.

Bookitty, I agree, there is always a market for woo.

Most, not all, "new age spiritual" people I have come across are very self absorbed.

I know this because when I was young, I was one of them.  I much prefer reality despite its ups and downs.

It is too bad and sad for Anita, but she can't say nobody cared, many non snarky JREFers tried to help her science student persona.