John Benneth wrote:

> Dear Luise,
>
> You're absolutely right. But for over the last two months it's been a
> continual struggle to get Randi to define what he wants to see in a
> trial. I've suggested a trial procedure, when and where to do it, but he
> continues to respond ad hominem without countering with any of the
> essentials such as who, what , when, where and how the trial should be
> conducted.

Happy Dog writes:

If you had suggested something practical, things might have moved faster.
And, John, when it comes to ad hominems, you're clearly leading the way.
Really want to get into this again?

John Benneth writes:

>      He has yet to officially recognize my claim or even return my
> application with his signature on it, as his Challenge implies he will
> do,  and he has kept the return postage fee. In the meantime, he has
> made demands for me to reveal additional information about my claim
> after I submitted the required two paragraphs defining it to him. And he
> continues to make predictions that I will fail.

Happy Dog writes:

You will fail, John.  And the additional information was required to design
a protocol.  Remember that we couldn't get you to say, exactly, what you
intended to do.
<inane and ad hominem ranting snipped>

John Benneth writes:

>      My proposal now stands on seed germination. I feel this would be an
> easy way to disseminate a test procedure that anyone can do. I suggest
> we use oats, but am currently looking for the right substance to
> potentize. Any suggestions as to what that might be will be taken
> kindly.

Happy Dog writes:

So when you fail you can blame someone else for giving you the wrong
substance...

>      Randi can then do his own test, and win the Challenge for himself.
> Too bad my claim was put in first.

Happy Dog writes:

Sorry John, but the first person to make this happen wins.  It could be
anyone.  You have no exclusive claim according to my reading of the rules.
I hope that lots of people apply now with a serious preliminary test.  I
think I'll publicize the method you suggest and see if someone else can
beat you to the prize.

<more inane ranting-like-he's-already-won snipped>

John Benneth writes:

>         Notice that they have been rather quiet, lately. Perhaps they are
> packing their old thoughts for a sudden absquatulation to a new position
> of bashing muscle testing, or something like that.

Happy Dog writes:

Nope, your method looks very promising.  We're preparing ourselves to beat
you to the prize and then use the money to suppress more alternative
modalities.

John Benneth writes:

>       If after a thorough drubbing by the obvious he has failed to
> surrender, and being pig headed as I think he is, and I fully suspect
> that this will be the case, I'll move in with the coup d'grace: A formal
> lay inquest of his claim.

Happy Dog writes:

Oooohhhhhhh.  Very scary.  I understand that Randi's already bought land in
Costa Rica.
<lunatic misunderstanding of the law snipped  But, then again, it's the US
where anyone can sue anyone else for anything>

John Benneth writes:
>      If there is a prize fund to be had, I fully intend to have it.

Happy Dog writes:

I predict that you'll be beaten to it.  It's already under way, I'm sure.
Should have ket your mouth shut and made it happen sooner John.  Such is
life.  Easy come, easy go.
erruff