« Autism – personal experience more credible than scientists? | Main | The Woo Handbook »

October 07, 2007

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Never mind to the mile. Get ten hairs from ten cities, being careful to choose people who aren't racially representative of the city, and match the hair to the city. If he can get even five out of ten right I'll be impressed; I calculate he has a 0.37% probability of success by that metric.

Email sent! Thanks for the suggestion.

OK, so let's look at this "Facts" site. Well, that should give the details of all these dozens of missing people he's located. Let's see....
Three (that's 3) missing persons cases are listed. Out of those, just there's just ONE (that's 1) case where Mr. Krugel actually found the misper - a teenage girl who had run away from home and was found alive and well quite close by. This was AFTER Mr Krugel had gone to several places where her friends hung out and talked to them. And the girl's mother says she never actually saw Mr. Krugel use his magic box.
Not impressed.

Amazing.

Yet another individual who claims an 90% accuracy rate, that he "never charges a fee," rave reviews from people he's "helped," and so on.

Where have we seen this before? Oh, right.

Using the word "quantum" and calling it a "system" rather than "psychic powers" doesn't really change the reading on my bull-o-meter.

"Give Krugel one strand of hair from each of (say) ten people randomly distributed throughout the world."

Sorry, that won't work. His claim states the people have to be missing. That makes it untestable, just like a good scam should be.

"Sorry, that won't work. His claim states the people have to be missing. "
Yet he also claims to have tested it on his own son - locating the boy to within two meters - and he's never said his son was missing at the time. And why should it only work on missing people?
And what's his definition of 'missing' anyway? In at least two of the cases on the Danie Krugel Facts site, the mispers were only missing to their families - others knew perfectly well where they were.
Like all such scam artists, his claims are never consistent.

After being one of the few voices speaking out about this con locally, it's almost a relief that he has been revealed to the globe. Your post, and the one on Bad Science, at least give me hope that there are more people out there willing to take a stand against Danie and his Magic Box.

PS what he doesn't say in the Maddy articles is that he not only claims to extract DNA from a single strand of hair, he also claims to do it from hair clippings, like the kind you find in an old razor. Yes, that's right, he claims to extract DNA from hair that has no live tissue attached. But it's science, science, science!

The part that cracks me up (and angers me) is that he claims that he can use this to find missing people, and then says it works kinda like a fish finder.

So he means it can't find missing people? You can't find a particular fish with a fish finder. You can only use it to see if fish happen to be below you or not.

What is in DNA that he claims transmits something that he can pick up?

GPS is almost as poorly understood as QM is. Most everyone thinks that with GPS you can find something else. This obviously can only happen if that "something else" transmits something.

But alas, this is more evidence that we as a society need to be educating our youngsters with more science and critical thinking courses. Weep.

I wonder how this nut gets around the fact that GPS signals are so weak that a 1 inch layer of water can stop them.

How does he locate buried and or hidden victims?

Does he account for a multipath signal?

Atmospheric interference?

How did he get the DoD to let him transmit
to their satellites, the GPS constellation is still run by the US military?

How many visible satellites does he need?

Did he take into account selective availability (which was only turned off in 2000)?

How does the victim download the ephemeris and almanac without having a reciever?

Did anyone mention to the nut that GPS recievers are not generally transmitters? You know, recievers.

GPS needs 3 segments to work - space, control and user. With this gibberish the user segment is missing. The victim has no reciever nevermind a transmitter that can communicate with a GPS satellite.

Unless DNA can download ephemeris and almanac data, can recieve and decode radio signals, has an extremely accurate internal clock, and can transmit radio signals that are decipherable by GPS satellites, and unless we've been lied to about the strength and wave length of GPS signals, this has to be the funniest and most ridiculous bit of woo I've read in a while.

I knew that class on the GPS would come in handy one day...

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search site