The Girl With X-Ray Eyes

imageNatasha Demkina, a young girl living in Saransk, Russia, began to receive a lot of media attention around the middle of last month. It started with an article in Pravda, which hailed her as the 'Girl with X-ray vision'. You see, Natasha possesses the unusual ability to peer through human flesh and spot diseases and injuries that are lurking unseen within people's bodies. Or, at least, this is what Pravda claimed. It didn't take long for more newspapers to catch onto the story. The British Sun has been the most relentless about pursuing it. They've actually flown Natasha to London and are now parading her around like some kind of weird curiosity. Does Natasha really have x-ray eyes? Well, I doubt it. But I'm sure The Sun is going to milk this for all it's worth.

Health/Medicine

Posted on Tue Feb 03, 2004



Comments

"The Girl With Very Normal Eyes"
Posted by askolnick  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  10:10 PM
<a href="http://www.csmmh.org/demkina/answerstocritics.html">Answers to Our Critics
Posted by askolnick  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  10:13 PM
Drawing Wrong Conclusions
Posted by askolnick  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  10:15 PM
<center>http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/cover.jpg
<font size="+1">
_"Testing Natasha"

"The Girl with Normal Eyes"</center> </font>
Posted by askolnick  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  10:23 PM
<font size="+1">Live Science</font>
http://www.livescience.com/othernews/reason_demkina_050128.html
Posted by askolnick  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  10:27 PM
<font size="+1"Wikipedia</font>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natasha_Demkina
Posted by askolnick  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  10:31 PM
<font size="+1">Reference.com
</font>
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Natasha_Demkina
Posted by askolnick  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  10:38 PM
I found these to be far more fair and balanced than the above drek.

(Oh, and thanks for the support, UncleBob! Glad you enjoyed Troll Fishing...told ya...classic..I'm sure he's not done with you yet. You must have hit the mark because he's reposting all the crap he and his cronies wrote...if it's even him and not some crack-head imposter....😉

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/observer/X-ray_sequel.htm

http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/propaganda/THES1.html

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=38855

http://dream-detective.com/_wsn/page9.html

http://www.unexplainable.net/artman/publish/article_1899.shtml

http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/criticandokardec/CSICOP-vs-Natasha-Demkina
Posted by Archangel  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  10:39 PM
<font size="+1">High Beam Research</font>
http://www.highbeam.com/library/docfree.asp?DOCID=1G1:132190057&ctrlInfo=Round18%3AMode18c%3ADocG%3AResult&ao;=
Posted by askolnick  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  10:49 PM
I don't expect Internet trolls like Archangel to understand the difference between respected published literature and the e-bleatings of cranks and trolls. But normal readers here should appreciate the difference by noting which references are cited by researchers and university faculty -- such as for the Fall 2005 course on The Scientific Method being taught at Southern Methodist University, which lists the Skeptical Inquirer reports on Natasha Demkina as recommended reading: <a href="http://www.physics.smu.edu/~pseudo/syllabus.html">
http://www.physics.smu.edu/~pseudo/syllabus.html
Posted by askolnick  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  11:02 PM
I never knew that lol!!! They are everywhere these day. stupid troll people seriously. they never admit they are wrong because they have no life. esp nick.

just because you things has to be "scientific" and it needs to be proven biologically means its true. people these day.

it's possible she could see through living tissues or see aura. we could find her ability really helpful. if she is doing the "cold reading" she is really skillful...unlike nick here. who tries making money for making other people look like a fraud.

americans... anything is possible, but it doesnt mean it's impossible if you dont have the ability to do that. what she did up there was really amazing and you guys still trying to insult her claims.

she even flown to london and japan. they were all impressed by her ability. i don't see why nick has to prove anything. its almost like if nick doesn't understand women.

http://www.victorzammit.com/articles/natashacansue.html
Posted by lolzer  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  11:10 PM
Feed the Troll!

Does anyone understand a 17 year old girl?
Does anyone understand the chemical inbalance of a women after giving birth to a child?
Does anyone understand that even though they are wrong they wont admit it?
Who are we to say she is a fraud?
I don't see any harm done so far...
Posted by Trollfeeder  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  11:17 PM
"Does anybody understand the chemical imbalance" that makes a person seek attention by posting mindless and illiterate drivel?

If Loozer and Trollfeeder would kindly submit themselves for an autopsy, they could greatly help scientists discover what goes wrong inside of broken minds.
Posted by askolnick  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  11:46 PM
LOL! Thanks Trollfeeder and lolzer. I needed a good laugh. I think nick takes himself too seriously, and he may have gone over the edge when he basically insulted every internet user on the planet...

The only reason I can see that he's so defensive is because he knows he's wrong and if he admitted it, it would be the end of his career and reputation - not mention the reputations of his cronies. So he fights every little battle with every weapon at his disposal. He even has the balls to attack a Nobel Prize winner on page 10 of this thread, saying "I don't think Brian Josephson has done anything "truly scientific" since winning his Nobel prize in 1973 -- the same year he turned to the dark side and endorsed the real, genuine fake psychic powers
Posted by Archangel  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  11:49 PM
Can you handle the truth? Not many people are able to do that. The truth is Natasha could see what is going on in the human body.

Natasha isn't dumb if she's really a fraud. Just like Nick isn't a really an ass. Some people are recieving bad information or being mistreated. Just like Natasha is being mistreated with her test.
Posted by Rubber Ducky  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  11:50 PM
Oh my god. I submitted my last post before I saw the Troll's 'autopsy' comment. What in the hell is wrong this man?

Definite Trolldom. And ya know what, he's used that little jewel before.

The guy is out of control.
Posted by Archangel  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  11:51 PM
Hahaha... Archangel so smart! I didn't know Nobel Troll Prize exist! *sarcasm*
Nick must be awesome winning that prize. I want to nominate askolnick as the best Troll of the year. :coolgrin:
Posted by Trollfeeder  on  Tue Oct 25, 2005  at  11:57 PM
Trollfeeder, I second your emotion...

Actually, I'm a little worried about our little Troll. Someone commented earlier in this forum's thread the askolnick gets wilder and wilder. Threats, insults, condescending putdowns.

Is he getting drunk? Is he off his meds? Is he just an unbelievably classic Troll? Can he really be the respected and renowned Andrew Skolnick, tamer of the young Russian teenage girl, who is required reading at a respected university? Can he leap tall buildings in a single bound; is an alien from another world? Look, up in the sky, it's a bird, it's a plane, it's SUPERTROLL!! Nothing mild-mannered about this reporter for a small, he's rude, he's abusive, he's insulting, he's INSANE!!!

Oh my. UncleBob, where are you when we need you...

askolnick, this is what you get when you insult the unwashed masses. Snark.
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  12:08 AM
It's a shame that one character assassin and several junior highschool trolls are taking over this thread. I'll leave it to them. But I will return to post links to information on Natasha Demkina reported in respected print and online publications.
Posted by askolnick  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  12:17 AM
lols
Posted by lolzer  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  12:25 AM
This from a guy who threatened to sue Brazil for libel..

Now he's going to take his ball and go home. Boo hoo. You can dish out insults and high-schoolish remarks, but you can't take 'em.

What a sad sack. Wish UncleBob were here to witness the last assholenick insult. Character assassin indeed. From a guy who wants to perform autopsies on teenagers. Great. I'm calling Southern Methodist Univ. tomorrow to enroll.

I just love it! Didn't clown-troll read his own posts? They're totally outrageous and insulting. Been that way for over a YEAR, with this mamas boy insulting people on the thread. Starting with poor Puck and his math skills.

You will return? What do you think, you're MacArthur?
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  12:51 AM
Now that he's gone, here's a serious question:

CSICOP changed the test after Natasha got to New York. This change was by introducing two elements that she said she could not
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  12:52 AM
So, um, does anyone think I went too far by calling him "Supertroll"? I do feel a little bad about that one.
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  12:54 AM
lolzer said:

"just because you things has to be "scientific" and it needs to be proven biologically means its true. people these day."

What did you intend to say there? That paragraph makes no sense.

"it's possible she could see through living tissues or see aura."

PROVE IT!

"we could find her ability really helpful. if she is doing the "cold reading" she is really skillful."

Yes, it would be helpful IF someone could see through solid objects. Unfortunately, no one can. As for the "cold reading" thing, many people are skilled at it. Actually, you don't have to be all that good at it if you have an audience that accepts you at face value.

"americans... anything is possible, but it doesnt mean it's impossible if you dont have the ability to do that. what she did up there was really amazing and you guys still trying to insult her claims."

The burden of proof is on the person making an extraordinary claim. Those of you who support this girl want to turn that around, but it isn't going to happen. If she can do what she claims to be able to do under controlled conditions, there is a million dollars just waiting for her.

"she even flown to london and japan. they were all impressed by her ability."

So what? David Blaine has travelled to London where many people were impressed with him. He's still just a magician.

"i don't see why nick has to prove anything. its almost like if nick doesn't understand women."

What ARE you taling about here?
Posted by Cranky Media Guy  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  05:04 AM
askolnick's lover said:

"What ARE you taling about here?"

What are you talking about?
I'm making typos and talking random crap 😊

"So what? David Blaine has travelled to London where many people were impressed with him. He's still just a magician."

Is David Blaine = Natasha Demkina? I never specifically said who were impressed and why they were impressed. Stop making assumption.


The post I made earlier was a bunch of random crap to get you guys goign with the argue, but I'm trying to say "where is the love"? LOVE!! love <3<3<3<3 LOvEvEevLover~ Stop hating. Just because you sit at home and eat American food (burgers fries and fatty stuff) doesn't makes you any better than her. LOVEERERE

Also... where is your proof of her claims are fake? Were all humans!!! Lovereoveelore
Posted by lolzerZz  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  05:29 AM
Cranky Media Guy, save your finger tips. The troll now has his children spamming this thread. It's not worth encouraging them. They'll eventually find another web site to troll if they're not fed.
Posted by askolnick  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  05:54 AM
Just because I'm something of an asshole, I thought I'd point out that Archangel and Uncle Bob are posting from the same IP, which is frowned upon. Draw your own conclusions.
Posted by Charybdis  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  09:07 AM
Charybdis, my conclusion is that they are the same person, and that "they" may be named Julio Siqueira. Siqueira claims to be a "microbiologist," although he admitted in an email that he never worked as a biologist. A year ago, Siqueria trolled for answers to questions about our test. He then distorted and rewrote our "quotes" and disseminated them in a crude attempt to discredit us. He eventually posted a collection of libelous statements on his web site, which he calls a scientific "study." He even had audacity to claim that I had reviewed a final draft 10 days before he published his "study" and that he had included my "feedback" in the final "publication." None of this is true. Long before that, I completely stopped all communications with him upon discovering that he was reworking our quotes and disseminating them in an attempt to discredit us. Julio Siqueira is to truth as a uremic dog is to a fire hydrant. You can read his libelous document here and see for yourself why I think he and "Archangel" are one and the same:

http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/criticandokardec/CSICOP-vs-Natasha-Demkina.htm
Posted by askolnick  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  09:46 AM
alskolnick says: "my conclusion is that they are the same person, and that "they" may be named Julio Siqueira"

Good. This further proves to me that alskolnick jumps to the wrong conclusions from the facts given.

Yes, indeed, UncleBob is posting from the same IP because he is Archangel's uncle - thus..Uncle Bob! Wow! Now guess Archangel's age and gender.

And, neither UncleBob nor Archangel are Julio. We watched the show for the first time a few days ago. UncleBob turned to Archangel and said, you know, if she's got x-ray eyes, maybe these smartasses should have brought a Gieger counter. Just because Julio had the same thought, and hit a lot of the same points doesn't mean we're him.

Does that look like a brazilian IP address to you?

Numbskull Troll. Askolnick, you are the master at reworking quotes. You do it all the time. Twisting things people say.
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  10:31 AM
My hostility towards askolnick began when I first got on the board, shortly after I first saw the documentary
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  10:33 AM
I would probably take more blame for this, but reading through the historical posts by askolnick on this site, the pattern of his rude and abusive behavior is readily apparent. Perhaps this is because he sits in some type of ivory tower, looking down upon the unwashed masses, or perhaps it
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  10:34 AM
"Archangel" is furious over being outed as a troll with a virulent anti-science agenda.
Posted by askolnick  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  10:57 AM
It's good you can read my mind, askolnick. Perhaps you should be tested yourself for mind-reading skills.

I think anyone can see who the real Troll is askolnick. You. Your responses are so predictably trollish that it's laughable!

Anti-science. Very funny. You left out something. I'm anti-bad-science.

Don't feed the Trollnick! And hey, didn't you say YOU weren't going to feed the Trolls, and make like MacArthur and "return" from your ivory tower to post your "respectable links" from the anals of bad science?

You actually like being part of the flaming message contingent, don't you? I think it's truly a means for you to get your frustrations out.

Furious virulence. Very poetic. Someone should use that as a screen name....heh...
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  11:58 AM
BTW Charybdis, thanks for jumping in to try to keep this place more honest.
Posted by askolnick  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  01:27 PM
Once again, askolnick makes an innuendo. There's been no dishonesty here. Archangel and UncleBob have been very open that they knew each other and have been communicating on this thread. Archangel actually asked UncleBob to look at the troll-like behavior and make a comment.

When you're working from a NAT address on a SOHO, that's the way the IP ball bounces.

Good job on getting this thread off track and away from the solid points that have been made against askolnick and his bad science.
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  02:36 PM
Archangel, you're a dishonest troll who has been posting under multiple names. You've been outed by the moderator. It's time to crawl back under your bridge and take your alter egos with you.
Posted by aaskolnick  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  02:44 PM
Oh! This is even BETTER! Archangel recalls the earlier post from askolnick actually SUGGESTS that a poster come back on the thread with a new screen name:

"Puck, your opinion of whether the passing score, which was agreed to by Natasha and her represenetatives, was too high is no more credible than your previous false statements about the statistics. You best return here under a new screen name because this one has been pretty much discredited. --ASkolnick"

This is on page 2 of the thread, December 10, 2004.

What was askolnick trying to do? (besides insulting the poster and belittling him/her) Encourage dishonesty? Set a TRAP for the poster? "Ah-hah! You're using the same IP adddress...gotcha! Fell into my diabolical trap! Got you like I got x-ray girl. Am I not so very clever?" Whoo-hoo!

This is like dealing with a child. alskolnick cannot be an adult. He sure brings out the child in me! Hey, wait...I may actually be a child. But not from Brazil....heh...

What a Troll!
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  02:50 PM
Sigh. Somewhere, a lowly bridge is missing its ugly little troll.
Posted by aaskolnick  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  03:00 PM
Normally, I would just yes, you've got a point. Since both my uncle and I used the same network, it sure looks like one person has posted under different names. I'm the one who acutally got my Uncle into that position, when I could have done better to ensure that there was no confusion.

This is exactly what csicop should have done, created a test that ensured that there was no confusion about their results or motives.

It's a perfect example of that, however intentional it may have been.

It's also an example of how askolnick uses the worst possible scenario to evaluate a situation, and doesn't care to examine more balanced views. I'll bet if two of his supporters were posting from the same NAT, he'd be counting them as two different individuals.

I definitely admit to Troll behavior. But it's just reflexive biting at the Supertroll - aaskolnik.
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  03:08 PM
"Sigh. Somewhere, a lowly bridge is missing its ugly little troll."

This is a great game. I'm rubber, you're glue, it bounces off me and sticks to you.

You know, I only have time for this because I just got out a month-long stay in the hospital and I'm recovering. What is the excuse for a "reputable" researcher like aaskolnick? It's just unbelievable. Interesting, but weird.
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  03:14 PM
Archangel, your bridge just called. It wants you and your "Uncle" back.

While you may be a nasty little troll, when it comes to lying, you're as big as a giant.
Posted by aaskolnick  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  03:14 PM
Did you get a number so we can call it back? You have to take better messages than that.

Was it the bridge in Brazil or the one in Russia? Or the one across the River Kwai?
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  03:19 PM
Hello Moderator.

Since we have been identified as posting from the same IP address, are we no longer welcome on your site? I know we have participated in lots of flaming communications with one of the other posters, but we have genuine concerns and questions that we'd like to continue adding to the forum. But, if we're no longer welcome, then we will be happy to quit giving our clicks.

Thank you,
Archangel, UncleBob and the rest of the as-yet-unposted household.
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  04:25 PM
"..the rest of the as-yet-unposted household."

Not that anyone else necessarily wants to post from here. Mom's not to thrilled with our "obsession" Well. Ok. Archangel's seeming obsession. UncleBob could really care less and he's having a beer.
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  04:28 PM
Archangel, we've had problems with people creating multiple personalities to support their position before. Therefore, when I see one IP on two different users I make mention of it, just in case. It's perfectly valid to share a computer, and we have no problem with it if that's what you're doing.
Posted by Charybdis  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  04:52 PM
Charybdis,

Thank you. I completely understand the concern about multiple personality creation, and I really appreciate your kind response.

It's not something either one of us would do, and we didn't really even think about it when we posted. Once I realized how it must have looked, it was a really strange position to be in and I had no idea how to fix it. Even if I posted photos of me and my uncle, what would that prove?

We acually have five pc's in the house using the same router connection. Glad my mom didn't post, that probably would have resulted in a total breakdown on the thread...heh..

I'll also try to keep things toned down a bit. I'm hoping the other poster will too.

Thank you again, Charybdis in Hell.

I like your screen name, btw. I'm a fan of ancient mythology - ok, well, I'll admit it, I really connected the name from the tv show "Hercules, the Legendary Journeys" one of my favs.. 😊

Thanks!
Posted by Archangel  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  05:50 PM
askonick is a ticked off troll at the moment now. He's not being honest in anyway and he's losing his ability to type 500 word nonsense that makes him smart.

So face it, atrollnick. You don't understand the situation of the test and what happen if you were there. You're just making up bogus to support your fantasy world of "I am right no matter what you say".

Bottom line... Natasha can "see" the actual flow of inside the human body.
Posted by Trollfeeder  on  Wed Oct 26, 2005  at  10:30 PM
Trollfeeder: LOL!

I think this askonick claims that he actually IS one of the csicop researchers who performed the "x-ray eyes" test and appeared on the documentary.

Let's say that I have my doubts...but there are indications that he could be one of the guys who put together that poorly constructed "test" and then littered the process with insulting barbs and innuendo that really have no place in good science, at least when dealing with it's subjects. It's bad enough when researchers and scientists insult their own peers, but to insult the subjects, that's worse than unprofessional.

If this truly is A. Skolnick, csicop, then his lack of professionalism on this very site are very enlightening. I've had a thought that someone might even be impersonating him here in order to make him look bad. But then again, it does match some of the poor behavior seen on the documentary and in the csicop journals on the subject.

Also, I think his analysis of the evidence where my "identity" has been concerned shows certain little gaps in his abilities, as he has been oh-so-off-target in his wild and strongly worded accusations. <sigh>
Posted by Archangel  on  Thu Oct 27, 2005  at  11:03 AM
Archangel, I see you're talking to yourself again -- or is he another one of your "relatives" who lives with you beneath the troll bridge?

You write: "If this truly is A. Skolnick, csicop, then his lack of professionalism on this very site are very enlightening."

What's the matter, did you forget you were no longer typing as "Tollfeeder?"

Do you think anyone here with at least half a brain is fooled by your posting as an illiterate numbskull to cheer the "brillance" of your own posts? Archangel, most people aren't as stupid as you apparently think. I suspect most can see right though your troll games.
Posted by askolnick  on  Thu Oct 27, 2005  at  11:40 AM
Nope. Wrong again. Trollfeeder is not Archangel, nor is Trollfeeder anyone Archangel knows. Archangel is perfectly capable of talking to himself and cheering himself on in his own posts...lol!

Verify with the Moderator, if you like.

You're just classic troll. Picking on an obvious typo, then claiming I'm posting as an "illiterate". Insulting Trollfeeder in the process. What a champ you are. You obviously know how to speak to the unwashed masses. I learn from the master. Sheesh.

I think the original sentence was actually:

"If this truly is A. Skolnick, csicop, then his lack of professionalism, insulting behavior, wild and outrageous comments, and continual displays of troll-like behaviors on this very site are very enlightening."

It bears repeating, with the inherent correction involved..thanks for the opportunity..heh..

Then you prove my point IMMEDIATELY! It's brilliant!

Trollfeeder is right, though...you are quite the "ticked off troll" I'm truly impressed at your almost exacting ability to exhibit true, classic, Internet Troll behavior.

I like the way everything is a big conspiracy with you. You know what they say about "projecting".

Yep, I've done a little trolling on this site, but my god, man, you take the cake!
Posted by Archangel  on  Thu Oct 27, 2005  at  12:08 PM
Comments: Page 5 of 15 pages ‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 7 >  Last ›
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.