 Now you see, the initial thing we require from all the claimants is a simple statement in three parts. What can you do under what circumstances with what accuracy? And that could be dousing, that could be flying by clapping the arms or whatever the claim may be. But under what circumstances with what accuracy? These are very important. That means that the claimant designed the protocol. All we have to do is organize it and set it out in a certain number of steps that the claimant also agrees with. If I had asked this or this initial... Walk us through what the next final challenge would be like. The next test would be essentially the same, but perhaps with somewhat different security depending on how the performance went. The first time on that same protocol. Or it could be that it would change completely. We've never had to deal with that problem, so we would have to design it as it comes along, I think. I think what we would do is take a look at the test, analyze it, see if there were any weaknesses there. I should strengthen it and make it a little bit more secure. And secure for both sides. Are you glad that the skeptical community is offering a price? Is there any recommendation of how you think it could be better? Because if there are these powers, we want to know about them. Well, I think Genni Randi has been well aware all the time. And I think it's easy. It's easy if you agree with the protocol. Well, it has taken some time, but it's okay. And I don't have some comments about that, because I think it's fair and easy to confirm. Connie, what your friend just said was that you were allowed to suggest an initial protocol and then it was modified. How close to your initial suggestion of a protocol was the actual challenge? Very close. The original, actually, in her application, which you guys can see in your packets, the statement after the claim said that she was able to identify letters written on tiles made out of cardboard, turned upside down on a table. So this was very close. Yes? I have a question. There's actually, for me personally, there was no fear of that. The protocol was so secure that the tester can't actually alter what happens. I've never given the level of access that would have been needed. I'm talking completely about perception. Perception. I think that would be my response to anyone who believed that. He never had the option. I think you have that perception on both sides. You can go either way. I think one, you can say, well, maybe you would do something to Hal Kahn. And then there's my background. You may look and say, well, if something was going on, Banachek might be one that I should be able to see if he's sitting right up there, because this is what I do for a living every day. So that perception can go both ways. The bottom line, there's a million dollars on the line. So I think if you're going to look and go, which way I'm going to go, you'd rather have somebody up there that, you know, could detect the trickery, rather than worry so much about the perception of somebody saying, hey, he can be helping, he can be cheating. The other thing is, it works both ways. I walked up to Randy at the very beginning and I said, Randy, I said, you know, I just want to make sure. And it was a question I had to ask, because when I worked with a scientist, they never did ask, we were magicians. And I said, Randy, this isn't like a publicity stunt. I just, I don't believe that it is, but I'm going to ask you that question. It's not to get to the first stage. And he said, no, no, no, of course it's not. And I took it to his word at that point. But it is a question I had to put out there. And I had to put it out that I wasn't being, like, Randy Ponged or something like that. I mean, I was not allowed to speak to him. I had no clue. And the other thing is it was a little scary for me, because I can think of multiple ways that somebody, if they wanted to cheat, could cheat. And so as a result, I was not allowed to exam on the cards. I was not allowed to look at those. And that was something I worried about. I mean, you know, in the very back of my mind, of course, it was like, trust me, I had it with my life. But you just never know, you know, you never really know. And so it worked both ways for me. As a result, they had a very good double-line tip, you know, set. And that bothered me, but I knew that I had to be put in that position. I have a ghost always in the back of my head, but one of these things is going to take place. I think of all the possibilities, because there are so many possibilities. We magicians know what the possibilities are, and we just sit in trouble just to weave in. I wonder if we've got a rare coming in here who is actually a cousin of somebody, whatever, who has a method. I could have figured, well, we both could. Yeah, no, I already had like three ways in my head where Randy wanted to go with somebody else, or Allison, or something like that. Allison, you know, you just never know. No, thanks, Al. But you never know, and I could think of multiple ways that they could have accomplished if they were working with clients. So you think about this. So I would think that if it hadn't been a success, well, when you go into the official testing, I probably would not be the tester at that point. That equation would be taken out at that point. That very fact is a reason for the two parts, the preliminary and then the formal test, because as Steve mentioned very early on in this discussion, the preliminary test, the odds are relatively easy to be one in one thousand. And we take a great deal of care, but we tend to assume that this is not a clever wizard from across the ocean who has been trained by mystical forces and whatnot. Government agencies are going to win that million dollars we need to buy something, to blow something up with the United States. We don't think that way. We automatically make the assumption, the basic assumption, this is the honest person who believes that he or she has the powers. And that's a safe enough assumption very, very, very probably true. But that occurs when you have the second stage and that's how you see it going. Man check this little screen, but we actually have spare tests, and if you would like to actually go through the test the same way that Connie did, you're welcome to. Um... For how you like it. Jamie? Okay, thanks. No, you know the bottom line is I wouldn't do it as much as I would love to simply because I feel that we're making a mockery of the system and to be quite honest with you, it shouldn't be a mid-mockery. This is very serious to me. Honey came here, she was very serious about it. I think we need to deal with the same aspect of being just as serious and hopefully that's exactly how we're going to cross in what we did because that was my intent the entire time. So, you know, we joke about maybe going after that prize money. It wouldn't be fun just as a fun thing to try to do it, but I think it would make it more great. I did come up with that thing again and say, you know, you really should have just gone for the fourth round more.