There is quite an unusual and challenging test on this site. Let me tell you that I got the number right when I did it.
Found by John Ligums
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
All I saw was a moonwalking bear.
I saw the original test so of course I got the wrong number==kinda hard to see in my browser anyway.
Yeah, I got the number right.
OT, the multiple choice survey was single choice… 🙂
F’ the bear! I got the count right and won! that is all that matters…
What bear?
What ball?
What video?
What site is this?
This is exactly why eyewitness reports are just bogus in a jury trial.
Man I really have the urge to go run over some cyclists! Damn subliminal messages!
I saw the girl grab the guys crotch while he was holding a knife.
I saw OJ’s killer.
Amazing. I got the count right…but did not see the bear. I reloaded the clip to make sure this wasn’t B.S., but there the bear was.
#8, I would offer another perspective. Witnesses see what matters; i.e. in this case, the number of passes. While concentrating on the assault (or whatever crime) they miss other parts of the picture. For instance, in a history class I had, the professor had someone run into the room and steal a purse. The identity of the thief was contradicted; but the fact that the purse was stolen was not.
So I agree, eyewitnesses reports on many things (including identity; esp. a Black/White circumstances) may be false; but the overall picture is not.
Defense attorneys will exaggerate this attention to detail; i.e., “was the shooter’s shirt red or black, did the shooter come in before or after John C. Dvorak”. These details will differ, but the fact of the shooting, or whom shot whom, will not. Still, a great defense ploy and a specious argument for bloggers; i.e., “this is exactly why eyewitness reports are just bogus in a jury trial.”
}} # 11 RedpawGraphics said,
}} I saw OJ’s killer.
OJ isn’t dead
ELVIS!!!!
I saw judge Crater and Jimmy Hoffa playing Pinochle in the corner!
#12, I’ll agree that some eyewitness accounts are valid, it depends on the circumstances. There are many cases when witnesses can’t identify a suspect accurately and have very differing accounts of the incident.
Would you like your life in the hands of someone who may have had a glimpse of the killer and identified you, days later, without a doubt as the killer?
Still, I thought the video was an impressive demonstration of misdirection.
#16 No I wouldn’t;-)
I’d bet that a large percentage of innocent people in jail today are there because of mistaken identity.
#16, Bubba,
Still, I thought the video was an impressive demonstration of misdirection.
Sorry, I disagree. The intent of the video was to make drivers aware that there were cyclists on the road. They failed. Instead of scanning what is ahead, as what a good driver should do, they suggest the driver should concentrate on a static event.
As a driver with many miles under my butt, I can tell you that is not the way people drive. A driver filters out the crap and concentrates on the relevant. The driver won’t be counting how many fence posts there are between an Oak tree and a Cottonwood. They are looking for potholes in the road, slow trucks ahead of them, speeding emergency lights coming up from behind fast, an on ramp just ahead, deer running in a field parallel to the road; all things that present information the driver needs to react to.
The false identity is very true. And scary.
Thanks John… what a waste of time.