talkmagic.co.uk

DAMN!

Wonderful Posts! Kudos to all three of you!

Seige, you hit the nail on the head and stated what I and others talk about with great frequency -- the JREF and the Challenge... all of it is merely one man's gimmick for getting work -- a marketing tool (and quite the clever one too).

Randi has built a small fortune based on the idea of being one of the most hated men in the America if not the world. Like Barnum, he love the fact that people talk about him (so long as they spell his name right... thank god he shortened it from Randall James Hamilton Zwinge).

The issue about things being "scientific" is simply due to the fact that Randi & Co. are always screaming the term "scientific" ad infenitem when it comes to the Psi question and yet the majority of them have little to no genuine scientific training (outside some limited psychology and base chemistry perhaps)... especially ferensic based science, which is one side of what must be applied to this particular field of research.

In a recently program on The Science Channel (I believe it was) a fairly in-depth article was done about the U.S. Government's use of Remote Viewers in the 60s and 70s. One of the things that was brought out in this "study" is Yes, the RV's were not 100% on the mark BUT their hit ratios were higher than what mere guess work would deliver. Too, the "match rate" between viewers -- in which two or more would pick up on the same/similar details and/or a collection thereof -- was exceptionally high as well.

From a "Scientific" point of view the project was not seen as a failure, only a program that was under-funded and due to the new Religious Right influence set into American politics (the Reagan era, etc.) the contract around the program was cancelled, the facility disassembled, etc. Yet, several of the people involved in that research as RV operators still work as consultants with Law Enforcement groups, they all have valid testimonies about the things they saw and experienced, etc.

I believe situations like the JREF and even CSICOPS exist and are used by "the powers that be" as a kind of misdirection by our governments, so fewer people are prone to believe, to give such ideas "power" as it were. What better way to use something in a martial manner than to have people out in the world telling everyone to not believe?

wow, interesting read this thread is becoming. Just to clartify what got it all started, "themagicwand" posed the following question:

[quote]
My question is, even if you had the power to, say, bend spoons with your gaze only from a distance of ten feet, do you think Randi's organisation would pay up?
[unquote]

what followed was a number of interesting replies and comments including Craig Browning's comprehensive post suggesting that the real reason no one has ever won the million $ is becuase there is no way Randi would allow anyone to succeed.

i totally disagree with that explaination and believe the real reason no one has won the million $ is because no one can really bend a spoon with their mind and therefore expose themselves to being found out.

of course this brings up all the typical retorts... the conspiracy theory, the fact that Randi is on the payrole of key media outlets that would ensure he never lost etc. then the golden classic... i cant accept that a person can bend a spoon with their mind because it goes against what is written in the bible. and finally... the knock out punch... just because science doesn't understand something doesn't make it impossible.

well, to touch on some previously raised examples, first the witch trials. we now know those put to death were not witches, they simply held a view that differed to the people in power at the time. the witch part was simply an excuse. life on Mars... we once thought there was life as we know it on Mars, it now seems more likely there is not. what has all this taught us??? simply that history and greater technology disproves more things than it proves. that makes it far more likely that 50 years from now we will scientifically have an explaination for why people cant bend spoons with their mind than a general acceptance that they can. of course that will see the cries of... just because science doesn't understand something doesn't make it impossible.

OK, so that last bit i agree with. " just because science doesn't understand something doesn't make it impossible". but is that what we are discussing??? i dont think so. that is more so the crutch used by the spoon benders explaining why they can when in reality they cant.

and the reason they cant is simple. we all accept the human mind is a remarkable thing. it is capable of much much more than we could imagine. i have seen documentaries of people who can read 2 pages of a book at the same time... one with their left eye and one with their right. i fully accept the untapped resource we have. our bodies for example have the abilities to produce various chemicals that create different conditions, both positive and negative. imagine being able to control that... imagine being able to attack cancer internally... can science understand, explain, predict what is possible? NO! do i believe one day we will get there? I have no idea... but i maintain an open mind.

however... spoon bending? sorry. problem number 1. the change in the molecular structure of the spoon that would be necessary to have it bend would require a different kind of energy than that we have in our brain. OK... so here come the "but science... etc" retorts.

OK, so let me put it another way. who of you believes they know someone who could pass this test?
(1) come to a place of my chosing with no advanced knowledge of where.
(2) undergo a complete CAT scan to ensure no foreign articles are present.
(3)apply garments I have selected and supplied.
(4) i will then place a spoon supplied by me, on a table designed & supplied by me.
(5) all you have to do is make the spoon bend without touching it.

science doesn't need to be involved. just show me a good bend. take a couple hours if you need it and make it bend in half. Randi's rule book is not the problem... the fact that no one can bend the spoon is what keeps his million dollars is his pocket.

On the issue of conspiracy theories, this chap has some interesting comments on bogus science:

http://chronicle.com/free/v49/i21/21b02001.htm

I don't agree with the exact wording of everything written, but specifically point 2 may be of interest with this subject.

Point 7 may be seen as somewhat antagonistic to this debate, but it's somewhat out of context here. It's also worth bearing in mind that he probably intended "laws of nature" to mean a different thing to "scientific theory". Though I'm not entirely clear on what he means.

Clearly science does develop and take on new ideas, but there is a natural (and healthy) reluctance to change the body of existing accepted knowledge without *very good* evidence to suggest that it should be updated. as discussed, this evidence comes from repeatable experiments.

Without delving too deeply into conspiracy ideas, a thought struck me earlier about the current status in this debate, and how it is beneficial to the claimants.

The psi claimants can't be disproven easily for previously discussed reasons, and also have a small number of orthodox scientists who think there may be something in the claims.

This is the ideal situation for them. They can claim scientific backing (even if it is dubious and very patchy), but would gain no real benefit if it were all explained and understood in a replicable way, as they would possibly be out of a job.

Why would you go to see a psychic if the average man on the street can train to produce exactly the same results using an understood and documented method (concentration, brain-wave transference or whatever it would be called). Once it's understood and documented, it becomes something that can likely be used in a similar way to how we use electricity or magnetism, and so possibly eventually loses its mystery.

Of course the ones who know they're a fraud wouldn't want to be thoroughly investigated either.

how's that for a conspiracy theory

Steverino wrote:What I think you were trying to say is that it's impossible to prove by experiment that something can't be done.

Yeah, sorry, that's exactly what I was trying to say, but it was before 10 am on a Saturday!

Bobby_Cat, as I understand it the Randi Challenge isn't just about spoon bending. I accept that the likelyhood of that being possible is incredibly small, however, the chances of true thought reading being possible are significantly greater and I don't think that anyone does their position any favours by rejecting them outright just because they don't believe.

NickJ is correct on that side of it and as far as Spoon/Metal Bending is concerned only one "psychic" ever had the items he bent tested by physicist and metal-experts who supported the fact that the molecular composition of the items bent had changed. They likewise testified that the metal did not show stress related fracturing and tension such as would be found in a similar item bent by a stage magician. Other than all of this the is only one other thing that must be wieghed when it comes to the whole Bending issue -- the first time it was ever mentioned in conjunction to anything remotely psychic, was in a magic book sometime back in the 1940s (memory serving me right). As to how this individual changed the molecular structure and can deliver bent metal without the stress issues found in tricked demonstration... well, I can't say. I don't think it has anything to do with ET or Casper the Ghost and I do believe that it will be discovered that the ability, though rare as well as peculiar, is 100% of natural origin. Which brings me to the next very important point.

There is an stark difference between a person that is legitimately Skeptical vs. a Cynic. Most of the honest skeptics I know aren't out to talk in absolutes or tossing tyrades here and there simply because someone may believe differently than they, etc. In short, most skeptics aren't out trying to convert folks, which cannot be said for the Cynic who generally seems to see everything in black & white with no in between and loathes the idea that people believe something that runs contrary to their opinion. Then again, the majority of those that hold to this more calloused position rarely have anything that represents a.) genuine experience in paranormal research and investigation; b.) any sense of education that goes much beyond High School; their primary knowledge on "the issue" coming from web sites and publications like the Skeptical Inquirer... so, just like the Sunday morning Christians (those that go through motion of religion but not living the action thereof) the cynic gets his/her facts straight from the priest's mouth, as it were vs. investigating and learning about things for themselves.

I can't tell you how many hardened cynics become believers after a few short months working in the field vs. talking about it and reading what everyone else is telling you to believe.

Anywho Steverino came up with some points I believe worthy of address...

The psi claimants can't be disproven easily for previously discussed reasons, and also have a small number of orthodox scientists who think there may be something in the claims.

I think you might want to double check your facts on that one... There is a very large population in the analytical community that not only believes in Psi or similar things, but who are working on some very potent government as well as corporate based research around such issues; telepathy and remote viewing getting the strongest of kudos at present. I believe you'll find reference to these studies in back issues of The Scientific American... I believe the articles were in this past year, I'm not positive however.

This is the ideal situation for them. They can claim scientific backing (even if it is dubious and very patchy), but would gain no real benefit if it were all explained and understood in a replicable way, as they would possibly be out of a job.

Two things here; firstly, it would seem that anytime a "Scientific" explanation or proof is given to an issue in today's world you will find a lobby group that can deliver a.) "Scientific' logic against that issue and b.) Reason to doubt the credibility of the reporting source. Both are classic games played in the business and political arenas so why not on this front? I again refer to Chris Mooney's book "The Republican War on Science" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465046754/sr=8-1/qid=1151177215/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-4849547-8659957?ie=UTF8) so as to give you some practical insight on what I'm saying

Why would you go to see a psychic if the average man on the street can train to produce exactly the same results using an understood and documented method (concentration, brain-wave transference or whatever it would be called).

Why do people go see therapists, accounts, doctors, lawyers and others that SPECIALIZE in a given field?

Bear in mind the fact that much of what we now refer to as the Psychological or Mental Health field evolved directly out of the Gypsy's craft i.e. the interpretation of dreams, images, and divination in general as well as the anthropoligical aspects of society and ritualism... you might say the the Psychic was the Chicken that laid the proverbial egg and thus answer one of the greatest of parodox known to humankind.


Once it's understood and documented, it becomes something that can likely be used in a similar way to how we use electricity or magnetism, and so possibly eventually loses its mystery.

It don't have to be "understood" we don't understand (can't explain or define) electricity or magnetism we only know that "THEY ARE" e.g. we have learned to work with them. Ironically, both were seen as taboo and proof of dark demonic forces not all that long ago in world hisotry.

We all use our "hidden" senses on a daily basis but at subconscious levels. The schools associated with spiritual mysticism helped the student to discover and understand this rather mundane realities as well as why they were not spoken of freely to those yet "initiated" into the fellowship. It wasn't a matter of cult-like domination but rather concern of abuse by those that would learn these secrets and use them for the sake of self-advancement (sound familiar?)

Of course the ones who know they're a fraud wouldn't want to be thoroughly investigated either.

This brings out one of the chief points of conflict and confusion when it comes to this topic. Yes, there are those that consciously go out with the inent to dupe the public there is absolutely no getting around that truth. What the Cynical of our era don't want to acknowledge is the fact that the greater majority of people who claim to be "Psychic" or "Spiritually Blessed" in some way are sincere, honest, hard working individuals that generally live right at the poverty line or maybe middle-class in a few rare instances. If such are the rewards of being a hard-core scam artist, me thinks it's time to move in another direction...

You will find predators taking on titles of all sorts including those that bring us "Scientific" breakthroughs and "Miracle" devices designed soley for taking wealthy people for a very expensive ride via an investment scheme. In short there is not a single vocation or concept that cannot be exploited by those dead set on taking advantage of others; Religion (spiritually oriented things) has always been the easiest of such routes.

These are factual points of view that the JREF not only side-steps but runs away from. Fortunately the gang at CSICOPS is just a hint more mature in attitude and not nearly as boisterous and opinionated.

I have pointed this out here and elsewhere and I feel it is suitable for this thread as well... just because you have discovered magic or mentalism does not mean you must abandon your spiritual beliefs. There is a growing trend within our fellowship trying to make it otherwise; delivering to persons that profess any sort of faith, nothing short of a hard time and exceptional acts of humiliation -- terrorism. The whole of these efforts hold alliance to Mr. Randi's other agenda -- to aid the American Ahteist Society in generating new membership as well as advancing its influence.... again, this is not supposition. Randi has recieved several awards of merit from said order and is very much involved at the public level as their evangelic messenger...

... I'd say that's worth more than a few minutes of genuine thought, wouldn't you?

Craig,

I'm sure you picked up the tongue-in-cheek nature of my conspiracy theory

I don't have any information on the actual numbers of scientists who do believe in psi stuff, but do have some experience working with scientists in other fields, and have never picked up the impression that many of them are particularly convinced. I imagine this follows in most orthodox scientific communities, but certainly couldn't say for sure. I'm by no means representative of anyone but myself.

While I have a somewhat open mind about things that may turn out to be true when we examine them in detail, I don't generally buy the idea of a conspiracy theory, or anything of that nature to cover up knowledge.

It always takes time and many peer reviews for new scientific knowledge to bec ome accepted. Scientists are naturally reluctant to openly support new theories without good reason, as they risk being made to look foolish. However this is balanced with the kudos and credit received when someone does discover or document something new.

As you pointed out, there clearly are some dubious people and claims in this arena, so I'm sure you can understand that a degree of caution is required.

This is indicated by the nature article you indirectly linked to where they published details of a Uri Gellar experiment, along with peer review comments - albeit with some strong objections to some of the ways the experiment was carried out

I do have enough faith (ha - interesting choice of words ) in the scientific community, and the processes scientists go through in order to accept new knowledge to believe that if/when psi experimentation is done to the same (or as similar as possible) standards as other scientific experiments, and appropriately peer reviewed, and finds something of interest - that we will all hear about it.

Yes, there are egos involved in science, but you only have to look at how many times in the past scientific "truth" has been challenged, changed, and accepted in order to see that the system does work, even if it's not always very fast - there's a reason for the time taken.

The scientific peer review ethic is strong, and I personally suspect strong enough to avoid issues like covering up knowledge in most cases. Scientists (at least good ones) by nature don't tend to be secretive about their work.

So anyway, back on the original topic, I reckon my cups and balls routine needs a bit of work before Randi will think it's worth a million

I don't generally buy the idea of a conspiracy theory, or anything of that nature to cover up knowledge.

I'm just wanting to clarify something on this in that you've mentioned "conspiracy theories" a couple of times... the "Cover-up" I refer to is part of CSICOP history... they had members that literally falsified tests when it was discovered that their experiments were pointing in favor of Psi ability instead of supporting the skeptic's point of view... I think this is referred to in one of the quotes I listed earlier. It's not supposition, it's the honest to god truth. (and they've never attempted any kind of "Scientific" research since... as an organization).

The "other" conspiracy centers around the growing suspicion that Randi & the JREF have been exploiting the whole Psychic Issue as a promotional tool and "hook" via which a failed and miserably grumpy old fart was able to perpetuate a "career" by spreading rumors and screaming fire as he saw fit. As I've pointed out, the "mechanism" surrounding Randi quickly reacts to information that may allow folks to see that side of him more readily. A great example are the "encouragements" and "suggestions" given to the admin of this forum to remove a thread I'd started about a month ago, questioning Randi's integrity and moral code. I know that such actions happened because I got phone calls from some of the people that encouraged them... individuals that are part of the JREF and trusted diciples to Randi.

My position on this and related issues has, unfortunately, placed some very dear and special friendships and business relationships in peril. But these folks know me well enough to know that I'm not just running off half-cocked. They know that I've mulled this/these issues over for some time now and as I said in my more recent VISIONS article, I had to follow my gut and call a spade a spade and give back to those that would speak ill of me and what I do as a psychic entertainer, offering them a bit of their own medication. I personally can't understand why everyone is so defensive if none of it is true.

I will give you one thing Steverino... I have heard and seen directly, that you UK based chaps tend to be a bit more cut & dry on things and far more into the intellectual mode of life vs. the "left brain" attitudes common to the States. So you may not know many in the "legit" science world that host sympathies towards the Psi issue. On the other hand, I know that much research has gone out to disprove it, only to return solid reason for "probability" -- not a cut & dry point of certainty or, as they say, this debate would no longer be.

this continues to become more and more interesting. thanks to everyone contributing, including those with an opinion that differs to mine.

first and foremost, to suggest that those with a differing opinion are lesser educated is an oft used device. it stops people being questioned. the "conspiracy theory, the religious umbrella, & the - if you had my experience you would agree with me" attitudes serve to get away from the rather simplistic nature of the debate.

so it has been raised, why talk about spoon bending? only because it was raised by the originator of this thread. and curiously no one has stepped forward and accepted my spoon bending challenge. that really cuts to the heart of this thread and the questions raised. whatever adgenda(s) James Randi may have, are a side issue. i dont know of his involvements in various associations as has been stated. and so i neither accept these statements as fact, nor do i discard them as false.

anyone can put anything on the internet. we are all very quick to say "you cant believe everything written in the newspaper". yet for some bizarre reason, we suddenly think that if it's on the nett it must be true. similarly forums such as these provide opportunities for us to make statements and pass them off as fact whether they are or not.

so, to stay directly on topic rather than use the conspiracy etc theories to avoid answering questions:

where can we find the following things on the internet? just because they are on the nett doesn't make them true, but if they happened they will be here in a reputable site... i suspect this will mean we dont get an answer, rather a "it's not on CNN.com because they are in with Randi"... OK so pick another reputable site... surely we dont suggest Randi is on the payrole of everyone except www.physcobabble.com ????

so can anyone tell me a reputable INDEPENDANT site where we can find:

Note: independant means, NOT www.jamesrandi.com and NOT www.icanbendspoons.com or any fringe self interest magazine sites... if it happened it would be in a substantial independant site.

(i) the name and details of the applicants who successfully won Randi's challenge yet he changed the rules so he didn't have to pay up.

(ii) as Craig Browning has alledged, the name of the person who provided the physisists and metal experts with the bent spoon. also what were the names of the people who did the testing, what tests did they do. was the spoon bent in front of them or rather... erm... passed to them "pre bent" for inspection. did it even happen at all???

i am afraid it is not enough to state these things as fact. lets all learn about these specific issues. did they actuallty take place or are they simply urban myths held onto by the spoon benders clubs around the world. are they fact or rhetoric. my mind is open... please point me to the reputeable independant web page where i can see the facts.

you see, the notion of special "powers" that we cant begin to understand does not scare me. nor do i simply pass them off as a total category as "rubbish". i am not anti physic... i am pro accountability. and i am afraid stating that "a scientist in Littlerock Arkensaw proved beyond doubt that UFO's exist but the government covered it up" just dont equate to accountability.

Bobby Cat, I'm with you on this one: assertion is not proof. It's assertion. We've got to be very careful that we don't mix up the two and say things like "well, it's obvious that..." or "it stands to reason..." or even "most of..." any more than we should just dismiss everything out of hand. If we go to either extreme everything breaks down.

But there does come a point where I simply wonder why I should care enough to keep picking at the same scab. That's why I'm in favour of bypassing Randi altogether and publishing an open source standard for would-be "psychics". Attain the standard and it really shouldn't matter whether it's a trick or not as long as your appear to be displaying anomalous control or perception beyond reasonable doubt. Thing is, what does "reasonable" actually mean? That's probably a bigger area for argument than whether Randi or Geller is a crook

Tomo, it really would be fantastic if some one other than "The Randi Institute" and "Physic Clubs of America" set some guide lines. however we would have to deal with sympathetic practitioners claiming indepenance, yet influencing the rules.

solution?

get members of both extreme groups. lock them in a room and make them "duke it out" until they agree on the guide lines. THEN we have a TV special worth watching...

you see, the winning of Randi's challenge is less important than addressing the questions raised by the challenge. that and ensuring those claiming various degrees of "yes i can" or "no you cant" are held accountable rather than allowed to pass off rhetoric and urban myth as fact.

after all... some people will believe anything...

B0bbY_CaT wrote:get members of both extreme groups. lock them in a room and make them "duke it out" until they agree on the guide lines. THEN we have a TV special worth watching...

Agree? What, like grown ups? Judging by the acres of rabid denunciations all sides post to the Web, we could be waiting for a very very looooong time indeed... probably until Satan himself drives to work on a snow plough.

I'm just tired of watching people chase the point of the point. I think it's time to pick a direction to run in.

i think the reason they cant agree is because they can make claims as "fact" and then not be held accountable. the solution would be to make the debate VERY public so we could witness any attempts at unaccountability.

the so called "public debate" at present is NOT what i mean by public.

right now... "the pro lobby" make a comment at their "club", it gets quoted somewhere. then the "con lobby" retorts in the safety of their "club" and we go back and forward tit for tat.

the public debate i refer to would mean: you make a comment, you're held accountable... in the same room at the same time with camera rolling. heck... force that on both sides and the meeting to set the rules may be over in 10 minutes.

Well, the best way I can think of to inject a bit of accountability is for an impartial third party to hold up the assertions of both sides to the light and see which have any substance. Finding someone interested enough to do that and yet dissinterested enough in both sides might be a strain.

The thing is, I suspect that both sides would end up hating that person and accusing (ha! asserting!) that they're in the pay of the other side simply because he's not automatically on theirs. I'm guessing that the more you explain that this is not the case, the less they'll hear you. Mind you, it could be a good way of showing how easily both sides fall for the very faulty logic they think they're out to detect in the other "side".

faulty logic is what it's all about. i ask you to prove you can REALLY bend a spoon. you ignore my question and simply refer to the guy in "Little Rock Arkensaw who did it and the government covered it up". BOTH sides are guilty of this...

we the public would laugh at most of these arguments. they really only stand up when you say them to a "true believer". so the thing that would get this on track would be the" how both sides would look to the public" and how their credibility would stand up if we were all looking over their shoulder, holding them accountable for the conspiracy theory explaination.

problem is, the spoon bender wants to know the exact circumstances of the test, what he will have to wear, where he will have to stand, how far away he will need to be etc in advance. while the skeptic wants to spring all this on the spoon bender at the last minute so he cant prepare.

they are both guilty of the same thing. deciding in advance the other is wrong instead of just doing the test and seeing what happens.

i myself would think that if you can really bend a spoon with your mind, let me decide what you'll wear and where you'll do it etc. you just bring your mind... and a spoon. no, on second thoughts... i'll supply the spoon.

we would all love to believe that spoon bending with one's mind is possible. however, we must temper our desire for this to be possible, with the cold hard reality that greed and self interest would make it far more likely that any "REAL" spoon bender would be allowed to prove his skill publically for us all to see, than covered up and hidden away for "our own safety". makes one wonder why none of these so called "spoon benders" have come forward somewhere other than urban myth... oh... that's right... it's because the TV networks dont want to upset Randi... even at the expence of ratings.

Highly Illogical.