Debunking Pseudo-Skeptical Arguments Of Paranormal Debunkers
Argument # 18: “No psychic phenomena has been demonstrated under controlled
conditions.”
Corollary: “Whenever proper
controls are put in place, psi experiments only get
average chance results.”
This argument is often used
by those who don’t believe psi is possible, and that only inadequate controls
and methods can result in above chance psi results. Again, this is based on another a priori assumption that psi is
impossible. This argument puts skeptics’
mindframe into a closed way of thinking.
Any experiment that supports psi is automatically assumed by skeptics to
be uncontrolled, and any test that fails is considered to be adequately
controlled. However, this is simply not
so because as mentioned in Argument 17 above, the successful ganzfeld and
autoganzfeld experiments were controlled.
For an in-depth description of the controls used, see the following
articles. They can also be viewed online
at the URL’s listed below.
Bem, D.J. (1996). Ganzfeld phenomena. In G. Stein (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the
paranormal (pp 291-296).
http://www.psych.cornell.edu/dbem/ganzfeld.html.
Bem, D.J. & C. Honorton
(1994). Does psi exist? Replicable evidence for an
anomalous process of
information transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 4-18.
Full text available at http://www.psych.cornell.edu/dbem/does_psi_exist.html.
Also, here is Daryl Bem's
rebuttal to Ray Hyman's critique of the ganzfeld.
http://www.psych.cornell.edu/dbem/response_to_hyman.html
Skeptics will say that an
experiment was uncontrolled even when they were never at the location of the
experiment. This happened with the SRI
(Stanford Research Institute) experiments on famous psychic Uri Geller. Psychic debunker James Randi (Geller’s
nemesis) and other skeptics who were not at SRI when Geller was tested, made a
bunch of accusations against SRI such as poor controls and deliberate skewing
of the results on the part of the scientists there, Harold Puthoff and Russell
Targ. But since Randi and his skeptics
were never there, all they have is speculation based on their closed
beliefs. Randi has no explanation for
Geller’s success in some of the experiments such as guessing the exact number
of the roll of a die in a cup 8 times in a row, or finding the cup with water
or metal in it out of a series of cups.
All he can say is that Puthoff and Targ are not magicians and do not
know how to detect magic tricks. (Though suffice to say, Randi is not qualified
as a scientist in any way, while Puthoff and Targ are) And of course, he charges SRI and Geller with
clumsy inadequate controls or fraud, which are merely blanket statements from
him cause he has no concrete evidence or explanations.
Harold Puthoff of SRI told
me in email exchanges regarding these Randi charges:
Puthoff:
“Not true at all.
They just quote Randi and his pronouncements, e.g., in his book Flim
Flam. In Flim Flam, he gives something
like 28 debunking points, if my memory serves me correctly. I had the opportunity to confront Randi at a
Parapsychology Association conference with proof in hand, and in tape-recorded
interaction he admitted he was wrong on all the points. He even said he would correct them for the
upcoming paperback being published by the CSICOP
group. (He did not.)
In case one thinks that it was just a case of our
opinions vs. his opinions, we chose for the list of incorrect points only those
that could be independently verified.
Examples: He said that in our Nature paper we verified Geller's
metal-bending. Go to the paper, and you
see that we said we were not able to obtain evidence for this. He said that a film of the Geller experiment
made at SRI by famed photographer Zev Pressman was not made by him, but by us
and we just put his name on it. We
showed up with an affidavit by Pressman saying that indeed he did make the
film. Etc., etc.”
“Geller did the same kind of remote viewing in our
lab, that more than fifty others from the government and army have done as part
of the 25 year remote viewing program. If the whole world has remote viewing
abilities, why shouldn't Geller have some?”
“Again, these claims of inadequate controls are
generally just repeats of what Randi says.
The truth of the matter is that none of Randi's claimed suspected
inadequate controls actually had anything to do with the experiments, which of
course Randi was not there to know of.
This has been independently reported by Scott Rogo somewhere in the
literature, who came out specifically to check each of Randi's guesses about
inadequate controls and found them inapplicable under the conditions in which
the tests were conducted. In fact, all
of Randi's suggestions were amateurish compared to the sophisticated steps we
took, suspecting as we did everything from magician's tricks to an Israeli
intelligence scam.”
As of now, you can watch the
SRI documented videos of the Geller experiments on YouTube.com, and verify for
yourself that they are real. Here are
the links to them, uploaded graciously by Shippi, Geller’s long time friend and
manager. They are very convincing and
remain undebunked.
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_2iPZiH5sk
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TvTnjwVOIY
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHrlzzVcyYA
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqpdfuRaRQQ
During the course of his
career, Uri Geller succeeded in 17 controlled experiments in different
laboratories. Here are some quotes from
the scientists who tested him. Notice
the bold emphasis on the controls and strict conditions of the experiments.
"I tested Uri Geller myself under laboratory-controlled conditions
and saw with my own eyes the bending of a key which was not touched by Geller
at any time. There was a group of people present during the experiment who all
witnessed the key bending in eleven seconds to an angle of thirty degrees.
Afterwards we tested the key in a scientific
laboratory using devices such as electron microscopes
and X-rays and found that there was no chemical, manual or mechanical forces
involved in the bending of the key."
Professor Helmut Hoffmann (Department of Electrical
Engineering,
Technical
----------------------------------------
"Through intense concentration, Uri was able to
bend a 3/8" cold rolled steel bar under controlled conditions, as he rubbed the top of it with his
forefinger. I was sitting very close to him during this experiment. On another
occasion, a radish seed sprouted and grew 1/2" as he held it in his hand.
I watched this very closely as well. "
Jean Millay PhD. (Saybrook Institute
--------------------------------------
"Uri Geller was tested in my laboratory at UCLA.
During the experiments in Kirlian photography and after hundreds of trials, he
produced three extraordinary photographs in which flashes of energy were
clearly visible. What wonderfully welcome sights they were! I have also tested
Uri's watch-fixing and metal-bending abilities. He has demonstrated
these to me under controlled scientific conditions, in a most convincing
manner".
Dr. Thelma Moss (Professor of psychology at UCLA and
one of the first
------------------------------------
"Uri bent a strong heat-treated alloy bar held
by myself and my assistant at each end. There was absolutely no pressure
exerted by Uri while the bar was bending. All the controlled experiments I conducted with Uri Geller have been
described in Sciences et Avenir, No. 345, pp. 1108-1113."
Professor Charles Crussard (Professor of Metallurgy,
Paris, and Scientific Director of
-------------------------------------------
"Uri Geller, as a psychic genius, has been able
to demonstrate the repeatability of controlled
scientific psychic experiments. Thereby he has proved the reality of
psychic phenomena (such as telekinesis, clairvoyance and telepathy)."
Professor P. Plum, MD (Emeritus Professor of
Pediatrics, University of
-------------------------------------
"We have observed certain phenomena with the
subjects [including Uri Geller] for which we have no scientific explanation. As
a result of Geller's success in this experimental period, we consider that he
has demonstrated his paranormal, perceptual ability in a convincing and unambiguous
manner." (The results of these experiments were published in the respected
British journal Nature, Vol. 251, No. 5).
Dr Harold Puthoff and Russell Targ (Stanford Research
Institute -
"Laser physicists Russell Targ and Harold Puthoff
of
"Under these conditions, they said, no magician
has been able to duplicate through trickery the psychic feat performed by Uri
Geller and others. Some won't even try."
------------------------------------------
"I have personally witnessed and experienced on
two occasions the metal bending abilities of Uri Geller. These experiments were
conducted under rigorous laboratory
conditions. In these two experiments the thick steel rod I was holding
and observing carefully bent, and continued to bend, in my own hand. One rod
bent to 90 degrees during a period of
approximately six minutes while I was holding it. The
other steel rod bent after Uri Geller stroked it and continued bending on a
glass table without anyone touching it. The steel rods were provided by myself.
I consider the Geller effect to be a phenomena which should be studied
seriously by science. "
"A scientist would have to be either massively
ignorant or a confirmed bigot to deny the evidence that the human mind can make
connection with space, time and matter in ways which have nothing to do with
the ordinary senses. Further, he cannot deny that these connections are
compatible with current thinking in physics, and may in the future
become accepted as a part of an extended science in
which the description 'paranormal' no longer applies, and can be replaced by
'normal'."
Dr. Kit Pedler, (Head of the Electron Microscopy
department, University
of
As you can see, the
testimony of experts who tested Geller appears convincing indeed. Besides, the failed psi experiments often
cited by skeptics are almost always done by skeptics and debunkers themselves.
(Gee, how unbiased is that?) The results
of real scientists, fortunately, are not so one-sided as skeptics would have
you believe.
Previous
Page Back to
Table of Contents
Next
Page
