Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ted Serios
#1
Information 
So we have a Uri Geller thread so I will start this one.

What do you think about Ted Serios? Do you believe his 'thoughtographs' were genuine or fraudulent?

For those who have not heard of this man. Here is a photo of Serios:

[Image: Ted_Serios_1.png]
Reply
#2
Here are some links about Ted Serios:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Serios (skeptical)

https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/articles/ted-serios (favourable, written by a proponent Stephen E. Braude)

There was also a debate about him in the Chronicle Review magazine:

http://www.chronicle.com/article/Ted-Ser...ic/126388/ (favourable)

http://www.chronicle.com/article/Psychic...-a/126934/ (skeptical)
Reply
#3
Julie Eisenbud,the parapsychologist who worked with Serios. Offered ten thousand dollars to anyone who could reproduce.Serios work,undetected.
It went unclaimed.
[-] The following 2 users Like Oleo's post:
  • Doug, Roberta
Reply
#4
If they were hoaxed or not has little to do with "belief". Are you asking for critical examination or polling people?
"Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before..."
[-] The following 2 users Like E. Flowers's post:
  • Sciborg_S_Patel, Oleo
Reply
#5
Jule. Not the auto corrected julie.
Reply
#6
Jule. Eisenbud tells a completely different tale about Randi's so called replication. " on October 4 1967 views of the today show were treated to one of Randi's demonstrations. At the end when it became apparent that his attempt to hide the transparency under the table that he was working from was an object failure. He attempted to salvage the situation by making the statement that he had agreed to accept Eisenbud challenge. Which he then did an about face on."
I belive the correspondence between randi and Eisenbud. Has been preserved at the university of Maryland.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Oleo's post:
  • Sciborg_S_Patel
Reply
#7
Serios produced paranormal photos on the Polaroid instamatic under a variety of conditions.
From inside a faraday cage. While the camera was outside of the cage.
From as far as sixty six feet from the camera.
Simultaneously with the cameras and gizmo held by others.
He produced photos that display spatial and temporal distortion.
While sewn into a suit.
He produced photos with the lens removed from the camera.
So as you can see, the hidden transparency explanation. Just leaves us in the dark(room.)
[-] The following 5 users Like Oleo's post:
  • Sciborg_S_Patel, Laird, Roberta, Ninshub, Doug
Reply
#8
(09-06-2017, 09:25 PM)Brian Wrote: I suppose Randi didn't need the money


https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ted_Serios
[/url]
Serios agreed to a public challenge, but when magicians asked to examine the paper tube immediately after a photo exposure was made, "Serios backed away, putting his hand in his pocket." Investigators guessed that Serios' "gizmo" concealed a second, much smaller tube, most likely a common jeweler's loupe or transparency magnifier. With a tiny magnifying lens at one end and a section of a 35mm transparency affixed with tape at the other, the device could effectively project the transparency image into the lens of the Polaroid camera. Photos produced by investigators using this method were nearly identical to Serios' "thoughtographs."
[3] After being summarily debunked and exposed by various photo experts and James Randi (when Randi replicated Serios' tricks on a live TV show, Eisenbud was reportedly "flabbergasted"), Serios faded into obscurity.[4]


[url=https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ted_Serios#cite_note-4](I can't get used to this forum software, I really can't!  It's totally up the creek!!!)
Am I the only one who recoils when I see anyone presenting evidence from Rationalwiki? 

Am I wrong to think of it as the National Inquirer of information sources? Or that it is to psi, what Newsmax is to politics?

Maybe it's just me.
[-] The following 6 users Like jkmac's post:
  • Sciborg_S_Patel, Laird, Roberta, Ninshub, Kamarling, Oleo
Reply
#9
(09-06-2017, 11:09 PM)jkmac Wrote: Am I the only one who recoils when I see anyone presenting evidence from Rationalwiki? 

Am I wrong to think of it as the National Inquirer of information sources? Or that it is to psi, what Newsmax is to politics?

Maybe it's just me.

Apparently we are now supposed to act like it's not an ideological echo chamber since we have Leuders here. But, it's still basically the anti-Chopra. If you have ever stumbled upon one of his papers, you will know what I mean.
"Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before..."
[-] The following 3 users Like E. Flowers's post:
  • Roberta, Ninshub, Oleo
Reply
#10
(09-06-2017, 01:07 PM)E. Flowers Wrote: If they were hoaxed or not has little to do with "belief". Are you asking for critical examination or polling people?

(09-06-2017, 09:25 PM)Brian Wrote: I suppose Randi didn't need the money


https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ted_Serios
[/url]
Serios agreed to a public challenge, but when magicians asked to examine the paper tube immediately after a photo exposure was made, "Serios backed away, putting his hand in his pocket." Investigators guessed that Serios' "gizmo" concealed a second, much smaller tube, most likely a common jeweler's loupe or transparency magnifier. With a tiny magnifying lens at one end and a section of a 35mm transparency affixed with tape at the other, the device could effectively project the transparency image into the lens of the Polaroid camera. Photos produced by investigators using this method were nearly identical to Serios' "thoughtographs."
[3] After being summarily debunked and exposed by various photo experts and James Randi (when Randi replicated Serios' tricks on a live TV show, Eisenbud was reportedly "flabbergasted"), Serios faded into obscurity.[4]


[url=https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ted_Serios#cite_note-4](I can't get used to this forum software, I really can't!  It's totally up the creek!!!)

The allegations of fraud came from two photographers, Charlie Reynolds and David Eisendrath.


Quote: "Anyone who knows anything about this issue knows that Mr. Serios was long ago exposed and thoroughly debunked as a fraud. This was done with absolute certainty by professional photographers Charlie Reynolds and David Eisendrath in the October 1967 issue of Popular Photography. Serios was observed, when he thought no one was looking, sticking pictures into his "gizmo," a tube he held between his head and the camera lens. That some claim he produced images without the tube, and at some distance from the camera, is easily attributed to double exposure or use of previously made exposures, followed by the fake snapping of a picture."

Len Peyronnin. (2011). Psychic Projections Were a Hoax. The Chronicle of Higher Education.

There was also another allegation of fraud from magician Persi Diaconis who stated he observed Serios putting a small marble with a photograph on it into a little tube that he used in front of the camera.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Fake Leuders's post:
  • Brian
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)