(2017-08-29, 07:54 PM)Leuders Wrote: [ -> ]Rationalwiki has hundreds of editors, I was not involved in that page and very little on anything parapsychology related. I have not been involved in the majority of them. I focus on debunking mostly conspiracy theories and UFO reports.
I wasn't accusing you of specifically adding that to Morton's biography, just pointing at the ironic lack of standards... And noting how you have been showing the same kind of "recycling" here by quoting arguments that I have seen in Skeptic Forum, while being oblivious to other basic facts about the subject that are present in other sources.
I actually checked the definition of legal blindness in California: 2/200 with corrective glasses. There is no practical way to ride a bicycle with 2/200 (that is something like +8 for you British folk), nevermind a motorbike.
I think Targ may have worse issues than being conned.
(2017-08-29, 07:49 PM)Leuders Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for the source, I do not trust what he wrote, just an unreliable claim.
Sorry - I'm still a bit confused. You said to me before "
Thanks, I really need to ask around on this. I asked Joe Nickell and he told me Russell Targ was never magician and the claim is a fabrication. It would be interesting to know what Targ really says, I will check it out."
Now someone's told you what Targ really says and you've instantly rejected it. Does that mean you've already asked around and checked it out?
I admire the man's ability to prove a negative.
(2017-08-29, 07:49 PM)Leuders Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for the source, I do not trust what he wrote, just an unreliable claim. Also Targ has had very bad eye sight throughout his life, even when he was testing Geller. He really is the last person you would trust to spot any kind of trickery. No wonder he was easily deceived.
Is this serious? I don't even have a vested interest in this conversation and think this response makes no sense whatsoever.
I can imagine Geller would've been a charismatic, entertaining presence in the lab. I've no doubt that with his charm (and hypnotic powers?) he would've stacked the odds in his favour at every opportunity. There would have been a will to succeed on all sides; significant time and money already invested and the chance of more funding to follow. Superiors awaiting promising results.
The fact that we have seen such egregious examples of Geller's fraud in the past makes him a curious poster-boy for the psi community. Perhaps he is just more photogenic than Radin and Sheldrake?
... Or perhaps folk double down on Geller in fear of having to admit a much darker truth: Randi might have been right!
(2017-08-30, 02:05 AM)malf Wrote: [ -> ]I can imagine Geller would've been a charismatic, entertaining presence in the lab. I've no doubt that with his charm (and hypnotic powers?) he would've stacked the odds in his favour at every opportunity. There would have been a will to succeed on all sides; significant time and money already invested and the chance of more funding to follow. Superiors awaiting promising results.
The fact that we have seen such egregious examples of Geller's fraud in the past makes him a curious poster-boy for the psi community. Perhaps he is just more photogenic than Radin and Sheldrake? ... Or perhaps folk double down on Geller in fear of having to admit a much darker truth: Randi might have been right!
Oh, really, Malf - a little below the belt tactic to get me to post again - amiright? I would have resisted were this not the thread that I started so I feel somewhat obliged to say something.
1. Explain how Geller's charm or hypnotic powers (again, really?) would have stacked the odds of him getting the drawings in the sealed envelopes right (did you watch the video)? What - he charmed them into telling him what they had drawn? And how does that work with the double-blind tests when nobody knew what was in the envelope?
2. So those testing him were frauds too?
3. Yes, Geller is a trickster. He is known to use stage magic. That was conceded on the first page of this discussion so he's no poster boy. Nobody really trusts him but there are some examples of his testing that still require a better explanation than "it's Uri Geller, guys - it must be faked".
4. Are you really suggesting that proponents are so shallow as to be swayed by his looks and ignore his faults? (ok, yes, I do see the wink smiley)
5. Look up the evidence of Scott Rogo exposing Randi for the liar he is and then tell me that you are not applying double standards here.
C'mon Malf - you can come up with a lot better than that.
Before I go again, I'd still like to know a couple of things if anyone has had the time to do the research or has better sources than I can find:
a) Is there any good evidence that any magician or mentalist has been able to reproduce similar results under similar conditions?
b) Does anyone have
reliable evidence of cheating, either on the part of Geller himself (other than the fact that he's Geller and has been known to cheat elsewhere) or on the part of the researchers?
I don't think Geller is more of a poster boy for psi than Enron is a poster company for multinationals. He was simply famous for the same reason that Randi himself was, his eccentricities made him a good entertainer.
(2017-08-29, 05:46 PM)Leuders Wrote: [ -> ]Laird do you have a source for Russell Targ being an amateur magician?
Yes, the book which I mentioned before,
Uri Geller: Magician or Mystic (2014 edition) by Jonathan Margolis. Here's what he writes on the matter:
Jonathan Margolis Wrote:[Russell Targ] had sought out Puthoff for two reasons when he heard that he was doing high-level research into psychics. The first was that he already had an interest in psychic research; the second, which would serve him well, was that he was a keen amateur magician. He grew up in New York, where he was a regular in the magic shops on 42nd Street, and prided himself on knowing the field of professional magic well.
(2017-08-29, 12:44 PM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]Oh dear... Geller is a magician, and a good one... and these types of tricks are well known as the type of tricks performed by magicians... Just to try and give a flavor of what is possible...
None of those tricks were similar to what Uri actually did in the double-blind experiments (the tricks involved manipulating objects; the experiments involved determining where objects were / what they looked like). Further, those tricks assume that the magician has control over the environment in which they were performed, which Uri didn't have.
Here's the challenge for you, Max: if you think Uri evaded double-blind conditions to fool a bunch of smart people, including not just PhDs but at least one (amateur) magician, then
explain exactly how he did it, preferably pointing to frames in the video where you can see him perform his tricks.