I think that Rviewer88 has given good responses to the criticisms. Here are some additional responses.
(2023-08-10, 06:51 AM)MarcusF Wrote: [ -> ]The fact is that the Copenhagen fire, a marvellous event by itself, an ultimate proof of paranormal, that was allegedly corroborated on Christmas 1905. didn't make it in the book Kvaran published in 1906. How can such an event be not interesting enough?
Why do you assume that the people involved considered it "an ultimate proof of paranormal"? There was many times that ostensible communicators reported veridical information that was tested. Haraldsson writes that there was an "detailed list of 41 memories ostensibly from Sigmundur Gudmundsson" and that "there are many examples of this kind of testing of memories". See page 140-141 in "Further Facets of Indridi Indridason’s Mediumship":
https://www.homepage-baukasten-dateien.d...l%20EH.pdf Perhaps the people involved did not consider this case so extraordinary, since it was just yet another instance of veridical information. Haraldsson calls it a "perfect case", but we don't whether the people involved considered it a "perfect case", or considered it extraordinary at all.
(2023-08-10, 06:51 AM)MarcusF Wrote: [ -> ]Also, can you completely exclude the possibility of someone sending a telegram from Denmark to Iceland for Kvaran or some other member of his company?
If it is correct as Haraldsson wrote, then the Cornwall station only transmitted major world news. In that case they didn't get telegrams from persons in Denmark to Iceland.
(2023-08-10, 06:51 AM)MarcusF Wrote: [ -> ]Regarding the Marconi station. Can you prove that the station didn't receive telegrams from Denmark? The Cornwall station surely got telegrams from Denmark that were intended for Iceland.
If it is correct as Haraldsson wrote, then the Cornwall station only transmitted major world news. In that case they didn't get telegrams from persons in Denmark to Iceland.
(2023-08-10, 06:11 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]Haraldsson admitted to me he knew about this. So why did he deliberately leave this information out of his 'Perfect Case' paper... just to make the case stronger than it was, as far as I can see, because including this information would have weakened his claim.
That is interesting. I thought the reason why Haraldsson didn't mention it could have been because he wasn't aware of it, and in that case it would have been strange that he would have overlooked such an important fact about the case. What other facts could he then have overlooked? However, if he was aware of the fact, then it means that we can be certain that he didn't overlook it. Regarding your claim that he was trying to make the case stronger than it was: It doesn't need to be the case. Maybe he just didn't think that this detail was important enough to include in the paper.
(2023-08-14, 08:22 PM)Wanderer Wrote: [ -> ]That is interesting. I thought the reason why Haraldsson didn't mention it could have been because he wasn't aware of it, and in that case it would have been strange that he would have overlooked such an important fact about the case. What other facts could he then have overlooked? However, if he was aware of the fact, then it means that we can be certain that he didn't overlook it. Regarding your claim that he was trying to make the case stronger than it was: It doesn't need to be the case. Maybe he just didn't think that this detail was important enough to include in the paper.
Presumably it comes down to the fact that you highlighted earlier, which is that, strictly speaking, there was no telegraphy in Iceland in 1905, so Kvaran and Nielsson were telling the truth and Haraldsson could legitimately say the same thing. Haraldsson seems to have believed the Marconi station to be irrelevant, based on the brief note he has in his book on Indridi discussing it. I've seen nothing to suggest that he was wrong or unreasonable in that conclusion so far. It isn't great that he didn't mention it in his article, but he does at least discuss it in his book. If he'd been deliberately concealing it, I don't know why he would've told Max he knew about the Marconi station.
At any rate we know that Haraldsson certainly didn't include something else that definitely is significant, but it seems only because he didn't look in the right places. He dismissed the possibility of an obituary for Jensen providing information about his life through mundane means as follows: "Kaare Claudewitz of Copenhagen suggested that Indridason might have read an obituary of Emil Jensen in a Danish newspaper. We jointly checked this possibility. No obituary of Emil Jensen was found in Politiken or Berlingske Tidende." We know now that checking just two newspapers wasn't adequate, because there were Jensen obituaries, although they were really more like simple death notices, published in other Danish newspapers. Somewhat strangely, Haraldsson doesn't seem to mention the obituary possibility anywhere in his book on Indridi, but obviously that came after his paper so he'd already mentioned it in his publication record.
I'd say we can't treat Haraldsson's research as totally reliable because of these things, but of course, is anyone's research entirely reliable? Mistakes and oversights happen all the time. What I haven't seen is strong evidence that he was hiding Indridi information in a way that could be called fraudulent.
I just realised that the obituary translation that MarcusF posted is incorrect. I did just take a look at the obituary again and saw that it means something different.
Here is the full obituary in danish:
https://imgbox.com/DPYPkvdG
It does not say "On behalf of my sister and myself (names of the brother and the sister)". It does say "On behalf of (søstres) and ourselves. (Name of brother #1). Parish priest. (Name of brother #2). Fabricant." However, I am from Sweden and although I can understand danish since danish and swedish are similiar languages, I'm still not good at danish. So I'm uncertain if the word "søstres" in the sentence "paa søstres og egne vagar" refers to one sister or several sisters, or if it can refer to either one or several sisters. Perhaps
can explain this?
This obviously doesn't make any real difference, because just as
wrote, all the facts that Indridi mentioned cannot be extrapolated from this information. However, it is still good to get all the details correct.
(2023-08-20, 06:06 PM)Wanderer Wrote: [ -> ]I just realised that the obituary translation that MarcusF posted is incorrect. I did just take a look at the obituary again and saw that it means something different.
Here is the full obituary in danish: https://imgbox.com/DPYPkvdG
It does not say "On behalf of my sister and myself (names of the brother and the sister)". It does say "On behalf of (søstres) and ourselves. (Name of brother #1). Parish priest. (Name of brother #2). Fabricant." However, I am from Sweden and although I can understand danish since danish and swedish are similiar languages, I'm still not good at danish. So I'm uncertain if the word "søstres" in the sentence "paa søstres og egne vagar" refers to one sister or several sisters, or if it can refer to either one or several sisters. Perhaps can explain this?
This obviously doesn't make any real difference, because just as wrote, all the facts that Indridi mentioned cannot be extrapolated from this information. However, it is still good to get all the details correct.
“søstres” means sisters in the plural sense at least in modern danish. If there was one sister it would be spelled “søsters”. I have however noticed that the danish written language has evolved considerably over the last 100 years so we can’t be fully sure. The information will be available from church records which are public.
do you know Kaare Claudewitz? Do you know if he is well?
This is a very interesting debate
And I must admit that is very hard to address some of the comments here. I am willing to admit that there is a possibility that the Marconi station didn’t receive the telegram about the fire in Copenhagen. However, that doesn’t exclude other possibilities for getting the information needed for making the case. For example, both Haraldur Nielsson and Einar Kvaran biographies say that they had been living in Copenhagen. We don’t know how often they had been travelling there. I could speculate that one of them, or some other person from their circle, had some info about Emile Jensen from other sources beside the obituary. The fact Jensen lived in the street where the fire broke (among other addresses) could had been a very strange coincidence.
said
“
Perhaps the people involved did not consider this case so extraordinary, since it was just yet another instance of veridical information. Haraldsson calls it a ’perfect case’, but we don't whether the people involved considered it a ‘perfect case’, or considered it extraordinary at all.”
If this is true, then this might explain why they didn’t bother at all with the confirmation of the Jensen case. Also, if they knew this was all a show, why bother at all proving something - as you say not so extraordinary - when you had already made your point with other “miracles”?
Beside trying to explain the claims made by the Indridi proponents there are other angles to explore. What interests me also is a socio-political atmosphere in Iceland in the beginning of the 20. century. I have tried to find more info about possible motives of Einar Kvaran and Haraldur Nielsson to promote spiritualism as a fact. I think that this case could had been embellished by proponents of
Indridi Indridason to strengthen their political agenda, as a political project. I will post two interesting quotes:
“But this political reflection was also based on a passionate interest in spiritualist theories and, in particular, in those focusing on the return of ancestors. It is obvious that in most Reformed countries, including Denmark, this movement was extremely popular at the end of the nineteenth century. Yet it takes on a special dimension in Iceland, because the process of national reconstruction is based not only on the need to establish a republican constitution, but also on a ’new religion’, one’s own that, while remaining Christian, would distinguish itself from colonial Christianity. This spiritualist movement made it possible to conjure up ancestors and rely on them to create this new religion. According to the words of Haraldur Nielsson, theologian and nephew of the bishop of Iceland, the aim was to ‘reconstruct a rationalist Lutheranism based on positive faith that the spiritualist way will strengthen and ennoble’ (Jónsson, 1968: 72-73). Therefore, at the turn of that century, the unofficial histories of religious spiritualism and political independence merged in the livingrooms of Reykjavík where politicians, essayists, poets and clergy met around mediums giving voice to ‘ancestors’. These experiences, still private, would then rapidly enjoy a popular success.”
“But, at the same time, after a local government was recognized in 1904, the dynamic forces of spiritualism made their solemn declaration of national independence by presenting, on the ancient plains of the Parliament of Þingvellir, the very young but oh so popular medium Indriði Indriðason astride a fiery white stallion, mimicking as such the revived image of Óðin, the shaman-god, on his mythical mount Sleipnir.”
Source:
IDENTITY THROUGH DNA AND SPIRITUALISM IN ICELAND, Christophe Pons
These historical facts explain possible motives for promoting Indrid’s “miracles”. People controlling the circle around the medium had a political agenda – independent Iceland. And they needed a “new religion” to strengthen the spirit of Icelanders.
Also, a few notes about Einar Kvaran. In 1924. he was promoting a fraudulent medium Einer Nielsen from Denmark:
“In 1922 in Christiania, Oslo, Nielsen was pronounced a fraud but seemed to have completely reinstated himself in 1924 in Reykjavik, in sittings for the Psychical Research Society of Iceland… The report of the novelist Einar H. Kvaran, endorsed by scientists and other people of high standing, recorded the materialization of forms, sometimes two appearing simultaneously near the medium while he himself was within view.”
Source:
https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/enc...ner-d-1965
I don’t think that Kvaran was so naïve that he wasn’t aware of the accusations before he invited Nielsen to “perform” in Iceland. So, perhaps he promoted spiritualism with the political agenda on his mind.
In some of the Haraldsson papers it is clearly stated that Indridi performed only in the dark and under the control of Haraldur Nielsson. Some of his contemporaries said that Indridi was a skilful imitator and ventriloquist. This raises a lot of questions at least for me. In the end this is a very interesting case. I admit that it is hard to explain every detail as all this allegedly happened more than 100 years ago. And most of the sources come from proponents and one report written by a sceptic happened during seances conducted under the control of proponents. The fact that Indridi was being promoted as a star medium with a purpose of building the new Icelandic nation is indeed fascinating.
(2023-08-22, 06:24 AM)MarcusF Wrote: [ -> ]The fact Jensen lived in the street where the fire broke (among other addresses) could had been a very strange coincidence.
That is very unlikely. The population in Copenhagen in 1901 was 468936 persons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Copenhagen So the probability that a specific person would live only two doors away from the fire is very low.
(2023-08-22, 06:24 AM)MarcusF Wrote: [ -> ]However, that doesn’t exclude other possibilities for getting the information needed for making the case. For example, both Haraldur Nielsson and Einar Kvaran biographies say that they had been living in Copenhagen. We don’t know how often they had been travelling there. I could speculate that one of them, or some other person from their circle, had some info about Emile Jensen from other sources beside the obituary.
As
wrote:
"Also you don't understand the point being made about the verification. The argument you and others make is that the Experimental Society were fraudsters trying to hoodwink people with paranormal marvels that were all fake. But according to Haraldsson there is no evidence that they ever tried to prove to their supposed victims that the Jensen who communicated was a verifiable person. They never went and pretended to discover the obituaries or other docs about Jensen they had all along and go to their victims and say "look it was all real!" Even in talks and other things years later Experimental Society members made discussing Jensen they don't bring up anything about how he was proven real. Why bother to pull a fraud specifically based on real info about someone who died only to make nothing of that info? They could much more easily have made someone up out of thin air. This fraud scenario doesn't make sense."
This competely rules out the possibility of conscious fraud regarding the veridical information about Emil Jensen.
However, it is still possible that they could have heard the information from other sources and that cryptomnesia could be the explanation for the veridical information about Jensen. Also, That explanation would however still have a big problem: If Indridi was aware that Jensen lived two doors away from the fire, then why did he not mention it? Indridi was trying to convince them that a spirit was communicating through him, so why not give them all veridical information that he was subconsciously aware of? If Indridi wasn't aware that Jensen lived two doors away from the fire, then why would Indridi tell them about the fire speaking as Jensen out of all possible communicators?
(2023-08-22, 06:24 AM)MarcusF Wrote: [ -> ]These historical facts explain possible motives for promoting Indrid’s “miracles”. People controlling the circle around the medium had a political agenda – independent Iceland. And they needed a “new religion” to strengthen the spirit of Icelanders.
This does indeed help to explain their interest in spiritualism and mediumship. However, that doesn't say anything about whether mediums has real paranormal abilities or not.
(2023-08-22, 06:24 AM)MarcusF Wrote: [ -> ]Also, a few notes about Einar Kvaran. In 1924. he was promoting a fraudulent medium Einer Nielsen from Denmark:
“In 1922 in Christiania, Oslo, Nielsen was pronounced a fraud but seemed to have completely reinstated himself in 1924 in Reykjavik, in sittings for the Psychical Research Society of Iceland… The report of the novelist Einar H. Kvaran, endorsed by scientists and other people of high standing, recorded the materialization of forms, sometimes two appearing simultaneously near the medium while he himself was within view.”
Source: https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/enc...ner-d-1965
I don’t think that Kvaran was so naïve that he wasn’t aware of the accusations before he invited Nielsen to “perform” in Iceland. So, perhaps he promoted spiritualism with the political agenda on his mind.
There are no good reasons to assume that Nielsen was a fraud. Haraldsson argues in this article in Edgescience 30, on page 10-12, that Nielsen was an genuine medium.
https://www.scientificexploration.org/edgescience/30 Try this link instead if it would not work:
https://web.archive.org/web/202209051622...m3q%2Bo%3D No matter whether Nielsen was a genuine medium or not, the accusations from the norwegian commitee are not a good reason to consider Nielsen fraudulent. Haraldsson explains why on page 10-11 of the article in Edgescience. The psychical researcher Eric Dingwall wrote on page 327-328 that "it is difficult to accept the committee’s findings as to fraud on part of the medium. There is really very little evidence to indicate that the medium acted as the committee allege."
http://iapsop.com/archive/materials/spr_...921-22.pdf
Kvaran was aware of the accusations, and Haraldsson writes on page 11 of the article in Edgescience that "In light of the Oslo investigations, extraordinary precautions were taken and Nielsen was thoroughly tested."