Dean Radin's spoon

The rules are completely straight forward... no debunking anywhere but SvP... which is why Chris ran for cover when Steve001 entered the original thread on SvP. (Note: It's only a few weeks ago where Ninshub stopped Steve001 posting here for 2 days, for this very reason).

That is nonsense, and it is insulting, Max.

Come on guys no reason to upset each other. If we can post it here fine, otherwise the SvP section is good for me. TìI'll wait for the mods decision in case 

[Ninshub]

This is Max’s mantra apparently. He’s free to continue meditating this way but he’s not a moderator.

[Ninshub]

TìI'll wait for the mods decision in case 

You're free to post here if you wish, Raf, as was said.

[Ninshub]

The rules are completely straight forward... no debunking anywhere but SvP... which is why Chris ran for cover when Steve001 entered the original thread on SvP. (Note: It's only a few weeks ago where Ninshub stopped Steve001 posting here for 2 days, for this very reason).

The reason why I banned Steve001 for 2 days, to be precise, was that I asked him if he was aware of the rule but he made it clear he was going ahead anyway, in disregard of what I had asked.

----

Laird and I are having a discussion right now as we realize the wording of the rule may lead to ambiguity so we'll take steps very soon to clarify it.

The intent when written (I should know because I wrote it!) is the following: anyone can post in the ECP, skeptic or not, but there shouldn't be general dismissal of a category of anomalous phenomena at hand, only criticism (or debunking if one wants to call it that) of a specific case.

So the spirit of that applied to this case is: feel free to criticize or "debunk" an instance of Dean Radin's spoon bending. But if you want to claim that spoon bending is impossible or laughable to begin with, you're in the wrong forum. (Respecting that logic, you shouldn't argue that Dean Radin's instance of spoon bending is ridiculous because you're basing it on the notion that the topic is ridiculous in the first place.) Hope that's clear enough. Sorry for the confusion if there's been any!

Anyway we'll try to make the wording of the rule as written reflect this thinking.

The reason why I banned Steve001 for 2 days, to be precise, was that I asked him if he was aware of the rule but he made it clear he was going ahead anyway, in disregard of what I had asked.

----

Laird and I are having a discussion right now as we realize the wording of the rule may lead to ambiguity so we'll take steps very soon to clarify it.

The intent when written (I should know because I wrote it!) is the following: anyone can post in the ECP, skeptic or not, but there shouldn't be general dismissal of a category of anomalous phenomena at hand, only criticism (or debunking if one wants to call it that) of a specific case.

So the spirit of that applied to this case is: feel free to criticize or "debunk" an instance of Dean Radin's spoon bending. But if you want to claim that spoon bending is impossible or laughable to begin with, you're in the wrong forum. (Respecting that logic, you shouldn't argue that Dean Radin's instance of spoon bending is ridiculous because you're basing it on the notion that the topic is ridiculous in the first place.) Hope that's clear enough. Sorry for the confusion if there's been any!

Anyway we'll try to make the wording of the rule as written reflect this thinking.

I've always assumed the rules were primarily intended to prevent pseudo-sceptics disrupting legitimate discussion, without preventing people who happen to be sceptical from participating in legitimate discussion. Whatever they were intended to say, I think as they are written they accomplish that quite well. (They let in someone who is a believer in some phenomena but a pseudo-sceptic about others, but thankfully that's not common. And they exclude some legitimate discussion by reasonable sceptics, but without much more proactive moderation to decide what points are legitimate and what aren't, perhaps that's unavoidable to some extent.)

If they're going to be changed to prevent anyone whatsoever arguing against a whole category of phenomena in this forum, I think that would be a big mistake. I think if someone starts a thread about - say - the so-called "electronic voice phenomena," it's crazy to have a rule that would prevent someone who is generally a proponent from expressing the opinion that they are an example of pareidolia. And in many cases it's impossible to discuss particular instances while pretending to ignore an elephant in the room in the shape of a general argument.

On the other thread, Max has explained his thinking about this:
https://psiencequest.net/forums/thread-p...8#pid29488

If I understand correctly, what he's suggesting is that the spoon could have been prepared by annealing so that the metal would be soft, but that because of the shape of the bowl, there would initially have been enough resistance that it couldn't be bent. But once it gave way it would have become rigid through work hardening.

I don't think this really corresponds to what Radin describes, which suggests the metal suddenly felt soft before he bent it, and that the bending didn't require much force:
"In accordance with previous claims I had read, the bowl momentary felt like putty, and I easily pinched the bowl over as shown."

But perhaps his recollection about the sequence of events was wrong.

Apparently this type of Oneida cutlery was made of nickel silver (that is, an alloy of copper, nickel and zinc), plated with silver, and nickel silver can be annealed. Perhaps, as Will suggests, an examination of Radin's spoon by a metallurgist would show whether this explanation is feasible.

There is also the video of Michael Shermer's experience at one of Jack Houck's spoon-bending parties, which Max posted on the other thread. Shermer did take a spoon to a metallurgist and towards the end of the video are some micrographs of the grain structure. Perhaps they would reveal something to an expert eye. (I am guessing that the party Radin attended was one of Houck's, though I can't see that stated. I have seen a statement that Houck used Oneida cutlery.):

On the other thread, Max has explained his thinking about this:
https://psiencequest.net/forums/thread-p...8#pid29488

If I understand correctly, what he's suggesting is that the spoon could have been prepared by annealing so that the metal would be soft, but that because of the shape of the bowl, there would initially have been enough resistance that it couldn't be bent. But once it gave way it would have become rigid through work hardening.

I don't think this really corresponds to what Radin describes, which suggests the metal suddenly felt soft before he bent it, and that the bending didn't require much force:
"In accordance with previous claims I had read, the bowl momentary felt like putty, and I easily pinched the bowl over as shown."

But perhaps his recollection about the sequence of events was wrong.

Apparently this type of Oneida cutlery was made of nickel silver (that is, an alloy of copper, nickel and zinc), plated with silver, and nickel silver can be annealed. Perhaps, as Will suggests, an examination of Radin's spoon by a metallurgist would show whether this explanation is feasible.

There is also the video of Michael Shermer's experience at one of Jack Houck's spoon-bending parties, which Max posted on the other thread. Shermer did take a spoon to a metallurgist and towards the end of the video are some micrographs of the grain structure. Perhaps they would reveal something to an expert eye. (I am guessing that the party Radin attended was one of Houck's, though I can't see that stated. I have seen a statement that Houck used Oneida cutlery.):

Can Radin be contacted in order to ask him to bring the spoon to an expert? A metallurgist, a smith, whoever can have the most knowledge about metal bending and hardening. It would be of great help.

Can Radin be contacted in order to ask him to bring the spoon to an expert? A metallurgist, a smith, whoever can have the most knowledge about metal bending and hardening. It would be of great help.

Yes, there's a contact form on his website:
http://www.deanradin.org/

If somebody has contacted him before it might be worth trying it out. Otherwise, I can contact him if you like