Indridi Indridason's contact with Emil Jensen

Yet here we have Haraldur Níelsson, and Einar Kvaran later lying...

Haraldsson must have been aware of these quotes by Níelsson and Kvaran, because he included them in the psi-encyclopedia article for the Copenhagen fire case. https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/artic...hagen-fire He did not consider the quotes a problem. Why? Perhaps because one does not need to interpret the quotes as lies. Perhaps they just meant that they did not have a telegraph that could get messages from other places than the Poldhu station in Cornwall or that they did not have telegraphs that could get the information in question.

Now look at the brief newspaper report I found published later in the Danish Newspaper Berlingske Tidende

Yes, the information are included in this newspaper report. But that is irrelevant, because the information was not available on Iceland at the time of the seance. Haraldsson was aware of this newspaper report, since he included that newspaper report in his paper on the case on page 14: https://www.homepage-baukasten-dateien.d...ndridi.pdf It can also be read here: http://hdl.handle.net/109.3.1/uuid:913d0...b22311f490

From Haroldsson's paper, the medium Indridi Indridason made 4 specific claims:

1. There was a fire in one of the streets of Copenhagen.
2. The fire was in a factory.
3. The fire started around midnight on 24 November 1905.
4. The fire was brought under control within an hour.

Now look at the brief newspaper report I found published later in the Danish Newspaper Berlingske Tidende

Last night at around twelve o’clock the Fire Brigade was called to Store
Kongensgade 63, where fire had broken out in a house in the backyard in the
warehouse of the Copenhagen Lamp Factory. The fire had spread considerably
when the fire brigades arrived from the Main Fire Station and Adelsgade
Station. Still, the firemen managed to get the fire under control in about an
hour. The damage was substantial.

Its not just close, it's amazingly close, it's the same report. All Indridi Indridason has done is report the contents of an even shorter telegraph news item from the Marconi feed, and made a sensational claim about it.

How do you know that it is the same report just because it includes the same information? If Indridi could see what was going on, either through clairvoyance or through the spirit Jensen seeing what was happening in Copenhagen, then he should have been aware of these four things. It is the kind of information about the fire that is relevant for the newspaper to report, so of course they reported it. How can you know that Marconi carried this information just because it was printed in a danish newspaper? The newspaper does not mention that it would be a telegraph news item, and it does not mention that this information would ever have been caried by the Marconi feed. Since Berlingske Tidene was published in the same city that the fire was taking place, I don't think they would need to get the information by telegraph in the first place.

the following morning (25th Nov 1905) the weekly edition of Björn Jónsson newspaper 'Isafold' printed the following column entitled 'Marconi Messages'

This column does not mention any fire in Copenhagen. Here is an english translation of it from Google Translate.
https://imgbox.com/Fn08ea0V

Your debunking pretty much annihilates the entire Indridi mediumship because IIRC basically all the testimony we've got that matters was reported through these people who lied about the lack of any telegraph communication that could bring in info about Denmark to beef up the Copenhagen fire case. How can we trust them on anything else then? And if they were actively lying about Indridi's mediumship it's not really a reach to conclude that they may have assisted in hoaxing outside observers.

Haraldsson must have been aware of these quotes by Níelsson and Kvaran, because he included them in the psi-encyclopedia article for the Copenhagen fire case. https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/artic...hagen-fire He did not consider the quotes a problem. Why? Perhaps because one does not need to interpret the quotes as lies. Perhaps they just meant that they did not have a telegraph that could get messages from other places than the Poldhu station in Cornwall or that they did not have telegraphs that could get the information in question.
All the testimony about the Indridi mediumship that matters does not come from these people. There was an big investigation made by an independent investigator called Gudmundur Hannesson in 1908-1909. https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/artic...son-medium
And as I has shown elsewhere, it was not possible for anyone on Iceland to be aware of the fire, since the Poldhu station in Cornwall only transmitted major world news to Iceland, so we do not have to blindly trust Níelsson and Kvaran in the Copenhagen Fire case either.
If they would have wanted to make the Copenhagen fire case more impressive, then why didn't they attempt to verify the information about Emil Jensen and then tell people about the verified veridical information? It was only in 2009 that Haraldsson verified the information.

Looking back over this, something that's really suspicious is what looks like a lack of contemporaneous reports. The earliest source Haraldsson cites on the Jensen/Copenhagen fire event is from 1910, 5 years after it allegedly happened. Another is even later: 1922. You'd think if they'd witnessed such an amazing mediumistic communication and it was confirmed to be fully accurate the very next day, the Indridi group would've immediately spread the news far and wide in Iceland and published the documentary proof. The fact, if it's a fact, that they didn't do that makes it seem like they had something to hide and restricted the whole thing to the witnesses at the seance they were hoaxing.

They got the confirmation that the information was correct only one month later when the danish papers arrived with the boat. It was only then that they became aware that there was any veridical information involved in the case, so before that they had no reason to tell anyone about the case. But after the papers had come with the boat there was no reason to tell anyone either, because they could have been accused of making it up after reading the paper where the veridical information appeared. The seances was restricted to the members of the Experimental Society and their invited guests, so why would the skeptics trust these persons if they would claim that the things had been said during the seances? The Experimental Society did invite an independent professional investigator, but those investigations took place in 1908 and 1909, and this case happened in 1905. Also, one can wonder whether the case really seemed so extraordinary to the people involved. If it would have, then they would have at least tried to verify the information about Jensen, which they did not. There was after all many times that Indridi told veridical information. What makes this into a "perfect case" is the fact that there were veridical information regarding Jensen which no one made any attempt at verifying and which was verified by Haraldsson in 2009.

Probably if it'd been made public an Indridi skeptic affiliated with a different newspaper would've pointed out the Marconi transmission that we know thanks to Max was published in at least one newspaper on the 25th reporting the fire.

It looks like he never addressed the fact that Björn Jónsson's own newspaper published on November 25th a Marconi transmission about the Copenhagen fire. That could be reasonably interpreted as actively misleading if that info was brought to his attention and it seems Max did show him that. Obviously that reflects badly on Haraldsson.

Björn Jónssons newspaper Isafold did, like Max showed, publish a Marconi transmission the following morning, but it did not say anything about the fire. Here is an english translation of it from Google Translate. https://imgbox.com/Fn08ea0V
 

I think I have responded in an adequate way to all the criticisms that has been made in this thread. In my humble opinion, "the perfect case" is indeed perfect, and Indridi has been proven to have had real paranormal abilities.

[Ninshub]

Welcome to the forum Wanderer!

I think I have responded in an adequate way to all the criticisms that has been made in this thread. In my humble opinion, "the perfect case" is indeed perfect, and Indridi has been proven to have had real paranormal abilities.

Wow! Thanks very much for putting such effort into assessing and responding to the criticisms here. I will carefully review all of your posts, hopefully later today, and respond with any thoughts. I'd be happy to have been wrong in my change of mind, believe me!