Leslie Flint

[Laird]

It is possible for Victor Zammit to join this forum. I might send him an email. Then he can debate the topic if he wishes and the information is not second-hand, it comes straight from him.

That is preferable to hearsay, but even so, unless there is hard, cold evidence, the moderation team is likely to look unfavourably upon it. But as I said, we are still discussing how to handle situations like this.

Back to the topic of Leslie Flint, there is a small mention of him in the book Spooky Science: Debunking the Pseudoscience of the Afterlife, he was asked to get in contact with spirits for a radio interview but failed the test.

jkmac the Wikipedia entry for Helen Duncan is a very well-sourced article with a huge bibliography. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Duncan

Duncan was notable for ectoplasm that was discovered to be cheesecloth... are you arguing otherwise?

I have spoken about Duncan a few times on this forum already. There is a very famous investigation conducted with her at the National Laboratory of Psychical Research in 1931 by Harry Price and his colleagues. All the photographs can be found in Price's report here: http://www.harrypricewebsite.co.uk/Seanc...-index.htm

Her ectoplasm was indeed cheesecloth or gauze. They even had samples taken and analysed. The only question is how she smuggled it into the laboratory. Most think she regurgitated it.

This is a very famous investigation, possibly one of the 'greats' in the history of psychical research. Are you saying it should not be mentioned on Wikipedia?

I would also add that the London Spiritualist Alliance investigated Duncan and took a sample of her ectoplasm. It was made from toilet paper, eggs and cheesecloth.

Is it 'POV' to mention these facts? Is it people with an 'agenda' who mention these facts? These facts are all well-sourced to the psychical literature. I have no idea how you would interpret the facts any other way than fraud. I am afraid I do not see any of this evidence 'tilted' by skeptics. The London Spiritualist Alliance and National Laboratory of Psychical Research were not skeptic organizations. If you disagree, how do you interpret their findings?

I think I was VERY clear in my post. In case you need a reminder, see below...

snip- Really, this is what made her famous? This is one of the most notable things about her?

Pretty clear, would't you say? 

I'm not arguing fact or fiction here. I have my thoughts on how well sourced this little gem of journalism is, but I have no time or interest to argue tit for tat, point by point, about someone who died decades ago. 

I specifically asked if this was the thing that she was famous for. Well, I ask you again. Is it?

This is like saying in the first line or two of Tiger's Wood's wiki: he is famous for drunk driving and beating his wife.

Or maybe the first line of Micheal Jackson's wiki ought to be: he is famous for taking drugs and abusing children. 

Come one. Are you really that blind or are you just pretending to be?

If you have any desire to be taken seriously here, you need to converse in good faith.

Helen Duncan was famous for two things jkmac:

1. Being known as the last person imprisoned under the British Witchcraft Act
2. Producing fraudulent ectoplasm made from cheesecloth

The thing that really made Helen Duncan famous was the fact that she disclosed the sinking of a Navy ship during WW2. She had contacted the spirit of a deceased sailor from HMS Barham yet the fact of the ship being lost had been withheld from the public due to the need for secrecy during the war. So she was tried and convicted under the obscure and archaic Witchcraft Act. 

http://www.helenduncan.org.uk/

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/jan/...dwar.world

I didn't say that there is proof. You stated that she is famous for two things neither of which are the thing that she was actually most famous for. Whether or not she was genuine doesn't change that.

Helen Duncan was famous for two things jkmac:

1. Being known as the last person imprisoned under the British Witchcraft Act
2. Producing fraudulent ectoplasm made from cheesecloth

Both the above points are mentioned at the top of her Wikipedia article.

Please run a Google Books search for "Helen Duncan" or search in a newspaper archive, in nearly all cases the above two facts is all she is known for. Most newspaper reports only refer to her cheesecloth or she was imprisoned. It is not 'bias' to mention that she is best known for these things.

If you have no interest in commenting on someone who died years ago why even raise the topic of Duncan in this thread? Not sure what the problem 

So,,,, she wasn't known as a medium, first and foremost....
In that case, I can only assume you have no interest in an actual discussion.
Fine by me. 
Clearly any time spent discussing any subject with you is a waste of time. I'm done.

Honestly, Leuders, I wonder whether you would share with us why you are here? We all know what you are going to post but you post it anyway - as though you believe that none of us looks at both sides of a story. I am pretty certain that you are not that naive but the more you post the more I wonder. Just citing Wikipedia or Jon Donnis, etc., as supposedly reliable sources doesn't convince those who are used to looking deeper. Internet "skeptics" like you love to pretend that you are defending science yet what you are doing is evangelising atheism/materialism. If you continue in the blanket denials that amount to the majority of your posts, the rest of us are left with the inevitable conclusion that you are here to troll. I'd suggest that you are on thin ice right now.