Dean Radin on Real Magic

Garrett Stevens, host of the Hemi-Sync Podcast, interviews Dean Radin about his new book Real Magic.

The Case of the Gold Leaf Lady with Stephen E. Braude

Stephen Braude presents his research on the case of Katie, the Gold Leaf Lady -- an
individual who experiences a metallic substance, similar to gold leaf,
forming on and around her body. Chemical analysis has shown that the
substance is actually brass. Braude goes into some detail explaining why
he was able to rule out fraud in this puzzling case. He also describes
Katie's other psychic gifts, including trance mediumship, xenoglossy,
and clairvoyance. He also describes the psychodynamics behind the gold
leaf manifestations.

Table Levitation with Stephen E. Braude

Table levitation has been studied, at times, under quite good conditions, and provides good evidence of rarely seen macro-PK phenomena. Stephen Braude is even performing experiments today using modern scientific apparatus in full-light conditions. Commonly associated with Spiritualism, table levitation does not seem to provide good evidence for spirit interaction, but instead appears to be a psychokinetic effect produced by the living people present.

The Nature of Psi with Vernon Neppe

Thinking Allowed with Jeffrey Mishlove



Dr. Vernon Neppe describes areas of psi research that have all achieved statistical significance at the six sigma level. These include remote viewing, random event generator research, the global consciousness project, the ganzfeld studies, studies on the sense of being stared at, and feeling the future studies based on the work of Daryl Bem, presentiment studies. Neppe also includes some research in the area of survival after death. All of this research shows that human consciousness is capable of interacting with the physical world in ways that bypass the normal sensory and motor systems of the body. Neppe presents a single, multi-dimensional model that could account for psi.

Blood Miracle Forecasts Bad Omen

Cardinal Crescenzio Sepeial holding the vial containing Saint Januarius' blood. 

Photo Credit:
Paola Magni



The vial containing the blood of Saint Januarius failed to liquefy. Just who is Saint Januarius, and why is this issue with his blood important? Here's the story, from Michael Talbot's Holographic Universe (p. 119-120):



"Every year in September and May a huge crowd gathers at the Duomo San Gennaro, the principal cathedral of Naples, to witness a miracle. The miracle involves a small vial containing a brown crusty substance alleged to be the blood of San Gennaro, or St. Januarius, who was beheaded by the Roman emperor Diocletian in A.D. 305. According to legend, after the saint was martyred a serving woman collected some of his blood as a relic. No one knows precisely what happened after that, save that the blood didn't turn up again until the end of the thirteenth century when it was ensconced in a silver reliquary in the cathedral.



"The miracle is that twice yearly, when the crowd shouts at the vial, the brown crusty substance changes into a bubbling, bright red liquid. There is little doubt that the liquid is real blood. in 1902 a group of scientists from the University of Naples made a spectroscopic analysis of the liquid by passing a beam of light through it, verifying that it was blood. Unfortunately, because the reliquary containing the blood is so old and fragile, the church will not allow it to be cracked open so that other tests can be done, and so the phenomenon has never been thoroughly studied.



"But there is further evidence that the transformation is a more than ordinary event. Occasionally throughout history (the first written account of the public performance of the miracle dates back to 1389) when the vial is brought out, the blood refuses to liquefy. Although rare, this is considered a very bad omen by the citizens of Naples. In the past, the failure of the miracle has directly preceded the eruption of Vesuvius and the Napoleonic invasion of Naples. More recently, in 1976 and 1978, it presaged the worst earthquake in Italian history and the election of a communist city government in Naples, respectively.



"Is the liquefaction of San Gennaro's blood a miracle? It appears to be, at least in the sense that it seems impossible to explain by known scientific laws." [emphasis added]



Skep-dicks have claimed the substance in the vial is a thixotropic gel containing iron oxide. Of course, they've produced bullshit stunts where they've created a similar substance that liquefies when shaken, but that's not proof of anything. A ventriloquist can reproduce the effect of voices coming out of a radio but that doesn't mean that radios are fake. Just because an effect can be reproduced through other means doesn't in any way indicate that those are the only means of producing the effect. There are many ways to produce powered flight, and there are many different types of light bulb, and all sorts of other phenomena can be produced in different ways. Magicians reproducing psychic phenomena does not in the least prove, or even provide evidence that psychic phenomena are fake. It's a confidence trick designed to subvert the rational mind.



From Live Science:



"The blood did not liquefy in 1939, when World War II broke out, nor in
1943, the year the Nazi occupied Italy, nor in 1973, remembered for a
bout of cholera in Naples. Most recently, it failed to liquefy in 1980,
when a devastating earthquake struck Irpinia, some 30 miles east of
Naples, leaving more than 2,400 people dead.



"According to the website storiacity.it,
over the centuries the failed miracle coincided with 22 epidemics, 11
revolutions, three droughts, 14 archbishops death (within a 30-day
period), nine dead popes (over a period of a few weeks), four wars, 19
earthquakes, and three religious persecutions."



The blood failed to liquefy again on the 16th of December this year. Every time the blood has failed to liquefy there has been some disaster.



That could mean one of two things:



1. The liquefaction of the blood is a genuine miracle and failure to liquefy really does portend bad omens.



2a. The liquefaction of the blood is a psychic phenomena involving the collective consciousness of the people of Naples to see into the future and predict when calamities are about to occur.



2b. The blood is fake but unconscious precognition is still involved. Either the priests and other church officials psychically sense the future and purposefully do some trick to keep the fake substance a solid to warn the public, or the collective consciousness of the people of Naples keeps the fake substance a solid because of unconscious precognition.



The skep-dicks have no legs to stand on. The failure of the substance to liquefy has always coincided with disasters. It doesn't matter what is in the vial, blood or iron oxide gel, either a miracle or psychic powers are involved, because no matter what's in the vial, the substance itself or the people around it are still able to predict the future, something materialism says is impossible.



What does that mean for 2017? Let me just say that if I had any travel plans for Naples I would cancel them.

The Apports of Amyr Amiden with Stanley Krippner

A fantastic discussion with Stanley Krippner and Jeffrey Mishlove.



Stanley Krippner, Ph.D., professor of psychology at Saybrook University,
is a Fellow in five APA divisions, and past-president of two divisions
(30 and 32).



Here he describes his research in Brazil with an unusual spiritist
medium, Amyr Amiden, who had the ability to produce apports. Krippner
describes how his team observed over ninety instances of objects simply
appearing in mid-air and dropping to the ground in front of startled
observers. The objects included semi-precious stones, medallions, and
even jewelry. Many research papers were published regarding these
observations. Furthermore, the research team was able to record various
physiological, and geomagnetic, measurements while the phenomena
occurred. Krippner’s studies are probably the most extensive, scientific
observations of apports on record.



Runs 30 minutes

Uri Geller's Tricks?

If y'all remember the early days of The Urban Mystic, there was probably the biggest, and maybe the only, controversey in Urban Mystic history when Bob Couttie tried to spam the site! I let him post his comment and then eight months later he posted the same comment and I deleted it and then he accused me of censorship. That led to some work by a reader/guest contributer countering Couttie's claims regarding Uri Geller and nitinol. I purchased a very old copy of Couttie's book (which is out of print), read it, and wrote a 16 page refutation that so far is up only in PDF format. One day I will turn it into a separate page on the site as well as a video series.

That was 2010. The crux of the matter is does Uri Geller use trickery to bend spoons or not? I don't have an answer, and I've made clear on The Urban Mystic many times that I think it could go either way. Some of his feats are probably tricks, but there is good evidence that he has genuine powers as well. Remember, Uri Geller became a multi millionaire not by bending spoons, but by dowsing for oil, and he has been very successful at finding oil and minerals just by pointing at spots on maps. There is also the experiments performed at SRI with dowsing that appear legitimate.



The reason I bring this up is that I have discovered a video of Bob Couttie talking about Uri Geller, with some evidence of what might be trickery. I'll leave any interpretation up to you, my valued couple of readers. Enjoy.

Mind over Matter

Another 5th Dimension documentary. This one rates a solid A. There is a nice history of psychical research, including Ted Serios, Nina Kulagina, and Uri Geller. They talk about the work of J. B. Rhine and the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research program, then move on to the random event generators of the Global Consciousness Project and the work of Dean Radin. Unlike the last program this was not a debunking exercise. Overall this was a much better, more honest work that presented data and asked the viewer to draw one's own conclusions.

Swami Rama the Himalayan Master

Here is a lovely 20 minute video on the life of Swami Rama, who came to the West and demonstrated yogic powers (siddhis) under controlled scientific conditions.

Dean Radin: Changes in Consciousness

Dean Radin talks about how meditation (usually) makes you a better person and trying to study the siddhis (supernormal powers attained through meditation) scientifically.

Mind Over Matter

The sixth episode in the 1980 television program "Mind Over Matter" with Kit Pedler. Features interviews with such luminaries as Lawrence LeShan, David Bohm, Brian Josephson, Geoffrey Chew, Charles Tart, Elizabeth Rauscher, and Fritjof Capra.



Mr. Pedler's own views:



"I think a scientist would have to be massively ignorant or a confirmed bigot to deny the evidence that the mind can make connections with space, time, and matter in ways that probably have nothing to do with the ordinary senses, and also he'd find it difficult to deny these strange effects are compatable with current thinking in physics, and may, in the future, become part of an extended science in which they are no longer viewed as paranormal but as normal."



Runs 26 minutes.

Forbidden Knowledge

If you're one of the two or three regular readers here you have probably read a comment made eight months ago on a post Uri Geller Bends On, in regard to a book review I made of the book The Geller Papers by Charles Panati. A man by the name of Bob Couttie, who I assume is either a magician or a maritime investigator (or both?), posted a comment saying that a permanent bend can be made in the metal nitinol using nonpsychic means. The enigmatic Couttie tells the reader to google his name plus nitinol. Then he disappeared, for eight months. About a week ago he posted another comment, on the same exact post, that was almost identical to the first one he posted. He said that he can tell anyone how to make a permanent bend in nitinol using nonpsychic means. I was a bit surprised that he returned eight months later to post a nearly identical comment, and after some thought deleted it because there was nothing really new in his comment.

He posted another comment again yesterday, in which he goaded me to approve his comment, questioned my masculinity, and called me closed minded. He also suggests that I have never met Uri Geller, though I don't know what I said in my book review which would lead him to believe that, and so I must assume he is bluffing and doesn't really know whether I met Geller or not. I did google his name and found an essay from 1988, a few references to said essay on some magic forums, and a site about maritime disasters, about 70 results in all, counting duplicates (The above linked Uri Geller Bends On being one of them). I have not had time to read the whole essay (linked here for your reading pleasure, and mine in a few days), but it seems to suggest that by tying nitinol in a knot and heating it with a match a permanent bend can be made similar to Geller's. Not having the money to spend on nitinol I leave the experiment up to you. Mr. Couttie also has a book, Forbidden Knowledge, that was published in 1988 and doesn't seem to have gone into reprint yet. There is no description of the book so I'm not sure what it's about but I'm guessing it's about Geller and other psychics of the 70s and 80s. There are nine used copies for sale for four dollars and up plus shipping. It's only 160 pages, a nice afternoon's read (maybe a weekend if you're a slow reader like me). I am personally endorsing the book, for what it's worth, and suggest all three readers buy a copy. As soon as I update my Amazon account I myself will buy a copy and read it when I get the chance (I have three books already in que), and when I am finished I will post a review like I did for The Geller Papers.

-Dee

The Geller Papers: A Final Assessment

Sorry, but I've been a bit off this year and should have posted this days ago.



What can I say about the paranormal abilities of Uri Geller. Before reading this book I was, in fact, thoroughly convinced that some of the abilities manifested by Geller were genuine. I have personally had experience with ESP and metal bending, so I know they're not fake like Geller's critics claim.


At times The Geller Papers is very involved and makes scientific references to areas in which I am unfamiliar and therefore cannot assess the quality of (there were several pages I barely understood, mostly involving statistical analysis and engineering equations). This should obviously appeal to the scientists who no doubt should read this tome to spark interest in psychical research. Many scientists who wrote for this book came away concluding that science should invest more time, effort, and money (especially money, if you ask me, and I suspect if you ask them too) into psychical research involving psychic all stars like Uri Geller and other people dubbed "mini-Gellers." Don't get me wrong, all this research involving "ordinary mortals" (read: college sophmores) and their performance in Ganzfeld, telephone telepathy, micro-PK, etc., is very good and very important, but you learn far less about basketball by watching gradeschoolers play than you do by watching professionals. Some people are more talented at generating psychic effects as others, just as in every field of human endevor, and it makes a lot of sense to study these psychic super stars so we can learn the limits of these abilities and work toward developing practical technologies to utilize psychic phenomena.


From my own experiments I must concur with J. G. Taylor's findings that length of an object corresponds to the ease of bending that object, with longer objects bending more easily, and also that objects with a regular shape bend easier than others (which explains why I can bend a spoon or fork, but not a key of identical thickness). The metal becomes momentarily plastic when it is ready to bend, then deforms at a point where the least effort is required - the metal's weakest point, where a bend or break would first occurr under mechanical stress.


Uri Geller of the 1970s was phenomenal. Uri Geller of today, seems to have watered himself down. On a television appearance he made promoting his new show with Chris Angel he broke a spoon in half and said something to the effect of "some people say this is magic, others say it is psychic, but I want to leave it a mystery." This is a huge departure from thirty years ago when he went around the world claiming to be psychic and damn the opposition. In no way does this detract from past performance. He has bent metal without touching it; several magicians came away from testing him staking thier reputations that Geller was not using any form of trickery known to magic; he has performed in ESP experiments with odds against chance of a trillion to one, but perhaps in recent years Uri has gotten soft and accustom to the fame, and perhaps now he is under more pressure to perform and employs a degree of trickery to reclaim the audience he had decades ago.


Anyway, I highly recommend the book The Geller Papers: Scientific Observations on the Paranormal Powers of Uri Geller, edited by Charles Panati. This book gives a glimps at what psychical research could be if we employ modern tools and techniques to pro-psychics like Uri Geller.



-Dee

The Geller Papers

From the preface to The Geller Papers by Charles Panati.

A growing number of professionals, most notably physical scientists, believe Geller can do these things. They have tested him. They have observed events for which there are no present scientific explanations. Other people, however, among them magicians, see Geller as tremendously talented, lightning-fast in his deceptions, and disarmingly humble over his many failures. They take him to task not because of his talent and theatrics, but because, according to them, he pawns off what he does as "the real thing" – the product of innate paranormal abilities.

    The purpose of this book is to present firsthand observations on the talents of Uri Geller and, in doing so, to bring to light and offer for public scrutiny much material that has either never before appeared in print or has surfaced only piecemeal in the popular press. The book is written – through papers, reports, diary entries, and letters – by the scientists and professionals who, in various ways, have scrutinized Geller's talents, and feel that Geller is an individual who deserves further scientific attention.

    Since 1972, when he first came to worldwide attention, Geller has been tested in seventeen laboratories in eight different countries. The scientists who have worked with him have watched him deform solid steel rods without touching them, cause part of an exotic crystal to vanish from within a sealed container, alter the memory of a rare metal alloy, erase information from computer tapes, set Geiger counters ticking with only his thoughts, and read the thoughts of others while he is sealed in a room that blocks out all types of radio waves. They are men and women of probity, affiliated with major universities and research centers throughout the world. To prevent fraud the scientists have searched Geller for metals that might be hidden under his fingernails and magnets sewn into his clothing, x-rayed his teeth for evidence of minute electronic devices, bound his hands, blindfolded his eyes, all but stripped him naked. Many of the scientists flatly stake their reputation on the genuineness of Geller's paranormal talents.

    But scientists, it is rightfully said, should not be the final arbiters in separating what is psychic from what is magic. And they have not been. Four magicians have worked closely with Geller, applied their own standards to prevent any sleight of hand, and have observed inexplicable events. It is their unanimous opinion that Geller either has paranormal abilities or is acquainted with a form of magic unknown to the entire brotherhood of magicians. Their observations are presented here along with those of the scientists.

    Some of the papers in this book were originally meant for publication in reputable scientific journals – and several were submitted to these journals. In each case it was the scientist's hope that publication of his work with Geller would provide a platform for healthful debate and would generate further and more exhaustive experimentation. To date, however, only one paper has appeared in a major scientific journal. It is not the purpose of this preface to examine the procedures of scientific publishing, lest of all for such a highly unorthodox subject as parapsychology. Suffice it to say that all of those papers appear here. No material in them has been altered; no terminology diluted; the reports contain all the original charts, diagrams, pictures, and references that support the research. Geller's failures as well as his successes are discussed.

    Some of the papers are heavily detailed, giving all the specifics necessary for a scientific investigation. Others are short sketches, informal notes, or personal observations about the hours and days a particular researcher spent with Geller. Fourteen papers are by physicists, mathematicians, and engineers; three by parapsychologists; four by magicians; one by a professional photographer (who witnessed Geller take a "thought photograph"); and one (a letter that appears in the Introduction) by a dentist who x-rayed Geller's mouth for evidence of hidden devices. These men and women who have tested Geller are convinced that he is a phenomenon worthy of, indeed, demanding, the serious attention of science. As the prestigious British technical journal Nature editorialized, Geller "has clearly created a prima facie case for further investigation."

    Who are the professionals who have investigated Geller? What are their credentials? How rigorous or causal were their investigations? Exactly what did they do? And, of course, what did they discover? These questions will be examined, in part, in the Introduction. It should be noted, however, that the Introduction is not meant to be an evaluation of the papers; the papers stand or fall on their own contents. Rather, because of the technical nature of many of the papers and the sheer volume of the material they contain, the Introduction will serve as a general review, for the layman, of the major highlights of the research that has been done with Geller.

    There can be no doubt that this research will affect different people in radically different manners. Geller-advocates who read this collection of firsthand observations may fell confirmed in their present opinion of him. His critics will dissect these papers and will find large loopholes and countless faults with the experiments and descriptions they contain, for all of the evidence presented here is certainly not of equal quality. There is nevertheless a considerable amount of new and impressive information – from responsible scientists and professional magicians alike. Their observations taken as a whole are hard to dismiss on the grounds of simple fraud or mass delusion. But whatever one's opinion of the events described in this book, the thoughtful reader should give these reports a careful review before drawing final conclusions on the phenomena associated with Uri Geller.

Uri Geller and the Magician

The following is from pages 244-46 of The Geller Papers: Scientific Observations on the Paranormal Powers of Uri Geller, edited by Charles Panati. Leo Leslie – a professional magician from Denmark, was asked to prep the audience of a television show, being filmed in Copenhagen in 1974, before Uri Geller was to come on. He told them what tricks he thought Geller would be performing and instructed the staff how to avoid potential fraud. After the show he met with Geller backstage to investigate Geller's claims personally.



I told Geller I was still skeptical despite what I had seen him do on the television show. He asked what he could do to convince me of the genuineness of his paranormal powers. "Well," I said, "you could either bend one of my keys or attempt, if you can, to read my thoughts." Geller responded enthusiastically. "OK," he said. "Make a drawing." He asked me to sit at one end of the sofa with my back to him while he sat at the opposite end with his back to me. I decided to draw a flower. (From the psychologist who stood near Geller and observed his every move, I later learned that Geller started to draw a flower immediately, even before I set my pencil to the paper. He had finished his drawing before I had even begun mine.) "Are you finished?" Geller asked me. I told him that I was not, and that I was still concentrating on the object I had decided to draw.

    "Then we must start over again," said Uri, "Because I have already received an image and finished my drawing." He thought this attempt had failed.

    Now I drew a flower and took some time putting finishing touches on it. But apparently Geller was receiving nothing. "I don't thik I can do it," he said. "Are you having difficulty concentrating on the object?" he asked. I told him that I was, but still I asked to see whatever sketches he might have made. He turned around and said, "I can only get the image of flowers." He had drawn a crude sketch of another flower.

    My suspicions of him had begun to fade. There was no chance that he could have cheated. None of his own people was present in the room. The girl from the studio sat at Geller's end of the room and she could not possibly see my drawing. A photographer roamed around the room, but he said nothing and did nothing but take photographs. Geller could not have used accomplices or relied on secret signs to receive the drawings.

    What about the possibility that Geller relied on "sound readings," that is, the reproduction of lines from the sound impressions a pencil makes on paper. Because I am an experienced mentalist, I intentionally had distorted the sounds my pencil made while I drew the flower. In addition, I spoke constantly during the time I was drawing – partly to drown out sound from my pencil and in part actually to confuse Geller. I believe that sound-reading must be ruled out as a possible method by which Geller could have received the drawings.

   Could Geller have used a "thumb-writer"? This clever little magician's aid is a tiny metal clip, filled with lead, which is held tightly underneath the thumbnail so that the lead point sticks out slightly. With such a device, an accomplished mentalist can, in a moment, reproduce a simple drawing or a small series of numbers on a card behind his back. When the mentalist pulls the card from behind his back, it looks as if the drawing had been there all along. Being a practicing mentalist, will not go into complete detail here on exactly what else a person experienced with a thumb-writer can ahieve. The only thing that must be stated is that the psychologist at Geller's end of the sofa saw Geller draw both flowers before he said he "gave up." I have to admit that I believe Geller actually read my thoughts.

    After his demonstration of telepathy Geller tried psychokinesis. A nickle-plated, enameled key was given to Geller. He asked the journalist who was present to hold the key between two fingers. Geller then rubbed it a couple of times, very lightly, with his forefinger. "I can't do it," he suddenly said. "You have done something to this key. I cannot get in contact with the metal." I immediately suspected that Geller probably used a chemical to soften metal, and that with the coating on the key he felt defeated. I took the key from the journalist and studied it closely. But while I sat looking at the key the enamal suddenly started to crack, and a second later strips of the nickel plating curled up like small banana peels, while the key actually started to bend in my hand. I don't know who was more excited, Geller or the rest of us in the room. I only know that we were all thrilled.

   The judgment of all of us who were present for what occurred was one of total endorsement of Geller's paranormal claims: both his ability to bend metal and his talent for receiving telepathic signals. When I am asked about the strength of my own conclusions as to what I witnessed, I can answer only that while Geller was in Copenhagen I did not catch him in any deceptions. Therefore I have to continue to rely on my own judgment and experience as a mentalist; they tell me that Uri Geller is genuine.

Uri Geller Bends On

The following is from pages 4-6 of The Geller Papers: Scientific Observations on the Paranormal Powers of Uri Geller, edited by Charles Panati. Geller demonstrated his metal bending ability for physical scientist Eldon Byrd of the Naval Surface Weapons Center, Silver Spring, Maryland, in 1973. He bent samples of the metal nitinol, which was, at the time, very difficult for the public to obtain.





Nitinol wire is composed of approximately 55 percent nickel and 45 percent titanium. It has a physical memory. That is, a piece of nitinol wire actually "remembers" the shape in which it was manufactured. No matter how much it is crumpled or bent, a nitinol wire, when heated, springs vigorously back to its original shape. Byrd is quite familiar with the properties of nitinol. He knows that no simple ordinary force can alter the wire's memory; he wanted to see if Geller could.


      Geller arrived at the Naval Surface Weapons Center in October of 1973. in one test Byrd held a five-inch straight piece of nitinol by its end while Geller "gently stroked" the middle of the wire with his thumb and index finger. After twenty seconds Geller felt a "lump" forming in the wire. He removed his fingers and there was a sharp "kink" at the wire's center. Byrd placed the wire in boiling water, which should have removed the kink. It did not vanish. "Instead of [the wire] snapping back with some force into a straight shape," Byrd writes, "[it] began to form approximately a right angle." Byrd then placed the kink over a flame, but still it did not straighten out.


      In his paper "Uri Geller's influence on the metal nitinol," Byrd states that a crystallographic analysis of the kinked section showed that the crystals that contain the wire's memory had actually increased in size. Such a change requires that the wire be reannealed by being heated to a temperature of about 900o F. "There is absolutely no explanation as to how Geller bent the wire by gently touching it," says Byrd.


      Perhaps not, but the metallurgists at the Naval Surface Weapons Center were intent on removing the kink. They put the wire under tension in a vacuum chamber, and heated it by passing an electric current along its length until the wire was glowing and almost molten; in other words, they reannealed it into a straight shape. When the wire was removed from the chamber and laid on a plate to cool it was indeed straight; it appeared to have regained its original memory. But when the wire cooled to room temperature, the kink spontaneously returned. "The day following the experiment, writes Byrd, "I took another piece of nitinol wire and tried to bend it into as tight a kink as Geller had formed; I used the point of a screwdriver ... It was impossible for me to [do it] without using Bunsen burners and pliers." Byrd also tried various chemicals on pieces of nitinol wires to see if the wires could be temporarily "softened" so that a kink might be formed without extreme heat and sizable force. The nitinol proved impervious to all the chemicals tested.


      But experimentation between Geller and nitinol does not stop there. Byrd realized that anomalous effects can occur in the best of experiments. Perhaps the wires Geller altered (there were several of them) had a structural defect: Is this why Geller had been able to change their memory? Byrd pondered this question for eleven months before he got another chance to test Geller. This time it was not at the Naval Surface Weapons Center, but in an informal setting at the home of a friend of Geller's in Connecticut. Byrd brought with him three pieces of nitinol wire; all had been thoroughly tested at the lab to make sure that on being heated they sprang back to straight configurations. Geller rubbed the wires one at a time, and all three became deformed. Heating would not straighten them out. On later examination, nitinol experts at the lab concluded that the only way "permanent deformation" could have occurred was through the use of intense heat and mechanical stress. "All of the bends that Geller had produced thus far in nitinol wires have been permanent deformation," says Byrd. "The wires can be ... twisted into any shape by hand, but on being heated ... [they always] return to the shape Geller had imposed upon them."


      Could Geller have somehow cheated to achieve the results he did? Because of the unusual nature of nitinol, the scientific controls essential for an unambiguous investigation are, for the most part, built into the testing material. Byrd and his colleagues conclude that Geller would have had to either "palm" a Bunsen burner or substitute his own pieces of nitinol, manufactured to his specifications, if deception is to be the explanation for the events that took place. Geller had to deform the wire, Byrd thinks, by paranormal means.

Uri Geller at SRI

The Stanford Research Institute in California investigates the psychic phenomena associated with Uri Geller in the 1970s (you can tell by the tight pants and poofy hair everyone has). The ESP and remote viewing tests provided the best results (the one test had odds against chance of a trillion to one). Geller also produced a full scale deflection of a magnetometer, altered the reeding of a weight on a scale that was under a glass dome, and dowsed for water, sugar cubes, and ball bearings inside sealed metal tins. The experiment where Geller moved a compass needle was discarded because of bad protocol. Informal demonstrations were conducted of Geller's metal bending ability on a variety of objects with different compositions. The entire series of videos lasts about 30 minutes.







-Dee

Is Uri Geller Real?

John Benneth examines the Uri Geller phenomenon.

Urban Mystic Classics: Summer Spoons

Reprint from 22 August 2008.



In the same vein as an earlier entry this month, "Michael Chriton on PK", I have returned to the world of metal bending. While out eating I took the coffee spoon in my hand almost unknowingly and began the process of bending it. I'm not sure why I did this; perhaps the spoon wanted to be bent or wanted me to bend it. When I felt that it was in the state where it is ready to bend I approached with mild trepidation and decided against anyting spectacular for what I hope would be reasonable and obvious reasons. Anyway, here is the result of that.











Although I had no way of officially measuring it the spoon did seem more bent after an hour or so from the time I had put it down than when I initially bent it. This has been known to happen often.

-Dee

Urban Mystic Classics: Michael Chriton on PK

Michael Chriton talks about his experiences with psychokinesis and metal bending a la Uri Geller. This is a reprint from 11 August 2008, back before The Urban Mystic changed URLs. This will begin the series on Uri Geller and metal bending.

"but other magicians, such a James Randi, claim that spoon bending isn't a psychic phenomenon at all, just a trick.

"But I had bent a spoon, and I knew it wasn't a trick. I looked around the room and saw little children, eight or nine years old, bending large metal bars. They weren't trying to trick anybody. They were just little kids having a good time."

Michael Crichton, world famous best selling author and global warming skeptic explains why the skep-dicks' explanation that spoon bending is just a trick is wrong. You can't deny experience. The experience for what it is, experience, is beyond chriticism.

It's refreshing to see someone as famous as Mr. Crichton is sympathetic toward psi. So just what is the secret to spoon bending?

" The only thing I noticed is that spoon bending seemed to require a focused inattention. You had to try to get it to bend, and then you had to forget about it. Maybe talk to someone else while you rubbed the spoon. Or look around the room. Change your attention. That's when it was likely to bend. If you kept watching the spoon, worrying over it, it was less likely to bend. This inattention took learning, but you could easily do it. "

I can attest to that. My old teacher told me about focused inattention in teaching me spoon bending (it's been a while since I've done it, so am badly out of practice; it can become an expensive endeavor).

-Dee