I am finding it interesting that we can take apart spychics but to write about pro-skeptics is an off limits topic.

Very strange,

Jack

"Take apart spy chics" ..is that what James Bond does..LoL

sorry Jack couldn't resist

Howard

Jack:

Are you saying that Geller was truthful when he said he was bending spoons with his mind (or other paranormal means)?

Also, how do you know Randi was "lying" about what Geller was doing? Do you believe Geller used paranormal power for his spoonbending?

Now you KNOW that we are ALL going to want to know now!!! Poor Seth - he'll be inundated with emails asking nicely...

Best
ML x

Howard I think that may possibly you are correct.

Much more interesting I would think.

Jack

Semantics. If I come up with a trick nobody's done before, it's still a trick. If someone famous (or semi-famous to a miniscule portion of the population—with a brief period of greater fame many years ago) calls it a simple "magician's trick" then I might feel annoyed, but if it's a trick it's a trick, no?

If you claim to have real powers I think you pretty much have to live with the fact that people are going to try and show that you don't. Why whine about it? It's nothing new. Just get on with it. It's part of the show.

-Travis

I can agree with you.

But you are missing my piont a bit.

If the guy exposing is not telling the truth why is he not examined as criticaly?

See some of these guys take some of the pro-skeptics to be honest searchers of the truth. They don't consider that they are running a bit of a swindle themselfs.

I simply was using one simple and well known example to prove my side that is all.

Best Wishes,

Jack

Geller dug his ditch so he can stand in it.

You know how this board is all about 'magicians helping magicians', right? Okay, well, in a friendly and supportive way, let me give you some helpful advice. You might want to look up the meaning of 'infer' and 'imply'. Any dictionary will do. Dictionaries are cheap. Just like your jibes about James Randi.

Lynne, I would love to read the next version of the Val Andrews Book Test. you seem like a great person - keep doing what you do

Thank you for concern and help Ian.

I will look into this.

A question.
If a dictionary is cheap does that make the content of the book cheap?

In the same way my comments may at first glance look cheap but in content they are not.

Best Wishes,

Jack

H.O.A_X

May I humbly suggest that you might not want to accuse people of lying if you don't have evidence, or even a coherent allegation? If you have evidence that Randi was lying about Geller, please spell it out in a clear, specific way.

Look Jim, I have made it clear.

It was not a magicians trick and is not simple.

I think I have made this quite clear.

What part of this is not easily understood?

Was it a truthfull statement?
No it was not.

Jack

And so has the dance started again.

You've made it quite clear that you believe Randi was lying about Geller. However, you have not provided evidence to support that allegation.

I don't believe that you answered this question, which I asked earlier on this thread:

Are you saying that Geller was truthful when he said he was bending spoons with his mind (or other paranormal means)?

Jim,

I am not making any comment on Geller.

The spoon effect was not a simple magicians trick at that time.

No one had seen it except for Geller doing it.

So how could it be a simple magicians trick or an old magicians trick.

I do hope this made my comment clearer.

It was not a truthfull statement now or then.

Jack

Why won't you answer the question I keep asking--what was it then? As far as I can tell, it was either a trick (which I'm pretty sure has been established) or a supernatural act. Please tell me if you think Geller bent spoons via supernatural means. Yes or no? If no, and it wasn't a trick, what was it?



Huh? No one had seen it except the millions of viewers who watched Geller on TV.

Easy. He did what mentalists do when they want to bend a spoon. As I said, he has been caught doing this by several different people, even on camera (I think). If he's not using a trick to bend the metal, why can't he do it in full view of the audience, without turning around or covering the spoon, or moving it around. How about he just puts the spoon on a table and bends it without touching it?

Jack,

You need to re-read & re-think some of the things you write, because the more you write, the more you begin to contradict yourself, which lessens your credibility.

You ARE entertaining.......I'll give you that.

Jim,

I think we have a communication problem.

Is your position that Randi was speaking the truth?

Do you belive that Geller had stolen an effect from magicians and was presnting it as real?

I would like to confirm this befor responding further.

Jack

Well, I don't really want to take part in this discussion since ther are many points where Jack and others are correct but also many points that are very hard to verify now.

But I do know that there are sources and I talked to old magicians years ago who mentioned that in the 50ies there were some so called psychics in Europe who did spoon bending like geller. They did see it. BUt in those days media (TV etc.) couldn't be compared to those in the 70ies and theses so called psychics didn't do it for show reasons.

ANother point is that Geller indeed was the first who wanted to make this public and cleverly used the media possible in those days and up today he is a great showman regarding audience management.

So IMO it doesn't matter if Randis comments are truth or not. He showed that it is possible to bend spoons though he mentioned that he doesn't possess special powers. And in exposing some methods he just brought up first sceptics that if he could do it than Geller also coud have done it that way. That was all that Randi wanted to show IMO.

But of course nowaday most of the poeple know that Geller really hasn't these powers. If one man really would have these powers the world would have changed.
Especially since ther are recent geller-shows where in slow motion you can detect method of the breaking spoon and even the bending method.

So I made the experience that the reaction from lay audience has changed a bit when I discussed Geller-Shows with them. IN the 70ies there really was the discussion about CAN THIS GUY HAVE THESE POWERS. Today, beeing more aware of many things they say DID YOU SEE HOW CLEVER HE DOES AND HOW HE CAN INFLUENCE AN AUDIENCE IN BELIEVEING THIS.

So they are aware, also because of many literature and DVD on spoon bending, that he doesn't have such powers.
So IMO this topic is similar to the moon landing. Even if there is proof about this, there always will be people who doubt anything. But that's OK since we all are thinking inidivuals and everybody has the right to free opinion. But that's the reason why this thread will go on forever without bringin new points up.

Greetings
Thomas

Indy,

I was making comment in the second half about the guys past creating what we deal with now.


Jack

H.O.A_X