Uri Geller on private island 'UFO hotspot'

[S2F]

I'm just making a point of how soime people who claim to be skeptics choose the evidence they want and brush other evidence under the carpet. lol

This is where logic and Occam's Razor enter the fray. Is it more likely that Mr. Geller is using psychic powers that have never been truly proven or is he a showman who is adept at fooling people?

By the way, a magicians greatest skill isn't the tricks he uses or his performance, it is his ability to read people and understand human nature to a point where he can use our perception against us. I haven't seen Mr. Geller do anything that couldn't fall into this category. That alone causes me to doubt his claims to the point where the proof required to substantiate his claims would have to be...er substantial.

[bee]

Soooo

Your real problem with Randi is racism, jealousy of his success and homophobia?

yeah right....

You obviously have no problem with ANYTHING Randi does.....I can only imagine how you would have reacted had the 'facts' applied

to someone famous classed as a 'believer'....you would have been all over it like a terrier ripping a rabbit apart.....

http://stevevolk.com...s/uncategorized

JAMES RANDI: SKEPTICISM’S GREAT ACHILLES

Is the real James Randi finally coming into view?

I have long felt that the skeptical community has a James Randi Problem.

At one time or another, seemingly every professional skeptic offers thanks and praise to Randi, lauds his Million Dollar Challenge and/or joins his self-named foundation (JREF). They applaud him for forty years spent debunking all things paranormal, line up in droves to attend his annual Amazing Meeting—“a celebration of critical thinking and skepticism sponsored by the James Randi Educational Foundation”—and they rarely, if ever, engage in any critical thinking about Randi himself.

Thus far, they seem unmoved even by the specter of “Jose Luis Alvarez.”

I put the name in quotes because Randi, a Plantation, Florida resident, has lived and worked with “Alvarez” for roughly 20 years, even traveling the world together to debunk psychics and stage mediums. But the feds, this last September, arrested “Alvarez” and charged him with stealing another man’s identity—obtaining passports and getting paid under the name of the real Jose Luis Alvarez, a teacher’s aide in the Bronx.

So, who is the man who has been living in Randi’s home and working with him for 20 years? According to the Sun Sentinel, Alvarez is actually Deyvi Pena, who came to the United States from Venezuela in the mid-80s on a student visa to study at the Art Institute of Fort Lauderdale. And now? The questions about Pena extend from his identity to his age to how the feds have come to accuse him of stealing the name, date of birth and social security number of a New York man, back in 1987, in order to travel internationally with Randi. And it is this relationship—the long partnership between Alvarez/Pena and Randi—that should now concern the skeptical community.

In short, what did Randi know and when did he know it?

The answer would seem to matter—a lot.

[Captain Zim]

I will say that Randi has done great things grabbing frauds. But I would also say that he designs his experiments in such a way that genuine psychic ability would not have a chance. Only having 10 trials is statistical bullcrap: in psychology, one has multiple subjects and multiple repetition. His "catching out" psychics is as much showmanship as the so-called psychics themselves. He does however, do well to educate the public on the basics of the scientific method.

Speaking of Von Braun, Ed Mitchell is one of those Geller has also fooled. He "materialised" a tie pin Mitchell left on the moon, appearing in his mouth while he was eating ice cream. If I were Ed Mitchell, I'd ask Geller to "materialise" a bit of moon rock too.

[bee]

I will say that Randi has done great things grabbing frauds. But I would also say that he designs his experiments in such a way that genuine psychic ability would not have a chance. Only having 10 trials is statistical bullcrap: in psychology, one has multiple subjects and multiple repetition. His "catching out" psychics is as much showmanship as the so-called psychics themselves. He does however, do well to educate the public on the basics of the scientific method.

that's quite a fair thing to say for someone on the highly sceptical side.....

Speaking of Von Braun, Ed Mitchell is one of those Geller has also fooled. He "materialised" a tie pin Mitchell left on the moon, appearing in his mouth while he was eating ice cream. If I were Ed Mitchell, I'd ask Geller to "materialise" a bit of moon rock too.

Geller must be one of the most clever people on the planet to be able to 'fool' all those clever people and scientists....

http://www.uri-gelle...hy/uribiog3.htm

"In an interesting interview for Free Inquiry magazine, April 2000,

Arthur C. Clarke surprisingly stated that he has his own door key that was bent by Geller. Furthermore, he indicated that he does not rule out the possibility of all sorts of remarkable mental powers. He went on to say that there are even things like telekinesis etc, summing up by proclaiming that there are many things we do not know about."

" I tested Uri myself under laboratory-controlled conditions and saw with my own eyes the bending of a key which was not touched by Geller at any time. There was a group of people present during the experiment who all witnessed the key bending in eleven seconds to an angle of thirty degrees. Afterwards we tested the key in a scientific laboratory using devices such as electron microscopes and X-rays and found that there was no chemical, manual or mechanical forces involved in the bending of the key."

Professor Helmut Hoffmann (Department of Electrical Engineering, Technical University of Vienna, Austria)

(the print went small for the quotes..... )

.

[bee]

Considering your information, do you not mean, you only have to tell people you had a scientist test you?

are you now trying to imply that Geller has NOT been tested by scientists......

[media=]

[/media]

[Captain Zim]

No. Arthur C. Clarke has never believed in psychic abilities (although he was open to them), save perhaps for dowsing as it has survival value (which I myself do not believe in, as repeated tests have shown it doesn't work).

And in Arthur C. Clarke's own words:

Since it is, of course, utterly inconceivable that Uri could tell an untruth, I am quite prepared to accept his account of my behaviour; most naïve observers react to his performance in exactly this way. But his memory is at fault in one important respect; he did take the door-key out of my hand, and he placed it on a firm metal surface while stroking it. Interesting, to say the least…

http://www.zem.demon.co.uk/clarke.htm

Edited June 27, 2012 by Captain Zim

[bee]

No. Arthur C. Clarke has never believed in psychic abilities (although he was open to them), save perhaps for dowsing as it has survival value (which I myself do not believe in, as repeated tests have shown it doesn't work).

And in Arthur C. Clarke's own words:

http://www.zem.demon.co.uk/clarke.htm

ok, Captain Zim.....

....he also said this (from your link)

"If, after all this, you ask me whether I believe Uri is a total fraud, I’ll refuse to give a straight answer"

so we are left with some ambiguity...?

.

[Coffey]

Ok.....

NO BELIEF in anything vaguely classed as paranormal.

And only believing the science and scientists endorsed generally by the status quo....

which is...the closed-minded sceptic's ultimate appeal to authority......

It's weird cause even Einstein talks about the mind etc and all this stuff. Yet people are happy to qoute and use his science as evidence. lol

Edited June 27, 2012 by Coffey

[psyche101]

The evidence is in Braun. As I have pointed out. If this was the other way aorund and Braun had commented on someone's UFO sighting and said "It's some sort of spyplane" etc (probably a bad example but you get my point) you would swear by his comment and use that as evidence. Saying because of his intelligence and position he has to be correct. I've seen this done so many times. Once it happens the other way. it cna't possibly be the case. It's hilerious. I don't even beleive Gellar did it, I think Braun might have lied. I'm just making a point of how soime people who claim to be skeptics choose the evidence they want and brush other evidence under the carpet. lol

Yes that is probably right, because Brauns special field was aeronautics, not slight of hand. You seem to be dismissing logic to arrive at a "believers" conclusion. You seem to be trying awful hard to support Geller, and the reason I have to say escapes me.

I do not think Braun would have lied, why would he cover for a trickster? You keep saying "the ring was in Brauns hand" that is slight of hand too, never seen someones watch suddenly appear in a Magicians hand? It strikes me as far mor logical that the well practised trick did what they were supposed to do - fool people.

[psyche101]

and Byrd's response.....

Letters: Eldon Byrd replies to Martin Gardner

I almost ignored the invitation to respond to Martin Gardner's article "Geller, Gulls, and Nitinol," but decided that it needed to be on record that I did not 100 per cent agree with it... There were many errorsin Mr. Gardner's article. A few were easy to make, such as referring to me as an operations analyst instead of a physical scientist and spelling Ordnance, "Ordinance." However, others were made on purpose to mislead the reader. Most of your readers are probably unaware of Martin Gardner's journalistic techniques because they may share his viewpoints. I feel that Martin Gardner believes that if he can discredit the work of anyone who supports the possibility that Uri Geller or anyone like him can produce "paranormal" events then the end justifies the means. (Be it journalistic "licence" or enlisting the aid of a third party like Mr. Klass to act as an intelligence gatherer.)

I had an opportunity to ask Hannah (Shipi Shtrang's sister) if she ever said that she assisted Uri dupe an audience. I doubt that Martin Gardner asked her directly about it, relying on third party information. It is my understanding that when Hannah was approached by the reporter from Israel she wouldn't even talk to him. Therefore an alternative possibility to footnote#2 in Mr. Gardner's article is that the reporter made up the story because Hannah wouldn't talk to him.

Another error was made in referring to Dr. Hawke as a paraphysicist. Still another was that I told Mr. Klass that I may have told Geller that I had metal with a memory, but did not recall if I specifically said it was Nitinol. I never had any contact with Uri Geller prior to the October 1973 meeting at the Isis Center.

However, there exists a third type of error in the article by Mr. Gardner that is inexusable. Mr. Gardner knew that Charles Panati's editorial comments in The Geller Papers were in error, yet he deliberately made it appear to the reader that I condoned them. There are other errors I could cite but they would only serve to add more of the same.

I am not trying to prove to the world that Uri Geller is "real," nor am I trying to say that my scientific techniques are flawless. It is apparent that there are those, however, who are vigorously persuing a course of action similar to the Salem witch-hunts to try to convince people that the Uri Geller's of the world and their friends should be drowned.

Eldon A. Byrd

Nice omission Bee, why did you not post the very next paragraph from the link I posted? Don't worry, I will take care of that for you

Letters: Martin Gardner replies to Eldon Byrd

Mr. Byrd speaks of "many errors" in my article. He lists what I presume are the six he considers the most horrendous. I will comment briefly on each:

1. Mr. Byrd is frequently referred to in the parascience literature as an "operations analyst." I cite one instance from Peter Thomkin's great scientific work, The Secret Life of Plants (page 40): "Eldon Byrd, an operations analyst with the Advanced Planning and Analysis Staff of the Naval Ordnance Laboratory at Silver Spring."

2.Yes, Ordnance is spelled "Ordnance."

3. Uri himself has explained Hannah's interview as the result of her being mad at him at the time. Readers should check the interview in James Randi's book The Truth About Uri Geller and should decide for themselves if the reporter is lying. Apparently Mr. Byrd believes anything that Uri, Shipi, or Hannah tells him.

4. A paraphysicist is a physicist who investigates the paranormal. Dr. Hawke is a physicist at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. He contributed to Panati's book a paper on his investigation of Geller's paranormal ability to erase magnetic patterns. If he isn't a paraphysicist, what does the term mean?

5. When Mr. Byrd says he "never had any contact with Uri Geller," he must mean that he had not previously met him in the flesh. Does he wish to deny that he communicated with Geller, through a third party, prior to the October 1973 meeting? If so, I have information to the contrary.

6. I did indeed know that Panati's editorial comments were in error, but not until Mr. Byrd told me. Nowhere did I suggest that Byrd condoned those errors.

Byrd writes: "I am not trying to prove to the world that Uri Geller is "real," nor am I trying to say that my scientific techniques are flawless." This is a doubly false statement. His paper is the strongest arguement in Panati's book for the genuineness of Geller's powers. In letters to me, he repeatedly referred to his tests with Uri at John Fuller's house as "rigidly controlled." To this day he has not admitted to the slightest flaw in his experimental design.

The sad truth is that Mr. Byrd is another of Uri's casualties. Geller has used him the way he has used many other sincere but highly gullible scientists, and it is a tragedy that Mr. Byrd does not yet have the courage to admit it.

Now what does Byrd actually say in what you posted Bee? Where does he defend the results? A spelling error makes the article incorrect does it? Doesn't Byrd jump at the involvement of Klass! Klass sure puts the fear of God into people with tall tales doesn't he.

Dead set, I think you exposed yourself here, you always say you want to explore every possibility. That is not the case here is it? This is a deliberate attempt to go against the facts.

Edited June 28, 2012 by psyche101

[psyche101]

Isn't beleiving in Science or nothing still believing?

You can't not believe in something really.

Even if you don't believe in something you are believing it's not true. lol

No, Science is not belief.

Empirical research is a way of gaining knowledge by means of direct and indirect observation or experience.

Link

Scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge.

LINK

Peer review is a process of self-regulation by a profession or a process of evaluation involving qualified individuals within the relevant field. Peer review methods are employed to maintain standards, improve performance and provide credibility.

LINK

[psyche101]

http://www.thesurviv...es-from-the-sky ... here is the story ... believe what you want. and yes i got the story a little bit wrong. but its also been a while .. since i heard this story .. i m not here to make things up..

Julianne can't explain why she lived with 91 other people on LANSA Flight 508 perished. "Maybe it was the fact that I was still attached to a whole row of seats," she says. "It was rotating much like the helicopter and that might have slowed the fall. Also, the place I landed had very thick foliage and that might have lessened the impact."

[DONTEATUS]

Amazon, survivor ,maggots,Uri Geller,private island, Now Let me get this all straight.

WhyDontYOuBellEveME ,psyche101,justDONTEATUS,UnexplainedMysteries,Swampgas,Big-Foot,and Area51. Does this all seem to have anything in common?

See how Simple its gonna to be to talk to E.T when they Land! We jus down load all this stuff onto there main frames on board there mother Ship , And Bingo THey Go Poof !

We Win !

[psyche101]

yeah right....

You obviously have no problem with ANYTHING Randi does.....I can only imagine how you would have reacted had the 'facts' applied

to someone famous classed as a 'believer'....you would have been all over it like a terrier ripping a rabbit apart.....

http://stevevolk.com...s/uncategorized

JAMES RANDI: SKEPTICISM’S GREAT ACHILLES

Is the real James Randi finally coming into view?

I have long felt that the skeptical community has a James Randi Problem.

At one time or another, seemingly every professional skeptic offers thanks and praise to Randi, lauds his Million Dollar Challenge and/or joins his self-named foundation (JREF). They applaud him for forty years spent debunking all things paranormal, line up in droves to attend his annual Amazing Meeting—“a celebration of critical thinking and skepticism sponsored by the James Randi Educational Foundation”—and they rarely, if ever, engage in any critical thinking about Randi himself.

Thus far, they seem unmoved even by the specter of “Jose Luis Alvarez.”

I put the name in quotes because Randi, a Plantation, Florida resident, has lived and worked with “Alvarez” for roughly 20 years, even traveling the world together to debunk psychics and stage mediums. But the feds, this last September, arrested “Alvarez” and charged him with stealing another man’s identity—obtaining passports and getting paid under the name of the real Jose Luis Alvarez, a teacher’s aide in the Bronx.

So, who is the man who has been living in Randi’s home and working with him for 20 years? According to the Sun Sentinel, Alvarez is actually Deyvi Pena, who came to the United States from Venezuela in the mid-80s on a student visa to study at the Art Institute of Fort Lauderdale. And now? The questions about Pena extend from his identity to his age to how the feds have come to accuse him of stealing the name, date of birth and social security number of a New York man, back in 1987, in order to travel internationally with Randi. And it is this relationship—the long partnership between Alvarez/Pena and Randi—that should now concern the skeptical community.

In short, what did Randi know and when did he know it?

The answer would seem to matter—a lot.

Why does Randi's partner status have anything to do with Randi?

How does a person evading deportation make Randi a fraud? As far as I can see it does not. If Alverez was in love with Randi, and faced losing him he may not have informed Randi of his status. I know many people that would lie rather than be removed from their partner.

How does this affect Randi's evaluation of tricksters?

Or is this a continuing homophobic rant? Because that is exactly what it sounds like Bee. This proves nothing of Randi's abilities or methods, it is a straight out gay attack. You may or may not condone the gay community, that is your choice but it has no bearing on Randi's abilities.

[psyche101]

I will say that Randi has done great things grabbing frauds. But I would also say that he designs his experiments in such a way that genuine psychic ability would not have a chance. Only having 10 trials is statistical bullcrap: in psychology, one has multiple subjects and multiple repetition. His "catching out" psychics is as much showmanship as the so-called psychics themselves. He does however, do well to educate the public on the basics of the scientific method.

Speaking of Von Braun, Ed Mitchell is one of those Geller has also fooled. He "materialised" a tie pin Mitchell left on the moon, appearing in his mouth while he was eating ice cream. If I were Ed Mitchell, I'd ask Geller to "materialise" a bit of moon rock too.

I can't agree with that. I feel ten tests is sufficient to pass Randi's tests for the million dollars. It is not an official or scientific test, that would follow if someone was successful. I see it as sorting the wheat from the chaff. If someone was to pass Randi's tests, the publicity would be such that any person capable of demonstrating a real ability would become a global phenomenon.

Then we would find out if someone managed to fool Radni, or if someone had real abilities.

If it were an official test to determine scientific value and recognition, I would agree. As it stands, it is Randi's own pet project that has captured the attention of many. That is all.

[psyche101]

are you now trying to imply that Geller has NOT been tested by scientists......

[media=]

[/media]

What do any say Bee? Do they say they have proven the Uri is Psychic or do they say "I do not know how he did that" ?

What does that mean specifically?

[psyche101]

It's weird cause even Einstein talks about the mind etc and all this stuff. Yet people are happy to qoute and use his science as evidence. lol

Yes people use the proven scientific values, what is wrong with that? Do you think if a person is smart that one should consider every single word and musing they utter as pure fact? Einstein had quite a sense of humour you know. How much "mid stuff" that Einstein spoke of make it to scientific journals?

Einstein said, "In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."

[booNyzarC]

What do any say Bee? Do they say they have proven the Uri is Psychic or do they say "I do not know how he did that" ?

What does that mean specifically?

It means "magic." Can't you see this psyche? Uri Geller is "magical." I mean, for the love of God, he can bend fricken spoons! Holy ****! Spoon bender magician! Amazing!

I brought him a whole set and he bent the **** out of em! I was amazed and a little peeved, that set was brand new! Oh he thought it was funny, but YOU TRY EATING CEREAL WITH A FRICKEN FORK!!!

Heh. At least I amuse myself I guess.

[psyche101]

It means "magic." Can't you see this psyche? Uri Geller is "magical." I mean, for the love of God, he can bend fricken spoons! Holy ****! Spoon bender magician! Amazing!

I brought him a whole set and he bent the **** out of em! I was amazed and a little peeved, that set was brand new! Oh he thought it was funny, but YOU TRY EATING CEREAL WITH A FRICKEN FORK!!!

Heh. At least I amuse myself I guess.

I see what you are saying, I have seen the little cars around with the "Magic Happens" sticker on the back of them. I suspect a member here might have one

Man I wish I could psychically bend a spoon! I'd show them I'd be all ........ hrmmzz ........... what they hell would I do with that ability?

Edited June 28, 2012 by psyche101

[S2F]

Man I wish I could psychically bend a spoon! I'd show them I'd be all ........ hrmmzz ........... what they hell would I do with that ability?

Mess with the soup-eaters. Nobody likes them anyway.

HAHA just got a funny visual in my head.

[booNyzarC]

Mess with the soup-eaters. Nobody likes them anyway.

HAHA just got a funny visual in my head.

[psyche101]

Mess with the soup-eaters. Nobody likes them anyway.

HAHA just got a funny visual in my head.

The ones that do not use spoons are OK but........

[bee]

Nice omission Bee, why did you not post the very next paragraph from the link I posted? Don't worry, I will take care of that for you

by the same reckoning why didn't you post BOTH further paragraphs when you made the quote....

Why does Randi's partner status have anything to do with Randi?

How does a person evading deportation make Randi a fraud? As far as I can see it does not. If Alverez was in love with Randi, and faced losing him he may not have informed Randi of his status. I know many people that would lie rather than be removed from their partner.

How does this affect Randi's evaluation of tricksters?

Or is this a continuing homophobic rant? Because that is exactly what it sounds like Bee. This proves nothing of Randi's abilities or methods, it is a straight out gay attack. You may or may not condone the gay community, that is your choice but it has no bearing on Randi's abilities.

I have absolutely no problem with the gay community.....but it is quite clever for you to twist it into this....the same would apply had Randi's partner

been female. When you make a (second) career going around accusing people of dishonesty you can't expect to have your own dishonesty ignored.

It's pretty clear that Randi was fully aware of the name/identity switch.....this is a quote from a blog about a 1986 article.....

http://zammoth-james...blogspot.co.uk/

A few feet behind him, David Pena, a young man of about 20, struggles with three large suitcases. One is bright blue with the name "James Randi - The Amazing Randi" printed on it. Hiring Pena to carry bags, arrange appointments and run errands was one of the first things Randi did with his award money.

Pena, as Jose Alvarez, went on to be the co-founder and a Director of the JREF........I'm sure you can see the irony of that, psyche..?

Pena was actually sentenced to House Arrest and Probation after being found guilty. There's a question of possible deportation...

but to be honest, after reading some of the stuff about the case and the poor health of Randi...and how much he depends on Pena..

I hope he doesn't get deported. That would be too cruel for them both having been together for 25 years.

What do any say Bee? Do they say they have proven the Uri is Psychic or do they say "I do not know how he did that" ?

What does that mean specifically?

You know what that means....it means that science doesn't (or didn't at that time) have an explanation for what Geller did/does.

Aaaaaanyway. I've said more or less everything I want to say on the subject for now....thanks for the exchanges....

.

[Captain Zim]

I see what you are saying, I have seen the little cars around with the "Magic Happens" sticker on the back of them. I suspect a member here might have one

Man I wish I could psychically bend a spoon! I'd show them I'd be all ........ hrmmzz ........... what they hell would I do with that ability?

WIN

[Captain Zim]

ok, Captain Zim.....

....he also said this (from your link)

"If, after all this, you ask me whether I believe Uri is a total fraud, I’ll refuse to give a straight answer"

so we are left with some ambiguity...?

.

Arthur C. Clarke is the exemplar of the scientist, which is to say he is humble. Nothing is ever a "fact," it's our best guess. A true scientist is always open to the truth and to admit they were wrong.

And he would say the exact same thing about Uri being a psychic. We know he bends spoons though.