Uri Geller claims he helped Boris win

[XenoFish]

https://www.thoughtco.com/gallium-spoon-science-tricks-606070

 

[psyche101]

2 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I do not accept quotes at face value but give them their due consideration. I am not qualified to prove or claim proof of this quote.

This is just one piece I consider in my overall evaluation of the subject.

Also another poster showed his involvement in paranormal organizations. Usually there are events that truly motivate and spur one to not stay on the sidelines.

 

What consideration did you give to that nutter Chritons quote?

It would appear none at all.

[Tom1200]

On 12/20/2019 at 5:10 PM, OverSword said:

James Randi demonstrated how to do that with a key you did not have prior access to.  Geller is a magician/illusionist and not even a really good one.  See what a truly gifted one can do on the street in front of multiple observers and a camera.

 

Honestly mate, that's really not the best example you could cite.  Multiple angles, cuts and edits and a clearly-faked hoisted "illusion" at the end.  Not saying he lacks talent - just pointing out that the levitations he displays here are just as credible as Geller's garbage.

But back to Uri - what a drama queen!  Everyone knows that it was ME who swayed the UK election.  (Oh, and I'm legally-obliged to mention the 13,941,085 others who voted Conservative.)  I refused to eat caviar or drink champagne for the entire day (except during my timed lunch break) and instead channelled all my desperation into willing people to vote Pro-One-Thing-Anti-Something-Else.  Sixteen hours later I revealed that it was Boris I had been backing all along!  

If you want more evidence here it is: I will be influencing the weather in London for New Year's Eve.  I will ensure that no hurricanes or typhoons develop, and the temperature will neither be too hot nor too cold for most people's comfort.  I will also ensure USING ONLY MY MIND that the New Year happens, no matter what.

I will refuse to eat caviar or drink champagne (except during my timed lunch break) and this will be the reason why New Year happens; despite Trump, Brexit, global warming and sixty-three thousand other factors.  Please join me in abstaining from caviar and champagne (except during timed lunch breaks) to ensure the world continues to revolve at more-or-less the same rate as it has done for thousands of years.

[RAyMO]

this is the truth - the whole truth I HELPED BORIS WIN the election. Much more so than Uri

no - no I didn't vote for him - that would be cheating!!!! 

I didn't vote Labour - there you have it - undeniable proof I helped Boris.

Uri, eat your heart out. 

[Tatetopa]

3 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I do not accept quotes at face value but give them their due consideration. I am not qualified to prove or claim proof of this quote.

This is just one piece I consider in my overall evaluation of the subject.

Greetings papa.  With all due respect, I think you are more qualified than you admit.  You have a degree of common sense. You know a little bit about how science works even if you don't know all of the details.

For important topics, data of some sort is expected.

If someone called you and told you they were with the IRS and you would be in serious trouble and subject to imprisonment if you did not  pay $2000 in back taxes on your credit card right now to the guy on the phone, would you be the least bit suspicious?  Would you suspect that is not the way the government works and ask to be mailed a statement?  Would you call the local IRS office to verify?  Would you do anything or take the guy at face value?

You know how the world works and how science works.  You don't need to do the research yourself on everything.  You can ask yourself if a scientist would make a statement as controversial as that without evidence to back it up.  You could ask if there is any evidence.

 

[SHaYap]

5 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Moron ! 

B. A. in B. S. ?

~

[papageorge1]

37 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

 You don't need to do the research yourself on everything.  You can ask yourself if a scientist would make a statement as controversial as that without evidence to back it up. 

 

Who said he has no evidence to back it up?? I'll bet money he has. I don't know how to find it or what it should even look like or even on the internet or in English or German or what?

I agree. I would not think a scientist like that would make a statement like that without evidence he finds convincing.

Edited December 22, 2019 by papageorge1

[psyche101]

2 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Greetings papa.  With all due respect, I think you are more qualified than you admit.  You have a degree of common sense. You know a little bit about how science works even if you don't know all of the details.

For important topics, data of some sort is expected.

If someone called you and told you they were with the IRS and you would be in serious trouble and subject to imprisonment if you did not  pay $2000 in back taxes on your credit card right now to the guy on the phone, would you be the least bit suspicious?  Would you suspect that is not the way the government works and ask to be mailed a statement?  Would you call the local IRS office to verify?  Would you do anything or take the guy at face value?

You know how the world works and how science works.  You don't need to do the research yourself on everything.  You can ask yourself if a scientist would make a statement as controversial as that without evidence to back it up.  You could ask if there is any evidence.

 

You don't have his number do you?

I decided to work on a flux capacitor reversal machine to search for quantum particles at paranormal sites, just need a few thousand to get it of the ground.........

[Timothy]

7 hours ago, XenoFish said:

Are you expecting a Christmas miracle?

I should not be so optimistic. I’m generally more of a realist! 

[psyche101]

5 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Greetings papa.  With all due respect, I think you are more qualified than you admit.  You have a degree of common sense. You know a little bit about how science works even if you don't know all of the details.

For important topics, data of some sort is expected.

If someone called you and told you they were with the IRS and you would be in serious trouble and subject to imprisonment if you did not  pay $2000 in back taxes on your credit card right now to the guy on the phone, would you be the least bit suspicious?  Would you suspect that is not the way the government works and ask to be mailed a statement?  Would you call the local IRS office to verify?  Would you do anything or take the guy at face value?

You know how the world works and how science works.  You don't need to do the research yourself on everything.  You can ask yourself if a scientist would make a statement as controversial as that without evidence to back it up.  You could ask if there is any evidence.

 

Do you honestly think that is the case?  I'm not sure if that makes things better or worse. I don't believe people like Tom Cruise or John Travolta believe the Xenu story for one second. Yet they will preach it your face. I can only figure they are brainwashed, or lying to my face thinking I am some sort of idiot that will believe anything they say. I can't respect people like that and am suspicious of their motives as clearly they are either weak minded or arrogant liars. I don't think either of them could get into the positions they hold today if they were brainless enough to believe such garbage so the logical conclusion is that they are arrogant liars who treat others as mindless idiots who will believe anything. 

Being qualified can also inadvertently expose one's agenda.

Or are we just seeing an example here of the "37%"?

37 Percent of People Completely Lost

[Tatetopa]

3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

You don't have his number do you?

No after I got the $2,000, I promised my wife I'd never do it again deleted the number.

[+OverSword]

8 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

Honestly mate, that's really not the best example you could cite.  Multiple angles, cuts and edits and a clearly-faked hoisted "illusion" at the end.  Not saying he lacks talent - just pointing out that the levitations he displays here are just as credible as Geller's garbage.

You’ve obviously misunderstood my post I never said he levitated I was showing what amazing things a truly accomplished magician can do as opposed to a crappy fraud like Geller. 

Also You are way off on how this trick was done, there were no hoists. I’ve had it explained to me and I won’t reveal the secret beyond saying he turns his body a certain angle to his target audience for a reason. If your unimpressed with that just go to YouTube and watch some more David Blaine videos. He does things that are simply amazing.

[psyche101]

9 minutes ago, OverSword said:

You’ve obviously misunderstood my post I never said he levitated I was showing what amazing things a truly accomplished magician can do as opposed to a crappy fraud like Geller. 

Also You are way off on how this trick was done, there were no hoists. I’ve had it explained to me and I won’t reveal the secret beyond saying he turns his body a certain angle to his target audience for a reason. If your unimpressed with that just go to YouTube and watch some more David Blaine videos. He does things that are simply amazing.

I'd have to agree. Walking on water, creating fishes or even freezing water with a touch in front of people shows how amazing slight of hand actually is. Today's magicians could easily perform what are considered miracles in antiquity.

 

[Tom1200]

On 12/22/2019 at 7:42 AM, OverSword said:

You’ve obviously misunderstood my post I never said he levitated I was showing what amazing things a truly accomplished magician can do as opposed to a crappy fraud like Geller. 

Also You are way off on how this trick was done, there were no hoists. I’ve had it explained to me and I won’t reveal the secret beyond saying he turns his body a certain angle to his target audience for a reason. If your unimpressed with that just go to YouTube and watch some more David Blaine videos. He does things that are simply amazing.

Watch the video again and you'll see where it's genuine and where it's been faked.  The footage that stays exclusively on the audience might well be genuine reactions.  You don't see the levitation itself because it isn't really that impressive - my children can do it.  As you correctly state it only works from a specific angle and elevation.

The footage that cuts back and forward between Blaine and the audience is 100% fakery, and obviously so.

• One camera, two camera angles but continuous footage?  No: two separate events cut & spliced to trick the viewer, like any tv illusion.  Fake.
• Blaine is filmed from directly behind - from where the 'illusion' is immediately visible.  This pretends the illusion is more convincing that it really is.
• Blaine, when filmed from behind, clearly rises completely off the ground, which obviously can't happen without fakery.

These clips cannot be trusted or used as evidence of Blaine's skills because they're a con, mixed in with genuine footage to make him look better than he really is.  His true genius is in the way he has marketed himself and convinced people he is totally astounding.  He's good! - I'll give him that! - but when he resorts to trick photography and carefully arranged stunts like this, he's actually no better than Geller.

 

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, Tom1200 said:

Watch the video again and you'll see where it's genuine and where it's been faked.  The footage that stays exclusively on the audience might well be genuine reactions.  You don't see the levitation itself because it isn't really that impressive - my children can do it.  As you correctly state it only works from a specific angle and elevation.

The footage that cuts back and forward between Blaine and the audience is 100% fakery, and obviously so.

• One camera, two camera angles but continuous footage?  No: two separate events cut & spliced to trick the viewer, like any tv illusion.  Fake.
• Blaine is filmed from directly behind - from where the 'illusion' is immediately visible.  This pretends the illusion is more convincing that it really is.
• Blaine, when filmed from behind, clearly rises completely off the ground, which obviously can't happen without fakery.

These clips cannot be trusted or used as evidence of Blaine's skills because they're a con, mixed in with genuine footage to make him look better than he really is.  His true genius is in the way he has marketed himself and convinced people he is totally astounding.  He's good! - I'll give him that! - but when he resorts to trick photography and carefully arranged stunts like this, he's actually no better than Geller.

 

He's completely different from Geller. He's not claiming miraculous powers but trickery. Surely you get the point? Some of the so called miracles from antiquity are re-enacted very well and would also be considered gods in antiquity with a time machine.

The God bar keeps dropping I believe is the point here unless I'm mistaken @OverSword ?

[Tom1200]

4 hours ago, psyche101 said:

He's completely different from Geller. He's not claiming miraculous powers but trickery. Surely you get the point? Some of the so called miracles from antiquity are re-enacted very well and would also be considered gods in antiquity with a time machine.

The God bar keeps dropping I believe is the point here unless I'm mistaken @OverSword ?

This started when OverSword stated:

James Randi demonstrated how to do that with a key you did not have prior access to.  Geller is a magician/illusionist and not even a really good one.  See what a truly gifted one can do on the street in front of multiple observers and a camera.

He then linked to a video of Blaine 'levitating' in front of multiple observers and a camera.  All I said was that wasn't the best clip he could have used, because it's so obviously, so badly faked that it utterly fails to show any talent except for deceiving the tv viewer.  

Don't think for a second I'm defending Geller and his life-long lie about supernatural mental powers, but that specific video of Blaine is pi$$-poor.  That's all. XxX

[+OverSword]

6 hours ago, Tom1200 said:

Watch the video again and you'll see where it's genuine and where it's been faked.  The footage that stays exclusively on the audience might well be genuine reactions.  You don't see the levitation itself because it isn't really that impressive - my children can do it.  As you correctly state it only works from a specific angle and elevation.

The footage that cuts back and forward between Blaine and the audience is 100% fakery, and obviously so.

• One camera, two camera angles but continuous footage?  No: two separate events cut & spliced to trick the viewer, like any tv illusion.  Fake.
• Blaine is filmed from directly behind - from where the 'illusion' is immediately visible.  This pretends the illusion is more convincing that it really is.
• Blaine, when filmed from behind, clearly rises completely off the ground, which obviously can't happen without fakery.

These clips cannot be trusted or used as evidence of Blaine's skills because they're a con, mixed in with genuine footage to make him look better than he really is.  His true genius is in the way he has marketed himself and convinced people he is totally astounding.  He's good! - I'll give him that! - but when he resorts to trick photography and carefully arranged stunts like this, he's actually no better than Geller.

 

Nope. You’re wrong. I KNOW how the trick is done. There is no hoist, it’s an illusion which only works depending on where the observer is standing. The most mechanical part of this trick is the human ankle.

[+OverSword]

4 hours ago, psyche101 said:

The God bar keeps dropping I believe is the point here unless I'm mistaken @OverSword ?

Not god but super mental abilities which is what geller claims

[+OverSword]

36 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

This started when OverSword stated:

James Randi demonstrated how to do that with a key you did not have prior access to.  Geller is a magician/illusionist and not even a really good one.  See what a truly gifted one can do on the street in front of multiple observers and a camera.

He then linked to a video of Blaine 'levitating' in front of multiple observers and a camera.  All I said was that wasn't the best clip he could have used, because it's so obviously, so badly faked that it utterly fails to show any talent except for deceiving the tv viewer.  

Don't think for a second I'm defending Geller and his life-long lie about supernatural mental powers, but that specific video of Blaine is pi$$-poor.  That's all. XxX

I can see why you’re saying that because they edit to a shot of the foot but the reality is he could do this trick in front of you and you would swear he appears to float and you wouldn’t have a clue how. 

[XenoFish]

I'm more impressed by Blaine's endurance feats that any of his magic tricks.

[Tom1200]

20 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I can see why you’re saying that because they edit to a shot of the foot but the reality is he could do this trick in front of you and you would swear he appears to float and you wouldn’t have a clue how. 

NO!  We all know exactly how he does it.  He rises a couple of inches off the ground: I can do it, my kids can do it.  Not as polished as him, true, but just as high.

The first and last acts cut back and forth between Blaine's back and the audience.  These are not continuous recordings.  They do not show the audience's reaction to the 'levitation' we are shown.  Blaine might be exposing himself, for all we know - it would better-explain the hysterical overreactions.

They even try to trick the viewer by filming a similarly-dressed stooge for the faked lift.  You can see her from 2'12'' to 2'21''.  When it cuts to the front scene this lady is rotated over 90° which was not shown in the previous shot.  In a longer version of this video you can see this happens several times.  Is it the same lady?  If so that just shows she's a stooge for both takes.  It's lazy, sloppy editing that was never supposed to be analysed or criticised; but if this footage appeared in a movie it would eventually end up on one of those tedious compilations of continuity errors.

Compare the elegance of those two lifts to a genuine levitation illusion by a Mr D Blaine (skip to 45'').

That's a genuine illusion!  It only works from the correct angle and he rises a couple of inches for a second or two.  In the two faked lifts he is filmed from behind, he is lifted right off the ground and lasts over five seconds.

In 'levitation' shots the camera is just behind the stooge, but the footage from the front shows there is no camera there.  & the same from the front.  They pretend it is one continuous shot but it isn't.  

Add in all my previous points - and some of this site's natural scepticism - and there is only one conclusion: the two filmed 'levitations' are faked for the camera.  Just like Geller fakes all his nonsense.  And I'm pretty sure Christopher Reeve couldn't really fly that fast in Superman - it's amazing what they can fake on film!

[+OverSword]

1 hour ago, XenoFish said:

I'm more impressed by Blaine's endurance feats that any of his magic tricks.

I like this one

 

[moonman]

On 12/22/2019 at 1:42 AM, OverSword said:

You’ve obviously misunderstood my post I never said he levitated I was showing what amazing things a truly accomplished magician can do as opposed to a crappy fraud like Geller. 

Also You are way off on how this trick was done, there were no hoists. I’ve had it explained to me and I won’t reveal the secret beyond saying he turns his body a certain angle to his target audience for a reason. If your unimpressed with that just go to YouTube and watch some more David Blaine videos. He does things that are simply amazing.

I will. The Balducci method isn't much of a secret.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levitation_(illusion)

 

Edited December 23, 2019 by moonman

[+OverSword]

1 hour ago, moonman said:

I will. The Balducci method isn't much of a secret.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levitation_(illusion)

 

Close.  In the version done by Blaine the front half of the bottom of the shoe is cut out leaving enough for his toes to cling to when walking so the shoe doesn't flop around.

[L.A.T.1961]

Geller needs to explain his reverse ferret on Brexit if he has helped Boris.  

"Uri Geller has vowed to "telepathically" stop Brexit" He wrote: "I feel psychically and very strongly that most British people do not want Brexit.  "I love you very much but I will not allow you to lead Britain into Brexit."

https://news.sky.com/story/uri-geller-tells-pm-i-am-going-to-stop-brexit-telepathically-11672961