Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Uri Geller claims he helped Boris win


Still Waters
 Share

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

No one ever said Uri wasn't good at what he did...but it is trickery...nothing more.

All I am asking is for someone...anyone...to lay a feather on a glass table.  Put their hands in their pockets and levitate the feather with their mind.  Is that really so difficult?  If you can induce the paranormal to bend a spoon...levitating a feather should be a piece of cake...I mean...you know...giving that poltergeist can throw bricks...they should be able to levitate a feather....right?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I prefer 'Realistic' meaning believing what is most reasonable from the evidence and argumentation.

 

You subscribe to ‘fantastic’ rather than ‘realistic’. 

You’ve provided plenty of evidence for that.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Hi papageorge1.  I don't want to dispute evidence of the paranormal when it appears, we would probably like  some proof that we can believe.

Yet, These quotes by supposed physicists do not seem to ring very true.  We know a pretty good deal about metal properties, especially garden variety everyday metals.  We know how they fatigue and fail, we do all kinds of testing for that. In many industries including the aerospace plant that I worked in, we test on every metal lot we use to make aircraft parts.  Tests would include stress testing at a range of temperatures, long cycle fatigue (millions of cycles to simulate stress in flight) creep at high temperatures, common things like stress , and tensile fractures. Every tensile bar we break is examined under a microscope and photographed to document results.

Crystal structure in metals is largely determined by the alloy it is composed of and how it is melted and cooled. Crystal size and orientation is very important to us.

What I am trying to say is that if these samples were unlike anything described in literature, it would have gotten a lot of notice in the academic and technical world.

There are only a limited number of way crystals can form in cooling metal .  If these bends displayed abnormal characteristics, it would far overshadow any stage act.  I am not saying I am anything more than a common engineer, but I do try to keep abreast of developments.  It would have been all over metallurgical papers and journals, and people would be scrambling to find out if the metal was stronger, or more brittle or showed any other unique features.    So far, there has been no commotion. 

When you bend a spoon at room temperature it behaves in a certain way, same with very cold and hot up to the melting transition.  As far as anybody knows, it does not matter how it is bent, by machine or by hand.  I would expect a Uri bent spoon to look the same as one bent by wrenches or on a tensile machine.

When one proclaims that the metal structure is actually different, that is a big deal and better be peer reviewed and backed up by a lot of micrographs.

I am not saying it is not out there papageorge, just that this may not be it.

The quotes I gave are rather clearly saying the metal is being bent by ways not known in the field of metallurgy at this time.

"The Geller method of breaking is unlike anything described in the (metallurgical) literature, from fatigue fractures at-195 degrees to brittle fractures at +600 degrees C. Why is metal bending important? Simply because we do not understand it."
Prof. John Hasted (Professorof Physics Birkbeck College, University of London, England)

 

Why isn't this making more splash? It's where we are at as a society. Anything paranormal is kept at fringe news level. Just look at the skeptics on this forum for the 'why'. Academics will bristle at Uri Gellar and call him a charlatan without full knowledge of the evidence. I believe in another century much more will be accepted.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, joc said:

No one ever said Uri wasn't good at what he did...but it is trickery...nothing more.

All I am asking is for someone...anyone...to lay a feather on a glass table.  Put their hands in their pockets and levitate the feather with their mind.  Is that really so difficult?  If you can induce the paranormal to bend a spoon...levitating a feather should be a piece of cake...I mean...you know...giving that poltergeist can throw bricks...they should be able to levitate a feather....right?

With all the claims, it should be easy to provide proof. 

I can use my breath. Lol. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Timothy said:

You subscribe to ‘fantastic’ rather than ‘realistic’. 

You’ve provided plenty of evidence for that.

Well, I feel I look at the full picture as in this thread. What you dismiss as too 'fantastic' can also be 'real'. Things change slowly and there are leading and trailing ends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

The quotes I gave are rather clearly saying the metal is being bent by ways not known in the field of metallurgy at this time.

"The Geller method of breaking is unlike anything described in the (metallurgical) literature, from fatigue fractures at-195 degrees to brittle fractures at +600 degrees C. Why is metal bending important? Simply because we do not understand it."
Prof. John Hasted (Professorof Physics Birkbeck College, University of London, England)

 

Why isn't this making more splash? It's where we are at as a society. Anything paranormal is kept at fringe news level. Just look at the skeptics on this forum for the 'why'. Academics will bristle at Uri Gellar and call him a charlatan without full knowledge of the evidence. I believe in another century much more will be accepted.

 

People are the issue. Give a specific example and I’ll address it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, papageorge1 said:

Well, I feel I look at the full picture as in this thread. What you dismiss as too 'fantastic' can also be 'real'. Things change slowly and there are leading and trailing ends.

No one has ever provided verifiable evidence. 
It’s stupid to claim that it’s proven.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Timothy said:

People are the issue. Give a specific example and I’ll address it. 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@papageorge1, any chance you’ve got a ghost who can help get my pork belly crackle perfect? 

I’m trying different methods. But it’s a bit hit and miss!

Have hit the mark before, but the perfect method would be much appreciated.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Timothy said:

@papageorge1, okay, so please provide the numbers from that study. All of the data please. 

Italic quote does not give me much hope. Sorry Papa.

That question is better addressed to Helmut Hoffmann.

I am a judger of what is most reasonable to believe like multiple sources saying similar things affect my views. 

You want to move the goalposts to me personally providing perfect proof of each stage of multiple tests into infinity. I am not claiming to be a scientist who is an expert in all these fields but I can understand the layman takeaway  that Hoffmann and others are giving us.

Edited by papageorge1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

That question is better addressed to Helmut Hoffmann.

I am a judger of what is most reasonable to believe like multiple sources saying similar things affect my views. 

You want to move the goalposts to me personally providing perfect proof of each stage of multiple tests into infinity. I am not claiming to be a scientist who is an expert in all these fields but I can understand the layman takeaway  that Hoffmann and others are giving us.

I’ve never moved goalposts. Don’t dare claim that. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Timothy said:

I’ve never moved goalposts. Don’t dare claim that. 

I was referring to your comment: okay, so please provide the numbers from that study. All of the data please. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, papageorge1 said:

I was referring to your comment: okay, so please provide the numbers from that study. All of the data please. 

So: Is there an actual study? 

There should be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Timothy said:

So: Is there an actual study? 

There should be. 

Obviously he studied this. I am only interested in the layman's takeaway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, papageorge1 said:

Obviously he studied this. I am only interested in the layman's takeaway.

****ing hell mate, provide actual evidence for once. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Timothy said:

****ing hell mate, provide actual evidence for once. 

You're not getting my point. His layman's takeaway is evidence (not proof). It's called expert testimony.

Edited by papageorge1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

You're not getting my point. His layman's takeaway is evidence (not proof). It's called expert testimony.

It’s nothing. Again: you absolute idiot. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Timothy said:

It’s nothing. Again: you absolute idiot. 

So much for any importance in expert testimony, LOL

We better just stick to skeptic naysaying, I guess

Edited by papageorge1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

So much for any importance in expert testimony, LOL

We better just stick to skeptic naysaying, I guess

Evidence would be nice. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How hard it could be to give some evidence, just call uri  at his time and place of convenience and give him a normal spoon and ask him to bend it. This does not require a big lab or equipment. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, joc said:

All I am asking is for someone...anyone...to lay a feather on a glass table.  Put their hands in their pockets and levitate the feather with their mind.  Is that really so difficult?  If you can induce the paranormal to bend a spoon...levitating a feather should be a piece of cake...I mean...you know...giving that poltergeist can throw bricks...they should be able to levitate a feather....right?

You are right.  Even chickens have some ability to levitate feathers, even if only for limited distances.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, kartikg said:

How hard it could be to give some evidence, just call uri  at his time and place of convenience and give him a normal spoon and ask him to bend it. This does not require a big lab or equipment. 

He has been tested on live TV, went badly for him

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Why isn't this making more splash? It's where we are at as a society. Anything paranormal is kept at fringe news level. Just look at the skeptics on this forum for the 'why'. Academics will bristle at Uri Gellar and call him a charlatan without full knowledge of the evidence. I believe in another century much more will be accepted.

 

Papa I am not going to let you off the hook so easily and accept that as an answer.  Yes indeed there are skeptics, and nasty fearful ones too. Yet, we area curious lot.  If there was physical documentation of something unique, it would be a very big deal skeptics or not. 

Papa, I want there to be something out there, but when I find it I want it to  be true.  That is why I and probably others try to knock holes in all of these claims.  Maybe, I can find an explanation for the instance, but someday, I rather hope that even though it is a good explanation, something else has happened.  In statistics we would say that it was confounding variables.

Now if I really had a psychic power, I wouldn't want anybody to know about it.  ( my fear of governments and my fellow humans exploiting and confining and hurting me,)  I would act in secret or in areas of high randomness and uncertainty.  I might deflect a car slightly to save someone's life. That might be viewed as a miracle or just lucky, but probably nobody would suspect a psychic in the crowd.   I wouldn't levitate a car.   I would fear becoming a hunted person.

So if Uri claims to manipulate elections, I think he is full of it or should be punished for doing so.   What real psychic would risk that?

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.