Sunday, November 2, 2008

What scientists and magicians said about Uri Geller that prove James Randi wrong

These quotes are very impressive indeed.

To see a long list of quotes from REAL scientists who tested Geller and testify that he is for real, see here:

http://www.uri-geller.com/uri-biography/uribiog3.htm

So you see, Randi's claim on "This Morning" that no scientist considers Uri Geller to be psychic was flat out wrong. The evidence in these quotes is overwhelming and impressive.

And to see what magicians have said about Uri Geller, see here:

http://www.uri-geller.com/uri-biography/uribiog4.htm

So you see, Randi's claim in his Town Meeting speech that no magicians consider Geller to be real, was false again.

In this video, psychic spoon bender Uri Geller performs successfully under controlled conditions at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI), conducted by scientists Hal Puthoff and Russell Targ back in 1973.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzKiODWx1gc

The results were published in Nature, the most highly accredited scientific journal, which concluded that Uri Geller did in fact pass controlled psychic tests that were double blinded.

You can see a copy of the report in Nature yourself here:

http://newsite.uri-geller.com/remote_perception_at_stanford_research_institute

Here is what the scientists at SRI told the public media about the Geller experiments:

"We have observed certain phenomena with the subjects [including Geller] for which we have no scientific explanation. "
"As a result of Geller's success in this experimental period, we consider that he has demonstrated his paranormal, perceptual ability in a convincing and unambiguous manner."(The results of these experiments were published in the respected British journal Nature,Vol. 251, No. 5).
Dr Harold Puthoff and Russell Targ (Stanford Research Institute - California, U.S.A.)

"Laser physicists Russell Targ and Harold Puthoff of Menlo Park's Stanford Research Institute admit their kind of research invites chicanery and trickery. They have taken special precautions, they said, to conduct the Stanford Research experiments under doubly strict laboratory conditions."
"Under these conditions, they said, no magician has beenable to duplicate through trickery the psychic feat performed by Geller and others. Some won't even try."
Los Angeles Times, Monday July 28, 1975


Remember folks, Puthoff and Targ were there and conducted the double blind controlled experiments. Randi wasn't, so he can only guess and remain in denial.

Regarding Randi, Puthoff himself told me this:

"Again, these claims of inadequate controls are generally just repeats of what Randi says. The truth of the matter is that none of Randi's claimed suspected inadequate controls actually had anything to do with the experiments, which of course Randi was not there to know of. This has been independently reported by Scott Rogo somewhere in the literature, who came out specifically to check each of Randi's guesses about inadequate controls and found them inapplicable under the conditions in which the tests were conducted. In fact, all of Randi's suggestions were amateurish compared to the sophisticated steps we took, suspecting as we did everything from magician's tricks to an Israeli intelligence scam."

See the words in bold below and the related quotes. Doesn't an electron microscope or metallurgy analysis constitute scientific proof to you of a psychic's powers?


" 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 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)

"The bends in metal objects (made by Geller) could not have been made by ordinary manual means."
Dr Albert Ducrocq (Telemetry Laboratory, Foch Hospital Suren, France)

"The evidence based on metallurgical analysis of fractured surfaces (produced by Geller) indicates that a paranormal influence must have been operative in the formation of the fractures."
Dr Wilbur Franklin (Physics Department, Kent State University - U.S.A.)

Check out what David Blaine and David Ben, two of the top magicians in the world and sleight of hand masters, and other magicians, have said about Uri Geller. It's quite impressive.

-------------------------------

"Uri bent a spoon for me, the first time he did it, I thought there must be a trick. The second time I was stunned, completely, completely stunnedand amazed. It just bent in my hand. I've never seen anything like it. It takes a lot to impress me. Uri Geller is for real and anyone who doesn't recognise that is either deluding himself, or is a very sad person."
David Blain, (American Magician. Star of ABC's Television Specials.)

--------------------------------

"I immediately pick up the spoon from the lectern and place it into my pocket so that no one can steal it before I have the opportunity to auction it off. I notice that it is now at a perfect 90-degree angle - a different physical appearance than what I recall seeing when he placed it gently down on the lectern. I secretly shake my head because it is now different and I did not see him do one thing that was suspicious, with speed, without grace or charm. It was flawless. I have no idea what he did. I now have the spoon at my home. It is perfect. I have seen many spoons bent by so called experts. Uri is in a league of his own. The curvature of the bend is beautiful - not forced. I have said to many people that the curvature reminds me of a single line drawn by Matisse. It is a work of art. You can tell that it was created by a master. Quite wonderful. I'm a fan. Now, I would like to add a few further comments. Although I am not an expert in the paranormal, I am an expert in sleight of hand. I would stack up my knowledge and ability in sleight of hand against anyone in the world. I do not believe that Geller used sleight of hand to bend the spoon. (I have seen most of the spoon bending experts created by the magic community and their work is not very elegant when compared with Geller.)"
David Ben Sleight of Hand Master
http://www.theconjuror.com/

--------------------------------

"As a magician, I believe that the tests we did (with Geller) could not be duplicated in any way by a magician's methods."
Abb Dickson (Professional magician - U.S.A. and President of the International Brotherhood of Magicians 1997-9Cool
Abb Dickson has been named as a new director of the World Alliance of Magicians (WAM). Dickson who is a Past President of the International Brotherhood of Magicians wants WAM to help maintain the secrecy of magic and prevent exposure to the public.

--------------------------------

Drew McAdam
"I will say only this: I have seen Uri do things that, even as a mentalist and amateur conjuror of some 30 years, I cannot explain. I know how mind-magicians obtain the effects they do... I know the illusionist's mechanics of producing so-called psychic effects that look incredibly convincing to the layman. However, I can categorically say that Uri Geller uses none of these methods. Quite simply, the man is a phenomenon."

--------------------------------

"Many of the top Mentalists in the world have no idea how Uri Geller can make a compass needle move.

Since he does so in his bathing suit and has been checked over by ultra sensitive equipment for metal or magnetic radiation, he obviously is NOT using a hidden magnet to move the compass needle.

Since reliable sources (and knowledgeable magicians) have not only witnessed Geller make spoons bend but have witnessed them to continue moving long after Mr. Geller has left, I would challenge these so called protectors and magic geniuses to explain how he does it.

If they reply, "I don't know for sure" then they have no right to say that he is a fake."

--------------------------------

(Even David Copperfield is unsure about whether Uri Geller is real or not, contrary to Randi's claim that all reputable magicians think that Geller is a fraud.)

"You know, I like Uri Geller. He is a good guy. I think he made many things with his abilities. I think some of the things he shows are illusion. But I cannot claim for sure, that this applies to everything."

David Copperfield

3 comments:

  1. "The evidence in these quotes is overwhelming and impressive."

    The plural of anecdote is not data and quotes are not evidence for anything.

    What comes to the SRI (which, by the way, is not affiliated with Stanford University) experiment, from Wikipedia:

    "In 1975, two scientists (Russell Targ and Harold Puthoff from the Stanford Research Institute) said they were convinced that Geller's demonstrations were genuine. [30] Since that time, however, notable scientists, various magicians, and skeptics have suggested possible ways in which Geller could have tricked the scientists using misdirection techniques."

    The fact is that anyone can learn to bend spoons, with no paranormal abilities needed. All you need to do is watch a YouTube video.

    Here's a few paragraphs from the actual Nature release:

    " (1) There was agreement that the paper was weak in design and presentation, to the extent that details given as to the precise way in which the experiment was carried out were disconcertingly vague. The referees felt that insufficient account had been taken of the established methodology of experimental psychology and that in the form originally submitted the paper would be unlikely to be accepted for publication in a psychological journal on these grounds alone. Two referees also felt that the authors had not taken into account the lessons learnt in the past by parapsychologists researching this tricky and complicated area."

    "(2) The three referees were particularly critical of the method of target selection used, pointing out that the choice of a target by "opening a dictionary at random" is a naive, vague and unnecessarily controversial approach to randomisation. Parapsychologists have long rejected such methods of target selection and, as one referee put it weaknesses of this kind reveal "a lack of skill in their experiments, which might have caused them to make some other mistake which is less evident from their writing".

    and

    " (3) All the referees felt that the details given of various safeguards and precautions introduced against the possibility of conscious or unconscious fraud on the part of one or other of the subjects were "uncomfortably vague" (to use one phrase). This in itself might be sufficient to raise doubt that the experiments have demonstrated the existence of a new channel of communication which does not involve the use of the senses."

    These are copy/pasted straight from Geller's site.

    And lastly, the quotes you provided say nothing about the truth of Uri's claims, just what some people believe.

    Cheers,
    Samuli

    ReplyDelete
  2. Just came across this in 2016 and first of all, quotes are not evidence of anything!

    Secondly, Geller has been debunked more times than Casper the Friendly Ghost as being real!

    Anyone who believes Geller is the real deal is an idiot!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Geller is not real...He is a complete and utter fraud and anyone who believes otherwise is ignorant of the facts.

    ReplyDelete

Please do not leave spam or advertising junk on this blog!