tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12956507672426904502024-03-06T01:56:08.825+01:00Garvarn's Blog ArchiveThoughts on Superstition, Pseudoscience,<br>and the Paranormal - 2006-2010Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.comBlogger41125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-55193115689885993682010-08-04T20:41:00.004+02:002010-11-16T14:38:42.989+01:00<div align="center"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigbKgktUHJ34qhctM3Hrl7cfxsRixc4HJf6Tf5T-IoPi8ITLJXWy06bK8XvANgAX6cE_T0gN8NWrOJB-ssr_tM0w09fb-GSBcHzSTcrpaVVjZ1G_JOmHXspJtaHH5ghc3yGyDrHmwRuhg/s1600/garvarndead.gif"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 120px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 126px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5501626843210119506" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigbKgktUHJ34qhctM3Hrl7cfxsRixc4HJf6Tf5T-IoPi8ITLJXWy06bK8XvANgAX6cE_T0gN8NWrOJB-ssr_tM0w09fb-GSBcHzSTcrpaVVjZ1G_JOmHXspJtaHH5ghc3yGyDrHmwRuhg/s320/garvarndead.gif" /></a></div><div align="center"> </div><div align="center"> Garvarn</div><div align="center"> </div><div align="center"> </div><div align="center">2002 - 1st August 2010</div><div align="center"> </div><br /><div align="center"> </div><div align="center">"The dead don't speak"</div><div align="center"> </div><div align="center"> </div><div align="center"> </div><div align="center"> </div><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><div align="center"><span style="font-size:85%;">(Although no new posts will be published, comments on old ones will be.)</span></div>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com22tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-15879804448297522022010-06-22T17:16:00.004+02:002010-06-22T17:32:02.191+02:00A match made in heaven! Or rather in woo-woo-land...<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjp3KRItUIHXr3a5V7BtZS0Ibq0nlWrge-aVRVDkuWZdraHQLgP0YNW__IE-3X5oigUv45wnLkpfEcNZIzzkzHrgK4nt9rlghTew5XlHZ168yaMMb8VpPY008wQ4d8iI9w2sRd0B6tnZhw/s1600/bevis.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 90px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5485618766420198866" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjp3KRItUIHXr3a5V7BtZS0Ibq0nlWrge-aVRVDkuWZdraHQLgP0YNW__IE-3X5oigUv45wnLkpfEcNZIzzkzHrgK4nt9rlghTew5XlHZ168yaMMb8VpPY008wQ4d8iI9w2sRd0B6tnZhw/s320/bevis.jpg" /></a><br />A new TV series is to be launched in Sweden this fall - <a href="http://www.greenworks.se/bevis/home.html">Bevis från andra sidan</a> (Proof From the Other Side). Greenworks Television in cooperation with Egmont and the <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2010/05/cash-is-king.html">Nära magazine</a> is producing the show that is aimed at finding solid proof from "the other side", proof that shows on film, sound or photography. It will feature the psychics Benny Rosenqvist, Erika Andersson and also a representative of "open minded skepticism" - parapsychologist Adrian Parker. If you have followed my blog, you may get a notion of what is coming. Rosenqvist and Andersson are the standard kind of psychic frauds and <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/adrian-parkers-fabrication-of-reality.html">Adrian Parker</a> is so open minded that anything that flies into his mind turns into proof, or at least evidence of paranormal phenomena.<br /><br />This is of course just yet another in a string of woo-woo-oriented productions flooding mainly commercial channels in Sweden. One positive effect might be that Swedish skeptics may take the time to look into the works of crackpot Parker, who for too long has been allowed to pose as a representative of science, a field of human endeavour he is extremely unfamiliar with. The time is ripe for a reality check, and perhaps some notes of concern addressed to the psychology department of Gothenburg University who gave Parker a professor's chair not long ago. A disgrace to higher education in Sweden.<br /><br />The process of normalizing superstition in Sweden is ongoing. It should be a matter of concern for those who champion ideas of reason and rationality. And it should be noted that a TV series is shouting it out loud, so those who profess to be in opposition of it better not whisper...Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-2357478555622031802010-06-09T16:53:00.007+02:002010-06-09T18:23:37.461+02:00The Mysterious Creature of Skeptic Woo-Wooism<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj98FduB17cH0pYVkruFvqO1-6i6ND8EIC_P4EaOoxQtNpZb5tUz-ppVrg02CpkBmFDkjiA7iUyq8G6kOrOptjfpuqzVC6RgI7T2BirwpVYcLT-TXToLG4__tJ_b3hF2BlemSNCXEkXq2A/s1600/fencesitter1.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 181px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5480787349835084066" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj98FduB17cH0pYVkruFvqO1-6i6ND8EIC_P4EaOoxQtNpZb5tUz-ppVrg02CpkBmFDkjiA7iUyq8G6kOrOptjfpuqzVC6RgI7T2BirwpVYcLT-TXToLG4__tJ_b3hF2BlemSNCXEkXq2A/s320/fencesitter1.jpg" /></a><br />Although Bigfoot has been exposed as a hoax, traces of Nessie have yet to be found, and the remains of Chupacabras always seem to turn out to be ordinary dogs, there are still some very peculiar supernatural beings out there. One of them is championed, not by woo-woos, but by skeptics. It is known as "the fence sitter" and it lurks in the shadows of intellectual impotence.<br /><br />Contrary to other mystical beings, more is known about the fence sitter's behavior than its appearance. There are no rough sketches of it, no imaginative renderings. Instead, many skeptics seem to know the emotional state and thinking of this creature. It only comes out, for instance, if skeptics adopt a "nice" approach towards woo-woos. Confrontational approaches scare the fence sitter away. It is very sensitive in that respect. Incidentally, it also seems as if it is skeptics who favor the "nice" approach who have the best knowledge of the fence sitter.<br /><br />There are several definitions of the fence sitter circulating. The first one describes a being who has not yet formed an opinion of either superstition or a science based world view - it is indifferent to the options available. The second has formed opinions but not chosen one or the other. A third has formed an opinion and chosen but is so open to delicate and nice arguments that the creature might swing the nice skeptic's way as long as no arrogant skeptic scares it away. There might even be more types of fence sitters; since many skeptics are keen on focusing their entire strategy on these very sensitive beings, they must be a numerous crowd indeed. They certainly outnumber the few that might be upset about the onslaught of New Age and superstition and would be attracted to someone opposing it in a confrontational and straightforward manner.<br /><br />However, as in the case of other mystical creatures, a bit of skepticism is to be adviced. Why would the first type of fence sitter, if it exists, be interested at all in what and how skeptics are doing? And why would such interest be stired up by some factual arguments in the context of friendly conversation? What would catch the fence sitter's attention in such a converstation? The skeptic answer is: "Nice people are more likable." I wonder it that is valid? If I came across two people opposing racists or neo-Nazis, would I be more attracted to the one treating the racists or neo-Nazis in a respectful and friendly manner, or would I be more attracted to the one making a firm and confrontational stance against them? Oh, it isn't fair to compare woo-wooism and racism? Okay, I guess there is a difference between trying to send people back intellectually fifty years and 500 years, but not necessarily to the advantage of superstition.<br /><br />So, what about the second type. It sits on the fence and swings back and forth, leaning towards one side for a moment and then the other. It knows the alternatives but can't make its mind up. Really? Are the alternatives a popsicle with strawberry flavor or one with pineapple flavor? Mustard or not on your hot dog? Boot cut jeans or loose fit? No, the alternatives are two fundamentally different ways of viewing existence. Two uncompatible philosophies, if you wish. A creature that so easily swings between those two different worlds, and is so sensitive that only influence under disguise prevents it from running away, is such a creature really worth the effort? Honestly, suppose you get the creature to chose side - it becomes the third type. Why wouldn't it just as easily swing back? If the fence sitter shares psychological traits with humans, social psychology states that attitudes easily changed are changed back with equal ease. Are such fence sitters, if they exist, really worth focusing on?<br /><br />Let's go to the numbers. Skeptics don't know their actual count, but have a good enough idea to consider these cretures worthwile focusing on. So, on one side we have the woo-woo:s, then comes the fence sitter, and then - blank. There is nothing more. There are no people who shares the skeptic cause but are not yet active or organized. Or if there are, they are so scarce compared to the mystical fence sitter that paying them attention is a waste of time. In addition, such sympathizers would probably favor a more confrontational style, at least not be as sensitive to it as fence sitters. So they are of no interest to the fence sitter-believeing skeptics.<br /><br />Why not? Because fence sitters are not really the goal, they are the means. Fence sitters are created and defined to legitimize a <i>comfortable</i> tone, an approach many skeptics find comfortable and are used to from campus debates and the lecture hall. But when they find that the public debate is very far from the academic discussion, and that the moderate "nice guy" approach is very far from rational in that context, they need something to make it appear so. And the fence sitter is born. Irrational? Of course. Devastating for the promotion of skepticism? Of course. But the important thing for many skeptics is not the advancement of skepticism, it is to feel good, and to be liked bÿ as many as possible. After all, who in their right mind would enjoy coming forth as a brute!?<br /><br />So, in the case of the fence sitter, there are no skeptics asking for "extraordinary proof" of this extraordinary creature. There are no skeptics asking for verification of its existence, in fact, most take it for granted. Why? Because the creature makes them feel good. They need the fence sitter to be true. Thus, skeptics may in some cases provide a valuable insight into the core motivational factors of woo-woo.<br /><br /><br /><iframe style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none" height="275" src="http://www.formspring.me/widget/view/Garvarn?&size=large&bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&fgcolor=%23333333" frameborder="0" width="400" scrolling="no"><a href="http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn">http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn</a></iframe>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-44347075503883448962010-06-01T12:50:00.010+02:002010-06-04T01:53:26.666+02:00Droppings of a Crank; The Sheldrake Research Pt. 3<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXJd6tJIV7oGTeMZqfRs4qPAHn2owLcTmQZfQDd1TpFzAbyuRITJAe9tfZRtq0sRZKDLD9FGudUFWBfcpxwRVGnB_36TgFS2GNSb2hBWZOggSPxMNSBP8XdEgHL6Co36U5G8RmkdmnA9o/s1600/sheldrake03.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 157px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5477756049472999698" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXJd6tJIV7oGTeMZqfRs4qPAHn2owLcTmQZfQDd1TpFzAbyuRITJAe9tfZRtq0sRZKDLD9FGudUFWBfcpxwRVGnB_36TgFS2GNSb2hBWZOggSPxMNSBP8XdEgHL6Co36U5G8RmkdmnA9o/s320/sheldrake03.jpg" /></a><br /><br />[ <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2010/06/droppings-of-crank-sheldrake-research.html">Read the second part</a> ]<br /><br /><strong>The Critique</strong><br /><br />A predominant problem of the reviewed experiments is the sampling. Sheldrake & Smart use rather vague terms in their report; it is explained that the phenomena studied is the most common example of telepathy in the modern world and you get the impression that the ability to sense who is calling before you answer is general. But does the study sample really represent the general public? The receivers who responded to the advertisment reasonably considers themselves to have telepathic ability, a notion stronger than a general supposition. Futhermore, it is reasonable that the callers nominated by the receivers to some extent shares this notion and also thinks the receiver has the supposed ability. The sample must therefore be considered representative of a population of what is usually called "high scoring subjects" rather than the general public. This narrowing down is, however, not done by Sheldrake & Smart, an error also noted by Schmidt, Müller, & Walach (2004).<br /><br />The snowball sampling of callers is motivated by the theory that telepathy occurs between people belonging to the same social group. But in a group of relatives and friends, there is so much more than an alleged telepathic connection. There is affinity, loyalty, shared values, group pressure, and social obligations. A systematic error to be considered in all psychological research is the "good-subject tendency," i.e. the tendency of experimental participants to act according to what they think the experimenter wants. In the classic Milgram experiments, two thirds of the participants were willing to administer dangerous electroshocks when told to do so by a "professor" in charge, even when the victims begged to be released or in the end responded to the shocks only with tormented screams (Milgram, 2004). Dissimulation as well as lies can be part of participant strategy to achieve what is believed to be the experimenter's goal. In an experiment with members of social groups participating together, with an established affinity, it is imperative to be aware that this type of participant tendency can manifest itself in both implicit and explicit cooperation within the participant groups. In an experiment on telepathy it is of the utmost importance that both verbal and non-verbal communication can be ruled out as cause of a measured effect, especially when participants are allowed to act within the frames of existing social bonds and forms of communication perhaps unknown to the experimenter. Are Sheldrake's & Smart's experiments controlled in these respects? Does the experimental design allow other forms of communication than telepathy? Here are some suggestions of confounding variables:<br /><br /><strong>Positive interpretation</strong><br /><br />All reported methods allow what can be called "positive interpretation." The experimenter is actually totally unaware of what is being said during the calls between receiver and caller. The receiver reports his or her guess to the experimenter first after the call and any caller confirmation is also done after the call. The experiments thus lack any control for interpretations in line with the following:<br /><br /><blockquote><p>- Uhm, I'm guessing Frank. Is it Frank?<br />- No, it's Mary. Sorry.<br />- Oh, I thought of you first but then I changed my mind.<br />- You did? Well, you were right then, from the beginning.<br />- Yeah, typical...<br />- But let's report you were right. The idea is to follow your intuition, isn't it?<br />- I suppose... But can I do that?<br />- Of course you can. It's not cheating since you thought of me first.<br />- I guess... Okay, I'll report I was right. </p></blockquote><br /><br />Both receiver and caller then reports that the guess was right, even though it <i>de facto</i> was wrong - the receiver might even have thought of all callers. None of Sheldrake's & Smart's methods is protected against this threat to internal validity. This type of interpretation is also more likely to emerge within a social group than between strangers who doesn't know each other. Thus, the results of the study don't exclude this kind of error; the fact that no telepathic connection beyond chance has been measured between receiver and unknown caller can be explained by the lack of social bond that permits this type of "agreement", rather than lack of a shared "morphic field." And it doesn't take many such instances of positive interpretation to significantly affect the data.<br /><br /><strong>Caller number identification</strong><br /><br />The report carefully describes what kind of die was used in the random selection of caller and calling time but there is no description of what kind of telephones were used by the receiver. It would have been appropriate that the equipment used had been accounted for. Was it an older type of phone or a more modern with a display? Does the receiver have caller number identification service and if not, can this be verified by the receiver's service provider? None of this is accounted for in the report.<br /><br /><strong>Cell phone/SMS</strong><br /><br />Since both receiver and caller are sitting all by themselves in their homes, there is no possibility to control possible verbal or text communication by cell phone. To exclude such communication, careful monitoring of both receiver and caller is required - a receiver may even have a cell phone set to "silent" kept close to the body, and be directed by agreed upon vibration signals.<br /><br /><strong>Sensory leakage</strong><br /><br />Even if the calls had been controlled, Schmidt, Müller, & Walach (2004) notes the possibility of sensory leakage as the receiver might apprehend cues from different sounds from the caller and his or her environment. This threat is eliminated if the receiver has to make a guess before answering. But as already noted, the Sheldrake & Smart experiments lack control of the calls altogether.<br /><br />In Sheldrake's & Smart's own discussion on errors, mortality and how it might have affected the statistical analysis is considered. But the mortality itself is not. In both experimental series, the mortality is 57%, i.e. more than half of the receivers dropped out before completing the ten trials. For an experimental study in which the participants have been informed in detail about procedure and in addition gets compensated, 57% is a whopping number. Sheldrake & Smart provides the following explanation:<br /><blockquote>They withdrew for a variety of reasons, most commonly because they could not persuade all 4 callers to agree to be available at the same times. (Sheldrake & Smart, 2003a).</blockquote><br />In the discussion on errors, this is somewhat elaborated on:<br /><blockquote>In fact most participants who stopped did so because their callers were unable or unwilling to continue. (Sheldrake & Smart, 2003a).</blockquote><br />The receivers, who at one point decided to participate, were thus unable or unwilling to complete the experiment. Why? Sheldrake & Smart claims that it usually was due to the four caller not being able to participate at the same time. What were the reasons that cannot be sorted under "usually"? Is it possible that some of the receivers saw no point in continuing because of weaknesses in the experimental design? Sheldrake & Smart doesn't say.<br /><br />It should be noted that the vague formulations regarding mortality allows for it all to be explained by unwillingness to complete a scientific experiment because it was experienced to be unscientific or otherwise not worth completing, despite compensation. Even if the participants knew each other well in the groups, they were not familiar with participants in the other groups. If you dropped out from the experiment because you considered it meaningless you might still get the impression from Sheldrake's & Smart's report that most of the others left the experiment due to time factors.<br /><br />Sheldrake & Smart use initials for the receivers in their report. An account of the mortality, listing the reasons for dropping out, would have been possible considering both space and practicality. In light of the methodological weaknesses of the experiment, such an account should have been in the report.<br /><br />In the discussion on errors, Sheldrake & Smart dismisses cheating for three reasons: (1) It is unlikely that a majority of the participants would have cheated and had that been the case, the results would have been different, (2) Sheldrake & Smart themselves did not cheat in the preliminary experiment, nor did the unknown callers in the second experimental series, and (3) the tests in a completely different experiment was videotaped (Sheldrake & Smart, 2003b).<br /><br />It is certainly unlikely that a majority of participants would cheat, had the sample been random and representative of the general public, but that is not the case in the Sheldrake & Smart experiments. Instead, the researchers have a non-random sample of people who think they have a telepathic ability or that the receiver does. It is not unlikely that a majority of such a sample considers it reasonable to somewhat adjust guesses in line with the "positive interpretation" principle described above - even if it means cheating in a strict experimental sense, it doesn't have to have that meaning to the participants. Sheldrake & Smart also presumes that cheating would have rendered even better results than was the case, thus ignoring the possibilty of participants assessing that major "adjustments" would be suspicious. Since the experimenters beforehand informed the participants of the procedure, they certainly disclosed information about what outcome would be expected by chance and thus hinted what results would be enough to be significant. It would be foolish - and revealing - to achieve more than necessary.<br /><br />That Sheldrake & Smart themselves didn't cheat doesn't say much, unfortunately. The fact that Sheldrake is looking for support for his very controversial theory on morphogenetic fields makes him more than inclined to "interpret positively". Smart was alredy convinced she had telepathic connection to her dog (Sheldrake & Smart, 2000) and must be considered just as inclined as Sheldrake to adjust results. Furthermore, it is rather remarkable that experimenters double as participants in experiments.<br /><br />The argument that unknown callers did not cheat (their results are at chance level) is only valid if the only possibility of cheating is the one suggested by Sheldrake & Smart. As is evident from the above, that is not the case.<br /><br />The experiment videotaped in another study (Sheldrake & Smart, 2003b) cannot guarantee that cheating was not used in the reviewed study. It is of course ridiculous to suggest such a thing. If you look at both studies you find that one woman, Sue Hawksley, scored 63% when her mother was calling in the reviewed study, but only 27% when her mother was calling in the videotaped experiments. The same woman scores at chance level when close friends are calling in the reviewed study, but 63% and 45% in the videotaped experiments. It seems highly unlikely that an alleged telepathic connection with the mother disappears entirely when someone turns on a videocamera, and that telepathic connection with close friends then suddenly emerges. A reasonable explanation would instead be that the mother is comfortable with "positive interpretation", which is possible in the reviewed study, while cell phone or caller number presentation, which are possible in the videotaped experiments, are more fitting cue tools for the close friends.<br /><br />A fundamental experimental flaw is the fact that the research method is changed three times during the experiments. It indicates that the design was weak and not thoroughly thought out from the beginning. The fact that Sheldrake & Smart so freely reports this suggests a lack of fundamental insights into research methods.<br /><br />Sheldrake (2006) claims that the experiments have been replicated but the study he refers to, Lobach & Bierman (2004), suffers from similar flaws as the one reviewed here. Another study, in which errors were eliminated and stricter controls adopted, reported results that would have been expected by chance (Schmidt, Müller, & Walach, 2004).<br /><br />To sum up, no inference regarding the existence of telepathy can be made on basis of this study. As it has been reported by Sheldrake & Smart, it suffers from methodological flaws so severe that it must be considered worthless. The researchers present a seeming representability that doesn't exist och appear totally unaware of fundamental psychological dispositions, in themselves and in the participants, that might be of importance to the experiment. The design is very weak and sensitive to several confounds that may affect the results.<br /><br />Next, a concluding post. Stay tuned.<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><strong>References </strong><br /><br />Lobach, E., & Bierman, D. J., (2004). Who’s Calling at This Hour? Local Sidereal Time and Telephone Telepathy. Report presented at The Parapsychological Association Convention, Wienna, Austria.<br /><br />Milgram, S. (2004). <i>Obedience to authority: The unique experiment that challenged human nature</i>. New York: Perennial.<br /><br />Schmidt, S., Müller, S., & Walach, H., (2004). Do You Know Who is on the Phone? Replication of an Experiment on Telephone Telepathy. Report presented at The Parapsychological Association Convention, Wien, Österrike.<br /><br />Sheldrake, R., (2006). In Conversation on Abc Radio National – Rupert Sheldrake [www dokument]. URL http://www.abc.net.au/rn/inconversation ... 754367.htm.<br /><br />Sheldrake, R., & Smart, P., (2000). A Dog That Seems To Know When His Owner is Coming Home: Videotaped Experiments and Observations. <i>Journal of Scientific Exploration, 14</i>, 233-255. URL http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Paper ... video.html<br /><br />Sheldrake, R., & Smart, P., (2003a). Experimental Tests For Telephone Telepathy. <i>Journal of the Society for Psychological Research, 67</i>, 184–199. URL http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Paper ... _tests.pdf<br /><br />Sheldrake, R., & Smart, P., (2003b). Videotaped Experiments on Telephone Telepathy. <i>Journal of Parapsychology, 67</i>, 187–206. URL http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Paper ... video.html </span><br /><br /><br /><iframe style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none" height="275" src="http://www.formspring.me/widget/view/Garvarn?&size=large&bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&fgcolor=%23333333" frameborder="0" width="400" scrolling="no"><a href="http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn">http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn</a></iframe>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-79679329215768196982010-06-01T01:51:00.009+02:002010-06-01T14:03:53.007+02:00Droppings of a Crank; The Sheldrake Research Pt. 2<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_lyV1XCXtxdp3VddBx42d59RLCUZU23f1jOdEgqSFbIpz5cMIUeFOh2mUu_ZDnZ3mcxAr2YcVkRn5BSRlfrTqZkK1zIEsb-bKATpHgp9Y42DAyEC719b3kWXUVC-ulsDYifnjPzIhsNI/s1600/sheldrake02.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 153px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5477586489219898002" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_lyV1XCXtxdp3VddBx42d59RLCUZU23f1jOdEgqSFbIpz5cMIUeFOh2mUu_ZDnZ3mcxAr2YcVkRn5BSRlfrTqZkK1zIEsb-bKATpHgp9Y42DAyEC719b3kWXUVC-ulsDYifnjPzIhsNI/s320/sheldrake02.jpg" /></a><br />[ <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2010/05/droppings-of-crank-sheldrake-research.html">Read the first part</a> ]<br /><br /><strong>The Design and Reported Results</strong><br /><br />In September 2006, Swedish tabloid <i>Expressen</i> published an article titled "Scientist proves tricky telephone classic" (2006). Reuters news agency reported that Rupert Sheldrake claimed he had evidence of telepathic ability in conjunction with e-mails and phone calls. In tests with both e-mail and telephone, test participants had scored 40%, which is far better than the 25% which is to be expected by chance. The odds that the results were caused by chance was 1 in 1 000 billion, reported Reuters. That the research had been received with some suspicion was due to the fact that only 63 people had participated in the telephone study and 50 in the e-mail study.<br /><br />The background of these news is several studies on telepathy that Sheldrake conducted between 1999 and 2004. His interest in telepathy derives from the belief that this phenomena confirms the theory of morphic resonance and its application in morphogenetic fields to which members of a social group are connected. These fields cannot be measured as such, but only by the effects they have and one effect is telepathy, suggests Sheldrake (2006). Another effect is the sense of being stared at, which Sheldrake claims is due to vision not being a one-way process. The image that is created by consciousness during visual perception also radiates from the eyes and can be sensed by the person being stared at (Blackmore, 2005).<br /><br />The following review, however, deals with one of the studies on telepathy which, according to Sheldrake, constitutes evidence of the existence of telepathy: Experimental Tests For Telephone Telepathy (Sheldrake & Smart, 2003a). The review only covers experimental design and tests - Sheldrake's statistical analysis is not commented on.<br /><br />Sheldrake's basic experimental design consisted of one person (the receiver) being called by one person (caller) randomly chosen from a group of four persons. In some of the trials, all the callers in a group were known and nominated by the receiver, in others at least two were known and the rest unknown and chosen by the experimenter. If Sheldrake's hypothesis was correct, people from the same social group would have telepathic contact, but people who were not members of the same social group would not. If the receiver was able to name the right caller to a greater extent than what was expected by chance, 25%, telepathy was considered to be the cause. In these tests, Sheldrake reported results that were slightly above 40% concerning callers known by the receiver and 25% concerning callers not known by the receiver, i.e. an obvious support for Sheldrake's hypothesis.<br /><br />Sheldrake used a convenience sample for the study. Participants were recruited through newspaper advertisments which read: “Do you know who is ringing before you pick up the phone? Good pay for fun and simple experiments as part of psychic research project.” Additional recruiting was done through a recruitment website. Those who responded (receivers) was sent a more detailed description of how the experiment was to be conducted, and was also asked to nominate four people in their circle of acquaintances who also were willing to participate (callers). Thus, callers were recruited through snowball sampling.<br /><br />Faithful to Sheldrake's approach, the experiments were done in the homes of the participants. The receiver sat in his or her home, the callers in their respective homes, and experimenters Sheldrake and Smart at yet another location. The experiments consisted of a preliminary experiment and two real experimental series, in which the following methods were used:<br /><br /><strong>Method 1</strong><br />Two callers from the group of four known callers were chosen randomly by throw of a die where the numbers five and six were thrown again. If the same number came up twice, that caller got to call twice. The time for the call was also selected randomly but kept within the stipulated 60 minute test period, which in turn was divided in six segments. An experimenter called the caller one or two hours before the chosen calling time and notified the caller when to make his or her call. The caller was also asked to think about the receiver a minute before making the call. The callers who weren't chosen were also notified that they were not selected for the current trial. A couple of minutes after the test call, the experimenter called the receiver and asked what he or she had guessed. Sometimes, the caller was asked as well. The experimenter then made notes of the result, date, time, receiver, caller, and guess. This method was used in a preliminary experiment and with the first 17 receivers in the first real experimental series, in total 198 trials.<br /><strong></strong><br /><strong>Method 2</strong><br />The random choice of time for the call was changed to a fixed schedule, for instance 10.15 and 10.45. Otherwise, it was exactly like method 1 and used for the remaining five receivers in the first experimental series and the first three in the second experimental series, in total 87 trials.<br /><br /><strong>Method 3a</strong><br />Only one call was made during the test. The experimenter chose a caller less than 15 minutes before the chosen time and the caller was notified, at latest, 10 minutes before the call. This method was used for 37 of the receivers in the second experimental series.<br /><br /><strong>Method 3b</strong><br />This method was similar to 3a but the callers who were not chosen were not automatically notified. Instead, they were told that if they hadn't been notified at least five minutes before the calling time, they had not been chosen. This enabled more tests during a shorter time period, in general with a 15 minute interval. This method was used for the remaining 34 receivers in the second experimental series, in total 268 trials.<br /><br /><strong>Analysis</strong><br />Sheldrake's & Smart's null hypothesis was that the receivers would make a right guess in 25% of the calls, which is to be expected by chance. The alternative hypothesis was that the receivers would guess right in more than 25% of the cases, which would then be explained by telepathic ability. For hypothesis testing, an exact binomial test was employed. To combine the results of different test trials, Stouffer was used. For comparison between results from known and unknown callers and first and second trials, Fisher's Exact Test, an alternative to Chi2, was used. A 95% confidence limit was calculated when analyzing the probability of right guesses.<br /><br />In a preliminary experiment reported by Sheldrake & Smart, Smart was the receiver and two sisters, her mom, and Sheldrake were callers. Sheldrake also acted as experimenter. Smart's result was 43%, i.e. significantly above 25%. Smart's best result (67%) was achieved when Sheldrake was calling.<br /><br />In the first real experiment series, 9 receivers carried the stipulated number of trials (10) through and all but one guessed right in 40% of the calls. This series had a mortality - people who dropped out during the test - of 12 receivers. The most common mortality cause was said to be an inability to get all four callers to participate at the same time.<br /><br />During the second and last experiment series, yet another hypothesis was introduced: phone calls from callers known by the receiver could be sensed but in calls from unknown callers, the result was what would be expected by chance. 16 receivers carried the stipulated number of trials (10) through. They guessed right in 54% of the calls from known callers and in 24% of the calls from unknown callers, results that lends support for the new hypothesis. This series had a mortality of 21 receivers.<br /><br />All in all, Sheldrake's & Smart's experiments supported both the original alternative hypothesis and the one introduced in the second series; it seems confirmed that you can sense, telepathically, who is calling and that this ability is dependent on the caller being someone you know.<br /><br />Are Sheldrake's & Smart's results to be trusted? Are the experiments well designed and conducted, or do they have weaknesses that threats the conclusion? This will be discussed in my next post. Stay tuned.<br /><br />[ <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2010/06/droppings-of-crank-sheldrake-research_01.html">Read the third part</a> ]<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><strong></strong></span><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><strong>References</strong><br /><br />Blackmore, S., (2005). Confusion Worse Confounded. Commentary on Sheldrake. <i>Journal of Consciousness Studies, 12</i>, (6), 64–66. URL http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Articles/jcs2005.htm.<br /><br />Forskare bevisar lurig telefonklassiker. (2006, 7 September). <i>Expressen</i>, URL http://expressen.se/index.jsp?a=676876.<br /><br />Sheldrake, R., (2006). In Conversation on Abc Radio National – Rupert Sheldrake [www document]. URL http://www.abc.net.au/rn/inconversation ... 754367.htm.<br /><br />Sheldrake, R., & Smart, P., (2003a). Experimental Tests For Telephone Telepathy. <i>Journal of the Society for Psychological Research, 67</i>, 184–199. URL http://www.sheldrake.org/Articles&Paper ... _tests.pdf</span><br /><br /><br /><iframe style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none" height="275" src="http://www.formspring.me/widget/view/Garvarn?&size=large&bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&fgcolor=%23333333" frameborder="0" width="400" scrolling="no"><a href="http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn">http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn</a></iframe>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-58344818673763232652010-05-30T15:10:00.007+02:002010-06-01T02:08:08.543+02:00Droppings of a Crank; The Sheldrake Research Pt. 1<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6-2NUg_LjzDPWJPjCKVH1SxTSCwB_1FkAkmUsIKFW9tUJQihXojMEUf0apAsbH1x_XPjFqOsS-oX0LIxxUf5jA79auUqzYc4f5YMacZZ6sQ0NdHTn6UX81JNyGFR97XgzkY8BLQULgf8/s1600/sheldrake1.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 135px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5477050170334927602" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6-2NUg_LjzDPWJPjCKVH1SxTSCwB_1FkAkmUsIKFW9tUJQihXojMEUf0apAsbH1x_XPjFqOsS-oX0LIxxUf5jA79auUqzYc4f5YMacZZ6sQ0NdHTn6UX81JNyGFR97XgzkY8BLQULgf8/s320/sheldrake1.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><strong>Introduction</strong><br /><br />A researcher who turns his back on traditional science is British biologist and parapsychologist Rupert Sheldrake. As a young and esteemed scientist at Cambridge, he caused some commotion in 1981 when he published <i>A New Science of Life: The Hypothesis of Causative Formation</i>. The book, and a <i>New Science</i> article published before it, got a strong but mixed reception (Freeman, 2005).<br /><br />Sheldrake champions the morphic resonance thesis, which suggests that the phenomena of existence becomes more probable the more times they occur and that biologic evolution and behavior therefore are adapted to patterns defined by previous organisms. He is of the opinion that the laws of nature, for instance, should be regarded as changeable habits evolved since the birth of the planet (Wikipedia, 2006) – subsequently, existence and nature has no conformity to law.<br /><br />The discussion was settled when <i>Nature</i> published an editorial in September 1981, attacking Sheldrake's theories and condemning them for being unscientific. It was suggested that Sheldrake was trying to bring magic into science and his book was nominated as suitable for book burning. The <i>Nature</i> article wrecked Sheldrake's academic career and since then, he is more or less excommunicated from the world of science (Freeman, 2005).<br /><br />Sheldrake's response has been to go his own way, in several respects. He publishes his theories and research in popular science books aimed at layman audiences (Wikipedia), he runs his research from home (Sheldrake, 2006), he does field studies on phenomena others would try to isolate in the laboratory and urges the public to conduct private research (Sheldrake, 1994) with the help of ready-to-use experiment designs which can be downloaded from his website (http://www.sheldrake.org).<br /><br />To fit Sheldrake into any traditional science can therefore not be done. He is trained in natural science but is strongly influenced by everything from Goethe to Eastern mysticism. Sheldrake's activities can be viewed as an attempt to change paradigm, from a science springing from a physical reality to research more open to a non-physical dimension (Freeman). He himself describes his world view as "holistic" and is of the opinion that the current direction of science lends support to the view that everything is connected. In addition, he defines his field of research as "everyday mysteries," which are best studied in their own contexts, i.e. in everyday life and not isolated in a laboratory (Sheldrake, 2006).<br /><br />At the same time, Sheldrake shows many signs usually associated with pseudoscience and "cranks," signs described by Goode (2000) among others. He condemns his critics as being dogmaticly prejudiced, as opposed to "sound" skeptics who are willing to accept his theories at large but express views about details. In his opinion, most scientists suffer from "tunnel vision" but he himself has a broader outlook on things and the phenomena he studies are real for other scientists too but the dominating scientific culture forces them to deny them (Sheldrake, 2006). So Sheldrake displays an ill-concealed conviction of his own excellence and the notion of a widespread scientific "conspiracy" preventing the real truth from being disclosed.<br /><br />So is it reasonable to examine the work of Sheldrake according to traditional scientific criteria? Yes, for several reasons. First, Sheldrake is making traditional scientific claims of truth; even if his research methods may be considered as unorthodox, Sheldrake claims his hypothesises kan be tested and confirmed by the real world. He further claims that his experiments can be replicated by anyone anywhere, with similar results. It is therefore justified to put Sheldrake's methods and the results he has achieved under scrutiny. This can be done according to prevalent criteria since Sheldrake claims his research satisfies these (Sheldrake, 2006).<br /><br />Secondly, a considerable part of Sheldrake's undeniable popularity is the fact that he has a researcher's authority, i.e. he is presumed to have reached his conclusion by scientific method. He is also expected, as a researcher, to be motivated by a strong desire to find out what reality is, rather than prefering it to be a certain way. Thus, Sheldrake is presumed to differ from other researchers <i>philosophically</i>, but not <i>methodologically</i>.<br /><br />Finally, Sheldrake has gained some popularity among other parapsychologists. In the news bulletin of the Swedish Society for Parapsychological Research, it is stated that Sheldrake is "viewed by many, inlcuding many here in Sweden, as one of the more exciting and promising researchers in parapsychology" (SPF, 2005), that he is "very good at conducting experiments on quite ordinary phenomena" (SPF, 2003), and the American parapsychologist Daryl Bem (2006) claims that, since 1986, Sheldrake has "constantly improved his experiments to eliminate sensory leakage." Thus, there is a general as well as methodological appreciation of Sheldrake as scientist. Scrutinizing Sheldrake's research may therefore also indicate a level of methodological awareness in other parapsychologists.<br /><br />In the following blog posts, I will look into Sheldrake's experiments on telepathy - the 2003 study <i>Experimental Tests For Telephone Telepathy</i> in particular. Stay tuned.<br /><br />[ <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2010/06/droppings-of-crank-sheldrake-research.html">Read the second part</a> ]<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">Note: This text was first published in Swedish in 2007 on the Swedish Skeptics forum. </span><a href="http://www.vof.se/forum/viewtopic.php?p=56991#p56991"><span style="font-size:85%;">It is still available here.</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;"><br /><br /></span><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><strong>References </strong><br /><br />Bem, D., (2006). Sheldrake och hans kritiker: Känslan av att vara iakttagen. <em>Notiser och Nyheter</em>, 33. Sällskapet för Parapsykologisk Forskning.<br /><br />Freeman, A., (2005). The Sense of Being Glared At. What is It Like to be a Heretic? <em>Journal of Consciousness Studies, 12</em>, (6), 4–9.<br /><br />Goode, E., (2000). <em>Paranormal Beliefs. A Sociological Introduction</em>. Prospect Heights: Waveland.<br /><br />Sheldrake, R., (1994). <em>Seven Experiments That Could Change the World.</em> London: Fourth Estate.<br /><br />Sheldrake, R., (2006). In Conversation on Abc Radio National – Rupert Sheldrake [www document]. URL http://www.abc.net.au/rn/inconversation ... 754367.htm.<br /><br />SPF, Sällskapet för Parapsykologisk Forskning, (2003). <em>Notiser och Nyheter, 19</em>. URL http://parapsykologi.se/nyheter/2003/2003-09.html.<br /><br />SPF, Sällskapet för Parapsykologisk Forskning, (2005). <em>Notiser och Nyheter, 29</em>. URL http://parapsykologi.se/nyheter/2005/2005-09.pdf.<br /><br />Wikipedia, (2006). <em>Rupert Sheldrake</em> [www document]. URL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake.</span><br /><br /><br /><iframe style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none" height="275" src="http://www.formspring.me/widget/view/Garvarn?&size=large&bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&fgcolor=%23333333" frameborder="0" width="400" scrolling="no"><a href="http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn">http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn</a></iframe>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-4233090964414812042010-05-27T00:50:00.014+02:002010-06-02T11:58:28.615+02:00Anti-psychic poster<div align="left">I've put together a mini-poster you can download and distribute as you see fit. I'm estimating that it can be upscaled two times without loss of quality. There is space at the bottom if you want to add a logo of your own. The original PDF is 210 x 297 mm, a standard A4. Do you have any modification requests, I'll be happy to oblige.<br /><br />Now, run off and litter your neighbourhood! If you do, I'll be happy to post a photo of the poster in place here at the blog. Just mail it to <a href="mailto:garvarn@hotmail.com">garvarn@hotmail.com</a>.</div><div align="center"><br /><br /></div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3tk_mnfSBxDLCj4WkDvK9boSZPyHQtxepiqvFBcj-vEhzwTfZm7-VCnMEYkP1Dw6KKUQgO0dqVjZxPpsfFuiSnr6yBEejrbd1GhNE3nXsdAi4uq52kFP7ezYklnRFcILxarIx5k4A4lc/s1600/poster02.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 233px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 320px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5475716381394087442" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi3tk_mnfSBxDLCj4WkDvK9boSZPyHQtxepiqvFBcj-vEhzwTfZm7-VCnMEYkP1Dw6KKUQgO0dqVjZxPpsfFuiSnr6yBEejrbd1GhNE3nXsdAi4uq52kFP7ezYklnRFcILxarIx5k4A4lc/s320/poster02.jpg" /> <p align="center"></a></p><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/poster02.pdf">Download English version </a><br /><br /><p></p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7NjsEtG_MaRS7flotGkabO5-kSY6VhUbEOn1X6tJpJ7_vM-cYq9YNQ6DiGkfDQm2ZLlcaHdwfF5Gtw5YS9qT8EoiLcwaypwnZBIjxuJY5NWop11v1uIbt9jZQ6miIXxKAPjtp7qaYUnk/s1600/poster03.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 233px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 320px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5475715474348516690" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7NjsEtG_MaRS7flotGkabO5-kSY6VhUbEOn1X6tJpJ7_vM-cYq9YNQ6DiGkfDQm2ZLlcaHdwfF5Gtw5YS9qT8EoiLcwaypwnZBIjxuJY5NWop11v1uIbt9jZQ6miIXxKAPjtp7qaYUnk/s320/poster03.jpg" /> <p align="center"></a></p><p><br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/poster03.pdf">Download Swedish version</a><br /><br /></p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRkHSceUSeH4vgnt7QlJCTx-8iNPKF7QzAh28TY-7mgLuooZlF9wES0C6l8HhrqzeyGvf1qaTeTisrYimzcCKsE9mUnLQg4L5idC03thvlnGJ-gN3FAJiCyBrGCM2X1Pgk5phPQiB-ZVY/s1600/poster006.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 238px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 320px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5478112959847436034" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRkHSceUSeH4vgnt7QlJCTx-8iNPKF7QzAh28TY-7mgLuooZlF9wES0C6l8HhrqzeyGvf1qaTeTisrYimzcCKsE9mUnLQg4L5idC03thvlnGJ-gN3FAJiCyBrGCM2X1Pgk5phPQiB-ZVY/s320/poster006.jpg" /></a> Another great posting at Halmstad University, Sweden.</p><p><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfR25FOthCAfiuUNUFTMEcImZgI-9jvHfhhAMzAE1VIlcBzfqOnNgw8xEpVfMK4XJoSchScxI8ZryjITwQRsuFY4C5qCENx9H9i8QuSf0uZ5PPPpMykI9VHAVaS4c-z017IWvjwJ6EByg/s1600/poster005.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 238px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 320px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5476776332861905426" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfR25FOthCAfiuUNUFTMEcImZgI-9jvHfhhAMzAE1VIlcBzfqOnNgw8xEpVfMK4XJoSchScxI8ZryjITwQRsuFY4C5qCENx9H9i8QuSf0uZ5PPPpMykI9VHAVaS4c-z017IWvjwJ6EByg/s320/poster005.jpg" /></a> Ängelholm has been blessed with one more mini-poster!<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3rCAG1YLOza3J_FLzMIw_i3rD4Enq2eNgw9cc1v4GXAuijmek5JPF2XA_xJXVYS1nGnaX05bsLIwWXg-q59us-OyX-rqZceRbk9_Ag_sOTlt2cGzyOJ82If6teZ_sjySSvo8ORBgiSIM/s1600/poster004.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 238px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 320px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5476318326636802722" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3rCAG1YLOza3J_FLzMIw_i3rD4Enq2eNgw9cc1v4GXAuijmek5JPF2XA_xJXVYS1nGnaX05bsLIwWXg-q59us-OyX-rqZceRbk9_Ag_sOTlt2cGzyOJ82If6teZ_sjySSvo8ORBgiSIM/s320/poster004.jpg" /></a> Another image from a local supermarket, this time from Ängelholm in Sweden.<br /><br /><br /></p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEV_b6hIGyVqlRisD0Mfa0X_83B_xs_6Z4PtbSEnqIbCd0CNcOc_AXvD2XjSYt0SN9dotb2lWaKu7bPMjv679lige5YACk_0CEXAuivKxf-7bxceUF7GBPdo0GCwrghU-R0rYfns4KBl4/s1600/poster003.JPG"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 240px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5476309382835701714" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEV_b6hIGyVqlRisD0Mfa0X_83B_xs_6Z4PtbSEnqIbCd0CNcOc_AXvD2XjSYt0SN9dotb2lWaKu7bPMjv679lige5YACk_0CEXAuivKxf-7bxceUF7GBPdo0GCwrghU-R0rYfns4KBl4/s320/poster003.JPG" /></a> This image was sent from Tranås in Sweden. Yet another lovely posting next to some church propaganda!</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqwVfvVILYU8USL3dflbSlGAbM5A19waB3DVOJ4NYk3LMJtYhshytxJCxkTZzlPFUnsz4pfNKG5CdqHMha1dWrD-xvl48FBVUqSIyS2HoWIiXl7OljZwqbDjesAf0k_ru3f3NLFjf-a4s/s1600/poster002.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 240px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 320px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5476010290487976818" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqwVfvVILYU8USL3dflbSlGAbM5A19waB3DVOJ4NYk3LMJtYhshytxJCxkTZzlPFUnsz4pfNKG5CdqHMha1dWrD-xvl48FBVUqSIyS2HoWIiXl7OljZwqbDjesAf0k_ru3f3NLFjf-a4s/s320/poster002.jpg" /></a> Great photo from a reader in Kalmar, Sweden, who posted the poster in a local mall, under two flyers from psychic Lasse Rydström. Bullseye!</p><p><br /></p><p><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhETZlShBHkU09b6AVROHiyMn2yFlaR97xGo25_RTci08ElVqX-ZAsnNeYBzx0pEQqHWPS07g9NJFrCnzucT2PG8L2qH0g_KRRLloVwdSYyzIXp0yjOBuS-r78WFcrayb8fWjYET5UJYsw/s1600/poster001.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 192px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5475923386341300674" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhETZlShBHkU09b6AVROHiyMn2yFlaR97xGo25_RTci08ElVqX-ZAsnNeYBzx0pEQqHWPS07g9NJFrCnzucT2PG8L2qH0g_KRRLloVwdSYyzIXp0yjOBuS-r78WFcrayb8fWjYET5UJYsw/s320/poster001.jpg" /></a> This photo comes from a supermarket in Färjestad, Sweden. Apparently, a psychic is promoting himself on one of the adjacent notes. Great! </p>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-31603427626271275452010-05-24T17:41:00.003+02:002010-05-30T17:13:16.920+02:00Gardner on Pseudo-scientists<div align="center"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsqJyQflJJ3yxK-e-FMYEkhH7HjJcF2nmMuH4wsWVDjZGMaIbzhCQv4Lzo5yq-gvP7EHUdcKF1uA76U2hE6FyGmI_DBcBoJQe0luQ5e5Q2M_7J3waF9xKhcmMyPbiE9W7EsGE30VImTqQ/s1600/martin_gardner-jpeg.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 223px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5474862537435131714" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsqJyQflJJ3yxK-e-FMYEkhH7HjJcF2nmMuH4wsWVDjZGMaIbzhCQv4Lzo5yq-gvP7EHUdcKF1uA76U2hE6FyGmI_DBcBoJQe0luQ5e5Q2M_7J3waF9xKhcmMyPbiE9W7EsGE30VImTqQ/s320/martin_gardner-jpeg.jpg" /></a> Martin Gardner 1914-2010<br /><br /><i></i></div><div align="left"><i>Martin Gardner's</i> Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science <i>was first published in 1952 under the title</i> In the Name of Science. <i>It soon became a classic of skeptic literature and it is easy to understand why. Reading it now, more than fifty years later, it feels just as necessary as it must have been then. Gardner's prediction has come true. We do have a multitude of pseudo-scientists promoting different weird ideas as though they are unquestionable truths. The cranks of the mid 20th century discussed by Gardner has been replaced by new ones, sometimes even weirder. From the traits and characteristics described by Gardner, it is easy to recognize a Rupert Sheldrake or Gary Schwartz, or - if you're involved in debates on paranormal phenomena - the followers of such cranks. Like Torbjörn Sassersson, who are able to forward the arguments of his Masters but lack the intellectual capacity to develop ideas of his own. Interestingly enough, the more devoted the follower, the more personality traits he or she seem to share with the Master. In some cases, the paranoia described by Gardner doesn't seem to be connected to a specific theory or set of theories. As in the case of Rickard Berghorn, former sci-fi publicist turned self-proclaimed genius, the paranoia itself is the main drive - he is just waiting for some lunacy to come along. Anyway, I am sure you won't lack contemporary references to the excerpt from Gardner's introductory chapter quoted below. I hope it will serve as a teaser for the book. It is, as far as I know, still in print and a must in any skeptic's library. Buy it and read it. Gardner comes in handy when taking part in the struggle for skepticism.</i><br /><br /></div><div align="left">"The modern pseudo-scientist - to return to the point from which we have digressed - stands entirely outside the closely integrated channels through which new ideas are introduced and evaluated. He works in isolation. He does not send his findings to the recognized journals, or if he does, they are rejected for reasons which in the vast majority of cases are excellent. In most cases the crank is not well enough informed to write a paper with even a surface resemblance to a significant study. As a consequence, he finds himself excluded from the journals and societies, and almost universally ignored by the competent workers in his field. In fact, the reputable scientist does not even know of the crank's existence unless his work is given wide-spread publicity through non-academic channels, or unless the scientist makes a hobby of collecting crank literature. The eccentric is forced, therefore, to tread a lonely way. He speaks before organizations he himself has founded, contributes to journals he himself may edit, and - until recently - publishes books only when his followers can raise sufficient funds to have them printed privately.<br /><br />A second characteristic of the pseudo-scientist, which greatly strengthens his isolation, is a tendency toward paranoia. This is a mental condition (to quote a recent textbook) "marked by chronic, systematized, gradually developing delusions, without hallucinations, and with little tendency toward deterioration, remission, or recovery." There is a wide disagreement among psychiatrists about the causes of paranoia. Even if this were not so, it obviously is not within the scope of this book to discuss the possible origins of paranoid traits in individual cases. It is easy to understand, however, that a strong sense of personal greatness must be involved whenever a crank stands in solitary, bitter opposition to every recognized authority in his field.<br /><br />If the self-styled scientist is rationalizing strong religious convictions, as often is the case, his paranoid drives may be reduced to a minimum. The desire to bolster religious beliefs with science can be a powerful motive. For example, in our examination of George McCready Price, the greatest of modern opponents of evolution, we shall see that his devout faith in Seventh Day Adventism is a sufficient explanation for his curious geological views. But even in such cases, an element of paranoia is nearly always present. Otherwise the pseudo-scientist would lack the stamina to fight a vigorous, single-handed battle against such overwhelming odds. If the crank is insincere - interested only in making money, playing a hoax, or both - then obviously paranoia need not enter his make-up. However, very few cases of this sort will be considered.<br /><br />There are five ways in which the sincere pseudo-scientist's paranoid tendencies are likely to be exhibited<br /><br />(1) He considers himself a genius.<br /><br />(2) He regards his colleagues, without exception, as ignorant blockheads. Everyone is out of step except himself. Frequently he insults his opponents by accusing them of stupidity, dishonesty, or other base motives. If they ignore him, he takes this to mean his arguments are unanswerable. If they retaliate in kind, this strengthens his delusion that he is battling scoundrels.<br /><br />Consider the following quotation: "To me truth is precious. ... I should rather be right and stand alone than to run with the multitude and be wrong. ... The holding of the views herein set forth has already won for me the scorn and contempt and ridicule of some of my fellowmen. I am looked upon as being odd, strange, peculiar. ... But truth is truth and though all the world reject it and turn against me, I will cling to truth still."<br /><br />These sentences are from the preface of a booklet, published in 1931, by Charles Silvester de Ford, of Fairfield, Washington, in which he proves the earth is flat. Sooner or later, almost every pseudo-scientist expresses similar sentiments.<br /><br />(3) He believes himself unjustly persecuted and discriminated against. The recognized societies refuse to let him lecture. The journals reject his papers and either ignore his books or assign them to "enemies" for review. It is all part of a dastardly plot. It never occurs to the crank that this opposition may be due to error in his work. It springs solely, he is convinced, from blind prejudice on the part of the established hierarchy - the high priests of science who fear to have their orthodoxy overthrown.<br /><br />Vicious slanders and unprovoked attacks, he usually insists, are constantly being made against him. He likens himself to Bruno, Galileo, Copernicus, Pasteur, and other great men who were unjustly persecuted for their heresies. If he has had no formal training in the field in which he works, he will attribute this persecution to a scientific masonry, unwilling to admit into its inner sanctums anyone who has not gone through the proper initiation rituals. He repeatedly calls your attention to important scientific discoveries made by laymen.<br /><br />(4) He has strong compulsions to focus his attacks on the greatest scientists and the best-established theories. When Newton was the outstanding name in physics, eccentric works in that science were violently anti-Newton. Today, with Einstein the father-symbol of authority, a crank theory of physics is likely to attack Einstein in the name of Newton. This same defiance can be seen in a tendency to assert the diametrical opposite of well-established beliefs. Mathematicians prove the angle cannot be trisected. So the crank trisects it. A perpetual motion machine cannot be built. He builds one. There are many eccentric theories in which the "pull" of gravity is replaced by a "push." Germs do not cause disease, some modern cranks insist. Disease produces the germs. Glasses do not help the eyes, said Dr. Bates. They make them worse. In our next chapter we shall learn how Cyrus Teed literally turned the entire cosmos inside-out, compressing it within the confines of a hollow earth, inhabited only on the inside.<br /><br />(5) He often has a tendency to write in a complex jargon, in many cases making use of terms and phrases he himself has coined. Schizophrenics sometimes talk in what psychiatrists call "neologisms" - words which have meaning to the patient, but sound like Jabberwocky to everyone else. Many of the classics of crackpot science exhibit a neologistic tendency.<br /><br />When the crank's IQ is low, as in the case of the late Wilbur Glenn Voliva who thought the earth shaped like a pancake, he rarely achieves much of a following. But if he is a brilliant thinker, he is capable of developing incredibly complex theories. He will be able to defend them in books of vast erudition, with profound observations, and often liberal portions of sound science. His rhetoric may be enormously persuasive. All the parts of his world usually fit together beautifully, like a jig-saw puzzle. It is impossible to get the best of him in any type of argument. He has anticipated all your objections. He counters them with unexpected answers of great ingenuity. Even on the subject of the shape of the earth, a layman may find himself powerless in a debate with a flat-earther. George Bernard Shaw, in <i>Everybody's Political What's What?</i>, gives an hilarious description of a meeting at which a flat-earth speaker completely silenced all opponents who raised objections from the floor. "Opposition such as no atheist could have provoked assailed him"; writes Shaw, "and he, having heard their arguments hundreds of times, played skittles with them, lashing the meeting into a spluttering fury as he answered easily what it considered unanswerable."<br /><br />In the chapters to follow, we shall take a close look at the leading pseudo-scientists of recent years, with special attention to native specimens. Some British books will be discussed, and a few Continental eccentric ones, but the bulk of crank literature in foreign tongues will not be touched upon. Very little of it has been translated into English, and it is extremely difficult to get access to the original works. In addition, it is usually so unrelated to the American scene that it loses interest in comparison with the work of cranks closer home.<br /><br />With few exceptions, little time will be spent on theories which come under the broad heading of "occult." Astrology, for example, still has millions of contemporary followers, but is so far removed from anything resembling science that it does not seem worth while to discuss it. The theory that sunspots cause depressions (popular among conservative businessmen who like to think of booms and busts as natural phenomena to be blamed on something remote) is the last respectable survival of the ancient view that human affairs are linked with astronomical phenomena. This literature, however, belongs more properly to economics than to astronomy. The social sciences have, of course, their share of eccentric works, but for many reasons they form a separate subject for study.<br /><br />Our survey will begin with curious theories of astronomy, the science most removed from the human landscape. It will proceed through physics and geology to the biological sciences, then into human affairs by way of anthropology and archeology. Four chapters will be devoted to medical quasi-science, followed by discussions of sexual theories, psychiatric cults, and methods of reading character. Finally, we shall make a serious appraisal of the reputable work of Dr. Rhine, with quick and not so serious glances at a few other venturers into the psychic fields.<br /><br />The amount of intellectual energy that has been wasted on these lost causes is almost unbelievable. It will be amusing - at times frightening - to witness the grotesque extremes to which deluded scientists can be misled, and the extremes to which they in turn can mislead others. As we shall see, their disciples are often intelligent and sometimes eminent men - men not well enough informed on the subject in question to penetrate the Master's counterfeit trappings, and who frequently find in their devotion an outlet for their own neurotic rebellions. More important, we shall have impressed upon us the traits which these "scientists" hold in common. The atmosphere in which they move will become familiar to us as we begin to breathe the air of their fantastic worlds.<br /><br />Just as an experienced doctor is able to diagnose certain ailments the instant a new patient walks into his office, or a police officer learns to recognize criminal types from subtle behavior clues which escape the untrained eye, so we, perhaps, may learn to recognize the future scientific crank when we first encounter him.<br /><br />And encounter him we shall. If the present trend continues, we can expect a wide variety of these men, with theories yet unimaginable, to put in their appearance in the years immediately ahead. They will write impressive books, give inspiring lectures, organize exciting cults. The may achieve a following of one - or one million. In any case, it will be well for ourselves and for society if we are on our guard against them."</div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><br /><br /><iframe style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none" height="275" src="http://www.formspring.me/widget/view/Garvarn?&size=large&bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&fgcolor=%23333333" frameborder="0" width="400" scrolling="no"><a href="http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn">http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn</a></iframe>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-77364693424386931552010-05-21T12:35:00.010+02:002010-05-23T01:35:27.546+02:00Cash is king!<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYiyijvSKjIoTLXJqBCVzORoziFu-ksumf-zu1T28x8iPKH_CERNYFRpFBVaCWWawTCy2-ze8_Mvh2nK6oK9jYtu38J1gNLoojBbLdnFvcHYKojQwqFAorKwV89Y897BOA4doz1S8Y4gw/s1600/greed.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 320px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 215px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5473670441621902562" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYiyijvSKjIoTLXJqBCVzORoziFu-ksumf-zu1T28x8iPKH_CERNYFRpFBVaCWWawTCy2-ze8_Mvh2nK6oK9jYtu38J1gNLoojBbLdnFvcHYKojQwqFAorKwV89Y897BOA4doz1S8Y4gw/s320/greed.jpg" /></a><br />Scandinavian mediagroup <a href="http://www.egmont.com/">Egmont</a> state that they "bring stories to life." Well, last year their <a href="http://www.egmonttidskrifter.se/">Swedish subsidiary</a> also decided to bring fortune to a couple of charlatans, Swedish psychics Erika Andersson and Benny Rosenqvist, when it launched the magazine "<a href="http://www.tidningennara.se">Nära</a>" ("Close"). This effort to cash in on the current interest in New Age and spiritualism is presented as dealing with spirituality, "providing well-being for both body and spirit" and features the standard mixture of psychics, "experiences", NDE's and additional, contemporary woo-woo.<br /><br />Andersson and Rosenqvist are the magazine's in-house psychics. They have been on the cover of the three issues published so far and much of the content is focused on them. Egmont also arranges <a href="http://www.hj.egmont.se/Nytt-pa-sajten/Sajtnytt_reportage/Mot-Benny-och-Erika-pa-storseans-i-Stockholm/">seances</a> and <a href="http://www.tidningennara.se/Chattarkiv/">online chats</a> with the two and is therefore an active partner in the psychic scams they perpetrate. Providing swindlers with a marketing platform in form of a magazine distributed nationwide is of course an all-time low for the publishing industry in itself, but engaging in the actual fraud is repulsive.<br /><br />For the psychics, the magazine is without doubt an opportunity denied most of their peers. Although broadcasting companies Channel 5 and TV4 have boosted the careers of several psychics, commitment has been restricted to the TV series. That a major publishing company condescends to active participation in the actual swindle must be a marvellous stroke of luck for the psychics Andersson and Rosenqvist. A recent incident on the magazine's online forum also suggests that the publisher is keen on covering up any blemishes appearing on the light-hearted surface.<br /><br />Just before noon April 5th, a posting questioning the quality of the messages conveyed by Andersson and Rosenqvist appeared on the forum. The poster, "Lina76", had attended - or arranged - a séance with Andersson and reported that the messages were very vague and general. Several in the audience of 20 people had expressed similar complaints. In addition, Andersson had charged nearly a thousand dollars for a two hour session and gave no receipt, i.e. the transaction was made behind the taxman's back.<br /><br />"Lina76" had also been on a private sitting with Rosenqvist who told her that she would have another child in the future. It was going to be a boy, but could also be a girl, according to the medium. Profound messages indeed.<br /><br />Several posters came to the psychic's rescue, testifying how wonderful experiences they had provided. But the discussion soon turned to the question of the receipt. Poster "Slingshot" suggested "Lina76" and the other dissatisfied sitters should file a joint complaint to the police. "Liviaxx" then asked if anyone seriously thought that the magazine Nära would encourage its partners to become black marketeers. Skeptic "Trilobite" responded that the transaction was private, without the magazine's knowledge.<br /><br />Then enters the magazine's editor in chief, Madeleine Walles. She states that Erika Andersson is employed by the magazine and is running her psychic business on the side. As an employee of Nära, Erika Andersson is required to run her side business in accordance with the law, i.e. provide written receipts. Andersson had informed Walles that such a receipt was in fact brought to the séance in question. In conclusion, Walles states that if Andersson wasn't serious and reliable, the magazine wouldn't employ her. So, there it is. Every testimony of Andersson's wrongdoings is flawed, because she is an employee of the magazine Nära. And since Nära doesn't employ dubious persons, Andersson can't be one. Circular reasoning <i>in absurdum</i>.<br /><br />Although "evigaeva" expresses her gratitude to the editors for assuming their responsibility (!), "Lina76" won't give in. She now claims that Andersson also failed to provide a receipt at another séance in the town of Limhamn. In addition, she quotes several complaints she received after the séances. At this point, the forum administration kills the discussion and erases it from the forum.<br /><br />Thanks to skeptic "Trilobite", who fortunately copied the entire thread before it was deleted and posted it <a href="http://www.vof.se/forum/viewtopic.php?p=392035#p392035">here</a> on the skeptic's forum, we have an illustrative testimony of how a reputable publishing company engages in the sordid business of mediumship and, steeped in the obvious tax evasion of its protegés, doesn't hesitate to use a line of argument straight from the crackpot textbook on rhetoric.<br /><br />I guess no one informed Walles about the motto historically linked to psychic business: cash is king!<br /><br /><iframe style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none" height="275" src="http://www.formspring.me/widget/view/Garvarn?&size=large&bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&fgcolor=%23333333" frameborder="0" width="400" scrolling="no"><a href="http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn">http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn</a></iframe>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-61192830347266294772010-05-14T01:59:00.007+02:002010-05-14T15:30:27.913+02:00Printable versions availableAs you may have noticed, I tend to post rather long texts - contrary to all recommendations. For your convenience, I have started making printer friendly versions in PDF format, with centred layout to enable double-sided printing. I will add a link to such a version on all my postings, starting with these seven:<br /><br /><a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/on-terry-evans-supremacy-of-personal.html">THE SUPREMACY OF PERSONAL EXPERIENCE</a><br />Exposing the cold reading and trickery of psychic fraud Terry Evans, one of Sweden's renowned TV mediums.<br />Download printer friendly PDF here:<br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/supremacy_a4.pdf">A4 format</a><br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/supremacy_letter.pdf">US letter format</a><br /><br /><a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/on-colin-fry-is-small-fry-big-fish.html">IS THE SMALL FRY A BIG FISH?</a><br />Investigating how well British psychic Colin Fry is doing in live séances.<br />Download printer friendly PDF here:<br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/fish_a4.pdf">A4 format</a><br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/fish_letter.pdf">US letter format</a><br /><br /><a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/adrian-parkers-fabrication-of-reality.html">ADRIAN PARKER'S FABRICATION OF REALITY</a><br />A close look at an article on evidence for PSI, written by Swedish parapsychologist Adrian Parker. In the paper reviewed, Parker systematically belittles critique raised against claims of paranormal phenomena made in several studies and distorts comments made by fellow parapsychologist Richard Wiseman. Document contains all posts in this matter, including Adrian Parker's reply.<br />Download printer friendly PDF here:<br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/parker_a4.pdf">A4 format</a><br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/parker_letter.pdf">US letter format</a><br /><br /><a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/forgive-them-for-they-know-not-what.html">FORGIVE THEM; FOR THEY KNOW NOT WHAT THEY DO?</a><br />Proposing that the notion that psychics are unaware of what they are doing is an understandable fallacy among believers but an ignorant misconception among skeptics. The psychic session offers intellectual tasks that cannot be accomplished unconsciously. The notion persists among skeptics because they tend to read Hyman or McLaren instead of visiting a séance and see what is actually taking place during a psychic session.<br />Download printer friendly PDF here:<br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/forgive_a4.pdf">A4 format</a><br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/forgive_letter.pdf">US letter format</a><br /><br /><a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2008/07/olof-jonsson-swedish-swindler.html">OLOF JONSSON - THE SWEDISH SWINDLER</a><br />An exposé of the life and feats of Sweden's greatest psychic ever: Olof Jonsson. A pathological liar and fraud, Jonsson swindled his way through the Rhine Institute and the Apollo 14 project.<br />Download printer friendly PDF here:<br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/jonsson_a4.pdf">A4 format</a><br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/jonsson_letter.pdf">US letter format</a><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2008/07/look-into-my-eyes-look-into-my-eyes.html">LOOK INTO MY EYES, LOOK INTO MY EYES...</a><br />On Jörgen Sundvall, "not active" hare krishna and bogus therapist.<br />Download printer friendly PDF here:<br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/eyes_a4.pdf">A4 format</a><br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/eyes_letter.pdf">US letter format</a><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2010/03/on-swedish-skepticism.html">ON SWEDISH SKEPTICISM</a><br />Is Swedish skepticism being taken over by the secular humanist society and if so, is that necessarily a bad thing?<br />Download printer friendly PDF here:<br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/skepticism_a4.pdf">A4 format</a><br /><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/skepticism_letter.pdf">US letter format</a><br /><br /><br /><iframe style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none" height="275" src="http://www.formspring.me/widget/view/Garvarn?&size=large&bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&fgcolor=%23333333" frameborder="0" width="400" scrolling="no"><a href="http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn">http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn</a></iframe>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-24703687907805987132010-05-08T03:13:00.006+02:002010-05-14T13:55:48.182+02:00Lyzell goes Duncan<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxYFDzPKlfOElEwV_Ec2vxS5FyGct5mo06O6zXE42YtoBOR3FRkWkycGBxD8WOL9DQL71iVy1XA-XdNbqhStyBxhzC96WgPONXqmqJGrExPVg09Ks-RvlMb3tBSTUpSy3-XOHR2VDEweA/s1600/lyzellgoesduncan.jpg"><img style="MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 155px; FLOAT: left; HEIGHT: 195px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5468702084229119698" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxYFDzPKlfOElEwV_Ec2vxS5FyGct5mo06O6zXE42YtoBOR3FRkWkycGBxD8WOL9DQL71iVy1XA-XdNbqhStyBxhzC96WgPONXqmqJGrExPVg09Ks-RvlMb3tBSTUpSy3-XOHR2VDEweA/s320/lyzellgoesduncan.jpg" /></a> I recently wrote about British psychic Helen Duncan and the fact that there is nothing unexplained about her - she was an obnoxious, obese fraud who dabbled in materializations such as "ectoplasm". She was arrested for having tried to hoodwink a naval officer on leave, then charged with psychic fraud and sentenced to nine months imprisonment (see <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2010/04/nothing-unexplained-about-helen-duncan.html">Nothing unexplained about Helen Duncan</a>. Justice was served.<br /><br />Materialization mediums have been a diminishing crowd. Harry Houdini and his debunking followers exposed this fraudulent practice to such an extent in the beginning of the 20th century that since, there is no doubt in reasonably sane people that materialization is one of the most pathetic attempts to exploit superstition and gullibility. This kind of kindergarten mysticism has survived through closed sessions for invited sitters only - mainly those deluded enough to consider the hilariously funny archive footage of psychics with cheese cloth hanging out of their ears and nostrils as evidence of spirit communication.<br /><br />In one such session as late as 1992, British psychic Colin Fry was caught redhanded. When, by accident, someone turned on the light at that seance, he was found standing with an illuminated trumpet in his hand (see <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2008/07/colin-fry-revisited.html">Colin Fry revisited</a>. Notably, Fry was also into cheese cloth for a while, as you can tell from the picture below. Psychics are of course ready to explore every deception - and exploit every believer - available to them.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIZJcV75F0POTwJMi6z-x9qjhUpPMuDMbVNCZXiwWuIJFwoNchmz4TBmRI1YNgtXmUw1hvdQd53L4T9eMmz_OtzoJWKKJuw0DngMJluZhXXBkRsCMHI-hcDf_cIJ2IskCGGvmoZNVUAzM/s1600/fryecto.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 300px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 225px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5468702949226405714" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIZJcV75F0POTwJMi6z-x9qjhUpPMuDMbVNCZXiwWuIJFwoNchmz4TBmRI1YNgtXmUw1hvdQd53L4T9eMmz_OtzoJWKKJuw0DngMJluZhXXBkRsCMHI-hcDf_cIJ2IskCGGvmoZNVUAzM/s320/fryecto.jpg" /></a><br />In Sweden, Fry's protégée Jane Lyzell has taken over his spiritualist center Ramsbergsgården. Lyzell has started to experiment with "ectoplasm", i.e. tissue tricks like those performed by Helen Duncan. As I have noted before (see <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2008/07/jane-lyzell-knows.html">Jane Lyzell knows</a>), Lyzell considers Helen Duncan a genuine medium. So she readily clings to the folklore made up after Duncan's death in preparation for her own scams.<br /><br />Lyzell has also issued some "evidence" of her accomplishments in manifestation. It's a picture with her sitting in darkness, apparently during some kind of spirit visit. Although there are no visible signs of such a presence, Lyzell says it is "ectoplasm." I cannot post the image here, but I will gladly link to it:<br /><br /><a href="http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/7435/lyzellecto.jpg">Lyzell waiting for "ectoplasm" to appear, probably from a body cavity</a><br /><br />Obviously, we will have to wait for the cheese cloth, torn sheets, or towels to appear on Lyzell photographic "evidence" but if she has any intelligence at all, she will go through the literature on Helen Duncan. It is more than explicit regarding how Duncan executed her tricks. And since Lyzell shares so many of Duncan's other characteristics, why not share her <em>modus operandi</em>? For Lyzell, as for Duncan, it's all about the money in the end and if some dupes are stupid enough to accept it, why not provide it?<br /><br />The ethics of psychics will never cease to amaze me.<br /><br /><iframe src="http://www.formspring.me/widget/view/Garvarn?&size=large&bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&fgcolor=%23333333" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" width="400" height="275" style="border:none;"><a href="http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn">http://www.formspring.me/Garvarn</a></iframe>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-55396347468253487442010-04-04T19:34:00.013+02:002010-04-07T17:59:52.085+02:00Nothing unexplained about Helen Duncan<div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgc6xfCrBCCIpoUOaYrLdOr1SCu_V_o7JztgoRmuSJYcSJw5NP5CdQahUnqewLyjUZUsgMe_1iOIeVyl7nYG1ivZRH2NGM2IqQYkl2rU5akD1xbrL8UIpKCsOYf5P2kfWjo1Oh6ULLLwT4/s1600/robinson.jpg"><img style="MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 120px; FLOAT: left; HEIGHT: 178px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5456337925083471154" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgc6xfCrBCCIpoUOaYrLdOr1SCu_V_o7JztgoRmuSJYcSJw5NP5CdQahUnqewLyjUZUsgMe_1iOIeVyl7nYG1ivZRH2NGM2IqQYkl2rU5akD1xbrL8UIpKCsOYf5P2kfWjo1Oh6ULLLwT4/s320/robinson.jpg" /></a> <strong>I have always enjoyed the performances of British actor Tony Robinson. First and foremost, he is the charmingly nutty sidekick of Blackadder in the classic BBC comedy series. But he is also great as presenter in the archaeology programme "Time Team", where he runs around among archaeologists and researchers on intensive three-day excavations all over Britain and sometimes abroad. But there is a dark cloud...</strong><br /><br />In 1982, Tony Robinson received a call from TV producer John Lloyd, who wanted him to audition for the role of servant to the Duke of Edinburgh in a sitcom set in 15th century England. Robinson got the job and when BBC 2 aired the pilot in June 1983, his portrayal of several generations of Baldricks in the service of several generations of Blackadders granted him a place in the Great Hall of Comedy Fame. Four series were produced, along with several one-off installments and if you haven't seen any of it, I strongly urge you to do so - preferably something from the second or third season of the original TV series.<br /><br />After Blackadder, Robinson turned to digging. In 1994, UK Channel 4 launched the archeology show "Time Team", with Robinson as presenter. The format is simple. During three days, a team of archaeologists and experts conduct an excavation somewhere in Britain or, on occasion, abroad. Robinson acts as a kind of middleman between the scientific crew and the viewer, asking questions and explaining in laymen terms. After more than 200 episodes, the show is considered to have improved public understanding of archeology in Britain and Robinson, along with others in the crew, has been awarded several honorary degrees for popularizing science.<br /><br />In 2005, Robinson hosted Wildfire Television's two hour documentary "The Real Da Vinci Code." The show is an almost ruthless demolition of the myths and hoaxes presented as facts by Dan Brown in his bestselling novel, and by Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln in their Dänikenian "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" from 1982.<br /><br />So when Robinson turned up as host and associate producer of the three episode paranormal documentary series "Tony Robinson & ..." in 2008, my hopes were high that he would bring his fact oriented and inquiring mind from "Time Team" and "The Real Da Vinci Code." The production company, Flashback Television, did indeed announce that the series, also known as "The Unexplained", would "bring a rational approach to the world of psychic mysteries and the myths and legends of the past." Having seen the first episode dealing with psychic medium Helen Duncan, aired on British Channel 4 on 29th of December 2008, I must conclude that Robinson's dig into the sewers of spiritism is yet another example of how journalistic inquiry turns into naïve ignorance when facing supernatural claims.<br /><br />Although Robinson is accompanied by freelance scientific journalist Becky McCall, the episode on Helen Duncan adds to the myth surrounding her rather than present facts. Even if Richard Wiseman in one sequence stresses that one needs to "look very closely in the records", no such scrutiny is employed. Instead, the viewer gets the standard "eyewitness" accounts, albeit over 60 years old, and an emotional testimony of Duncan's granddaughter Mary Martin.<br /><br />I understand the need for television shows to be entertaining, but I don't understand how someone honored for popularizing science so easily converts to popularizing myth and fraud. And I particularly don't see why the facts about Duncan are less entertaining than the fiction.<br /><br />Let's look at some of the claims made in the show. First of all, there is the suggestion that Duncan was hunted by MI5, that she in some way was a threat to national security during WWII. Did she pose such a threat? And her granddaughter claims Duncan was arrested as a spy. Was she really?<br /><br />The suggestion that Duncan had revealed war secrets during her séances was put forward by Percy Wilson at a conference organised by the College of Psychic Science in 1958, i.e. two years after the death of Duncan. Prior to that, nothing. There is no such claim or suggestion in the 1944 court proceedings - and nothing in the Old Bail Trial report that covers over three hundred pages. No public mention of it at all by anyone prior to 1958. It is in essence a later fabrication aimed at rendering Duncan martyrdom. Several circumstances supports this conclusion. First, Duncan had allegedly conveyed the message that HMS Barham had went down in the Mediterranean before that information had been made official by the naval authorities. The Barham was sunk on 25th of November, 1941 and the news was released 28th of January, 1942. Helen Duncan was arrested two years later. It is an absurd thought that a suspicion of being a security threat would take two years to result in an arrest, in wartime.<br /><br />Second, according to myth, Duncan received the Barham message in the form of a sailor with the name "HMS Barham" on his capband. But during WWII, capbands had only "HMS" on them, ship names were omitted for security reasons. This is illustrated by a sculpture at the memorial Robinson and McCall visits in the episode, see picture below. </div><br /><div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIgdqfxFGK2eQXWtQ6Z8I_FXH-Wz9U8Jy4KKRAP7rYFPOeZbBbr918iaWdViU72HZQot6lutGOut3VRkRAAak1IJzQg-PCECNGEEyBiYavbImFhK3aAawl2dz4SNi3SagmjRTZLNu1inM/s1600/hms.jpg"><img style="WIDTH: 320px; HEIGHT: 209px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5456340312493228498" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIgdqfxFGK2eQXWtQ6Z8I_FXH-Wz9U8Jy4KKRAP7rYFPOeZbBbr918iaWdViU72HZQot6lutGOut3VRkRAAak1IJzQg-PCECNGEEyBiYavbImFhK3aAawl2dz4SNi3SagmjRTZLNu1inM/s320/hms.jpg" /></a></div><br /><div>Similar claims regarding another ship, HMS Hood, are made by one of the "eyewitnesses" in the episode. Duncan is supposed to have received a message during a séance on the same day it went down. This is, in lack of any supporting evidence whatsoever, of course another fabrication.<br /><br />Was MI5 involved in the arrest? Well, let's recall what really took place. In January 1944, Helen Duncan gave a series of séances at The Master Temple Psychic Centre in Portsmouth. The establishment, along with the drugstore above which it was situated, was run by spiritualist couple Homer. Duncan was paid £112 for six days of performance. During one of these séances, two naval officers attended. One of them, Lieutenant Worth, received a vivid message from his aunt, which left the officer unimpressed since he didn't have any deceased aunt. Later during the sitting, he became even more suspicious when a spirit materialised claiming to be his sister. When Worth confronted Duncan about the fact that he had no sister, the psychic explained that his sister had been premature.<br /><br />When Worth's mother assured him she had never had a premature child, he was disgusted by the psychic's show and reported the matter to the local police. Following instructions, Worth booked two seats for another seance and attended in the company of a policeman in plain clothing. During a materialisation, Worth switched on a light and the policeman sprang forward grabbing the psychic in order to remove the white drape. Sitters rushed to the psychics defense and as one turned the light off, another snatched the cloth from the policeman's grasp. When the light came on again, the cloth had disappeared.<br /><br />This incident, and nothing else, is what brought Helen Duncan to the Old Bailey, along with her assistant Mrs Brown and the Homer couple. Duncan was sentenced to nine months imprisonment, Brown to four, and the Homers were bound over for two years. An appeal was made but the verdicts and sentences were upheld. The group was sentenced for falsely conspiring to pretend that Duncan was able to communicate with the dead, under section four of the Witchcraft Act. Nothing else. Not for spying or revealing war secrets. Duncan was accused and committed for being exactly what she was - a psychic fraud. MI5 had nothing to do with it.<br /><br />Twelve years later, in 1956, the Nottingham police raided another of Duncan's séances. She became ill and died after a month, 59 years old. And no, there was nothing odd about her death. It was not caused by her "trance" being disturbed by the police or other ridiculous claims in that line of thinking. Duncan's medical records showed that she had a long history of ill-health and as early as 1944 she was described as a large, obese woman who could only move slowly as if she suffered from heart trouble.<br /><br />So, contrary to the suggestions of Robinson, there is nothing unexplained about Helen Duncan. Had Robinson followed Wiseman's advice and looked into the records, he would have found that Duncan was exposed as fraudulent by the research department of the London Spiritualist Alliance and by Harry Price in 1931, that following Price's report, Duncan's former maid came forward and confessed in detail to having aided Duncan in her psychic feats, that her husband admitted that he believed the materialisations to be the result of regurgitation, and that a suspicious sitter in a 1933 séance grabbed the psychic and when the lights were turned on, Duncan was found sitting in stockinged feet, hastily stuffing a torn white west up under her clothes. Perhaps Robinson would have had something to respond to the "eyewitness" account of how a one-piece garment was sufficient safe-guard against any fraud - Duncan's trick with that garment was exposed as early as 1931.<br /><br />In closing, I would like to quote Price's report from the Duncan tests, as quoted by Paul Tabori in <em>The Art of Folly</em>:<br /></div><br /><blockquote>At the conclusion of the fourth seance we led the medium to a settee and called for the apparatus. At the sight of it, the lady promptly went into a trance. She recovered, but refused to be X- rayed. Her husband went up to her and told her it was painless. She jumped up and gave him a smashing blow on the face which sent him reeling. Then she went for Dr. William Brown who was present. He dodged the blow. Mrs. Duncan, without the slightest warning, dashed out into the street, had an attack of hysteria and began to tear her seance garment to pieces. She clutched the railings and screamed and screamed. Her husband tried to pacify her. It was useless. I leave the reader to visualize the scene. A seventeen-stone woman, clad in black sateen tights, locked to the railings, screaming at the top of her voice. A crowd collected and the police arrived. The medical men with us explained the position and prevented them from fetching the ambulance. We got her back into the Laboratory and at once she demanded to be X-rayed. In reply, Dr. William Brown turned to Mr. Duncan and asked him to turn out his pockets. He refused and would not allow us to search him. There is no question that his wife had passed him the cheese-cloth in the street. However, they gave us another seance and the "control' said we could cut off a piece of "teleplasm" when it appeared. The sight of half-a-dozen men, each with a pair of scissors waiting for the word, was amusing. It came and we all jumped. One of the doctors got hold of the stuff and secured a piece. The medium screamed and the rest of the "teleplasm" went down her throat. This time it wasn't cheese-cloth. It proved to be paper, soaked in white of egg, and folded into a flattened tube... Could anything be more infantile than a group of grown-up men wasting time, money, and energy on the antics of a fat female crook?</blockquote><br /><div><br />Needless to say, Helen Duncan was one of the more revolting and offensive con-artists on the psychic scene, so perhaps Robinson should let her remains stay in the sewers of spiritism, where they belong. Or at least look for facts instead of boosting myth.<br /><br />See the episode on youtube.com:</div><br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VyvAybV-SM&feature=related">Part 1</a>,<br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1dcDklDfTg&feature=related">Part 2</a>, <br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfYcyAqp47U&feature=related">Part 3</a>, <br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2rKfCkdmcI&feature=related">Part 4</a>, <br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug875nIhjME&feature=related">Part 5</a></ br></ br>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-76587077535275093412010-03-05T17:50:00.008+01:002010-05-14T11:52:28.695+02:00On Swedish skepticism<span style="font-size:85%;">(Download printer friendly PDF of this posting in </span><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/skepticism_a4.pdf"><span style="font-size:85%;">A4 format</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;"> or </span><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/skepticism_letter.pdf"><span style="font-size:85%;">US letter format</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;">.)</span><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_z7Cu0qHQuC4wdA6Yl0vPmhrlREMZ5gcy3DkDgPC9lALonv_cqU7wVybxrt2bi4Zph5wZicoA9uWlyx1T_7vbmZIvrGa7mtdodryuSbrDaccJhw0mkzOL6mLltbFdW0ALHzE2DO53sMo/s1600-h/sturmarkl.jpg"><img style="MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 142px; FLOAT: left; HEIGHT: 224px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5445194202132101426" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_z7Cu0qHQuC4wdA6Yl0vPmhrlREMZ5gcy3DkDgPC9lALonv_cqU7wVybxrt2bi4Zph5wZicoA9uWlyx1T_7vbmZIvrGa7mtdodryuSbrDaccJhw0mkzOL6mLltbFdW0ALHzE2DO53sMo/s320/sturmarkl.jpg" /></a> <span style="font-family:verdana;">What would motivate Jane or John Doe to join the skeptic movement? That is a question the Swedish Skeptic society may need to address very soon. Because in the public eye, it seems like the Swedish Humanist Association has already found an answer. Under chairman Christer Sturmark, the secular humanists have had an exceptional growth in the last five years. Sturmark has achieved lots of media exposure and he is often the preferred choice when TV producers cast debates on issues concerning religion, creationism, and, yes, New Age, occultism and paranormal phenomena - issues that one would think are more appropriate to be dealt with by the skeptic society. There is a reasonable possibility that the Humanist Association soon will start to attract support and members with a main interest in skepticism rather than secular humanism, if it doesn't already.<br /><br />Is such a development necessarily a bad thing? Of course not. The skeptic cause needs active promotion and the keyword in the term "skeptic movement" is <em>movement</em>, i.e. the opposite of standing still. I would also like to add being <em>open to change</em>, and <em>ability to adapt</em> according to the conditions provided by the environment in which the movement aspires to have an influence. An organization not willing to actively promote the skeptic cause, not willing to move in a direction beneficial to the growth of skeptical influence, and not able or interested in adapting to its environment should not carry the skeptic torch. An organization willing, able and interested should, even if it means that the torch in Sweden is carried by the Humanist Association or a completely new skeptic society. As New Age is spreading and getting increasing support, acceptance, and media exposure, the skeptic cause has to be furthered through active effort. A skeptic movement has to oppose and even confront this development. Just being available to provide rational and natural explanations to supernatural claims, if somebody wants them, is not enough - such an approach is in reality a non-approach, it is lack of movement and activity.<br /><br />In a recent article in the public online article portal Newsmill.se, skeptic chairman Hanno Essén and former chairman Jesper Jerkert stated that they mainly see the Swedish Skeptics as a sort of consumer agency that students, authorities, journalists and people in general can turn to with questions about paranormal claims. They also noted that public official statements from the organization will continue to be scarce in the future. They do, however, encourage members and supporters to actively defend a scientific perspective. So the message is clear and explicit: availability, not activity, is to be expected from the board of the Swedish Skeptics, i.e. the core of the organized Swedish skeptic movement does not include movement. That this is the strategy dominating the actual work of the board is admitted by a board member on the skeptic forum; the board isn't that active in public discussion and when it is, it's only after long and slow discussion aimed at not offending anyone. Is that a rational adaptation to a modern society characterized by the information highway and communicative speed? Is that a rational strategy in a media climate where individual cranks make the effort to seek attention and very often gets it? In a culture where new media collides with old, where the distance between media consumption and production is shrinking at rapid speed and audience mobility is a striking feature - is a public relations policy of the 1960's sound? When technology, economy and accessibility is more favorable than ever for small and relatively poor actors on the opinion market - is this the time to chose silence, or answering only when questioned, as a principal approach?<br /><br />The Humanist Association has chosen a very different strategy. Whenever a media discussion that concerns the organization's interests emerges, chairman Sturmark or someone else on the board makes a contribution in the form of an article or a public statement. Always. Regarding ongoing issues such as creationism, religious influence on education, or confessional schools, the board initiates public debate in every way and media they can. Representatives from the board regularly participates in arranged panel discussions on topics like humanism, religion, and even New Age. They also arrange such events and seminars themselves. Last year, the Association ran a nationwide ad campaign themed "God probably doesn't exist." They engage in networking and even have a group in the Swedish parliament. And, as indicated earlier, media increasingly tend to pick them as representatives for a skeptic view as well as for secular humanism - even when the Swedish Skeptics would be a more appropriate choice.<br /><br />Devoted skeptics are complaining, of course. However, they don't arrive at the conclusion that skeptics can learn from the humanists. Instead, they've started to engage in bashing them. Chairman Sturmark has a history in computer and internet market speculation which means that he is immoral and a bad representative for the humanist movement. Whenever he appears on TV, he fails to explain all relevant facts and arguments and relies heavily on repeating catchword phrases. During the expansion, the humanists have also attracted some celebrities and that's always a big help. Oh, and they receive donations. And the humanist boom is not an effect of the efforts of the Swedish humanists, but of a global secular humanist boom. Etcetera, etcetera. What the complaining skeptics fail to realize is that the undeniable success of the humanists is the result of strategy and organizational change. Their member stock has increased with 500% since 2005, which means that they once were a rather small organization with very limited resources, much like the Swedish Skeptics is now and has been since it was founded in 1982. But the humanists are going somewhere, they have made a change. They are able to convey their message in a more effective and attractive way now as a result of intentional effort. The key elements in this effort are not celebrities or donations - those are bonuses, but motive and intent. They have also realized that promoting secular humanism will upset a lot of people but chosen their cause over the convenience of their opponents, i.e. they have remained loyal to their reason to exist, even if it means that some, or even many, will consider them evil or immoral.<br /><br />Sadly, it appears as if the skeptics are inclined to chose the convenience of their opponents over the cause. At the moment, the main topic of interest at the skeptic forum is the current "tone" of argument. Apparently, some members are afraid that heated discussion and frank dismissal of certain woo-woo claims might scare people off. Don't take this the wrong way; the skeptic forum has an excellent staff of moderators who are doing a great job, it offers the standard possibilities to report abuse and of course the obvious choice not to take part in heated discussions or the forum in general, but some say that isn't enough to prevent people from "feeling bad". There is a lack of empathy among some of the forum members. Not among the hordes of attending woo-woos - their everlasting claims of being subject to "intellectual oppression" has rooted successfully, but among skeptics. There has even been a motion submitted for the upcoming annual meeting suggesting that the board appoints a committee to define ethical guidelines for member behavior. So, instead of worrying about how to promote the skeptic cause effectively, the concern is how to cripple it.<br /><br />But let's go back to the initial question: What would motivate Jane or John Doe to join the skeptic movement? Well, if Jane or John are predisposed for New Age or some related lunacy, the chance they would join the skeptic movement is nil. What if they are "sitting on the fence"? Well, the probability that they are interested at all in these issues is rather low and to make them interested under the conditions stipulated by the media culture we live in would demand resources that even the humanists lack. But what if Jane and John have started to react negatively on the current swarm of psychics, healers and miracle mongers and would be inclined to contribute to an organization that is against woo-woo? Would they be attracted to an organization that is available for questions and mainly concerned with not upsetting anyone, or would they be more attracted to an organization that often, actively and publicly denounces woo-woo claims in a clear-cut and uncompromising manner? I know the bulk of devoted skeptics will yell that there is a middle course, but in the end I think the Swedish Skeptics will have to come up with rational answer to this question. I know the Swedish Humanist Association has done so.</span>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com23tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-76048155850068111192009-09-20T16:14:00.005+02:002010-03-05T18:23:39.391+01:00Who Can You Trust?Adrian Parker and Göran Brusewitz have outdone themselves again. In a letter to the <em>Dagens Nyheter</em> editor (Brusewitz and Parker, 2009), the two representatives of the Swedish Society for Parapsychological Research comment on a recently broadcast TV show on paranormal phenomena. The show featured two hosts, one alleged skeptic and one believer, who "investigated" different paranormal phenomena and, every now and then, comments from more renowned people of both sides were cut in. This apparently opened a window of opportunity for Parker and Brusewitz, who writes (my translation):<br /><br /><blockquote>An important factor in deciding whom to trust, skeptic or proponent, is the question of who appears more reliable. Was it the rather calm proponent Jan Fjellander or the considerably more determined and cocksure skeptic, humanist Christer Sturmark? Who appears more science oriented?</blockquote><br /><br />Apart from the fact that Fjellander is a fellow board member of the SSPR, Parker and Brusewitz make no room for doubt that he is the more trustworthy.<br /> <br />Is the board of Gothenburg University aware that one of its psychology professors, Parker, is publicly promoting appearance as a hallmark of scientific legitimacy? Not scientific method, but social appearance - who is the nicer guy? However revolting this notion might be - held by a man who is allowed to teach students in an higher educational setting - it explains why Parker has refused to answer any questions about the paper he and Brusewitz published in 2003, <em>A Compendium of the Evidence for Psi</em>. Instead of addressing specific inquiries, he has suggested that we all should get along and turn our attention elsewhere, away from his paper. In an act of benevolence, he refered me to, not published research, but a TV show. He added some name dropping and ended up proclaiming insolence since his alleged authority didn't rid him of questions about his claims.<br /><br />But my inclination was all wrong! Asking Parker specific questions about his paper was not in line with scientific reasoning, him trying to be a nice guy was (although I think he failed miserably at that too). Scientific fact does not rest on research and empirical evidence, it is a matter of what people you have socialized with, of how willing you are to neglect research and just be nice. What does it matter that a paper is seriously flawed, as long as we pretend and act as if it isn't? A giftwrapped box of dung is still a gift, isn't it?<br /><br />In Adrian Parkers world of academic make-believe, deceit is perfectly in order - as I have clearly demonstrated, Parker does not hesitate to fabricate and distort the positions held by fellow researchers. Nor does he feel obligated to explain obvious flaws in his own writings (Garvarn, 2007). In every aspect, he resembles the typical crank. The only paranormal phenomena in this context is the fact that Gothenburg University allows him to waste research funds and teach.<br /><br />My previous discussions with Parker suggests that he is the last person to ask for advice on whom to trust, especially regarding science. I would even go as far as stating that the term "science" has no meaning to Parker - he makes it up as he goes along. And if it has some particular meaning, Parker does not have to submit to it.<br /> <br /><span style="font-size:85%;">Garvarn. (2007). Web document: </span><a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/adrian-parkers-fabrication-of-reality.html"><span style="font-size:85%;">Adrian Parker's Fabrication of Reality.Part I: The Delmore Tests</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;">. URL: </span><a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/adrian-parkers-fabrication-of-reality.html"><span style="font-size:85%;">http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/adrian-parkers-fabrication-of-reality.html</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;"><br /></span><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">Parker, A., & Brusewitz, G., (2003). A Compendium of the Evidence for Psi. <em>European Journal of Parapsychology</em>, 18, p. 33-51.<br /></span><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">Parker, A., & Brusewitz, G., (2009, September, 12). Paranormala fenomen långt ifrån tillräckligt utforskade. <em>Dagens Nyheter</em>.</span>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-73460932738700341332009-06-27T01:47:00.004+02:002009-06-27T01:52:53.466+02:00The Men Who Stare at Goats<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHkhRR3HXjh0EqPyt7lF50qpDYbmKZ9wSKe8GrtdFOpYWlMSTXOZBcxbNhXGgJ7z9kUjSEnrVr1cgH1exn8Gy2PlcDx_8nYyANiAIN9vJxQop_ac0wEYmRrACw8z2PFwDTvkKBn8yRHIM/s1600-h/clooney.jpg"><img style="MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 150px; FLOAT: left; HEIGHT: 200px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5351787505515629906" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHkhRR3HXjh0EqPyt7lF50qpDYbmKZ9wSKe8GrtdFOpYWlMSTXOZBcxbNhXGgJ7z9kUjSEnrVr1cgH1exn8Gy2PlcDx_8nYyANiAIN9vJxQop_ac0wEYmRrACw8z2PFwDTvkKBn8yRHIM/s320/clooney.jpg" /></a>It may be old news, but I was happy to see that one of my favourite books is being adapted for the screen. The Men Who Stare at Goats, Jon Ronson's hilarious non-fiction book about a journalist's encounter with the US military's psychic warfare efforts, puts the lunatic remote-viewers claiming military merit in an enlightening context. The movie boasts an impressive all-star line-up with George Clooney, Ewan McGregor, Kevin Spacey and Jeff Bridges, and is scheduled for release in December. If the movie is true to the book, the skeptic movement is up for a real treat this Christmas.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.jonronson.com/news.html">Jon Ronson's website</a>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-55877211896312556692008-08-08T23:35:00.021+02:002010-04-07T18:00:14.703+02:00Mitchell the Lunar Lunatic<div align="center"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwtvFeIZdCNzHblHtqq-Qq4Plb9xoTxG-UsKNJhnsM6obV6nVfayetb7nbTV1ZrjuUc65SskBVJic-Dnl9CDDDMKRivNn8Bli1Zt6IXUUD5pkOdP-hgYnetX0kUCCz59vTAGZBdczfr0k/s1600-h/mitchell.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5232280633050800242" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwtvFeIZdCNzHblHtqq-Qq4Plb9xoTxG-UsKNJhnsM6obV6nVfayetb7nbTV1ZrjuUc65SskBVJic-Dnl9CDDDMKRivNn8Bli1Zt6IXUUD5pkOdP-hgYnetX0kUCCz59vTAGZBdczfr0k/s320/mitchell.jpg" border="0" /></a><br /></div><br />On 4th of July, Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell appeared on the <em>Larry King Live</em> show, stating that aliens have indeed visited Earth. High ranking civilians and military officials told him so. In addition, the Roswell incident was indeed an extraterrestrial vehicle that crashed and since then has been kept in secluded and top-secret care of the US government. The fact that Mitchell knows this and the rest of us don't, is of course due to a massive cover-up by a government conspiracy against Truth and Mankind, a conspiracy embodied in an extremly secret organization called MJ-12, instigated by Harry S. Truman and ordered to take care of the ET matter. Basically, it's the same story that Mitchell has been telling over and over again for years. So the <em>Larry King Live</em> appearance was in no way sensational and American media subsequently did not bother to follow it up. Perhaps they know Mitchell by now.<br /><br />Almost three weeks later, Mitchell repeated the story in an interview on a London radio station. This time, all hell broke loose and he made international headlines. In Sweden, conspiracy fetishist <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2008/07/torbjrn-sasserssons-oyster.html">Torbjörn Sassersson</a> hooked on and started to make accusations against Swedish ufologist organization UFO-Sverige, claiming they are in liaison with the military in keeping the lid on UFO reports. Clas Svahn, head of UFO-Sverige, rebutted referring to an old interview he did with Mitchell. Sassersson immediately counter-attacked with an alleged e-mail correspondence with Mitchell that in essence confirms Svahn's stand, which brings further doubt about Sassersson's state of mind. Once thrown out of the ufologists' forum due to misconduct, Sassersson then applied for a new account and triumphantly announced their reluctancy to grant him one as a sign of fear of his questions. And so the battle goes on, and on...<br /><br />The promotor supreme of Swedish psychics, Mrs Caroline Giertz, is said to have described Sassersson as a terrier; once he gets a grip on something he doesn't let go. That is perhaps a too mild description of the pathological hysteria so often displayed by Sassersson. But Svahn, on the other hand, is far from critical concerning claims of paranormal nature and they both have one thing in common - they glorify Mitchell in a way that is naivë at best and deceptive at worst.<br /><br />Years before Edgar Mitchell embarked on the Apollo 14, he took a trip to woo woo land - on a one-way ticket. Popular myth suggests that he had some kind of revelation in space but in reality, he was a woo woo during his student years and was later baptized into mysticism by Reverend Arthur Ford, the alleged medium who in 1928 claimed to have conveyed a message from the late Harry Houdini to his widow. The Houdini hoax was publicly exposed almost immediately after it was executed but mediums tend to survive such blemishes. Mitchell became friends with Ford in December 1969, perhaps because they shared a common interest in the idea of a rocket-to-earth ESP experiment. Unfortunately, Ford died just weeks before the Apollo 14 launch in 1971 and, incidentally, the nature of his mediumship became more than evident when a multitude of biographical notes and clippings on his sitters, disguised as the "poetry books" he used to read before seances, were discovered. (Christopher, 1975) But by then, Mitchell was probably too busy with space matters to learn from the lesson involuntary given by his friend. Or confirmation biased beyond reproach.<br /><br />In the <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2008/07/olof-jonsson-swedish-swindler.html" target="_new">Olof Jonsson entry</a>, I mentioned the Apollo 14 ESP experiment involving Mitchell as "sender" in space and four psychics - not two, as Svahn (2007) states in <em>Det okända</em> - as "receivers" on earth. The project was Mitchell's private sneak operation. A proposal from the American Society for Psychical Research for a telepathy experiment had been turned down by NASA in 1970, so Mitchell played it safe and kept his plans to himself and those involved.<br /><br />The experiment was of fairly simple design. Christopher explains:<br /><blockquote>Mitchell wrote down two hundred numbers in eight columns of twenty-five numbers each on a piece of paper. The figures, chosen at random, ranged from one to five. The numbers would represent the five ESP symbols in a sequence to be chosen each time he attempted to transmit his thoughts earthward. The receivers were given the days and hours they should be receptive to the images Mitchell hoped would reach them. (Christopher, 1975, p. 106)</blockquote><p></p><p>But things didn't go as planned. The launching of Apollo 14 was forty minutes late so Mitchell's first two "broadcasts" were delayed as well, i.e. the receivers of the first two runs were receiving on the scheduled time without anything being sent. Then Mitchell had to cancel two transmissions but was able to complete the last two on his way back to earth. But Jonsson and one of the anonymous receivers made notes on all six of the planned transmissions. I think you understand where this is going. Due to the first two delayed transmissions, parapsychologists Rhine and Osis, who volunteered to evaluate the "data", decided it was not a test of telepathy, but of precognition. It's a good thing that research design is so flexible... And what about the scores? You may have heard or seen Mitchell stating that the experiment was successful and yilded results of 3000 to 1. Journalist and ufologist Svahn (2007) quotes him stating it, but also refers to Semitjov (1979) who states a somewhat more modest, but still significant, result. Something unusual did happen during the experiment, concludes Svahn.<br /><br />If Svahn had read Mitchell's <em>Psychic Exploration</em>, he would have realized that something unusual happened <em>after</em> the experiment, namely during evaluation. Randi did read Mitchell, and quotes him: </p><blockquote>The results were statistically significant, not because any of the receivers got a large number of direct hits but because the number of hits were so amazingly low. The statistical probability of scoring so few hits was about 3000:1. This negative ESP effect, called "psi-missing", is something that has frequently arisen in other psychic research work, and theorists are attempting to explain its significance. In any case, it offers good evidence for psi, because the laws of chance are bypassed to a significant degree. (Mitchell quoted in Randi, 1982, p. 115)</blockquote><p>Please note that these are Mitchell's own words in his own book. And he is saying that telepathy, or precognition, was abscent during the experiment to such an extent that <em>the absence must be judged as paranormal</em>. That is the truth behind the "3000 to 1" result that Mitchell is flaunting around - the psychics performed remarkably poor! But Mitchell prefers to omit that part of the analysis. And journalists prefer to ignore Mitchell's account in <em>Psychic Exploration</em>. I wonder why...<br /><br />Mitchell left NASA shortly after the Apollo 14 flight and founded the Institute of Noetic Sciences in Palo Alto, California. Its mission was to study theoretical and applied consciousness research and one of Mitchell's first endeavours was to raise funds to bring Uri Geller into the laboratory of the Stanford Research Institute (Christopher, 1975). He met the Israeli con artist at the luxurious home of Dr. Andrija Puharich, who had brought Geller to the US. Puharich and Mitchell then arranged a meeting with Targ and Puthoff, and the rest is pseudoscience history. Initially, Mitchell sat in during the SRI experiments but to his credit, he got frustrated because Targ and Puthoff totally lost controll of the situation, and left (Marks, 2000). Mitchell is, however, a devoted Gellerite, by all accounts. And Uri Geller is still the most exposed fraud in the history of psychical research.<br /><br />For decades now, Edgar Mitchell has proven himself to be an ardent believer in all kinds of mumbo-jumbo. And as a fund raiser for a wide variety of paranormal projects, he has probably flushed more money down the toilet than most people. In assessing his credibility, people unfortunately focus on his space mission - someone who has walked the moon must know what he is talking about! And this blank check of confidence has kept Mitchell in the spotlight far too long, and far too often. Although a moon-pedestrian, the guy is a full-fledged woo woo and doesn't care what is right or wrong. He is willing and able to go to any lengths to promote the notions he feels must be true.<br /><br />Take, for instance, the MJ12 documents. They have been proven forged over and over again (Klass, 2000). Yet Mitchell still refers to them. Why? Because he wants them to be genuine. And because some people will believe whatever he says because he walked the moon and because he tells them what they want to hear. That is what living in woo woo land is like. They make their own rules, and to hell with reality.</p><p>The only lid that is being kept on is the one covering the facts rebutting all the lunacy Mitchell is spreading. And while the likes of Sassersson are sitting on the lid, the likes of Svahn look the other way out of undeserved respect.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><strong>References</strong><br />Christopher, M., (1975). <em>Mediums, Mystics & the Occult</em>. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell<br />Klass, P., (2000). The New Bogus Majestic-12 Documents. In <em>Skeptical Inquirer</em>, May/June 2000. Available online: http://www.csicop.org/si/2000-05/majestic-12.html<br />Marks, D., (2000). <em>Psychology of the Psychic</em>. New York: Prometheus<br />Randi, J., (1982). <em>The Truth About Uri Geller</em>. New York: Prometheus<br />Semitjov, E., (1979). <em>Mellan dröm och verklighet</em>. Askild & Kärnekull<br />Svahn, C., (2007). <em>Det okända. Övernaturliga fenomen från Sverige och världen</em>. Stockholm: Semic</span> </p>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-19558124157715818342008-07-30T00:19:00.029+02:002010-05-14T11:50:42.305+02:00Olof Jonsson - the Swedish Swindler<span style="font-size:85%;">(Download printer friendly PDF of this posting in </span><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/jonsson_a4.pdf"><span style="font-size:85%;">A4 format</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;"> or </span><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/jonsson_letter.pdf"><span style="font-size:85%;">US letter format</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;">.)</span><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRQI9qVvRtOPMCGkU9nZVo4WEfSU_tz-CnlpmdSQ2UjFzDWloBc04IGFSh0319hN6hfsjSTBerajneiWfO5EeqH742Zble0G3DIabx6TbbQD-3dfCnbOICQF_OuVMPsf-E04NDsU-mRMo/s1600-h/trickster03.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5228577029455341762" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRQI9qVvRtOPMCGkU9nZVo4WEfSU_tz-CnlpmdSQ2UjFzDWloBc04IGFSh0319hN6hfsjSTBerajneiWfO5EeqH742Zble0G3DIabx6TbbQD-3dfCnbOICQF_OuVMPsf-E04NDsU-mRMo/s320/trickster03.jpg" border="0" /></a><br /><br />The popularity of physical mediums and spiritualistic seances faded inexorably during the first decades of the 20th century. Most of the prominent psychics were exposed as fraudulent and as some of them confessed and revealed the methods used, business for those remaining wasn't exactly blooming. The reputations of researchers like Sir William Crookes, Charles Richet, Baron von Schrenck Notzing, Sir Oliver Lodge, Henry Sidgwick, Edmund Gurney, Frederic Myers, and Sir William Barrett, were unsparingly blemished when spiritualistic mediums they had once declared genuine now admitted to fraud or were exposed beyond doubt. (Edmunds, 1966; Hansel, 1989)<br /><br />In 1934, Joseph Banks Rhine published <em>Extra-Sensory Perception</em>, in which he described very promising research on telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, and psychokinesis at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. It aroused huge interest among the lay public and the term "ESP" was suddenly on everyone's lips. But the critique was severe, and rightfully so; Rhine's experimental conditions were far from satisfactory (Hansel, 1989). Nevertheless, his work set the standard for modern parapsychology. And the people who claimed contact with the dead were not welcome. Although religiously inclined, Rhine left no laboratory door open for spiritualism. His research subjects were mainly university students. A special group of individuals did however emerge - the birth of modern parapsychology paved the way and introduced an academic label for a new breed of swindlers: "high-scoring subjects".<br /><br />You have probably heard of some of the names. There was Ingo Swann who "remote viewed" the content of boxes by simply peeking into them when no one was looking (Randi, 1982). Bill Delmore made his way into the annals of parapsychology by doing parlour card tricks (Diaconis, 1978). Ted Serios produced "psychic" pictures by holding gadgets in front of camera lenses (Christopher, 1975; Diaconis, 1978). In the Soviet Union, Nina Kulagina was able to move objects by "psychokinesis", i.e. with the help of thin threads and magnets (Björkhem & Johnson, 1986). There was of course Uri Geller, who managed to hoodwink hordes of parapsychologists and gullible scientists. He is probably the most exposed fraudster in history but there are still grown-ups, even on university payroll, who credit him with genuine psychic abilities. Not bad for a con artist.<br /><br />These dexterous and unscrupulous attention-addicts were met by researchers who were gullible and presumptuous, to say the least, by experimental conditions that could be altered or overturned at whim, and by experimental analysis that demanded few successful deceptions to cause "statistical significance". But if the parapsychologists were clowns in the laboratory, they excelled in covering up. Diaconis notes that reports from ESP experiments "are often wholly inadequate" and offer poor record of what has actually taken place (Diaconis, 1978). When Barber suggested that parapsychological research very well could serve as a model to other fields of science regarding stringency and control (Johnson, 1980), it was on the basis of reports, not actual experiments.<br /><br />Into this hodgepodge of deception, delusion and sloppy science entered a flamboyant Swedish psychic in the middle of the 20th century. His name was Olof Jönsson.<br /><br /><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5228580746564204162" hspace="10" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMlpnmQlg8_z-Zmrsra5Dv29eqlyag_28SSRUsGem1Xc1zwl7pwgGAsPJXwHuCeFlUm1LeRx5yh9U-aCiFUmhBWKZ1r5aASfwHoHCngcC-zZOOw_SW4yr3-bnVjAxVBdgb2el9Eybl-m8/s320/ollej.jpg" align="left" border="0" />Most psychics create some sort of interesting background narrative to gloss over their often ordinary and banal descent. In Jönsson's case, the story is passed on by long time friend, Swedish literature professor Olle Holmberg (1968), and American writer Brad Steiger (1971), and it carries the standard elements of mindblowing miracles as everyday fun for the innocent psychic child. Jönsson, born in Malmoe 1918, claimed that he started to experience strange things at the age of seven. At his parental home, he one day discovered, allegedly, that he could make a bottle fall from the table to the floor just by concentrating on it. According to Jönsson, he realized that he could affect lots of objects just by looking at them. He also claimed to have started to dream of events that later occured and that he knew what people were thinking; he could answer questions before they were asked. In school, he didn't need to study because he dreamed up the answers the night before the tests. That no one heard of those miracles when they were performed is astonishing...<br /><br />One of his school teachers is said to have lulled Jönsson into Rosicrucianism. Later, when he was beginning his psychic career, Jönsson used to start his sessions with a lecture on the fundamentals of this branch of mysticism, but he soon gave that up since his audience had more taste for miracles than for ludicrous "wisdom".<br /><br />Jönsson studied engineering and after a couple of odd jobs following his exam in 1941, he was employed as a draftsman at the Monark bicycle manufacturing company in Varberg 1946. By then, he had also dabbled a bit in healing together with a sidekick whose stutter Jönsson claimed to have cured. But it was during his time in Varberg that Jönsson's reputation as a miracle man started to spread. He soon became the pet psychic of a number of influential names in Swedish psychic research. Unfortunately, that doesn't say much since Swedish parapsychology has been, and still is, the playground of woo-woos with or without academic badges. Subsequently, the "experiments" with Jönsson, as described in Holmberg's, Steiger's and other's tributes, were in most cases carried out in the comfort of someone's home, during dinner, in the living-room, or at a restaurant, always in the company of friends and devotees. The feats reported is the standard routine for most mentalist entertainers; a lot of card tricks, identifying apparently random words in "never-before-seen books", and an occasional pullling of bottles with threads. Yes, that's right - Jönsson was performing parlour magic. But he, and his fans, called it "clairvoyance", "telepathy", "psychokinesis", and so on.<br /><br />In 1949, the professor of telephony and telegraphy of the Royal Institute of Technology, Torben Laurent, conducted a series of experiments with Jönsson. Laurent was astonished but could not explain Jönsson's accomplishments with other than it had to be tricks. And again, as you read the "reports", the "experiments", although in an academical setting, are nothing but card tricks. Jönsson was allowed to do exactly what he was doing among friends in their homes; he had full controll over the situation.<br /><br />A couple of years ago, I made notes on several of Jönsson's most common effects. Now, when you describe a magic trick, you have to separate what is being performed by the magician from the effect it has on the audience. The most important psychologichal tool of the magician is <em>misdirection</em>, i.e. leading the audience to look somewhere else when the feat is executed. But the misdirection can also be in time, i.e. the presentation of a trick is done long after it has been executed.<br /><br />The reports on Jönsson's effects are available <em>en masse</em>, but I wanted to find out how some of them could have been produced. I e-mailed a translated compilation of my notes to a very prominent British mentalist, who was kind enough to take the time to read and answer my letter. He admitted he had trouble identifying the exact tricks that would cause the described effects. But not because he didn't know how they had been produced, but because he couldn't decide <em>which of many possible ways to produce the same effect</em> had been used. Every effect, i.e. what the audience experience, often has a multitude of different ways to be accomplished. That is another very important tool of the magician. Never produce an effect the same way twice.<br /><br />Indeed, when magicians were present during Jönsson's "experiments", they had no doubt about what he was doing. At one private dinner party, Erik Truxa and his wife were invited and when Jönsson demonstrated his "telepathy", Truxa immediately duplicated the trick, showing that all it took was some sleight-of-hand (Wikipedia.se, Truxa). Eric Cubis was another magician who debunked Jönsson several times.<br /><br />But the downfall of Jönsson in Sweden was his own doing. In the small village of Tjornarp in the south of Sweden, a murder occupied the police and the national press in November 1951. Mill owner Allan Nilsson was found dead in his bed after a fire had almost burned his house down. During the following investigation, the police soon suspected arson and in the autopsy, the cause of death was found to be severe battery. But the police had no leads and in desperation, one of the many psychics that had announced their interest in the matter was called in - Olof Jönsson.<br /><br /><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5228814573415759522" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" hspace="10" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiow1zUIet709iIudNyEteF9uMn0h_oH5FXUCHAGbHGkd_gRrwSXHDv4ruwXP_ZnJFA7ORDNww-sVYHg3ultmmw-TXg5XmUMljB8LXOtt7sLAIq2vqSUuV7m2gpWAUo2JbthtNgV-P0jOs/s320/ollej01.jpg" align="left" border="0" />Jönsson was confident and stated that he at anytime would be able to disclose who committed the crime, even if the murderer had made his way half around the world. With the help of objects belonging to the victim, Jönsson spent a day trying to "sense" the killer. He was assisted by local police officer Tore Hedin - seen here together with Jönsson who is "feeling" a rifle. The picture was published nationwide and confirmed Jönsson's reputation as a miracle man. But Jönsson was unable to come up with the name of the murderer and the crime remained unsolved for almost a year.<br /><br />On the night of Friday 22 August 1952, local police officer Tore Hedin slew his sleeping parents with an axe in the village of Saxtorp. After having set the house on fire, he proceeded to Hurva village, and a home for old people where his former fiancée was working, and living. He crushed the back of her skull with the axe, in her sleep. The next victim was the manager, who received three blows to the head and died. Hedin dropped the axe, got two cans of gasoline from his car and set the house on fire. Four more people died in the flames.<br /><br />Hedin wrote a suicide note and had some sausages in his car. Then he took a rowing-boat, went out on lake Bosarp, tied some weights to his body, jumped in the water, and drowned himself. He was found on Saturday. In his note, he admitted to having killed mill owner Allan Nilsson the year before. In the following investigation, it was discovered that Hedin had saved a clip with the picture of him and Jönsson during the arson investigation in 1951. The national headlines that followed cunningly mocked the psychic for apparently being too close to the perpetrator (Nilsson, 2008). Jönsson's reputation was wrecked and only the Swedish parapsychologists still had faith in him. With their help, he left for the United States in 1953(Steiger, 1971).<br /><br />In the US, Jönsson got rid of the dots over "o" to make it easier for Americans to pronounce his name. He moved to Chicago, where he found work with the help of an aunt. In Durham, J. B. Rhine had heard about the Swedish miracle man - although I doubt that the Swedish parapsychologists had informed him of Jönsson's assistance in the Hurva murder case or the many fraud exposures - and offered him to come down for testing. Jönsson willingly complied and of his accomplishments at the Rhine laboratories, there are several versions.<br /><br />According to Jönsson (Steiger, 1971), Rhine considered him one of the most talented psychics he had ever tested. His results were so significant that Rhine even asked some research assistants to "adjust" the best ones because they were too good. And Jönsson told his fan club back in Sweden that he was performing well in controlled experiments (SM, 1998). The "tests" he bragged about were those conducted at night, during a stop with the car on a road, or in someone's home (Steiger, 1971) - conditions very far from those prescribed by Rhine as necessary when verifying parapsychological hypotheses (Rhine & Pratt, 1974).<br /><br />Rhine, on the other hand, had a slightly different version. The testing of Jönsson was terminated because he never managed to produce anything convincing. In fact, Rhine noted that Jönsson's performances diminished as controls increased. At an important presentation for a group of scientists, Rhine even caught Jönsson red-handed, when he was about to cheat. Rhine whispered to him:</ br><br />- Ollie, stop that at once!</ br><br />Jönsson blushed, embarrased, and failed miserably with the test. Rhine had also figured out how Jönsson did some of his other "telepathy" card feats. (Semitjov, 1979)<br /><br />Holmberg (1968) notes that both he and Jönsson overestimated the support Jönsson would get from American researchers, so I guess it is safe to conclude that Rhine's version is closer to the truth. But, in fairness, there are some parapsychologists in the States that were completely taken in by Jönsson. Norman Don, for instance, illustrates how completely deluded you can be and still hold an academic title. Although Jönsson died in 1998, Don corresponded with him as late as 2001 (Harrell, 2001). There is also William Cox who readily acknowledged that Jönsson was a fraud but still considered him a "sensitive" (Cox, 1974). Yes, the same Cox who, at the 1976 Parapsychological Association convention in Utrecht, declared that magician Ulf Mörling, who was demonstrating how paranormal phenomena could be accomplished with trickery, was a genuine psychic without knowing it (Johnson, 1980).<br /><br />Jönsson's next big escapade was the telepathy experiment during Apollo 14's space trip in 1971. In short, four psychics on earth were supposed to receive telepathic signals from astronaut Edgar Mitchell in space. The tests failed miserably, of course. In fact, Jönsson's results were so bad the parapsychologists decided it was supernaturally bad, so-called <em>PSI-missing </em>(Randi, 1982). Jönsson even "received" during a day when Mitchell had to cancel "sending" due to other commitments (Semitjov, 1979). What is interesting about this experiment, though, is Jönsson's stunt with the press. NASA had decided that the test, which was Mitchell's private project, should be conducted in secret and it was stipulated that the names of the four psychics not were to be disclosed, they were only to be referred to as A, B, C, and D. But days before Apollo 14 landed, someone leaked to the press and the experiment made big headlines. Only one of the psychics was named. Olof Jönsson. He was psychic A. None of the other psychics have ever been disclosed. According to Mitchell, the leak was Jönsson (Backstrom, 2001). He simply couldn't restrain himself from seizing this opportunity to personal fame and glory.<br /><br />One of many outrageous psychic accomplishments Jönsson claimed was helping adventurer Mel Fisher to find a Spanish galleon with $300,000 (or sometimes $140million) worth of gold in July 1974. The site of the wreck was outside Florida Keys and Jönsson was allegedly able to direct the search team to the spot were the treasure was found (Semitjov, 1979). But no one at Fisher's company - it is still in business, or at the Mel Fisher Maritime Museum, has any recollection of any such assistance or knowledge of a man by the name of "Olof Jönsson" - and some of the people now (or when I contacted them a couple of years ago) working for the company did so back in 1974. In fact, no galleon was even found that year, no major discoveries at all were made. The famous gold treasure and <em>pieces of a ship</em> found in 1985 was the result of a long-time search effort with findings of scattered pieces preceeding it. And Olof Jönsson had nothing to do with it, although he may have claimed that too.<br /><br />The stories about Jönsson led Philippino president Ferdinand Marcos, a certified woo-woo with psychic aspirations of his own, to hire the Swede for a World War II treasure hunt, the gold cargo of a sunken Japanese heavy cruiser, the <em>Nachi</em>. Jönsson's reward, if he found anything, was to be more than generous. This time, Jönsson was sort of lucky. The location was already marked on a map. When a first dive failed, Jönsson insisted that they should try some hundred yards away. Ka-ching, there was the <em>Nachi</em>! Jönsson had actually found war loot using his psychic powers! And a map marked with the location of the wreck... (Seagrave & Seagrave, 2003) On the picture below, Jönsson meets with Marcos.<br /><br /><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5229329205391814402" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGKAGwHyJmrimr69vi7f1UUV8Kts-R7H1c8MwzSBp_gUWchyphenhyphenlBz0Ixpf3g_2fsLpaIei4UYEtjIz77G2EFPNZpuvTcNbi08ot7WIxSei4Bl2J_jf6mYXci1AT9l677YVuOhzFY18Tt31w/s320/ollej02.jpg" border="0" /><br /><br />In closing, perhaps Olof Jönsson's obituary in the Chicago Tribune may serve as a proper summary of his life as a psychic. I quote:<br /><br /><br /><br /><blockquote>Yet Mr. Jonsson did establish an international reputation as a psychic as a young man growing up in his native Sweden. After a small town in Sweden had a series of bizarre murders in which 12 women were brutally slain, police authorities contacted Mr. Jonsson, who had a detailed vision of the crimes and the murderer. After Mr. Jonsson identified the suspect as a young policeman, the officer confessed the crimes in a suicide note. Mr. Jonsson later told the Tribune that the situation disturbed and depressed him, and he swore to never again get involved in solving violent crimes. (McSherry Breslin, 1998) </blockquote><br />Remember Jönsson's complete failure in finding the Hurva murderer, police man Tore Hedin? Well, in the US, Jönsson converted that to a success. He didn't even bother to keep track of essential details, such as the number or gender of the victims, or the fact that Hedin only had slain one person at the time when Jönsson was involved in the investigation. He sometimes counted the victims to thirteen, and claimed that Hedin made a note in his suicide letter that it only was a matter of time until Jönsson would identify him (Semitjov, 1979). No journalist ever bothered to check Jönsson's stories...<br /><br /><br /><p></p><p>Olof Jönsson was a simple trickster, with an amazing career. Next to Uri Geller, he may very well be the swindler that managed to cheat the largest number of parapsychologists ever. Then again, anyone can call him- or herself a parapsychologist. And if you take an interest in these matters called "paranormal", you will soon find that anyone does. </p><p></p><p><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><strong>References<br /></strong>Backstrom, F., (2001). Private Lunar ESP: An Interview with Edgar Mitchell. In <em>Cabinet Magazine</em>, 5. [web document] <a href="http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/5/esp.php">http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/5/esp.php</a><br />Björkhem, Ö., & Johnson, M., (1986). <em>Parapsykologi och övertro</em>. Stockholm: Forum<br />Christopher, M., (1975). <em>Mediums, Mystics & The Occult</em>. New York: Crowell<br />Cox, W. E., (1974). Parapsychology and Magicians. In <em>Parapsychology Review</em>, May-June, pp. 12-14.<br />Diaconis, P., (1978). Statistical Problems in ESP Research. In <em>Science</em>, 201, (14)<br />Edmunds, S., (1966). <em>Spiritualism. A critical Survey</em>. London: Aquarian Press<br />Hansel, C. E. M., (1989). <em>The Search for Psychic Power. ESP & Parapsychology Revisited</em>. New York: Prometheus<br />Harrell, M. A., (2001). <em>Condition Three</em>. [web document] http://www.marharrell.com/Pages/NDon01.html<br />Holmberg, O., (1968). <em>Den osannolika verkligheten</em>. Stockholm: Bonniers<br />Johnson, M., (1980). <em>Parapsykologi</em>. Zindermans<br />McSherry Breslin, M., (1998). Olof Jonsson obituary. In <em>Chicago Tribune</em>, quoted in [web document] http://paranormal.se/topic/olof_jonsson.html<br />Nilsson, K., (2008). Polis - och mördare. Tore Hedin utredde sina egna mord. In <em>Aftonbladet</em>, 9 July.<br />Randi, J., (1982). <em>Flim-Flam. Psychics, ESP, Unicorns and other Delusions</em>. New York: Prometheus<br />Rhine, J. B., & Pratt, J. G., (1974). <em>Parapsychology. Frontier Science of the Mind</em> (5th printing). Springfield: Charles C. Thomas<br />Seagrave, S., & Seagrave, P., (2003). Gold Warriors: America's Secret Recovery of Yamashita's Gold. Verso.<br />Semitjov, E., (1979). <em>Mellan dröm och verklighet</em>. Askild & Kärnekull<br />Steiger, B., (1971). <em>Fallet Olle Jönsson. Ockulta fenomen - parapsykologiska experiment</em>. Zindermans. (Am: <em>The Psychic Feats of Olof Jonsson</em>, Prentice-Hall)<br />SM, (1998). The laws of nature were put out of play. Conversations with Sune Stigsjöö. In <em>Sokaren</em>. [web document] http://www.sokaren.se/INDEX98.HTML<br />Wikipedia.se, article <em>Truxa</em>, [web document] http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truxa</span></p>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-73450728239043950582008-07-19T19:53:00.013+02:002010-05-08T18:47:40.015+02:00Colin Fry revisitedIn August 2007, English psychic Colin Fry signed over charlatan hothouse <a href="http://www.ramsbergsgarden.se/Engelska.htm" target="_new">Ramsbergsgarden</a>, Sweden, to Jane Lyzell and her spouse. Lyzell served as Fry's sidekick during his time in Sweden (see <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/on-colin-fry-is-small-fry-big-fish.html">Is the Small Fry a Big Fish?</a>) In a way, it's a shame that Fry's Swedish engagement has been reduced. After all, he brought a bit of class and style to the Swedish psychic scene. Now we are left with nasty rabble like Terry Evans, Jörgen "Cry Baby" Gustafsson, Elisabeth Lannge, and of course the absolute scrapings, Jane Lyzell.<br /><br />As a tribute to Fry, it would be nice to revisit a definite highlight in his career -- the trumpet incident. I know he has made everything he can to pass this occasion to oblivion, but it is such a great moment I just have to repeat the story again. I do it in form of the actual article in <em>Psychic News</em> that broke the news to the world. Just click the following images to open high resolution versions in new windows. As an extra bonus, I've added an image of Colin Fry playing around with so called ectoplasm at the bottom. What a great showman, what a great fraud - enjoy!<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYn9f2ZZC1V8Vj4nUcCx_wA5W7WjkdEFeS_SJ93hhpqpZBU1fY-G4Gpy8yOYr-O3e0bZNgyhIyJm4Lpnt4O1LXeU8ItzdW7SYJxrs9OuSh6XmPlMt01O3f76OjCLdplaj8U9T64CRYnuc/s1600/cfrykd2.jpg"><img style="TEXT-ALIGN: center; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 140px; DISPLAY: block; HEIGHT: 200px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5468940827395430978" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYn9f2ZZC1V8Vj4nUcCx_wA5W7WjkdEFeS_SJ93hhpqpZBU1fY-G4Gpy8yOYr-O3e0bZNgyhIyJm4Lpnt4O1LXeU8ItzdW7SYJxrs9OuSh6XmPlMt01O3f76OjCLdplaj8U9T64CRYnuc/s200/cfrykd2.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><br /><center><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5224788343872763266" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhF7kxAugg-KClhjysDXQ3ANUYgh7bLVHeeHHwNXHnAK5DU4M3hB4knbPh5yVURyXBdvdp0xCijHRyuSYkhZb3H37KjVAJ1qDc804nbZVfyAPdF3h9zDsGM1YBMb9hJtlaOyZAFF-tz4Rw/s320/fryecto.jpg" /></center>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-61248275203593206282008-07-18T17:30:00.013+02:002008-07-18T17:47:34.345+02:00BannersSomeone requested a banner so here are some models. Just right-click and choose "Save image as" to download it to your computer. The link URL is <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/">http://garvarn.blogspot.com/</a><br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6TpJJ3ZKLUDq8f0f5qQ4KPO8NKc8wnZ3MgQ04a5OUhI68ZSPgpLAcvpZff5VSLPfgf70Xlza_093nF0KDdYGtFh4OgPwsXXf5HpPIkfrdV2elvYC2I8G9tUhH4Mjof7a96E9CwfI87sM/s1600-h/ga88x31.gif"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5224379328818666946" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6TpJJ3ZKLUDq8f0f5qQ4KPO8NKc8wnZ3MgQ04a5OUhI68ZSPgpLAcvpZff5VSLPfgf70Xlza_093nF0KDdYGtFh4OgPwsXXf5HpPIkfrdV2elvYC2I8G9tUhH4Mjof7a96E9CwfI87sM/s320/ga88x31.gif" border="0" /></a><br />88x31<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFYQ0KDforji0Y8XZM9L2OCWRAK2w4wLtyF5oNvBpxbs-g0_w5gTGIlmVTjnu9xKmhWftzI7bb3sLen7ENmR37Xg24jSzjtdKBFnovZIriOCsZhsoIcmfDv2Gl5HiTBkWVyUye_LYccXY/s1600-h/ga120x60.gif"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5224379182606424690" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFYQ0KDforji0Y8XZM9L2OCWRAK2w4wLtyF5oNvBpxbs-g0_w5gTGIlmVTjnu9xKmhWftzI7bb3sLen7ENmR37Xg24jSzjtdKBFnovZIriOCsZhsoIcmfDv2Gl5HiTBkWVyUye_LYccXY/s320/ga120x60.gif" border="0" /></a><br />120x60<br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPgLiqLa88h6lx4mdTElbxEDwok7scUpEVkc6Qt3uNcXfm6MokB0yQIwnmH9dnMmyHSb-WJtjoDcqaH3_50JoGaNuvP_ZOl6seaoYc_-S94ZCgdm9wmkL-5Yfvyrt8KJ5VzWGSkqSZzvw/s1600-h/ga120x90.gif"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5224379062715791026" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPgLiqLa88h6lx4mdTElbxEDwok7scUpEVkc6Qt3uNcXfm6MokB0yQIwnmH9dnMmyHSb-WJtjoDcqaH3_50JoGaNuvP_ZOl6seaoYc_-S94ZCgdm9wmkL-5Yfvyrt8KJ5VzWGSkqSZzvw/s320/ga120x90.gif" border="0" /></a><br />120x90<br /><br /><div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGgR9MIkPg8SFkyq3Dtns0Qi0a9sC06lNvIXSZcxIzw365e7jLaDgF9GG-2Jc-gt6PUr_wZCC862QkbgjxMM2neH6DhCg_3k-ebShiye7HxwWwrvGXPCqdgO_UEPo1Io8nbtQgcCeklw8/s1600-h/ga120x240.gif"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5224378886041278754" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGgR9MIkPg8SFkyq3Dtns0Qi0a9sC06lNvIXSZcxIzw365e7jLaDgF9GG-2Jc-gt6PUr_wZCC862QkbgjxMM2neH6DhCg_3k-ebShiye7HxwWwrvGXPCqdgO_UEPo1Io8nbtQgcCeklw8/s320/ga120x240.gif" border="0" /></a><br />120x240<br /><br /><div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgJiUnV5RxT79d50vZIeEfzyQpWizSHQYgdOg9jx6JbjoYrZq3unWtvOhyLdcQFtqdFiFY8gY2eQRNGLDHYB7bpsOuU3Frl759gAEyVgB2QEJc1eg2yACxe9Ipm0cUCm2-UHeKhQQci7E/s1600-h/ga125x125.gif"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5224378725758538818" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgJiUnV5RxT79d50vZIeEfzyQpWizSHQYgdOg9jx6JbjoYrZq3unWtvOhyLdcQFtqdFiFY8gY2eQRNGLDHYB7bpsOuU3Frl759gAEyVgB2QEJc1eg2yACxe9Ipm0cUCm2-UHeKhQQci7E/s320/ga125x125.gif" border="0" /></a><br />125x125<br /><br /><div><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgn2fMVOEMTXdZ9uoFPQ4bAIMkQbtiNq3lOD-VoF4FURrwO8jZUBll1OuZv1APOettgpgh87YibMzYdQcoj1uZtO43PjzeF1UkE_-XC5wWC9BEHOMaNKTfSaZ7fpqBiC1HbdhGJxZTemPc/s1600-h/ga234x60.gif"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5224378574262818514" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgn2fMVOEMTXdZ9uoFPQ4bAIMkQbtiNq3lOD-VoF4FURrwO8jZUBll1OuZv1APOettgpgh87YibMzYdQcoj1uZtO43PjzeF1UkE_-XC5wWC9BEHOMaNKTfSaZ7fpqBiC1HbdhGJxZTemPc/s320/ga234x60.gif" border="0" /></a><br />234x60<br /><br /><br /></div></div></div>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-33348056719517931282008-07-14T14:28:00.002+02:002008-07-16T23:50:16.404+02:00Jane Lyzell knows<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhADNH-3mKkrVRioBsHGez4u0hSXqxe-3uaTtypG5DHP8f358A5DS2-da_iGir_4ebtLJu7ofFl3fuaNgOt9KHhq6PJt6TPL2nNSvvgESvwsbOpeEI0GoPOWip2-VuJfeblKvTk_5J6-00/s1600-h/lyzell.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5223732210925606866" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhADNH-3mKkrVRioBsHGez4u0hSXqxe-3uaTtypG5DHP8f358A5DS2-da_iGir_4ebtLJu7ofFl3fuaNgOt9KHhq6PJt6TPL2nNSvvgESvwsbOpeEI0GoPOWip2-VuJfeblKvTk_5J6-00/s320/lyzell.jpg" border="0" /></a> Ooops, I just noticed that Jane Lyzell, former sidekick of trumpet-swinging British fraud <a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/on-colin-fry-is-small-fry-big-fish.html">Colin Fry</a>, claims that the facts are already there for you to find, if you just bother to check. But she is not willing to back up her claim with links, since this generation lives in "syberspayce" (I think it means "cyberspace"). The right thing to do, according to Lyzell, is to search for knowledge in our libraries and ask psychics. Then you will discover the real facts! Indeed, Helen Duncan was tested! (And was declared an obvious fraud, but I think Lyzell missed that shelf.) Anyway, in an act of benevolence, Lyzell suggests an old title from 1922 by Björke. I happen to have it and it's the standard anecdotal stories being repeated over and over again on the internet, with the exception of a few Scandinavian cases. But since she is devoted to books, there are some titles I would like to suggest for her to read:<br /><br />"A Beginners Guide to the Swedish Language"<br /><br />"Hair-care for Dummies"<br /><br />"Sociopathy and hysteria combined? How to adapt to social contexts."<br /><br />I'm sure Lyzell will find them if she just bothers to check...Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-22651769109106943292008-07-14T13:40:00.003+02:002008-07-23T15:38:13.490+02:00Psychic and brain incompatible?<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcBJm4g68eGiUS26eYFx5W59dea6h04H0WlVadAJVazPycs2Qibu6_mPzEVMiwFdQbvhkycegYqb7A-sdePwfQKdLh7nZgpHbjn4KGHjNvCA3qjslOEykSg4PBxe-VvrrADV0TIMMeVyM/s1600-h/johan.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5226202476982302514" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" hspace="10" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcBJm4g68eGiUS26eYFx5W59dea6h04H0WlVadAJVazPycs2Qibu6_mPzEVMiwFdQbvhkycegYqb7A-sdePwfQKdLh7nZgpHbjn4KGHjNvCA3qjslOEykSg4PBxe-VvrrADV0TIMMeVyM/s320/johan.jpg" align="left" vspace="10" border="0" /></a> Mr Johan Lundberg, the "psychic in training" that was thrown out of the Swedish <em>Psychic Challenge</em> by his peers in 2007 and since have been somewhat unobtrusive, is now calling out for a power demonstration by Swedish psychics who claim to be able to aid the police in finding missing persons. According to Lundberg, or <em>Manthrax</em> as he also calls himself, such a demonstration would be possible through "some sort of test". That is, Lundberg doesn't know how the test is to be designed. He just knows that a test may show skeptics the power of psychic ability "once and for all". Apparently, the multitude of cases of missing persons so far has not been ample opportunity for psychics to prove their abilities "once and for all". As psychics tend to shower police switchboards with "insights" as soon as a case makes headlines, you would have expected some success by now. There has been none. Zip. Zero. Nada.<br /><br />However, as a demonstration of pure delusion, Lundberg's initiative is very illustrating indeed...Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-65676784479380019812008-07-12T01:57:00.001+02:002010-05-08T18:52:20.225+02:00Holy Crap! Or Myrna Nazzour - the Miracle Faker of Damascus<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5__qDGQa66JgT-31Eu8XODWlw99Kdc5VeFkrfWoJEAc4vBMe7_UEx4vXj27uCPj_7vjLp5LHbL8sexMXI3ind49uc9BWQlO2x8VuDtAyCS7PKl-9airyX9_mQduMUlr77rb7NLJ6-GMI/s1600-h/nazzour10.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5222100546405144546" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5__qDGQa66JgT-31Eu8XODWlw99Kdc5VeFkrfWoJEAc4vBMe7_UEx4vXj27uCPj_7vjLp5LHbL8sexMXI3ind49uc9BWQlO2x8VuDtAyCS7PKl-9airyX9_mQduMUlr77rb7NLJ6-GMI/s320/nazzour10.jpg" /></a><br /><br />Take a look at the objects below. The first is the Holy Lance that is kept in the Schatzkammer of Vienna. Allegedly, this is the spear that was used to pierce Jesus on the cross. There are of course other relics like it and we don't even know for certain that the story of the crucifixion - or Jesus for that matter - is anything more than religious myth. But for our purpose, it is sufficient that if the incident took place at the time suggested, and if Jesus was pierced by a Roman spearhead, it would a have been roughly similar to the one below in shape.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgB2YXYqmrNXPi7wMA3iDY7Rnvy5_7PLB1YetIELdCpjqvHzpZ9eUUZdA-O8ffAzOoMYyFyHjMfuoegy9wU39EQ-BeMNUU0lRMcfwIwslxHN3gQ8KpVD_w5iVXJ4T98Zcvp4rZop14crDk/s1600-h/stigpic1.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5221910396857045986" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgB2YXYqmrNXPi7wMA3iDY7Rnvy5_7PLB1YetIELdCpjqvHzpZ9eUUZdA-O8ffAzOoMYyFyHjMfuoegy9wU39EQ-BeMNUU0lRMcfwIwslxHN3gQ8KpVD_w5iVXJ4T98Zcvp4rZop14crDk/s320/stigpic1.jpg" /></a><br /><br />What kind of wound would such a spear produce? What would a wound from a Roman spear look like? Painters and other artists have imagined and depicted it for centuries and if you google for "stab wound" or "knife wound", perhaps you can get a general idea. Now, would it look like on the picture below?<br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjboHXFEGPGGqAoWObPrdc-CivjAYPjxHUWV4T6NjLhfU1HSIvyUl8SaX0syKaJqvuo4dmG6g7gRXbSzruit7fYWkG9klTi8L3hs5ZDNQ9vZX3ejlvelUhPV1Ya8BO1bzl5lr2PmwmcTGA/s1600-h/nazzour2.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5222476248630115586" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjboHXFEGPGGqAoWObPrdc-CivjAYPjxHUWV4T6NjLhfU1HSIvyUl8SaX0syKaJqvuo4dmG6g7gRXbSzruit7fYWkG9klTi8L3hs5ZDNQ9vZX3ejlvelUhPV1Ya8BO1bzl5lr2PmwmcTGA/s320/nazzour2.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><br />As you can see, this is not a cut and it is not an open wound. The shape of this wound to the side of the chest is irregular so it has not been produced by a blade pushed into the body and then pulled out. And even if the blade had been turned and twisted during the penetration, it would have produced a wound with totally different irregularities - and something of a mess. In addition, alongside the wound in the picture, there is coloring of the skin suggesting that it has been scratched rather than pierced. I think it is fair to say that a) this wound is not caused by a Roman spear and b) this wound is not what you would imagine that such a wound would look like. Why these two alternatives are equally important, I will explain later on.<br /><br />The next object is a replica of a Roman nail as they were designed during the time of Jesus. It is fairly safe to say that nails had to be quite large and look something like this to hold a body in place on a cross. And it is a fact that crucifixions were Roman practice at the time.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhXNb3BN94vl5MfHAFQ3c-TpwjCRsRE02ny5qdk34HyLXwnnpSllYOxgK_0yIkClMhFDzXFOH3VO2AZO0A0ml8ITL1aXPCEAtiU3yR5INO2oCK7wxCoo0-ieL11ZUe8MEZohHISDgJ3sQ/s1600-h/stigpic2.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5221910839427385330" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhXNb3BN94vl5MfHAFQ3c-TpwjCRsRE02ny5qdk34HyLXwnnpSllYOxgK_0yIkClMhFDzXFOH3VO2AZO0A0ml8ITL1aXPCEAtiU3yR5INO2oCK7wxCoo0-ieL11ZUe8MEZohHISDgJ3sQ/s320/stigpic2.jpg" /></a><br /><br />We don't really know if it was the palm of the hand or the wrist that was spiked, or if the feet were penetrated on the instep or through the heel. Some suggest that the arms were tied to the cross with ropes. Regardless of which, you should be able to imagine what kind of wound a Roman nail would cause. And keep in mind that the nails were not withdrawn right after the penetration, but stayed in place for at least one or a couple of days. Now, is it probable that the wounds pictured below were caused by Roman nails?<br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi62Z2RrKLWap0TVN01_AN6i2ltB1Br1Byl3ZDMpSHF3L64dNG3hGWgQOknWiWOtPU3v09drTQEJPwiHsmmQv9hkbArl9vPl4pYU-AmudIQBtJ3fiXb5PD4FzbR3eX3wfzUiA_lDT60Fng/s1600-h/nazzour1.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5222831773387515938" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi62Z2RrKLWap0TVN01_AN6i2ltB1Br1Byl3ZDMpSHF3L64dNG3hGWgQOknWiWOtPU3v09drTQEJPwiHsmmQv9hkbArl9vPl4pYU-AmudIQBtJ3fiXb5PD4FzbR3eX3wfzUiA_lDT60Fng/s320/nazzour1.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhSkn4P-MGsQKIyQ_TpIxp89UdQkJkCXH_16oLeOA9T7XdKmi38AOoPfizGCgO7KooOS_2Amw1hXKKoT3NZh84uQVkZDT12APLyfgEjS5Vk_VkFbfXQVWU7Q1Tc9iacsOUiNc-vrZjYX4/s1600-h/nazzour11.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5222860229952625698" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhSkn4P-MGsQKIyQ_TpIxp89UdQkJkCXH_16oLeOA9T7XdKmi38AOoPfizGCgO7KooOS_2Amw1hXKKoT3NZh84uQVkZDT12APLyfgEjS5Vk_VkFbfXQVWU7Q1Tc9iacsOUiNc-vrZjYX4/s320/nazzour11.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><br />If you saw these wounds out of context, would you suggest they were caused by a thick nail having been pierced through the limbs? Of course not. They are similar in type to the chest wound, only shorter. It is likely that these palm and instep wounds derive from the same source and it is fair to say that a) these wounds are not caused by Roman nails and b) these wounds are not what you would imagine that such wounds would look like.<br /><br />Jesus is said to have been wearing a crown of thorn. The image below is just a costume replica and it is of course impossible to know exactly what such a headgear would have looked like but we do know thorn and it could have looked something like this. We can be certain that it would have had lots of thorns, since crucifixion and everything pertaining to it was intended to cause as much pain as possible, for as long time as possible.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiW7vDrzPPgmoGmaOIyDFUEhAQXZBSSRchVF1fiwhfVEFyGwz6RkGFXm9QxYQhevZHLeTEmVGkxgPKN1jjCWIyEI-gtZDiZo8KxKuJI2IAQxx4sjL_DDyODhyphenhyphenu2mjJQl1Sc83LFGUHkv34/s1600-h/thorn.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5222876208538459714" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiW7vDrzPPgmoGmaOIyDFUEhAQXZBSSRchVF1fiwhfVEFyGwz6RkGFXm9QxYQhevZHLeTEmVGkxgPKN1jjCWIyEI-gtZDiZo8KxKuJI2IAQxx4sjL_DDyODhyphenhyphenu2mjJQl1Sc83LFGUHkv34/s320/thorn.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><br />Would a crown of thorn produce wounds like on the picture below?<br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgJWI25qLWhoFhPvZCPNJzTCOQhwW6bhqpnxy2R5YKgMnZ2gz7kcwpjWuyi44B9Tdy46885OqjOnu_UiCteLt4g_rEQQKWbstVnQh_VqULM7PYBrqdy5H39kQvKPPwb2b2W8YBpTXFgZIY/s1600-h/nazzour6.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5222880133751500706" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgJWI25qLWhoFhPvZCPNJzTCOQhwW6bhqpnxy2R5YKgMnZ2gz7kcwpjWuyi44B9Tdy46885OqjOnu_UiCteLt4g_rEQQKWbstVnQh_VqULM7PYBrqdy5H39kQvKPPwb2b2W8YBpTXFgZIY/s320/nazzour6.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><br />This time, it's hard to tell because of the blood. But if you look carefully you see that just above where the blood seems to spring from, there is a scratch or irritation of the skin close to the wound. You can also see that there is only one wound, perhaps with the other, upper scratch being a failed attempt. But there are no other wounds around the head, just the one at the center of the forehead. So this stigmata corresponds with a crown of thorn <em>with only one thorn. </em>It is fair to say that a) this wound is not caused by a crown of thorn and b) this wound is not what you would imagine that such wounds would look like.<br /><br />All the objects above are essential to the myth of the crucifixion of Jesus, and to the phenomena of stigmata, the appearance of bodily wounds, or sensing of pain, in locations corresponding to the wounds of Jesus on the cross. Apart from nail wounds to the palms and feet, a spear wound to the chest area or abdomen, and marks from the crown, stigmatics may also show wounds to the shoulders from carrying the cross or sweating or crying blood. The phenomena is regarded as a sign from God and stigmatic persons tend to be canonized by religious believers and sometimes even by the church - such a miracle is of course only displayed by someone who is pure in heart and faith.<br /><br />There are three major suggested explanations for the phenomena of stigmata:<br /><br />1. Wounds or other signs are produced by a suggested supreme being.<br /><br />2. Wounds or other signs are produced through self-suggestion, i.e. the "victim" inflicts the wounds him- or herself by power of suggestion. The stigmatic has such a strong faith that it effects the physiology.<br /><br />3. Wounds or other signs are faked.<br /><br />In our case, the first option must be considered totally out of the question. If a supreme being would have the power to inflict wounds, it would surely not restrain itself to scratches -- we would see wounds that actually resemble what wounds would look like if they were caused by the objects suggested. In our case, they don't. Not by a long shot.<br /><br />There is scientific evidence that lends support to the second option. There are studies suggesting that dermatological changes can occur as a result of suggestion (Spanos & Chaves, 1989). However, not in any case have such changes been in the form of scratches. Blisters, warts, hemorrhages, or burns may appear, but never scratches.<br /><br />So none of the wounds above look like what might be expected if they were inflicted by a supreme being, or what might be expected if our imagination was aided by strong suggestion and the skin subject to change in accordance.<br /><br />That leaves us with the third option: fake.<br /><br />Myrna Nazzour of Damascus, Syriah, is stigmatic. The wounds you have seen so far are all pictures of Myrna. She is a fake. All her wounds appear when she is hiding under a blanket. Although there are a lot of footage of her, not one sequence shows a wound actually appearing. Myrna's case is similar to that of Therese Neumann, another stigmata faker (Spanos & Chaves, 1989).<br /><br />In fairness, Myrna's wounds do derive from Jesus, just not in the way they are supposed to. Under the blanket, Myrna uses her crucifix pendant to produce the wounds. That is why she needs a blanket and that is why she keeps twisting and turning under it. That is why the wounds look like they have been caused by an object with features like those of a crucifix pendant.<br /><br />Crucifix pendants are designed to hang from necklaces. They come in different sizes and models but the three pictured below are fairly common.<br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkR2bGYeYDr7wwT1rCIQcnmqBlp1phFjPGZCH8ODK_7ENJrAuvQHVUaejFvH90SUvJqZ3F-dSMzteYPe_W4t5u0VDoTXejCmgZhsiq-52Caf7ekUlb0iVckrZ8CdQ2oNlLVrxRYbLPJVo/s1600-h/stigpic4.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5222898141794210290" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkR2bGYeYDr7wwT1rCIQcnmqBlp1phFjPGZCH8ODK_7ENJrAuvQHVUaejFvH90SUvJqZ3F-dSMzteYPe_W4t5u0VDoTXejCmgZhsiq-52Caf7ekUlb0iVckrZ8CdQ2oNlLVrxRYbLPJVo/s320/stigpic4.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><br />These pendants each have at least four points that would produce wounds such as Myrna's. There are the ends of the cross itself and then there is the attachment to the necklace. The ends of the cross can very easily be sharpened without making it visibly obvious. As you can see on the following pictures, Myrna wears her pendant at every time the wounds appear under the blanket. (Feel free to browse the internet for more pictures and footage.)<br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEir3odHTSkjLYT6zO7zaQSHEhyr-VwSYEkiGQFmQf-zTBL0OouEQmX4MPzxwmtUBgCYlzFnVE7juepccqNQSG97r95NdbqEWKyhF8pG2WXB3-0Vt06hEgDaM572f_jixy9slIFF75pbxEY/s1600-h/nazzour7.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5222904432081814946" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEir3odHTSkjLYT6zO7zaQSHEhyr-VwSYEkiGQFmQf-zTBL0OouEQmX4MPzxwmtUBgCYlzFnVE7juepccqNQSG97r95NdbqEWKyhF8pG2WXB3-0Vt06hEgDaM572f_jixy9slIFF75pbxEY/s320/nazzour7.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizSBE7ggi_LoKh9hg1gzAC6GlnrPrU3bNJxB7IUR5by3bXG6qwApCKwGQacrIbtJLFAGvLz8hlf8omY9oTx7uQoY4xAi4yW7pYnmL4g53AFS2P018U45YkldJs_rWg1hCUaEQPqc8dpA8/s1600-h/nazzour8.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5222905372344509474" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizSBE7ggi_LoKh9hg1gzAC6GlnrPrU3bNJxB7IUR5by3bXG6qwApCKwGQacrIbtJLFAGvLz8hlf8omY9oTx7uQoY4xAi4yW7pYnmL4g53AFS2P018U45YkldJs_rWg1hCUaEQPqc8dpA8/s320/nazzour8.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6m1-F42WIlDBhkFlPW1Ho8YgFJw0ElTS4xJ3X-_2s1achKey2vu7y4TQR3R4TGErBh912WOPiZgOvR9tI-7MdJFTeCAdcJzkJ_wy7yfchdY378djW1Jdh4c3EOCuzyYH5QOfsjEkwrqc/s1600-h/nazzour9.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5222905889201385154" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6m1-F42WIlDBhkFlPW1Ho8YgFJw0ElTS4xJ3X-_2s1achKey2vu7y4TQR3R4TGErBh912WOPiZgOvR9tI-7MdJFTeCAdcJzkJ_wy7yfchdY378djW1Jdh4c3EOCuzyYH5QOfsjEkwrqc/s320/nazzour9.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><br />If the pendant doesn't show, it is concealed under Myrna's clothes. This is evident when you watch the following movie clip:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.soufanieh.com/MULTIMEDIA/2004.04.SWEDEN/20040412.swe.swe-eng-ara.tv3.strix.part3-3.wmv" target="_new">[Movie clip: watch closely from about 03:35 into the film]</a> (opens in new window)<br /><br />What you see in this clip is how a hand removes the crucifix pendant to make the wound visible. This tells us two things: if the necklace and pendant doesn't show, it is concealed under Myrna's clothes, and the necklace is of such length that it is more than possible for Myrna to produce wounds below her breasts.<br /><br />This movie is the third part of a Swedish TV3 documentary, <em>Reportage</em>, televised 16 September 2004. Along with the TV-team, there was a team of Nordic scientists present at Easter that year, monitoring Myrna and the event. The research team was headed by Norwegian cardiothoracic surgeon Knut Kvernebo. No wounds appeared when the researchers were present, but when they all went shopping on the last day, a wound of course appeared. What a proud moment for the scientific community when research is conducted in this way. And what a proud moment for the Swedish skeptics, the VoF, when their chairman at the time, Dan Larhammar, suggests in an interview that the wounds may be caused by bacteria or blood vessels starting to bleed spontaneosly. Larhammar illustrates perfectly the fallacy of misplaced rationalism as described by Sheaffer in the July/August issue of <em>Skeptical Inquirer</em>:<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><em>"Before suggesting such a bizarre and complex yet still ultimately rational explanation, it would be more rational to inquire whether there is really any mystery in need of explaining."</em> (Sheaffer, 2008)</span><br /><br />In the case of Myrna Nazzour, there is no mystery - she is using jewelry to scratch her skin. It is obvious to anyone that cares to look. There is no need for far-fetched explanations. Skeptics that are afraid to state that fakers are fakers should not comment on fakers.<br /><br />The simple and obvious explanation for Myrna Nazzour's alleged stigmata is this:<br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigz1fqkgU2tNgngqW1GCIROA63rIojdKXvkmdjN4vvKZDmJ9SEkjf20t1uA7X7_yXVQ6sACsQ1_St-gma4i3RcrwXxldroBzokHzgkYKGxMB-xRnki36h_WC6udxslGHO0J3-7huG_ln8/s1600-h/nazzour12.jpg"><img style="CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5223045537277550146" border="0" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigz1fqkgU2tNgngqW1GCIROA63rIojdKXvkmdjN4vvKZDmJ9SEkjf20t1uA7X7_yXVQ6sACsQ1_St-gma4i3RcrwXxldroBzokHzgkYKGxMB-xRnki36h_WC6udxslGHO0J3-7huG_ln8/s320/nazzour12.jpg" /></a><br /><br /><br />And should Myrna be deprived of her jewelry, and if her nails were checked properly, no wounds would appear. That such precautions are not taken by a research team is an outrage. The scientist's "testimonies" that they have "no explanation" for the wounds displayed by Myrna are now flaunted all over the internet in support for "miracles" that are nothing but fraud. Knut Kvernebo has prostituted science for the benefit of superstition. Hallelujah...<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">Swedish TV3 documentary: </span><a href="http://www.soufanieh.com/MULTIMEDIA/2004.04.SWEDEN/20040412.swe.swe-eng-ara.tv3.strix.part1-3.wmv" target="_new"><span style="font-size:85%;">Part 1</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;">, </span><a href="http://www.soufanieh.com/MULTIMEDIA/2004.04.SWEDEN/20040412.swe.swe-eng-ara.tv3.strix.part2-3.wmv" target="_new"><span style="font-size:85%;">Part 2</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;">, </span><a href="http://www.soufanieh.com/MULTIMEDIA/2004.04.SWEDEN/20040412.swe.swe-eng-ara.tv3.strix.part3-3.wmv" target="_new"><span style="font-size:85%;">Part 3</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;">.<br /><br />Sheaffer, R., (2008). The Fallacy of Misplaced Rationalism in <em>Skeptical Inquirer</em>, 32, (4).<br /><br />Spanos, N. P., & Chaves, J. F., (1989). <em>Hypnosis. The Cognitive-Behavioral Perspective</em>. New York: Prometheus.</span>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com48tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-60469152739170326582008-07-10T20:32:00.002+02:002010-05-14T11:51:40.700+02:00Look into my eyes, look into my eyes...<span style="font-size:85%;">(Download printer friendly PDF of this posting in </span><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/eyes_a4.pdf"><span style="font-size:85%;">A4 format</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;"> or </span><a href="http://skeptikerpodden.se/garvarn/eyes_letter.pdf"><span style="font-size:85%;">US letter format</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;">.)</span><br /><br /><p>Let's say, hypothetically, that you suffer from skin disorder, anorexia, bulimia, obsessive compulsive disorder, obsessional neurosis, post traumatic stress disorder, asthma, allergy, tinnitus, migraine, depression, phobia, or anxiety. Or perhaps you want to quit smoking, ejaculate later rather than sooner, or stop sucking your thumb. If you had one or more of these health-care problems and wanted to get rid of it or them, would you call Jörgen Sundvall or Zoe D. Katze?<br /></p><p>You probably don't know anything about them, but let me assure you that they both have documented qualifications to treat your problem or disorder. Jörgen Sundvall holds diplomas in hypnotherapy from both HCB in England and ISEAH in Ireland. He's also a member of both the International Association of Hypnoanalysts and the Irish Association of Hypnoanalysts. Zoe D. Katze on the other hand, is a psychotherapy Diplomate in the American Psychotherapy Association and has been certified as a hypnotherapist by the American Board of Hypnotherapy, the International Medical and Dental Hypnotherapy Association, and the National Guild of Hypnotists. Does this information make your choice easier? Both Sundvall and Katze have impressive credentials, but you may be leaning towards Katze. In comparison, she appears to have a more solid background, being certified and all. She holds a Ph.D, a C.Ht., and a DAPA. Very impressive indeed.<br /></p><p>But what if I told you that Zoe D. Katze is a cat? And I mean it literally - Zoe D. Katze is a <em>felis silvestris catus</em>, a furry animal that has long tail, sharp claws and often is kept as a pet. However, there is nothing wrong with Zoe's credentials, they are all issued in her name, and she is listed as a practitioner in therapist registries. When a reporter found "Dr. Zoe D. Katze" in such a registry and called her to get her opinion on hypnosis in childbirthing, Zoe's owner, Steve K. D. Eichel, felt compelled to disclose the trick he had played on some organsiations he considered a bit too generous when handing out credentials. I won't give you the whole Zoe story here, but I urge you to take the time and read it at <a href="http://www.dreichel.com/Articles/Dr_Zoe.htm">http://www.dreichel.com/Articles/Dr_Zoe.htm</a>. </p><p><br />By now, you probably have made your mind up. Let's face it, credentials aside, Jörgen Sundvall is at least <em>homo sapiens</em>! Surely, you would prefer being treated by a human rather than a household pet!? But before you make your final decision, let me tell you about Jörgen Sundvall.<br /></p><p>First, let's check his credentials. A diploma from HCB -- what does it represent? HCB stands for Hypnotherapy Control Board. However, when you visit http://www.hypnotherapy-control-board.org, you soon realize that it isn't a "board" at all and it doesn't "control" anything. HCB is actually the Successful Hypnotherapy Diploma Course. But when you visit http://www.successfulhypnotherapy.com, you arrive at the International Association of Pure Hypnoanalysts, IAPH. Confusing, isn't it? Well, if we ignore the name juggling we find that this is a course, and an association that is comprised of people who have completed the course. So when you finish the Successfull Hypnotherapy Diploma Course, you get a HCB diploma and a IAPH membership. Two credentials in one. Why? Simply because two merits look better than one. And to the lay person, "International Association of Pure Hypnoanalysts" sounds just like an organisation of independent professionals, formed to manifest professional practice and code of ethics -- a sort of health-care professional's guarantee. But in this case, it only manifests that the members have completed a course.<br /></p><p>So what profound education is necessary to achieve these impressive titles? What kind of hard studies have Jörgen Sundvall undertaken and what qualifications did he have in order to enrol?<br />To become qualified to treat phobias, compulsive disorders, neurosis and depressions, Jörgen Sundvall bought a 20 lecture CD course. That's right, the Successful Hypnotherapy Diploma Course is a home-study course. But surely, since hypnosis is just a therapeutic tool, Jörgen Sundvall must have had some professional healt-care experience? No, he had none, and it was not required. This home-study course "is very thorough and covers all aspects of hypnosis, psychology and hypnotherapy" so you don't have to have any knowledge whatsoever prior to enrolling. And to think that I spent five months of full time university studies to finish an introductory psychology course, which doesn't make me qualified to give treatment of any kind to anyone! I could have paid £1495 and studied in the comfort of my home. And besides all aspects of psychology, I would have learned hypnosis and hypnotherapy as well -- and become qualified to treat premature ejaculation and frigidity! What a bummer... I would have had a clinic up and running by now, just like Jörgen Sundvall (<a href="http://www.sseah.se/index_eng.htm">http://www.sseah.se/index_eng.htm</a>).<br /></p><p>People like Jörgen Sundvall, "institutions" and bogus credentials as the ones mentioned above, are the reason why real healt-care professionals with real education and background issue warnings like these:<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">"In most cities, the Yellow Pages of the telephone book carry a listing of 'Hypnotists' or 'Hypnotherapy'. While this should make finding an appropriately trained clinician of hypnosis relatively easy, in fact, it does not. In these pages, professionals in Medicine, Psychiatry, Psychology, and Social Work are lumped together with individuals who have no such formal training -- that is, with what are called lay hypnotists. [...] A further difficulty in finding a properly qualified clinician who is trained in hypnotic procedures is that many of the lay hypnotists confer upon themselves and each other official sounding names, titles and letters after their names; some even designate themselves as 'Doctor', or 'Professor.' These letterings after the name and pseudo-titles imply a legitimacy that, usually, does not exist.The Bulgarian Institute of Hypnosis or the Norwegian College of Hypnotherapists, for instance, could be the name of a legitimate professional practice, but it could, as equally, be the name of a lay hypnosis organization." (Perry)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">"It is time that the general public be informed that there is no such person as a 'qualified hypnotherapist', and claims of degrees in this speciality exist only in the fantasies of the so-called 'therapist'. No properly recognised degrees in hypnosis are issued anywhere in the world." (David Waxman, 1984, quoted by Wheeler, 2008)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">"Whether your training costs you two hundred pounds or nearer twenty thousand pounds makes no difference: the certificate or hypnotherapy qualifications you will receive are only worth the value of the sheet of paper it is printed on. The reason for that is because there is no one governing body controlling the system." (Wheeler, 2008)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">"In Britain anybody can be regarded as a psychotherapist, and there are many 'hypnotherapists'. We strongly believe that hypnosis is not a therapy in its own right, and should only be used alongside standard psychological treatment by a suitably qualified professional." (Whalley, 2008)</span><br /><br /><img border="0" hspace="10" align="left" src="http://www.mirakelboken.com/Jorgen%20Sundvall.jpg" />In Sweden, where Sundvall is operating his Swedish School of Ethical and Analytical Hypnotherapy, use of hypnosis in clinical practice is regulated by law (LYHS, 1998:531). It clearly states that anyone that lacks professional training controlled and authorized by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare is forbidden to examine or provide treatment with the use of hypnosis. Examining and treating with the use of hypnosis is exactly what Jörgen Sundvall is doing. Do you think that the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare has approved the Successful Hypnotherapy Diploma Course? Neither do I. But the people that should be on the lookout for the likes of Jörgen Sundvall, the Swedish Society for Clinical Hypnosis, are busy lobbying against stage hypnotism (Lindahl, 2005), so they don't have time to bother with a self-proclaimed health-care practitioner who treats real health problems with amateur methods and bogus credentials. It's better to focus attention on hypnotists who make people behave silly on stage for entertainment. And Jörgen Sundvall is sort of a peer, although he prefers to associate himself with New Age riff-raff like Jörgen "Cry Baby" Gustafsson, renowned psychic and charlatan.<br /><br />So, by now you know that Zoe D. Katze is a cat and that Jörgen Sundvall's diplomas are worth nothing more than the paper they are written on, and that he probably is breaking Swedish law. So who would you choose? Zoe? Come on, it's a cat! Even if Jörgen Sundvall is a total fraud, at least he is human. And he looks nice. Even if he is a con artist, it must be better to have a conversation with a nice-looking person than a cat? But wait, there's more to Jörgen Sundvall than the above.<br /><br />Do you know Vegavan Das? No? It's Jörgen Sundvall. Vegavan Das was the name he chose for himself when he joined the Hare Krishna, or ISCKON. In fact, Sundvall was instrumental in introducing Hare Krishna in Sweden back in 1973. Although he nowadays claims to be a passive member only (Essén, 2008), he is still listed as a guru and leader (www.krishna-das.com) and holds seminars on international krishna gatherings (Radhadesh, 2006). For a passive member, Jörgen Sundvall is very active. And respected among the krishna members, almost a legend.<br /><br />So how involved has Sundvall been in the systematic child abuse in the Hare Krishna movement? The sexual child molesting aside, there is the child labor, the systematic malnutrition, the disintegration of families, the concentration camp conditions at the movement's schools for children, the <em>kuru-gulas</em>, that were aimed at keeping the children as far away from the parents as possible (Essén, 2008). Did Jörgen Sundvall look the other way or did he take active part in it? To me, both alternatives disqualify him from coming anywhere near my children and the fact that his religious beliefs, as dictated by the founder Prabhupada, states that women are inferior to men (Essén, 2008) probably makes me want to keep my wife away from him too.<br /><br />So now, finally, would you choose Jörgen Sundvall or Zoe D. Katze?<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">Essén, C., (2008). <em>Sektbarn</em>. Stockholm: Bonniers<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size:85%;">www.krishna-das.com. List of leaders. Web document: </span><a href="http://www.krishna-das.com/ksyberspace/docs/leaders.rtf"><span style="font-size:85%;">http://www.krishna-das.com/ksyberspace/docs/leaders.rtf</span></a><br /></p><p><span style="font-size:85%;">Lindahl, S., (2005). <em>Angående ansökan om tillstånd för scenhypnos</em>. Web document: </span><a href="http://www.hypnosforeningen.se/etikestradhypnos.htm"><span style="font-size:85%;">http://www.hypnosforeningen.se/etikestradhypnos.htm</span></a><br /></p><p><span style="font-size:85%;">LYHS, <em>Lag om yrkesverksamhet på hälso- och sjukvårdens område</em>, 1998:531. Web document: </span><a href="http://www.riksdagen.se/webbnav/index.aspx?nid=3911&bet=1998:531"><span style="font-size:85%;">http://www.riksdagen.se/webbnav/index.aspx?nid=3911&bet=1998:531</span></a><br /></p><p><span style="font-size:85%;">Perry, C. <em>Key Concepts in Hypnosis</em>. Web document: <a href="http://www.fmsfonline.org/hypnosis.html">http://www.fmsfonline.org/hypnosis.html</a><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size:85%;">Radhadesh Newsletter, (2006). Web document: </span><a href="http://www.radhadesh.com/pdf/RNL_6_06.pdf"><span style="font-size:85%;">http://www.radhadesh.com/pdf/RNL_6_06.pdf</span></a><br /></p><p><span style="font-size:85%;">Whalley, M., (2008). <em>Finding a clinician</em>. Web document: </span><a href="http://www.hypnosisandsuggestion.org/clinician.html"><span style="font-size:85%;">http://www.hypnosisandsuggestion.org/clinician.html</span></a><br /></p><p><span style="font-size:85%;">Wheeler, J., (2008). <em>Hypnotherapy Training and Qualifications</em>. Web document: http://www.dangers-of-hypnosis.co.uk/hypnotherapy_qualifications.html<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /></span></p>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-53736919311350227582008-07-06T16:55:00.004+02:002008-07-28T11:28:37.664+02:00My name is not Susan...For as long as I've been active in internet discussions regarding charlatans and the paranormal, my true identity has been of some concern for both psychics and their followers. They want to know my real name. Why? I don't know. But since they have been so eager, I have found it best to stay anonymous. Some of the louder followers seem to be psychologically unstable, so you never know...<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYLSwG27XDlai7U-cjLbh1pckml4TmbbrTLC34nnnwKHz2CLCjuzIX_nEcHx2TRx83ltbcPPnnXNgmmAh8cpF_trku2RfaxlpQAdJ34MMhJyR7SK43nKqMpnp-LTfHqMa_FiiceZeCa2s/s1600-h/johan.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5223921644963663586" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYLSwG27XDlai7U-cjLbh1pckml4TmbbrTLC34nnnwKHz2CLCjuzIX_nEcHx2TRx83ltbcPPnnXNgmmAh8cpF_trku2RfaxlpQAdJ34MMhJyR7SK43nKqMpnp-LTfHqMa_FiiceZeCa2s/s320/johan.jpg" border="0" /></a>Lately, several psychics have declared that they actually know who I am. One of the contestants in <em>Psychic Academy</em> (the Swedish version of <em>Psychic Challenge</em>), Mr Johan Lundberg, approached me at the Swedish Skeptics forum, www.vof.se, and declared that he had identified me. Apparently, I had made some sort of mistake somewhere that lead him on the right track. He didn't want to post the name out in the open forum, so we agreed that he would send it in a private PM and I would answer truthfully. I did. And I also posted the name on the open forum for all to see. Mr Lundberg was totally wrong. But he doesn't trust me so he probably still thinks my name is the one he suggested.<br /><br />But wait a minute! This self-deluded man thinks that he receives information from spirits, that he can speak to the departed! How come he is dead wrong on such an easy task as finding out my real name? And isn't his way of finding it out superfluous when he could take a shortcut and ask the Other side? I had to make a mistake first!? Psychic, my ass... Mind you, Mr Lundberg gets all cranky when you call him "psychic", you have to call him "psychic in training". Anyway, he got thrown out of <em>Psychic Academy</em>, failed in his attempt to put together a Swedish Psychic Association, and now keeps a low profile. But it won't be long before he is fully "trained", I guess, and busy ripping people off.<br /><br /><img hspace="10" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilANdNBLM1rSv_UYUROPjdDCCZjsXAjSSkWjK1NbIm04TwtgsVSdeLfkiJsssfOEAo9ehevMPcsjbaQ3PxqPdLZydGsIoN-ti7baHkC3iEF3xwR7RPzteKWU2dKd3JFgnBLP_4ChT9OA0/s320/lannges.jpg" align="left" border="0" />Another charlatan who claims to know my name is Mrs Elisabeth Lannge. She has "seen" it, whatever that means. But she won't say what it is until I decide to announce it in public. Yep, she knows it but I have to say it first... Remember the arguments you used to hear in Kindergarden? Smells just the same, doesn't it? But this old bag claims superior insight and contact with the dead - are the spirits not able to tell her that she is displaying the rhetoric capacity of a five-year-old? It is truly amazing that there are grown-ups who take Mrs Lannge seriously. She's not even house-broken -- when she abruptly left the judging panel of <em>Psychic Academy</em> and left her fellow swindlers gasping, she clearly demonstrated that it's her way or the highway. You'd better rub her up the right way or you're in for a verbal frenzy.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglks1x6H1ZHPmgnqWeL1FUnPo2KXeYHpdITZKfmi94Xm2NGJlAmr-BY3kvhueTFDo465-QeOiE9F7MXrOoD9oiBeEUX1caA0w7Yi7BU6s9uVK-tNSt_4OABaw6ZzRgY8K5MSA49s1od54/s1600-h/elisabethj.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5223889051686633554" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglks1x6H1ZHPmgnqWeL1FUnPo2KXeYHpdITZKfmi94Xm2NGJlAmr-BY3kvhueTFDo465-QeOiE9F7MXrOoD9oiBeEUX1caA0w7Yi7BU6s9uVK-tNSt_4OABaw6ZzRgY8K5MSA49s1od54/s320/elisabethj.jpg" border="0" /></a>Next in line is Mrs Elisabeth Johansson, an upcoming tarot-tart who claims that she has seen me at the entrance of some psychic demonstrations, so she knows who I am. What makes this pathetic liar hilarious is that she actually has met me once, but in a totally different context and setting. But isn't it educational to see how she, and her peers, so easily make things up in order to gain prestige in the eyes of the gullible mob that flocks around her?<br /><br />Perhaps it's time to announce the Garvarn Challenge; any psychic who claims to know my identity is hereby invited to e-mail me his or her suggestion and if it is correct, I promise to post a full declaration here on the blog with due credits to the psychic who made it. Nope, no money award this time -- just the glory. And Torbjörn Sassersson, the ravin lunatic "editor" of www.soultravel.se, is invited too. His wisdom always cracks me up...Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-54346600769210451012008-07-05T18:30:00.000+02:002008-07-07T23:25:48.762+02:00The psychic can of wormsDon't you just love the way woo-woo people glorify psychics and other charlatans? Oh, besides having access to the wisdom of spirits, psychics are so kind-hearted, altruistic and understanding! They give so much that whatever they gain is nowhere near enough to compensate for the emotional and spiritual distress they suffer from their "work". Bordering to outright worship, this idolatry is of course aimed at rendering the psychic untouchable - any allegations of fraud or moral misconduct will bounce off someone that is closer to divinity than to fellow humans. And for every benevolent trait the woo-woo worshipers ascribe to a psychic, they add a little bit of confirmation that their trust and faith haven't been badly invested.<br /><br />Although serious investigative journalism seems to make exception for psychics, we sometimes come to know that there is something ugly behind the varnish. If you scratch the surface of Sylvia Browne, you find grand theft and investment fraud (Lancaster, 2006). If you scratch the surface of Mervyn Johnson, former president of the <a href="http://www.theisf.com/">International Spiritualist Foundation</a>, you find a rapist and child molester (Garvarn, 2007). Of course, psychics are swindlers as such. But if you go beyond the explicit deceit of their "trade", you may very well find that the immorality is not restricted to messing with people's memories of deceased loved ones and charging for services they cannot provide -- the apple tends to be bad all the way through.<br /><br />In December 2004, I visited the website of one of our more "prominent" Swedish psychics, frequently featured on psychic shows televised nationwide. As I browsed through the posts in the guestbook, I noticed one poster who was criticizing the psychic for the way the "training courses" was being managed. The psychic's answers were of course evasive empty phrases and since the upset poster didn't settle for that and continued with detailed accusations, the guestbook was soon shut down by the psychic. In addition to the critique, one post had stated the e-mail address of the poster, so I decided to make some further inquiries. I found out the following.<br /><br />An associate of the psychic had started to question some of the psychic's doings, suggesting they were dubious and wrong. In response, the psychic promptly ended the collaboration, claiming that the associate had broken a vow of silence. When asked for specific reasons, the psychic told the associate that the spirit world had strictly forbidden any disclosure in the matter.<br /><br />I was able to get in touch with some more of the psychic's former associates and regular sitters. Some of them were reluctant to tell anything about their time with the psychic and those who were willing to talk explained why. Threats is one of the common tools of this charlatan. The psychic is in the habit of threatening people, in dislike for major or minor reasons, with the spirit world. In the comfort of the inner circle of people around the psychic, the "happy messages" conveyed during public seances and TV shows are substituted with warnings of forthcoming suicides or fatal diseases. Scare tactics is the glue that holds this particular little psychic group together. And the psychic expects everyone to submit to any little whim, at any time -- be it administrative work or household duties. There is really no limit to what this voice of the dead may require from the sheep in service.<br /><br />Another tool is lying. The image this psychic paints of the business conducted has no resemblance with the actual state of affairs. Claimed successes turn into disasters when scrutinized. Reasons for relocation turn out to be more evasive than strategic when checked. In essence, this character is a genuine conjurer.<br /><br /><img src="http://image.bokus.com/pics/tts/HTML/57489/0_carolinegiertz2.jpg" border="0" align="left" hspace="10" />The funny thing is that the truth about this scumbag is only a couple of phone calls and e-mails away. So when I see this psychic on television, being lead through a haunted house by the major Swedish promotor of these fraudsters, Mrs Caroline Giertz (who claims to be a journalist!), smiling and acting all "sensitive", I rest assured that some day the bubble will burst. Some day one of these women, scared to silence, will realize that "the spirit world" really doesn't pose any actual danger and she will be the one who teaches this sociopath psychic that people are not be juggled with. Hopefully she will display the lesson in public but if not, a court of justice will do.<br /><br />Make no mistake, this and other psychics are sociopaths. James Randi expresses their line of thinking eloquently: "If it's good for me, it's good" (Skepticality, 2006). They just don't care about other people at all. People are just means to their ends. And they know exactly what they are doing, they know that they are fooling people. Randi again:<br /><br />"It's lika a violinist. He didn't just pick up that violin and started playing. He took lessons. And he has to concentrate on what he is doing." (Skepticality, 2006)<br /><br />And don't make allowance for the psychics who doesn't charge for the "services". We have at least one of those in Sweden too, Elisabeth Lannge. She doesn't need to charge money because she is married to it! Her currency is social acceptance and "being someone". Those who don't understand the value of that has little understanding of human nature. Her fraud is just as severe, or perhaps more so.<br /><br />Are the psychics to blame for the gullibility of their worshipers? No, they are not. But it isn't immoral to be gullible. To exploit the gullibility is. Is it silly to feel threatened by the wrath of made up spirits? Of course it is. But being silly is not immoral. Exploiting the silliness in order to rule a semi-cult is. And for some people, the spirit world is far from imaginary. Psychics know this, and they feed on it.<br /><br />All psychics suffer, to some extent, from personality disorder. The psychological faculty that restrains sane people from messing with people's most sacred thoughts and emotions are non-existent in psychics. They just don't give a damn.<br /><br />So, for your own enjoyment and other's benefit, open a can of worms -- pick a psychic of your choice and do some background checking. I'll bet something nasty will crawl out...<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">Garvarn, (2007). </span><a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/psychic-rapist-senteced-to-five-years.html"><span style="font-size:85%;">Psychic rapist sentenced to five years</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;">. Garvarn's blog. Web document: </span><a href="http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/psychic-rapist-senteced-to-five-years.html"><span style="font-size:85%;">http://garvarn.blogspot.com/2007/01/psychic-rapist-senteced-to-five-years.html</span></a><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">Lancaster, R. S., (2006). The People vs. Sylvia Brown(e). www.stopsylviabrowne.com. Web document: </span><a href="http://www.stopsylviabrowne.com/articles/peoplevsbrown.shtml"><span style="font-size:85%;">http://www.stopsylviabrowne.com/articles/peoplevsbrown.shtml</span></a><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">Skepticality, (2006). Podcast, September 24.</span>Garvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.com3