Old Randi article on Geller lawsuit
- Thread starter walthrup48
- Start date
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 15,945
I seriously doubt that those were the tricks used. Those were cereal box prize tricks included with the cereal. Modern plastic toy junk. Randi was pretty specific about the tricks being on the boxes when *he* was a kid, which would be a much earlier era...well before era of cartoon characters promoting suger laden junk for the baby boomer generation's morning fix. I would hard pressed to beleive that toy prizes were even in the cereal boxes for Randi's generation. A quick google search seem to indicate that cardboard cut-out animals and board game boards, or a recipie insert was the limit. But if they did not have cutouts, they had stuff on the back for kids to read. Doubtless at some point this would have included magic tricks for kids to do. This not a stretch of the imagination.
I do not know why Randi is under some obligation to produce a box for Peter Morris. Randi says one was found. It was presumably presented in court. The case is now over. Randi is not in Peter Morris' court and does not have to supply anything he demands.
I do not know why Randi is under some obligation to produce a box for Peter Morris. Randi says one was found. It was presumably presented in court. The case is now over. Randi is not in Peter Morris' court and does not have to supply anything he demands.
Dr Adequate
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2004
- Messages
- 17,766
Do you suppose Peter Morris ever tells the truth? Perhaps in private when no-one's listening?
How will you find out if you don't know how Geller was tested?
The boxes that have magic tricks on them, supposedly like what Geller does, that have supposedly fooled scientists.
I haven't seen evidence that the nail through finger trick has fooled any scientist, nor is that something like what Geller does.
Where are the boxes?
I haven't seen evidence that the nail through finger trick has fooled any scientist, nor is that something like what Geller does.
Where are the boxes?
"like", Justin. Nobody has claimed that the nail-through-the-finger trick has fooled any scientist.
Educate yourself. That's exactly the kind of cheap trickery Geller does.
You saw the boxes. Where are you going with this?
Educate yourself.
Read the books, Justin.
thesyntaxera
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2005
- Messages
- 882
http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/exam/Prescott_Randi.htm
http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/exam/Dace_amazing3.htm
this article might be of interest here.
http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/exam/Dace_amazing3.htm
this article might be of interest here.
Last edited:
Well, then, go and do some work, and find out the answer.
People have cited enough things here that it's obvious your "skepticism" is pure disingenuity.
Skepticism consists of more than asking questions, you have to actually examine the evidence you're handed. You ought to know that, after all, your irritation with the PEAR experiment discussions is that skeptics very well did examine the proffered evidence.
Now, you've been handed the evidence, it's up to you to examine it in more than a cursory fashion, and then respond substantively to the issues at hand.
You're the one asserting knowledge of what Geller does.
First asserting "that's not what he does", then asking somebody to educate you about what he does, suggests that you have the process a wee bit out of order.
Let me explain:
FIRST you educate yourself
THEN you can have an informed position.
When you assert that something is or is not what Geller does, you're claiming to have knowledge.
When you ask for the knowledge after you say that, sorry, you're caught making (yet another) empty claim.