• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

More TV vicar

Beth said:
Well, I certainly can't make any judgment on whether or not it was faked. If it was, it clearly fooled that MD.
Click to expand...

Assuming it is the same case, they were doing things that an American MD would have a hard time wrapping his mind around. No American hospital could ever be persuaded to be complicit in a woman lying on a trick table with a cadaver placed on her chest.

http://members.aol.com/garypos/Rosenfeld_sram.html

This link explains how it was done. The original photo is not here, just a sketch. I wouldn't be surprised if this made it into Randi's commentaries; the photo may be online somewhere.
 
ChristineR said:
Assuming it is the same case, they were doing things that an American MD would have a hard time wrapping his mind around. No American hospital could ever be persuaded to be complicit in a woman lying on a trick table with a cadaver placed on her chest.

http://members.aol.com/garypos/Rosenfeld_sram.html

This link explains how it was done. The original photo is not here, just a sketch. I wouldn't be surprised if this made it into Randi's commentaries; the photo may be online somewhere.
Click to expand...

Same doctor and presumably the same operation being described. Thanks for the link. It was interesting.
 
Well, also, we've heard one explanation that the patients are given local anesthetic and sedatives, as well as acupuncture. Possibly this doctor from Parade, years ago, witnessed the surgery but they just didn't show her the part where they gave the anesthetic and sedatives.
 
Rolfe said:
Ian, Randi is a showman. He knows all there is to know about racking up tension. I don't think you can read anything at all into any facial expression he might choose to adopt.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

It was absolutely unmistakable. I've never seen anyone look so worried. You obviously didn't see the programme.
 
Interesting Ian said:
It was absolutely unmistakable. I've never seen anyone look so worried. You obviously didn't see the programme.
Click to expand...

The most worried person I've ever seen was Macbeth, just after Macduff tells him "Macduff was from his mother’s womb Untimely ripped," hence sidestepping the "unkillable" spell the witches placed on him.

Oh, wait. That was just a really good actor.
 
Interesting Ian said:
It was absolutely unmistakable. I've never seen anyone look so worried. You obviously didn't see the programme.
Click to expand...
Not only did I see it twice on live TV, I have it on videotape and I've rewatched it several times.

So, I "obviously" didn't see the programme, just the same way as Randi was "obviously" really worried.

Q, E, and, I think, D.

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
Not only did I see it twice on live TV, I have it on videotape and I've rewatched it several times.

So, I "obviously" didn't see the programme, just the same way as Randi was "obviously" really worried.

Q, E, and, I think, D.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

How do you expect me to respond here? I have said what I have to say. Any reasonable adult would acknowledge that he was extremely worried indeed. The fact you were unable to recognise this is extremely interesting from the psychological perspective, but there's really no debate to be had here.

This is not to denigrate you whatsoever. I think you're ok, and I like your straightforward no-nonsense manner. I also like your arrogance. But I'm not prepared to get into an infantile debate as to whether black is really white. Sorry.
 
Interesting Ian said:
Any reasonable adult would acknowledge that he was extremely worried indeed. The fact you were unable to recognise this is extremely interesting from the psychological perspective, but there's really no debate to be had here.
Click to expand...

Can I direct you to Randi's commentary of February 20th, 2004?

"Just a quick explanation: I received a lot of mail about a somewhat devious bit of editing that was carried out by the BBC. At one point, I'm shown with my hand up to my mouth as if I'm expressing anxiety about what the presiding statistician is about to announce as the final result of the experiments. That was a moment when I coughed violently — though the audio was edited out — as can be seen under careful observation. I was suffering from very severe laryngitis at that meeting, and my voice was hardly there. It was a bit of a cheap shot, when in actuality I had no trepidation whatsoever about the results that were about to be announced. I trusted those involved, the protocol was tight and proper, and I was confident, as I always am, about what science would show us."

Next please.
 
Thing said:
Can I direct you to Randi's commentary of February 20th, 2004?

"Just a quick explanation: I received a lot of mail about a somewhat devious bit of editing that was carried out by the BBC. At one point, I'm shown with my hand up to my mouth as if I'm expressing anxiety about what the presiding statistician is about to announce as the final result of the experiments. That was a moment when I coughed violently — though the audio was edited out — as can be seen under careful observation. I was suffering from very severe laryngitis at that meeting, and my voice was hardly there. It was a bit of a cheap shot, when in actuality I had no trepidation whatsoever about the results that were about to be announced. I trusted those involved, the protocol was tight and proper, and I was confident, as I always am, about what science would show us."

Next please.
Click to expand...

This has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I was referring to his demeanor as the early results came in.
 
Ian, you said it was "obvious" that I hadn't seen the show. You were wrong. So, is it at least possible that you're wrong about something else? I don't see Randi's expression as indicating much at all - whether deliberate tension-building acting, or just a bit of editing, I don't see it as especially significant.

According to you, that debars me from being regarded as a reasonable adult. Gee, thanks.

This is a question of interpretation, and it's impossible to declare that one interpretation is right and the other wrong. Even if Randi declares that it was just acting, or just editing, this doesn't invalidate Ian's interpretation, because Randi could be fibbing about that. Nevertheless, the acting/editing explanation remains tenable, and is indeed supported by Randi. So, opinion. Reasonable adults can agree to differ on a matter of opinion, no?

Ian, why do you always see such things in black and white, my interpretation to the exclusion of all else? Don't you think that's a bit on the childish side?

Rolfe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom