Answering the Lou Gentile Issue

Check this out:

http://www.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices/2003/DOC-254257A1.html



Before the Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of

Lou Gentile

Philadelphia, PA

1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture
("NAL"), we find that Lou Gentile apparently willfully violated
Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended
("Act''), by operating an unlicensed radio transmitter on the
frequency 107.7 MHz in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.1 We
conclude, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the Act, that Mr.
Gentile is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of
ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
Click to expand...

So much for the Lou Gentile "Radio" show.
 
Gentile was certainly permitted to use his specialized recorder. Where did the notion that he couldn't, originate?

Randi
 
Randi said:
Gentile was certainly permitted to use his specialized recorder. Where did the notion that he couldn't, originate?

Randi
Click to expand...

Actually, that was pure speculation on my part, I was trying to come up with a "good" reason why he would withdraw.

In part it came from discussions about how one would shield such a device adequately from non-paranormal transmissions. But perhaps this wouldn't be necessary in the test protocol?

My apologies.
 
And, where did the notion come from that Gentile and I had protocol differences? We agreed completely on the protocol, then he withdrew! I wish that those who comment on such matters, would better inform themselves... Gentile is typical: much noise and complaining, confronting, and finally agreeing -- then backing out. The JREF has never backed out, ever.

Randi
 
Randi said:
And, where did the notion come from that Gentile and I had protocol differences? We agreed completely on the protocol, then he withdrew! I wish that those who comment on such matters, would better inform themselves... Gentile is typical: much noise and complaining, confronting, and finally agreeing -- then backing out. The JREF has never backed out, ever.

Randi
Click to expand...

I believe that notion came from comments by KevinM who is a cohort of Lou Gentile. He definitely gave the impression that he felt the challenge was tipped unfairly in your favour.

Most of us on this forum were attempting to straighten KevinM out on that perception.

Also, I've been following Lou's website to see what's been posted there regarding the application, and oddly he still has his "Silvia Browne" type clock ticking away which suggested the application was still ongoing, but a protocol was yet to be agreed upon.
 
I this age, in which we know that we are literally bathed in EM emissions of natural and artificial origin it astounds me that anyone hearing an extraneous signal from a radio receiver would conclude that he or she was hearing a ghost or demon. Right now as I sit in my living room typing this post there are innumerable radio transmissions passing through my body unseen. As a child, in the days before cable transmission, I can remember our television occasionally speaking with a strange, loud voice due to our neighbors ham radio transmitter. Hardware has improved much with the advent of digital tuners but extraneous signals are still as normal and expected as hubcaps along the highway. Yet we are told that this very natural phenomenon is supernatural. Don't get me wrong, radio is an amazing technology but I was under the impression that the practical end of electromagnetism was well understood as a science.

Steven
 
If KevinM is still around, I'd like his comments on Lou's backing out of the application as noted by Jeff in the Challenge Applications section (and I am not looking for a fight, I was contacted by Randi about this issue in researching the Panasonic Device inisted upon by Mr. Gentile, and as of yet Panasonic has not returned my calls or letters regarding that specific device.)

I hope it is not his health that is preventing his continuance. What happened? Also, I apologize if this has been addressed in this thread before and I missed it.

Thanks.
 
Book review of "The Faith Healers"

I googled "Lou Gentile" and "Randi" and came across this on Barnesandnoble.com on the page for Randi's "The Faith Healers":


Kevin (kmeares@rocketmail.com), Co-host of The Lou Gentile Show, September 22, 2003, 5 out of 5 stars
A Slam to Frauds Everywhere
As both a believer in the supernatural world and a Christian I can do nothing but stand up and applaud James Randi for this book. He goes through some of the biggest charlitans and frauds in the business and prove the lot of them are nothing but con artists protected by outdated laws. The particular example of Leroy Jenkins claim regarding challenging Randi to prove him wrong. As the reproduced advertisement blatently shows any reader this was grand standing at its worst. He did it for publicity knowing full well no skeptic would take him up on it because his premise was patently impossible. Why? For the same reason you can't prove that the moon is not made out of a particularly rock like brand of green cheese or that Santa Claus does not exist. Its impossible to prove a negative and simply enough thats not the point of science. It's Jenkin's responsibility to prove his claims some thing he is incapable of doing.
 
Humanists Harbor said:
I googled "Lou Gentile" and "Randi" and came across this on Barnesandnoble.com on the page for Randi's "The Faith Healers":


Kevin (kmeares@rocketmail.com), Co-host of The Lou Gentile Show, September 22, 2003, 5 out of 5 stars
A Slam to Frauds Everywhere
As both a believer in the supernatural world and a Christian I can do nothing but stand up and applaud James Randi for this book. He goes through some of the biggest charlitans and frauds in the business and prove the lot of them are nothing but con artists protected by outdated laws. The particular example of Leroy Jenkins claim regarding challenging Randi to prove him wrong. As the reproduced advertisement blatently shows any reader this was grand standing at its worst. He did it for publicity knowing full well no skeptic would take him up on it because his premise was patently impossible. Why? For the same reason you can't prove that the moon is not made out of a particularly rock like brand of green cheese or that Santa Claus does not exist. Its impossible to prove a negative and simply enough thats not the point of science. It's Jenkin's responsibility to prove his claims some thing he is incapable of doing.
Click to expand...

We sent people to the Moon and they brought back rocks that prove the Moon is not made of green cheese. Santa brought me a DVD Player last year, so no additional proof is necessary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom