Help with debunking skeptikos absurd comments about psychics and skeptics

[Garrette]

Just to second the idea that Open Mind is not Winston Wu. If it's the same person, Open Mind used to post here (as others said). I was involved in a couple of very long exchanges with him. He is more intelligent and intelligible than Winston, but his arguments still boil down to You're close minded, and I'm not; science doesn't know everything; here's a misrepresentation of Einstein to buttress my point.

 

[James Cunningham]

Just to second the idea that Open Mind is not Winston Wu. If it's the same person, Open Mind used to post here (as others said). I was involved in a couple of very long exchanges with him. He is more intelligent and intelligible than Winston, but his arguments still boil down to You're close minded, and I'm not; science doesn't know everything; here's a misrepresentation of Einstein to buttress my point.

Thanks, I now know that Open Mind is not Winston Wu (anonymous) as he's from the UK. I caught Open Mind online at 3-4am at night the other day, I work night shifts as a security guard part time so have a lot spare time on my hands sometimes at night . I'm still suspect about him, he may be a sockpuppet of someone else.

I recently looked at the Skeptiko forum and a user has obviously seen this thread then started a thread over there about this, accusing me of being mentally ill, being someone else and other ad hominem. Very strange stuff.

I did a search on this forum and there is a user called Doom Metal on this forum who has already attempted to debunk Open Mind's absurd conspiracy theories and has created a thread on debunking mediums; I haven't read through it all yet but some of it looks sound. I will send him a personal message and perhaps he can help refute some of Open mind's or Wu's comments.

One thing I am interested in, is this claim:

Susan Blackmore justified her claim that she could not demonstrate any paranormal phenomena by ignoring her own studies that demonstrated a paranormal effect.

Does anyone know what the supposed paranormal effect was?

 

[James Cunningham]

Skeptiko, yeah; I just read this Skeptiko interview about NDEs between Dr. Gary Marcus and Alex Tsakiris. Marcus is eminently reasonable throughout. Tsakiris cuts him off at the end, and afterwards makes a bunch of comments belittling him. It didn't come across as a fair or professional approach.

I have only known about the skeptiko website for less than a week and I am not impressed so far. It's seems to be filled with some very sick and mentally unbalanced people.

Here's a comment from one of their main users Skippy Borzakov:

Perhaps. I can't explain *why* some rape/forced videos sexually excite me, they just do. I think I'm possibly stimulated by the idea of a dominant man, perhaps. But of course, one can enjoy dominance in porn without looking at the rape/forced category.

August 9th, 2013, 12:49 PM in the ***The Skeptiko Random Stuff Thread***

Watching rape videos, how very spiritual! These are the sorts of people who run that website, says it all.

 

[Arouet]

I'm a reg at both Skeptiko and Winston's site. There is no way that Anonymous is Winstin Wu. They are incredibly different in their writing styles and interests and I've had many discussions with both.

While I've disagreed with both Winston and Anonymous in most of those discussions, Anonymous' argument style and ability to discuss issues is orders of magnitude superior to Winston's.

 

[James Cunningham]

I'm a reg at both Skeptiko and Winston's site. There is no way that Anonymous is Winstin Wu. They are incredibly different in their writing styles and interests and I've had many discussions with both.

This isn't the place to discuss Winston Wu or his sockpuppets, I apologise for raising it, I'd rather debunk his nonsense rather than personally discuss the man. But briefly, I have seen conclusive evidence that Wu and anonymous (ncu9nc) are connected, and are most likely the same person (most of the information on their websites is duplicated) and they use all the same arguments etc. But back to the purpose of this thread, have you read his website? Are you willing to admit he has written nonsense?

As Steve wrote above, he has two websites, one called Spiritual Development and another blog called Life in B Flat. Check his latest blog post "The Science Scam".

Here is what he has written:

Eminent Researchers This article lists twelve Nobel prize winning scientists and many other notable scientists who believed in some paranormal, psychic or afterlife phenomena because of their own research, their own experiences, or the research of others. Some of the names may surprise you. Nobelists include: Max Planck, Wolfgang Pauli, Erwin Schrödinger, J. J. Thomson, Brian D. Josephson, Charles Robert Richet, John William Strutt, Marie Curie, Pierre Curie, Eugene Wigner, John Eccles, and Otto Stern. Other scientists include: Charles Darwin, Kurt Gödel, Alan Turing, Wernher von Braun, David Bohm, Karl Popper, Sir William Crookes, and Sir Robert Boyle. Robert Boyle is one of the greatest scientist of all time. In the book "Extraordinary Knowing", Elizabeth Mayer describes Boyle as the father of modern chemistry, the founder of the Royal Society of London, and the author of Boyle's Law.

Appeal to Authority.

And why is Charles Darwin and Karl Popper on the list

Robert Boyle lol.

 

[Garrette]

Thanks, I now know that Open Mind is not Winston Wu (anonymous) as he's from the UK. I caught Open Mind online at 3-4am at night the other day, I work night shifts as a security guard part time so have a lot spare time on my hands sometimes at night . I'm still suspect about him, he may be a sockpuppet of someone else.

I recently looked at the Skeptiko forum and a user has obviously seen this thread then started a thread over there about this, accusing me of being mentally ill, being someone else and other ad hominem. Very strange stuff.

I did a search on this forum and there is a user called Doom Metal on this forum who has already attempted to debunk Open Mind's absurd conspiracy theories and has created a thread on debunking mediums; I haven't read through it all yet but some of it looks sound. I will send him a personal message and perhaps he can help refute some of Open mind's or Wu's comments.

One thing I am interested in, is this claim:



Does anyone know what the supposed paranormal effect was?

I could speculate (I recall something about the sheep-goat effect, bug I am not certain that was Blackmore), but the best way to address this is to ask the claimant which research is meant. I suspect they will be unable to come up with anything but vagaries. If they mention actual research you can look up the real papers.

 

[James Cunningham]

I could speculate (I recall something about the sheep-goat effect, bug I am not certain that was Blackmore), but the best way to address this is to ask the claimant which research is meant. I suspect they will be unable to come up with anything but vagaries. If they mention actual research you can look up the real papers.

Thanks, I searched this forum for Blackmore and found mention of an OBE experience she had induced by drugs. I suspect he is referring to this. Not a paranormal effect though.

According to Wikipedia:

The accepted explanation for the OBE in the fields of cognitive science and psychology is that the OBE is a hallucinatory construct that arises from different psychological factors. The scientific community consider the OBE to be an experience from a mental state, like a dream or an altered state of consciousness without recourse to the paranormal.

Even some parapsychologists agree that the OBE is not paranormal:

Gardner Murphy wrote OBEs are "not very far from the known terrain of general psychology, which we are beginning to understand more and more without recourse to the paranormal."

 

[Arouet]

This isn't the place to discuss Winston Wu or his sockpuppets, I apologise for raising it, I'd rather debunk his nonsense rather than personally discuss the man. But briefly, I have seen conclusive evidence that Wu and anonymous (ncu9nc) are connected, and are most likely the same person (most of the information on their websites is duplicated) and they use all the same arguments etc. But back to the purpose of this thread, have you read his website? Are you willing to admit he has written nonsense?

I haven't looked much at Anonymous' site, but again, have spoken with him a lot on the forum. His style could not be more different than Winston's. I believe I have disagreed with Anonymous is most of our interactions.

I thought you were banned at Skeptiko because you didn't follow the rules on a particular subforum where skeptical arguments are not permitted - not because people disagreed with you on the main forum (where skeptical views are encouraged and allowed - as evidenced by my being one of the more prolific posters on that forum!). Also maybe because you were starting to become quite rude in your comments in the main forum as well.

I disagree with Alex on a lot - but I don't think its fair to describe skeptiko as not permitting dissenting views from Alex'. I think if you had kept your comments more polite and not have broken the rules in the sub forum you would still be there.

I was enjoying your early posts, and was hoping that you'd stick around, but it soon became clear to me that you were pushing for a banning (if you were the poster William there - if you're not, then the above doesn't apply.)

 

[James Cunningham]

I thought you were banned at Skeptiko because you didn't follow the rules on a particular subforum where skeptical arguments are not permitted - not because people disagreed with you on the main forum (where skeptical views are encouraged and allowed - as evidenced by my being one of the more prolific posters on that forum!). Also maybe because you were starting to become quite rude in your comments in the main forum as well.

I disagree with Alex on a lot - but I don't think its fair to describe skeptiko as not permitting dissenting views from Alex'. I think if you had kept your comments more polite and not have broken the rules in the sub forum you would still be there.

I was enjoying your early posts, and was hoping that you'd stick around, but
it soon became clear to me that you were pushing for a banning (if you were the poster William there - if you're not, then the above doesn't apply.)

No, William was not me. I noticed this user got banned on the same day as I did. I agree his posts were rude, he was swearing in them, and he came across as he didn't know anything, he was asking people for psi material to read. A bit of a troll to be honest.

The username I got banned on was J@mes. I only started two threads before I was banned for no reason. There's also a user on that forum who is now accusing me of being someone called "Doom Metal". Well I am not Doom Metal. There is a user on this forum with that name, I will send him a message. The reason they are now saying I am Doom Metal is because this same person has debunked some of Open Mind's comments regarding mediums.

 

[Steve001]

One thing I am interested in, is this claim:
Quote:
Susan Blackmore justified her claim that she could not demonstrate any paranormal phenomena by ignoring her own studies that demonstrated a paranormal effect.



Does anyone know what the supposed paranormal effect was?

You can go to her site and find out directly. As I recall, the more she tightened up the protocols the more the effects disappeared. Ignore is something she didn't do.

 

[James Cunningham]

You can go to her site and find out directly. As I recall, the more she tightened up the protocols the more the effects disappeared. Ignore is something she didn't do.

That usually happens, various people claim evidence for paranormal effects but as soon as scientific controls are in place they disappear. A typical example is a medium called Rudi Schneider who Wu claims is genuine on his website. I only just read up on this medium. At first it looked convincing evidence for psychokinesis (a parapsychologist called Anita Gregory even wrote an entire book defending him), but then you discover that when scientific controls were introduced no objects were moved.

Between 1933-1934 Rudi was investigated by the Society for Psychical Research in 55 sittings and not a single paranormal effect was observed. This is because in these sittings infrared ray apparatus was used, and he had no chance to cheat. There are 100s of examples like this. But people like Wu ignore this evidence, filter it out and only cite the positive evidence.

There are many cases of mediums being tied up in the séance room, and after the lights are turned on all kinds of objects have moved. But there are a number of ways to escape control. I have even practiced it myself. If an amateur like myself can do it, then just think what mediums can do with plenty of years of practice.

 

[Arouet]

No, William was not me. I noticed this user got banned on the same day as I did. I agree his posts were rude, he was swearing in them, and he came across as he didn't know anything, he was asking people for psi material to read. A bit of a troll to be honest.

The username I got banned on was J@mes.

Ahh, that explains why I thought William was you. I'm afraid I don't remember your posts. I'm not sure why you were banned.

 

[abaddon]

Ahh, that explains why I thought William was you. I'm afraid I don't remember your posts. I'm not sure why you were banned.

[OT]Are you Arouet from cluesforum?[/OT]

 

[Arouet]

[OT]Are you Arouet from cluesforum?[/OT]

Nope! Never heard of that forum. Though I'm Arouet on several forums.

 

[James Cunningham]

Nope! Never heard of that forum. Though I'm Arouet on several forums.

Is it true that there's a secret section on the Mind-Energy forum? I have recently been told this by someone who was a high up member of that forum, but apparently this secret section is only open to the "elite chosen" long time members of the forum. You wouldn't be able to reveal any top secret information would you

 

[abaddon]

Nope! Never heard of that forum. Though I'm Arouet on several forums.

LOL. There are only so many possible usernames, I find it best to straight out ask the question. Nonetheless, I am certain I have seen you somewhere else plowing the lone furrow of the rational. Gimme a clue.

 

[James Cunningham]

Does anyone have a rebuttal to anonymous/Wu/Open mind's remaining points cited in my OP?:

James Randi made false statements attempting to debunk a video of dog telepathy when he never even watched the tape. He was forced to retract his statements.

Wiseman and Hyman tested 17 year old Russian school girl Natash Demkina's ability to make psychic diagnoses. She beat odds of 78 to 1 against chance, a statistically significant result. Twenty to one is the usual scientific standard. Wiseman said she failed and mistakenly said she achieved odds of 50 to 1. Hyman told her to forget her delusions. The commentator said she would return to Russia discredited.

 

[James Cunningham]

Martin Garndner claimed psychic medium Mrs Piper used cold reading techniques. He neglected to say that she had many successful readings using proxy sitters who knew nothing about the actual spirits that were coming through.

I am pretty sure his above statement is false. According to Wikipedia the only researcher who believed Piper was in contact with spirits was a man called Richard Hodgson. But by the looks of things he lost his mind.

To quote Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonora_Piper

Deborah Blum has written that Hodgson was personally obsessed with Piper. Hodgson would stand outside her house, observing her for long periods of time even in the winter blizzards of 1888. The American psychologist Walter Prince who knew Hodgson well commented that the mediumship of Piper had "wrecked" his mind.

As for this part of his comment:

He neglected to say that she had many successful readings using proxy sitters who knew nothing about the actual spirits that were coming through.

I don't see the evidence for any spirits coming through.

Before his death Frederic Myers had left a message in a sealed envelope, Piper's "spirit" control of Myers did not reveal the message. In 1906 the supposed spirit of Myers was completely baffled when given a message in Latin by a séance sitter, and took three months to get the meaning of the message, this was unlike Myers as whilst alive was a classicist who knew Latin.

After the death of Richard Hodgson, between December 1905 and the beginning of 1908 Piper held about seventy séances during which the spirit of Hodgson was said to have communicated through her. However the control of Piper sounded nothing like Hodgson. According to Joseph McCabe "when Hodgson died in 1905 and left a large amount of manuscript in cipher, she could not get the least clue to it. When friends put test questions to the spirit of Hodgson about his early life in Australia, the answers were all wrong." Before he died Hodgson had written a test letter, and claimed that if he was to communicate through Piper he would reveal the contents inside the letter. Piper's Hodgson control failed to reveal the test letter.

In an experiment to test if Piper's controls were purely fictitious the psychologist G. Stanley Hall invented a niece called Bessie Beals and asked Piper's 'control' to get in touch with it. Bessie appeared, answered questions and accepted Dr. Hall as her uncle.

I guess Open Mind/Wu forgot to mention this information

 

[James Cunningham]

Just pasting in for some humour:

Skepticism, The Big Lie. Activist Skeptics and Atheists are a Danger to the Health and Well Being of Believers.

If you think all skeptics are honest truth seekers, then you need to read my web page on Skeptical Misdirection. There is overwhelming evidence for the afterlife and psychic phenomena. The skeptical atheist view that consciousness is produced by the brain is an absolute fraud. Skeptics claim to be interested in truth. This is the Big Lie of our time.

I've been there during Spiritualist church services and seen and heard a medium provide this comfort to people suffering from extreme grief. I knew the medium, I knew the church, I know it wasn't cold reading or hot reading and I know the information the medium gave to identify the spirit was specific, detailed, and impossible to guess by chance.


So I also know the harm that can be done by skeptics who never had this experience and who don't know what they are talking about when they try to convince someone else that it is all a delusion or a fraud.


The people who are deluded and who are committing fraud are the skeptics and atheists. There is overwhelming evidence for the afterlife and the skeptical atheist view that consciousness is produced by the brain is an absolute fraud. Skeptics claim to be interested in truth. This is the Big Lie of our time.

http://ncu9nc.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/skepticism-big-lie-activist-skeptics.html

The dude is so far removed from reality, it's difficult to know what to say. He repeatedly claims on his blog that paranormal belief is healthy, but he doesn't sound too healthy himself by invoking all these conspiracy theories and making accusations of skeptical fraud without evidence. He comes across as a mean guy, trying and lighten up! Did a "skeptic" steal his wife or something? It sounds personal.

 

[James Cunningham]

http://forum.mind-energy.net/skeptiko-podcast/2210-142-jim-marrs-donald-rumsfeld-what-building-7-podcast-post53028.html#post53028

Here's some more conspiracy theories that Open Mind has supported, he claims both the government and magicians have been out and are supressing evidence for psi. Just some of his points from his timeline:

The Society of American Magicians (SAM) is founded in Martinka's magic shop. The shop sells books and equipment on how to fake psychic phenomena. Most of the co-founders were religious and keen to discredit psychics.

Like most of his claims, no reference given. The shop selled books and equipment to fake psychic phenomena? So what.. IT was a magic shop... what do you expect. I see no "conspiracy" here.

Magician Hereward Carrington of SPR, ASPR and (also Society of American Magicians member) is promoting a medium called Eusapia Palladino to be tested by US debunkers. Palladino had been supported by European scientists over many tests and also Everard Feilding of British Naval Intelligence (and SPR). Did they really believe Palladino was genuine? Or were they promoting her for other magicians to expose? (Fielding a few years later employed Aleister Crowley as British spy disinformation merchant during WW1)

Hereward Carrington was not a magician. He described himself as a "psychical researcher". It's true he did have an interest in conjuring and did purchase magic materials (I know someone who has most of his collection). Not a professional magician though. In his book The Physical Phenomena of Spiritualism he wrote "98%" of mediumship is fraudulent. The book annoyed spiritualists because he debunked their methods of slate writing, spirit photography and other ways of moving objects around the room.

No European scientists "supported" Palladino. Even spiritualists such as Frederic Myers and Oliver Lodge caught her cheating, as did other European scientists such as Gustave Le Bon and Albert Dastre, Camille Flammarion and Eugene Antoniadi, Albert Moll and Theodor Lipps.

SPR member Henry Sidgwick published a letter to the British Medical Journal admitting that no British SPR member believed Palladino was genuine. Frank Podmore exposed her tricks in detail.

SPR member Everard Feilding did not work for the British Naval Intelligence. The first books that mention this conspiracy are wacky books on Aleister Crowley which also claim Crowley was working with the British Intelligence... You don't really believe that do you?

Everard Feilding was not a debunker (I only know of one medium he exposed), he was married to the medium Stanislawa Tomczyk and was a firm believer in psychokinesis.

I can't find any evidence Carrington was a member of the Society of American Magicians.

Did they really believe Palladino was genuine? Or were they promoting her for other magicians to expose?

Yes, Hereward Carrington and Fielding both believed Palladino has some genuine "supernormal" ability, but also admitted she used tricks. They had both been duped by Palladino into believing she had some genuine paranormal ability. Neither Carrington or Fielding were professional magicians. When Fielding attempted to replicate the same experiments with the experienced magician William S. Marriott no paranormal phenomena was observed, as Marriott caught Palladino cheating. When professional magicians are present during séances they always find the sleight of hand tricks. Palladino "levitated" the table with her foot. Magician Joseph Rinn and others exposed her tricks. There is no conspiracy.

The Society of American Magicians (SAM) president John W Sargent is asking government to employ their magicians to debunk psychic phenomena.

No reference given.

J W Sargent, is now debunking the medium Eusapia Palladino in a blaze of media. Sargent is also giving magic lessons to a young magician John Mulholland who many years later is employed by CIA during project MK-ULTRA to secretly investigate parapsychology.

John Mulholland investigated sleight of hand tricks with the CIA, he didn't secretly investigate parapsychology.

(perhaps earlier) Harry Houdini is forming his 'own secret service' (Houdini's words) Robert Gysel a fraudulent magician, WS Davis a fraudulent magician, Joe Rinn (who carried a gun) is now assisting Houdini team in debunking psychics.... a young Mulholland (later CIA agent in 1950s may have been involved too) . The police are assisting Harry Houdini's group.

Again original research no references given. It's true Joseph Rinn did briefly carry a gun, but only because a handful of spiritualists attempted to take his life. So a bunch of magicians are friends, and enjoy debunking fraudulent mediums and psychics? There's no conspiracy at all. The keep mentioning of CIA is just trolling. Apart from Mulholland you wouldn't be able to name any other link.

Harry Houdini is debunking a medium called Mina (Margery) Crandon in a prize challenge ....The US secret services are involved too (at least through Houdini's UK manager/politician/spy Harry Day).... again magician Hereward Carrington is promoting medium (some claim they had an affair) ... the outcome of the investigations damages the reputation of Psychical Research ... was that the goal?

No references given, there's no evidence the secret service was involved. It's true Hereward Carrington did have an affair with Mina Crandon, he admitted it in his own notes. Crandon was sleeping around with a lot of men. Even if we ignore Carrington and Houdini completely Crandon was still a fraud. Her ectoplasm was made from animal liver, and her "spirit prints" belonged to an SPR member and dentist. No conspiracy here.

With Houdini dead ... no court cases against his assistant debunkers? No public information about who these debunkers were? No public information about the government secret services involvement in debunking psychic claims?

That's because no government secret services have been involved in debunking the psychic claims that you mention. You are pulling most of your material from a book called The Secret Life of Houdini , the book is not entirely reliable. It invokes conspiracy theories that the spiritualist writer Michael Prescott even laughed at on his blog. You are using sources that your fellow spiritualists oppose, make your mind up.