Are "woo" researchers ever fully discredited?

[desertyeti]

Since Erik VonDaniken's 1970's alien pyramid-builders seems to have faded (mostly) into oblivion, and Uri Gellar's tricks are being done by school children around the world, I was wondering this past weekend about some of the modern-day "researchers" who are being avidly followed by many misinformed and ignorant people in the mainstream. There's a wide variety of con-men and huxters that seem to be cropping up in every corner of the paranormal world. But does their b.s. ever actually catch up to them and stick?

1) Jimmy Swaggart got busted with a hooker, and he essentially vanished. But now I hear he's coming back to some degree.
2) Pat Robertson makes b.s. predictions all the time that are constantly proven fales, yet he's still got an entire t.v. network behind him.
3) Jeff Meldrum's claimed that two hoaxed Bigfoot videos are absolutely the real deal, and tried to tell the world that an elk's body imprint is an ape-man's assprint, but he's still selling books on the subject.
4) Sylvia Brown keeps getting busted on Montel's show making wild claims about dead relatives that aren't even dead yet, but she's somehow paying the bills.
5) John Edwards is still convincing rubes that he talks to dead people even though his show's been yanked from most major audiences.

So I'm wondering how long this residual effect lasts. Are there any spiritualists from the 1950s or earlier, for example, that are remembered and/or followed today? Or does this kind of thing have a shelf-life, so to speak? Witnessing this country's current angel-, demon-, and ghost-absession, I'm afraid I already have my answer, but I'm just curious about what anyone else thinks. Now...back to coffee...

 

[Ersby]

As far as parapsychology is concerned, one or two: Soal and Levy are both considered largely discredited. And Sargent's work has a question mark over it after Blackmore's revelations.

I can't think of any psychics who've had their career ruined by any kind of debunking.

 

[volatile]

As far as parapsychology is concerned, one or two: Soal and Levy are both considered largely discredited. And Sargent's work has a question mark over it after Blackmore's revelations.

I can't think of any psychics who've had their career ruined by any kind of debunking.

Popoff? Didn't he file for bankruptcy after Randi outed him?

 

[kitakaze]

Would Beckjord count?

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Some researchers may be discredited, but the topics will never be.

~~ Paul

 

[Ersby]

I find that quite interesting. In science, topics can be discredited. Ideas like phrenology and eugenics can have a period of popular support, but if the idea doesn't work, it'll eventually fall by the wayside.

In the paranormal, topics are hardly ever discredited. Even when reasonable explanations are put forward, or the hoaxers reveal themselves (take a bow, circle makers) the people investigating the phenomena don't seem able to let go.

 

[CynicalSkeptic]

Popoff? Didn't he file for bankruptcy after Randi outed him?

Yup, but he's making a comeback. Peter Popoff^WP

 

[kitakaze]

I find that quite interesting. In science, topics can be discredited. Ideas like phrenology and eugenics can have a period of popular support, but if the idea doesn't work, it'll eventually fall by the wayside.

In the paranormal, topics are hardly ever discredited. Even when reasonable explanations are put forward, or the hoaxers reveal themselves (take a bow, circle makers) the people investigating the phenomena don't seem able to let go.

I wish the idea of eugenics would fall a little more by the wayside.

 

[Mojo]

In the paranormal, topics are hardly ever discredited. Even when reasonable explanations are put forward, or the hoaxers reveal themselves (take a bow, circle makers) the people investigating the phenomena don't seem able to let go.

It's the old "well, it may have been faked on that particular occasion, but surely some instances of the phenomenon must be genuine" line.

Another classic pseudoscience dodge is to claim that while properly controlled tests appear to show no effects, this is because they are somehow not appropriate to the phenomena in question. In the case of psi it is claimed that this is because it is "actively evasive". Homoeopaths are producing ever more bizarre excuses for not using dbpc trials to test homoeopathy, the most recent (as far as I'm aware) being "quantum entanglement" between the homoeopath, the remedy and the patient which is somehow undermined by the process of testing.

 

[Steven Howard]

Some specific paranormal or pseudoscientific effects do go out of fashion, but not very often. Off the top of my head, I can only think of three: slate writing (because nobody has slates any more, for one thing), ectoplasm, and biorhythms.

You remember biorhythms. You did some math based on your birthday and it told you what kind of day you were going to have. Back in the '70s they used to print them in the newspaper right next to the other "woo" features: horoscopes and Ann Landers.

 

[ObscureReferenceMan]

People still quote Nostradamus. It's the old "remember the hits, forget the misses" axiom.

SH - I think I recall people referencing biorythms on occasion.

 

[Miss Whiplash]

Verified by author Ray Garton concerning "demonologist" Ed Warren:

Ray Garton on Ed Warren's Hoaxes

I passed this on to CFI and Joe Nickell put it in Warren's obituary.

 

[Doc Daneeka]

You remember biorhythms. You did some math based on your birthday and it told you what kind of day you were going to have. Back in the '70s they used to print them in the newspaper right next to the other "woo" features: horoscopes and Ann Landers.

They were still putting biorhythm charts in some papers here until just a few years ago. Is Toronto some sort of 70's holdout?

 

[ponderingturtle]

People still quote Nostradamus. It's the old "remember the hits, forget the misses" axiom.

SH - I think I recall people referencing biorythms on occasion.

You just have to be sufficinetly obscure and vague and you never have a miss only hits. I thought everyone knew that.

 

[Sugriva]

So I'm wondering how long this residual effect lasts. Are there any spiritualists from the 1950s or earlier, for example, that are remembered and/or followed today? Or does this kind of thing have a shelf-life, so to speak? Witnessing this country's current angel-, demon-, and ghost-absession, I'm afraid I already have my answer, but I'm just curious about what anyone else thinks. Now...back to coffee...

I wish it had a shelf-life; unfortunately it just gets repackaged with slight modifications over time. Either the gurus of the paranormal continue their influence by "inspiring" the like minded (Von Daniken spawning the likes of Zechariah Sitchin come to mind) or their popularity continues, albeit somewhat diminished (Edgar Cayce still has his admirers), or their popularity actually grows after death (Mary Baker Eddy and L. Ron Hubbard seem to fit the bill here).
.....Same as the old boss.

 

[Aepervius]

Other question :

are "woo" researcher ever really credited, except by media and the "folk" ?

 

[ComsatAngel2017]

I believe one of the Randle & Schmidt "investigative" UFO duo who claimed to be a physics graduate was outed as actually being a mailman. He was subsequently dropped, hot-potato like, by the other researcher. Sorry, but I can't remember which was the guilty party.

 

[carcharodon]

Now...back to coffee...

You seem a tad irate. May I suggest a cold shower instead? Wouldn't want you popping a blood vessel old son.

 

[carcharodon]

Since Erik VonDaniken's 1970's alien pyramid-builders seems to have faded (mostly) into oblivion, and Uri Gellar's tricks are being done by school children around the world, I was wondering this past weekend about some of the modern-day "researchers" who are being avidly followed by many misinformed and ignorant people in the mainstream. There's a wide variety of con-men and huxters that seem to be cropping up in every corner of the paranormal world. But does their b.s. ever actually catch up to them and stick?

3) Jeff Meldrum's claimed that two hoaxed Bigfoot videos are absolutely the real deal, and tried to tell the world that an elk's body imprint is an ape-man's assprint, but he's still selling books on the subject.

Excuse me? Is it established and proven that it is an elk print then? Who proved this? Where? When? Did not Dr Darius Swindler also claim it was an unclassified primate? Did not Dr Esteban Sarmiento also give it plaudits? I seem to recal that every point you made on this particular subject over on BFF was easily refuted and there was some stalemate with neither side budging. Neither side had the monopoly of proof over the other. Hell, for all you know it could have been a clever hoax.

Soooooooooooo.........not making unverified and unproven claims are we Desert Yeti???

It's an elk print? Fact? Because YOU say so? Why, as far as I know, you haven't examined the original have you?

I smell arrogance. Ooops, I shouldn't have said that. I should be quiet when the 'great Desert Yeti' is holding court. Oh well.

 

[LAL]

And what two hoaxed Bigfoot videos? Dr. Meldrum exposed Snow Walker. What other hoaxed Bigfoot video are we talking about here?

BTW, experts can be wrong, but only if they're on the other side.