Psychokinesis (vidéo)

[Open Mind]

Perhaps some thread magic expert out there can confirm to the contrary but Kulagina video does not look like a thread to me, for example look at the 6 second point, her hands aren't moving when the object moves most, unfortunately the camera is zoomed in bit too close at this point to see whole body.

There is much clearer couple of video clips of Kulagina out there on the net (doesn't look like a thread either in couple of places), , I won't provide a link as I think the traffic in here would kill someone's bandwidth quickly ... but you can do a google search

 

[Ashles]

Perhaps some thread magic expert out there can confirm to the contrary but Kulagina video does not look like a thread to me, for example look at the 6 second point, her hands aren't moving when the object moves most, unfortunately the camera is zoomed in bit too close at this point to see whole body.

There are a few ways to do the thread trick.

One involves tying it to the hands - another involves securing the end to, say, your leg and resting the thread over the hands/fingers. That way tension can be applied to the thread without discernable hand movement.

A combination of both creates a very nice effect. It's similar to how David Blaine makes leaves levitate from his palm (which I won't describe).

Would one of the other clips of Nina by any chance involve a perspex box?

 

[Open Mind]

There are a few ways to do the thread trick.

One involves tying it to the hands - another involves securing the end to, say, your leg and resting the thread over the hands/fingers. That way tension can be applied to the thread without discernable hand movement.

Could be, the movement is more to one side through the matches. However I was puzzled why some people were suggesting human hair, it requires thread much longer?

I agree we really need a camera showing the movement of her whole body (and even tongue too, anything that moves )

Would one of the other clips of Nina by any chance involve a perspex box? [/B]

Yeah, quite well known clips.

 

[Garrette]

Ashles beat me to it.

The use of IT is far more developed and involved than most people realize it could ever be.

With a simple pre-set up, and remaining undetectable except to a strip search, one could move something like this can in a direction away from the body and apparently inconsistent with hand/body movements. Especially when the video doesn't really show the body...

 

[Ashles]

Yeah, quite well known clips.

I'd have been slightly more impressed if the box was over the objects before Nina started her manipulations.

It seems the Russian scientists were almost doing everything they could to accomodate any trickery she might choose to use.

 

[Lavie Enrose]

As for Nina Kulagina, the conditions under which she operated were far from acceptable by basic scientific standards. Tests were frequently carried out at her own home or in hotel rooms; no tight controls were ever applied, owing in part to the fact that a demonstration might take several hours of preparation (i.e., concentration by Nina), which, of course, was no guarantee of success. Also, when watching these films, anybody who has a background in magic cannot avoid the feeling that she is using standard conjuring techniques: magnets hidden on her body to move the compass needle; threads or thin hair to move objects across the table; small mirrors concealed in her hand to read signs with numbers and letters being held behind her. Unfortunately, no expert in conjuring techniques was ever present at Kulagina's demonstrations.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

 

[Hitch]

Perhaps some thread magic expert out there can confirm to the contrary but Kulagina video does not look like a thread to me, for example look at the 6 second point, her hands aren't moving when the object moves most, unfortunately the camera is zoomed in bit too close at this point to see whole body.

There is much clearer couple of video clips of Kulagina out there on the net (doesn't look like a thread either in couple of places), , I won't provide a link as I think the traffic in here would kill someone's bandwidth quickly ... but you can do a google search

That's where the art of a stage magician comes in. Anyone can use an "invisible thread" to move a light object, but a really good stage magician can make it seem impossible for that to be the answer.

 

[jambo372]

jambo should look up the book by John LeClaire on working with Invisible Thread. I reckon jambo discounts thread in the Nina case partly because HE can't see it. In actual fact, nobody can see Invisible Thread unless they know what to look for. It is a magician's prop that can be made to look like miracles are taking place. It would definitely be available in Nina's time -- a long blonde hair is quite effective.

Plus jambo has no conception of how this is done. He doesn't know about LOOPS for example. Or, about how one effect can be achieved by a variety of trick methods.

All he has to do is google on magic and invisible thread to find hundreds of suppliers. Or drop in to the shop at the bottom of (note sure what street) off Argyll Street in Glasgow to Tam Shepherd's magic shop and ask for some IT plus an instruction video. Then he could really amaze his friends. I'm not giving away secrets here as this stuff is readily available from any good magic shop. You have to buy it, to understand it properly.

When are we going to see this Randi e-mail that so upset jambo's applecart?

Oh, and for Beth - video is not accepted for the challenge. The JREF will video a demo, but other precautions will already have been put in place - including eliminating magnets and IT and anything that might effect, for instance, a candle flame other than mindpower, ghosts, or 'energies'.

I can't attach the email. If you're so desperate to see it, I might be able to send it to you if I had your email details.

As for long blonde hair - this can be easly seen. They could snap anyway and since Nina Kulagina had dark hair she'd run out. Unless she stole/borrowed a blonde's comb.

I wouldn't waste money on invisible thread.

 

[Garrette]

Of course you wouldn't waste money on invisible thread just as you obviously won't waste money on books and won't waste time on educating yourself.

However, regarding the e-mail, I offer two options:

1. Cut and paste the content into a reply on this thread

2. I'll send you my e-mail address and you can forward it to me

 

[Garrette]

Double post

 

[Azrael 5]

Open Mind originally wrote

Perhaps some thread magic expert out there can confirm to the contrary but Kulagina video does not look like a thread to me, for example look at the 6 second point, her hands aren't moving when the object moves most

Harry Blackstone Jnr floated a lit lightbulb across the audience in a theatre in the 70/80's(dunno which from memory)his hands were nowhere near it.

 

[Open Mind]

Azrael, I wasn't saying it wasn't a trick. Anyone who has read my past posts will already know I've always said I don't really think macro PK under the control of the human willpower exists.... Poltergeist macro PK claims are harder to completely rule out since it would require a confused poltergeist trying to prove something to science ..... however if humans had such super macro PK powers at their command, as shown here, I think it would already have been proven by now.

Yes I do think some ESP mental phenomena exists, I have no fixed opinions on PK ... well except that a degree of micro PK is perhaps required to explain such a mechanism as ESP.

I was just questioning whether thread explanation is the correct one.... and although the possiblity of a longer invisible thread did enter my mind I was rather confused why magicians were talking about hair which would not seem long enough. In some of her other clips, if it is a thread, her hands have very little to do with it (other than place it over object perhaps) would have to be attached to other areas of lower body I think..... time for a book I think

 

[The Mighty Thor]

I can't attach the email. If you're so desperate to see it, I might be able to send it to you if I had your email details.

As for long blonde hair - this can be easly seen. They could snap anyway and since Nina Kulagina had dark hair she'd run out. Unless she stole/borrowed a blonde's comb.

I wouldn't waste money on invisible thread.

If you don't buy some invisible Thread, you will never know just how hard it is to see it. The hair has nothing to do with it. That was an old way to do PK in bad lighting. Kuligina would know where to get IT from -- hint - ladies' stockings or tights. Before you say anything, getting IT from this source needs knowledge of the technique.

As Ashles and others have said -- it's not just the thread, it's the way magicians use it. A magician could stand right opposite you and attach an end of the thread to YOU, and you'd never know.

IT does break That's why charlatans only move light objects and often FAIL -- i.e. their thread broke.

 

[The Mighty Thor]

Azrael, I wasn't saying it wasn't a trick. Anyone who has read my past posts will already know I've always said I don't really think macro PK under the control of the human willpower exists.... Poltergeist macro PK claims are harder to completely rule out since it would require a confused poltergeist trying to prove something to science ..... however if humans had such super macro PK powers at their command, as shown here, I think it would already have been proven by now.

Yes I do think some ESP mental phenomena exists, I have no fixed opinions on PK ... well except that a degree of micro PK is perhaps required to explain such a mechanism as ESP.

I was just questioning whether thread explanation is the correct one.... and although the possiblity of a longer invisible thread did enter my mind I was rather confused why magicians were talking about hair which would not seem long enough. In some of her other clips, if it is a thread, her hands have very little to do with it (other than place it over object perhaps) would have to be attached to other areas of lower body I think..... time for a book I think

Have you seen country singer Crystal Gail's hair?

Book and DVD:

http://www.magictalk.com/cgi-bin/reviews.cgi?read=144

http://www.penguinmagic.com/product.php?ID=686

I have the book -- the techniques are astounding.

As for length of thread, do a google on magic and thread reel.

 

[jambo372]

Of course you wouldn't waste money on invisible thread just as you obviously won't waste money on books and won't waste time on educating yourself.

However, regarding the e-mail, I offer two options:

1. Cut and paste the content into a reply on this thread

2. I'll send you my e-mail address and you can forward it to me

What have books got to do with anything ? I've got several of them.

Send me an email address then.

 

[Garrette]

jambo,

The books would be those regarding magic tricks, particularly the use of invisible thread.

Check pm for my e-mail.

 

[jambo372]

jambo,

The books would be those regarding magic tricks, particularly the use of invisible thread.

Check pm for my e-mail.

You should have the email now. Randi claims the thread is CLEARLY visible in the 16mm of film. I can't see it at all never mind CLEARLY. Another one of his accusations.

 

[Azrael 5]

You should have the email now. Randi claims the thread is CLEARLY visible in the 16mm of film. I can't see it at all never mind CLEARLY. Another one of his accusations.

jambo why dont you just tells us-supported by verifiable evidence-how she did it?

 

[cyr]

Have you seen the 16mm film?

It just might be a little clearer than this low-res MPEG clip that looks like it was digitized from a crappy VHS tape...

 

[Garrette]

I am unsure why jambo could not have done this, but here is the e-mail with Randi he had last year, as e-mailed to me but with jambo's e-mail address cut out:

From: James Randi

To: xxxxxx

Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 10:01 PM

Subject: FW: james randi

I never heard of Demkina, and why hasn’t SHE come to ME to collect the prize? Should I chase after her and beg her to take the money?

Since you’ve no knowledge of conjuring, I can’t argue the Kulagina matter with you.

Yes, the explanation was discarded by idiots who knew nothing and were blind – the solution can CLEARLY be seen in the 16-mm film.

The threads passed UNDER the plastic – NOT GLASS! – container they used.

How old are you? Am I arguing with a child….?

James Randi


-----Original Message-----

From: Linda [mailto:info@randi.org]

Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 3:38 PM

To: James Randi

Cc: kramer@randi.org

Subject: FW: james randi


-----Original Message-----

From: xxxx

Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 2:00 PM

To: jref@randi.org

Subject: james randi

I have a few questions I would like answered .

If James Randi is as brilliant as he claims , why doesn't he get Natasha Demkina to take his million dollar challenge ? She'd soon burn a whole in his pocket .

Secondly , why did James Randi say that he had debunked Nina Kulagina when he did no such thing ? He said she used tiny threads too fine to see to move objects .

This explanation had already been discarded way back in the 1960's - she could still move objects - even when checked for magnets , threads & static electricity .

The objects were placed under a glass container & still moved - can thread penetrate through glass ? No .