This is just a magicians stunt, right?

[RonSceptic]

Another item to watch for is "forehead wrinkling" in the area of the center of the forhead. Watch your favorite politicians on TV sometime.

Yes, I seem to remember something about the eyes lokking up and to the left slightly too.

 

[Humphreys]

Drooper - and others - of course I don't disagree it is possible to get subtle hints or clues to tell whether someone may be lying. I simply don't believe it is possible to do this reliably or to anywhere near the standard Derren Brown would have us believe. Someone skilled in psychology could guess whether someone is being honest, accurately over 50% of the time, I'm sure. But Derren Brown claims nothing like 50-60% reliability. For him to be willing to put his life on the line, he is giving the impression he has near 100% reliability. Of course this is not the case.

I suggest you never go watch Randi perform, you would hate him. He is always lying to and misleading the audience.

I disagree, I think Randi is great. There is of course a difference between standard magicians and Derren Brown, as we shall see.

Randi claims to be an illusionist. He claims to perfom tricks using sleight of hand, misdirection and other standard magician techniques. Derren Brown, however, claims to have given these up long ago and moved on into the realm of psychological tricks and mind manipulation. He has done nothing of the kind.

Do you really not believe this could be aggravating to a standard magician? A standard magician who can no longer get publicity because he is still performing using regular magician techniques, just as Derren is! The only difference is that Derren has lied to make himself appear to be something else altogether - he isn't.

They are the same, exactly the same. Randi and Derren use the very same techiniques in their acts. They are not of a different ilk. Uri Geller also uses the exact same techinques, but we have only Randi being honest and claiming to be a standard magician. The frauds Derren and Uri try to make us believe they are different, and different gets you on T.V.

As to your weak rebuttal of my example where human reaction can be predicted, others have since provided better supporting evidence.

But I haven't stated human behavior cannot be predicted. It can, for sure, just not anywhere near the degree Derren claims.

However, I do not rule out the ability of somebody properly trained and experienced to be able to tell truth from lie with a better than chance result on some subjects

I'm certain some people can achieve greater than chance results. Perhaps in the range of 60-70% on true/false questions.

Not enough to make any difference in a Russian Roulette stunt, however, where Derren would have us believe he can achieve 100% accuracy!

I hope you can see the point I am trying to get across.

 

[Humphreys]

I may not be getting my point across very well, so I have linked to an article I have found which states my reasons for having concerns with Derren a little clearer.

http://www.simonsingh.net/Derren_Brown_Article.html

Pay particluar attention to this quote:

Portsmouth University's Professor Aldert Vrij, an expert in methods for identifying deception, says, "People think that you can use body and voice cues to spot lies, but in fact it is much harder than it seems. There might be some excellent lie detectors but I don't know anybody who can consistently and reliably spot a lie. It is beyond current scientific knowledge. Even polygraph machines are not reliable."

And a Randi-like challenge to Derren:

Finally, I suppose I should put my money where my mouth is. Derren performed two stunts on This Morning. If he can repeat them - read my childhood thoughts and replicate a drawing that I make - then I will happily donate £1,000 to charity. Derren, if you are happy to accept the challenge, then just contact the Telegraph offices.

Still not a "woo-woo"?

What are your opinions on this?

 

[fsol]

Lets play a guessing game. Who shall we atribute the following quote to?

I am an author, journalist and TV producer, specialising in science and mathematics, the only two subjects I have the faintest clue about.

http://www.simonsingh.net/home.html

Ah yes, from his home page. Well that makes me chuckle. Simon Singh is a good author his Fermats Last Theorum book is very good for example. But, regardless here is an extract from another of his articles.

In addition to physical misdirection, there is also mental misdirection, which misdirects suspicion rather than attention. Mental misdirection is particularly useful because it hinders the audience’s attempt to figure out how the trick is done. If the magician can temporarily direct the audience’s suspicion towards a false method, they will be less likely to discover the real one. During the trick, they think they know the method, but at the end are shown to be wrong. By that time, it is too late for them to figure out the real method.

http://www.simonsingh.net/The_Psychology_of_Magic.html

Could this be a psychological technique that is "the real stuff of magic," as Derren would say? Well I think so and so does Simon Singh apparently. So I don't really see what he is complaining about.