lew@ihuxr.UUCP (01/20/84)
I bought this book hoping to find something about the remote viewing experiments depicted in NOVA: THe case for ESP. I was not disappointed. The book is a collection of articles written by Gardner on a variety of topics, and published in various magazines. Many are reviews of books relating to paranormal phenomena. A significant fraction have to do with the activities of Puthoff & Targ (P & T) who conducted the experiment depicted in NOVA. Gardner has an extensive history of knocking heads with P & T, starting I think with a 1975 article he wrote about Targ's ESP teaching machine and its negative results under controlled conditions. The book reproduces letters Gardner exchanged with Targ, and Gardner comments on various followups to the situations described. Gardner compares the Uri Geller phenomenon with similar incidents in the 1890's. A striking parallel is that conventional scientists were the principal dupes in those days too. (Zollner, an Austrian astrophysicist, eg) He describes P&T's involvement with Geller extensively. P&T's remote viewing is discussed in a review of the book, MINDREACH. One gets quite a different perspective on the whole set-up compared to what came across in the NOVA program. For example, there is quite a scientology crowd involved. This includes Puthoff, who is not only "clear" but has advanced to some sort of "Thetan" degree. The principal subject, Price, was similarly advanced in this respect. NOVA's lack of mention of this is damning in itself, I think. Gardner and Randi are viewed by some as extremists who categorically reject claims solely on the basis of their conventional prejudices, and who are so insecure as to stoop to personal attacks in the face of any rational challenge. I think their point is that trying to approach this mess as though it were a scientific dispute is a gross misjudgement in itself. The careers of various parapsychologists intertwine and run in and out of all sorts of bizarre situations. You should think about this entire context before agreeing to accept them on the terms of conventional science. Lew Mammel, Jr. ihnp4!ihuxr!lew
rene@umcp-cs.UUCP (01/25/84)
>>From cvl!rlgvax!seismo!harpo!ihnp4!ihuxr!lew Wed Dec 31 19:00:00 1969 >> >>P&T's remote viewing is discussed in a review of the book, MINDREACH. One >>gets quite a different perspective on the whole set-up compared to what >>came across in the NOVA program. For example, there is quite a scientology >>crowd involved. This includes Puthoff, who is not only "clear" but has >>advanced to some sort of "Thetan" degree. The principal subject, Price, >>was similarly advanced in this respect. NOVA's lack of mention of this >>is damning in itself, I think. >> >> Lew Mammel, Jr. ihnp4!ihuxr!lew Why are the people's religious affiliations important? Does it matter if the guy doing whatever is being studied is a guru or an agnostic? Surely what he does is what should be critically looked at and tested, rather than his background. I commend NOVA for not mentioning that they were Scientologists, as this is background info that has nothing to do with what the show was about, yet will immediately predjudice many people against what they were trying to show was or was not possible. Arguments "ad hominum" should be ignored. - rene -- Arpa: rene.umcp-cs@CSNet-relay Uucp:...{allegra,seismo}!umcp-cs!rene
chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (01/25/84)
Yes; religious background should not be a factor. Unfortunately
it often is. According to *Science: Good, Bad & Bogus*, the
Scientology people are what is known as ``true believers'' and may
(*may* -- not *will*) mislead themselves into finding what they
want, rather than what their data shows.
Now for an aside. Let us, just for a moment, suppose/know/imagine/
verb-you-will-accept-here that there really are such things as
``psychic powers''. Let us further presume that these are *not*
abilities that everyone has; that only a small percentage of the
population has these abilities, and that there is no way for the
general person-on-the-street to ever even develop such. Now, if
this were true (and I'm *not* claiming it is), do you think that
those with these odd abilities would go about demonstrating it?
Consider well the history of mankind: the terrible things done in
the name of [insert name here] because someone was ``different''.
Suppose that no ESP experiment has been repeatable because the
subject realized what might happen to her/him. Do you seriously
believe that when we, oops, strike that...
Boy, had you going for a minute there, didn't I? *snicker*
--
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci
UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet: chris@umcp-cs ARPA: chris.umcp-cs@CSNet-Relayhutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) (01/30/84)
(This follows up a discussion by Rene at umcp-cs of a followup by Lew Mammel on an earlier topic, were Rene asks why Lew's condemnation of the Nova program for failing to point out the Scientologist connections of some of the participants in some of its segments) It is important to note the number of Scientologists involved precisely because of their affiliations to that particular organisation. The Church of Scientology is on the face of it a scam, using spurious techniques and equipment to delude its followers into believing that a scientific method is being appled to the solution of their problems. Obviously some of the persons involved have no knowledge of the fakery involved in the expensive process of "getting clear" and such persons are not deliberately practicing chicanery. The point of all this is, that if ESP phenomena are really a result of their religious practices (and don't bother to call it anything else) then members of other religions, or persons who do not wish to become involved in a religious practice, will be better advised to look for a different approach. A further point is that the history of fakery coming from that organisation renders all assertions coming from it as immediately more questionable than they were otherwise. Hutch