View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Discussions about the James Randi Educational Foundation and its Million Dollar Challenge.

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ciscop » 21 Sep 2009, 13:57

Woodguard wrote:Hi,
I think the real question here is did Uri always fake his spoon bending thing.
He was caught on video using magic(fake) tricks to bend spoons like Randi showed.
Did he always do it this way, I don't think so.

It is probably easier to fake bending a spoon on TV, with all the pressure to perform on time and every time.
And Uri does like being in the spot light.

I always felt Randi's attacks on Uri come from the fact that Uri has something Randi will never have, "A little bit of real magic".


Woodguard from Canada.


um? yep... he bends spoons with sleight of hand like any other magician does since then and now
nothing wrong with that
the problem with uri is that he scamed many people in believing he was for real
;)
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04






Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby creepingdeath_120mm » 21 Sep 2009, 17:21

Woodguard wrote:Hi,
I think the real question here is did Uri always fake his spoon bending thing.
He was caught on video using magic(fake) tricks to bend spoons like Randi showed.
Did he always do it this way, I don't think so.

It is probably easier to fake bending a spoon on TV, with all the pressure to perform on time and every time.
And Uri does like being in the spot light.

I always felt Randi's attacks on Uri come from the fact that Uri has something Randi will never have, "A little bit of real magic".


Woodguard from Canada.


I agree. Uri does have something Randi will never have, "the ability to scam people with no remorse".
creepingdeath_120mm
 
Posts: 6
Joined: 19 Sep 2009, 00:40

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby Woodguard » 21 Sep 2009, 23:40

If Uri is a total fake what about all the lab tests. Look at the YouTube video Scepcop posted early.
Or do you hold to the idea like Randi, that a trained Scientist cannot design an experiment properly. :lol:
One yes, but several.

And just a side note, I seem to be putting Randi in a bad light. I like Randi and have respected for his work, not all of it.
But we need people like him, but just not so lock in his ways.


Woodguard from Canada.
Woodguard from Canada.
User avatar
Woodguard
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 21 Sep 2009, 08:17

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ciscop » 22 Sep 2009, 02:44

yes
several scientists can be fooled by a skilled magician such as geller
those scientists arent trained in sleight of hand nor they did controls therefore they were playing in uri geller´s field of expertise

i am not saying those scientists were stupid, im saying they acted as lay person and spectators to uri gellers tricks
just like any other guy will see a magic show and dont know how is it done, that´s how the scientists saw geller

and it has been proved before scientists (and parapsychologist mostly) are easy to trick when they have a bias towards believing in PSI
we have known that since the alpha project commanded by randi, where 2 magicians fooled scientists for over 2 years.
so yes.. SCIENTISTS THAT ARENT TRAINED IN SLEIGHT OF HAND or USE CONTROLS AT ALL.. are like shooting ducks for a scam artists as geller.
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby Woodguard » 24 Sep 2009, 08:46

Can you real say that all the scientists that tested Uri early in life are 100% wrong? Not one knew how to do his job.

You cannot say this without looking at the data and reviewing each test and protocol.

I think your giving Uri too much credit as a magician, he sloppy and not very good. Just look at the videos.
Woodguard from Canada.
User avatar
Woodguard
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 21 Sep 2009, 08:17

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ProfWag » 25 Sep 2009, 01:44

Uri actually was a good magician 40 years ago. Ask any magician, (myself included,) and they will tell you that it is much, much harder to fool children than adults. I hated doing kid's shows as they could always point out what I was doing. The more educated one becomes, the less obvious an illusion is to that person.
When Uri was on Phenomenon in the US a couple years ago, he did a simple math trick, but he has a good stage presence and a look about him that helps his cause.
I can't speak on all things he has done, but I personally have never seen him do anything paranormal.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby Kevin Kane » 27 Jan 2010, 02:25

It actually should be pointed out .. again and again .. that the Uri Stanford tests were never debunked by any skeptics. And the skeptic theories to explain how Uri managed to do what he did at SRI are not just unproven theories .. but improbable and ridiculous theories. And yet, skeptics keep making these assertions without the slightest bit of proof or evidence to support their wild claims. According to skeptic theories, Uri would have to be Plastic Man ... peeking thru keyholes, hiding materials in floor cracks, making hypnotic suggestions, and other silliness, all without being caught on film, all at the spur of the moment without any preparation or foreknowledge.
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ciscop » 27 Jan 2010, 03:53

Kevin Kane wrote:It actually should be pointed out .. again and again .. that the Uri Stanford tests were never debunked by any skeptics. And the skeptic theories to explain how Uri managed to do what he did at SRI are not just unproven theories .. but improbable and ridiculous theories. And yet, skeptics keep making these assertions without the slightest bit of proof or evidence to support their wild claims. According to skeptic theories, Uri would have to be Plastic Man ... peeking thru keyholes, hiding materials in floor cracks, making hypnotic suggestions, and other silliness, all without being caught on film, all at the spur of the moment without any preparation or foreknowledge.


yes
they were debunked

uri has being caught cheated
he accepted a magic award
he is a magician, you dummy

What i do on stage when i perform
is a MIMIC of what Uri Did, i bend spoons and do draw duplications, just the way uri did
he is a great performer
but he is a magician
nothing more, nothing less

the standford tests just like Project Alpha proved that Parapsychologists CAN BE TRICKED
thats it

im sorry to burst your dumb bubble
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ProfWag » 27 Jan 2010, 03:56

Kevin Kane wrote:It actually should be pointed out .. again and again .. that the Uri Stanford tests were never debunked by any skeptics. And the skeptic theories to explain how Uri managed to do what he did at SRI are not just unproven theories .. but improbable and ridiculous theories. And yet, skeptics keep making these assertions without the slightest bit of proof or evidence to support their wild claims. According to skeptic theories, Uri would have to be Plastic Man ... peeking thru keyholes, hiding materials in floor cracks, making hypnotic suggestions, and other silliness, all without being caught on film, all at the spur of the moment without any preparation or foreknowledge.

Uhm, perhaps you should research that statement about Uri and SRI a little more...
Here's something to help you get started: http://www-stat.stanford.edu/~cgates/PE ... rs/ESP.pdf (specifically, 2nd page, 3rd column, 2nd paragraph down)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby Kevin Kane » 27 Jan 2010, 04:40

ProfWag wrote:Uhm, perhaps you should research that statement about Uri and SRI a little more...
Here's something to help you get started: http://www-stat.stanford.edu/~cgates/PE ... rs/ESP.pdf (specifically, 2nd page, 3rd column, 2nd paragraph down)


So you're saying that the tests were faulty because Ray Hyman was not allowed to observe and didn't get his ass kissed? And that the investigators were having coffee with Uri? Now that's some serious Woo.


There is no evidence to indicate that Uri committed fraud or trickery at SRI. Nor is there evidence to suggest investigators screwed up. To infer such is to fabricate. A thorough review of proceedures indicates only minor flaws. To suggest that Uri exploited these minor flaws is doubtful and improbable. Based on the evidence, Uri Geller demonstrated psychic ability. Believe whatever you like, but there is no evidence to back up skeptic beliefs that Uri tricked the Stanford team.
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ProfWag » 27 Jan 2010, 05:08

Kevin Kane wrote:
ProfWag wrote:Uhm, perhaps you should research that statement about Uri and SRI a little more...
Here's something to help you get started: http://www-stat.stanford.edu/~cgates/PE ... rs/ESP.pdf (specifically, 2nd page, 3rd column, 2nd paragraph down)


So you're saying that the tests were faulty because Ray Hyman was not allowed to observe and didn't get his ass kissed? And that the investigators were having coffee with Uri? Now that's some serious Woo.


There is no evidence to indicate that Uri committed fraud or trickery at SRI. Nor is there evidence to suggest investigators screwed up. To infer such is to fabricate. A thorough review of proceedures indicates only minor flaws. To suggest that Uri exploited these minor flaws is doubtful and improbable. Based on the evidence, Uri Geller demonstrated psychic ability. Believe whatever you like, but there is no evidence to back up skeptic beliefs that Uri tricked the Stanford team.

No, that's not what I was saying at all. Your statements were written in a manner that the reader would think that Uri's Stanford experiments could not be debunked by skeptics when, in fact by their own admission in the aforementioned article, the researches spent just 2 hours with Uri and their time was informal and his presentation was in an uncontrolled environment. As such, there is nothing to "bunk" or "debunk."
Additionally, a review of the procedures actually indicates that there were no procedures set up by Targ and Puthoff at all. It was all controlled by Geller. It is true that there is no evidence to back up that Uri tricked the team, but it's also true that there is no evidence that what he did was anything paranormal. Just to make sure that is clear to anyone who may not know this story.
Find me an experiment that Geller was involved in that was in a controlled atmosphere and that does not have questionable controls established and then we'll talk. And while you're at it, how about bringing in the extraterrestrials that Uri claims had given him his power. That will surely help with his validity!
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby NinjaPuppy » 27 Jan 2010, 06:05

I saw Uri on TV the other night. He obviously has a plastic surgeon who can do magic. Uri looks fantastic, considering his age.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ProfWag » 27 Jan 2010, 06:22

NinjaPuppy wrote:I saw Uri on TV the other night. He obviously has a plastic surgeon who can do magic. Uri looks fantastic, considering his age.

When he was younger, he wanted to be a rock star. He loved the limelight and enjoyed the wild life (especially women and being the center of attention.) I don't think he ever married so he probably still enjoys that lifestyle. At least, that's what his manager said on A&E Biography.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby Kevin Kane » 27 Jan 2010, 06:25

ProfWag wrote:No, that's not what I was saying at all. Your statements were written in a manner that the reader would think that Uri's Stanford experiments could not be debunked by skeptics when, in fact by their own admission in the aforementioned article, the researches spent just 2 hours with Uri and their time was informal and his presentation was in an uncontrolled environment. As such, there is nothing to "bunk" or "debunk."


No, it says that some preliminary tests were performed in an informal environment which skeptic/chauffeur Persi Diaconis observed. Later tests were performed in a controlled environment. Those are the tests that are on the record and Uri passed. Persi Diaconis criticized the tests and got his ass handed to him by Puthoff and Targ. It only goes to show that skeptics don't make good scientists.
User avatar
Kevin Kane
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 01:18

Re: Was Randi Wrong about Uri Geller?

Postby ciscop » 27 Jan 2010, 08:49

Kevin Kane wrote:
ProfWag wrote:No, that's not what I was saying at all. Your statements were written in a manner that the reader would think that Uri's Stanford experiments could not be debunked by skeptics when, in fact by their own admission in the aforementioned article, the researches spent just 2 hours with Uri and their time was informal and his presentation was in an uncontrolled environment. As such, there is nothing to "bunk" or "debunk."


No, it says that some preliminary tests were performed in an informal environment which skeptic/chauffeur Persi Diaconis observed. Later tests were performed in a controlled environment. Those are the tests that are on the record and Uri passed. Persi Diaconis criticized the tests and got his ass handed to him by Puthoff and Targ. It only goes to show that skeptics don't make good scientists.


hahahahaha
you hate skeptics so much that you even wanna believe in uri.. Thats so pathetic
uri believers are laughable
[youtube] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mtprdOP ... re=related[/youtube]
you gotta be so easy to scam
being so naive

im sorry but uri has being caught cheating
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

PreviousNext

Return to JREF / Randi Challenge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron