Hindu Rope Trick

[Maxell]

The Hindu Rope Trick

Science has never been able to explain the remarkable feat of "white magic" know as the Hindu rope trick. Since the time of Marco Polo Western travelers have marveled at this uncanny and inexplicable performance. There are many variations, but the trick in ins complete and classic form is described as follows: the conjurer takes a large ball of rope, fastens one end to a sack, and tosses the other into the air. Instead of falling, the ropes keeps ascending until its upper end is lost to sight, while its lower end becomes taut. The performer's boy helper climbs lightly up the rope until he too disappears. When he is ordered down, his voice is heard, refusing. Angered, the man climbs after him with a knife between his teeth. Soon, to the horror of the crowd, blood and pieces of the boy's body shower down. the magician returns and throws a sheet over the dismembered corpse. In a moment, he removes the sheet and reveals the boy smiling and well. Though some photographs show parts of the performance, photographers usually get nowhere. For instance, some British soldiers once slipped into the audience of a magician with a camera and stop watch. The watch functioned and showed their time perception to be accurate, but their negatives were entirely blank. The jealously guarded secret of the fakirs is still safe from prying curiosity.

-------------------

edited: This article can be found at http://www.ety.com/HRP/media/hypnotism.htm. I've edited out the last paragraphs because quoting whole articles is against the forum rules.

[Pyrrho]

Why should science have to explain it? Accounts of it are anecdotal and to explain away anecdotes is a fool's errand, because anecdotes are so unreliable when it comes to meaningful detail.

Anyway, here's one explanation that requires no mass hypnotism:

solution removed as it violates forum rules

Besides, the classic "rope trick" is widely considered to be a myth in the first place.

[renata]

The Hindu rope trick has been explained many times in literature. There is nothing magical about it. It is clever and must have been quite shocking at its time.

This website has a rule about revealing magic secrets on the forum, however. You can find out the information by googling for it.


ooops...beaten to it....and by a moderator :)

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by renata
The Hindu rope trick has been explained many times in literature. There is nothing magical about it. It is clever and must have been quite shocking at its time.

This website has a rule about revealing magic secrets on the forum, however. You can find out the information by googling for it.


ooops...beaten to it....and by a moderator :)
Thanks for the reminder. I goofed up.

[renata]

Originally posted by Pyrrho

Thanks for the reminder. I goofed up.

Bad moderator! No cookie! :D

[rustypouch]

I liked P&T's take on it in their magic and mystery tour series, when they went to India.

[Stumpy]

Last week on UK's channel 4 they did a 2 hour special entitled "The 50 greatest magic tricks".

They did show some footage of the rope trick being performed in India. However it consisted of a rope being place into a basket, rising vertically before a boy climbed the rope, when the boy climbed back down, the rope collapsed. If I recall correctly the presenter said words to the effect that "there is no known footage of the Indain rope trick where the child climbs the rope and disappears". The reports would therefore appear to be entirely anecdotal.

As an aside, illusion number 35 of the "50 greatest magic tricks" was Uri Geller's spoon bending! This was the second time within 7 days that Geller was exposed on UK national TV as an illusionist, the previous occasion was Channel 5's "Psychic" show featuring Alaistair Cooke (see this weeks commentary). Both shows featured archive footage of Uri in action, reporting how the effect was achieved and showed other illusionists performing the same trick.

regards

Stumpy

[SteveGrenard]

UK Skeptic Dr Richard Wiseman studied this trick (I am not sure if he did so in person) and wrote up a review in the JSPR debunking it.

I will try and find the abstract. Try entering rope trick and Richard Wiseman in search string.

[roger]

Maxwell, you DID NOT write that post. You copied it from "Amazing Facts in a Marvelous World" from 1938.

evidence:
http://www.ety.com/HRP/media/hypnotism.htm

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by roger
Maxwell, you DID NOT write that post. You copied it from "Amazing Facts in a Marvelous World" from 1938.

evidence:
http://www.ety.com/HRP/media/hypnotism.htm
Thank you Roger for pointing that out.

Mods, can we get Maxtroll's post deleted, as it violates the forum rules? Can we just get Maxtroll banned now, and save everybody a lot of trouble?

[roger]

I have already reported it to the mods, so no need to do it again.

[Dragon]

:tr:
A hit-and-run troll, no less.
Just do a search on Maxell's posts.

[Ed]

Simple explination: Rope is made from hemp.

[SteveGrenard]

Wiseman and his co-investigator (Dr Peter Lamont, University of Edinburgh) examined the evidence relating to The Indian Rope Trick and DID travel to India to investigate these claims. They carefully analysed all existing eyewitness reports of the trick. Their findings, published in Nature and the JSPR, indicated that the eyewitnesses were exaggerating their accounts over time.

Here are some references concerning what I posted earlier above. THE JSPR abstract is available from the
SPR database. The citation as given below may no longer be at that site.
You now need to go to:
http://www.spr.ac.uk/index.php3?page=onlinelibrary

and register to use their database. It is free but has a limit on the number of retrievals. Members have unlimited access.
Wiseman, R, & Lamont, P. Unravelling the Indian Rope-Trick. Nature, 383, 212-213, 1996.

http://www.blather.net/archives/uncon97/97rope.html

http://www.csicop.org/si/9511/eyewitness.html

Lamont, P. & Wiseman, R. The rise and fall of the Indian Rope Trick. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, July. 2001.
http://www.spr.ac.uk/JSPR2001.html#jul

[Bikewer]

They have a show on the "history of magic" that airs sporadically on one of the "upper" cable channels; Discover science or somesuch. Pretty good show, they had one segment on the "bullet catch" trick that was excellent, and Penn and Teller are among the commentators. (Well, Penn...)

Anyway, they had a segment on the Indian Rope Trick, which appeared to pretty much coincide with the research listed above; essentially, there were no witnesses to the trick as described in various written accounts. The feeling was that the written accounts were considerably embellished....

[Maxell]

Ok, i borrowed that text. I am sorry, i am just newcomer of these magic tricks and so on...

Btw... i feel that some of you are little paranoid :wink8:

I am not troll, just asking perhaps stupid questions to some of you..

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

Originally posted by Pyrrho
Why should science have to explain it? Accounts of it are anecdotal and to explain away anecdotes is a fool's errand, because anecdotes are so unreliable when it comes to meaningful detail.

Anyway, here's one explanation that requires no mass hypnotism:

solution removed as it violates forum rules

Besides, the classic "rope trick" is widely considered to be a myth in the first place.

This post is ancendotal so I refuse to consider it. **** it.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Well, now that you already have a taste of it... Welcome to the forum Maxell! :)

[Dragon]

Originally posted by Maxell
Ok, i borrowed that text. I am sorry, i am just newcomer of these magic tricks and so on...

Btw... i feel that some of you are little paranoid :wink8:

I am not troll, just asking perhaps stupid questions to some of you..
Maxell,

This seems to be the first time you have replied to any of the seven(?) threads you have started, why is that?

It's OK to cut and pace extracts from elsewhere, just so long as you properly attribute them. It would be interesting to hear what you have to say about these topics yourself.

[SteveGrenard]

Yes Maxell, they are extremely paranoid here. For example, Professor Wiseman who is a well known skeptic and skeptical investigator is welcome to, and publishes his research debunking things like this in the Journal of the Society of Psychial Research (JSPR).
This really annoys many people here because this same journal also publishes research which supports paranormal findings as well. Both anti and pro paranormal studies and articles receive the same rigorous peer review. For example, a series of experiments by Dr. Gary Schwartz (who published results on mediumship in the JSPR) was recently rejected by the peer review process of the JSPR for reasons I am unable to give at this time since they haven't been released by the author.

However, the closed minded skeptics here fail to recognize that this proves the JSPR is more level-headed and rigiorous than they want to give it credit for. It also proved that the data, which Schwartz reported, and which was found to be wanting, was honestly reported and not embellished in any way. So the rejection by the JSPR of the Schwartz evaluation of Chris Robinson's dream precognition
underscores the integrity of the JSPR. Now the closed minded skepticks that populate this board are having a hard time with this. They also are having a hard time with the fact that the same hated JSPR publishes articles debunking such things as the Indian Rope Trick, myth or magic trick, it doesn't make any difference. They might want to notice that this same evaluation by Wiseman also appeared in their beloved Nature magazine which they hold up as a yardstick. So when people like Pyrrho
feel it is not necessary to debunk a myth, what he is really doing is saying that skeptical investigators like Richard Wiseman are on fool's errands. It is an insult.

But then since you are new here you will soon learn that there are cretins on this board who will insult anyone for a penny. Don't let it bother you and welcome.

[Ed]

Originally posted by SteveGrenard
Yes Maxell, they are extremely paranoid here.

Steve, you seemed to take great exception to Someone characterizing you as having a mental illness. Why is your doing it alright?

For example, Professor Wiseman who is a well known skeptic and skeptical investigator is welcome to, and publishes his research debunking things like this in the Journal of the Society of Psychial Research (JSPR).
This really annoys many people here because this same journal also publishes research which supports paranormal findings as well. Both anti and pro paranormal studies and articles receive the same rigorous peer review. For example, a series of experiments by Dr. Gary Schwartz (who published results on mediumship in the JSPR) was recently rejected by the peer review process of the JSPR for reasons I am unable to give at this time since they haven't been released by the author.

Here you go again. Are you "in the know"? Can't you make a simple statement of fact without somehow suggesting that you are a confident of someone or other? As has been amply demonstrated, Schwartz is a hack. I suspect that even JSPR has it's limits

However, the closed minded skeptics here fail to recognize that this proves the JSPR is more level-headed and rigiorous than they want to give it credit for.

Booting Schwartz proves that they are level headed? Perhaps it proves that there are depths that even they will not descend to

It also proved that the data, which Schwartz reported, and which was found to be wanting, was honestly reported and not embellished in any way.

Proves no such thing. A simple test of your thinking abilities. Why does their rejection not prove that did not "embellish" or that if he did, he did not do it quite enough?

So the rejection by the JSPR of the Schwartz evaluation of Chris Robinson's dream precognition
underscores the integrity of the JSPR.

Are you suggesting that preceiving Schwartz research as dreck is a sign of integrity? The only way that this assertion makes sense is if you know for a fact that Schwartz provides dreck reliably and that JSPR correctly identified it as such. I will say that this is a telling slip on your part

Now the closed minded skepticks that populate this board are having a hard time with this. They also are having a hard time with the fact that the same hated JSPR publishes articles debunking such things as the Indian Rope Trick, myth or magic trick, it doesn't make any difference. They might want to notice that this same evaluation by Wiseman also appeared in their beloved Nature magazine which they hold up as a yardstick. So when people like Pyrrho
feel it is not necessary to debunk a myth, what he is really doing is saying that skeptical investigators like Richard Wiseman are on fool's errands. It is an insult.

Hang on a second. Are you suggesting that the idea of some Indian tossing a rope in the air and having a kid climb it and disappear is really worthy of serious investigation into some paranormal explination? Are you really so zero based intellectually and experientially that you would allow for one second that this is anything other than a trick? Do you think that every claim, no matter how transparently fraudulent should be seriously investigated? You think this had to be "debunked"?

But then since you are new here you will soon learn that there are cretins on this board who will insult anyone for a penny. Don't let it bother you and welcome.

You may be insulted for a penny, but it won't be your intellegence that is insulted, as Steve just did[/QUOTE]

[SteveGrenard]

MAX, see what I mean? Thanks Ed.

And BTW Professors Lamont and Wiseman did. They even went to India from the UK to do this. Maybe it was their revenue stream that motivated this? eh?

Max, in case you don't know who Wiseman is, he is Britain's answer to James Randi. He runs around the country debunking stuff. And now the world.

[DangerousBeliefs]

The Hindu Rope Trick is simple to explain... there has never been a case of it having occurred. (I.E. The boy disappearing... the boy climbing the wire... er... rope is quite easily explained)

Regardless, magicians in the Hindu culture and their methods (of deception, not mystical powers) are quite well known.

[davidhorman]

I have a memory, though quite possibly a false one, of the magician Paul Daniels doing the "traditional" hindu rope trick. Except that I think he did it at night, next to a building, with bright stage lights ruining everyone's night vision...

David