'Materialization, Crookes and Will Goldston'

[Open Mind]

Quote:

Originally posted by Grendel

For a to-the-point accounting of Crookes' adventures in woo woo land, read The Skeptics' Handbook To (Of?) Parapsychology, edited by Paul Kurtz, an excellent read all around, and a must-read for psychic believers and skeptics alike.

Paul Kurtz must be an incredibly old man, 130 odd years old or something? Or is he just psychic enough to know what really happened? To be fair I’ve not read that Paul Kurtz Book by Prometheus Publications (owned by Mr Kurtz, humanist founder of CSICOP)

I wonder if people wrote about Paul Kurtz in 100+ years time whether it would be free from hearsay, rumour, conspiracy .......because CSICOP are probably already in some UFOlogists, remote viewing conspiracy theories, after just 30 years

Probably the best idea is to read Sir William Crookes own words, without someone telling you what really happened. I have read his own reports, long ago (can’t remember all the detail).

I have also read or heard other people's ideas (usually written after Crookes was too dead to comment) on how he was mentally brain poisoned by discovering 'Thallium' (no proof) how he was having an affair with Florence Cook (no proof) , blackmailed by Daniel Dunglas Home (no proof), was an extremely gullible man (no proof), was a keen believer before the experiments (not proven) and he was extremely easily hypnotized (which is still rather paranormal! )

Then there accounts of his psychic Daniel Dunglas Home fooling Crookes with an levitating accordion playing music – this was claimed to really be a miniature mouth organ hidden by Home's beard (But home had no beard), or using a trick accordion (crookes states he bought the accordion) and loads of amusing guesswork by people desperate to explain it in rational terms.

And today we could add an extra layer of 'false memory syndrome' , 'magnetic fields around brain' , 'psychology of suggestion' ... and so on

But none of us were there. Nobody knows for sure. Not even Paul Kurtz.

Quote:

Much of the research and testing done in Britain and the US from 1850 to the 1920s was conducted by scientists who were conflicted by religious beliefs. A lot of it had less to do with science than with proving religious concepts such as the 'soul' and its survival after the death of the body, evidence hopefully to be found in mediumship, seances, and spiritualism in general,

Crookes claims he was sceptical before research, the sceptics claim he was already believer in paranormal .

Quote:

Another factor was the classism in effect. Scientists were educated. The educated tended to come from the elite classes. The elite and educated had a hard time believing they could be bamboozled by lowly peasant class folks, while scientists in particular were not prepared for a 'lab rat' capable and willing to fool the lab scientist.

So magician Will Golston (close friend of debunker Houdini ) author on 40 books on conjuring, along with 2 other magicians was fooled by Helen Duncan?
http://sl.wus0.com/quclk.go?rd=http:...ill%20goldston

Yes, it is possible they were fooled, but can you be certain, if you weren’t there?

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mighty Thor
Great post! But don't forget the most powerful motive of all -- SEX!

For some of these old duffers it was a chance to get their hands on 'a bit of skirt.' The 'psychics' and their entourage often stayed at the homes of these wealthy patrons of the Societies. The 'putting the lights out' was part of an excuse to get a bit of 'unhealthy' kissing and groping going on.

Damn I wish I was there! But have you seen a picture of fat Helen Duncan? No thanks, Yikes!

Quote:

Religious based subjectivity, classism, unwarranted trust with resultant lack of controls, working outside one's area of expertise, plus other factors conspired to produce some pretty inept investigations, research, and dubious conclusions. As time went by greater controls were effected, and results diminished accordingly, i.e., the new field of parapsychology began to grow up.

Possibly. (You also forgot the infra red camera being invented )

Of course the believer can still claim (and you cannot prove otherwise) ‘the spirits are not allowed to prove life after death to everyone because it removes the real purpose of life, to test of peoples actions in earthly life’

They might claim the believer then finds PSI nad the sceptic finds nothing

At this point the sceptic then walks out the room shaking his head, hands in the air.

No I don't like the theory either but many PSI researchers assume the phenomena is under the control of the psychic or experimenter. If only ghosts wanted to win $1,000,000

[The Mighty Thor]

Quote:

Originally posted by Open Mind
Paul Kurtz must be an incredibly old man, 130 odd years old or something? Or is he just psychic enough to know what really happened? To be fair I’ve not read that Paul Kurtz Book by Prometheus Publications (owned by Mr Kurtz, humanist founder of CSICOP)

I wonder if people wrote about Paul Kurtz in 100+ years time whether it would be free from hearsay, rumour, conspiracy .......because CSICOP are probably already in some UFOlogists, remote viewing conspiracy theories, after just 30 years

Probably the best idea is to read Sir William Crookes own words, without someone telling you what really happened. I have read his own reports, long ago (can’t remember all the detail).

I have also read or heard other people's ideas (usually written after Crookes was too dead to comment) on how he was mentally brain poisoned by discovering 'Thallium' (no proof) how he was having an affair with Florence Cook (no proof) , blackmailed by Daniel Dunglas Home (no proof), was an extremely gullible man (no proof), was a keen believer before the experiments (not proven) and he was extremely easily hypnotized (which is still rather paranormal! )

Then there accounts of his psychic Daniel Dunglas Home fooling Crookes with an levitating accordion playing music – this was claimed to really be a miniature mouth organ hidden by Home's beard (But home had no beard), or using a trick accordion (crookes states he bought the accordion) and loads of amusing guesswork by people desperate to explain it in rational terms.

And today we could add an extra layer of 'false memory syndrome' , 'magnetic fields around brain' , 'psychology of suggestion' ... and so on

But none of us were there. Nobody knows for sure. Not even Paul Kurtz.


Crookes claims he was sceptical before research, the sceptics claim he was already believer in paranormal .


So magician Will Golston (close friend of debunker Houdini ) author on 40 books on conjuring, along with 2 other magicians was fooled by Helen Duncan?
http://sl.wus0.com/quclk.go?rd=http:...ill%20goldston

Yes, it is possible they were fooled, but can you be certain, if you weren’t there?



Damn I wish I was there! But have you seen a picture of fat Helen Duncan? No thanks, Yikes!



Possibly. (You also forgot the infra red camera being invented )

Of course the believer can still claim (and you cannot prove otherwise) ‘the spirits are not allowed to prove life after death to everyone because it removes the real purpose of life, to test of peoples actions in earthly life’

They might claim the believer then finds PSI nad the sceptic finds nothing

At this point the sceptic then walks out the room shaking his head, hands in the air.

No I don't like the theory either but many PSI researchers assume the phenomena is under the control of the psychic or experimenter. If only ghosts wanted to win $1,000,000

I take note of your smilies, but do you think the most probable explanation for spiritist 'phenomena' was that it was real? Do you think Daniel Dunglas Home actually levitated out of a window and into another room, or that he could hold red hot coals in his hand?

Wasn't it Crookes who was extremely short-sighted? (I may have that wrong)

Just because we were not there does not mean we can't make reasoned judgments as to the most plausible scenarios. Do you think Sir Oliver Lodge was really a sceptic? And Conan Doyle?

Some of these supposed psychics were very clever in an unscrupulous way. The techniques were many and varied, and, as usual, it was them who dictated the rules of engagement, always to their advantage. So, it is not surprising that some otherwise clever minds were fooled by them. If they did uncover trickery after a while, do you think they would want to admit to having been fooled by charlatans?

I wonder what sold more copies -- Crookes' and Lodges' science publications, or their spiritist volumes?

Edited to add -- yes, I've seen photos of Helen Duncan. I've also seen photos of the alluring Margery. I guess they had to take the good with the bad. After all, they couldn't just say 'you can't be a medium because you are ugly.' That would not be proper decorum, now, would it? The point is that there were probably many young and pretty sitters of both sexes who were being 'touched by the spirits' in the darkness. Many would probably view such events as a risque parlour game a bit like psychic 'postman's knock'. And any feelings of guilt could be transferred to those naughty spirits.

Just speculation, of course, but more plausible to me than the reality of spirit manifestation.

[Open Mind]

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mighty Thor
I take note of your smilies, but do you think the most probable explanation for spiritist 'phenomena' was that it was real? Do you think Daniel Dunglas Home actually levitated out of a window and into another room, or that he could hold red hot coals in his hand?

Not being there, to me, I do instinctively feel trickery was involved However My sceptic grandfather tested materialization psychic Helen Duncan in his own home (with neighbours as witnesses). The psychic was searched (by my grandmother) to check she was not hiding any materials. Grandfather built the cabinet, entry door guarded, séance held in red light. He came out convinced of life after death for the rest of his life..

The psychic charged only travel expenses (I mention this as the money scam/motive argument is often made)

(Note: that was the same psychic as magician Will Goldston's report above)

Personally, I'm suspicious of anything done requiring a cabinet and fairly dim red light.

Quote:

Just because we were not there does not mean we can't make reasoned judgments as to the most plausible scenarios. Do you think Sir Oliver Lodge was really a sceptic? And Conan Doyle?

Conan Doyle seems gullible, easily fooled. I have more respect for Lodge (but I think he lost his son Raymond, so that will satisfy many sceptics/psychologists he was easily fooled) I think such scientists would need proof, not just faith.

Quote:

If they did uncover trickery after a while, do you think they would want to admit to having been fooled by charlatans?

I think that is a fair argument. Scientist have historically stuck rigidly to prized theories, even after considerable evidence to the contrary.

Quote:

Edited to add -- yes, I've seen photos of Helen Duncan. I've also seen photos of the alluring Margery. I guess they had to take the good with the bad. After all, they couldn't just say 'you can't be a medium because you are ugly.' That would not be proper decorum, now, would it? The point is that there were probably many young and pretty sitters of both sexes who were being 'touched by the spirits' in the darkness. Many would probably view such events as a risque parlour game a bit like psychic 'postman's knock'. And any feelings of guilt could be transferred to those naughty spirits.

Possibly in some cases, but I still would doubt that happened at seances with scientists, doctors and grieving people.

With regard to 'Margery', sceptics say Houdini caught her cheating, believers think he was planting objects (either to get accomplices to admit fraud or expose her) Sceptics say she was caught out with dentist's fingerprint, believers say many other impossible to obtain fingerprints were proven genuine. And round and round it goes ...
http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/bo.../chapter23.htm (believer’s argument)

Quote:

Just speculation, of course, but more plausible to me than the reality of spirit manifestation.

My own viewpoint is that it is far too long ago to place much value upon today, the scientists, doctors and witnesses are all dead. But I'm not keen on sceptics publishing books or making TV programs with confident conclusions on how scientists back then were fooled when they are no longer able to defend their claims or comment.

[rppa]

Quote:

Originally posted by Open Mind
Not being there, to me, I do instinctively feel trickery was involved However My sceptic grandfather tested materialization psychic Helen Duncan in his own home (with neighbours as witnesses). The psychic was searched (by my grandmother) to check she was not hiding any materials. Grandfather built the cabinet, entry door guarded, séance held in red light. He came out convinced of life after death for the rest of his life..

The psychic charged only travel expenses (I mention this as the money scam/motive argument is often made)

(Note: that was the same psychic as magician Will Goldston's report above)

Personally, I'm suspicious of anything done requiring a cabinet and fairly dim red light.

Thank you for that last remark. As to the rest of it...

Money is not the motive? You think getting a skeptic to vouch for you isn't worth money on the psychic circuit? You just said he became free advertising for her for the rest of his life!

The search? I'll give you credit for actually seeming to have an open mind and at least considering the possibility of trickery. You realize that every decent close-up magician who ever lived "allows" the audience to "search" him or "examine" his apparatus, to "prove" that no trickery is possible, right?

[The Mighty Thor]

Quote:

Open Mind said -- Not being there, to me, I do instinctively feel trickery was involved However My sceptic grandfather tested materialization psychic Helen Duncan in his own home (with neighbours as witnesses). The psychic was searched (by my grandmother) to check she was not hiding any materials. Grandfather built the cabinet, entry door guarded, séance held in red light. He came out convinced of life after death for the rest of his life..

So, did he witness a 'materialisation'? Ectoplasm?

Would your granny have searched the medium's private orifices? I doubt it very much.

[Open Mind]

Quote:

Originally posted by rppa
You realize that every decent close-up magician who ever lived "allows" the audience to "search" him or "examine" his apparatus, to "prove" that no trickery is possible, right?

Of course. You think it was a trick, I think it is most likely to be a trick ........ at least 4 magicians who saw it were possibly fooled

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mighty Thor
Would your granny have searched the medium's private orifices? I doubt it very much.

There was no internal examination, down to the bare skin, underwear then she worn a robe in seance (information according to my mother, I never directly asked my grandmother such details )

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mighty Thor
So, did he witness a 'materialization'? Ectoplasm?

Both, according to my grandfather, of course I cannot even guess to what degree they 'materialized' in clarity because I wasn't there. He spoke of psychic's guide materializing, also a young girl, a woman carrying a baby (a sitter's miscarriage), and incomplete materializations. He also said a spirit voice retold him exactly the wording of a conversation he had earlier that day with his father (also at seance)

But frankly it doesn't matter if materialization (real or not) happened in 1930s, it would not change opinions in 2004, PSI research today in controlled (and fair) circumstances is more important.

Ectoplasm photographs are not impressive (to me), some are ridiculous, grotesque looking some look passable, none (I’ve seen) are evidential unless you just trust the honor or reputations of those involved. Believers will claim the flash photography instantly destroys the ectoplasm image clarity or it is just a incomplete or poor materialization . Some believers claim the purpose of the curtain was to let the materialization fully form into their dead relative shape before scaring the visitor or sitter with a half developed image. The curtain was reported by several witnesses to open to see both psychic and materialized person fully formed (or dummy?)

We think we know better than the people who were there, better than those who took the photographs and stuck by such grotesque and unbelievable images (which is surprising, unless they had some reason to, pure fraud would have faked them better) These people cannot speak to defend their claims, perhaps we need another (infra red) materialization séance to let them defend their claims!

But here is the most important point of all, the existence of PSI is not dependent on whether materialization exists or not. Because fraud and self delusion are common doesn’t mean genuine cases cannot exist in some areas of psychical research. Because most psychics today are completely useless, giving non evidential messages, that doesn’t mean some (very rare) but better psychics, upon occasions aren’t providing real evidence. I think the truth lies somewhere between ‘it’s all fraud and delusion!’ and ‘it’s wonderful and true’ mentalities You are entitled to disagree, of course I still think science will find PSI, to be a weak effect in largely replicable trials with exception to those who have already decided any weak effect is an experimental error (e.g.. some CSICOP psychologists with (not proven) theories )


I hope that clarifies my personal viewpoint

[The Mighty Thor]

Quote:

Open Mind said: We think we know better than the people who were there, better than those who took the photographs and stuck by such grotesque and unbelievable images (which is surprising, unless they had some reason to, pure fraud would have faked them better) These people cannot speak to defend their claims, perhaps we need another (infra red) materialization séance to let them defend their claims!

Maybe Colin Fry would oblige. Have you read the Scoles stuff?

I don't think we need to question the integrity of your grandfather, or even assume any of the testers were colluding in fraud. But times have changed. The two World Wars profoundly affected these generations who witnessed the senseless deaths of millions of young men and women. Established religion was not providing the comfort that some desperately needed. To many, spiritism provided the hope that there was some 'better place' that dead people went to. People in such circumstances are, unortunately, easily fooled because they see and hear what they want to.

I have never seen an ectoplasm photo that did not look utterly ridiculous. However, for the participants on the night, in near darkness and with a believer's mindset, the event might have been fairly convincing and even scarey, given the atmosphere.

Look at how 'horror' has changed. There was a time when the black and white Universal and Hammer Frankenstein and Dracula films were XXX in the cinema. Nowadays, kids probably find them funny.

I remember all the hullabaloo when 'The Exorcist' came out. There were priests outside cinemas warning folk not to go in. I took my girlfriend who was 18, and got a row from her dad because she didn't sleep well for three nights.

I watched it recently on satellite and wondered what all the fuss was about. After seeing 'Possessed' with Leslie Nielson, the Exorcist became laughable. So, it's all about mindset and beliefs. Indeed, seances and psi effects in general are still stuck in the past -- same old tricks, usually badly performed for a credulous audience. If I came back from the dead, I'd hope to do more than blow a silly paper trumpet!