From: revpk@cellar.org (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: Dr. Puthoff: Information Wanted About His Past Work in PSI
Date: 7 Apr 92 22:18:25 GMT
Organization: The Cellar BBS and public access system

noring@netcom.com (Jon Noring) writes:
> 
> However, several physicists have commented to me that Dr. Puthoff also was
> involved in PSI research several years ago while he was at SRI, and alluded t
> the possibility that he (or his associates) may have faked data.  Whatever
> happened, it sure must have been controversial.
> 
> Anyway, I'd like to get more information about what happened from both sides 
> the issue.  References to magazine and journal articles about this controvers
> would be most appreciated.
        Well, having 'faked' data is a pretty strong charge; let's just say 
that Puthoff was a little less than forthcoming when critics requested 
material regarding his experiments.

        Harold Puthoff, along with Russell Targ, were the two SRI researchers 
who ostensiblytested Uri Geller and proclaimed him to be genuine. However, 
other researchers (David Marks and Richard Kammann in _The psychology of the 
Psychic_ and James Randi in _The Truth about Uri Geller_) noticed small 
discrepancies in the accounts of the experiments given by P and T, and after 
extensive investigation foundthat the controls were lax enough to allow 
Geller the opportunity to cheat.

        Similarly, when testing claims of 'remote viewing,' P&T claimed that 
their experiments followed this protocol:

1)      A location was selected randomly, and one of the researchers would go 
to that location:
2)      The psychic, who was not told of the location, would then astrally 
travel to that location and begin dictating descriptions.
3)      The transcripts of the descriptions would be excised of obvious cues 
(references to previous tests).
4)      The transcripts were given the judges who were to match up the 
descriptions with a randomized list of the destinations. If the matching was 
greater than chance, then this constituted evidence in favor of psi.

        Again, the investigations of Marks and Kammann found a lot to be 
desired. After failing to replicate the procedue by themselves, Marks and 
Kammann asked for the transcripts from P & T, who refused. However, they were 
able to obtain several transcripts, and reconstruct others from Russell 
targ's book _Mind Race_. It turns out that not only weren't the cues excised, 
but that based on the cues alone, the transcripts could easily be matched to 
the locations. In other words, P & T broke their protocol, and refused to 
allow other researchers review their data.

        The two books above, along with Martin Gardner's _Science: Good, Bad 
and Bogus_, are a good critical bibliography.


Brian "Rev. P-K" Siano                                  revpk@cellar.org
...Saure really turns out to be an adept at the difficult art of papryomancy,
the ability to prophesy through contemplating the way people roll reefers -
the shape, the licking pattern, the wrinkles and folds or absence thereof
in the paper.  "You will soon be in love," sez Saure, "see, this line here."
"It's long, isn't it?  Does that mean --" "Length is usually intensity.
Not time."                       -- Thomas Pynchon, _Gravity's Rainbow_