From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: WANTED: Research Info on Uri Geller
Date: 12 Aug 92 17:16:12 GMT
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science

In article <77853.2219217877@crfm.gen.nz>, megan@crfm.gen.nz (Megan Mills) writes:
|> In the early seventies Harold Puthoff (how do you pronounce this name?) and
|> Russel Targ of Stanford Research Institute (now SRI International) did research
|> on Uri Geller.  Apparently he was also studied at the Max Planck Institute.  I
|> have read of this research in other people's books but I want to know if/how I
|> can obtain their results and methods etc in their own words.
|> 
|> None of the books I have state specifically what these researchers' credentials
|> are.  I'm sure they must have some!  Does anyone know if they have PhD's etc
|> and in which fields they have them?  
|> 
|> Any info, or pointers to where I can obtain it, will be snapped up
|> gratefully ;-}

A fair request fairly stated.

Here are some original sources on the P&T studies at SRI.
These are not necessarily limited to studies of Uri Geller.

Technical Papers:

H. E. Puthoff and R. Targ, "A Perceptual Channel for Information Transfer 
over Kilometer Distance:  Historical Perspectives", Proceedings of the
IEEE, vol 64, no. 3, March 1976, pp. 329-354.

R. Targ and H. E. Puthodd, "Information Transmission Under Conditions 
of Sensory Shielding", Nature, vol. 252 October, 1974, pp. 602-607.

Book:

R. Targ and H. E. Puthodd, Mind Reach: Scientists Look at Psychic 
Abilities, Delacorte Press, 1977.

As to Targ and Puthoff's credentials, they were both competant physicists
studying lasers at SRI long before getting involved in UG and remote viewing.  
Contrary to their rhetorical poses, they had longstanding interest in ESP, 
etc., before the studies.  These credentials and personal background are 
not totally relevant to their results, although neither was a trained 
conjurer, which may have handicapped their investigation of old Uri.
I would also note that the critics cited below are competant psychologists
(except for James Randi, who, like Geller, is a conjurer).

Criticism and Attempted Replication:

Articles:

Ray Hyman, "Review of Mind Reach", The Humanist, May-June 1977, pp. 16-20.
Reprinted in the collection, Ray Hyman, The Elusive Quarry, Prometheus
Books, 1989.

D. F. Marks and R. Kammerman, "Information Transmission in Remote Viewing",
Nature, vol. 274, 1978, pp. 680-681.

D. F. Marks, "Sensory Cues and Data Selection Invalidate Remote Viewing
Experiments", Nature, vol. 292, 1981, p. 170.

D. F. Marks, "Remote Viewing Revisited", Skeptical Inquirer,
Summer 1982, pp. 18-29.  Reprinted in Kendrick Frazier, ed., Science
Confronts the Paranormal, Prometheus Books, 1986.

Books:

James Randi, The Truth About Uri Geller, Prometheus Books, 198?.

D. F. Marks and R. Kammerman, The Psychology of the Psychic, Prometheus
Books, 1980.

I particularly recommend the Marks and Kammerman book, as it is a
long discussion of how they attempted to independently replicate
some of P & T's findings, and what they found.  This is very important
because M & K found the original reports were very incomplete.  I
mentions this as a caution when you read the original sources.

(Randi's book is not for the squeamish, he's not at all subtle
or pretty.)

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu