Another report from Britain relates a typical incident;..
break and reseal
flasks. So we
still can't call
this fool
L
t
v
v-1
>11
.
l
..
.1.
a!
L.
«.!
1.-.
.
r -
II
.
•
A. £
_
_
_ „ ^
Cantor
study).
Children and
adults throughout
the country
described their own PK
gift. One seven-year-old boy made
front-page news in a national paper, the DAILY MIRROR.
"I
decided to have a go after seeing that man on TV," he said. "I
just
think about
the
fork
bending and
it does.
It was
bit
frightening
at
first—but
there's nothing
to
it." The
child's
mother commented: "It has to be seen to be believed. It's just as
well my husband runs two cafes, or we would be out of cutlery
within days." Her husband admitted he was skeptical, "until
I
saw him perform the
feat. Now
I've seen him bend
half-a-
dozen forks without any failures." One of the paper's journal-
ists saw the boy demonstrate. After twenty minutes a fork "was
virtually bent double," he wrote. (104)
In the journal NATURE, Harry Collins and Brian Pamplin
reported:
Sir,—We have investigated six young people who claimed
the power of the bending objects by stroking in the manner
demonstrated on television recently by Uri Geller and others.
In
this
report we
will
call
these people A,B,C,D,E, and
F.
Subsequently,
Dr.
Pamplin appeared on BBC
"Points
West" local television news programme when B demonstrated
her
ability
quite
convincingly. The
parents
of DE
and
F
subsequently contacted Dr. Pamplin claiming that their child-
ren could also bend cutlery by stroking.
Most of the subjects were first visited in their own homes
where they showed their ability in the casual atmosphere of
their sitting rooms. A succeeded
in bending a weighed and
measured rod of mild steel of 3/10ths inch diameter supplied
by the experimenters as well as her own cutlery. (105)
From Denmark there is more anecdotal material provided by
rarapsychologist R.D. Mattuck in RESEARCH IN PARAPSYCHO-
LOGY 1976:
Lena listed D,
is an 18-year-old Danish girl who discover-
ed her PK abilities after Uri Geller's
visit to Copenhagen
in
January 1974. At the time of this investigation, she was studying
languages at a gymnasium (junior college) in Denmark. Lena
and
I conducted
1 1 experimental sessions together, during the
period April
1974
to March
1975,
in
the presence of her
parents.
In the
first seven sessions, she was able to achieve
striking effects, but not when adequate controls were exer-
cised. Some of her insufficiently controlled phenomena were:
bending 3.2 mm iron nails through 45°, changing the position
of the hands on a watch by several hours, and causing 15
deflections of a compass needle. (106)
(
Finally,
is an excerpt from a report to the Swiss Socie
Parapsychology, the phenomenon occurring after Geller's
television appearance:
"After we completed the second test, Edith Aufdern
complained of a severe headache. Now, she and
I we
ourselves. The others had
left. While we were sitting a
living-room
table,
Edith picked up a teaspoon.
Slowly
began
to rub
it,
almost
as
if she were caressing
it.
I
watching her closely. After a few moments the spoon beg
bend, without any physical
pressures whatever.
Durin,
next few hours she repeated this performance with two
tional teaspoons, as well as with a solid steel pin and a p
steel nail clippers." (108)
Many of those individuals manifesting PKMB other
Geller are children {they have been dubbed "mineGeller
some), however there are similarities to Geller other tha.
PKMB itself. As with Geller, the ability seems to wax and
and is not 100% reproducible on command. In addition the
also reports of cheating on the part of some of the chi
l
Examples of the two characteristics will follow a surv
controlled observations on the other individuals manift
PKMB.
b) Controlled Observations
From Germany, parapychologist Lusi Wendlandt is quoted
concerning two more children manifesting PKMB:
"One boy was able to mentally stop an electric saw that
was cutting down a tree near his home," she reports. "We ask
parents and witnesses for accounts of the phenomenon, but one
of the biggest problems we have
is obtaining better documen-
tation.
"We gave the other boy, who lives in Switzerland, metal
teaspoons placed in plastic flasks. These are first sealed by an
attorney. At first we used glass bottles, but he returned them
broken.
"At that time we thought he was just another trickster, bu{
he denied this, claiming the bottles broke while flying around
the room during the bending.
"After we switched to plastic containers," she continued.
As with Geller, successful controlled observations
a.
plentiful, howeverwhat has been published indicates abili
least equal to those reported for Geller. In Britain, John
I
working with a number of children has reported much
work.
Hasted's subjects succeeded
in a wide range of e
ments, including the psi-bending by children of small dia
wires encased
in
hollow
glass globes,
usually
withii
minutes. Curiously, the bending always required a hole
globe (2-10 mm), although
skilled craftsmen, using
s
tools, could not bend the wires asquickly as could thecF
using no tools. Some children could psi-twist long thin m
bars at the rate of 2-3 rotations per second while one of hi:
subjects recorded a torque at the limit of human strength.
Another report reads:
In one of
his experiments. Hasted made simulU
electronic- measurements of the PK
"strain" on
thre<
which were suspended from the ceiling of the
laboi
equidistant and out of reach of his young subject. The
i
show a comparable, but not exactly identical, force aff
all three keys simultaneously.
In another study, aluminum strips which were left al
a room became twisted and braided like pigtails within a
i
of seconds. The subject was in an adjoining room. Elec
Strain gauges recorded a force on the metal unlike anythii
would be seen by normal human bending. (120)
Finally is a report by Hasted RESEARCH IN PARA PS Y<
LOGY 1976, where a sensor consisting of a resistive strain
.
was the measuring instrument. Andrew G. is one of the ch
in the Cantor study:
This apparatus has been used with several subjec
eluding Nicholas Williams (age 17) and Andrew G.
(ag
Use of two and of three sensors simultaneously with Wi
at seven sessions has produced synchronous signals
"a strange thing occurred." The spoons inside two of the flasks
App*avisd> Fioici Fj&eleas eh<2Q£h1t/©3/i07vedGlA»BDP96-Oft7§3RQ02ObQMt3O04i 1 ^5 strain pulses are pro
"However, even though the seals appear untouched when
when
an otherwise undetectable moving
"active su
the flasks are returned, professional magicians claim they can
encounters and passes through the seniors. The sense
suspended from their electrical connections so as to define a
line
who
is',
.lira
be*
so far os
i s p^sibie, kepfTbTa
,
seated at a working surface and occupied in building mode
_
aircraft. He knows of the positions of the sensors and is asked to
C
bend the latchkeys. The typical distance from the subject to the
sensors
is five meters, and between the sensors, one to three
’ meters. The subject does not in general have direct contact with
the latchkeys.
,
,
C1
The total number of strain pulse events recorded was 81
.
Many contained considerable “fine
structure," which
indi-
cates
flexibility of the “surfaces." Typically, no visible bend
results. The most usual configuration of the surface
is vertical,
and
extending
outwards
from
the
subject,
as opposed
to
extending around him. To a small extent the subject has learned
to produce synchronous signals in other configurations. Since
synchronous signals can be obtained with sensors on opposite
sides of the subject the surface may be considered to contain
his person. A surface has been known to extend
in length to
about 10 meters. The rate of travel of a surface between sensors
is
in
the range
of
to
100 cm/sec. On encountering
a
screening obstacle a surface flexes .its shape around
it, so that
partial
screening of the sensor advances or delays
a
strain
pulse; a metal screen can augment the intensity of the strain
signals and bring about bending and fracture.
The folding of pairs of thin metal strips and the twisting of
pairs of wires have been recorded on many occasions. (121)
From Japan we have indications of controlled experiments
from a brief notation:
.
, n_.
After the
visit of Uri Gelier
to- Tokyo, Japan,
in
19/ i,
thousands of Japanese children apparently manifested similar
paranormal powers. Eight of these children were investigated in
€
1974 by
Dr. Shigemi Sasaki, professor of psychology
at the
Denki Tsushin
University, Tokyo with a team of fifteen
re-
searchers. Laboratory tests were devised
to
test PK (psychp-
kinetic ability) and metal-bending. One 12-year-old (jun Seki-
guchi) demonstrated an amazing ability to bend spoons para-
normally, and also recharged dead electric batteries by merely
holding them. Dr. J.B. RHINE of Durham, N.C., commented:
“The tests in Tokyo have shown that PK power exists among
many of their children. The research
is of great significance."
( 122 )
As mentioned earlier all of these individuals cannot perform
PKMB completely at will, and again as with Gelier, the critics have
been quick to point out that failures are more common under
controlled conditions. A.J. Ellison together with a select group of
investigators could only report little success with child subjects.
We started these experiments with the children's attempts
at the familiar spoon bending with closed-circuit television
recording, and then went on to the single crystal specimens
Every specimen was accurately weighed before and after each
trial. We had little success except that one of the single crystal
specimens fell
in half while being stroked. (127)
Cheating has been observed with child rnetal-benders after
an investigation of those claiming to have PKMB ability. Hans
Bender reports:
This enterprise made us acquainted with
a number of
persons, mostly youths, who claimed to be able to bend metal
objects
repeatedly,
especially spoons. Most
of them were
tricksters. One demonstrated spoon bending before our eyes
but failed when we tried to film
it. Another moved metal objects
under his hand; we were able to document the phenomenon on
A
^
AA
IA A
^
I A
V
Since
1975
I
have done experiments
with
the
Swiss
designer Silvio, the most important genuine metal-bender we
-RDR9^Q07cB8R0t©2OO8^^0'Mli8,ent metal forks and
spoons by
holding them
between two
fingers have been
recorded on videotape, as well as sessions in which he has bent
a plastic spoon, silver coins, and an untouched spoon
In one
session, Silvio was studied by Dr. Betz of the Institute of Physics
of Munich University; he remarkably increased the resistance
of an electrical device. The collaboration with physicists will
be continued. (123)
In France, another adult subject has appeared bythe name of
Jean-Pierre
Girard. The research here
is by several teams
of
investigators and appears to be of high quality. The parapsycho-
logist and magician, William Cox reports:
Jean-Paul Girard, a Parisian chemical firm employee who
claims to be able to bend metal by PK, gave filmed demon-
strations at Freiburg, West Germany, on September 4 and b,
1976. Prof. Hans Bender was an observer and W.E. Coxwasthe
experimenter. Nine bendings occurred in six bars (5/16 in. to
5/8
in.
in diameter and under
ft. long) under close scrutiny
and without any apparent physical explanation. (124)
William YYolkowski of the University of Paris, after prelimi-
nary observations with Girard writes:
We then embarked on a more sophisticated experiment
which consisted of sealing different metal objects in Pyrex glass
tubes; these were completely sealed with a torch. They were
weighed with a precision of 10-4 grams and measured with a
precision of 10-4 meters, and were left with Girard. Inside we
had placed different metal objects such as metal paperclips anc
steel springs of the coil kind; when they were returned to us
they were quite remarkably bent, from 10° to 30
. The stee
spring, for example, which wds sfrftight at the beginning, wa:
now so distended that at one point
it could no longer move
freely in the Pyrex tube. All the tubes were still the same weight
and the same dimensions, and the glass blower could not detec
any tampering. (125)
In February, 1978 an extensive research report appeared
i
the
French
metallurgical journal MEMOIRES SCIENTIFIQUE
REVUE METALLURGY concerning the PKMB of metal specimen
by Girard. The authors were C. Crussard and j. Bounvaist. Asho
extract (translated) reads:
Here*we will describe the test made on the thickest ba
This was.a bar 17 mm in diameter and 300 mm long made
<
alloy AU2 (2.05 c/c copper) in state T4 (hardened in coldwati
and aged for one year). Reference marks were engraved in ft
mass of this bar, and the placement of smali characteristic flav
were noted....
,
.
During the tests, the two experimenters sat at about a me.
away on either side of J.P. Girard, who worked in shirtsleeve
with
his sleeves
rolled up, without contact.
J.P. Girard d
formed this bar four times in succession by holding one end
his right hand and
lightly touching the free part with his
It
hand
or by placing his left hand five cm above the speome
After each deformation, one observer took the profile of the tc
bar, while the other remained next to
J.P. Girard. The
t\
largest deformations.....c.ould be seen with the eye: both we
produced toward the bottom during a time on the order
10-20 seconds. After each deformation,
it was verified that
heating up could be detected by touching the bar with
t
hand, and that the bends made without force by
J.P- Gin
jndemisnflnajwewctr^w^
hand, ana ut<n me
'
.
...
,AfH»i;0Med)For Release 2001/03/07
: CIA-RpP96^7B8R002OO&13Qdt1^y 3Y^
The European parapsychologist Hans Bender has also report-
"
c\n
a
ult cnhi&rt
»
rinmo rr
h
at
its face value, The curious fact here
is that the closed
rr
III. THE DISCUSSION OF THE DATA ON-PKMB
shown by the scoffer who dismisses all talk or evidence o
'Apprfrfttf
2001/03/07
: CIA-RD^96 -e(!r7B®RO02OOO1^0
iT1
)^bsu rd, also manifests
among researchers who are drawn into positive belief fo
In considering the criticisms of the recorded data on PKMB
we shall confine ourselves to the "controlled data" where para-
psychologists and other scientists are the experimenters , since it
is these observations which will carry the most weight if conclus-
ions are to be arrived at. Research in this area is unique in that
fraud can exist at the level of the subject being observed. One
can therefore assess the quality of an experiment in PKMB by
refering to the two factors which can screen out the possibility of
fraud, namely, physical controls and experimenter competence
in detection of fraud. Indeed, the criticisms involve one or both
of these.
In addressing the topic ofadequate controls and safeguards,
parapsychologist D. Scott Rogo has written:
While
I am open to the possibility of there actually being a
PK-mediated "Geller effect," to this date
I have found
little
evidence of such a process either in my own investigations or
when
critically evaluating the evidence and
tests of others.
(133)
A critique of work on PKMB done by South African parapsy-
chologist E. Alan Price reads in part:
Objects already secretly bent can be held even by a child
to appear straight until the "power" is to take effect. Weakened
metal can be bent more easily with concealed pressure. Old
timepieces can
often
begin
running
again
after
a hidden
shaking. A discussion of numerous other methods would
fill
books; in fact such books are present on magicians' shelves and
have become more frequently available to lay people.
Dr. Price seems to be well aware that carefully controlled
laboratory experiments will be required to obtain
definitive
evidence of the "Geller effect." In providing possible subjects,
his report is no doubt valuable. These reports themselves may
be
preliminary evidence
of
great undiscovered
abilities.
It
should be understood, however, that phenomena "occurring in
good
light in the presence of responsible, outside observers"
may just as likely be evidence of another ancient and well-
known ability—the ability to deceive. (134)
The experimenter competence in detecting fraud has been
substantially written by the critics. Martin Gardner ofSCIENTIFIC
AMERICAN is a confirmed skeptic.
Any magician will
tell you that scientists are the easiest
persons in the world to fool.
It is not hard to understand why. In
their labortories the equipment is just what
it seems. There are
no hidden mirrors or secret compartments or concealed mag-
nets.
If an assistant puts chemical A
in a beaker he doesn't
(usually) surreptitiously switch
it for chemical B. The thinking
of a scientist is rational, based on a lifetime of experience with a
rational world.
But the methods of magic are
irational and
totally outside a scientist's experience.
The general public has never understood this. Most people
assume that if a man has a brilliant mind he is qualified to detect
fraud. This is untrue. Unless he has been thoroughly trained in
the underground
art of magic, and knows
its peculiar prin-
ciples, he
is easier to deceive than a child. (137)
In writing of the Geller controversy, Bernard Dixon, editor of
NEW SCIENTIST, adds that experimenter bias
is a contributing
factor to experimenter competence to detect fraud.
t
Another lesson of recent months has been that scientists
are not necessarily as critical, sceptical, and obervant as their
craft should require them to be. Putting aside the quite separate
question of active willingness to believe, many trained scien-
„
<Ej©datR$i teiis idSvZOiQil /0<3t T7 1 sb G IAt
1RDP96 -/QGb7§
reported where this
i
more willing than might be supposed to accept the unexpected
has been confronted. Hans Bender reports: j
very reason that the evidence appears
to conflict with
previous conceptual picture of the world. There
is, sureh
intriguing field here for psychological research
into the
chinery of belief. (139)
Another factor
is one of viewpoint
in
the experimt
situation.
The matter of who is actually in control may objective
quite different from the vantage point of the experimentei
the
subject. When Houdini escaped
from
a
prison o
presume the prison warden thought he was in control am
Houdini. When Randi fooled the editor of PSYCHIC NEW!
editor presumed he was in control. The whole point of de
tion
is to secretly have control in a way unknown to the
:
tator/experimenter. (140)
Through Randi some professional scientists have seen
hand the full meaning of competence to detect fraud,
certifying
Geller as manifesting PKMB, physicist Jack
Sa
retracted in SCIENCE NEWS:
I have witnessed The Amazing Randi fracture meta
!
move the.hands of a watch in a way that
is indistinguisf
from my observation of Geller's "psychokinetic" demor
tions. Also,
I am advised of Randi's demonstration of cat
bu rsts
i n a Geiger counter and of deflecti ng a compass neec
reported
in a letter from Kings College, University of Lo
(July
11, 1975) signed by Maurice Wilkins, F.R.S., and
other faculty associated with the Department of Biopfy
(143)
The
critics have put much of PKMB research into a
perspective, and although demonstrating that fraud was p
ble,
it does not prove that fraud'occurred: Scientists do rec
strong quarantees of fraud proof conditions, both physical
experimenter based.
ti) THE DEFENSE
In response to the criticisms,
it seems that the major,
parapsychologists have agreed, and have attempted to
i.
porate suggestions. Parapsychologist A.).
Ellison
in a
lett
NEW SCIENTIST states:
I
fully agree that physical scientists can be exceed
naive when outside their own fields—well known to magii
and parapsychologists. Experience of working with a varit
genuine psychics,
preferably over some
years,
is
esse
training for an investigator. There are many factors invo
primarily relating to psychological matters and especial!'
unconscious
mind.
It
is
sad
to
see
recently
"conve/
physical scientists trying to investigate parapsychological
ters outside their field of experience. A year or so ago son
us formed a multi-disciplinary committee to study the so-c,
Gelier-type phenomena and included physical scientists,
chologists, a doctor, and a magician (with a second ex<
ionaly knowledgeable consultant), several of those merr
having deep experience of parapsychology. Experiments
[
ned by such a committee for Geller and the many others cl
ing similar faculties in the light of all that
is known abou
diffcult and recondite subject seem to me to be most like
lead to something useful. (146)
A professional magician, Rolf Mayr, drew our attention to
a 33-year-old Swiss designer,
Silvio, (he wanted
to hide bis
family Approved Pc^eie^20enra^7
t
l
uplA
who, to his great surprise, convinced him of the genuineness or
r
'
is performance.
In a most welcome collaboration with this
1 .nagician we started an investigation of Silvio's metal-bending
abilities with the intention of documenting his performances by
fi lms and videotapes. We brought along a professional camera-
man and provided spoons and forks that we had examined and
marked. Our first success came in December 1974. Silvio held
the object between his index finger and thumb at
its thinnest
part- from time to time he held the thumb of his left hand over
the fingers of his right hand. Without the spoon’s being rubbed,
the scoop of the spoon bent with a bending radius of over 70
degrees. In this first sitting, Silvio bent five spoons, breaking two
of them; he also bent a massive fork in an upward direction, as
had intended.
.
.
,
,
We feel that our collaboration with the professional ma-
gician is a very favorable condition for obtaining results which
ought to convince even professional skeptics. We hope that the
secular controversy between parapsychologists and magicians
can one day be transformed into the kind of cooperation we are
achieving in our Berne experiments. (148)
Data with Gcller as subject and magicians as experimenters
are documented.
Arthur Zorka
of the Occult
Investigations
Committee of the Atlanta Society of Magicians reports:
The tests took place in a room which contained no mirrors,
no windows, and one door, by which we entered. The door was
locked behind
us. Mr. Dickson (also a member of the com-
mittee), Mr. Geller, and
I sat facing each other. No one else was
present or in the near vicinity of the testing area.
The first test involved Uri Geller's attempt to bend a fork
C
.'hich
I provided. The fork was made of forged
steel, with a
nylon reinforced handle.
I
specifically selected
this fork be-
cause of
its extreme resistance to physical stress.
I placed the
fork into Mr. Geller's outstretched left hand. His fingers curled
around
it, and in moments, without the fork leaving my sight for
even an instant,
it literally exploded, sending fragments of the
handle across the room. (149)
Magician Leo Leslie reports:
After his demonstration of telepathy Geller tried psycho-
kinesis. A nickel-plated, enameled key was given to Geller. He
asked the journalist who was present to hold the key between
two fingers. Geller then rubbed
it a couple of times, very lightly,
with his forefinger. "I can’t do it," he suddenly said. "You have
done something to this key.
I cannot get in contact with the
metal "
I immediately suspected that Geller probably uses a
chemical to soften metal, and that with the coating on the key
he felt defea'ed.
I took the key from the journalist and studied
it
closely. But while
I sat looking at the key the enamal suddenly
started to crack, and a second later strips of the nickel plating
curled up
like
small banana
peels, while the key actually
started to bend
in my hand. (150)
,
There are critics who are beginning to look more favorably at
some of the PKMB research. Concerning Jcan-Pierre Girard and
his investigator
C.. Crussard, Joseph Hanlon wrote:
Crussard
involved
a
magician
at
an
early
stage
the
French illusionist Ranky has issued a public statement saying
that in the tests he watched, he could not see how Girard cou d
have used tricks. And his involvement more recently of kandi,
probably the best spoon-bender in the magic business
con-
tinues to show that these experiments are on a much higher
level.
Chris Evans commented:
"I was
impressed by
their
manner—quite
different from any other so-called
scientific
CVdlO iciiiania u
studies of this that
t nave seen.
_
.
.
.
skeptic, but he admits that "Girard is quite the best
I have ever
" 52 ’
Experiments with people are very hard to do and require
years of skill and patience.
It does not help, then, that most
parascientists are physical scientists with little or no behavior-
al science background. Their
initial tests are often laughab y
sloppy. They think,
for example, that
if they crowd enough
observers into a room then everything will be OK, when Geller
proved
it much easier to cheat in those circumstances.
Yet, the past four years have seen a major improvement in
experimental
techniques;
one-way
glass,
tight
controls
of
materials, and even controls of theexperimenters. And we have
seen
recently the archest of sceptics agree w.th one of the
strongest proponents on
protocol. We seem
to be
rapidly
approaching a definition of the dragons to be slain.
Sadly, as conditions get tighter, the phenomena seem to
disappear. But
if parascience has so far produced precious
little, neither has the much better funded cancer research. And
there
is a curious
similarity between the
laetrile and para-
science controversies—both rest on anecdotal data that do not
stand up to traditional scientific scrutiny. Gould
it be that our
science
is wrong—that some things are only amenable
to
uncheckable
personal
report? To accept that would be
as
revolutionary to science as the Protestant reformation was to
Rome or the inevitable socialist revolution to Britain. Clearly a
lot of people think that such as overthrow of science
is called
for. But if they do, then there is little point in, at the same time,
trying to enter the inner circle of institutional science. (153)
This brings us back to a phenomenon observed in the data
on PKMB.
It seems as though certain kinds of controls can be
inhibitory to the manifestation of PKMB effects and parapsy-
chologists have gone as far as labelling it "the shyness effect
The team of Hasted, Bohm, Bastin and O'Regan addressed this
topic well in their NATURE paper:
We have come to realize that in this domain the experi-
mental situation
is different
in certain crucial ways from that
which has been common in scientific experimentation. This
is
because the phenomena under investigation have to be pro-
duced from the minds of one or more of those who participate.
Relationships among the participants therefore play a much
more essential role than is usual in traditional scientific fields.
One of flie first things that reveals itself as one observes is
that psychelkinetic phenomena cannot in general be produced
unless
all who participate are
in a relaxed
state. A state of
tension,
fear,
hostility, on the
part of any of those present
generally communicates itself to the whole group. The entire
process goes most easily when all those present actively want
things
to work well.
In addition, matters seem to be great.y
facilitated when the experimental arrangement is aesthetically
or imaginatively appealing to the person with apparent psycho-
kinetic powers.
We have found also that
it is generally difficult to produce
a predetermined set of phenomena. Although this may some-
times be done, what happens
is often surprising and unex-
pected We have observed
that the attempt
to concentrate
Strongly
in order to obtain
a desired result (the bending of a
'
piece of metal, for example) tends to interfere with the relaxee
state of mind needed to produce such phenomena.
Thus,
if any of those who participate in a physical experi
ment
are’ tense
and
hostile,
and
do
not
really want
tht
experiment to work, the chances of success are greatly dimin
RbP90^OO7B8R€020001
t30O^1
l-S theex!xrimT
,UetUi
often helps to maintain
interest and enthusitjim, whereas
at