linuxmafia.com 2013/2013.06.linuxmafia.com/linuxmafia.com/pub/skeptic/newsletters/basis/basismay.87

Text File | 1997-06-28 | 37.2 KB | 756 lines

-----------------------------------------------------
May 1987 "BASIS", newsletter of the Bay Area Skeptics
-----------------------------------------------------
         Bay Area Skeptics Information Sheet
                   Vol. 6, No. 5
                Editor:  Kent Harker



CONFESSION OF A PSYCHIC

If one of the "world's leading psychics" confessed to being a hoax
what would he or she say? Seldom do we find out because leading
psychics don't reveal the tricks of their trade. In 1981, however,
that very thing happened. The confession, unfortunately, took
place during a television special which was aired only once.
Southern California Skeptics (SCS) published for the first time,
in vol. 2 #2, page 13 of "Laser", the newsletter of SCS, excerpts
from that rare and fascinating television interview with confessed
psychic James Hydrick. "BASIS" reprints (with editing for space)
that article with kind permission from SCS.

First some background information on Hydrick. He rose to national
fame after appearing on a Dec. 1980 taped broadcast of ABC's
popular "That's Incredible" when he appeared to demonstrate very
strong psychokinetic powers. These "powers" enabled him to flip
the pages of a telephone book and cause a pencil to turn on a
table merely by the power of his will. The tabloid "The Star"
quickly ran an article on Hydrick labeling him "The world's Top
Psychic" whose powers are "incredible and staggering." Other
newspapers alleged that Hydrick could cure headaches and colds
with a touch. An electrical engineer from the U. of Utah concluded
that Hydrick's powers were indeed authentic.

Hydrick claimed that he had learned these powers from special
training in the martial arts and that he could teach them to
anyone. He opened a popular and successful school to teach
psychokinetic powers.

While Hydrick was fooling the gullible he was not fooling magician
and psychic investigator James Randi. Randi immediately offered
Hydrick his prize of $10,000 for proof of any paranormal
demonstration under controlled observations. Hydrick accepted
Randi's offer and agreed to be tested on the TV show "That's My
Line."

Randi's simple but effective test involved emptying a small can of
styrofoam particles around the open book to detect air blowing
from Hydrick's mouth. If Hydrick claimed that his power could not
differentiate between the pages of the book and the styrofoam
particles, Randi was prepared to place a simple germ mask on his
face. Hydrick refused the test. (The incident is recounted in
detail in "The Skeptical Inquirer," Summer 1981.)

A few months later Hydrick again agreed to undergo testing of his
psychic abilities. Again proper controls were used and again he
failed to exhibit any psychic powers. He then confessed to
magician Danny Korem, who was part of the team testing him.
Hydrick began his confession by talking of his fascination with
magicians at the age of nine.

HYDRICK: He [the magician] would show how easy it was to trick
people: slight of hand, etc. Things like that impressed me, how
close minded a lot of people really were. It was so fascinating to
see how people would miss things just like that. The obvious thing
they would miss. I was impressed by Houdini's trick of vanishing
an elephant off a stage. I could figure out how it was done. I
began to think, if people go crazy over that, maybe I should do
something people go crazy over.

KOREM: Why did you feel that you had to tell people that you had
powers that you didn't have?

H: Because I wanted attention. My parents would never give it to
me. I would always be ignored or kicked around. I had to do this
to make me feel good. It gave me confidence. Every time someone
thought what I did was very good but I'd never tell them what it
was. I'd tell them it was something else. Because if I told them
what it was they would say, "Fine, it's just a trick." But I would
always tell them it was something else so I would continue to get
recognition.

K: You were on "That's Incredible" a few months ago and you really
tricked them.

H: I tricked the whole world.

K: Yes. What did it make you feel like?

H: I did that to reach. It's like a hand reaching out for
recognition. I don't know.... I just wanted to be known. I needed
to be recognized. All my life I've been...I hate to keep going
back to the past, but I don't know. I wanted to do that because it
was different. I just wanted to see how open minded people were. I
wanted to see if these people who were so-called intelligent and I
was so-called dumb; I mean, surely I'm here for a reason. My whole
idea behind this in the first place was to see how dumb America
was. How dumb the world is.

K: How do you cause the objects to move?

H: People are looking at the object and waiting and so it moves,
ok? Actually it didn't move from psychic powers, it moved from
something else -- physical. It moves from air currents.

K: From where?

H: From my mouth. But you can't tell it because it took so many
years of practicing to get this down pat to where you can't see
it.

K: What you did, if I'm not mistaken, was to take somebody, hold
their hand and get them to point at the leaf and then would make
the leaf move?

H: Right. It's called the power of suggestion. Once you can get a
person to believe that he can actually do something -- then
perhaps he can do it.

K: What did you do? Can you show me?

H: First of all I'm not just puffing out the air because that can
be seen. I am taking the air from my inside and making it come out
in a way in which it doesn't show. I can direct the air in a way
that it hits head-on every time. I spent one year and six months
in solitary confinement. All that time I had been thinking and
thinking...then that's it!

K: You had all the time you needed to learn how to breath and make
things move?

H: I had spent hours and hours. I'd hold my breath. Different
breathing controls. So many ways. I could make deputies think
someone touched them on their neck because I could breath in a
certain way on their neck. They would feel something and say,
"That's a ghost!" They would piss on the floor and go running out
of there! It was something that was fascinating to me and it got
me recognition. I mean every deputy in that jail was so frightened
of me. "That guy is possessed!"

I remember when I was in the Chaplin's office. He taught me how to
read and write. And I would convert people from bad to good. He
told me that you had to turn them onto Jesus, the Lord. And he
gave me a Bible and I'd read it. Then I got an idea. Now, I've
never told Brother Joe this, and I've never told anyone this, but
I would convert twenty inmates a day. That was my limit. I'd get
up there and start telling them about Jesus and stuff. And when
I'd see that they were beginning to get turned off -- I'd stop and
say, "You don't believe that it exists?" -- I'd take a Bible and
open it up and say, "If the Lord is here with me make these pages
move!" or I'd open the Bible and say, "Hold the Bible. Father in
the name of Jesus Christ make these pages move." And the pages
would move. And the guys are going "Oh my god!!" Every time it
worked. Then I would say, "It's in you." Or I take a pencil and
put it there and say I've got to call the Lord; but you are going
to have the power to do this if you accept the Lord. The next
thing you know you would see them with this big cross and handing
Bibles out to people! [Note: Hydrick is now serving time in jail.]



THE EVOLUTION OF SKEPTICISM
by H. Keith Henson

In reading the skeptical literature I often feel as if I am
reading medical journals prior to the time of Pasteur. While there
are valuable reports on fraud and debunking, there is no
understanding and not much discussion about why we, as a species,
are so susceptible to religious and parapsychological nonsense.
(There is no obvious boundary between them.) It is clearly
anti-survival to follow a Jim Jones into the grave in a remote
clearing in the jungle, but similar events, such as the Children's
Crusade (from which one in ten thousand returned), are well known
from history. It is less obvious that following advice in an
astrology column interferes with survival, but it can't help.

There are three books, which taken together shed a flood of light
on this topic. Earliest is "The Selfish Gene" (1976) by Richard
Dawkins. It is primarily a layman's discussion of evolution from a
gene's viewpoint. It is also one of the more widely referenced
works in recent times -- the "Science Citation Index" listing goes
on for several columns.

Though the entire book is fascinating, it is the last chapter,
"Memes, the New Replicators," that applies to this discussion.
Much of this chapter and some related material was printed in
Douglas Hofstadter's "Metamagical Themas" column in "Scientific
American" (January 1983) and reprinted in his book of the same
name. "Meme" is a word Dawkins coined in purposeful analogy to
gene. A meme is an information pattern that is passed from mind to
mind.

Meme is a similar concept to "idea," but the critical part of the
"idea about memes" is that memes are subject to adaptive
evolutionary forces very similar to those that select for genes.
That is, memes are subject to variation and selection in the
environment provided by human minds, communication channels, and
the vast collection of cooperating and competing memes that make
up human culture.

The analogy is remarkably close. Genes in cold viruses that cause
sneezes by irritating noses spread themselves by this route to new
hosts and become more common in the gene pool of the cold virus.
Memes that cause those they have infected to spread the meme to
other people become more common in the meme pool of human culture.
(In a weird self-referential way, this "meme about memes" has
influenced me to write this article.)

The use of words such as "infected" is purposeful. Memetics could
be summed up as the "germ theory of ideas." Visible only through
behavior or objects resulting from behavior, memes can replicate
and infect even through the electronic media.

The power of this analogy is that it encourages us to use our
well- developed tool box of models about living things and systems
to investigate the spread and persistence of cultural information
patterns, from the height of doorknobs to belief in mediums. It
turns out that the models of epidemic and endemic disease fit the
data from historical social movements (such as the spread of
religions) very well. An influenza virus that mutates to a more
infectious form can cause a new epidemic. A meme that mutates to a
more infectious form may signal the start a new social movement.

I have more than an intellectual curiosity about memes and social
movements. I was a participant from 1975 on in a relatively mild
social movement based on the space colony meme. This meme had a
clear origin from a combination of new and older memes in the
minds of Dr. Gerard K. O'Neill of Princeton University and his
students in 1969. It spread out and gained its most visible
expression as the L5 Society, peaking (much like an epidemic) at
about 10,000 members. As memes go, it has been relatively harmless
-- no fatalities that I know of, though several have lost
fortunes. While it has not accomplished much, it certainly has
been a "successful" meme in that it has spread out to perhaps half
a million people.

Unfortunately, a successful meme has no more direct (that is short
term) concern with the well being of its host than a virus. In the
long run, of course, memes that kill the people they infect, or
prevent them from breeding, tend to die out. An example of this
latter type of meme would be the one which infested the Shakers.
(Shakers were a sect that forbade having children -- in this they
were similar to the recent Rajneesh cult, which encouraged the
sterilization of the barely pubescent female children of its
devotees.)

All memes can be placed somewhere along the parasite-to-symbiote
spectrum. The vast majority of our culturally transmitted
information is either useful or at least harmless. Some memes may
even protect us from other memes. Unless a parasite kills all of
its hosts, the normal evolutionary adjustment is for parasites to
become symbiotes. The first step in this direction is for a
parasite to protect its host from similar parasites. The
progression from cults to established religions is clearly
analogous. It is certainly safer to be an indoctrinated member of
some long-established religion than to be susceptible to infection
by a cult that may prove fatal. I have come to sincerely
appreciate this positive aspect of religions.

Even if we understand that memes parasitize our minds, the
question still remains as to the mechanism -- why are we
susceptible? Two other books, "The Society of Mind", by Marvin
Minsky, co-founder of the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory,
and "The Social Brain", by Michael S. Gazzaniga, a principal
split-brain researcher, explain our susceptibility as a side
effect of an adaptive evolutionary advantage. Minsky discusses the
mind as emerging from a vast confederation of mental agents.
Gazzaniga starts his book with "Believing is what we humans do
best..." and reports on the mental modules that contribute to the
process of forming and maintaining beliefs. The books are strongly
complementary and lead to remarkably similar views of the mind
despite starting from very different places and using very
different methods.

What relations do memes have to mental modules or agents? I
suspect that memes are the information patterns used to construct
some of Minsky's agents or to fill some of Gazzaniga's modules. It
is Gazzaniga's contention that certain mental modules, physically
embodied in small areas of the brain, are ready receptor sites for
the information that makes up certain beliefs. It is known that
destruction of a very small area of the brain makes a person's
belief systems so unstable that they can change religions as often
as underwear.

He makes a strong case that the capacity for belief is due to the
hardware organization of the brain. The ability to form beliefs
and the ability to learn them from others evolved from simpler
mental skills because it greatly improved survival. But once the
capacity for forming and passing on beliefs existed, an entirely
new type of non-biological evolution took off, that of pure
information or memes that could get themselves copied from mind to
mind and from generation to generation. The collective minds of
the human race became a new "primal soup" for a wide variety of
competing beliefs.

Any student of evolution would expect that the long-term survivors
of this process (such as astrology) are well adapted to get their
hosts to spread and defend them. It would also be plausible to
them that in the tens of millennia since memetic evolution became
a major factor there has been biological evolution in brain
hardware. The parts of our brains that hold our belief systems
have probably undergone biological adaptation to be less
susceptible (that is more skeptical) to memes that result in death
or seriously interfere with reproductive success. The People's
Temple episode of a few years ago shows that the selection for
this type of skepticism is far from universal. As skeptics, we are
normally concerned with more common and less drastic beliefs such
as UFOs, psychic healers, spoon benders, etc., and with attempts
to subvert the education system with creation "science."



EDITOR'S CORNER

A friend of mine is a doctor. We take lunch together occasionally
and I probably abuse our friendship when I ask him about some
annoying malady.

On a recent occasion I mentioned a running injury that has been
the bane of my morning excursions, so he told me to come back to
his office to have a look-see. His genuine concern relieved my
anxiety about the friendship abuse so I went. After examination he
suggested cortisone, but cautioned that chances were high the
condition was chronic and I would only realize temporary relief. I
thought about that because one of my business associates had just
recently told me about the wonders of chiropractic from his visit
following some allergy problems. He said the good bone cruncher
ASSURED him relief if he would follow the treatment all the way
through. (There was probably a HIDDEN caveat in the chiropractor's
statement somewhere.)

It occurred to me that this is one of the significant differences
between "standard" and fringe medicine (or pseudoscience in
general): the fringe promises the world for whatever ails. No
disease or condition is bigger than the nostrums they offer.

In fact, the medical quack cannot lose under a plan that was
unfolded at the London CSICOP conference. Since every disease, no
matter how serious, has periods of amelioration and deterioration,
the sure-fire program works like this. First, the treatment must
be administered only when the client is on a deterioration phase,
and second, the treatment or substance must be perfectly
innocuous. The outcome will be one of four things: (1) The patient
improves. In this case you CUT BACK on the dosage or treatment,
explaining that it is working (Win). (2) The patient stabilizes.
Here, you tell the victim that we just need a little more time,
but the treatment is working (Win). (3) The customer continues to
get worse. Well, the dosage apparently isn't high enough, so we'll
just increase it a little and see you next month (Win). (4) The
unfortunate soul dies. "If only she had come to me sooner." (She
is not around to tell how bad you are -- win.)

Now, with each of these four cases the patient gets better or
worse; again, treating only on the deterioration phase one of four
things will happen. (1) The one who got better is now
deteriorating; we tell him we decreased the treatment too soon,
and now must return to the original Rx (Win). (2) The stabilized
gets worse and we offer that the dosage must be increased a little
(Win). (3) The worse gets "worser." This is probably a very
serious case that will require massive doses and more time (Win).
(4) Poor client dies. "If only he had come to me sooner." (Win, as
above). This whole thing repeats until you have only the "cured"
and the deceased. Win, win.

After all, the patrons of the quack are patient and forbearing. If
a highly trained MD doesn't deliver what the customer expects
he/she will never hear the end of it. The quack, however, seems to
slip criticism while he bathes in the warmth of his patients'
praise. (The same escape clause is afforded shysters of other
metier: Uri Geller can botch a trick and be forgiven because the
"vibes are bad," while a legitimate illusionist would get the
stage hook for the same bungling.)

So guarantees are often a test for pseudoscience; another give
away is secrecy. Barring competitive trade secrets and national
security, science is open. In fact, when a new discovery is
announced there is almost a rush to get peer review and
confirmation. Books and notes are opened for inspection because
the honest researcher eagerly wishes to establish his/her idea.
When original data must be pried and researchers cajoled to
release information, we want to ask, "What is there to hide?"

The pseudoscience contrast is that months and often years pass
before hard or original data are released. An excellent example is
Dr.s' Hal Putoff and Russell Targ's "remote viewing" research.
David Marks and Richard Kammann spent over THREE YEARS trying to
pry the raw data from Putoff. The excuses and promises flowed like
flattery from a riverboat gambler. When finally the material was
released, it was clear that the papers were incomplete and that
there had been some editing. Putoff seemed to have been putting
on. (See "The Psychology of the Psychic," Prometheus Books (1980)
p. 12-43 for a complete account.)

Science continually seeks to clean house: ideas and theories are
in a constant state of flux, undergoing modifications and
refinements as new information is considered. No person or idea is
above criticism -- a hero today could be obscure tomorrow. When
hoaxes and charlatans -- usually revealed from within the ranks
-- are discovered they are exposed and denounced.

Compare all of this with pseudoscience. The heros are eternal heros
and "theories" are cast in granite. Ideas that dangle in thin air
are pressed into service almost no matter how inane if they carry
the party line. Crackpot notions and hoaxes are usually discovered
by outsiders, and when the insiders finally accept the reality, the
purveyor of the wacky idea is still afforded company in the ranks
(e.g., Immanuel Velikovsky). In short, there is little criticism
from within, and external criticism is usually just ignored.

Those who attack the scientific method (as in the pejorative
"western linear thinking") would undermine one of the single most
powerful tools of intellectual advancement in history. Science
does not offer the comfort of absolute certainty and answers to
all mysteries. Science can only offer an uncertain and incomplete
reality. Pseudoscience sells certainty and hope; and that, I
think, is the enduring power of its grip -- for many, hope is
better than the reality they wish to ignore or pretend doesn't
exist.



RAMPARTS

[Ramparts is a regular feature of "BASIS", and your participation
is urged. Clip, snip and tear bits of irrationality from your local
scene and send them to the EDITOR. If you want to add some comment,
please do so.]

From the "Toronto Star" we learn that the TM movement is having to
ante up for some of its vaunted (and totally unfounded) claims.
"Two Transcendental Meditation organizations have been ordered to
pay a former member almost $138,000 for not fulfilling a promise
to teach him to fly." (Presumably, not in a Cessna 150).

The Executive Council of TM in the US was found guilty of fraud and
negligence by a federal court jury, "and ordered to pay the
judgement to the plaintiff, Robert Kropinski, a former instructor.
Kropinski had sought $9 million in punitive damages, alleging that
TM had made false scientific claims" (reduce stress, improve
memory, reverse aging, and promote world peace), but maybe the
jury, after meditation, thought that was too harsh and turned him
down on that score. The bottom line may be that the courts are an
avenue to make paranormal peddlers more sensitive to the brash
claims they make. Let's send a free, one-year subscription of
"BASIS" to Kropinski.

BAS subscribers are involved people. They DO something. EUGENIE
SCOTT, a subscriber in Berkeley, sent notice that the "Oakland
Tribune" has cancelled its science page which ran once a week. It
is sobering that the only link the average person has to the world
of science has not found sufficient ground to warrant its
continuity. Dr. Scott heads the National Center for Science
Education and rightly urges us to write the "Trib" to encourage
the reinstitution of the feature. Send a barrage of mail to
"Robert Maynard, Oakland Tribune, Box 24424, Oakland, CA 94623."
Thank you, Genie.

If you've ever wondered why Uri Geller doesn't make a try for our
$11,000 and just embarrass the heck out of us consider. His new
book, "The Geller Effect," has reportedly netted him a nice
million. He has contracted with Australian and Japanese mining
companies for over $1 million to help them find precious metals
"psychically," and of course, his work on tours brings a
phenomenal amount. Geller is a millionaire several times over. He
has his bank balance, his library of press clippings and his
photograph album to demonstrate his achievements. "I do not have
to challenge, confront, argue with or even defend myself against
anybody." he said in an interview. Indeed.

Someone sent us the front page of the "Psychic News," "Britain's
Only Independent Spiritualist Weekly" in which the lead story
concerns a break in at the paper's headquarters in London. Usually
it is best to hear something from the horse's mouth, and this
article is certainly a case in point: "[the break in]... has left
us with a headache. For a day's mail was stolen -- and we have NO
IDEA what it contained."(!!)

Usually the cops call the psychics, but the tables were turned
here when the psychics called the cops to find the felons. In a
rare candid admission coming from a gaggle of psychics, "But the
big problem is we know FROM THE POST OFFICE that letters were
delivered on Saturday, Jan. 17. OBVIOUSLY we don't know what the
post contained. [emphasis added]" None of the "psychics" foresaw
the burglary, nor were any able to come up with a psychic
composite drawing of the perpetrator. Probably is easier to
discern what is happening to someone else would be their excuse.
That report ought to be on "That's Incredible."



FROM THE CHAIR
by Robert Sheaffer

Those of you who were in Pasadena for the 1987 CSICOP Conference,
"Controversies in Science and Fringe Science", don't need me to
tell you how great it was. CSICOP ventured somewhat afield from its
usual fare of refuting psychic spoon-bending, telepathy, and UFOs,
to discuss certain subjects that while superficially bizarre, have
at least some degree of scientific plausibility: the Search for
Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI); "Animal Language" (which
might be termed "Communications with Simian Intelligence," or
CWSI); and hypnosis. Other sessions dealt with the more typical
CSICOP concerns: Chiropractic & Holistic medical claims,
"Spontaneous Human Combustion," Psychic Fraud, and Astrology.

Space and time do not permit me to give you a detailed account of
the conference; that will appear in a forthcoming issue of "The
Skeptical Inquirer". So let me just touch on some of the things
that, for me, made the conference unique and valuable.

In the session discussing the possibilities of detecting ETI
astronomers Frank Drake and Jill Tartar (who is a BAS Advisor)
argued why they believe extraterrestrial intelligence is a
relatively common occurrence in the universe, and why there is a
good chance we could someday detect radio signals from one of them.
Astronomer Robert Rood presented a far more pessimistic estimate,
suggesting that intelligent life (or, indeed, ANY life) is quite
rare, perhaps even unique. He teased the SETI optimists by drawing
parallels between the radio search for ETI and the attempt in
previous centuries to lure unicorns from the woods with the lap of
a virgin to nestle its head. When such attempts did not succeed one
could speculate that perhaps the unicorns are far away, or we did
not wait long enough, or even that our supposed virgin ISN'T; but
we avoid facing up to the possibility that the unicorns we seek do
not exist! A lively discussion followed this session.

The following session, titled "Animal Language: Fact or Illusion,"
was notable primarily for who was NOT in attendance: specifically,
any of the major researchers or experimenters in Communications
With (Alleged) Simian Intelligence (CW(A)SI). It was not that they
were not invited; indeed, CSICOP worked very hard to include at
least one of several well-known researchers who are known to be on
good terms with certain clever apes. However, not one of them would
come! (Perhaps the apes dissuaded them from consorting with those
skeptical of simian intellects.) Thomas Seboek delivered a somewhat
hard-hitting criticism of alleged communications with apes, drawing
parallels with the "Clever Hans" incident (the horse that could
allegedly do arithmetic, but only if his trainer was present to
subconsciously cue him).

He noted that, for some odd reason, clever apes fail to communicate
in the presence of skeptics. Seboek also wryly noted that Washoe,
one of the clever apes which allegedly has a big vocabulary, bit
off three fingers of a scientific colleague who went to investigate
his alleged abilities! (This can hardly be called intelligent
behavior; in any case, it proves that the ape is NOT the legendary
Noble Savage of romantic myth).

Professors Gerd Hovelmann and Robert Rosenthal discussed animal
communications in more general and abstract terms. Rosenthal had
much to say about the "experimenter effect" in such undertakings.
(Martin Gardner's excellent skeptical book "Science: Good, Bad,
and Bogus" contains a chapter debunking the claims of
communications with Clever Apes such as Koko, Washoe, etc.)

Carl Sagan's Friday evening Keynote Address was well-attended. It
was a strange mix of excellent skepticism with blatant political
harangue. Sagan argued that schools and parents ought to encourage
children to become more skeptical, suggesting that if skepticism
were more widespread, people would become more skeptical of the
national leaders he mistrusts. What he apparently does not realize
is that there are a good many people in CSICOP and the local groups
for whom skepticism is indeed deeply ingrained, and who for
precisely this reason have become highly skeptical of the very
faction he would have us trust!

BAS's own Dr. Wallace Sampson moderated a fascinating symposium on
"Medical Controversies." William Jarvis gave a very fair talk on
Chiropractic claims (indeed almost overly fair, in my judgement,
giving them the benefit of every doubt). A Chiropractor
representing their national organization was present, and was given
a few minutes to present his side; he looked and talked like a
truck driver, which did not help him impress the crowd.

Philosopher Austen G. Clark defined the word "Holistic" (as in
"Holistic Medicine") down to the tiniest nuance, proving
conclusively that it doesn't mean anything, or perhaps he said
that it means whatever you want it to mean, which probably works
out to the same thing. Dr. Jerry P. Lewis, a Davis physician very
active in battling cancer quackery, presented what might be called
the "seven warning signs" of cancer quackery. Dismissing the
claims of "nutrition as a cure," he made the point that a proper
diet can HELP PREVENT cancer, but diet CANNOT CURE cancer for
those who already have it, and other treatments should be pursued.

I found especially valuable the session on alleged "spontaneous
human combustion" (SHC) by Joe Nickell. In recent years, a number
of claims have been made about people allegedly bursting into flame
for no reason. In "UFOs Explained", Philip J. Klass investigated
three such cases reported by Brad Steiger, and found them to be
wild misrepresentations of the facts. But other than that, nobody
had done any in-depth investigation of the more "respectable"
claims of alleged SHC: until, that is, Joe Nickell.

He found, going back to original sources, that prosaic sources of
ignition were generally present -- a nearby lit pipe, or a
fireplace -- but these sources of fire are not mentioned in
subsequent accounts. In a nutshell, alleged SHC seems to occur
when a person is incapacitated by alcohol, drugs or medical
infirmity, and accidentally sets his clothes on fire. Furthermore
(this is not a pleasant subject), as human flesh burns, it exudes
a greasy fat which can sometimes effectively turn the body into a
candle, thereby consuming it almost completely. A gruesome
subject, but a persistent claim in pseudoscience.

The Saturday evening Banquet featured more speeches by CSICOP
officers (yawn). (I'm just kidding -- I really enjoy hearing what
they have to say!) The highlight of the evening was a condensed
version of the famed Penn and Teller magic act, which has been
wowing 'em in The Big Apple and elsewhere. For those of you who
haven't yet seen them, their style of magic might not exactly be
described as refined or effete; their humor is more in the vein of
the late John Belushi, and their effects are not for the squeamish.
But if you're not put off by a little fake blood being spilled,
you'll have a great time at their show, and their tricks will leave
you mystified. Both Penn and Teller are big supporters of CSICOP,
and attended the conference sessions, not just the banquet. Penn
closed the act by telling CSICOP to go out and "kick @$$."

A year ago, after the CSICOP Conference in Boulder, I mentioned
that participation in those conferences seemed to be growing at a
compound rate of about 25% a year. Well, it happened again. I
guessed (hoped) at that time that as many as 1250 people might
participate in one way or another at Los Angeles; I understand it
was about 1400. Please excuse my pessimism!

Now, that rate of growth is going to be very hard to keep up,
unless everyone in the U.S. is to be attending in 10 years or so,
then everyone in the world, after which we start enrolling
extraterrestrials from the Galactic Federation. However, it is an
extremely good sign. At a time when UFO groups are crumbling, and
interest in other goofy things has fallen so low that Erich Von
Daniken cannot even get his new books about the "Gods from Outer
Space" published, there is one organization dealing with the
paranormal that is growing very rapidly, and that group is CSICOP.
Maybe the world isn't as bad off as some of us may have thought!



GELLER HITS TOWN

Famed "psychic" Uri Geller came to the Bay Area during IRS week,
so he was scheduled on KGO radio and channel 5's "AM San
Francisco".

On the 14th he was on KGO talk show with host Michael Krasne.
Michael has had BAS founder and magician Bob Steiner on his show
numerous times, so Bob helped prepare him for the Geller visit.
Since BAS had adequate advance notice of the program the word went
out, and as a result, all but three call-ins to the program were
skeptics!

Geller bent a spoon as host Krasne described the event to the
listening audience. Although he claims he bent it with his mind he
held it in his hands, averring "it would take hours if I didn't
hold it." I remember when Geller performed in S.F. over a year ago
at a stage show in which he told people to take keys from their
pockets and they would find them bent: "things like this always
happen when I am around," he declared. So, a heavy key shank can
be bent by his mere presence, but a thin spoon shank "will take
hours." Hands, especially those of a deft manipulator can bend
spoons. Of course a mind MIGHT be capable of doing the same thing,
but so long as the utensil is in the former, we cannot know that
the latter was the sole cause.

Geller refused a test to "psychically" reproduce a picture Steiner
had drawn in advance and left in a sealed envelope with Krasne --
 it was a drawing of a light bulb -- but Uri urged Krasne to draw
something which he would then reproduce. Well, Uri was back in
control with this proposition. He had no control over Bob's pre-
drawn, sealed target. Michael's physical presence and emotional
involvement are potentially powerful factors in a "test" of this
nature. The untutored Krasne drew a circle and a triangle, which,
along with boats, houses (with a sun in the corner) and trees are
what 95% of the populace will draw. Even with those odds heavily
in Geller's favor Krasne declared Uri's efforts "inconclusive."
Given the vagaries and subjectivity of a few abstract lines that
Geller can sketch, it is very difficult to lose.

Steiner called in and asked Geller, "Why won't you be tested by
James Randi?" Never-to-be-on-the-defensive Geller, as though butter
wouldn't melt in his mouth, quickly retorted, "Bob, do you believe
in God?"(!!)

Geller doesn't have to catch bullets in his teeth like Superman,
he just adroitly dodges 'em.



BAS CHALLENGE!

May's BAS meeting will feature an individual who claims he will
demonstrate truly remarkable powers. He is reportedly able to add,
subtract, multiply, divide, do square roots and algebra -- you say
no big deal, I can do that. Ah, but you are not a Dalmatian, are
you! Sunny, along with his owner Jim Todd has appeared in schools
and on TV's "Mac and Muttly" show. Now they are ready to meet
skeptics. Our own Bob Steiner will be on hand to oversee this
informal test and tell us the checkered history about claims of
animal genius.

If you can speak Spanish, Portuguese, or Yiddish, Sonny will answer
math question in those languages. If you are a math whiz Sonny will
match wits with you. What are the limits of animal intelligence?
Can we really communicate with other species? Is there something
else going on here? Find out on Thursday, May 17th at 7:30 p.m. in
the Campbell public library.



"CRYSTAL POWER" CLAIMS VERSUS PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF CRYSTALS
(Continued from Lawrence Jerome's "CRYSTAL POWER," April issue)

CLAIMS:

- Crystals have an "energy" field extending 3 feet around the
crystal.
- Crystals held in the hand produce an "energy" that can be felt
as a tingling sensation. Crystals can pick up "vibrations" from
thought patterns which are then "locked in" crystal.
- Prayers, thoughts, and feelings can be transmitted to a crystal
several feet away.

REALITY:

- Piezoelectricity: mechanical strain produces a minute electric
field within quartz and other asymmetric crystals.
- Pyroelectricity: heated quartz and tourmaline crystals produce
a small electric field; however, the heat of one's hand would be
far too low (tourmaline heated in a fire will attract ashes).
- Crystal oscillation: thin slices of quartz are used as
oscillators at million cycles per second range; brain waves are in
the hundred cycles per second range.
- Brain wave electrical patterns are barely detectable on the
surface of the skull, much less at several feet.

                             -----

Opinions expressed in "BASIS" are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect those of BAS, its board or its advisors.

The above are selected articles from the May, 1987 issue of
"BASIS", the monthly publication of Bay Area Skeptics. You can
obtain a free sample copy by sending your name and address to BAY
AREA SKEPTICS, 4030 Moraga, San Francisco, CA 94122-3928 or by
leaving a message on "The Skeptic's Board" BBS (415-648-8944) or
on the 415-LA-TRUTH (voice) hotline.

Copyright (C) 1987 BAY AREA SKEPTICS.  Reprints must credit "BASIS,
newsletter of the Bay Area Skeptics, 4030 Moraga, San Francisco,
CA 94122-3928."

                             -END-