Worst Psychic “Proof” Ever
December 1st, 2009
|
| Share |
The sad thing is that this will actually fool some people into thinking it provides evidence of some kind of evidence of psychic powers. Simple though these effects may be, many don’t even know they exist.
The Proof – PART 1 – James Twyman:
If you want you can go on to watch Part 2, but it’s about what you’d expect – a lot more of the same
Now lets see what really happened here. I should admit I’m not an expert in this area – at least not to the degree of someone like Banachek or James Randi, but in this case, the tricks are so transparent they’re hard to miss.
In fact, I bet most readers can find them all before they’re listed. So see if you can find them all before hitting the “more” button to see the whole posting.
1. The idiomotor effect is used to find the hidden items. Given the instructions to “think” about the locations and nothing else. I’d be surprised if this didn’t work for just about anyone. Twyman is clever to use an item that both individuals hold, as this gives him the ability to feel motions without even looking at the individual. It’s also possible that this could be done by closely observing the person’s body motions, but that would take a little more skill and might be a bit more obvious.
2. The “best sender” is selected. Basically this means that she has the greatest tendency to present the idiomotor effect or manifest other non-verbal cues. This person is used with the hidden item and a map, which is large enough to find the area of the country the person is thinking about while walking around and keeping his eyes on her.
3. A little cold reading. Just for good measure, Twyman asks a few vague questions which he then claims to get right. First, it’s an urban/natural area. This could be a park in an urban area or an urban area near a park or a natural area a few miles from a city. It could be nearly anything! Next it’s a bridge, but not really a bridge. It could be a bridge, a walkway, a catwalk, a deck or almost anything. Twyman gets the information and claims to have determined it himself.
4. Now go to the site and play the idiomotor game all over again.
By the way, Hay House is the same outfit that Sylvia Browne is part of.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, December 1st, 2009 at 6:53 pm and is filed under Bad Science, Culture, Just LAME, Not Even Wrong, Paranormal, media. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
View blog reactions
December 1st, 2009 at 8:23 pm
One can understand why legitimate magicians, that is to say skilled entertainers, hold these frauds in such contempt. They soil the art and put everyone that has these skills in a bad light.
Quote Comment
December 1st, 2009 at 9:30 pm
DV82XL said:
I actually think that most legitimate magicians are more talented than most of these frauds. You have to be really really good at what you do to get people to actually be mystified by it, even when you are upfront and honest about the fact that it’s all illusion, hand tricks and so on.
I’ve seen a few who are so good that even though I know how a trick is done, I am all but convinced they must have done it by some alternate method.
Of course, there is also some showman ship involved (or a lot of it) A lot of it is confidence and how they interact with the audience. Also, pulling off illusions when you don’t expect them. Some shows are very good, in that they do something totally unexpected when you think they’re setting up for the actual trick, or you think you see a simple illusion and then realize the real illusion is something else.
Also, they need to mix it up and keep it fresh. Some of these frauds use the same bull**** for years. A real magician can’t do that. You’re not going to get a lot of credit for pulling a rabbit out of a hat for 1000 shows in a row.
Here is a good example of Penn and Teller pulling a very unexpected and downright hilarious illusion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKhKVR1bovk
They also have a signature illusion that involves catching a bullet in the mouth from a gun, after it passes through a pane of glass. They have been asked about how it is done and Penn’s response was that he wouldn’t mind telling if it were something simple and elegant and clever that allowed them to pull it off, but that’s not how it is done. The real answer is that it’s a complicated technical thing that really would not be added to by revealing it.
He did say one thing though – apparently some had suggested that it is a real bullet and gun and the the bullet has a little bit less powder in it and that after going through the glass, it is slowed down just enough that it is possible to catch it. He said that he promised everyone that it absolutely does not involve a real bullet and gun and please don’t try to replicate it that way, because you will kill yourself or someone else.
Quote Comment
December 1st, 2009 at 9:49 pm
The things that the guy in the video above does, I could do quite easily with no practice. Most people probably could.
I could not do what Penn and Teller do. They have a lot of talent that has been developed over many years and they spend a lot of time and put a lot of effort into coming up with things.
The guy in the video here is pathetic.
Quote Comment
December 2nd, 2009 at 1:00 am
The main character in the CBS show “The Mentalist” uses this technique all the time to get people to reveal something.
Quote Comment
December 2nd, 2009 at 5:26 am
DV82XL said:
A lot of magicians are big on skepticism and debunking.
Have you ever seen Banacheck? That dude is amazing. Just plain amazing.
Quote Comment
December 2nd, 2009 at 6:52 am
I saw a really bad psychic on TV once. I can’t remember where though.
He had a pocket watch loaned from an unknown audience member. He asked “is the owner on this side of the audience” and no-one had a clue except for one person who started nodding. He then looked directly at her and asked “Is it yours?”. She said yes and the audience applauded.
Next he asked “Was it your father’s?” and she said it wasn’t. His response was “No, I didn’t think it was.”
Quote Comment
December 2nd, 2009 at 6:55 am
Concerning the magic bullet, Penn wrote how the trick is done:
The bullet is made of painted paraphin, which is hard enough to wistand basic inspection but vaporize when shot, the blank shot is strong enough to break the glass but not enough to be harmfull to the “receiver” (in the video I saw, Penn however wears protective googles, much more usefull than his kevlar jacket for this trick because the potential harm at this point is a hot droplet in the eye).
The “catched” bullet is a real used one that is marked offstage to match the marks made by the witness that Penn puts in his mouth while putting the kevlar jacket on.
Cool trick, but still dangerous even when you know how to do it.
Quote Comment