" Ne Science Pubhca!ions 600/,08ID7,%dClAcRDP9 6-00787ROQ0700110020-3 e proved For K"14seQ 70ophone: 01-836 Cables: Ncwscient London \VC2 Telex: 27253 'ion inquines 01 -242 e 4177 17 October IS74 Volumo r Subscrip, C4 Nu m 919 E,li!or: Dr Dixon MDnitor 165 r'[P'j'.y r-ci!cr (Sc~encc): Technology revim 1EG Dr Mer Stubbs Ql-p--"~ [6!or (Techno;ony): Enemy fite 198 Nichokis Val6ry E,~Ilor: Mchard Fifield reedback 203 Westminster scene 202 Science Policy Editor: Dr Nevi York vicw 202 Martin Sherwood Science EdIcr: Dr Rog-ar Paris notebook 203 Lewin Assisten~ Science Edi',cr: EEC notcbook 203 Dr Robert Walgate Socizel Editor: k!n Low Venture 204 Technology Ed'tor: /,ichiel Pig-ignorant 2r15 Kenward Technclony Fol~cy Editor: A groundling's ncleLook 05 Dr joserph Hanlon Technolog/ Ncv~,s Ceitar: Tantalizer C-6 Lav.,renco NIcGinty Lc'ters 212 Art Editor: MnrC..aiet V,1r-b!) Grimbledon Dcv.,n 2 j 2 Assislant Aft Ed:tc,~ : Arladne 2 A'an Middleton " 2 Aft;sts- N'e'll Hys:cp, WTchiael Peyton LIS Editor: Graham Chedd 72 Addi -- Rd & rigon - rook!ine, , Massachusells 0214G COMMent Dr Roger Lewin,Adrian Hope, Dir Wchecl Schw--b163 Consultpnts Eliochcmlslr-,~: Dr Ro~ert Ffeedman conlputc.s: Hadley VOYSEY Juhn De!in Env!ronmenll: Jon T:rver Maadnc,: Ton)- Loltps Ps),cho!c;y: D, N'c% Hurnphrey Sovi(![ sc;~.-)Ce: Dr Sarah White Ron Brown Adver!~Eernc-nt manager Roy Edv.-ards Adv:s6ry P~nel Or M.,-nly Fhnis~cr~ FRS S I., W;;'~ i am, G 1 a n ~ i 11 o F R S Or Bas'l '.',?son FIRS Professor S;r W-ichael Swann FRS Uri Geller and Science A Nev., Scientist special investil-ation, by Dr Joseph Hanlon Gencralisations Professor Guy Ourisson talks to Dr Martin Sherv;ood 10 How safe are N'orth Sea Platforms? K'elth iVifield 192 195 Is the Nor1h Sea bubble bursting? Lavvrence [.i,c%Gin+y Revievv Professor Leslie Audus, Dr M-arl-e Boas Had, Dr ,kndrev; 1,1;!ier, Dr Mal-tin Sherv.-ood, Dr Clive Wcod, Davld Dickscn, 1 %-inty, et Al Dr William N. Beesley, Lawrence Mc 207 PUELISHED %'.'EE1'LY OVERSEAS REPRESENTATIVES F"b!ishcr's s,,bscrinflon rat,, Wand: $'10 &0 USA: Jo,-.scn, Jordan, H;-.rrison 1, Schulz Inc., 57 Post St,(~et. Su;te 712-715, Sem rranciscc, cLi:,,C'fni?. wc-j F;~~,:h Less Ar-!76c~.~. C~.;:Icrnia S'~157 (11.3) 4a3-&"-'0 f ~7 `~3 r'.' c - - F. St; C c;"Otz inc. ~~O P"'K Av~~)~jc' 14tw Volk, , "y 1C "~ 7 (21"') i W C t"':! 6, C --c" Lon.~on f DD P( z:!A re-; -i hz' Pon', Of.-,cc as a nsv'*"'D3;)c1 CANADA: Clcmrnt Dick, Chirnney Copse, RR NO 1, ChIJI.Chi!l, OSIP.60, C2nnea. (7C,5) 455 2 '41 er", 1?Lnd e. c!! c-'!:! va, d at Janl"Jc'l NY. 11,431 JAPAN: ln',~,rnalional Wed;,i Rcorcsontative-, I.W. 1, Sh;ba-KcIo~titz:,ho. /.,if, -i c:cx: rd rie-lmo in vic us/, Tu~yo. J;-.;~an. I e1: 3 3 P,A'-c,1;Drs Inc.. .,,,j 1'\-11!;r-, Nly I oncjr'n Lid 1~14 T Approved For Release..~dbbl6V/61":t'l~k-ftt)Oig6c-br6~8!kdbO7OOllOO2O-3 New Scientist 17 Octclbcr 1974 *,73 FIJI uVed-RUDIR IV 4115 W _zU N % Lid Is Uri Geller the world's niost gifted psychic, capable of bencling inetai without, touching it and discovering the contents of closed boxes with incredible accuracy? Or is lie flie biggest hoaxer of our tirne, able to convince trained scientists that they saw 1hings which never actually happened ? 7 his week, Hature publishes the first scientific p-aper on Geller-a report on tests at !he Stzinford Research Institute. And in this special issue of N'exv Scieril-list, Dr Joseph Hanion reports on both Our own invostigaiton and the SRI paper % 1A elease 2000/08/07 Approved For R Geller and New ScierMst Url Geller was first brought from Israel by a scientist- Dr Andrija Puharich-and has given demonstrations at the Bell Laboratories, New Jersey; the Goddard Space fornia; Bickbeck College, London; and Flight Center, Cali. irst r other research centres. New Scientist f .2ported on Geller two years aga (vol 56, p 360) and more than a year ago (vol 59, p 95) reported on early results from first came the Stan-ford Research Institute (SRI). Gellei to national attention in Britain on 23 Nevember 1973 when lie appeared on the Dimbleby Talk-In on BBC tele- vision, where lie reproduced a drawing in a se-aled envelope, bent a fork, and apparently started a dud watch. Two scientists, Professor John Taylor and Dr Lyail Watson, appeared on the programme Nvith hin . ler ri G e1 tressed that lie baffled the scientists-a point supported s by both Taylor and Watson-and said he was anxious to participate in research Nvith British scientists. Geller was a sensation on Brit-sh television, oeneratino far more interest than he, had in aDrearances on natioi rial ice was an im television in the US. And scici portant part of this-if Geller had simply appeared as a ma-lician, he would have attracted much less attention. Yet Geller had indeed baffled the scientists, -and it Nvas at least possible that he had powers previously unknown. to science. For this reason, Nev; Scientist took the unusual steu of settinal up its own small research panel and on 26.Nio ber invited Geller to participate in experiments. ('New Scient3st, vol 60,,p 603). We told Geller that the committee would consist of a member of the, Societv foc Psychical Research (SPR), a research psycholocrist, the editor and one other representative of New Scientist, an independent journalist Nvith a major newspaper, and a professional magician. Geller accepted our invitation quickly, in a letter on 3 December. Althou,,,h our initial letter to Geller did not actually name the members of the conimittee, they had already been chosen and were Denys Parsons of the SPR, psychologist Dr Christopher Evans of the National Physical Laboratory (N%,hD was responsible for the. ""ew Oricntist aue~ztiDnna~-_' vo, editor of New Scientist Dr Ber-nard Dixon ~a Dr Joseph Hanlon (a physicist), international rna~;ician David Berglas, and Alan Brien of the Sunday Times. Wc lalcr added a statistician, Professor D. J. Finney of the University of Edinburgh, and a forensic scientist, Dr I ' I C r"-, CIA_1~ "UL PAN OPWATATRO CRTP P Vi hi,,h. 311y -October 1974 eyj tist 17 N Ve' I Fo r0 ~f_. PqP%81%Tv: Cl the time GeAeftOpg our.~ a - tRDP96-0.0~8grQ M08 0 i'ork. but Nve met several times with an e au associate, Yaslia c ' Katz. i-i December and set up a meeting Because this is largely a report of my with Geller for pexsonal investiga- - 8 Februiry to discuss the experiments. And tion of the Geller phenome on "SeeinY is non, it is important t Z> 0 m be'-ving", a documentary on Thames Televisionclear my own attitude and bia-ses. I in feel strongly that 'the Lozdon on 15 January, Geller declared "whennext interestinl~,, breakthrough in science I arn doing may well cocae C.10,11h experiments with scientists, this disbelief will not from expensive research by huge teams in S." c S phi y drop 0". and biology, but from research by iridNriduals, and smaill o Bu., oaly a few days after they arrived teams int back in Britain, o tha interaction of people and themselves and Ka= reported that Geller had received a their surroundimrs. bomb threat and . ca.:celled the New Scientist ineetincl and h biof some, but not ThrouLn, eedback, we now have control over o r U all. of Geller's remaining performances. bodies of a sort that not so long ago Time passed, and was almost univer-,-'. g G-2!ler's attitude clearly changed. Katz sally agreed -co be impAsible. Ne,, said the New yative ions in the air seein Sc,e.jzist tests would have to be delayed,.to affect our attitudes. Arid so on. although he In the pis,, few, vears, assured us that Geller had not dropped out.these areas a-rid others such as parapsycholo-y By then, how- have . o ~ . ever, Gel!er had already backed out of several, other sets __ become less the province of hopeful amaleurs a rd more ' Of tests. And on 3 May 1974, on the NeNv ~ York television : the area of trained scientists, At the s~-ne time ~ big show Mid-Day Live on WN-EW-TV, his view . of scientists .~ . science, Darticularly my own field of hi-h :ly PDYSICS , had ch:!.-i~,,ed to: "the Stanford Researchhas become corporate and unimaginative. Institute has Finallv the co-- ' val.:cIated the work I have done with them tinuincr squeeze on science fur for a year." ding puts the ttenti Finally, in June Geller told us on the telephone-- from New more on the scientist Nvho can work, on a shoestring rather, , York- that "I have changed my mind.... Right, now I don't , than the one who cannot Yet the money to go to have the feeling to work with your peODle."higher energies lookin.-, for the quark. In preparation for the lNew Scientist experimentsThus the appearance of Uri Geller and we the interest of studlied the Geller phenomenon extensively.two scientists at a primarily military Dr Joseph research organisa- Ilan'on went to the 'US for three weeks tion, SRI, sparked my own interest. I in January to talk was res .-~le . ~`, Pons, . for to L4e SRI researchers and a larYe number securin-, our first Wahly favourable) of other people reuort on the SRI Nyho had dealt with Geller, in an effort research on Geller more than a year ago. to design effective And I was exp-eeri.ments. This report is based primarilyparticularly plea-zed that New Scientist on his investi- agreed to conduct, gat"wri. but we have not published it untiltests, and -that Geller agreed. now because it was felt.that in fairness to both SRI I began to collect material relevant and Geller, the SRI to experiments with team should have a chance first to report Uri, and in January I Nvent to the US on their research so that I would in a formal journal. have a background picture before we tallked to him in \atture publishes the SRI report.this week February. I spoke with critics and believers, despite strong tallE:d ml;-ivino-s about both the experimental ' technique and the ~ many scientists and other trained observer-, who had seen " , rez~l.s, and that journal is certain to ,, be criticised by some , .,, Geller work, spoke with the SRI scientiz-,s -rid sav; zoma-, . Scientists who will argue that publication , glives Nature's of their videotapes, and watched many taoes of Uri'z tele--.z - stamp of approval to the results. But publication- does not as a'~' nces. Most of the Deo vision appea-ra I ple talked to me . imply agreement, and Nature should indeed researcher and not a journalist. but be con- what I found ~greatly -gratulated for exposing the paper to intelli.gent` discussion surprised me, and now that Uri has withdrawn from th~4' bv the Scientific cornmunit , y proposed New Scientist investigation, I o-..+ant th,,n'- it i= What follows here is New Scientist's attempt,to present this material to put the SRI ba-sed on report in cortext. its ow-ri investigation and on the only Joseph Hanlon scientific evidence available so far, to draw its own conclusions about Uri Geller. 111 IV IM C7 71 P vv I 0 , 1 , L 6 2 "d k~. C o L Like witnesses to a motor accident, people who have seen Uri bend a spoon or do a drawing by ielepathy tell widely differing stories about the xplanations range from the obvious to same event. And e the impossibi depending on just what the observers thought they saw The believers Puharicb, says Geller has accomplished fame, money, and women and that he-%~, ' the task, which eluded the alchemists-- can be childish, petulant, and extremely Ht~lrloom spoons, expensive jewellery, turned~ lead to gold- and that he com- dif5cult to work N,,ith. It is tlie7,e latler: f---cy w2!ches, and even a piece oZ a municates with flying saucers and tcle- characteristics that c-aused ex-astronaut ineleomte-often among their owners' ports objects thousands of miles by the Dr Edgar 'Mitchell, who was Geller's most prized possess ;on s--are now power original funding source and a co-ex-per-i- of his mind. irreparabiv broken. But their owners The enon is dominated rneriLer on Geller whole phenom at SRI, to fall out '%%7:tb point to them with pride, not anger, by Geller's own personality. Ile exudes Geller last )car. Nevertheless, 'Mitchell _ because they %vere destroyed by Uri sincerity. and a childl ike innocence and and others who have experienced his G -, 11! e r. desire to pl(~ase wh ich rr~0~es neople %%h;.Ms S!:Il b-~!;r~ve h'! is on--t of Th~s %ourq Trrael; i- clain",~d Nv~rir tc, n~ --vo ;:I 17r.-,,oran~ Psyclics of a our nme. to la.-C ni st 1, 0 L 'h 'e'lor menal psychic This is reimforccd by a hi~!i lailiir~ rate, tMother aspcc', of the Geller persoa- Po%serz ,~e world has ever seen. Even what nstant fear that lie ality is hi3 hyperactivity seenis to be a co and cronstaaL' some sc-:,cn',i3ts sav he can break spoons will no', b(~ able to do %-.-hit lie is trying, motion. In small groups, either of the by n-.Enial, powers without touchinEr and when lie does suc- press or friends. genuine ple.~.,sure he Pits frorn cn,.~ Vi '~k them, read minds, and make objects ceed. Arid lie is a consummate show- to another, L-willy givingl up the first appear and disappear. The man N%ho man, male modo-1 and a time and suddenly rcturn having been a Iing to it 12ter ' &Flu him to "he U, tid L) s a d,,tP.Qons aru- quddeniv - &t Dili - wrot, 'App ' Yul I MOMM 4 tU&&7 - Wo m"bRud - eease c Vedli;c5;ust %%nat i S this by W. IT. Allen), Dr Andrija admit goals in life are happening and Geller that his main reads ~lie contents A 4 - We r Re e OP96-00787ROO07001 04rl d 2000/08/07: CIA-R F i.st, 11 Octo P.r ase, ber 19, ;~4 4, S, >: 7 0~ -Uri Geller attempts to J. bend a journalist's key A held by David Dimb!eby S, press conference a, at a ZN_ e th BBC Lime Grove, (London) studios on 22 November 1973, the day before Galler's appearance on the Dimbleby Talk-In broug him to the attention of. ..A the British public of se-aled envelopes which, after he noticed-the equipment was rezeroed in of trickerv would have been poss'ible failed to read them before, were left the mornina~ and the film resolution was Geller e-xamined the key, then passed lying around unguarded. not good enough to measure the length to Wharton who held it between tb This means that people often disagree of the bar. And there is no evidence of palms of his hands. Geller held h" an just -what they have seen, and no it actually disappearing and reappearing hands over Wharton's for a few second demonstration is totally conNiricing. The ---on the film, it is just suddenly there, . . . and sure enough the key turned ou bel:ef of most of Geller's suooor-te-s is he said. to be bent through an angle of about 1 built on a lony series of demo ristrations, Yet Puthoff believes implicitly in degrees.... Geller might h3ve distractc none of v,7bich is watertight, but which Geller. One of the events which con- our attention when he first had the ki~: to.gether they find give a convincing vinced him occurred when he was drMng bent it, and put it into Bryan Whartorl picture. For most people, there are one down a motorway with Geller in the car. hands already bent." or two clinching events, although the Puthoff said he queried Geller about Journalists are not alone in havin clincher for one person may be totally flying saucers, and Geller said he would this problem-trained scientists do a unacceptab' ,e to another. prove he got his power from them and well. Geller and Puharich gave a demoi Jolm White, Ed 'Mitchell's assistant at promptly stopped the car without touch- stration at Bell Laboratories, NewJerse: his Irstitute of Noetic Sciences, in Palo ing-r anything. one of the world's top research centred Alto, CaLffornia, told me in January of a on 8 June, 1973. Geller dA*d one of h. Geller test at SRI using a bimorph-a favourite tests: reproducing a drawin brass strip with special coatin.~,s which Reporting what you see in an envelope. He always stresses th-1 gives, a signal in proportion to any bend- the. envelope is sealed and that be hz iog. The strip was clamped in a vice and Another problem is that even experi- never seen the drawing beFore. The Be Geller was to bend it without touching it. enced reporters tend to misreport just report, by Charles Davidson, says "tv; According to White, suddenly one end what has happened. Bryan Silcock, the sealed envelopes were brou~zht" and goe of the bar began to ~lisappear and re- science correspondent of the Sunday on to report Geller's accurate reprodu( appear on a lower level. Geller had Times, reported on Sunday 25 -,November' tion of the drawing. But the man ,,;b clearly dematerialised part of the bar last year: "In a taxi on the way to actually brought the envelopes, I and remaLerialised it elsewhere, White London airport yesterday Uri Geller bent Richard Moore, told me in Jan-uary thz said. But Dr Hal Puthoff, one of the the very tough key to my offlice desk in fact the dravings were put into larE experimenters, found it not p?rticularly without even touching it. The key was clasp envelopes which were not seale corivincinq and dcscrib~,d it sonip~vhat Iving flat in the palui of P'iotn-ranher Further, Monre al-nitted. t1he drawinr li-:-d 3', 14n-2." re dore a', s~-or' nnt~c,!. cl ha"- tied to b-,~nd th(- bar un-sur-ccss.,ully But the next Sunday, 2 December, request, while Geller supposc(~!v was ri on cne day and then returne'd to try Silcock admitted error on tlif-- two most the telephone in 'the next office. Thu again the next. Early in the test, a piece critical points: Geller had handled the Geller could have used -any of seven of the bar suddenly appeared on the key, and it was in fact concealed in rna.-iciaris' tricks_-includin,cf surrept table, although tile siinal from the bar Wharton's liands when it Nvns su LSL 0 NZ he drznvings bein did not `Pbr1Rd1"s# 2000106iffnt- CIA&ROF MilrR MA01114064the t:nvelopes an tDo WOUL'I 11ave Lyeen convinced lie is renuine, but after think- loo-King" at the drawin~,,S. hut tile Bc Possil,le for someone to have broken off ing caraftilly about what happened I arn report implies that neither was possibi, a Piece between tests and it nnt hp r--1 +_ ",-;, _ __-Ir .1- 1-1 *N~w sd-6-itLi~-t 17 October 1974 ~001 10020"3 A- ~Py1pgF,0,r%Rq1We 491WR8~q CIA-RDP96-00.787ROOO , a 1 of a m Geller's supporters argue norma explanation was co Mi`e Doti;las show on the that he is ain C13S TV n et- their own descri tion . p e US on 29 October last oung and simply not yet One example is the case ye in full control o Worl- in t, ar, ' fG eller i.1 %,-hich the participantsof his powers, and thus teleporting Pubarich's came and probably cannot naake ra c e M million,s of viewers Nvereevents happen on command _ convinced they or precisely New York to Israel, which Pubarich.. saw Geller bend a nail where lie wants. And they quotes in his book Uri and on television. I point to his which is often . , %,atche-d a %ideotape of high failure rate as being . the show, and this proof of this-- cited by Geller supporters. when is %shat I saw: There wereif lie Nvere a magician, Puharich explained it to several nails they say, he Me in J,:1-*- cn a t-,b!e in front of would always succeed on despite his own belief, Geller. Ne picked cue. a normal expiana- C.-e up %%-:,Ii his right Further, they argue that tion became obvious. "I hand and gave it to if one believes bad about 'Mi'Xe Dou.glas, who examinedthat the power of the mind k9 of equipment that I Nvas it and can do such talkin.- Israel so I left all of snowed on close-up that things, t, the excess bao-fage it Nvas, indeed, hen the power of other minds . ht. Next, Geller picked should be able to block up another thLse events. Thus behind. And one of the things strail, I didn't ~ nail %%ith his left hand 1. bring was my camera case and held it by the magicians and others who for are workin.,f MI., ZU p e r. bo-tom. With his right sh-on.aly against Geller 8 cirnera %sith wl~jch I hand he too', the will always Make document a lot . nail back from Douilas it impossible for him to of my work. One day Uri and held it, as perform simply and I were at: well, by the bottoril. by blocking him. Mitchell the Dead Sea and I complained Then lie turned to is "convin-:ed to him guest Ton% Curtis and askedthat the neryative tliou--htthat one of the dumb thin-f3 him to hold enercies of 1 d~d was the top of ',)oh. Still severe sceptics and criticsleave this camera case, lioldin.,r both by the do interfere Nvh,-,h is brown, bottorn, Geller rubbed with the process you are locked in a special closet the nails. Finally tryin,cf to I have in my he told Curtis to take measure" and thus such peoplehouse for my equipment. the nail from his 5 hould About five.. - (Geller's) right hand-the be banned from the room hours later he call one Nve saw during s6en- ed me up-we'd come to be sn-aight on close tiric tests. back to Tel Aviv and he'd up-and put it gone to hi.,, eo~sm. Stiii holding the bottom of the apartment and I'd .-one to my hotel., left hand nail, Geller And he said 'You know vou continued to were ta_*~'utr stioke, never showing the about a camera case-t~ere bottom. Slowly is Solnemino, he lowered his finger to Why assume the paranormal on my bed here-you think expose a slight. ? it's yours.' bend very close to the tip. Despite all of So I described it to him and I said 'Look the show of checkin.c, One of the early choices inside, 'cause I've ripped to see that a nail someone out some of was straight, the audience,studying Geller must make the inside' and sure enou-h Curtis, and is whether it was my Douglas never saw. the to assume a normal or paranormalcamera case." PLharich then tip of the nail hypo- went t-0 until Geller said it was thesis. Geller is extremelyGeller's apartment and identiFed bent. Thus we personable the have no evidence that the and Most People, Including case as his. "To my knowled.-re, nail was riot Mys , can- there is elf already bent, perhaps beforenot help liking him. And no Nvav it could have gotten the show when he per- taere e-Xept began, by non-paranormal forms, he really makes you by tel'eportatiorl 6000 means. Nvant to miles." A sceptic believe in him. Combined might think it more plausible with the ram- that Geller pant confusion that surroundssimply went to a camera the Geller shop, bouzhtt a tornado wherever he Nvorks case, and then marked it (which can accorcliac, to- Magic sour grapes? mean no one ever sees an Puharich's ovm deScriptiou entire event), on the p~a`ore. it is extremely easy to Another similar description slip without appeared Is the diversion ~iad confusionrealisincy it into the acceptancein the 12 June of 0b- of para- 1972 issue of the Ge= an ' servers 2ccidental? normal explanations. One , Many magicians of my Many newspaper Bild-MUnchen ' Repo7ters argue that it is quite surprises.was how easily . intentional, and is some trained took Geller to a cable car which uns precisely what they do scientists are drawn into r all the time when acceptance, up "he Chiemgau mountains ' and asked they. perform. and then how each event , Magician James Randi, a adds to what he un- him to stop the car. "At noon t persistent Geller critic, becomes a strong belief h said he talked to in Geller. . ' canny one [Guller] boarded a cable car . stagehands after the But scientists should be .. Mike Douglas show guided I at : ~o and that they told him , gond that Geller speci- least in formal c%perimentsla for the first time in. by Occam's iis life, ' ' " e , I don fied that they should buy Razor: that one should not , think it can be done a box of ten- assum -ated- a . he r e The gondola was suspended penny nails and that he more complex h fti the air. also asked them othesis until it is yp Uri Geller noticed a control to Nvrap some in a bundle absolutely necessary pa.-n-21 on with tane an na- simpler expla - the door which governed hour before the show. Geller, the steering walks tions having failed. 'e ' mechanism. Sudd a7ound the studio a lot With Geller nly, he cried outs before the show, this'means that scientists I. ' ' ' ' " , think I can bring it offl Randi said, and it would must first convince themselveshen Geller have been easy that . T .. bounded around the car doing for Geller to take his events cannot be explained Vazlous own pre-bent ten- by a com- tricks, and periodically peany nail out of his poc~kctbination of magic and psychologych an f,, ed th e and put it before direction of the cable car. into the bundle when no they postulate 'a paranormal one would ex-planation.. notice. This need not imply fraud-people - Bu t the magic community, communicate far mor with few c than they realise exceptions, is strongly by subtle looks, gestures, Sending keys by hand? opposed to Geller, tone of voice, arguing that he is a magicianand so on. In the case of too, but is recent reports earning far more money in Britain of children bcnd:p-~Sonic pe-ople by claiminor to forks and however ' have seen and be sornetliing more. Professionalspoons, they may exert mor , Magi- e pressure , accepted a normal rather than vaTa- cians have a vested interest,than they realise while _%v1ho however, stroking the normal explanation. Bob'Nlc_Nlis-te:- and have earned considerableobject. , publirity produces the programme V11")_n,1-rama 1 and money in their own r investi"ated a large numberoid about'.'. attempts to of for WNEW-TV in N'ew York ' t . demon s-trate-apparently Geller everi . highly success- is with Occam in Mind one incident whea Geller I was there , . fully in some cases--that found it extremely dif9cultGeller asked for a key they can do to .-o back and McAlis=ter what Geller does. Finally,and find out just what happened, the magicians in a gave him one. "We Nvere in an a-louve note that Geller has failedGeller event, because of outside the control room to perform the previously and Geller when large numbers of nia mentioned problem of gettingsaid 'Let's get out of here' , icians are accurate He beld wa-h;~91 or an TV MI'l--i clc-cr;p!ions of the !wont.. -; "n s 1~ C! p Tilit I cave the kev im so I could see it the he se, t;-!(* bocn to --a n . tu-nad' h;s' back a~:d as 1-2~ '0:-2~ned a refused to pariicipatL! of what hLppuned in niany door the k-ev wert in front in any c-, Inem. In of 3 b r- kc: y CXPer1=1r-,at (such as a surprisimy number, the right down -by the gro;n Nevr Scientist's) normal ex- and the other ' b that involves a magician. planation %Y ha as actually niore plausiblend came to that position as he was Nevertlac-less, as Geller than the paranormal,and wallking through the door himself said the paranormal lie im- on Mid-'I)ay Live- (WNEW-TV,was accepted only because . New the witness Mediately said '1)o ou want to ho!d York. 3 May, 1974), "everythingy could was stron,l committed to be clup'icate A Geller. In I I'll ~zold ift W- J 200016-8_107 R k6-;~' l C -IA 00787960~lD6i*? RDP19 - Q 1, t. An6 lic was diaset e & t PTav" -n't have t doe N event did not even rcalise " - , t at that the onl can t iat I did it the showin f h k g one corner o y t e ey. A.$ _e~ I- . - - - - . - . - - I -- -_ . ..1 , He' than went into a room oon by hand. The N.11 details with a lot of the'- "P of People, INAOOraved, F e.! 20001.09107. 87K 1pV*;;Pn as TV, h ow eve ' hand ande-kReliMit , ,1 an P VON o n u rf .o his comment s, . . Film magazines contain e ten minutes of~"-~, e o key in soin McAlister coniniented But pre~,umably, I I be had actually bent it while going out film, but a standard sound tape runs 20 min the door. utes. Thus it is normal practice to Thames Television Producer leave the sound tape running Terry Nvhile the 0 Dixon told me about filming film inagazines are reloaded Geller it) Accordiiiy:.-' to McCrae, while the cameramen New York in December 1973. t "Oe were Dixon iverted said that each member of "i~:, di reloading film, Geller the crew did attempted a drawing and that the drawings were to divert everyone else's attention by,-, h referring them back t hi f l rk l b d te enve o a en o ope, t ie 5ea!ed, Erst in a w a a brown one, in San Franciscomerv Griffin sbow on US two, object. On the , already broken. But McCrae did not weeks before the crew arrivedGeller did the trick successfully,turn to th,e broken fork-, in New but and said he TV K to talk to Geller. Each , actually saw Geller bend-by crew mem- some people thought they hand, not, Yor' sa%v Geller ber had also si.,Ined the jarring the table so that "Sychic powers--the larse envelope. In the cans would spoon. Geller - Geller's Pat, Uri was given shake and he could tell then called attention to the dozen which was the bent spoon sealed envelopes and he handledheaviest. On the Johnny and fihning immediately them Carson Tonight resumed. one at a time, according to Dixon. At show on I August, 1973, Support for McCrae's story L, therefore, comes this point both cameraman special precautions were from producer Terry Di:xon, Mike Fash, taken and who noted and assist-Lint cameraman Geller was not permitted that McCrae had been a Peter George, to get near strong believer however, noted that Fash's enotiah to the table to in Geller and before this envelope had jar it or touch incident was ' ~ fallen on the floor and botl~the c convinced that Geller %vas said, in- a genuine. ns. He failed. dently, that Geller would On the A-11 New York show, Dixon also noted that Uri do that they and his asso- depen , went a step further and ciatcs were "obsessively" eraNsirig. Eventually, Gellerused heavy interested in said that he needed a long rest, and Dixonfilm cans that could not the equipment, particularly suggested be jarred. But bow long it they move to one of the ThamesGeller went further as well.took to reload a film magazine. hotel Maclician "No one ' rooms. Geller agreed and suggested they Felix Greenfield reported ever asked quest that one of ions like that before." take cnlv three envelopes, the staff rang him shortly Ray Hyman, a psycholo which he before the l , professor picked (~raNv~ings by Fash, l George, and show was to go on at 7 am P 7 to say that at the University of Oregon, was called when she arrived at 5.50 in to see Geller at SRI Dixon). Geller suggested am Geller was by a government th, at they~ be sealed together, but there already there, and insistedagency to whom Russell was no Sello- that he watch Targ and Dr tape immediately available, while she put the 'objects Hal Puthoff had applied so the en. in the cans for funding. vel0peS were passed to one and wrapped tape around One of Uri's demonstrations of Geller's them. Green- -for Hyman assistants, Melanie Toyofuku,field told her that Geller at SRI in December 1972 who had would probably was to have them out of sicylat of the remember how the tar.get someone else in the room Thames crew can be taped write down a for more than 16 minutes, sucta according to and ggested she retape them.number on the pad and then She did he, Geller , Dixon. She had more than and Geller failed. would guess it. "As he enough time wrotct Uri made to use any of the magician'sThe Thames TV crew found , tricks to that a show of covering his eyes with his ' see inside (rubbing alcohol Geller could do the film hands. Frorn my s on the can trick for ide, I could see his envelopes to make them transparent,them when someone wa3 presenteyes through his hands. who Also .1 could holding them up to a strong , light, open- knew which can contained easily see, from George's ~ the object, ar,-Ti motions Lrig ju , t a corner so that a small but not otherwise that he had written the light v,,hich suggested to number 10.".. . can be put inside, or even , Hyman also told a story opening and them that Geller looked confirmed i for their reseal reactions. , ng the envelopes, among others). to me by one of the others pcesent (who At the hotel room, Geller Bob McAlister of NVINEW requested not to be identified) succeeded in told of about a ' drav,irigg a combination some of the special precautions, of Dixon lie took Geller prediction s draw- At 4 pm Geller decided ' i.ng (a three-dimensional . box) and Fash for another Geller event. he was "burned out" and s "Geller said decided to go (a dice). he wanted to try something home. About a half hour bly like later he sud- stopping an escalator, and denly reappeared, warning he suggested one of those BloominAdales [department present riot to fly back store). But to Washin.aton, Tightening the conditions our news department suggestedDC as planned. He said Gimbles that during because they had worked lunch lie had had a premonition witla the public about One thina characterises all relations department there a plane crashing. But someone of these before. Geller decided examples: Geller did not seemed quite upset and disappeared,to call a newspaper, and do his feat found that,'~ in the sim ple, immediate saying 'I've got to make there had indeed already way in which a 'phone call'. been a plane it is usually reported. InsteadWhen I got to Girubles, .'. ' he I talked to a crash in Washington around lunch time,1. ~ succeeded only after unconsciousguard who told me that you , help can throw and the report N yould have been on the from a participant or' aftera switch on any floor to news stands and radio during taking an stop an escala- the half , extra step which could be Lor. On my advice they stationedhour Uri was away. used by a a magician in a similar circurastance.guard -at the switch at Finally, three people report In each escalator that they other words, for whatever landing. Geller did not saw Geller cheat when he reason, stop the 'oerformed at " Geller worked in such a wa' escalator. the New York offices of y as to make Time magazine the normal explanation seem in March 1973. T-hese are more perhaps the Likely than the paranormal. weakest cases because Time Uri's sup- is strongly Porters. of course, will Did they see Geller cheat? opposed to Geller. Charles say that these Reynolds, are all accidents or coincidences, picture editor of Popular and Photo.-raphy, that he does not use the At least five people claim and rna.aician James Randi, oppor-Lunities to have both say they offer for tricks. To seen Geller actually cheat.they saw Geller bend a test this theory, This is a key in his hand it is worth loolking at whatdifficult area, because after having attempted has happened if we. cannot trust to divert ever-y- in those cases where the the reports of observers one's attention by asking conditions were who say Geller for a beer can rn~de fi-lit enoug!i th:it dn~s miracles, wliv slin,ildopener. And r-,itn ()10rn, Gellf,.r rit)t v;f, qivp- Irv a r?F~-C'ncr in a V Cr~ - 0 Z_* C,! to SLIC-1111110,_C Cl- C 1 I-r, C t'ac P:cture &~*3;-trneiil t-liCI-3. P(rh lips L! t, 1 c, SoF lic., vho w3s Z;-.X~ous 110, sLi7prisingly, lie doescheated? At lca5t some of to believe in Geller, saw not perform the ~.-xaniples, hina peel, very well. however, seem to have supportingbetween gaps in iiis fingers 0 during a 0 One of Geller's standard evidence, picture drawing test. feats is to have an object put into one Perhaps the strongest case When asked on television of ten is that of (NLid-Day light a-lurninium 35mm film Thames sound recorder Sand,,,Live, 3 ',\Tiy, 1974) about cans, Geller *INIcCrae, Pj-.Indils state- then sclects eight empty telcvi.~,ion on 15 January inent, Geller replied simply caps, one at a who said on "I am sure time, and firially picks .. the one with th e I I iw b(;J1er bend a lar9C Approved For Releas k1,LCb e ~&6)618/07 : CIA-F P9 _00YVR66~6'610020-3 '94 t 17 October 1974 e ~eeeioww: GIA RDP96 00787-R0007001' 1 090-3- R 0 d F ul - . ema.s Approve Through a' I, an n -2 P darMy One of Uri's more dramatic feats is to apparently project his image- onto l film even though tile camera has a lenscap taped on. Such pictures have appeared in several places, including the News of the World (2 December. 1973). Geller also projected his image through the lensc:ip of Yale Joel, the ex-Life photographer who tool, our cover picture. But be may have made a mistake, and the US ruaflazine Popular Photorraphy (June 1974) was able to su"est a distinctly non-pannorinal explanation. The photo ffilgure 1) was taken "through the tapl!d on lensicap of a Pentax equipped Nvith a 17 rom Takurnar extreme wide-angle "BsEeye" lens. The photo was tal(eri in Geller's New York apartment. Joel admits that Geller had the camera for several minutes while he (Joel) was out of the room, and so Uri might have been able to untape the lenscap. N, Ficure 1 Photo Uri took of himself "through taped-on Figure ably li%e Ui's, 2 Photo of Seth Joel looks remark lenscap" of Yale Joel's Pentax but IJ A t 7- 1 4\ Figu, e 3 i twas taken by holding the 1criscap just a bit Figure 4 Picture of Seth Joel taken with 50mm lens. away from the camera Is this what Ui intended? But it was the sharp circle with the bumps that lead Joel and Popular Photography to their answer. After some experiments, Yale Joel was able to protluce a photo of his son Seth (Figure 2) that looks remarkably like Geller's. The sharp circle is tile lens cap and the bumps the thumb and finger holdin", P;C:u,-C of "I'LlIOLIT'll 11olmar 1). I notw'raphy found thaL onc, pc.,Sun could do it %%ithout I . j help. Geller apparently knows a lot Fbout Cameras, but did he outsmart himself on this one? Poi)ular Photography sug-csts that .vhat he (-,\pccted was Fig"re 4. This is a picture of Seth tal-J-11 in i-ciselY the sarne. Nvay, only with a 50-inni lens oil tile 13enta.< instead ot 11w fishe ve. No sharp circle no l , fingCrs. L________A12prgved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0700110020-3 3,7 6 "I _xiil L I t a p, [vp i14, L 1.1 artial success". Then Young:.,~',~.;",' 'rransa'kl]aAftfbl#~dt~bt.Rel6ase IN 9h&"d87FWD07e0Q410Q20Ag "a fat sausage'.'~__11 rnm -t pltw 11 th, at the rear, a part th es-i ating the Geller phenomenon can you tell us what the three are, wi at comes'.,'-, Ln v .1 e epuan second-hand is all Nvell and good, but just in case one of. tll~:M matches?" down and looks like, say, an I the front, the sttroa.gasL impressions necessarily Geller declined and more Ion,, silences foot, then goes along to~v~-rd come from personal contact with Uri. I followed. Finally, at 20 minutes Uri said and becomes a sort of a brea-t" hive seen Uri worl, twice, once as part he could not do it. But Ellison said: Ellison laughed and gave a negative..'! of a pathy experiment "Would you like to tell Lis anything response. Geller then announced tranSaLlantic tele that conducted by the Sunday 11%lirror (10 about the Patterns you were getting in he was finislied, and asked Ellison what,; December, 1975) and the other in the your mind when we I.~ere all concen- the photo was. 'Niontcalm Hotel, London (19 June, trating on the picture?" Ellison said it was a police car, and'1"_:t1 Geller replied that he had drawn Geller then claimed to have written 1974). In the Nlirror test, Geller was in New three different sets of things. First, down the Nvord "Car" even tl,ou,,Il York, coniected to the '111irror office in Iree people appeared in my mind had not mentioned it before with the London bv transatlantic telephone. In with somethin.g white underneath" list of words in his mind. Later he ord the ~.lirror off~ice were Clifford Davis, Second, "something Iong". Ellison im- cla!imed to have written down the the ~%Ijrror TV editor who arranged the mediately replied "that sounds likely, car" twice. test; P-.ofessor Arthur Ellison of City it could be described as something long". To me, at least, this* was hardly a' University and chairman of the execu- Then Geller said it was like an animal success. Guided by Ellison, he drew a tive committee of the Society for -a dof or a horse standinor sidi~ivays. shape fliat could have been an ani m'al, Psychical Research; Dr Christopher With no further encouragement at this a car, a table, a hill, or almost any Evans of the New Scientist pancl;Ronnic point, lie moved on to the third drawing thing. Later in the nearly two-hour. Bed-ford, Nlir methin-, telephone call, however, Geller made ror science editor; Patricia -which he destribed as so O'Flanagan and myself from New triangular with a semi-circle coming out remarks like "I am happy I got the-~,':,. Scientist; the Thames TV crew; and of tile left side---~'a mountain, sort of, drawing". about a dozen spectators. Yasha Katz with somethincf coming out". Firally, he When I asked him afterwards, Ellison~ of Geller's staff, and Sidney Young, said lie had words in his mind: "pattem, answered immediately that Geller bad, from the '2\1irror, were with Geller in horse, animal, do,g, dog, dog". indeed, gotten the car. Ile called the New Yo7k. The -attempt lasted nearly Although this drevi no encouragement test "remarkable" and noted that Geller-' two hours, and covered a variety of from Ellison, he continued to press the "didn't say a cup or a tree or a human,.. tests. Katz listened on the New York dog-askin.-, if there was a photo of a being". Actually, of course, Geller did% end of the telephone and later told dou somewhere in the room. There mention people and his drawing could N-ew Scientist (during one.of his ineet- Wasn't. Only the "something long" had have been a cup-it was Young who in t's to discuss our experiments) that drawn a positive response from Ellison. said it might be a pig or a car. But Geller's bi-,-*est success was seeing a Ne)ct Geller said that of the three most important, Ellison seems to have photo.graph of a tar. impressions the "biggest one" was the been totally oblivious to the amount of % 7 ss 4 V A" --n -In _i~~ N f N A. 14 Photo v,,hich Uri Geller attempted to see in the 7 Mirror transatlantic V.- st telepathy te 2:: 10 December 1973 W % In fac-L, the even, was not so clear" second-an "object that was Nvide, long, help lie gave. Geller duriny the entire , cu t. At my request, Patricia O'Flann..gan and bri--fht in colour". "Very good," time. He permitted Geller to offer him h ad provided a set of sealed envelopes replied Ellison. Geller then went throu.-h three basic shapes from which he chose containing simple photographs v.,hich no another series of words-table, flower, one, then guided Geller to somethinf one ~ut 'She had seen.'When Uri was telephone-which drew no support from that v;as only vaguely right, and finall'y already oa the telephone, she gave me Ellison. accepted Geller's statement that it was, the*sealed envelopes and I selected one, Then, 28 minutes into the test, Geller indeed, correct. This is a good examDle which turned out to contain a photo of- began drawing and Sidnev Younry came - of how Geller is able to draw people a a Prc-Fi-Szor on the. Vinno In v.,hit hc~ was into helping 1~.irri arid wantinz tn beli,.!ve .~;l on CG!"" I- "a cz) r or Z. suc2e(~6cd, cven' u;i ',o t1lc., p"'.0ne n,-.d concentrated oil the photo, Young said, which dre~~_a favourable point of repoi-ting, an event that did not attempting to transmit it to Geller. We rC5P011SC from Ellison. Then Youn.(, said happen. could all see and bear Ellison and hear it looked "like a child's Nvooden toy- Nothing appeared in the Sunday Gc1ler. the sort of thing you got from C7e.010- P-Tirror about the trial, which surprised The photo transmission experiment slovakia where it is just a semblance me is Geller v;as hot nc%vs at the time. took 7-3 minutes-the first haif bein- of a car or a pi-not N%heels, not legs, Onlv later did I find that Geller had primari'v Ir-ug silences followed by en-- sorl: of rowided". Coll Insisted and Ddvis accepted that 110,11itli! the test failed. 4 M. ,Ne%,; Scientisl d#br 20001,08/07 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO070011 0020!"! Uri bends nly key-and rips ousers his tr o watch Uri vmrk t-7.7w/ second chancet N":7 A was )9 June when editor Dr Bernard D-'.\'O" a!'d I "let N"ith Uri in the lobby ~7: .4 the Monlcalm Hotel, London, for l,a!i an hL rrore th lur. sat in a secluded corner of the lobbv and chatted for a long time. Then r orne of his skills A Uri ole ed to try s for us. Ile tried to reproduce pictures which Dixon and I drew but eventually J T passed*' (lie said lie saN% iothimr clear on his "r-nental screen") each time. Next he suc-ested lie try bending metal. I gave 1~111 my ~ousekev, which he worked with unsuccessfully. Dixon commented afterwards that he was struck b%- the extent to which Geller s'ressed his failurcs-~nstantly saying he did not think he could do it and telling us stories about his failures on nd elsev.-here. Indeed, he talked far TV a a .ore ab-3ut failures than succe rr _sses. The Ke everyone effect. of course., is to mal around Geller exceedingly anxious that be should succeed. Geller suggested we move to the next ____aT empty dinin.cr room with a room n lew Sol, chairs near the door. lie con tilnu e d to attempt to bend my key. Noting that it Nyas often easier to bend an object when it 'Nvas near other metal, he rubbed the key agaL rist an upended ' mezal floor ashtray and other metal objects. Even Nvith just But I can offer the three of an explanation that I Faces and flowers us, a high degree of cliaosfiid more plausible prevailed- than previously un- at one point I was sent identified mental looking for forces. First, ' it should After the key bend, Uri again tried iretal Frd -t another looking for a ' pad. be noted that 'r keys are surpnisingly easy telepathy. After a couple of unsuccess- Hotel sta to bend, particularly who passed-who by no for a pe U AV rsori like Jul atlempts-as before he alwavs s-eeined used to the events--addedGeller with strong hands. Few of us passed never showing a final cc.rnments. But still nothing, unusual ever try it, however, and we assume it despite attempts on his part---lie fiana'K Y~ happened. is difficult. did one draNving. I drew a simple flo%,;P-r FinallN Uri suggested we But anyone, including move into me, can bend i (1) Uri made two attempts (2 and 3) ' the corner and s , t down on a sofa a key on the - edge of a chair. Sitting in which he rejected and then said that beh;nd a low ccfl , ee table. Bernard a chair 'with your legs slightly spread, I had drawn a face (4). It is, as he Dixon N*.'as sent to fetch reach down to Geller's jacket. the bottorn of tbp chair noted not too far off because it does Geller sat down, first and , I walked - seat and you Nvill "eel part of the have a basic circle Nvith lines cornin around the table and was . just sitting chair frame. Holding the head of the out from it The final drav~ing (5) is down; Bernard was waMrig . across vith key in both hands, put the point on the his explanation-that he d,-e%v a circle GelleCs jacket. Thus neither- of us was top of the frame l and press down. You N~ith bumps and then guessed at the , ,w2tching Gel , er closely. Suddenly Gellerwill be surprised bow easily the key eyes and then the rest of the face. lurched forward, spreading bends. With practice, his legs so you can do this Uri's relative lack of success his own-'- rapidly that he split his , trousers. His writh it quick, casual movement in which explanation of how be did the drav.-mg , bands were down in front you pull the' of him. chair forward. towards a and some observations by Bernard . After jol