Downfall of a Charlatan

I was disappointed with David Marks’s long and interesting article on the downfall of Hans Eysenck (November/December 2020) for two reasons.

First, he criticizes Eysenck for his “credulous defense of parapsychology.” But parapsychology is a legitimate field of science, even if the phenomena it seeks may never be found. It is only the positive claims of psi that Eysenck should not have defended.

Second, and more personal, is Marks’s description of my work with Carl Sargent. The ganzfeld methods Sargent used are complex, and my discoveries and their implications are hard to understand. Yet Marks does not cite my original article or my book recounting the whole story (Blackmore 1987a; Blackmore 1996). Without these, it is impossible for readers to understand what happened and draw their own conclusions from the evidence. He does, however, cite Sargent’s and Harley’s rebuttals of my article but not my reply to them (Blackmore 1987b).

Marks includes answers to questions he emailed to me. But he did not ask me about the Parapsychological Association’s investigation. He writes that they reprimanded Sargent but not that they also reprimanded me very heavily, which was traumatic for me on top of the pain of discovering that my esteemed colleague and friend was probably cheating. They deemed it indefensible of me to go into Sargent’s office, open his randomization envelopes, and set traps—all of which I knew was necessary for me to try to get to the truth, and Sargent had explicitly given me the run of his office.

We did not know then that this is the common fate of whistleblowers, though we do now. When Sargent died two years ago and I responded to Harley’s obituary (Blackmore 2020), I thought I would never have to return to this miserable topic. Sadly, it goes on.

References

Blackmore, S.J. 1987. A report of a visit to Carl Sargent’s laboratory. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 54: 186–198.

———. 1987b. (A response to Harley, Matthews and Sargent). Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 54: 275–276

Blackmore, S. 1996. In Search of the Light: The Adventures of a Parapsychologist, Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books

———. 2020. A response to the obituary for Carl Sargent. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 84:3, 182–3

Susan Blackmore
Ermington, Devon, U.K.

David Marks replies:

My SI article “Downfall of a Charlatan” focused on Hans Eysenck and Carl Sargent cheating with data and promoting false claims in parapsychology. Sadly, as the whistleblower, Susan Blackmore in her letter reveals she suffered “the pain of discovering that my esteemed colleague and friend [Sargent] was probably cheating” and that she was traumatized by the Parapsychological Association’s admonishment for the manner of that exposure. In turn, Susan Blackmore admonishes me for not citing her extensive publications on this topic, which are listed in her letter. Clearly, there can be no saints in this unsavory episode, only sinners. Please let’s agree that this chapter in the checkered history of parapsychology and “skepticism” can finally be closed.

Quantum Voodooism

Regarding Sadri Hassani’s “Sources of Quantum Voodooism” (November/December 2020), it is the “unique character of quantum physics”—as opposed to, say, condensed matter physics or even relativity—that makes it such an attractive apparent foundation of holistic or New Age worldviews. Central ideas such as “mind over matter” and the interconnectedness of everything in the universe seem to be backed by quantum theory: 1) The need to include the measurement apparatus in a rigorous discussion of particles’ behavior is (wrongly) extrapolated to imply the necessity of a conscious observer; and 2) Nonlocal correlations between entangled particles are (wrongly) thought to prove the existence of universal connections between apparently separate entities.

Spiritualism wants to be a “warm” alternative to the “cold,” purely materialistic world devoid of meaning associated with Newtonian physics and its clockwork universe. If physics is to provide corroborative evidence for spiritualism, it is thus natural to look for it in the quantum realm, which is not seen as an expansion but as a refutation of classical physics.

Unfortunately, the abuse of quantum mechanics by purveyors of esoteric nonsense is thus not likely to go out of fashion. It is just too good of a victim. And yet, quantum theory itself provides powerful counterarguments. If everything is connected to everything else due to entanglement, then why do entangled particles need to be so thoroughly insulated against the outside world in actual experiments?

Dr. Philippe Leick
Gerlingen, Germany

God’s Pet Bunny

Stanley Rice’s use of Haldane’s “God’s bunny” as a rhetorical vehicle for critiquing creationism was informative and fun (“Creationist Funhouse, Episode 5: God’s Pet Bunny,” November/December 2020). Rice points out that the entire creationist framework is simply incoherent when matched against the fossil and geological record. He is, of course, spot-on.

But there’s another, rarely noted element to creationist thinking that he doesn’t touch on. Put simply, when creationists use the “flood” hypothesis to explain the data they are acknowledging that the god of their belief system is the greatest mass murderer of all time. I pointed this out to a creationist I met at a party one evening. He, of course, had never considered this and countered with the claim that all those who drowned were Sodomites, pagans, atheists, or other miscreants who hadn’t accepted the one true god. I asked him why, if this were true, his god also needed to rid the world of newborn babies, pregnant mothers, devout priests, rabbis, and acolytes, all of whom perished. He did not look happy and walked away. I’ve often wondered if this revelation made any impact on his belief system.

Arthur S. Reber, PhD
Point Roberts, Washington

In “God’s Pet Bunny,” Stanley Rice refers to the Cambrian period and writes, “Geologists have given names to each of the periods of earth history. Some, like Cambrian, were named after places where they were first found (in this case, Cambridge).”

The period is named after Cambria (the Latin name for Wales) and specifically the Cambrian mountains in Wales (between Snowdonia and the Brecon Beacons), not the markedly unmountainous fenlands of Cambridge.

John Ritson
London, United Kingdom

I am enjoying your series “Creationist Funhouse” in Skeptical Inquirer. In Episode Five (“God’s Pet Bunny”), there is an error. On p. 55, there is a list of marsupial counterparts, including marsupial bats. However, bats are placentals, not marsupials.

Ray C. Telfair II, PhD
Certified Wildlife Biologist
Whitehouse, Texas

Stanley Rice replies:

I was referring, apparently a little too carelessly, to the sugar glider, Petaurus breviceps, which more closely resembles a flying squirrel than a bat.

History of Lynchings

I loved Guy P. Harrison’s commentary on lynching (“Why White America Must Learn the History of Lynching”), but I guess he ran out of space to include some important additions.

Though lynching was prominent in the South, the South wasn’t the only region it was done; the Northeast was the only region that didn’t record a lynching.

Each time there was a lynching, the NAACP office in Washington, D.C., would hang a banner from their window that said “A MAN WAS LYNCHED TODAY” so that Legislators driving to their offices at the Capitol could see it.

Two hundred anti-lynching bills were introduced in Congress; three made it past the House to the Senate only to be stalled by the Southern Democrats. These laws would have made lynching a federal crime, as the states (citing states rights) were doing nothing about it. The Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s made the need for such legislation moot.

White people constantly accuse black people of living in the past. (“This happened years ago, so get over it! Things have changed!”) Well, those same Southern Democrats were absorbed into the Republican Party in 1968 as part of the Southern Strategy for their seniority; in trade, the Republicans will never (and still haven’t) adopt a civil rights platform.

In 2005, the Senate adopted a Non-Binding Resolution to “apologize” for failing to pass an anti-lynching bill. This resolution neither offered compensation nor changed any law. It was simply a resolution. By the recess, the press reported that all the Democrats had voted for it, but most of the Republicans hadn’t. Then–Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, sensing a public relations disaster, rounded up Republicans to vote, but Republicans (many from the Deep South) didn’t vote No—they just declined to vote at all. No official roll call was taken, and the press was left guessing who didn’t sign on. But note this is decades after society was supposed to change.

Erik Bailey
Vallejo, California

Thank you for publishing Guy Harrison’s excellent commentary, “Why White America Must Learn the History of Lynching.” It was well researched and reasoned and couldn’t have been more timely or important. The articles published in Skeptical Inquirer are of the highest quality, and Harrison’s commentary was no exception. Thank you.

Timothy J. Redmond
Amherst, New York

In September 1914, W.E.B. DuBois—one of the founders of the NAACP—penned a powerful and eloquent editorial on lynching for Crisis, the monthly publication of that organization for which he served as editor for twenty-four years. It should be required reading for all Americans.

It is too long for you to publish, but I hope readers will look it up and read it in full. Here is one brief excerpt:

Once more a howling mob of the best citizens in a foremost state of the union has vindicated the self-evident superiority of the white race. The case was perfectly clear: it was not that murder had been done, for we Americans are not squeamish at mere murder. Off and on, we do more of that kind of thing than most folk. Moreover, there was not much of a murder—only the crazed act of a drunken man, quite unpremeditated. The point is, he was black.

Blackness must be punished. Blackness is the crime of crimes as the senator-elect from Mississippi has amply proven. Why is it a crime? Because it threatens white supremacy.

David Gardner
Lacey, Washington

Lynching is a terrible blight on American history and should be taught. Unfortunately, Guy Harrison’s commentary is misleading. George Floyd’s death is regrettable, but he was a career criminal, high on drugs, who resisted arrest. Floyd’s attacker was arrested and will stand trial. Floyd was not lynched as defined by the Tuskegee Institute.

More questionable is Harrison asserting 4,000 lynchings from post–Civil War through 1950 averaged “one black person lynched per week spread over nearly nine decades.” That’s a preposterous perversion of average. What do the data actually show? The last year averaging one lynching per week was 1922—ninety-nine years ago. Subsequently, lynchings markedly declined. Give credit to the brave blacks and whites beginning in the 1930s who roused a complacent public to demand reforms. The struggle against racism continues, but today hate crimes are aggressively prosecuted. Black voting and holding elective office have steadily risen. Harrison loses credibility ignoring progress by implying ninety years of stasis when the data refutes him.

John Clinger
Bella Vista, Arkansas

I suspect Guy Harrison is right, and Americans do need to learn the history of lynching. Perhaps they also need to learn the history of anti-Semitism in the United States, along with the negative stereotyping of Italian-Americans as low-life mobsters and the historical mistreatment of Native Americans. However, I see no reason why Harrison’s harangue should be presented on the pages of Skeptical Inquirer, a publication with a specific focus on paranormal claims and attacks on science and rationalism. I do not subscribe to this magazine to be hectored on social grievances and the need for white guilt.

Dennis Middlebrooks
Brooklyn, New York

Guy Harrison replies:

All my data was drawn from Lynching in America, an ongoing project by the Equal Justice Initiative. It’s not protest-oriented material but sound historical scholarship produced by respected historians at credible universities. (See Lynching in America: Confronting the Legacy of Racial Terror at eji.org.) The stats they use are sound, probably a huge underestimate in many cases given the cover-ups. 

It’s understandable and expected that this topic would upset people. If talking/writing in an honest manner about lynching thousands of black people didn’t make us uncomfortable, something would be very wrong. Again, my commentary did not make claims that police kill more blacks than whites today or that every victim was a perfect citizen. It’s about the missing historical awareness in our society that leads to confusion and insensitivity. Skeptical Inquirer, from my perspective as a reader for many decades, is not only committed to busting UFO cases and explaining astrology but also uplifting and educating humanity so that we may be safer and more efficient in our daily lives. I think this essay fits given the times, and I applaud the magazine for having the courage to run it. 

Feng Shui

In his review of the book Feng Shui: Teaching about Science and Pseudoscience (November/December 2020), Terence Hines laments the lack of formal testing of feng shui. However, years ago, on their television series Bullshit!, Penn & Teller did test feng shui in a very elegant and logical way. They hired three feng shui “experts” and had each in turn furnish the same large house. Needless to say, each master came up with completely different arrangements of furniture and decorations—this after assuring the magicians that they were guided strictly by well-established scientific principles honed over centuries, with no mysticism or personal taste involved. Even with this limited sample, I believe the case was closed.

N.C. Jones
Winchester, Virginia

UFOs Again

In the news and comment article “UFOs Come Out of the Shadows. Again. Perhaps” (November/December 2020), author Mick West asks rhetorically, “Why would [defense contractor] Eric Davis know something [about government UFO research] that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid would not … ?”

Well, for one thing, Mr. Reid hasn’t been Majority Leader since 2015 and hasn’t even been a Senator since 2017, while Mr. Davis’s purported briefing occurred in March 2020. For another thing, while the Senate Majority Leader would certainly be privy to a lot of classified information, there are thousands of classified programs and Special Access Projects. No one person could possibly be aware of all of them.

More to the point, it seems to me, is that Mr. Davis is claiming that he gave a briefing on UFOs to the Defense Department (DoD). Mr. Davis is the source of the purported information. The fact that he gave a classified briefing to DoD officials at best shows that they were interested in what Mr. Davis thought he knew about UFOs—not that the DoD officials themselves had any information.

W. David Pattison
Leland, North Carolina

Another Side of Randi

Some of the public, no doubt, saw James Randi, who died October 20, 2020 (see “Remembering Randi,” January/February 2021), as a somewhat gruff, insensitive, rather close-minded paranormal skeptic. It’s true that he had little tolerance for charlatans. If Randi had evidence someone was lying or was a fake, he had little reservation about exposing them. No criticism here. But some of the public might be surprised to know of Randi’s more sensitive side. As an example, Randi had a soft spot for impoverished children. I wish everyone could have heard him speak on this topic. It was another side of Randi.

The public might also be surprised to hear of Randi’s entertaining sense of humor. Example: Randi once came to Oklahoma City to speak and we had dinner one night at a Chinese restaurant. When we were finished, we opened our fortune cookies. His read, “You are the guiding star of his existence.” Not a person of faith, Randi gave me the fortune, closed his eyes, put his hands together like he was praying, and said something like, “Dear Lord, I hope this fortune was meant for Bryan.” Watching James Randi pray was utterly hysterical and is something not many have seen him do—even in fun. I still have the fortune taped to my refrigerator. It was another side of Randi. These are just a few examples.

Thanks, James Randi, for helping teach critical thinking to so many. Thanks for alerting the public about scams, flimflam, and con artists. And thanks for teaching me how to better handle the media. Just thanks.

Bryan Farha
Author, Pseudoscience and Deception
Professor of Behavioral Studies in Education
Oklahoma City University