Fraud mediums in spiritualism An argument with a Sceptic

Hello all

There is nothing new in forests posts, we have seen and heard it all before. What I find interesting is the fact that he can label ALL of physical phenomena being faked.

Again. I would ask what PRACTICAL experience has he had, or is it all armchair research???. Funny that he does leave some mediums out of the discussion, ie Alex Harris for one.

One well known poster on here has stated how he decided to test one of Harris's materialisations when he was invited to shake hands and examine the form in clear red light.

The materialisation was an Indian, bare cheated and some 6 ft tall. He held onto the hand, determined to not allow the spirit form to escape, only to find the from dematerialising in front of him, and the hand vanishing from his grip! ( but tyhen again he must have been deluded, or just a liar perhaps ? )

I am well aware that many 'modern' spiritualists are not happy with our history of physical mediumship, but then again I have been very lucky to witness it, and under scientific conditions along with other scientists who had impeccable qualifications and experience.( ie, we were in the same seance room )

I spent over 30 years in academia as a social scientist and researcher, so I am well versed in psychology and in the history of physical mediumship.To imply what forest implies shows gross ignorance, and to be honest I do not know what his motives are.

LeroyC

LeroyC wrote:Hello all

There is nothing new in forests posts, we have seen and heard it all before. What I find interesting is the fact that he can label ALL of physical phenomena being faked.

Again. I would ask what PRACTICAL experience has he had, or is it all armchair research???. Funny that he does leave some mediums out of the discussion, ie Alex Harris for one.

One well known poster on here has stated how he decided to test one of Harris's materialisations when he was invited to shake hands and examine the form in clear red light.

The materialisation was an Indian, bare cheated and some 6 ft tall. He held onto the hand, determined to not allow the spirit form to escape, only to find the from dematerialising in front of him, and the hand vanishing from his grip! ( but tyhen again he must have been deluded, or just a liar perhaps ? )

I am well aware that many 'modern' spiritualists are not happy with our history of physical mediumship, but then again I have been very lucky to witness it, and under scientific conditions along with other scientists who had impeccable qualifications and experience.( ie, we were in the same seance room )

I spent over 30 years in academia as a social scientist and researcher, so I am well versed in psychology and in the history of physical mediumship.To imply what forest implies shows gross ignorance, and to be honest I do not know what his motives are.

LeroyC

He/she has a point about the pictures tho LeRoy, yes?

Again. I would ask what PRACTICAL experience has he had, or is it all armchair research???. Funny that he does leave some mediums out of the discussion, ie Alex Harris for one.

Harris was never investigated by scientists, all I could find is that a few "skeptics" once went to one of his seances, the only mention of him is in spiritualist books, spiritualists newspapers such as psychic news etc. There are no photographs of his "materializations". If you can provide some scientific evidence for his mediumship, then it would be interesting to see, but by the looks of things all you have is personal experiences or the words of other spiritualists, this is not scientific evidence.

and to be honest I do not know what his motives are.

There is no motive, I just look at the fact. As I said if there is scientific evidence for physical mediumship then we should have it by now, but all we have is old reports and photographs of cheese-cloth, dolls or tissue paper. Are you willing to admit the above photos depict tissue paper?

I spent over 30 years in academia as a social scientist and researcher, so I am well versed in psychology

You do realise that in some cases fantasy proneness correlates positively with paranormal belief? Findings have also revealed that psychological absorption and dissociation were higher for believers in the paranormal than non-believers. What it means is that for some people (devout spiritualists etc) they are living in a fantasy and are absorbed in their mental fantasy. So no matter what the evidence, you will still believe in your fantasy. The problem with this is, is that it can lead to fantasy prone personality etc.

Gow, K., Lang, T. and Chant, D. (2004). Fantasy proneness, paranormal beliefs and personality features in out-of-body experiences. Contemp. Hypnosis, 21: 107–125.

Williams, Emyr, Francis, Leslie J. and Robbins, Mandy. (2007). Personality and paranormal belief: a study among adolescents. Pastoral Psychology, Vol.56 (No.1). pp. 9-14

Boer de R. & Bierman, D.J. (2006). The roots of paranormal belief: Divergent associations or real paranormal experiences? Proceedings of the PA 2006 Convention, 283-298.

The interesting thing, is that there are actually studies that have proven that those who believe in the paranormal and practices such as spiritualism have less stress than non-believers. So there is nothing wrong with believing in the paranormal, perhaps it is "natural" for humans to believe in such things but it is not healthy to get absorped into some of these beliefs at a deep level. The human mind is fascinated with the paranormal. I have an interest in some paranormal topics myself, but we must at times be rational as well otherwise like the religionists full blown steps away from reality will be taken. I have sent in the past such photos of tissue paper to spiritualists, but they are so far in their fantasy that they claim the photos are real spirits. We are not dealing with this, on this forum are we? Please don't tell me you believe tissue paper is spirits!!

Hi all,

There is no doubt that physical manifestations (so called) have been faked, and that so called materialisation or ectoplasmic photo's appear as 'tissue paper' and look very suspect to me. I think we agree on that!.

Again, your assertion that all phenomena is fake is based upon what ??. If you are telling me that we need 'scientific' evidence I presume you are looking at quantifiable, quantitiative and statistical evidence ( ie, as practiced by Rhine and others within many of the parapsychological institutes ). This is what most of the publc regard as scientific, and it is perfectly suited to the physical sciences

However many social scientisits, (psychologists, anthropologist, sociologists) including myself work with qualitative data AS WELL ( in fact my PhD work consited of 'accounts' to investigate and understand conflict situations, but that is another story ). In fact because you cannot 'photograph or physically measure' does not mean a phenomena does not exist. We social scientists can work entireley with one, or use both approaches as I have done in the past. It depends on what you are researching and the most appropriate method to adopt

Accounts of phenomena, if multiple, and/or frequent enough cannot be ignored. ( Perhaps you may wish to look at the 'accounts' provided by multiple (hundreds) of witnesses who observed Mirabelli in South America, including many qualifed doctors, lawyers, scientists and even the president of Brazil ). Qualitiative approaches are, in my view, a better vehicle for undertanding what is going on in the seance room.

As for photographs, then just try it. Even if you were able to produce a portfolio of evidential photographs then they would be blasted by the skeptics. Its perhaps not worth the effort. There is an intersting one ( a photo) of Queenie Nixon in trance ( taken by a Loghborough university team I think ) which shows her and her guide, Edith both at the same time. I knew Queenie, and also knew of her integrity and dedication to the proof of survival, but as you conclude she may just be another 'fake'.

As for Alex Harris he was more of a private medium. He did not charge, and sat often in his own home and for healing. His mediumship was never the same after being disturbed by imposters who exposed him in deep trance to a bank of cameras in his seance room. Harris was very ill after this episode and he needed medical attention. He suffered the effect of this for many weeks after and his mediumship was never the same again.

I presume however that you have read his story by Louis Harris, the preface by Professor Fontana and the introduction by his son Bradley.

LeroyC

Very well put LeRoy.

Leroy it is nice to see that you are honest and admit those photographs are tissue paper but I am suprised that a well qualified academic such as yourself has fallen for the tricks of physical mediumship. I would be interested in hearing what experiences have convinced you into believing physical mediumship is genuine.

Again, your assertion that all phenomena is fake is based upon what ??. If you are telling me that we need 'scientific' evidence I presume you are looking at quantifiable, quantitiative and statistical evidence ( ie, as practiced by Rhine and others within many of the parapsychological institutes ). This is what most of the publc regard as scientific, and it is perfectly suited to the physical sciences

It is based on all the photographs cheese-cloth, dolls, tissue paper. Seriously just go onto google images and type in ectoplasm, every single photo is fake, and there are 100s if not a few 1000 of them. And we also have scientific reports from people who have examined this stuff and exposed it as fraud. Here is another thing, this ectoplasm or "materialization" is meant to literally pop out of nowhere, if these materializations were true then they would contradict the law of conservation of energy amongst other scientific laws, indeed such a thing would turn science on its head. Such a thing if scientifically demonstrated would be fascinating and be all around the world in newspapers in hours or days. But it hasn't happened. There is no scientific repeatable evidence that it exists and no, there is no conspiracy to supress the evidence for such a thing.

Now does there need to be scientific evidence for something to exist? Here is the contradiction with you spiritualists, you don't accept your beliefs are paranormal or metaphysical, i.e. beyond science. If you said that materializations were paranormal and beyond scientific study etc then maybe I could understand that, but instead you say it is scientific. I suggest you look up the definition of science. Materializations are not scientific, they contradict known scientific laws and there is no evidence for their existence in science.

If materializations are real, then why can it not be performed in light conditions, in scientific conditions or on the TV for millions of people to see? And why can only a "select few" people perform "materializations"? None of it makes any sense, it is delusion and magical thinking and the folk who claim to do such feats are conman looking to feed off the gullible and feed their wallets with some dosh.

Point one those 4 professors with phd's failed to go back to primary sources and used flawed secondaries, it is very doubtful that their supervisors would have had the expertise to deal with that. They are flawed and written with a degree of opinionated bias.

Second the photos may or may not be fraud neither you Forrest nor I can be categorical about it. They look dodgy but we were not there to verify the controls in use and despite your personal opinions the researcher was highly rated by his peers in Psychical Research, some of whom were not in favour of phenomena.

Thirdly you make the most sweeping assertions Forrest. For a start if you took time to look around this site you will find that many cases of fraud are discussed as is the significant issue of fraud in dark séances. You use generalisations to assert facts which you cannot prove.

I notice you sidestepped Alvarado one of the most important current researchers. I suspect you would avoid any researcher who tended to indicate some sympathetic tendency to the possibility of the "Spiritualistic hypothesis".

Sweeping claims are unacceptable as a form of argument. In honesty I fail to understand your reasoning to be on here if spiritualism is now to you all fraud and delusion. Like LeroyC I have seen and heard far to much that is genuine and verifiable to accept your position. As a working medium I have given messages describing a loved one in detail, including cause of death, sensations associated, description etc etc before going directly to an audience member who I nave never met and saying this is your father to receive a distinct and rather shocked yes it is.

I would imagine you will dig through the sceptical scientist/psychologists manual for a reason that occurred because I doubt that you would accept it.

Accepting survival means very little most religions teach this and atheists now believe in it. It is the proof through communication which is important.

This forum will always attack fraud but, in the case of the actual mediums you attacked there is always another researchers opinion or others who witnessed more with them.

I also suggest you stop relying upon 4th or 5th level reporting and get back to primary materials. One of Spiritualism's biggest problems is a failure to do this so errors like Mr Splitfoot, which Fox Sister Did What, their ages and of course the 7 Principles being handed down at Cleveland Hall are part of folk law not truth.

Also the error that the Davenports were important mediums whereas, after multiple exposures, they just presented themselves as a wonder show. However, to assert that without tracking their steps would be wrong and interestingly the tracking makes a mockery of Maskelynes claim that he was their debunker. At some stage soon the person I have been helping research the Davenports will put the full story together.

Fraud and trickery may abound but is also does on the side of the would be debunkers of Spiritualism. Many of the claims of these people fall apart when you place them under the same scrutiny that they insist they put Spiritualism under.

That has also been interesting to research, once again going back to primary materials the flaw with lazy researchers is its to easy to quote a flawed scholarly report which has not been properly researched but has a Professorial or PHD tick behind it.

I have spent 3 months using all possible sources of historical newspapers on the internet (and there are many in the USA, UK, NZ and here in Australia)to minutely track all references to the start of Spiritualism from March 31st 1848 to December 1849 just after the Rochester event. It has been fascinating because it revealed a lot more that is incorrect about the earliest 21 months. It even turned up an early and probably more correct name for the peddler so for that one new fact the time was valid.

In my opinion that is the level of research that a person doing a PHD referencing the Spiritualist Movement should do, it also places the movement much more clearly in relation to its social context which surely a social historian should be doing.

In all the articles Lis and I wrote for Psychic News that was the level of meticulous research we did, when I wrote on Psychometry I tracked every possible reference in spiritualist magazines and books. I was able to access about 85% of them including all key source documents.

To criticise Spiritualism enter this study with an open mind start in 1848 and come forward, medium by medium researcher by researcher sceptic by sceptic (including the magicians. Its great fun to do this.

I am not sure I follow you forests. How do any number of apparently fake photographs prove that ectoplasm cannot or does not exist?

I don't see how ectoplasm would contradict the conservation of energy, please explain. I have a degree level science education and an A level in Physics (I mention that only so you know where to pitch your answer).

I have seen purported photographs of ectoplasm eg Leslie Flint, which whilst not conclusive, certainly didn't look anything like the photos you have adduced.

My understanding of ectoplasm isn't that is just 'pops out of nowhere' but that it is supposed to be created from a combination of matter of some from from the medium, sitters in the seance and other physical ingredients. Is that not correct?

Many mediums were investigated by scientists and other reputable folk and considered to be genuine. Are their verdicts to be disregarded in favour only of those who reached a different conclusion?

I don't follow your logic that you find dubious photographs and pronounce the entire phenomenon false (as opposed to reserving judgement).

As to why such phenomena cannot be produced today in a controlled, repeatable environment - who knows? It could be because they were all fraudulent, but does it have to be? Many human phenomena studied by scientists cannot be replicated in a controlled way - ask a psychologist or a social scientist.

I am not saying any of the phenomena are real, simply that your conclusion does not seem to be of necessity supported by the evidence you adduce.

As to why such phenomena cannot be produced today in a controlled, repeatable environment - who knows? It could be because they were all fraudulent, but does it have to be? Many human phenomena studied by scientists cannot be replicated in a controlled way - ask a psychologist or a social scientist.

Interesting point Obi, when I was introduced to Spiritualism in 1983 the word was that, because of the high level of mental mediumship the crude ectoplasmic method was no longer required.

Additionally it was a dangerous imprecise method which even my research suggests only occasionally produced good results (albeit there are many home circles that empirical data suggests got good results but remained unknown because of the excessive interest in attending séances.

There was a lot of talk about energy mediumship, now I have seen Spirit produce what looks like a video tape of faces being played over the face of someone in the circle. It would seem to me that this should be a better way forward as it can be in the light. Given all the advanced physicists who wre over there surely this is more the way they would work tan in the days where the Sprit Chemist was one of the séance guides to "mix the ectoplasm" as they put it.

The 'old stuff' seemed to do the trick for Flint, Alec Harris, Minnie Harrison etc Jim

I get what forests is saying but agree he seems to be making a generalisation. The problem with asserting that a particular thing is false, always, is that when others say they have witnessed it themselves - they are basing their statements on what they saw, or think they saw. forests seems to be basing judgement on what he/she believes to be fact, ie assumptions about the world we live in, together with only evidence which supports that position.

This may be correct, however it is a dangerous basis on which to stand conclusions. As said....

"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong"
Arthur C. Clarke, Clarke's first law
English physicist & science fiction author (1917 - )

The 'old stuff' seemed to do the trick for Flint, Alec Harris, Minnie Harrison etc Jim Smile

This may be correct, however it is a dangerous basis on which to stand conclusions. As said....

"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong"
Arthur C. Clarke, Clarke's first law
English physicist & science fiction author (1917 - )

Agreed Obi but sometimes when you are in a Forest its hard to see the wood for the trees

Admin wrote:

The 'old stuff' seemed to do the trick for Flint, Alec Harris, Minnie Harrison etc Jim Smile

This may be correct, however it is a dangerous basis on which to stand conclusions. As said....

"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong"
Arthur C. Clarke, Clarke's first law
English physicist & science fiction author (1917 - )

Agreed Obi but sometimes when you are in a Forest its hard to see the wood for the trees

true dat.

http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/scientists/lodge/lodge-mofe-2007.html

I can neither endorse or oppose the views expressed here, but it is claimed that a leading scientist of that day could repeat his experiment of 'materialisation', which was also achieved by Alan Cleaver, a journalist.
There is a claim that survival of physical death is really a branch of physics, but dark vested interests are engaged in suppressing this information.

Any views. please?

The view that Life is based on spiritual vibration, with the more evolved folk being undetectable by those of a slower vibration, although they inhabit the same 'space,' raises interesting possibilities, including an explanation of the theologians' bugbear of enlarging upon the biblical claim that 'the kingdom of heaven is within'

Hi all,

Sorry if I started a thread on the PhD!!. Sufice to say a 'research' PhD is one hard slog, and needs to be at a level in which one understands and applies scientific/theoretical concepts. Enough said, I think I speak from experience.

I TRY to do this when evaluating the evidence of physical mediumship. Just because a thing is rare is not an indication that it does not exist!.

Some points: materialisation was demonstrated within living memory, not once, but many times in WHITE LIGHT ( see Mirabelli ).

Ectoplasmic photo's do not of course tell the whole story. Any photo captures a 'moment' in time. It does not show ectoplasmic moving and flowing. Yes, I have seen this close up many times, with hands and limbs forming in front of my eyes ( and by the way that does NOT negate that photo''s have been faked in the past and probably will be in the future )

To quote Richet 'Materialisation is impossible, but it is true'.

I fear the main reason we see little of this today is that the mediums we do have are just not developed suffciently or are prepared to devlelop suffciently

Scientific analysis of ectoplasm has been undertaken by Richet, Shrenk-Notzing and other researchers.

It has been handled, observed, and smelt by countless witnesses. So forests, either these people are deluded, liars or both. Oh, and I do not regard myself as a Spiritualist, as much as what passes for Spirituaism today, at least in my eyes is a joke.

LeroyC

Very good points Leroy - all of them

Point one those 4 professors with phd's failed to go back to primary sources and used flawed secondaries, it is very doubtful that their supervisors would have had the expertise to deal with that. They are flawed and written with a degree of opinionated bias.

You are anti-science if you are denying scientific works like that becuase those books report from the scientists who were actually there exposing the mediums in the flesh, but it does not matter... If you want to reject science for magical thinking that is up to you.

Second the photos may or may not be fraud neither you Forrest nor I can be categorical about it. They look dodgy but we were not there to verify the controls in use and despite your personal opinions the researcher was highly rated by his peers in Psychical Research, some of whom were not in favour of phenomena.

lol come on they are tissue paper, end of story. And as I said even if they were real why would a spirit the size of a golf ball be coming out of someones mouth. lol! its nutty. you can see from the photos that they are cut outs from magazines, there is no motion. by the way one of your forum members called MU!! actually believes those photos are real spirits.

I notice you sidestepped Alvarado one of the most important current researchers. I suspect you would avoid any researcher who tended to indicate some sympathetic tendency to the possibility of the "Spiritualistic hypothesis".

I have spoken to Alvarado, and yes he is a dedicated researcher, but he is a paranormal believer and endorsed lots of far out stuff, this is why he doesn't have one paper in a scientific journal, his papers are published in paranomral journals only.

In honesty I fail to understand your reasoning to be on here if spiritualism is now to you all fraud and delusion

I have questions to ask you. Do insects, plants or bacteria have spirits and do they enter the spirit world? If your answer is no, then please explain why. Why do mediums in seance room never report dinosaurs, neanderthal men etc?

I also suggest you stop relying upon 4th or 5th level reporting and get back to primary materials

I have reported from the primary materials. The scientists who discovered Mina Crandon's ectoplasm hand was made of carved animal liver attended her seances, they were there. Likewise the scientist who caught Eusapia Palladino using a rubber bulb to move curtains in the seace room was there with her, these scientists were the scientists who caught these mediums in fraud. There is no conspiracy. These were educated scientists who could have spent their time publishing their physics books or psychological texts but instead they spent a heck of lot of time exposing fraud mediums. If anything we should be thanking these scientists.

At some stage soon the person I have been helping research the Davenports will put the full story together.

A waste of time, the davenports were frauds, were caught cheating and even admitted it. I don't see the point in researching this any further.

Rochester event

The fox sisters were frauds and you know they were, we have the confessions etc, again a waste of time to research this any further. They were frauds, so what is the point in looking any deeper? They wanted money and they made a lot of money in conning people with their seance tricks.

In all the articles Lis and I wrote for Psychic News that was the level of meticulous research we did, when I wrote on Psychometry I tracked every possible reference in spiritualist magazines and books. I was able to access about 85% of them including all key source documents.

If you have written for the Psychic News, then sorry but there is no hope for you in accepting the scientific evidence against spiritualism! A true case of true believer syndrome... Not to be rude, but you are a devout fundi spiritualist even if there is evidence against spiritualism you aint gonna accept it (this is even shown when you won't even admit that those tissue paper photos are fraud) you won't just come out and say it. and you just admitted it yourself you are only reading spiritualist magazines and books, that is a major bias, you are not interested in what the scientists actually reported. sorry but the scientists win, they were there exposing these mediums in the flesh, and it doesn't matter what later spiritualist books write, they were not there.

Some points: materialisation was demonstrated within living memory, not once, but many times in WHITE LIGHT ( see Mirabelli ).

You are thinking irrational here, come on. Now I don't believe you are are like that, you are a clever guy deep down, I know you don't believe in this sillyness.

Carlos Mirabelli was a fraud, who was well known for paying people to sneak into his seance sessions.



San Paul, Brazil, Carlos Mirabelli (1889–1951) (left) and Dr. Carlos de Castro (right) are seated at a table with the alleged materialized dead poet, Giuseppi Parini (1729–1799).

please DONT tell me you believe the materialised "poet" in the middle is actually a real spirit. c'mon man... its a real life dude, just a guy who sneaked into the seance room.

Scientific analysis of ectoplasm has been undertaken by Richet, Shrenk-Notzing and other researchers

mate... no. As I said previously you are half right becuase Notzing and Richet did believe in ectoplasm but they rejected it had anything to do with spirits, so quoting these guys does not support your belief.

Secondly Notzing was a sexual maniac who with Eva Carrière (Eva C) would get up to all kinds of erotic and pornographic acts, he would enter his finger into the vagina of Eva C many times in a seance, and Eva C was totally naked and would pull these materializations out of her genital area which were shaped in the size of you guess what... these are the sorts of perverts that are in your spiritualist movement and who you are happy to quote from? Do some real research mate, this is your movement.

Here is a photo of some ectoplasm "materialization" that Notzing believed to be real (photo of Eva C).



As you can see her materialization fake ectoplasm is in the shape of a deflated, and disembodied penis. And some very graphic sexual things were discussed in the notes of Juliette Bisson, Eva's bisexual lover who would also get naked in her seances.

If you guys knew the truth about your spiritualist movement, you wouldn't want anything to do with it, what amazes me is that all this information is out there some of it only a click away on the internet, but you choose to ignore it or have not been exposed to it becuase the modern spiritualist books don't want people to know what is in their movement.

Well forests, you need to do your homework. Can I suggest you look at the mediumship of Klusky if you want evidence of neanderthalic, and in particular animal materiaisation.

The picture of Mirabelli you produce is interesting. The poet materialised in front of a number of people, including the very amazed sitter on the other side, but according to you it was a fake, so all those individuals again must be liars ?. ( The same individual was observed to 'dematerialise' in front of the sitters as well ).

The resort to sexual infatuation is a common claim amongst the skeptics, so I don't mind you having a go at it. Once again, I am not a 'Spiritualist', and do not 'get my stuff' from Spiritualist websites.

Also if you would like to read some original 'scientific' research then have a look at the 'technical' Scole report. Two of the professors in that study were acquaintances of mine, and had impeccable qualifications and integrity. They have also sat with me in physical circles.

All in all, you are total convinced that ectoplasm and all physical mediumship is fraud. That is your perogative. It is neither rational, nor scientific, nor I feel based on personal experience ( which you may wish to share with us perhaps ? ). Nothing more to say really.

LeroyC

Seriously, are you guys so bored as to give this pseudoskeptical troll JREF cast-off one moment of your time?

MU!! wrote:Seriously, are you guys bored giving this pseudoskeptical troll one moment of your time?

MU!! on the Mind-Body Energy forum, you posted that you believe the ectoplasm of Helen Duncan is real:







If you honestly believe the above dolls are real spirits, then are you not the real definition of a troll? Remember a troll is someone who says something silly for a reaction etc. Sorry but I don't believe anyone deep down believes those photos are real. They are dolls end of story.

Else where you have been endorsing the mediumship of Eva C.



Are you going to claim that the fake penis ectoplasm in that photo is real MU!!? Do penises have spirits now? LOL. Think rationally. What you have been promoting is not only perverse, but it is all fraud.

on the other side, but according to you it was a fake, so all those individuals again must be liars ?. ( The same individual was observed to 'dematerialise' in front of the sitters as well ).

"materialised"

Let's take a look again:



The dude in the middle is a real life human, c'mon don't tell me you believe in this sillyness, you have a phd, there must be some rational thinking inside some somewhere. If you do some research into that medium you will discover he was known for paying people to enter his seances. The dude in the middle sneaks in half way through the seance. You need to rememeber that the seance room was pitch black. You ask if those observers were liars, no, just conned with a trick.

Also if you would like to read some original 'scientific' research then have a look at the 'technical' Scole report

Sorry but the scole experiments were an embarressment, and no.. scientists did not expose this one, both alan gauld and tony cornell (two researchers into the paranormal) exposed the whole thing as a scam. You can read about it in Cornell's book Investigating the Paranormal (actually an interesting book). Cornell spent 40 years of his life investigating seances and came to the conclusion there is no evidence for the spiritualist hypothesis.

Leroy

When you say that the Parini figure dematerialised in front of them, do you mean in some form of illumination?