Talk:Eusapia Palladino

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] Magicians and parapsychology. I am all ears

Hello Martinphi, I have read many books and articles written by parapsychologists and magicians. I can think only of examples back beyond seventy five years ago where parapsychologists sought any advice from magicians, listened to them, and especially thanked them for an explanation that may have slipped by. If something does slip by parapsychologists and the error is pointed out by a magician, usually the magician is bad mouthed and called a DEBUNKER, SKEPTIC, ATHEIST, or worse and the error denied. (Can you say Milbourne Christopher, Martin Gardner, James Randi and Ray Hyman?) If I have missed something, say in the last seventy five years, which I am sure can easily happen; I would be glad if you pointed it out and cited these specific examples. I am always curious, willing to learn, flexible and thankful for new data to examine. Love a historical puzzle! User:Kazuba 18 Oct 2006

I don't think Randi and Hyman are good examples, especially the former. Often the explanations they offer are not something that 'slipped by' the investigators; they are explanations that are either pure speculation or are predicated on ignorance of the facts of the particular case. Has Randi ever succeeded in duplicating Ted Serios so-called "Thoughtographic" phenomena under the conditions that appertained during the original investigations with Serios? As for seeking advice and listening to them, relatively recently (compared to your example of 75 years) during Stephen E. Braude's investigation of the 'gold-leaf lady' in Florida (part of which was depicted on Unsolved Mysteries) a skilled magician (who had designed tricks for Copperfield and others) was present and could not offer an explanation for the phenomena via conjuring.لقمانLuqman 21:14, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Naples Sitting

This article ommits all mention of the Naples sitting. This is unacceptable because it provides an exception to the conditions described in this article. During the Naples sitting Palladino was investigated by three skeptics, two of them skilled magicians, under good conditions (including good lighting and tight control over Eusapia herself) and manifested impressive phenomena. The issue is not whether she had cheated at some point. The issue is the genuineness of the phenomena which were exhibited under good conditions of observation and with good controls. If the precautions were such as to eliminate fraud, the conditions such that misobservation is unlikely, and the investigators such that one can be confident in their objectivity, integrity, and accuracy, then any phenomena produced during these sittings ought to be considered as genuine (i.e. they are more likely than not to be veridical). لقمانLuqman 21:14, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eusapia Palladino

You are jumping to your conclusions too quickly. You must read more. Not all magicians are capable of unmasking charalatans. Randi is special, as was Houdini. Palladino's greatest feat was avoiding controls. It is important to remember phenomena and transcendence was, and still is, desired. Especially when dealing with the paranormal. It is not popular to say I misunderstood my own experiences and they were just ordinary humbug. Like critical reason, creativity, talent, imagination, illusions, hallucinations, delusions and selectivity, really exist in the world. Thanks for your interest in magic. User:Kazuba 28 Nov 2006 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kazuba (talk • contribs) 16:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC).