Talk:Tina Resch
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Photo reference line removed - discussion
Respectfully, I removed this line for the reasons given below:
"Also, the photos were duplicated by Paul Kurtz in the Skeptical Inquirer by laying the cable over his chair from left to right, then hitting it at the right place, thus giving the receiver an upward momentum."
Mr. Kurtz did not duplicate or replicate any of the photos in the case. Both those words mean "an identical copy in every detail; an exact copy." A duplicate photo is a copy of the original or a copy of a copy.
Mr. Kurtz did simulate/imitate/mimic one photo of the concept of a phone handset and cord in the air in front of a seated person who has his hands displayed in front of his body.
Such a photo, taken by a photographer for the Niagara Gazette newspaper, appeared, besides in the newspaper, in the Summer 1984 issue of the Skeptical Inquirer, page 295. The caption for the photo reads: "CSICOP Chairman Paul Kurtz performing a similar feat." The photo credit reads: "From the "Niagara Gazette," photo by Ron Schifferie.' There is no discussion about how the photo was taken or how many failed attempts were photographed. The phone looks as though it is being held up by a thread. Mr. Kurtz is seated in an office chair, not in a cushioned large living room chair.
Also the article makes no mention of hitting a cord to make a phone jump. Logically, with a flexible cord, the cord would just move down or the phone would move back across the chair, not out and away. James Randi in his 1985 SI article on the case did suggest that a phone across a chair could be make to move upward if it is pulled on at a certain location, not hit downward.
In simulating a photograph of a "Tina Resch" phone in flight and offering it as evidence of a hoax, one would also have to disregard the testimony of the witnesses in the room, including that of the photographer.
I am a member of a skeptics organziation myself. Respectfully to the poster and to be fair to those involved in the case, I have removed the quote. The poster is free to revise it or leave it out.
208.50.10.6 18:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Polygraph inadmissible line removed
Deleted line as untrue regarding polygraph evidence: "though such evidence is inadmissible in US courts." Google the phrase: polygraph admissible Georgia. Both parties have to agree.