# How did Uri Geller (psychic) divine pictures people had written?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion
**Created:** [March 7, 2013, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260 "2013-03-07T03:25:59Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 5
### Author:  [@ianzin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ianzin)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/81 "2013-03-09T02:25:41Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#):
>
> BTW, this is bullshit. You have been here long enough to know legal issues are discussed and the mods have never had a problem with posters expressing belief that someone has committed murder, fraud or anything else.
If you’re correct, then I stand corrected. I had honestly misunderstood the position. I thought the Mods would prefer it if we didn’t publicly accuse a named individual of illegal fraudulent activity.
---
### Author:  [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/82 "2013-03-09T02:44:50Z")
> [@ianzin](#):
>
> If you’re correct, then I stand corrected. I had honestly misunderstood the position. I thought the Mods would prefer it if we didn’t publicly accuse a named individual of illegal fraudulent activity.
Who accused him of _illegal_ fraudulent activity? BTW, can you show me where on his own website he claims to be a magician doing tricks, and not a psychic with paranormal abilities?
---
### Author:  [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/83 "2013-03-09T02:47:24Z")
> [@ianzin](#):
>
> I’ve been friends with Randi for years and I’ve performed with him at two or three different conventions. Randi has lectured on this piece of TV footage many times. In his lectures he openly explains how he did this drawing duplication effect. He has his own reasons for wanting to explain it in his lectures but not more publicly, and I will respect his wishes. However, it has nothing to do with anything Geller may or may not have done, as Randi would be the first to acknowledge.
Acknowledge what exactly? Often, it has plenty to do with what Uri Geller and his ilk for what abilities they claim they genuinely have when not doing their show, and are stating they are not relying on trickery. In the Barbara Walters piece, it too, had plenty to do with Geller and what he was claiming and doing. Barbara couldn’t explain it, so she asked for Randi to duplicate something similar of which he did. Randi admitting to being a magician at least tried to show here a more plausible explanation that it is a magic trick, nothing more.
> [@](#):
>
> Incorrect. Carson, with whom I corresponded personally before his passing, never debunked anyone or wanted to. When Geller appeared on his show, nothing happened. This isn’t the same as ‘debunking’ anyone or anything.
That seems a rather strange perception of events. Had Carson’s show got ahold of Geller beforehand and asked for advice, or something similar you might make a case for it. I doubt they did, other than to book him. Carson’s show did get ahold of Randi who wasn’t even going to be to on the show at that time. They asked for advice from Randi and what to look for and to make sure no trickery was going to occur, and were also advised by Randi to make sure not to let Geller use his own props among other things. This is because Geller had been making his rounds on lots of TV shows as a genuine psychic.
So true, Geller didn’t get debunked, but this is a far cry from saying Carson never wanted to see Geller debunked, or I would prefer to say, fail, and failed miserably he did. Had Carson wanted Geller to succeed here, he would have let him bring his own props, and do the same few tricks he was most known for. He didn’t. So it seems a reasonable assumption he had a similar distaste for him as Randi did in passing himself off as a genuine psychic who isn’t relying on trickery.
The fact you drop names and say Carson and you had corresponded with him personally before his passing, brings what to light, other than I suppose you want others to know you had a conversation with him? Carson had more than just an inkling that Geller was a fraud and charlatan. The fact that Carson invited Randi back to expose more charlatans like Popoff, weighs heavily that Carson did want Geller and the Popoff’s of the world shown to the world for the fraud that they were or at least help some see the light, anyway.
> [@](#):
>
> I believe it is the case that on at least one occasion, a corporation invited Uri to try and dowse for valuable ores and minerals such as oil, but the invitation was to Uri, not from him.
Does it make a hill of a beans difference if the invitations are to Uri and not from him? Uri’s own cite has him using psychic abilities to find minerals. He says if he makes a lot of money from it, he will donate a large part of it to charity.
> [@](#):
>
> You may regard them as credulous if you wish, but this is simply your opinion. They are two well-qualified scientists who conducted some experiments into controversial fields (as good scientists have done since time began). Their only involvement with Geller was written up as a paper and submitted to Nature magazine, where it was peer-reviewed and published albeit with a note of reservation from the editor. Anyone can read the paper online for free. It’s not work of credulity. It’s a scientific paper that was published in the most pretigious scientific journal in the world. May I ask how many scientific papers have you had published in Nature magazine?
They were not “well-qualified scientists” to be detecting fraud, however. Randi’s book _Flim-Flam_ exposes a great deal of what was going on there in the chapter _The Laurel and Hardy of Psi_ and devoted a great deal to it. Many found it surprising to find _Nature_ running an article on parapsychology. Randi says the editorial called the article “weak,” “disconcertingly vague,” “limited,” “”flawed,” and “naïve.” He further notes even the _New York Times_ fell into the trap, treating it as a respectable paper. Randi further elaborates, had the NYT known what is now known, they would have covered the Targ-Puthoff work in the entertainment pages.
Targ and Puthoff also have said repeatedly, _that in their research, they do not retain successful tests and reject failures._ Randi says this just isn’t true, and gives many examples of it in his book.
---
### Author:  [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/84 "2013-03-09T02:51:31Z")
> [@ianzin](#):
>
> It may be the case that you have never heard of a professional magician calling Uri anything but a fraud, but how large is your data set? I am very confident I know more professional magicians than you do, and have known them for longer, and mix and mingle with them on a more regular basis. The number who have anything bad or unkind to say about Uri is very small They are in a tiny minority. Most are either neutral towards him or like him very much. I’ve been friends with Uri for years, and I think he’s a really nice guy.
Being likable, doesn’t keep one from being a fraud. He is a fraud and charlatan (also Randi’s words) and Randi did everybody a great service for exposing him for the fraud and charlatan he is. If you say these magicians hardly can say a bad or unkind thing about Geller, and that the number is quite small, I say that doesn’t speak very well of magicians as a whole if that truly is the case, and if so, they are in need of some serious form of ethics reform. Here’s a great deal Geller’s fraudulent nature, from the [wiki article.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uri_Geller)
In the same article, he is also flaky about this:
> [@](#):
>
> Randi highlighted a quotation from the November 2007 issue of the magazine Magische Welt (Magic World) in which Geller said: “I’ll no longer say that I have supernatural powers. I am an entertainer. I want to do a good show. My entire character has changed.”
>
> In a later interview, Geller told Telepolis, “I said to this German magazine, so what I did say, that I changed my character, to the best of my recollection, and I no longer say that I do supernatural things. It doesn’t mean that I don’t have powers. It means that I don’t say ‘it’s supernatural’, I say ‘I’m a mystifier!’ That’s what I said. And the sceptics turned it around and said, ‘Uri Geller said he’s a magician!’ I never said that.”
---
### Author:  [@ianzin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ianzin)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/85 "2013-03-09T02:59:19Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> BTW, can you show me where on his own website he claims to be a magician doing tricks, and not a psychic with paranormal abilities?
No, I cannot. I have never claimed that I could.
---
### Author:  [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/86 "2013-03-09T03:06:43Z")
> [@ianzin](#):
>
> I would suggest that this is self-evidently not the case. To reproduce what someone else said is not the same as saying it yourself. I think it’s really helpful to preserve the distinction, particularly when people are discussing things they think Geller has said.
It’s rather interesting that you would take this position. It says something about your willingness to deal honestly here.
If I hand you a letter of recommendation that says that I was one of the most brilliant graduate students at Trinity College, Oxford, and I never tell you that I never attended Trinity College, Oxford, would you not take that as a claim on my part that I had in fact attended that college?
> [@ianzin](#):
>
> Obviously, to have this discussion we need to understand what we mean by the word ‘fraud’.
I’m glad we agree. Indeed, you might have noticed the posts in which I offered y’all the opportunity to define it. And then I went ahead and offered a definition.
> [@](#):
>
> If you are using this word in the legal sense, then to allege that someone is a ‘fraud’ is to suggest they have contravened a particular law or statute. It makes sense to be cautious about accusing a named individual of having perpetrated ‘fraud’ in the legal sense, on a public message board such as this. The Mods would probably prefer it if we didn’t.
Another interesting statement for you to make. The evidence is piling up that you are not participating in this conversation in good faith. Your credibility is on the line.
> [@](#):
>
> If you are using the word as a synonym for ‘magician’, then I’d have to argue that these are not synonynmous terms.
Has anyone suggested that all magicians are frauds?
---
### Author:  [@ianzin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ianzin)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/87 "2013-03-09T03:17:36Z")
> [@razncain](#):
>
> Acknowledge what exactly?
Randi would not say that the method he used to achieve his drawing duplication effect has anything to do with any method that Uri Geller may or may not have used to achieve a similar effect. That’s the only point I’m making.
> [@](#):
>
> In the Barbara Walters piece, it too, had plenty to do with Geller and what he was claiming and doing. Barbara couldn’t explain it, so she asked for Randi to duplicate something similar of which he did. Randi admitting to being a magician at least tried to show here a more plausible explanation that it is a magic trick, nothing more.
As I have already said and agreed, Randi’s point was to demonstrate that the psychic hypothesis is not necessary in order to account for a ‘drawing duplication’ effect. This is perfectly true and I completely agree. The only clarification I was trying to provide was that the method that Randi used on this occasion has no bearing on any method that Geller may or may not have used. That’s all.
> [@](#):
>
> So true, Geller didn’t get debunked, but this is a far cry from saying Carson never wanted to see Geller debunked, or I would prefer to say, fail, and failed miserably he did.
An earlier posted said Carson debunked Geller. I was just trying to point out that I don’t think he did, or wanted to. Your interpretation may be different - that’s fine.
What Carson did was ask Randi’s advice and take steps to ensure that Geller wouldn’t be able to use any kind of trickery while on the show. Perhaps it’s just a matter of opinion, semantics or usage, but I don’t think this is ‘debunking’. I think ‘debunking’ usually means providing or demonstrating a more prosaic or factual explanation for something as an alternative to a more sensational or controversial explanation. Carson didn’t do this, or want to. It wasn’t his style.
> [@](#):
>
> Does it make a hill of a beans difference if the invitations are to Uri and not from him?
Only if one is interested in facts. An earlier poster suggested Geller had made the invitation or invitations. I was just trying to point that to the best of my knowledge, this was not the case.
> [@](#):
>
> They were not “well-qualified scientists” to be detecting fraud, however.
I agree with you. I never stated they were.
> [@](#):
>
> Randi’s book _Flim-Flam_ exposes a great deal of what was going on there in the chapter _The Laurel and Hardy of Psi_ and devoted a great deal to it.
Yes he did, and he did an excellent job. I love that book and I have always praised in highly. However, he did get some simple factual matters wrong, which is why in the second edition he had to include quite a list of corrections and disputed points. This isn’t to detract from the brilliance and excellent of either that chapter specifically, or the book overall. In my opinion it’s Randi’s finest hour, and I’ve told him so.
---
### Author:  [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/88 "2013-03-09T03:57:14Z")
> [@razncain](#):
>
> No, that won’t change my opinion of him, so I don’t need to watch it. It won’t erase everything I know and have read about him.
You just KNOW that Uri Geller is bad, because other people have told you so, and you directly REFUSE to actually watch his act.
This tells me everything I need to know about you.
Burned any good books lately?
---
### Author:  [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/89 "2013-03-09T04:04:39Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#):
>
> You just KNOW that Uri Geller is bad, because other people have told you so, and you directly REFUSE to actually watch his act.
>
> This tells me everything I need to know about you.
>
> Burned any good books lately?
Given any cheap shots lately? What about those links _you_ requested from **razncain** that he went through the trouble of providing for you?
---
### Author:  [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/90 "2013-03-09T04:17:09Z")
> [@Acsenray](#):
>
> You’re mistaken. You did not answer my question. I asked for a list of the elements that define a psychic fraud and identification of the ones that don’t apply to Geller.
And I answered the question in four paragraphs.
I gave you two examples of things that make John Edward a fraud, and for each of them I gave a reason why Geller is different.
Which is what you asked for.
---
### Author:  [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/91 "2013-03-09T04:21:28Z")
Take a look at my post No. 68. Do you accept that definition of paranormal fraud? If so, which of those elements do you assert are missing with Geller?
---
### Author:  [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/92 "2013-03-09T04:47:59Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#):
>
> Peter Morris, you said he doesn’t claim to assist the police in solving crimes and that people that do that are lowlifes. Razncain and I showed you that he does do that, and he also sells instructions on how to dowse and develop ESP and telekinesis. Do you now label him as a lowlife or will you make a special exemption for him?
Haven’t had time to study them closely yet. I’ll look at it tomorrow.
> [@](#):
>
> Cite? And I’m specifically asking for a cite that the lawsuit was regarding his skill as a performer and not about it being claimed that his supposed powers were just tricks.
> **[Another Round: Psychic vs. Skeptic](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-10-06-vw-171-story.html)**
>
> In the article about my libel suits against James Randi, when Randi claims that my performances can be duplicated by methods found long ago on cereal boxes, he attacks not only my abilities but also my originality.
---
### Author:  [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/93 "2013-03-09T04:58:18Z")
Peter Morris, I was specific in what I was asking a cite for. That link does not back up your claim that the lawsuit was regarding his skill as a performer and not about it being claimed that his supposed powers were just tricks.
---
### Author:  [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/94 "2013-03-09T05:09:27Z")
> [@Acsenray](#):
>
> Take a look at my post No. 68. Do you accept that definition of paranormal fraud? If so, which of those elements do you assert are missing with Geller?
I gave my own definition, and told you why Geller does not meet that definition.
BUt, okay let’s look at YOUR definition
\*
1. Makes a false
2. Claim of fact
3. That he has a paranormal power
4. Which people believe
5. And rely on
6. To their monetary detriment
7. From which the alleged psychic fraud profits
8. Through false demonstrations of such power.
-
Uri Geller does not match items #4,5,6 of your list.
Firstly, many of the people that hire him are perfectly aware that he’s performing conjuring tricks. They don’t believe in him as having psychic powers in the first place.
Secondly, they are relying on his abilities to provide entertainment for the audience. And they get it. Money paid, job done.
Thirdly, It isn’t to their detriment. If the show is successful, then they profited by hiring him.
---
### Author:  [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/95 "2013-03-09T05:15:13Z")
> [@ianzin](#):
>
> It may be the case that _you_ have never heard of a professional magician calling Uri anything but a fraud, but how large is your data set? I am very confident I know more professional magicians than you do, and have known them for longer, and mix and mingle with them on a more regular basis. The number who have anything bad or unkind to say about Uri is very small They are in a tiny minority. Most are either neutral towards him or like him very much. I’ve been friends with Uri for years, and I think he’s a really nice guy.
>
> Uri has been welcomed to several major magic conventions over the years, most recently the ‘Genii’ anniversary convention last year, where he was interviewed for two hours about his life and work and won a standing ovation. I wasn’t at that particular event, but I was at the Macmillian International convention in 2008 when he was given a prestigious award and spent hours afterwards with hundreds of magicians who wanted to shake his hand, have their photo taken with him and get his autograph. He was enormously popular, and it was rather like watching a rock star sign autographs for a couple of hours for enthusiastic fans!
You could easily know more professional magicians than I do, but I wasn’t referring simply to the few I know personally, but also those that have written and spoken publicly on this subject. Geller may have many fans within the profession, and he may be a very nice person, but he still a fraud in my book.
---
### Author:  [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/96 "2013-03-09T05:18:08Z")
So basically your position is akin to Larry Flynt and his Hustled cartoon of Jerry Falwell – yes, it falsely states that Falwell lost his virginity to his own mother, but the claim is so patently absurd that no one reading the cartoon would actually believe it to be true.
---
### Author:  [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/97 "2013-03-09T05:18:50Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#):
>
> Peter Morris, I was specific in what I was asking a cite for. That link does not back up your claim that the lawsuit was regarding his skill as a performer and not about it being claimed that his supposed powers were just tricks.
Yes it does.
\*
"he attacks not only my abilities but also my originality. That is defamation aside from any paranormal issue. After all, spoon bending is my professional trademark. "\*
---
### Author:  [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/98 "2013-03-09T05:41:38Z")
No, it doesn’t. You said:
> [@](#):
>
> On one occasion he sued someone for claiming that his act includes tricks taken from the back of cereal packets. The issue there was his skill as a performer. It was not about whether his tricks are real or fake.
The quote you provided does not back up your claim that Randi was sued for claiming his tricks were taken from the back of a cereal packet. As a matter of fact, Randi never claimed that. He said his tricks “are _the kind_ that used to be on the back of cereal boxes when I was a kid.” I doubt that statement could have a suit get as far as it did.
Anyway, these are statements that do not show what was alleged in the lawsuit. Got any real facts?
---
### Author:  [@stpauler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stpauler)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/99 "2013-03-09T12:34:23Z")
By the way, have we had the [Master’s column](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/660/how-did-uri-geller-bend-spoons) listed about this yet?
> [@](#):
>
> Other tricks were even more simpleminded. To “see” a drawing inside a sealed envelope, Geller would secretly hold it up to the light. An assistant would signal the right answers to him when he was doing mind-reading demonstrations. He’d copy down license plates and makes of cars in the parking lot to dazzle audiences with his uncanny knowledge of their private lives. A child could do it. You could do it.
> [@Peter\_Morris](#):
>
> I gave my own definition, and told you why Geller does not meet that definition.
>
> BUt, okay let’s look at YOUR definition
> \*
>
> 1. Makes a false
> 2. Claim of fact
> 3. That he has a paranormal power
> 4. Which people believe
> 5. And rely on
> 6. To their monetary detriment
> 7. From which the alleged psychic fraud profits
> 8. Through false demonstrations of such power.
>
> -
>
> Uri Geller does not match items #4,5,6 of your list.
>
> Firstly, many of the people that hire him are perfectly aware that he’s performing conjuring tricks. They don’t believe in him as having psychic powers in the first place.
>
> Secondly, they are relying on his abilities to provide entertainment for the audience. And they get it. Money paid, job done.
>
> Thirdly, It isn’t to their detriment. If the show is successful, then they profited by hiring him.
#4/5/6 doesn’t match since **Acsenray** didn’t say “all people”, just people. So no, there are people that have hired him perfectly unaware that he’s “performing tricks”. Unless you think hiring someone who can divine gold underground is suddenly a trick and not a claimed psychic power. Which you’d probably be an outlier if you claimed that.
[Here’s a little more substantiation to my claim:](http://www.zem.demon.co.uk/nzrh.htm)
> [@](#):
>
> Another blow that Uri suffered came from Professor Klassen of the University of Tel Aviv. He is a professor of physics and also an avid amateur magician so well accomplished in the art that he is looked upon by his friends as an excellent performer. Klassen was present at a Geller performance and was able to identify most of his tricks. He was incensed. " **What I’m upset about is that there appears to be here a swindle of this audience," the professor said. “If Geller would say that he is simply a magician, I wouldn’t care, because then he would be regarded as a fine magician. For him to claim that he has special divine powers is lying and cheating, and can bring about a great deal of damage.”**
---
### Author:  [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)
#### Post date: [March 9, 2013, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260/100 "2013-03-09T14:45:38Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#):
>
> No, it doesn’t.
I’m sorry you can’t see this, but it does. The issue in the case was the originality of his act, not whether it was paranormal.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260.md?page=4)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-did-uri-geller-psychic-divine-pictures-people-had-written/652260.md?page=6)