This just crossed my news feed.
What the heck is going on here? Does this guy have any critical reasoning skills at all?
No I really don’t think there is an end to any “grudge.” Uri Geller is a charlatan, a con man, a thief. He always was, he still is.
On the other hand, the NY Times is so lacking in shame as to give a platform to David Brooks, so I shouldn’t expect any better.
James Randi is rolling in his grave.
Geller is yet another example of the fact that we get exactly what we deserve.
It doesn’t matter how many times James Randi (or numerous others) perform the same tricks, expose faith healers or demonstrate how tent evangelists use hidden earphones. As Randi himself often said, people are just determined to lose their money. That Geller has made a successful career capitalizing on this comes as a disappointment, but not a surprise.
The article mostly summarizes that career, but should be rightly criticized for not holding him accountable as a harmful fraud. The fact that he hired himself out to companies to find natural resources should certainly make him liable to the charge of being a scumbag, if not actual malfeasance. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together realizes this, even without seeing that sorry segment on the Tonight Show. But the fact is, lots of people who saw that didn’t care, much in the way people keep sending money to Peter Popov despite what’s known about him.
Geller is certainly a lowlife, but in the grand scheme he’s symptom, not a cause.
The comments to the article help restore my faith in humanity. The essay itself is unfathomable.
Not sure if the OP’s link is a paywall or not, but here’s a gift link just in case.
I scanned the article and it was ridiculous. The description of Geller’s appearance on The Tonight Show is laughable; it makes it seem as if Geller just decided on a whim not to use his powers that night. No, he didn’t use them because Johnny Carson consulted with James Randi beforehand; Randi gave him the simple advice to provide the spoons for Geller to bend, and to make damn sure that Geller and none of his entourage and handlers got anywhere near them prior to the taping. Geller couldn’t set up his party trick, so of course he couldn’t do it!
That’s a good way to put it. I couldn’t figure out what the author was trying to say. He seemed to be trying to have it both ways, while still buying into everything that Geller said.
He seems to have a massive crush on the guy. I went into the essay thinking, “Oh, it can’t actually be that bad,” but it really was.
That was less an essay, and more an application form to become Geller’s press secretary.
Dang. I thought that conman had died. Wishful thinking?
The article reflects the long time opinions of all the magicians who never came close to the success of Geller. They all would have done the same as he did if they thought of it first.
That is absolute bullshit. There is an uncountable number of professional illusionists that are much more successful than he could possibly be. He is a third rate magician at best, and if it weren’t for gullible idiots and those (like the author) who want to be in on the con he would have disappeared into obscurity decades ago. Real artists constantly hone their craft to entertain others.
While this is The BBQ Pit, I, for one, would greatly appreciate some semblance of reputable substantiation for that load.
Does this mean that most people that get pissed off at carjackers are just jealous that they aren’t good at it?
And what does this say about people that oppose sexual assault?
Your link to the NYT didn’t work, so I searched and found this (supposed) gift link.
This might be the dumbest thing you’ve ever said on the board. Probably not, but it’s in the running. I’m positive you know that the vast, vast majority of professional magicians have never had a chance for the success Uri Geller has enjoyed. And he is absolutely not a 3rd rate magician, he’s definitely 2nd rate.
First of all, learn to read for comprehension and go back to the OP. Or is the NY Times not reputable enough for your ignorant ass. Then look at this post correcting my own misimpressions from a professional magician member of the Dope:
Oh great. You didn’t even bother to fail to comprehend what you were reading before posting your bloviating nonsense.
I completely understood your assertion.
You should read the rest of that thread-It is quite enlightening.
Dude. You’re leaving out your own reply to him.
As for the article itself: I’ve seen this before. It’s basically the same as the one on the Theranos lady. The NYT has a habit of these weirdly controversial articles.
It literally tries to treat James Randi as a fool near the end. It’s trying to piss people off. At least with the Theranos piece, it felt more like they got someone who was truly hoodwinked and just used her.
I can’t find it right now, but I read an article once about how the NYT will do some trolling, like when it claimed that the best Ramen was with American cheese on top, or claimed a bunch of obviously fake trends. It sometimes does these “opinion” pieces for the controversy.
That said, this one also reminds me of that piece on Dan Schneider*. It was obviously an advertisement for his new show he was pitching. The Geller piece has a bit that seems like it’s promoting a new book about the man.
Mr. Geller ultimately emerged the victor in this war, and proof of his triumph is now on display in the museum: a coffee-table book titled “Bend It Like Geller,” which was written by the Australian magician Ben Harris and published in May.
*Sorry, no gift link. I don’t have a subscription. I read it originally from a link elsewhere.