• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Gordon Smith

rich_m

New Blood
R
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
6
Hi all, first thread here, please be gentle... :)

Does anyone here have any ionformation on the medium Gordon Smith, specifically him being tested by the "[FONT=arial, helvetica]Scottish Society for Psychical Research". It was mentioned in Mr Randis weekly column of April 30th 2004, but I can't find any other references to it, or a copy of the paper that published the results.

I've been told by someone that he was tested under triple blind conditions and "passed", and that the results of the test have been peer reviewed. Now, my ********-o-meter has gone off the scale at this, and I can't find any other information about these tests, which makes me think I'm right, but it would be nice if anyone else can give me some more info to back this up.

Thanks in advance...

[/FONT]
 
there is no such thing as triple blind. So anything claiming to have been triple blinded you can safely disregard as nonsense.
 
Add to Tobias' statement.....

If a medium was demonstrated to be genuine under properly blinded conditions, and that was peer reviewed and confirmed:

1) You would not need to be searching for it, it would be headline news around the world.
2) There would be Nobel Prizes awarded.
3) And every woo website on the planet would trumpet the result with a giant "told ya so".
 
Yeah, kinda exactly what I was thinking - does anyone know anything more about this "[FONT=arial, helvetica]Scottish Society for Psychical Research"?

Again, I'm detecting large amount of bulls*it :)
[/FONT]
 
"Triple blind" is refered to in a paper I've found (but can't post the link to yet coz I've not done enough posts) which seem to be a document looking at the protocols used in this so called testing....
 
Overman said:
What the hell is triple blind?

:cookieeat
Click to expand...

Triple-blinded is an idea that has been kicked around, but I've not heard of it implemented. An example would be:
Testing new bloodpressure med; have it prescribed by doctors, to patients, but neither the doctor, nor the patient, know a study is occurring. Some of the bottles are placebo, some are real.

The jist behind the triple-blind is that not only do the participants not know if they are control group or not, but they don't even know they are in the study.
 
The SSPR began in the early 60s/late 50s. They were trying to develop super soilders to counter America's successful Captian America project. The end result was the movie Braveheart, which enjoyed moderate success at the show and in DVD sales.

:hypnodisk :hypnodisk :hypnodisk :yinyang: :twocents:
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
Triple-blinded is an idea that has been kicked around, but I've not heard of it implemented. An example would be:
Testing new bloodpressure med; have it prescribed by doctors, to patients, but neither the doctor, nor the patient, know a study is occurring. Some of the bottles are placebo, some are real.

The jist behind the triple-blind is that not only do the participants not know if they are control group or not, but they don't even know they are in the study.
Click to expand...


Sounds like a good idea for results...but this may bring up ethical questions....
 
From his website :
http://www.thepsychicbarber.co.uk/about2.html

Gordon has worked with Professor Archie Roy, Emeritus Professor of Astronomy at Glasgow University and Tricia Robertson of the Scottish Society for Psychical Research. Both are trying to establish a scientific approach to studying the evidence given by mediums to their recipients in order to dispel the age-old claim of the sceptic that information given by mediums is no more than general.
Click to expand...

If his website is up to date, it doesn't look like he has actually been tested. I don't like the tone of that quote, looks like they are starting out with a bias, which doesn't give me confidence of a rigorous double blind test being administered.

Professor Archie Roy is founding president of http://www.sspr.co.uk/ and according to Smith's site considers Gordon Smith a good friend.

If you read through the SSPR site, it looks like they are just a bunch of believers with no scientific evidence.

Here's an example :

Historical psychical research covers many topics but it is a fact that the careful and prolonged studies by psychical researchers, sometimes over decades, of mediums such as Mrs Piper, Mrs Leonard, Mrs Willett, Mrs Garrett and Miss Cummins have demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt to anyone of open mind that these psychics again and again could acquire knowledge in a paranormal manner.
Click to expand...
 
AW - close, but not quite right. I had asked this question a while ago, and someone gave me an example very similar to what you said. But it's that the "patients" don't know which they're taking, the doctors don't which they're giving, and the people who compile the results don't know which is the drug and which is the placebo (I assume they compile/crunch data using some kind of code numbers which get translated later).
 
My findings are as imagineNoReligion's. Just not as fast.

ETA: and my conclusions were pretty much the same as well.
 
I have written many posts and a transcript at one point,wether thats still around I dunno,I even had email exchanges with a silly woman from the SSPR about White Crows!! He had a regular spot on some online radio show(where I got the transcript)Hay House radio I recall.
He was on This Morning with Chris French today but I missed most of it.
Forgot to mention..he's a fraud.Welcome to the madhouse rich m :D

Here is white crow thread
http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?t=51791&highlight=Gordon+Smith

Psychic Barber thread
http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?t=54266&highlight=Gordon+Smith

Lastly
http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?t=46961&highlight=Gordon+Smith

Randi's Commentary
http://www.randi.org/jr/043004bad.html#1
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, has anybody got any more information on this paper mentioned in Randis commentry? I know he's a fraud like every other medium out there, but I'm currently involved in a debate elswhere where some "believers" are jumping up and down with glee about this so called test citing it as "proof"....
 
rich_m said:
Hmmm, has anybody got any more information on this paper mentioned in Randis commentry? I know he's a fraud like every other medium out there, but I'm currently involved in a debate elswhere where some "believers" are jumping up and down with glee about this so called test citing it as "proof"....
Click to expand...

I would suggest asking them to produce it, if they are citing it as proof.
 
scotth said:
I would suggest asking them to produce it, if they are citing it as proof.
Click to expand...

Excellent suggestion!

Whenever you have to deal with people like that, always remember to ask, "Your evidence?"
 
scotth said:
I would suggest asking them to produce it, if they are citing it as proof.
Click to expand...

Come on now, you don't think something so simple would satisfy a true believer do you?

They have read it on the internet, it MUST be true :D
 
rich_m said:
Come on now, you don't think something so simple would satisfy a true believer do you?

They have read it on the internet, it MUST be true :D
Click to expand...

You miss the point. If they are citing the paper as proof, they must have a copy of it for your to examine.
 
scotth said:
You miss the point. If they are citing the paper as proof, they must have a copy of it for your to examine.
Click to expand...

Nah, I get the point, but I'm just beginning to get that "head against a brick wall" feeling :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom