PK parties

[flyboy217]

I haven't seen any postings on here about this yet, so I thought I'd ask. I'm going to cover it in a good amount of depth, so bear with me.

If you're not familiar, a man named Jack Houck has been giving for 21 years what he calls "PK parties." At these parties, he (purportedly) teaches people to bend metallic objects that they are normally physically incapable of bending:

http://www.jackhouck.com/pk.shtml

Prima facie, Uri Geller would come to mind. Since I understand he was caught cheating on numerous occasions, I'll not bring him up. The interesting thing about these parties is that several well-known (and well-respected) people have come away with the strong belief that they did indeed bend spoons in ways normally impossible:

Michael Crichton, a skeptical, Harvard-trained MD:

Michael Crichton in "Travels"
Michael Crichton in an interview

Dean Radin, well-respected parapsychological investigator:

Dean Radin's experience
(Please refrain from ad hominem attacks, especially if you are unfamiliar with his works. Read his account carefully.)

The University of Arizona:

PK Party at University of Arizona

I have many more links lying around.

Now, there are several interesting things to note:

• In most cases, these people brought their own spoons, so that tampering is unlikely.
• These people did it themselves (so please, no postings on sleight of hand or other trickery on behalf of the participants).
• The spoons exhibit extreme structural damage to their bowls, which is extremely hard to do with one's bare hands (try it).

I have read one explanation from James Randi:

There are a lot of these guys out there. What they do is they tell you to put pressure on the spoon but not enough to bend it. Now, what if I told you to take a wine glass, rap it on the edge of the table, but not hard enough to break it? How do you do that? How do put enough pressure on the spoon but not enough to bend it? Then concentrate on it, and it will bend.

You don't know how much pressure it takes to bend the spoon or to break this wine glass. That's the point. You can tap it on the table a number of times, and it won't break, then when you concentrate on it, it will break. But at the point where it does break, was it because you added something to it or because you rapped it a little harder or at a slightly different angle?

He's telling you to put pressure on the thing. He doesn't tell you to bend it with your mind; he tells you to put pressure on it but not enough to bend it with your hands--and then add energy to it from your mind. How do you know where that energy is coming from? You don't know.

This clearly fails to address the point that buckling the head of a spoon is beyond the physical abilities of most people (Crichton and Radin included).

At the very least, it is apparent that there exist spoons that have had their bowls crushed. Considering that both Radin and Crichton brought their own spoons, and are unable to do this with "normal" strength, what could be the cause? The two explanations I can see are 1) there is "something interesting" going on at these parties, or 2) all of these people are liars.

Considering that Mr. Houck himself has hosted parties for over 15,000 people, 85% of whom he says have shown positive results, shouldn't there already be a well-known explanation, either way?

 

[Goshawk]

All questions of "gee, how do you suppose they could have done that, if not by psychic powers?" aside, I have only one question: If Jack Houck has been doing this for over 20 years, why hasn't he trotted down to Randi's office, demonstrated it for him, and thereby earned himself an easy million dollars?

 

[Goshawk]

An obvious explanation:

In most cases, these people brought their own spoons, so that tampering is unlikely.

Beg to differ.

I read all four of your links, and none of them mentioned where they got the spoons, that I could see. Michael Crichton doesn't say he brought his own spoon. Nobody else says they brought their own spoons.

I am forced to conclude that the flatware, both spoons and forks, was provided by the "host" of the spoon-bending party, and that it was of some soft metal that would warm up when manipulated in the human hand, and become malleable enough to squish into weird shapes.

It's possible that even standard Oneida silver flatware would do this, although I'm not a metallurgist and I wouldn't really know.

I doubt if you could do the spoon-bending trick with stainless steel flatware.

Left this out, oops:

Also, I found this on Jack Houck's website:

We try to create a peak emotional event at a PK Party. The bigger this peak emotional event, the better the results.

So, he gives people these soft metal spoons, he gets them all pumped up, and in all the excitement, after the spoons are softened, they bend them with their own fingers, but they're really excited, and they're willing to believe that they did it with their minds alone. He even says to one guy, "Hey, didn't you notice that you bent the fork in your left hand?" and the guy goes, "Oh...yeah...you're right."

Read it for yourself.

It's all about persuading people of what they saw.

 

[Virgil]

All questions of "gee, how do you suppose they could have done that, if not by psychic powers?" aside, I have only one question: If Jack Houck has been doing this for over 20 years, why hasn't he trotted down to Randi's office, demonstrated it for him, and thereby earned himself an easy million dollars?

it sounds passe, but that is where the rubber hits the road.

 

[T'ai Chi]

The spoons exhibit extreme structural damage to their bowls, which is extremely hard to do with one's bare hands (try it).

It is something, like bending a key, that can be done probably pretty easily with practice.

 

[flyboy217]

All questions of "gee, how do you suppose they could have done that, if not by psychic powers?" aside, I have only one question: If Jack Houck has been doing this for over 20 years, why hasn't he trotted down to Randi's office, demonstrated it for him, and thereby earned himself an easy million dollars?

Yes, this is the first question any reasonable person (myself included) would ask. Unfortunately, this line of reasoning does nothing to answer my questions. After all, my question wasn't "is PK real?," but "why are the spoon heads bent?"

I am forced to conclude that the flatware, both spoons and forks, was provided by the "host" of the spoon-bending party, and that it was of some soft metal that would warm up when manipulated in the human hand, and become malleable enough to squish into weird shapes.

This is a reasonable conclusion. Consider Radin's quote: "All of my attempts to repeat this effect later, both with and without the use of force, failed." A metal that becomes malleable just once, and never again? I suppose not as far-fetched as a claim of people using psychokinesis, but it sounds far-fetched nonetheless (any metallurgists out there?).

It's all about persuading people of what they saw.

Which is why I bring up the issue of the pictures. They're certainly not incontrovertible evidence of anything at all, for sure. But they at least do give a direction in which to ask questions. Namely, regardless of what people believed or saw, why are the spoon heads bent? So far, the one-time only melting alloys is the best contender.

I doubt if you could do the spoon-bending trick with stainless steel flatware.

Read Jack's site again. He suggests using only stainless steel silverware. He also suggests that anyone who tries does the same, for this reason.

In the end, perhaps the best way to answer my question is to gather 30 of my friends, find stainless steel spoons and forks, and try it myself. One would be foolhardy to let words alone convince him, especially if the experiment is so simple. I think we can both agree on that. This thread will give me ideas on what to look for while conducting such an experiment.

It is something, like bending a key, that can be done probably pretty easily with practice.

These people did not have practice. In any case, I invite you to try buckling a spoon head with your bare hands. Practice as much as you'd like, and let me know how it goes.

 

[Lucianarchy]

Re: Re: PK parties

It is something, like bending a key, that can be done probably pretty easily with practice.

With respect, the Houck parties are not the same thing at all.
I did some research for someone a few years ago on this very subject and during an interview with Dr Russell Targ he gave me this first hand account of the Houck party.:

"My co-author Jane Katra, a spiritual healer with small delicate hands, rolled up the bowl of a teaspoon at a PK party with Jack Hauk last year. She was quietly meditating (waiting for the party to end, so that we could go home) when she screamed!
The bowl rolled up 180 degrees in her closed fist, and frightened her. We took a picture of the spoon and put it, with its picture into a plastic bag. By the time we arrived home, the bowl had bent an additional 90 degrees, 270 in all.

I wouldn't know how to create such a smooth roll, even if I took a spoon to the lab. At the party, I later bent the bowl of a similar spoon by brute force, damaging my hand in the process. The bowl creased sharply as I broke the back of the bowl. It looked nothing like Jane's.

The following month we had another opportunity to go to a PK party. Northern California does have some advantages. At this party Houck (a metallurgist from Boeing) had one-foot long, 3/8 diameter aluminum rods as objects for bending. Holding one of these rods in my two hands, I had the experience of it getting springy. As I bent it back and forth with my eyes shut, I finally had the impression that it froze in the bent position. This turned out to be about 30 degrees.

Neither I, nor my two athletic sons could bend a similar rod whatsoever, without putting it over a knee, which is again quite a painful undertaking."

 

[Matabiri]

This is a reasonable conclusion. Consider Radin's quote: "All of my attempts to repeat this effect later, both with and without the use of force, failed." A metal that becomes malleable just once, and never again? I suppose not as far-fetched as a claim of people using psychokinesis, but it sounds far-fetched nonetheless (any metallurgists out there?).

He doesn't say he attempted it again with the same spoon.

 

[Ceinwyn]

Re: Re: Re: PK parties

With respect, the Houck parties are not the same thing at all.
I did some research for someone a few years ago on this very subject and during an interview with Dr Russell Targ he gave me this first hand account of the Houck party.:

You are actually using Russell Targ as a source?

The man is incapable of critical thought. He believes that Uri Geller gets his powers from space aliens.

Oh wait. I forgot who I was posting to. Nevermind.

 

[The Don]

As I understand it:

If someone should wish to bend metal by means other than PK, there is a range of products available through your friendly magic retailer to enable you to demonstrate your powers.

When a group of people get together there is often a deal of pressure fit in with the group. If everyone else's spoons (the ones they bought from a magic shop) are bending and your spoon (the one you "borrowed" from the cafeteria) isn't, then there is a tendancy to either claim that your spoon is bending when it isn't or to apply a little manual force to enable it to happen.

If the explanation isn't PK then it's got to be the result of illusion. The reason why experienced observers are so convinced with someone's powers is that they are an excellent illusionist.

Should the PK master agree to be tested under "proper" conditions where the tests have been designed by skilled illusionists and they still manage to produce the effects, then that really is something to write home about.

and finally......

Considering that Mr. Houck himself has hosted parties for over 15,000 people, 85% of whom he says have shown positive results, shouldn't there already be a well-known explanation, either way?

The emphasis is mine, he gets to decide what is a "positive result" (perhaps it's just being in a room with a bent spoon" and he also provides this figure with no supporting evidence.

The most likely explanation is illusion. If he is willing to submit to properly controlled tests the PK perhaps can be ruled-in.

 

[Lucianarchy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: PK parties

You are actually using Russell Targ as a source?

The man is incapable of critical thought. He believes that Uri Geller gets his powers from space aliens.

No, he does not.

He is actually a govt sponsored physicist and CIA contractee with a history of credibility and integrity. He was also a performing stage magician before getting qualified as a physicist so he is well versed in spotting trickery.

 

[Lucianarchy]

The emphasis is mine, he gets to decide what is a "positive result" (perhaps it's just being in a room with a bent spoon" and he also provides this figure with no supporting evidence.

"At this party Houck (a metallurgist from Boeing) had one-foot long, 3/8 diameter aluminum rods as objects for bending. Holding one of these rods in my two hands, I had the experience of it getting springy. As I bent it back and forth with my eyes shut, I finally had the impression that it froze in the bent position. This turned out to be about 30 degrees.

Neither I, nor my two athletic sons could bend a similar rod whatsoever, without putting it over a knee, which is again quite a painful undertaking."

 

[The Don]

Re: Re: Re: PK parties

With respect, the Houck parties are not the same thing at all.
I did some research for someone a few years ago on this very subject and during an interview with Dr Russell Targ he gave me this first hand account of the Houck party.:

How is this not a Russell Targ quote ?

 

[Lucianarchy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: PK parties

How is this not a Russell Targ quote ?

?? What?

 

[Hamish]

A metal that becomes malleable just once, and never again? I suppose not as far-fetched as a claim of people using psychokinesis, but it sounds far-fetched nonetheless (any metallurgists out there?).

Not a metallurgist but you could try looking up work-hardening. In fact you can even try it. If you bend a teaspoon a couple of times it starts to become stiffer before it breaks. You increase the yield strength and decrease malleability.

 

[The Don]

"At this party Houck (a metallurgist from Boeing) had one-foot long, 3/8 diameter aluminum rods as objects for bending. Holding one of these rods in my two hands, I had the experience of it getting springy. As I bent it back and forth with my eyes shut, I finally had the impression that it froze in the bent position. This turned out to be about 30 degrees.

Neither I, nor my two athletic sons could bend a similar rod whatsoever, without putting it over a knee, which is again quite a painful undertaking."

Alternative possible explanations (to PK)

- the correspondent's memory of the event is not accurate
- the correspondent is lying to support their beliefs
- the two rods were superficially similar but quite different. After all (my emphasis)
Neither I, nor my two athletic sons could bend a similar rod whatsoever

Without access to any of the artifacts it's difficult to tell what the likely cause is. At a guess I'd suggest a combination of the first and the third.

 

[The Don]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: PK parties

?? What?

Comprehensionally challenged this a.m., sorry

 

[Lucianarchy]

Alternative possible explanations (to PK)

- the correspondent's memory of the event is not accurate
- the correspondent is lying to support their beliefs
- the two rods were superficially similar but quite different. After all (my emphasis)
Neither I, nor my two athletic sons could bend a similar rod whatsoever

Without access to any of the artifacts it's difficult to tell what the likely cause is. At a guess I'd suggest a combination of the first and the third.

With respect, Don, that's not really a rational skeptical explanation given the number of people involved and the integrity people involved. In a proper skeptical argument those sort of explanations only fly if they have evidence to support them.

 

[The Don]

With respect, Don, that's not really a rational skeptical explanation given the number of people involved and the integrity people involved. In a proper skeptical argument those sort of explanations only fly if they have evidence to support them.

With the very greatest lack of respect....

The fact that the correspondent was not allowed to handle the bar in question causes major alarm bells to ring. If *I* was going to try and mislead someone into thinking I could magically bend metal *I* would use a softer piece of metal for me to bend and would then get my audience to examine a superficially similar, but much stiffer piece of metal.

I see no reason to grant the benefit of the doubt to your correspondent who is, if I recall correctly, you (a non-skeptic) recalling a conversation with Russell Targ (a hard-core non-skeptic) in which he recounts the experiences of himself and another non-skeptic. This anecdotal evidence is flawed.

The evidence of my assertion is that a different bar was used for the two "experiements"

 

[steenkh]

In my opinion this whole thing sounds very anecdotal. If all this bending of spoon bowl and metal rods was so easy, you would have physicians flocking to examine it - or Houck et al. clamoring to have it examined. A million dollars could also come his way.

But no, this phenomenon is limited to special parties arranged for the show and the money, and sponsored by types like Gary Schwartz, which in itself discredits the whole procedure!