69) proposed that most likely the evidence was defective. It was therefore necessary to carry out further investigations to find out exactly what the defects were. Regarding well documented cases of psychokinesis in connection with poltergeists, Taylor (1980, p. 108) said, “The only possible explanation left open to us in this whole poltergeist phenomenon is that of a mixture of expectation, hallucination and trickery . . . Such an explanation is the only one which seems to fit in with a scientific view of the world.”
So what happened to Taylor between 1975 and 1980? In 1975, Taylor had accepted the paranormal events he witnessed during his own carefully controlled experiments with Uri Geller and a number of British children. He had hoped to explain these by one of the four fundamental forces accepted by modern physics, namely electromagnetism (the other three being the atomic strong force, the atomic weak force, and gravity). Philosopher david Ray Griffin (1997, p. 32) said, “Taylor soon learned, however, that this issue had been discussed for several decades by parapsychologists . . . In particular some Russian parapsychologists, given their Marxian materialistic orthodoxy, had devised experiments explicitly designed to show ESP and PK [psychokinesis] to be electromagnetic phenomena. Their experiments suggested otherwise.” So when Taylor found he could not explain the paranormal phenomena he witnessed in terms of one of the forces accepted by modern physics, he developed an apparent case of amnesia about his own experiments and dismissed the experiments performed by others as the result of trickery, hallucination, and credulity. He did not offer any explanation as to exactly how Geller and the many children he tested had tricked him.
Edgar mitchell (astronaut)
Edgar Mitchell is an American astronaut who became interested in psychical research. during his trip to the moon he had a transcendental vision, giving him “new insight” (Mitchell 1996, p. 68). After returning to earth, he tried to gain understanding of his vision by studying mystical literature. He concluded (1996, p. 69): “What the ancients, who wrote in the Sanskrit of India, described as a classic savikalpa samadhi was essentially what I believe I experienced . . . this phenomenon is a moment in which an individual still recognizes the separateness of all things yet understands that the separateness is but an illusion. An essential unity is the benchmark reality, which is what the individual suddenly comes to comprehend.” This also resembles the vedic concept of acintyabhedabhedatattva, inconceivable simultaneous oneness and difference. This generally refers to the relationship between God and God’s energies. According to the teachings of chaitanya Mahaprabhu all living beings have souls, and together these souls comprise an energy of God. The souls are simultaneously one with and different from God. They are one in spiritual substance and power but possess this spiritual substance and power in different quantities (Bhaktivinoda Thakura 1987, pp. 46–48).
In 1972, Mitchell left nASA and completely dedicated himself to the study of consciousness, which he believed bridged the gap between science and religion. “Mystical traditions assume, implicitly or explicitly, that consciousness is fundamental. Scientific tradition (epiphenomenalism) explicitly assumes it is secondary. It seemed to me that the study of consciousness provided the only unified approach to the questions of who we humans really are, how we got here, where we are going, and why” (Mitchell 1996, p. 72). To further his own studies and those of others, he organized the Institute for noetic Sciences.
Edgar Mitchell participated in some spoon-bending experiments with psychic Uri Geller at the Stanford Research Institute. The normal procedure was for Geller to grasp the spoon in his hand, and lightly stroke the shaft of the spoon, at its narrowest point, with one finger. The shaft would then twist or bend. Skeptics claimed he could do the bending because he had unusually strong fingers. Others suggested he applied a solvent that caused the metal to soften. But Mitchell stated (1996, p. 86), “no one was aware of any such solvent that could be used in this way; the physicists in the group couldn’t explain how he could be capable of twisting the metal so adroitly into such a neat little coil by merely touching it with a single finger.” The experimenters found that he could not bend a spoon simply by mental effort. This was tested by placing a spoon under a glass cover.
When it became known that Mitchell was investigating Geller and his spoon bending, he received phone calls from parents of children who, after seeing Geller on television shows, were also bending spoons. Mitchell began investigating these children and, like Taylor in England, found them even more convincing than Geller. Mitchell (1996, p. 87) said: “I went to a number of homes around the country, sometimes with my own spoons in my pocket, or I would select one at random from the family kitchen. Typically it was a boy under ten years of age who would lightly stroke the metal object at the narrow point of the handle while I held it between thumb and forefinger at the end of the handle. The spoon would soon slowly bend, creating two 360-degree twists in the handle, perfectly emulating what Geller demonstrated on television. no tricks, no magic potions, just innocent children (with normal children’s fingers) who had not yet learned that it could not be done.”
Mitchell noted that during the six weeks of investigations of Geller at SRI, a number of unusual things occurred: “video equipment that he had no access to would suddenly lose a pulley, which would later be found in an adjoining room. Jewelry would suddenly be missing, only to be found locked in a safe with a combination Uri could not have known” (Mitchell 1996, p. 87). In one psychokinetic experiment, Mitchell and the SRI researchers put a big ball bearing under a glass jar on a table. In Geller’s presence, Mitchell says the ball bearing “began to jiggle, then roll this way and that” (Mitchell 1996, p. 88). The movement was recorded on videotape. But when the film was shown to SRI researchers outside the group that was investigating Geller, the reaction was hostile. Mitchell stated, “They became red in the face, and some left, refusing ever to return to the lab. They accused Uri of being a fraud and the rest of us of being chumps in an elaborate charade. But their accusations flew in the face of the solid scientific work that had been done, and I believe they knew it” (Mitchell 1996, p. 88).
Modern Research into Paranormal Phenomena
In addition to isolated studies with single subjects like Geller, there is a great deal of experimental evidence for paranormal effects associated with mental intention. The experiments mostly involve micro-psychokinetic effects and remote viewing. This type of research became prominent in the middle part of the twentieth century, and has continued up to the present day. A good review can be found in the Conscious universe: the Scientific truth of Psychic Phenomena (1997), by dean Radin of the consciousness Research Laboratory at the University of nevada, Las vegas. Let us first look at the remote viewing experiments.
Remote viewing
The simplest kind of remote viewing experiment involves card guessing. The nobel-prize-winning scientist charles Richet carried out some card guessing experiments, and published a report in 1889. He hypnotized his subjects and asked them to guess what cards were sealed in opaque envelopes (Radin 1997, p. 93). Later, in the mid-twentieth century, more systematic work was carried out by dr. J. B. Rhine at duke University and dr. S. G. Soal in England. These researchers conducted careful remote viewing experiments in which “receiver” subjects were able to correctly name images of cards viewed by isolated “transmitter” subjects. The number of correct identifications exceeded what could be expected by chance. Results like this from Rhine and others prompted Professor H. J. Eysenck, chairman of the Psychology department, University of London, to say: “Unless there is a gigantic conspiracy involving some thirty University departments all over the world, and several hundred highly respected scientists in various fields, many of these originally hostile to the claims of the psychical researchers, the only conclusion the unbiased observer can come to must be that there does exist a small number of people who obtain knowledge existing either in other people’s minds, or in the outer world, by means as yet unknown to science” (Radin 1997, pp. 96–97).