Theos-Talk Archives (January 1998 Message tt00386)

Sophia TenBroeck wrote:

> Geller was also accused in this manner.  Many of Uri's phenomenon were
> fact and paranormal,

 Name one. Every so-called "scientific test" he was put to turned out to
have major flaws; mostly having to do with allowing his assistant to have
access to the information Uri was supposed to divine and ample opportunity
to communicate this information to Uri. Every time the equipment Uri used
was specifically designed to prevent a specific method from being used, he
was unable to perform his tricks (for example, his famous "detect which
container has the nuts and bolts" never works when non-magnetic nuts and
bolts are used, or, if he is not allowed to wear his magnetic ring, the
table is so sturdy that he can't bump into it and see how the containers
shake.

> I personally have witnessed some of Sathya Sai Baba's phenomena, and
> they were not faked, as far as an observer could judge, and I went there
> critically.

    But did you know what to look for? Can you look at, for example, a David
Copperfield TV special, and figure out exactly how each effect is done just
by looking (I can figure out only about 80% of them, myself, and I HAVE been
trained).

>  But this is not to say that : a) I became a follower; b)
> that skeptics--we have a very strong group right here in Bangalore,
> working to detract from him--have not been trying to make him out a
> fake, and that even faked video's could have been made.

    Why are the skeptics trying to detract from him? What is the motivation
to fake a video? What is the mindset of the skeptics? The questions are easy
to answer, as long as you ignore the 1st Principle of the Secret Doctrine;
much harder if you don't.

    BTW, the reason I feel this discussion is important is because I see far
too many people ignoring the importance of learning discrimination, far too
few people ignoring the first limb of Theosohpy, STUDY.

    Bart Lidofsky