A rawtha angry letter by Rupert Sheldrake will appear in the next issue of Skeptic, in response to Chris French's ("reverential") interview of James Randi in the summer issue.
The letter has its points -- for example, when it accuses Randi of occasional grumpiness (It's true! He can be grumpy!) -- but the bulk of the thing is an attack upon Randi's character and qualifications.
Mostly, Sheldrake seems discomfited by a document passed out by Randi, Andrew Mayne, and Michael Shermer at The Amaz!ng Meeting 3, entitled "Communicating Skepticism To The Public." We have no copies of this document. Perhaps you can help us.Does the document say, as Sheldrake claims, that it's "easy" to become a media skeptic? And what about this:
Becoming an expert is a pretty simple procedure; tell people you're an expert. After you do that, all you have to do is maintain appearances and not give them a reason to believe you're not.
Did Randi really write that? If so, nobody at the JREF, and nobody we've been able contact, has any recollection of it. And if Randi did write these words, in what context did they appear? We'd really like to know. If you were at TAM3 and still have a copy of the document, please tell us.
(Incidentally, the idea in quotes has merit, whether it's a Randi quote or not. It is extremely easy to become an "expert" in telepathy, telekinesis, dowsing, channeling, prophecy, scrying, cursing, spell-casting, acupuncture, and homeopathy. In those fields, the master and the novice are on precisely equal footing. Fantasy, like punk rock, is democratic that way.)