Harriett Moore is a correspondent of mine who often contacts the JREF on matters of interest, usually to do with quackery. Here she relates how a specific UFO report got her attention, and she provides us with an excellent example of how such a matter can be looked into, and a rational explanation can be arrived at. Thank you, Harriett!

As I subscribe to the e-mail Fortean list compiled by Daev Walsh in Dublin, I received this report of a UFO sighting in my local town, Belfast. I received this in May 2000 and reproduce it in its entirety below. My comments on the alleged event follow. Daev can be contacted at http://www.blather.net

The Report.....

The first Irish UFO stories in months has been brought to our attention by Luis R. Gonz�lez Manso in Spain, who forwarded a report found in "UFO Roundup," Vol 5 Nr.14, 6 April 2000.

UFO HIJACKS CAR IN ULSTER: VICTIM REPORTS SIX HOURS OF "MISSING TIME"

An Ulster man claims that his car was lifted off the ground by a UFO, and he experienced six hours of "missing time" as a result. On Thursday, March 23, 2000, John H., employed at a factory in West Belfast, County Antrim, Northern Ireland, "was on my way home from work after a long and tiring shift which had lasted 24 hours. So, as you can imagine, I wanted to go home to my wife and children and sleep for a few hours." "But," John reported, "as I was on my way home, I pulled into a petrol station to fill up the tank and noticed to my right a large light in the sky.

"At first I thought maybe it was the moon. But on looking again, it didn't take on the shape of the moon. Indeed, it took on the shape of an egg. I was amazed at what I was looking at. At first I thought to myself, go and get someone to look at this thing. But, as the thought crossed my mind, something told me to get in the car and drive away from the filling station.

"Without paying for the petrol or anything I got into the car and drove away. The thing was following me. I live on the Falls Road in West Belfast, but I was driving the road that leads down to Dublin. I didn't want to go to Dublin! I wanted to go home to my wife and babies. I couldn't understand why I was driving down this road.

"While I was driving, I noticed the object again. It was starting to scare me very much indeed. So much, in fact, I started to scream. Without knowing why, I stopped the car on a hillside road that leads to a farming area northbound on the (motorway) M-3. The car, it seemed, was lifting. I felt it. But for some reason, I was not sure that it was. It was as though someone was screwing with my brain. Telling me what to think. All I can remember after this was driving on the Whiterock/Donegal Road and back to my house on the Falls Road. The funny thing about it is, on my way home from work, it takes five minutes to get to my home from the filling station. But it was 2:30 a.m. before I got home. I have about six hours of my life gone, and I can't account for it. I want to know what is going on, and I have to know it now."

The case is currently being investigated by Conor McLaughlin of the Belfast UFO Society. (Many thanks to the witness and to Conor McLaughlin for this report.)

posted to the UFO Updates Mailing List: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/updates/2000/apr/m06-001.shtml

The Investigation.....

I was intrigued about this story, as it allegedly occurred within 10 or 15 miles of where I live. So I set about finding out as much as I could about the event. I had never investigated a UFO report before. Normally I look at health fairs and alternative medicine issues. This was going to be interesting because it was a new field for me. My investigation consisted of several telephone calls and consultation with a map.

I began by contacting the local newspapers. No one that I spoke with had any recollection of such an event. Next I thought I would try the Meteorological Office, located at Aldergrove International Airport and see what the weather conditions were for that date. According to them, on Thursday evening 23rd March, there were strong winds blowing from the South East that night, with light rain and drizzle. Cloud cover was quite heavy and low.

I then telephoned Armagh Planetarium. I spoke to a most interesting gentleman there, known as JT. He asked me to send him the story, and I duly did so. JT advised me that, weather conditions permitting, three planets would have been visible in the sky that evening from 8:30 p.m., Jupiter being the brightest, Saturn and Mars rather faint. The moon rose at 11:30 pm that night and was in the south-east. JT is interested in such stories, and keeps the reports on file. We discovered a mutual acquaintance — one Alan Sewell of the Irish UFO society. JT thought Alan would have known about the story and would have been in contact with him. He did not know of any Belfast UFO correspondent named Conor McLaughlin.

Next, I got some local maps and looked at the geographical layout of the area, roads and locations mentioned by "John H," noting the times and orientation of the moon, the weather and any other possible sources of bright lights. While looking at the map I made the following observations.

West Belfast is located on hills to the west and north; therefore the main view is to the south and to the east. Belfast Harbour Airport is only a few miles away, to the east, and planes approaching the harbour must do so from the north-east over the Belfast Lough or from the south. Both directions are clearly visible from West Belfast.

There are a number of structures visible from West Belfast which have warning lights; i.e. apartment blocks, power stations, and TV/Radio transmitter masts.

Then I considered John's story in the light of these available facts.

John H is rather shy about his name, and indeed details of the garage where this event allegedly occurred are rather scant. Such coyness raises my suspicions a little. Furthermore, the "Belfast UFO Correspondent, Conor McLaughlin" is an elusive beast. There are several in the telephone directory, and I tried them all. He was not one of those.

Confusion is evident in the telling of the story. Although John claimed that he found himself traveling towards Dublin, he never mentioned the Westlink or the M1 — the main arterial route south from Belfast. He also claimed to have stopped on a hillside road off the M3. The M3 is about 2 miles long and is entirely concentrated within the city boundaries; not only that, but there isn't a farm, an animal or a country road anywhere near it, unless you count the pigeons [aviculture as opposed to agriculture, I suppose].

Although the header of the article stated that John was hijacked by a UFO, my reading of the story indicated he made a number of conscious choices, the initial one being a decision to leave the garage without paying for his fuel. John never claimed the UFO came near his vehicle. According to his story it is always in the sky, or following him. Since I had established it was a wet cloudy night between the hours of 8:30 p.m. and 2.30 a.m., there would have been plenty of vehicles and people about who would notice a low flying egg-shaped alien. It's a national pastime in Ulster — taking notice of what other people say/think/do.

Since John was, by his own admission, six hours late coming home, did his wife report him missing, or did he telephone her to say he would be late? Unfortunately, the story doesn't tell us. Neither do we know if John is on any medication or if John takes alcoholic beverages. As John claimed to have done a 24-hour shift he must have been exhausted when leaving the factory. Very tired people have been known to hallucinate, and a 24-hour shift seems excessive [unless you are a junior doctor!]. The 24-hour shift raises the interesting question of whether John knew in advance he would be working such hours. If he did, perhaps he should have taken a taxi home, rather than endangering lives by driving.

As Belfast Harbour Airport is only a few miles away from West Belfast, and quite close to the M3, landing aircraft approaching with headlights on, seen through cloud cover can be rather bizarre. The bright moving patch of light, no sound and a lack of visual perspective contribute to the overall "eerie" effect.

In conclusion, I believe the story is a misrepresentation of actual events. It is unlikely John saw celestial bodies such as the Moon, Mars, or a UFO because of the low cloud cover and light rain. Having considered other possibilities such as lights on transmitter masts, I think it is more likely John saw aircraft coming in to land at the Harbour Airport; particularly when he had parked; and the "lifting" sensation he reported in my opinion was caused by two things — the wind rocking the vehicle, and tiredness as he drifted in and out of sleep.

It was an entertaining and educational exercise to look at this UFO claim, and I hope that I approached the issue with an open mind. However, I would appreciate other comments and I can be reached by e-mail at harriett@theconnexion.co.uk.

Well done, Harriett! A little basic Miss Marples work here, no running about with scientific instruments and/or assistants, and a far more likely scenario develops. But, I must say, I'm sure that "John H." still believes his own story, and always will....

My Danish friend Mogens Winther has contributed to us an item on "crop circles," that strange obsession that seems to return every year all over the world. Devotees swear that it's UFOs creating these patterns in crop fields, and though we in the USA use the term "crop circles," in the UK they're "corn circles," because there "corn" refers to any grain crop, rather than to what they call, "maize."

My first Hungarian Prize was given, in 1992, to students in that country who created their Hungary's first-ever crop circle. It was celebrated by all the believers, until debunked by the boys themselves. Now Mogens has an active group in Denmark. But read my condensation of his description:

You maybe saw the images taken by my astronomy class recently [shown here]. They did this themselves — during their holidays — working during extreme cold for nearly three nights. It's a pleasure working with such a group of bright young boys and girls. At the start of this school year we were asked by Danish TV2 to make a crop circle. At that time we were doing a project about "Life in the Universe" — and so we accepted.

Our intention was to copy a "mysterious" Danish crop circle which had appeared in the city of Borum in August of 2000. According to "experts" this circle was mathematically so complicated, that it could never have been created by humans. However, it took my students merely a few minutes to figure out how to construct it.

Danish TV2 arrived after school hours, and in 90 minutes it was finished, the same size as the "mysterious" one.. To the right you have the "genuine circle" and to the left you have our circle.

So I may conclude that my students do have an extraterrestrial intelligence, but still, so far as I can see, they do not have green skin and are of normal human size! We did our circle (my neighbor, the local farmer had given his permission) a few meters from a highly trafficked highway. Thousands were slowing down in order to watch the students at work. But people forget very fast, and two weeks later some "experts" rediscovered our circle and enthusiastically phoned the newspaper (who had already photographed it from a plane) and the radio stations.

In the end, it was shown on a children's TV program how it had been done, after all farmers had harvested their fields. This was a lot of fun, however what surprised my students most were the nearly six-meter stack of letters that followed from people all over the country expressing their anger! One even asked who had given me, as a teacher, the permission to do this kind of lesson with an astronomy class. But yes, they would do it again, and they have, as a joke, even started their own crop circle company — Dansk Korncirkel Central, "offering companies landscape commercials out of this World."

Please notice the mysterious thunderbolt-like UFO! My students had a lot of fun when they faked this image. Nobody actually saw this UFO, but remember, human vision only has a limited wavelength span!

On August 22, 2001, Radio DR-Syd suddenly interrupted their news program and connected directly with their field reporter standing at this presumed UFO landing site close to Sønderborg. Previous to this on-location radio broadcast, several crop circle enthusiasts had phoned TV, radio and the newspapers. As we however did reveal during this radio transmission, this crop circle was not of extraterrestrial origin. This circle was simply constructed as an experiment by astronomy students at Amtsgymnasiet in Sonderborg, following a request from the childrens program called "Bugs Bunny's Sunday Club," on National TV2.

Why this particular pattern? We chose this circle design, because it appeared once before in our country close to the city Aarhus in August 2000. Crop circles were found in 1997 close to Randers, and 1996, we had a crop circle at Lolland, as well as one close to the old 1864 Battle Field at øl, near Sønderborg. At first look, these patterns appear most convincing. But read on....

Technical advice on how to do this. We performed experiments on how to construct such a circle. This is what you need:

1. wooden piece of board, and
2. two pieces of rope.

Here's how: First of all, take your two pieces of rope, and connect each of them to an end of your piece of board. Holding a rope in each hand, place one foot in the center of the board and push down on the vegetation. Advance, and do it again. Just walk, it is SO EASY! The crop is not cut in any way, but a word of caution: if you do these experiments, remember to ask the field-owner for permission! Do not make these crop circles for fun, because this is a costly, illegal destruction of a farmers property.

Both the Danish crop circle at Dybbøl and the 1997 Randers crop circle followed shortly after TV transmissions on this topic, 1996: Discovery, 1997: Danish DR TV1 Transmission of a National Geographic Crop Circle Program. This was pointed out during a hot three-day both pro and con discussion in the local newspaper Jydske Vestkysten. But still a number of magazines tried to declare this circle as being genuine. Following an angry and quite interesting phone call from a UFO-believer, it appeared to me that some people desperately wanted this Dybbøl crop circle to be genuine.

Tony Blews had similar experiences, while constructing four fake crop circles together with his friends. Tony writes: "In my opinion the self-proclaimed experts and book writers desperately want us to believe that it's something more than a hoax." And, according to some New Age groups these circles are even due to an awesome "tachyonic energy,"an undefined phenomena by which you might be able to cure yourself from a lot of dreadful diseases like cancer.....

Reader Michael "Athanasius" Jonker submits this essay for your consideration. I have always been concerned with semiotics — the study of signs and symbols as communication — and how so many persons fail to see how misleading certain subtle methods can be in deceiving them. As a magician, I am more than ordinarily aware of these factors.

In science, as well as in the media and on a theater stage, semiotics enters our experience. Mr. Jonker addresses many aspects of this matter. (I have edited out his many inserted references to the bibliography that is attached. The essay was almost unreadable, having a reference for almost every statement. Yes, this is standard procedure for scientific papers, which seem to gain stature from the number of such inserts and the length of the bibliography — but for my readers, I have made the reading much easier by this editing, for which I hope I will be forgiven by the author. I have also changed his punctuation and spelling to suit American usage.)

The Semiotics of Scientific Language in the Classroom and in the Community

Introduction

The abstract nature of science is an incredibly difficult concept to completely understand. It has long been recognized in the positivist philosophy that the universal truth exists separate from our biased perception of it. In attempting to understand this truth, mankind must endeavor to make use of two tools — his limited senses and the wealth of information which already exists in his wider society.

Science is, by nature, self-progressive. Theories are formed on the basis of observation and change as the data increases. In a purist sense, science struggles to reach the unattainable goal of knowing the universal truth. It is unattainable because human beings are limited by those tools — their senses have boundaries, and the great pool of accumulated data relies on an appreciation of language to interpret it. It is on this latter point that this paper will focus.

Communication relies on a medium that conveys the same meaning to the receiver as that which is transmitted by the sender. To share scientific knowledge within a group strict rules of language must be used. Any deviation from this language can alter the perception of a scientific event within that group, and because science is (in practice) the subjective interpretation of natural data, there can evolve a discrepancy between the real truth and the perceived truth.

As science teachers, we must strive to educate students in a manner which ensures a sound understanding of the importance of language, how it is manipulated to achieve a bias, and how this is important in today's modern community.

Symbols and Signs

Human beings are social creatures. With their innate curiousity and adaptable intelligence, humankind can explore the natural environment and create an understanding of natural phenomena in an objectivist sense. Social behaviour is influenced by the ability to communicate between individuals.

Language is a system of rules which is common to individuals within a community. One field of study in linguistics explores the concept that there exists an "assumption that all social practices can be understood as meanings, as signification . . . between subjects." Therefore what was known within a group can be remembered and examined in relation with what is presently known within that same group now. This is why science is possible. Without it mankind would forever be trapped in a single generation of discovery.

Semiotics is the study of signs and symbols in communication. As stated in Elements of Semiology, by R. Barthe, "semiology aims to take in any system of signs, whatever their substance and limits." And it is the limits that are of concern. Be it a non-verbal gesture or a verbal oratory, semiotics lends evidence to indicate that any single statement always conveys two messages, which can lead to confusion over the intended meaning.

Using verbal literacy as an example, a single word is attributed a single meaning when placed into the context of a sentence. For instance, on its own the verb to "rape" means literally "to seize or take," from its Latin derivative "rapere, to seize." From its Romantic roots such words as "rapier" (fast sword), "rapid" (rapidus, seize quickly) and "rapt" (raptus, carried away) have been derived. In the context of a sentence, the definition can be seen: "The man was raped of his belongings."

The term for an absolute meaning of a word or statement is "denotation." The denotation of a term is usually strictly related to its definition. As words are used in conjunction with events, phenomena and objects, the denotated meaning can vary depending on the context. This varied meaning is called "connotation," and carries an implied definition rather than a defined one. Often this implication is emotional. Therefore using the example "rape," while the denotation means "to take forcefully," its connotation carries a sense of sexual power and violence.

To go further, the denotation of a term will change with the influence of its connotation. While the Latin word "rapere" means "to seize," after many generations of being used in reference to the forcing of an individual into unconsentual sexual intercourse, the definition evolved. While the true denotation of "rape" today can mean "to force an individual into unconsentual sex," it is often used in conjunction with the environment, a sub-class of society, or in any form of personal violation. Hence the connotation has again changed, with the added insinuation of a powerful group "seizing" from a less powerful group.

Connotations often imply emotion and imagery, while denotations transmit a defined meaning.

Semiotics in Science

Language conveys information. This is incredibly important in science, for the information cannot be left open to creative interpretation by the receiver. What is observed must be recorded so that the receiver of the data can observe it "by proxy" (away from the event observed) without discrepancy.

As stated by Ferdinand de Saussure, reality is in effect an interpretation:

Structuralists believe that the underlying structures which organize units and rules into meaningful systems are generated by the human mind itself, and not by sense perception. As such, the mind is itself a structuring mechanism which looks through units and files them according to rules. This is important, because it means that, for structuralists, the order that we perceive in the world is not inherent in the world, but is a product of our minds. It's not that there is no "reality out there," beyond human perception, but rather that there is too much "reality" (too many units of too many kinds) to be perceived coherently without some kind of "grammar" or system to organize and limit them.

Therefore when interpreting language that conveys scientific information, the denotated meaning is more relative than the connoted one.

To express and communicate our understanding of certain observations we rely on common language. When terms are unique to a field, they are called "jargon." Science is rich with words that apply chiefly to an event, object or phenomena. However, jargon has two problems. Firstly, it is subject to the same evolution of meaning as most forms of communication. As it relies on a context it is liable to adopt connotation as time goes on. The word "spastic" means "ineffective muscle control resulting from spasms or convulsions," hence the denotation of effective paralysis, as is evident in sufferers of cerebral palsy. The connotation suggests incompetence, clumsiness and stupidity.

To refer to "the spastic child" in scientific language refers to a child suffering from muscular spasms. However, if left open to creative interpretation, the receiver could understand that the child is mentally incompetent, something that is not denoted in the statement at all.

The second problem with jargon is its initial mysticism to individuals who do not have the means to interpret it. In these cases, the connotation is relied upon more than the denotation. For example, "radiation" is a natural phenomena that is well understood by people who study its properties. Jargon relating to radiation carries a negative bias due to the publicized dangers of this phenomena. Therefore when the term "alpha particle" is heard in association with radiation, the connotation is carried that this is something to be wary of, regardless of whether or not the receiver understands the nature of the term.

While these examples have obvious connotations, some words are ambiguous. The word "expert" is often confusing in meaning. Its connotation refers to an individual who has dominating knowledge of a subject. In strict definition, it refers to a person who possesses extensive skill or knowledge in a particular field. However, the denotation does not clarify what the nature of "extensive" is. It does not make comparison of levels of expertise, only that the individual must have more than an average person's knowledge or skill in that field. Therefore, information transmitted by an expert which is relevant to their field has the connotation of being accurate. In reality this may not be the case.

In summary, language in science must endeavor to represent the data in a fashion that leaves little room for argument of meaning. Words that have ambiguous connotations do not do justice to this process.

The Media and Language

Media bodies, as corporate entities, aim to sell their product to as large an audience as possible. For any one consumer to associate with their product it must be considered relevant to the consumer's needs. The more consumers who find any one product relevant, the larger the profit for the company. This relevance is called "newsworthiness." Information, being the product, must be associated with something relevant to the consumer. It stands to reason, therefore, that information is projected in a manner which makes it newsworthy to as many people as possible. This is called "sensationalisation," the process whereby information is projected in a manner which makes it more newsworthy to more people.

Connotation is utilized heavily in this process. Language that is ambiguous in transmission can be interpreted differently by different receivers. Hence one word can have one denotated meaning, and several connoted meanings. Emotion is an effective tool in manipulating an audience into associating with a piece of information. If a consumer feels, for example, anger towards a piece of information, they will see it as newsworthy, regardless of its true relevance. Again words with ambiguous connotations are useful in this process.

Scientific issues are becoming more prominent in society. Health, technology, leisure, medicine, industry . . . most members of any society have an association, either directly or indirectly, with one these fields. When information concerning these areas is conveyed through a media body, it is projected in a way that makes it seem more emotional, more sensational, in an effort to make it more newsworthy.

Language is used in a fashion that biases the information to elicit an emotion or a sense of relevance. For example, the phrase "bacteria invade" lends a sense of fear, for while the word "invade" carries the denotation of "intrusive immigration," it has the connotations of helplessness, aggression and determination.

As Teachers . . .

It would be foolish to expect media bodies to portray information in a fashion that does not bias it. Even if it were a commercially viable choice, language naturally carries connotations that would make it hard for the most determined scientist to transmit information of a purely denotative fashion. Therefore potential receivers of this information should be educated to critically interpret information. Science students should be made familiar with jargon, the principles of denotation and the skill of transcribing information in a manner that leaves little room for ambiguity.

Johanna Scott, editor of Science and Language Links, explains that science and language are reliant on each other to exist. Science must be interpreted through a "pane of glass" that is language, while language is learned using scientific observation and exploration. To make this "pane of glass" as translucent as possible is one goal for science teachers. Students must be encouraged to construct a reality from their observations, and then share in their observations through effective communication. Questions and answers of a specific rather than a general nature should be offered. This is not to say that the questions should be closed — indeed the language used should convey meaning which reflects on a wide range of possibilities. However in science, the language must be accurate in denotation.

Open discussions, narratives, creative writing tasks, evaluation of media stories, verbal and written explanations of experiments will all contribute to an appreciation of communication. In the most beneficial cases, an integration of language KLA's (Key Learning Areas) and science KLA's would aid an understanding of the importance of language in science.

Conclusion

As the world advances, information is slowly becoming a valuable commodity. Students must be taught how to interpret information in a fashion that enables them to explore the truth behind it, while being able to transmit information in a way that conveys a meaning that is unambiguous. They must remain aware that information can be manipulated and they, as consumers, have the right to critically analyze whatever they receive.

Biography

Coward, R., Ellis, J., (1977), Language and Materialism — Developments in Semiology and the Theory of the Subject, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London

Dixon, B., (1973), What is Science for?, Penguin Books, Middlesex, England

Fiske, J., (1990), Introduction to Communication Studies 2nd Ed., Routledge, New York

Hanks, P. (Ed)., (1979), Collins English Dictionary, William Collins & Sons, Sydney

Hartley, J., (1982), Understanding News — Selection and Construction, in QUT Faculty of Arts MJB140 subject course booklet, QUT, Brisbane

Jesperson, O., (1982), Growth and Structure of the English Language, Oxford, Mass.

Lutz, W., (1996), The New Doublespeak: Why no one knows what anyone's saying anymore, Harper Collins, New York

Nash, W., (1993), Jargon: Its Uses and Abuses, Oxford, Mass.

Newton-Smith, W.H., 1981, The Rationality of Science, Routledfge, London

Scott, J., (Ed)., (1992), Science and Language Links, Australian Reading Association, Carlton, Victoria

Ward, I., 1995, Ownership and Control: Media Mates and Moguls, Macmillan, Melbourne

Ferdinand de Saussure, http://www.colorado.edu/English/ENGL2012Klages/saussure.html, — Commentary on Semiotics

I've often had philosophical differences with the American Civil Liberties Union, though they were very helpful to me years ago when I came up against some problems in New Jersey. Now they're threatening a federal lawsuit against Mayor Carolyn Risher of Inglis, a small Florida town about 50 km west of Ocala, 1400 citizens, for her proclamation which bans Old Splitfoot, Beelzebub, The Evil One, Satan, or whatever title you assign to The Devil, from setting even one cloven hoof within their town limits. No, I'm not kidding.... My concern here is that the ACLU may be giving too much attention to very silly people, and encouraging their madness.

The ACLU has actually sent a formal letter to Risher threatening to file a federal lawsuit unless she removes "anti-Satan proclamations" from four posts that sit at the town's entrances. (I wonder if Inglis also has a moat with resident serpents, surrounding the hamlet?) The group also wants the town commission to repeal the edict and demands that she reimburse the town for any costs of printing a retraction. (Probably only four copies will be needed.) The mayor, upon advice from the Inglis town attorney, we're told, declined to comment to the media.

Risher issued the proclamation on Hallowe'en night, typed on town stationery, signed by her and by Town Clerk Sally McCrainie, and topped with the Inglis town seal. Devout Christian Risher put a copy on her office wall and then placed others at the town entrances. An ACLU attorney said in their letter that they are acting on behalf of Polly Bowser, an Inglis resident, who became outraged when she saw a copy of the proclamation on the door to the community center. Bowser at first started a petition to impeach Risher but then backed off when she and her family began suffering for it. Should Bowser decline further involvement, the ACLU still intends to go ahead with their suit.

In my opinion, perhaps some critical thinking in Inglis-area schools might be called for here. It's too late for the mayor, I'm afraid. And this person was elected mayor? How are decisions made? By divine inspiration, or prompting by angels? I'm reminded of a quote I heard long ago: "If you don't preach religion in my school, I won't think in your church."

A chap named Bob Murphy — at BobMurphy.net — has given us permission to use this excerpt from an article he featured there recently about speaking-with-dead-folks operator John Edward.

Oh my, would someone please make it stop? Apparently People magazine has named John Edward one of the twenty-five most intriguing people of the year. (I'm still waiting for my nomination. Those jokers at Time just play politics.) For those of you not incarcerated in a rest home, let me explain: John Edward is the psychic host of Crossing Over, a show where he communicates with the dead friends or relatives of his studio audience. Now what I do best is expose frauds, so let's take just a moment to go over some of his ploys.

First, you've got to keep in mind that he can't possibly be communicating with dead people. Okay? So there has to be a trick to it. Now, if you watch the show, you'll see that it isn't a big con, with actors and actresses; it's just that the studio audience is a bunch of morons. (This is why democracy gives me the heebie jeebies.)

The first thing our charlatan does is pick a root for some common names. Once he said, "I'm sensing a 'P' connection . . . Is there a Peter, Patrick or Patricia involved in some way?" Just today, he started a s�ance with, "I'm getting an 'S-A' connection . . . Sam or Sally?" Now, since he says this in front of a full studio, no kidding some gullible schmuck is going to yell out, "Yeah, I've got a dead Uncle Pete!"

The second thing you should notice (if you lose a bet, say, and have to watch the show) is that a lot of times he's simply wrong. He'll have a quick "flash" of intuition, then backpedal to something more generic when it doesn't work. In today's episode, he was in the middle of talking to some couple's dead relatives, then suddenly blurted out, "Who died in the car crash?" The couple didn't know. Then he quickly said, "Yes, it's not a car crash but an impact on the head . . . Was someone hit on the head in some way?" And the astonished lady responded that that's how her father had died. So you see, he can make incredibly precise guesses without penalty; if he's right, he's a genius, and if he's wrong, well, what do you expect? It's tough talking to dead people.

Another of this guy's tricks is to start with something very precise and then broaden it until he catches something. So today, he was talking to three people. He started with, "I'm sensing that someone is upset over the family business [pause] A dispute, someone feeling they weren't treated fairly in some manner?" One of the women piped in, "Well yes, that would be our aunts. Many of us felt they didn't leave their money the way they should have." Don't you see? This had nothing to do with a family business. And it didn't involve a single person feeling cheated, but a group. But wow, he was pretty close anyway, what with talking to a group of strangers. How intriguing this John Edward is! (As a postscript, after the lady mentioned the disputed wills, Johnny knowingly said, "And this was a planned thing, wasn't it?" No kidding, John. We're talking about wills here.)

Finally, keep in mind that the people who jump in are the ones who want to believe. For example, after he said he was sensing a Sam or Sally, the lady in question shook her head. But then another woman in that same row volunteered, "My father was named Sam!" Without missing a beat, our wonderboy said, "This isn't unusual. Did the two of you come together?" Of course they did; that's why they were sitting together! But of course, the studio audience took away from this the fact that he "knew" about this other lady's dad, not that he had completely missed when he guessed the lady he was talking to had a Sam or Sally in her family. All right, I'm done wasting my time with this fraud. I'll speak of him again only when he runs for office.

The opinions and statements are Mr. Murphy's. But why can't other media people see these things, and do similar analyses? Could it be that they don't want to spoil a perfectly good story with facts and an intelligent investigation?

I'm off to test our Russian little-girl "psychic" in NYC. A report next week. I've already written most of it.....