In a forthcoming issue of Skeptical Inquirer (www.csicop.org/si/) you'll have the pleasure of reading an account titled "Bridging the Chasm between Two Cultures," by Karla McLaren of California. It will relate her ongoing conversion from full, unquestioning, New Age aficionado to evolving rationalist, an interesting process to follow. SI editor Ken Frasier has graciously allowed me to tease you with this excerpt:

To be fair, a skeptical movement did arise during my early teens, but it unfortunately created a deep cultural rift that continues to this day. In the seventies, Uri Geller (the spoon bending man) became popular. My first real contact with someone in the skeptical culture was watching James Randi on television, just tearing Geller to bits. I didn't understand what was happening. Uri Geller appeared on the Mike Douglas show and on the Merv Griffin show, and you could clearly see him perform his paranormal feats right there on television. Surely Mike and Merv wouldn't be involved in lying to the public? I really didn't understand what Mr. Randi's problem was with Geller, and my friends and I thought Randi was very vitriolic. I didn't learn about critical thinking from Randi — what I learned was that some people just had it in for healers and people with paranormal gifts. I know he would not like to hear this, but it's still true: James Randi's behavior and demeanor were so culturally insensitive that he actually created a gigantic backlash against skepticism, and a gigantic surge toward the new age that still rages unabated.

I certainly understand and support James Randi's anger, frustration, and even vitriol now — especially after having lived through the new age for so many decades — but all I could see then was a very sarcastic man who seemed to take Geller personally. Now, after having been a regular visitor to Mr. Randi's web site, I can see him as a deeply caring man who works tirelessly for an important cause. I also see that he is very concerned about some of the unbalanced new agers who write to him in barely legible missives. I empathize with Mr. Randi, because people like that write to me, too (though I take on the role of hero in their fevered fantasy lives, while Randi is treated as a villain). Now that I can see him as an individual and understand his culture, I can see James Randi as the excellent man he is — but it took me a while. Had Mr. Randi understood the new age culture back when Uri Geller was becoming popular, he could have easily spoken in a way that might have been heard — or at least in a way that wouldn't have caused such a violent backlash. Or perhaps I'm being too idealistic. . . .

I've been studying the conflict between the skeptical community and the metaphysical/new age community for a few decades now, and I think I've finally discovered the central issue that makes communication so difficult. It is not merely, as many surmise, a conflict between fact-based viewpoints and faith-based viewpoints. Nor is it simply a conflict between rationale and credulity. No, it's a full-on clash of cultures that makes real communication improbable at best.

I know this firsthand, because as a former member of the new age culture, I struggled for years to decipher the language, the rules, the attitudes, and the expectations of the skeptical culture. Yet for a great while, all I could hear from the skeptical culture was noise — and confusing noise at that.

I hear you, Karla, and accept your very pertinent comments. Maybe it's in my DNA, or just a bit of an evolutionary disparity, but I'm often driven — by my extensive and constant exposure to nonsense — to express myself with less-than-appropriate gentility. I'm aware of that failing, but I despair of any immediate reform of my behavior. Warts and all, it's me. Despite my manners, I seem to get some things done, and I'll have to take comfort in that. Thanks for your observations.

Folks, Karla's piece in SI will be well worth watching for. She writes well and strongly, and I am listening to her. I suspect we would have many arguments on terminology and semantics, and I cannot guarantee that I'd agree with much of what she's already published, but basically she appears to be a good person — and that's a good 80% of the requirement, right there. Now, if only she were a rich widow with an attraction to bearded old codgers...

Two weeks ago I appeared at Oswego State University New York (SUNY) for a lecture, and was very impressed with Miss Erin Halligan, a student there who had asked me to participate in an interesting test of students' belief structure. You'll see a complete report of that episode here on our web-page, anon. We had an overflow audience for my lecture, SRO, and a splendid reaction from the students. I received this e-mail note the next day from a student:

I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed your lecture. We had to go see a speaker for a class assignment and I just happened to go to yours. I am very glad I did. You were entertaining, funny, and most important, very informative. Overall it was a 10. Thanks for coming to our small college. It was much appreciated by all who attended. Sincerely, Evan LaMendola.

Well, I can tell you that you'll be hearing about Erin. Her experiment was well-designed and well-conducted, and she'll be sending us the final results very soon. You'll see them here...

I recently received a strident commentary from a Whitney Leigh Harris, who tried to straighten out my ignorance about what psychics are "really" all about. When I signified that with her permission, I'd publish her comments, she replied:

I was hoping you would be willing to share my views on your site. Now, readers can decide for themselves by understanding another viewpoint. Now, I'll be curious to see if you use the entire thing.

I think that your viewpoint will be quite evident, Ms. Harris. I replied:

Whitney: of course I'll use the entire piece. I don't edit or censor material to suit my purposes, ever. I'm publishing your view so that my readers will be better able to understand the "escape" clauses and tendency toward vagueness that the "true believers" favor. It will appear next week.

So, here it is, with my comments inserted:

Hello Mr. Randi. I just came across your website and the information regarding the 1 million dollar psychic challenge and I'm puzzled at your obvious lack of knowledge about psychics and why this contest will never prove anything.

Comment by Randi: first, it's not a contest. It's simply an award. Second, I agree that it will never prove anything to those who cannot accept evidence. She continues:

First of all, TRUE psychics do not make specific, detailed predictions (or if they do, it is very rare and it is usually about trends more than specific details).

Agreed. Trends are fuzzy and obvious; facts are not. Thus, trends are far to be preferred so that one can never be wrong. Clever... What follows by Whitney implies that she has profound knowledge of the "true" nature of psychics and psychic matters that have so far escaped me. Where she obtained this arcane information, I cannot say, nor will she. For clarity, I have changed the strange punctuation in the original...

True psychics can tune in to the energy field of an individual or group and understand areas of challenge, which can relate to health or emotional states. Everyone has psychic abilities to a degree, but truly gifted psychics are born with abilities that are intended to help others grow and learn, and NOT to entertain with silly parlor tricks. A true psychic holds a high and loving intention to help others for their highest good and greatest happiness. An example might be if a young woman is in an abusive relationship and she seeks assistance from a psychic. A good psychic would help her pinpoint her deepest fears which prevent her from leaving the relationship. The psychic would help her see the bigger picture of her life and inspire her based on the goodness and promise they see in her. A good psychic would not make any predictions even if they could "see" her future, because she must take control over her own life and not become dependent upon a psychic when making choices. A good psychic would encourage her to listen to the desires of her heart, which is often difficult to hear when fear is up. The psychic would help her learn to embrace her passions and gifts. And when the reading is complete, the psychic has helped the woman gain insight and a fresh perspective into herself and her situation and she can walk away more confident in herself, her own wisdom, and her power. So, THAT is what a healthy psychic reading looks like. Somehow, I don't see where predicting lottery numbers fits into the more important aspects of one's life! So, do you see why "predictions" truly are not what good psychics do?

Damn! That's good! Bottom line here: psychics can't really do anything but flounder around and make lucky guesses, along with nice soothing noises. Just what I suspected. But Sylvia Browne, surely a "good psychic" in Whitney's book, makes predictions all the time, though they're wrong. She continues:

The other aspect of all of this is the fact that a true psychic believes in themselves and in their guidance so deeply, they have no desire or need to prove this to anyone. They would ask themselves, what is the "intention" here? If the intention was to rake in the 1 million dollars, than they should not be practicing psychism because their goal has become about money, so it really makes no sense to me.

Whoa! As I've suggested before, why doesn't one of these psychics step forward, win the million with a quick demo, nobly donate the money to starving kids or AIDS research, and make a fool of me and set the JREF back a million? Surely that would promote the "real" psychics out there, and warm Whitney's heart? More:

In other words, most good psychics who are out there helping people are gaining fulfillment with their work and have no desire to enter contests run by skeptics. I don't know what type of test you are using for this challenge, but if it is about specific numbers or objects, or how someone appears, or whatever, I can confidently say that no one would win because that is not what psychism is about. It is not about being a fly on the wall! If someone is struggling with something in their life, the psychic will see whatever is most needed in order to assist that person, and in most cases, winning the lottery is not going to help them solve the deepest issues of their life, which is why psychics cannot see these material things for anyone!

I gotta ask: Whitney, if that's what "psychism" is all about, then why do thousands of "psychics" out there make specific claims, coming up with exact numbers, and giving dates? I guess they don't have your deep insight into how to avoid actually doing or saying something other than just noodling around. She continues:

Sir, you simply don't understand this work at all. Yes, there are some scam artists out their [sic] feeding on the vulnerability of people when they are weak and scared. And those people are doing something very different. They are not using psychic abilities, but their craftiness and sales skills, and they won't be in business for long.

Really? You mean like Sylvia Browne, in business now for 30 years, George Anderson, in his 40th year of success, and James Van Praagh, who has been simpering at his victims for more than 20 years now...? I'd say that's "long"...

I do hope you find peace with all of this somehow. You clearly hold a lot of anger about people who have this gift. But there are many psychics out there working selflessly every day who are not seeking fame and fortune (in fact, many donate their time), and are simply doing what they love while quietly helping others improve their lives. And, ya know, those people will never join in on games like this, and I say, good for them!

There's the generous pity that I find dripped on me by the self-righteous. Browne also told Larry King how sorry she felt for me, in my ignorance and obduracy. How comforting, that I'm blessed in spite of my faults. Whitney, I found "peace" a long time ago, and it's not anger, but disdain, that I hold for the scammers. Count on it, the "selfless" ones out there who give it all away suddenly get very interested in money, as soon as they're proficient enough at the scam. I've seen them go to "the dark side" — as opposed to "the fuzzy side" — very fast, when that door has opened!

Whitney, thanks for the lesson in naivety and obscurantism.

We've been saturated with the current/latest Michael Jackson scandal, to the point of distraction. On a day when several little kids in Turkey had their limbs blown off in a terrorist attack, the first item on the NBC-TV "Today" show was Jackson's arrest. Somehow, I see an innocent, mutilated, kid as a more serious subject than one whose parents willingly put him within reach of a "star" whose reputation might raise some doubts about his dependability. Another news item, slavishly following the firm rule that any item which can include two celebrities is better that a one-celebrity item, told us that Jackson's "friend," Uri Geller, described the singer as "extremely gullible and very naïve." Gee, Uri, I wonder if that's why he believes you have mysterious occult powers...?

Geller has eagerly jumped aboard the rickety publicity bandwagon by appearing in interviews in which he tells us of how he warned The Gloved One of impending disaster, and also boasted that it was he who actually introduced him to Martin Bashir, the interviewer who did the Jackson TV documentary that may have really brought the whole mess down on Jackson. Perhaps it's appropriate that Uri and Michael are such good buddies...

But what ever happened to David Blaine, who Geller was courting so heavily not long ago? Has that camaraderie faded...? Or is Jackson merely "hotter" as a friend, right now?

On another angle here, we're told that Jackson's child accuser revealed all this story to a "therapist." I have to wonder whether that therapist is a "recovered memory" artist, a member of that elite who can enable anyone to remember anything — with great clarity — whether it happened, or not. I have to ask whether there are tapes of the "therapy" session available...

Hey! Now we have yet another opportunity to see whether Sylvia Browne really has any powers! Since it now seems pretty evident that she will never meet her promise to be tested by the JREF, this is happy news indeed. Last week this stunning Campbell, California-based psychic told a Belmont man that his missing wife is still alive and has joined a cult. The victim of the guess was Bruce MacDuckston, who appeared on the "Montel" show to get information about his 52-year-old wife, Nancy, a preschool teacher who disappeared on August 11th. While Bruce isn't the first person who's lost someone under mysterious circumstances and then sought a psychic's help on television, he has provided us with a great test case to watch and evaluate.

Those who have appeared on such shows, as well as experts, have mixed thoughts on whether these programs actually help investigations, what families get out of the experience, and whether TV psychics are actually out to exploit people's desperation in exchange for entertainment value and publicity. But there's more here: Sylvia also told MacDuckston that the mysterious man last seen dining with his wife was a "cult leader." Belmont police investigators have checked out Browne's "evidence," made on the show's October taping, but haven't found any indication that any cult was involved in the disappearance. But, they say, they'll continue to keep Sylvia's proclamations in mind. And so will we, Sylvia, so will we.

This isn't the first time that the Belmont police have listened to a psychic. They lent an ear during the October 14th, 1996, investigation of the disappearance of one Ylva Hagner, who has never been found in the seven years since, despite this potent advantage. Since this was a failure by a psychic, it didn't make the news.

The MacDuckston family has the usual it-can't-hurt attitude toward calling in a highly doubtful means of solving a mystery. "When you're in a situation like this, you open yourself to more possibilities and input," Bruce said. "Police haven't gotten anything they can really hang their hat on. In the absence of hard facts you're pretty much obliged to try anything." Yes, and in this case, it's like trying Chinese fortune cookies or Tarot cards with some cards missing...

Montel's producer said she doesn't believe "Montel'" is exploiting people's desperation, because the guests often ask to be on the show, and because — she fancies — the national exposure is helpful to police investigations. She pointed out that Browne doesn't always give people good news, and she has told several people that their loved ones are dead. But she also failed to mention that some of those persons were not dead...

Investigator Lindsey Brooks of the Campbell-based non-profit child-search agency Child Quest, has a much more realistic view of the matter. She said that families of missing people are particularly vulnerable to "psychics" who can take advantage of them. "When someone loses a family member, they become in a desperate state," she said. "Some psychics feed off that. . . . It's just one of those buyer-beware kinds of things." She said that Child Quest has listened to psychics in some missing-child cases, but has never broken a case with their information.

We'll watch to see if this missing woman (a) was still alive as of the date Sylvia made her guess, (b) that she had joined a cult, and (c) if that man she lunched with, was a cult leader. Can't wait!

Eric Idle, of the Monty Python group, is doing an "Around the States in Eighty Days" series for the media. He just published: "Day Fifty One. Happy Birthday Sweet Tania," Wednesday, November 19, 2003, from the Pantages Theater, Minneapolis, Here's an excerpt, along with his editor's notes...

It's my wife's birthday. I have now been with her more than half her life. Poor thing. She must be a saint. But a Scorpio. So watch it. According to that ridiculous bollocks called Astronomy — a pseudo nonsensical science if ever there was one — Aries and Scorpios never get along. Well 26 years says crap. (You see Eric, it's bad language like this that gets you banned from the Malmesbury Public Library Internet Access Site. It's just not necessary. Ed.) If people want to go on believing that the whole world is divided into twelve, based on astronomical observations that are two thousand years out of date, then that's up to them. The constellations are now no longer overhead in the same place as they are supposed to be and everyone knows the lowest peg on a newspaper and the first job they give to newcomers is writing the astrology column. Still people persist in believing in this nonsense despite all evidence, which shows mankind's urge to believe in something, no matter what, is very strong, and makes it easy for all those horrible men with bad hair in bad suits on TV to make their millions. (OK we got it. Ed.)

Oops, Eric! I really think you meant "Astrology," and if you did, we agree 100%. But mark my words: you'll be branded as an incompetent for having made this small slip. The astrologers will celebrate your lack of knowledge and sophistication, your poor grasp of reality, etc. And I approve your language. Tell it like it is. The hell with the Malmesbury Public Library, wherever that is!

Reader Steven E. Cerier of Forest Hills, New York, a previous contributor, offers us:

We live in an era dominated by science and technology, which has enhanced our enjoyment of life, prolonged life expectancy and eradicated diseases, such as small pox and polio, that not so long ago were responsible for the deaths and the crippling of hundreds of thousands of people every year. Everyday brings the announcement of a new wonder drug, or a new breakthrough in science. Everyday, a new technology is developed that will help bolster the quality of our lives. It is therefore a very strange paradox that many people distrust science and technology and place their faith in the metaphysical, the supernatural, alternative medicine and the paranormal.

It is unfortunate that the irrational has seeped into so many aspects of our society and has such a great hold and fascination for many people who eagerly embrace absurd, idiotic and questionable beliefs that have no logical explanation and defy the wisdom of science. Perhaps this is because life is a very complicated journey and many people seek simplistic answers for complex problems. Maybe its because there is a spiritual dimension to the metaphysical that helps provide meaning to people's daily lives and to random events.

The paranormal and the supernatural provide simplistic answers that appeal to a lot of people. Diseases for instance, are caused by stagnant energy patterns. Break up those stagnant patterns and you can heal yourself. Macrobiotic diet and homeopathic medicine can cure cancer. As a result, you don't have to go through the painful experience of an operation or chemo-therapy to be cured. All you have to do is change your diet and chant a few magical words everyday. Tarot cards and the lines on the palm of your hands can divine the future. Communicating with the dead can unburden the pains and doubts of a relationship with a loved one who has passed away. The notion of reincarnation suggests that if you don't get it right in this lifetime, you will have another chance. How seductive it is to believe that the alignments of the planets influences our lives and as a result, all we have to do is read our horoscope to know if this will be a good and productive day.

I wish that life were so easy. I wish that it were as simple as consulting my astrological chart to see what was the most propitious time to invest in the stock market or fall in love or go on a vacation or buy a house. I wish that alternative medicine was valid because it would prevent a great deal of suffering that people have to experience in order to get well and recover from serious diseases. But such is not the case. Life is not so simple. There are no easy answers to difficult problems, as the purveyors of the paranormal, the supernatural, and alternative medicine, would like us to believe.

People have a vested interest in their own prejudices and will tenaciously cling to their beliefs, no matter how irrational or illogical. As a result, I have stopped arguing with the devotees of the metaphysical and alternative medicine because I know they will never change their minds, no matter what facts are presented to them. Instead of being open-minded, they cling to their beliefs and dig themselves into holes that are impossible to dig themselves out of. They will believe in the strangest things rather than alter their view and admit they are wrong. Science is completely irrelevant to them. It is a meaningless concept, particularly as they believe it is a tool of corrupt corporations who place profits above people. No more is this true than with the controversy over genetically modified food. You would think from listening to the critics of "GM" food that it was poison instead of a scientific breakthrough that has the potential to significantly reduce the use of pesticides, boost crop production and enhance the nutritional value of food. But the opponents of GM food simply refuse to listen to reason.

I have come to realize that many people do not see science in beneficial terms. Instead, they see it as an "out-of-control demon" that is being harnessed by an "elite," intent on manipulating our lives. This view is the product of a growing suspicion of all forms of authority. Unfortunately in this regard, we have seen all too frequently how the government has lied to the American people, as was the case with the Vietnam War and Watergate. It is only logical for many to assume, therefore, that if the government lied to us about those matters, then it is also lying to us about Roswell, the causes of this summer's power blackout, and landing a man on the moon.

Science is not immune to the growing distrust of our institutions and pillars of authority. Many ask why we should put our faith in science when there have been so many scandals in the pharmaceutical and chemical industries, when the Pentagon finances a great deal of scientific research, when health care is so expensive, when there is the widespread mistaken belief that vaccinations cause autism, cell phones cause brain tumors, and most medications have serious side effects.

People such as myself, who define themselves as skeptics, are often accused of believing in nothing. But I would rather be accused of believing in nothing than being so gullible as to believe in the most ridiculous, absurd and idiotic concepts and notions. I prefer to put my trust in science rather then in the metaphysical and the paranormal. I do not subscribe to the view that belief alone is the sole criterion for something to be true. Instead, I demand proof. I have learned, though, that belief trumps proof and that is why reason and logic very often do not prevail and the absurd and the illogical are eagerly embraced.

Thanks for your thoughts, Steven. Reader comments...?

A Thomas M. Jones has written me to correct an error on last week's page. He informs me that he, "as the webmaster," wrote the comments I ascribed to Montague Keen concerning the "spirit" photo that you saw there, and that those comments referred to a different photograph of "Eva C." than the image I used on the website. I stand corrected.

To better inform myself, I referred to a hilarious book in the JREF library written by a Fred Gettings, titled "Ghosts in Photographs." This is a collection of incredibly obvious photographic errors and blatant fakes that the faithful — Montague included, I'm very sure — have accepted as establishing survival-after-death-as-proven-by-bad-photographs. I give you here an example, a photo taken of one Linda Gazzera in 1909 in Turin, Italy. She is in a swoon or a trance, we're told, and the weird thing on the wall behind her is a "well-modeled face, draped in what appears to be a white ectoplasmic veil." Folks, to me, that appears to be a hunk of cheesecloth fastened to a cut-out from a fashion magazine. But then, I'm not a scientist, remember? However, I will dare this observation: the photograph shown was taken while — says the text describing it, Linda was "under control," and "her hands were held during the entire séance." Sure. Take a closer look.

To excuse the fact that some of the uproarious examples of credulity in that book look — to any reasonable observer — like photos of crude plaster castings and simple, wrinkled, magazine pictures, one Dr. Charles Richet, a French physiologist and Nobel Laureate who spent much of the later years of his life in pseudoscience, wrote this justification for the American Society for Psychical Research back in 1925:

The fact that these ectoplasms are not living is not an objection at all: there is nothing to prevent us from admitting that the ectoplasm may be merely an image, and not a living being. Certainly, the materialization of a plaster head, or a lithographic print, is not in itself more absurd an idea than that of a human head, containing blood, movement and thought.

Incredible. Though I'm not a physiologist, I stubbornly tend to think that a living human is more complicated — by several orders of magnitude — than a bad plaster dummy or a photograph. Compare a real human head with this plaster-and-gauze-framed-magazine-cutout "materialization" that was shown and discussed in a 30-page chapter of "Intention and Survival," a 1942 book that described this "outstanding" artifact as "in many ways one of the most important single examples" of a spirit form. If this is anything but a crude fake, my name is Liz Taylor.

Montague, awaken from your prolonged reverie...

Reader August Pamplona, among several others, chided me for failing to notice that the Macchu Picchu photos I directed you to last week, when properly examined, is a big of a PhotoShop hoax. Now, I've been there several times, and I've taken lots of photos of the area. That particular view I'd not seen, but as August points out, it's been pretty well retouched to satisfy the requirements of the hoaxster(s). I hadn't noticed. Sorry! But I'm sure that if we examined enough views of that or any other area, we'd be coming up with pretty good photos to use in just that fashion. I just don't have time for all that...

Thanks, August, and the rest!

A point I missed last week in pontificating re the wheel, was that some force is needed to pull a wheeled vehicle. Llamas, as found in South America, are not suitable either temperamentally or physically, for that application. Several readers pointed this out to me, a factor I'd forgotten!

Preparations for The Amaz!ng Meeting 2, in Las Vegas from January 15th to 18th, are rolling along very well. Registrations continue to arrive daily, and the other added attractions — such as the in-person tour of Penn Jillette's LV home (lunch with both Penn and Teller included), and the Solved Mysteries Workshop on Thursday — are being snapped up. The ever-busy Linda is on the phone here, into e-mail, and at the fax machine every day keeping it all organized. This will be an exciting event, especially with the just-announced addition of such a luminary as actress/author Julia Sweeney as a speaker. You'll know her as "Pat" from Saturday Night Live, and her role in the movie Pulp Fiction. Julia will edify us with an excerpt from her in-person show, "Letting Go of God," on Saturday.

And, just last week, I heard from the one-and-only Paulette Cooper, who says she's intending to be there, too. Paulette is the author of "The Scandal of Scientology" and eight other books, along with hundreds of magazine and newspaper articles she wrote to support her full-time crusade to expose Scientology, at a time when few outsiders knew much about the cult, and those who did know were generally afraid to speak out. In 1982, the American Society of Journalists and Authors recognized the high personal price she paid to fight Scientology and awarded her the prestigious Conscience in Media Award. Perhaps next year Paulette will be one of our featured speakers, I would hope.

Join us in Las Vegas, folks. The room rates we have at the Tuscany Hotel, are great, and booking early gets better air fares, of course. We've a sterling roster of speakers and performers which you can see by clicking here. Hope to see you there!