If you have any questions about my skeptic history or when I worked with scientists. Please post them here. For a complete history of the Alpha Project you an visit my web site and hit the Alpha project button there. There is also a pdf file booklet written by one of the scientists .

Hi Banachek, thanks for joining us here.

One thing I've always wondered about the Alpha Project is, how much coercion did it take to get the testers to relax whatever controls they had in place? Were the "minor tantrums" mentioned in the article a regular occurrence, or were they fairly rare? Also, as time went on did the testers tend to get more stringent or more lenient?

Oh, and do you still keep in touch with Michael Edwards?

Quinn

Hi Banachek,

In your opinion, was your ability to fool the scientists a result primarily of (a) their lack of controls of the sort a magician or mentalist would think of, but a scientist would not, (b) their lack of proper scientific controls in the first place, or (c) a combination of the two, or (d) other factors entirely?

I'm not asking about parapsychologists in general here.. just about the specific group that you worked with. In other words: would you say that, minus the fact that they had no expertise in magic or mentalism--and were not consulting someone who did--that they were behaving like good scientists?

Just curious... being into both science and magic myself, I find the whole Alpha Project story fascinating.

Allan

Quinn asks about the minor tantrums. To be honest there really were no minor tantrums. This was a little poetic license that refers to the tantrums Geller performed when he did not get his way.

We had no need to; the scientists were very agreeable and easy going. So much so that they gave us our way all the time. They really wanted to please us so they could document their own beliefs rather than test us to see if what we did was real or not. Their pro biased opinion of PSI got in the way. The fact that they were so nice made things very hard for Mike and I as things progressed. It no longer became impersonal but very personal. It was no longer Mike and I just fooling scientists, but two kids fooling people that they considered friends. We had many agonizing discussions over this but we were way to far into it to stop once the ball got rolling.

Allan makes a good point. One we should remember in every walk of life. Just because these particular scientists did not use proper protocol does not mean all scientists are that way. In a way it is a catch-22. The ones who use proper protocol are never heard of simply because they do not get the results that those who are gullible obtain. As a result, those who are tricked, get the news coverage. Even if the tests are exposed for being as faulty as they are later, the publicity certainly leaves an incurable stain of belief in the prior claims in society. Take a look at Ted Serios and others that have been shown to be frauds. People still wonder what if it was possible when a new claim comes about. And those that want to believe say "well he could not do it but certainly there is probably someone who can." But back to the point. So often skeptics and believers are lumped into one group by the apposing force. This is a big mistake and insulting to those who are open minded but skeptical of claims and those who are open minded but skeptical of the other side.

But as stated, it is usually those on either side that shout the loudest (usually they are the most opinionated and closed minded on either side) that get the most attention. Sad but true.

I saw the different papers on your web site, but did you write a book about the alpha project? If not, do you plan to write that later...? Some kind of autobiography, where you could talk about your personal experience during this strange experiment. I'm sure it would be very interesting.

I am actually talking to Scott about doing a large book on my life and effects. I have been very inspired by the Berglas book, and meeting the man himself.

I was fascinated by the articles I read on your site concerning this subject. But one thing they seem to skip a bit is the reaction of the scientists who had tested you.

A few posts above, you said you became friendly with them. How did they take it once the ruse was exposed? Do they continue to work in the field, and have they at least improved their testing methods? In other words, have they learned from their experience? Are you still in touch with any of them?

I also have to say I was surprised at how long this went on. When I first heard about it, I figured it would be a 2-3 month long project, not something that went on for several years. Wow!

Well keep in mind, this was not 4 years 24 hrs a day, it was holidays and weekends once in a while. The total hour amount is in the article.

Towards the end the scientists did come around again. Rather than repeat I would have you go read the article on the site.

However, at the end they did call and would go over many things, looking for one thing that we could not explain. And of course, during that time and playing the odds there are going to be a few, but very few and nothing impressive.

One of the scientists continued with a psychic awarness class. One went to Africa and that was the last I heard. Needless to say there was not much communication afterwards, they were ashamed to call and we were embarrassed to call them. It became very awkard. And of course, a trust and a bond had been broken.

It seems that people and their feelings were manipulated (you included) for someone elses amusement and profit. Based on that, do you think that the ends justified the means?

Chad

Well, this is an interesting question isn't it? At the same time this all came about a question arose, is it ethical to deceive in the name of science. During that debate a lot of accusations were thrown about that cast dispersion on the character of Mike and I (in fact I even take a chance bringing it up) but it is a fair question.

I look at it this way, the scientists took the money for the research under false pretenses, they were given the money under the guise they were qualified to perform proper research testing. They were not. Had we of not gone into the lab, a host of fakes would have. In fact, during they time I was there, they did research with at least three people that claimed to be real, that I knew were fakes and taking advantage of the situation. The research with them only stopped due the better results they were getting with Mike and I.

And stopped altogether from what I understand when we revealed the hoax.

There was a much bigger picture here than our feelings. It is the same with war. Each individual has a life and feelings, but there is a bigger picture overall. Trust me, I am not saying this was anything like war. The stakes were not as high. I have two sons in the armed forces, one in the marines and one in the army.

This was a necessary evil at the time. Scientists had lamented that the reason there was no proper scientific evidence of ESP was due to the lack of funding. We felt otherwise. As in the article, even some scientists themselves had submitted that maybe a magician should try to fool them. It was their contention that it could not happen.

Has it changed the face of testing? In some areas yes, and it certainly did at the time and made many much more cautious in their studies. And that was a good thing. Was it worth humiliation and ruining reputations, I don't know. I am not sure that would not have happened anyway with the way the tests were being performed. I also can't tell what would have happened if they had of promoted one of the fake psychic wannabe's and the harm they might have done.

As for the profit. There was none on our part. Mike and I actually lost time and money on the deal.