Zetetic Scholar - No 12 and 13

Magazine Overview

Title: Zetetic scholar
Issue: Nos. 12/13
Date: August 1987
Publisher: Marcello Truzzi
Type: Journal of the Center for Scientific Anomalies Research (CSAR)

This double issue of *Zetetic Scholar* (Nos. 12/13, August 1987) serves as the official journal of the Center for Scientific Anomalies Research (CSAR). Edited by Marcello Truzzi, the publication aims to foster quality research and critical inquiry into anomalies and paranormal claims, encouraging readers to seek questions rather than definitive answers.

Editorial

In his editorial, Marcello Truzzi apologizes for the significant delay in publishing this issue, attributing it to his own procrastination and overload. He emphasizes that *Zetetic Scholar* is largely a "labor of love" and a "one man operation." To prevent future delays, the journal will adopt an irregular schedule, though Truzzi hopes to publish at least two issues per year. He also announces the development of CSAR projects, including the CSAR newsletter. Truzzi expresses gratitude for the continued support and patience of the readership.

The editorial also marks the passing of several key contributors and senior consultants to CSAR, including George Abell, Milbourne Christopher, Eric J. Dingwall, J. Allen Hynek, Walter Gibson, Richard Kammann, and Piet Hein Hoebens. Their contributions and influence are deeply missed.

On Pseudo-Skepticism

Truzzi addresses the misuse of the term "skeptic," noting that it is often equated with "rationalist" or used to imply denial rather than doubt. He argues that critics who present negative claims without sufficient evidence, or who mistakenly assume an anomaly claim is disproven by the mere possibility of an artifact, are "pseudo-skeptics." True skepticism, according to Truzzi, involves an agnostic position, suspending judgment and recognizing that the burden of proof lies with the claimant. He criticizes those who attack anomaly claims based on plausibility alone or who dismiss claims based on potential flaws without empirical disproof. Truzzi advocates for a scientific approach that investigates claims fairly, acknowledging that evidence is a matter of degree and that science progresses through laboratory investigations, not armchair counterexplanations.

Articles

Zetetic Ruminations on Skepticism and Anomalies in Science

Author: Marcello Truzzi

Marcello Truzzi introduces the concept of "zeteticism," derived from the Greek philosopher Pyrrho of Ellis, which emphasizes the suspension of judgment and an open-minded inquiry. He contrasts this with "dogmatism" and "academic skepticism." Truzzi argues that the term "skeptic" is often misused by critics of anomalies, who act as disbelievers rather than true inquirers. He highlights the distinction between disbelief and nonbelief, asserting that true skepticism involves uncertainty and a willingness to explore possibilities without premature conclusions. Truzzi critiques the "pseudo-skeptics" who claim to be objective but hold preconceived notions, often attacking proponents of anomaly claims with ad hominem arguments or by exaggerating the possibility of error. He advocates for a "constructive" skepticism that seeks to advance science by investigating anomalies, rather than merely debunking them. Truzzi also discusses the "essential tension" in science between conservatism and openness, and the need for organized skepticism to function effectively.

He further defines "anomaly" as a deviation from the common rule or accepted scientific theory, emphasizing that anomalies are "facts in search of an explanation." Truzzi categorizes anomalies based on their nature (paranormal vs. supernatural), their relationship to theory (unnested vs. nested), their origin (spontaneous vs. experimentally produced), their reproducibility, and their spatial and temporal dimensions. He distinguishes between "crypto-events" (hidden things) and "para-events" (anomalous relationships), noting the different validation challenges for each. Truzzi concludes by advocating for a "zetetic approach" that first seeks ordinary explanations for extraordinary events before resorting to extraordinary theories, and that assesses claims based on the event, the report, and the narrator's credibility.

A Remote Viewing Experiment Conducted by a Skeptic and a Believer

Authors: James McLenon & Ray Hyman

This article details a remote viewing experiment designed to test the efficacy of remote viewing under controlled conditions, involving both a skeptic and a believer as participants. The experiment aimed to assess whether remote viewing abilities could be demonstrated in a way that would satisfy scientific scrutiny.

New Zealand Prophecies Exposed as a Hoax

Author: Richard Kammann

This piece investigates prophecies originating from New Zealand, presenting evidence and analysis to demonstrate that they were fabricated or misrepresented, thus exposing them as hoaxes.

UFO (Flying Saucer) Groups: A Look at British Membership

Author: Shirley McIver

McIver examines the membership and characteristics of UFO (Flying Saucer) groups in Britain, offering sociological insights into the motivations and demographics of individuals involved in these organizations.

Historical Notes on a Seance with Eusapia Palladino in 1912

Author: Carlos S. Alvarado

This article provides historical documentation and analysis of a séance conducted with the medium Eusapia Palladino in 1912, exploring the phenomena observed and the context of psychical research at the time.

Reflections on "Project Alpha": Scientific Experiment or Conjuror's Illusion?

Author: Marcello Truzzi

Truzzi critically examines "Project Alpha," evaluating whether it was a genuine scientific experiment or a staged illusion designed to deceive. He applies principles of skepticism and critical analysis to assess the evidence and claims associated with the project.

Distributions of Beliefs on Controversial Matters

Author: Henry H. Bauer

Bauer investigates the statistical distributions of beliefs concerning various controversial topics, likely exploring patterns of acceptance and rejection of anomalous or paranormal claims within the general population.

Exchanges and Continuing Dialogues

A Constructively Rational Approach to Parapsychology and Scientific Methodology (Responses to My Commentators and Some Further Attempts at Clarification)

Author: Gerd H. Hovelmann

Hovelmann presents a detailed response to various commentators on his previous work concerning parapsychology and scientific methodology. He defends his approach and offers further clarifications on his arguments, engaging with critiques from a range of researchers including John Beloff, Susan J. Blackmore, Hans J. Eysenck, and others.

Special ZS Bibliographic Feature

Chinese Parapsychology: Bibliography of English Language Items, Part II

Author: Marcello Truzzi

This is the second part of a bibliographic feature compiled by Marcello Truzzi, listing English-language items related to parapsychology in China.

Regular ZS Features

Editorial

(See above for summary of the editorial content.)

Random Bibliography on the Occult and the Paranormal, I & II

This section provides a curated bibliography of literature related to the occult and the paranormal.

Book Reviews

• The Enigma of Daniel Home: Medium or Fraud? by Trevor H. Hall
• Reviewer: Eric J. Dingwall
• This review critically examines Hall's work on the famous medium Daniel Home, assessing the evidence for his alleged mediumistic abilities.
• Birthtimes by Michel Gauquelin
• Reviewers: Piet Hein Hoebens and Geoffrey Dean
• This review discusses Gauquelin's controversial research on the influence of planetary positions at birth on personality and career.
• Anomalistic Psychology: A Study of Extraordinary Phenomena of Behavior and Experience by Leonard Zusne and Warren H. Jones
• Reviewer: Ron Westrum
• Westrum reviews this work on anomalous psychological phenomena, likely evaluating its scientific rigor and contribution to the field.
• Psychic Warfare: Threat or Illusion? by Martin Ebon
• Reviewer: John Beloff
• Beloff reviews Ebon's book, assessing the claims and evidence presented regarding psychic warfare.
• Superstition and the Press by Curtis D. McDougall
• Reviewer: Henry H. Bauer
• Bauer reviews McDougall's work on how superstitions are portrayed and influenced by the press.
• Champ: Beyond the Legend by Joseph W. Zarzynski
• Reviewer: Henry H. Bauer
• This review likely discusses Zarzynski's book about the Loch Ness Monster, "Champ."
• Books Briefly Noted
• Compiler: M. Truzzi
• A collection of brief notices for various books relevant to the journal's scope.

About the Contributors to This Issue

This section provides brief biographical information on the authors and contributors featured in this issue, including their academic affiliations and areas of expertise.

About CSAR

Information about the Center for Scientific Anomalies Research (CSAR), its mission, and activities.

Cover Illustration

Artist: Piet Hein Hoebens

The cover illustration is by Piet Hein Hoebens.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue of *Zetetic Scholar* strongly emphasizes the importance of critical thinking, rigorous methodology, and a balanced approach to the study of anomalies and paranormal claims. The editorial stance, as articulated by Marcello Truzzi, champions "zeteticism"—a form of skeptical inquiry that prioritizes open-mindedness, the suspension of judgment, and the pursuit of questions over premature answers. The journal actively critiques "pseudo-skepticism," which it defines as dogmatic denial rather than genuine doubt. There is a consistent call for evidence-based reasoning, a clear understanding of the burden of proof, and a constructive approach to anomalies, viewing them as opportunities for scientific advancement rather than mere curiosities to be debunked. The publication also highlights the challenges in scientific research, particularly in fields dealing with controversial or anomalous phenomena, and the need for careful evaluation of claims, reports, and their sources. The recurring theme is the promotion of a scientific ethos that is both critical and open, striving for a more nuanced understanding of the unexplained.

This issue of the Zetetic Scholar, identified as issue number 12/13 and dated 1987, presents two primary articles that delve into the nature of anomalous claims and belief systems. The publication focuses on skeptical inquiry into paranormal phenomena.

Article 1: NEW ZEALAND PROPHECIES EXPOSED AS A HOAX by Richard Kamman

Richard Kamman, writing under the pseudonym 'Emory Royce' for the alleged prophecies, details how he created a series of four major predictions that were later reported as accurate in New Zealand media. Kamman, a psychologist and skeptic, explains that the prophecies were intentionally vague and ambiguous, designed to be matched with subsequent world events through a process he terms 'semantic retrofitting' and 'data selection.'

Kamman outlines the methods used, categorizing them into 'major' (pure chance, ambiguity) and 'minor' (inside information, trickery, data selection). He specifically addresses each prophecy:

1. Sinking of two warships in the Falkland Islands: This was a 'shotgun blast' prediction, loosely associated with 'man-made disasters' involving water, poisonous gases, or 'war scares,' which could encompass naval accidents or oil spills.
2. Abrupt cancellation of a major factory planned for Dunedin: This prediction was linked to Kamman's opposition to the Dunedin aluminum smelter on ecological and economic grounds. He had 'inside information' from ecologist friends confirming the smelter's economic untenability, despite positive official reports.
3. A mid-year scandal involving the Prime Minister of New Zealand: Kamman intended to create a code for 'Prime Minister, Robert Muldoon' but made a mistake, producing code '14.13' instead of '13.13.' When the John Jones affair erupted, he had to manipulate the code to fit.
4. Death of Soviet leader Mr. Brezhnev: This was based on Brezhnev's age and health reports. Kamman sent a registered letter to dramatize the prediction, which he could later dismiss as lost if another senior world leader died.

Kamman also discusses a fifth prophecy that was a complete miss, which he omitted from his report, further illustrating 'data selection.' He emphasizes that the 'miracle mongers' of the paranormal press would consider such loyalty to facts a 'bad precedent.' He argues that the flexibility of numerological thinking allows for numerous matches with names and events, citing the example of 'RONALD' and 'REAGAN' summing to digits related to his 'ten dot ten' code.

Kamman concludes that alleged miracles of prophecy can be explained by subjective validation, coincidence, and data selection, and that skeptics should demonstrate this by replicating such 'miracles' using normal techniques.

Article 2: A REMOTE VIEWING EXPERIMENT CONDUCTED BY A SKEPTIC AND A BELIEVER by James McClenon & Ray Hyman

This article details a remote viewing (RV) experiment conducted by James McClenon (playing the role of a 'believer' and 'agent') and Ray Hyman (a 'skeptic' and 'observer'). The experiment aimed to test the psi hypothesis of remote viewing and to explore the social-psychological factors associated with it.

• Methodology:
• Agent: J.M. took photographs of 64 locations in Eugene, Oregon, creating 8 sets of 8 potential target sites. These were randomly selected by a computer.
• Procedure: For each of the 8 trials, an agent traveled to a target site while the subject, in a separate location, underwent a 20-minute relaxation period. The subject then described their mental imagery for 15 minutes. Afterward, the subject ranked the 8 site photographs by similarity to their description, and independent judges also ranked the photographs based on the typed transcripts of the subjects' descriptions.
• Subjects: Five 'inexperienced' volunteers were recruited via classified ads, and three more volunteered through informal interaction. Most subjects were naive to remote viewing, with only one being inexperienced in occult matters.

• Results:
• Subject Scores: The subjects' total scores did not demonstrate evidence for remote viewing. Their rankings correlated with the average rankings of the judges at approximately 0.74, which is significant at the 0.05 level.
• Judge Scores: The average score from five judges was 4.8, which is consistent with the absence of psi, as the expected average by chance is 4.5.
• Statistical Significance: None of the statistical tests applied to the subjects' or judges' scores achieved statistical significance at the 0.05 level.

J.M.'s Discussion (Believer's Perspective):
McClenon discusses his personal experience as the agent, including a separate clairvoyant test where he rank-ordered potential target sites. His clairvoyance test yielded a statistically significant result (p=0.012, one-tailed), but he found no correlation between his clairvoyant scores and the subjects' or judges' RV scores. He notes that participants' beliefs in psi often persisted or increased regardless of experimental outcomes, attributing this to personal experiences and a tendency to interpret ambiguous events in ways that reinforce existing beliefs. He argues that while skeptics may dismiss these experiences as 'faulty cognitive apparatus,' they are powerful in shaping belief.

R.H.'s Discussion (Skeptic's Perspective):
Hyman acknowledges that the experiment had limited power due to only 8 trials. He points out that the results were consistent with chance, with subjects averaging 5.0 and judges averaging 4.8, both close to the expected 4.5. He highlights the importance of specifying statistical tests in advance to avoid 'data dredging' or selective reporting of results. He notes that even J.M.'s clairvoyance results, while statistically significant, cannot be taken in isolation and were not part of the original experimental design.

Conclusions:
The experiment did not provide evidence for remote viewing ability. However, it did illustrate that participation in such experiments can increase participants' belief in psi, underscoring the importance of understanding the psychological factors that contribute to paranormal belief. The authors emphasize the need for researchers to transcend a 'culture of disbelief' and to consider the role of personal experiences in shaping beliefs.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

This issue of Zetetic Scholar strongly advocates for a skeptical approach to anomalous claims, emphasizing the need for rigorous methodology, statistical analysis, and the avoidance of logical fallacies such as confirmation bias and data selection. The articles highlight how ambiguous predictions, coincidence, and psychological factors can create the illusion of paranormal phenomena. The editorial stance is clearly in favor of scientific scrutiny and the debunking of unsubstantiated claims, while also acknowledging the psychological reality of belief in the paranormal and the importance of understanding its origins.

This issue of Zetetic Scholar, number 12/13 from 1987, features an article titled "UFO (FLYING SAUCER) GROUPS: A LOOK AT BRITISH MEMBERSHIP" by Shirley McIver. The magazine focuses on sociological research into UFO phenomena and the people involved in it.

UFO (FLYING SAUCER) GROUPS: A LOOK AT BRITISH MEMBERSHIP by Shirley McIver

This article delves into the characteristics and motivations of individuals who join UFO research groups, particularly focusing on members of the British UFO Research Association (BUFORA). The author notes that popular interest in UFOs began after World War Two, and social scientists have long sought to explain why people report seeing UFOs and believe them to be extra-terrestrial.

Early research, such as U.S. Gallup Poll data from 1966 and 1973, found that those who claimed to have seen UFOs were not significantly different from the general population, challenging initial hypotheses about status inconsistency or psychological factors.

Regarding the belief that UFOs are extra-terrestrial, studies by Resta and Littig found correlations with externality (feeling powerless) and affiliation motivation, respectively. However, Fox argued that belief in UFOs is more consistent with a broader American worldview and a collective attempt to understand ambiguous stimuli. Other explanations suggest belief in UFOs is part of a wider interest in the occult, paranormal, or new religious movements.

The article distinguishes between different types of UFO groups, including "religious cults," "platform societies," and "investigation groups." In Britain, there are numerous small regional research groups, alongside larger national organizations like BUFORA (founded 1962, ~550 members in 1981), Contact (UK) (founded 1967, ~1,000 members in 1978), and the British UFO Society (mid-1970s, ~600 members in 1981). These groups often refer to themselves as "ufologists."

A questionnaire survey of BUFORA members conducted in September 1981 revealed key insights into their profile. Out of approximately 550 members, 218 replies were received. The findings are presented under social details, UFO experiences, and religious beliefs.

Social Details

• Gender: 80% of respondents were men.
• Age: Just over half (54%) were aged between 21 and 40 years. A significant portion (29%) were aged 21-30, and 25% were 31-40. Only 13% were in the 41-50 age range, and 10% were under 20.
• Marital Status: Nearly equal numbers were married (48%) and single (43%), with 6% separated or divorced.
• Education: Formal education levels were higher than average, with 12% holding a degree and 28% having a professional qualification. Many also engaged in continuous further education and considered reading important, with 77% reading one or more books weekly.
• Employment: 66% were in full-time employment. Engineering was the most frequent occupation (12%), followed by civil service/local government (9%). Thirty percent were self-employed or employers.
• Socio-Economic Class: Most members fell into socio-economic classes two, three, and four (lower-middle and middle classes), as detailed in Table One. This contrasts with the "social drop-outs" sometimes associated with contactee cults.

Table One breaks down the socio-economic class composition of BUFORA members: Professional (5%), Employers and managers (11%), Intermediate and junior non-manual (34%), Skilled manual (17%), Semi-skilled manual (4%), and Unskilled manual (2%).

The article notes a large gender difference, possibly due to the emphasis on the scientific nature of UFO research, which is stereotypically seen as masculine. This male bias is also observed in other fringe science subjects like Loch Ness Monster enthusiasm and science fiction fandom. While studies of contactee cults suggest a higher proportion of women, UFO research groups appear to attract more men.

The age distribution is similar to other fringe science subjects, with a peak in the younger adult range. The high proportion of single people among BUFORA respondents is noted, though qualified by the middle-class status and young adult age range, and compared to similar findings in Loch Ness Monster and science fiction groups.

Members consider continuous education important, evidenced by their extensive reading. Popular subjects include space research, astronomy, psychic research, science fiction, and Fortean phenomena, suggesting an interest in speculative and imaginative science, alongside popular science.

UFO and Associated Experiences and Opinions

• Interest Duration: 39% had been interested in UFOs for 5-15 years, and 44% for over 15 years. Most had been interested since their teens.
• Triggers for Interest: 35% cited a particular book, 21% a news event (like a sighting report), and 19% a personal UFO experience.
• UFO Sightings: 61% claimed to have seen something they considered a UFO, mostly lights in the sky (48%). Less than 1% reported a close encounter or contact with aliens.
• Psychic Experiences: 57% reported having had a psychic experience, though this was not strongly correlated with UFO sightings.

The article addresses common misconceptions about UFO group members, noting that while many believe UFOs are extra-terrestrial spacecraft (44%), they are divided on other aspects. For instance, 23% agreed that governments withhold information about UFOs, but only 23% agreed with Erich von Daniken's idea of humans being created by extraterrestrials. Similarly, opinions were divided on the Atlantis myth.

Most BUFORA members (55%) considered that some ufologists have been visited by "Men in Black." They were uncertain about the connection between cattle mutilations and UFOs.

Religious Beliefs

Respondents were sensitive about their religious beliefs due to the organization's stated aim of unbiased scientific research. While most answered the questions, some expressed confusion about the relevance.

• Affiliation: 40% indicated they were not affiliated with a church, significantly higher than the general population (8%). 58% never attended church, compared to 27% of the general public.
• Belief in God: A majority (61%) believed in God, similar to the general population (68% for men).
• Life After Death & Reincarnation: Most respondents believed in life after death (68%) and under half in reincarnation (45%), percentages much higher than the general population (35% and 28% respectively).
• Mystical Beliefs: About 45% believed in an impersonal spirit or lifeforce, and 41% agreed with the statement that each human being is travelling a path of spiritual evolution ending in union with God. These suggest mystical rather than orthodox religious beliefs.

The article contrasts BUFORA members with those in contactee cults, noting that while both groups read extensively, UFO research groups focus more on imaginative science than occult philosophy. Their interest is framed as part of a broader engagement with the "frontiers of science," including space research, astronomy, and psychic research.

Conclusion

The survey suggests that UFO research groups are distinct from contactee cults, though similarities exist, particularly in reading habits. BUFORA members appear more interested in imaginative science than occult philosophy, viewing their involvement as part of a general interest in "frontiers of science" and "anomalies"—subjects unexplained by science. The article explores various explanations for this interest, including a fascination with mysteries, a reaction against science, or a misunderstanding of scientific methodology. It also highlights the conflict within ufology between "nuts and bolts" and "paranormal" approaches.

The study implies that UFO research groups, along with contactee cults, form part of a wider "cultic milieu." The article concludes by emphasizing the importance of studying these diverse organizations and their interrelationships to understand the UFO movement and its place within the sociology of science and social movements.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the sociological study of UFO phenomena, focusing on the characteristics, motivations, and beliefs of individuals involved in UFO research groups. The editorial stance appears to be one of objective, scientific inquiry into these phenomena, distinguishing itself from purely religious or occult interpretations. The article emphasizes the importance of empirical research and data analysis, as evidenced by the detailed survey of BUFORA members. There is a clear effort to differentiate UFO research groups from more religiously oriented "contactee cults," highlighting the former's emphasis on scientific investigation and the study of anomalies.

This issue of Zetetic Scholar, identified as a CSAR Project Report, presents a bibliography of English language items on Chinese parapsychology, compiled by Marcello Truzzi. Titled 'CHINESE PARAPSYCHOLOGY: A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE ITEMS, PART II*', it also features a historical note by Carlos S. Alvarado on a séance with Eusapia Palladino in 1912, and an essay by Marcello Truzzi reflecting on James Randi's 'Project Alpha'. The publication date is indicated as 1987, with the issue number 'Part II' and volume 'A CSAR PROJECT REPORT'.

Chinese Parapsychology Bibliography

The bibliography is divided into several sections:

General Books

This section lists books such as 'Mind Over Matter: Beyond the Bounds of Nature' by Glen Barclay, 'The Four Major Mysteries of Mainland China' by Paul Dong, 'Encounters with Qi: Exploring Chinese Medicine' by David Eisenberg, and 'The Stone Monkey: An Alternative Chinese-Scientific, Reality' by Bruce Holbrook.

Background Publications

This section includes academic articles and book chapters that provide context on Chinese psychology and medicine. Notable entries include L.B. Brown's work on psychiatry in China, C.C. Ching and S.L. Jiao's studies on sensory and perceptual phenomena, and Ralph C. Croizier's analysis of medical revivalism in modern China.

General Articles

This extensive section lists numerous articles from various journals and publications covering topics like 'Studies of Clairvoyance in Peking University,' 'Paraphysics Group in China,' 'Psi in China: New Era of East West Cooperation,' and 'Exceptional Human Body Function: Studies in the Peoples' Republic of China.' It also includes translated research from Chinese sources.

Qi and Qigong

This subsection focuses on literature related to Qi and Qigong, including articles on 'Ch'i: A Neural Hologram?', 'Summary Report on Qigong Investigation in Mainland China,' and 'Qigong--Chinese Breathing Exercise.'

Historical Notes on a Seance with Eusapia Palladino in 1912

Authored by Carlos S. Alvarado, this section delves into the history of parapsychology through the lens of the Italian medium Eusapia Palladino (1854-1918). The article highlights her significance as a physical medium and discusses numerous researchers who investigated her phenomena, including Aksakof, Carrington, Lodge, and Lombroso. Despite instances of detected fraud, many investigators remained convinced of the genuineness of some phenomena. The paper focuses on a specific, previously unpublished 1912 séance report by Francisco Ponte, detailing observed phenomena like telekinetic blows, table levitation, and materialized forms. Alvarado notes that while Ponte's report might be criticized for lacking rigorous controls, it provides valuable historical information about Eusapia's later years and contributes to the understanding of physical mediumship studies.

Reflections on "Project Alpha": Scientific Experiment or Conjuror's Illusion?

Marcello Truzzi's essay critically examines James Randi's 'Project Alpha,' a hoax involving two young subjects, Steve Shaw and Michael Edwards, who allegedly faked paranormal abilities to expose alleged flaws in parapsychological research. Truzzi questions the scientific methodology, ethical conduct, and reporting of Project Alpha. He argues that while Randi's actions might have exposed poor controls in some research, they also raised serious ethical concerns. Truzzi compares Project Alpha to historical hoaxes in science and psychical research, emphasizing the importance of considering the intentions and motives of those conducting such experiments. He concludes that while Randi's project might have some constructive aspects for parapsychology, it also highlights complex issues surrounding scientific practice, ethics, and the evaluation of evidence in the field.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around parapsychology, particularly in the context of Chinese research and historical investigations of mediumship. There is a strong emphasis on scientific methodology, the ethics of research, and the critical evaluation of evidence. The editorial stance, as expressed through the selection of articles and Truzzi's own reflections, appears to advocate for rigorous scientific inquiry, transparency, and a balanced approach that acknowledges both the potential for genuine phenomena and the need for robust controls against fraud and error. The issue also implicitly critiques the use of sensationalism and personal attacks in scientific discourse, as seen in the discussion of Randi's methods.

This issue of The Skeptical Inquirer, dated Winter 1983-4, features a lengthy article titled "The Alpha Story: A Critical Examination of James Randi's Project Alpha." The article delves into the controversial Project Alpha, initiated by magician and debunker James Randi, which aimed to expose fraud and incompetence in parapsychology research.

The Alpha Story: A Critical Examination of James Randi's Project Alpha

The author begins by discussing the difficulty of definitively proving or disproving past paranormal claims, often relying on parsimony as the most adequate explanation. The article highlights instances where the revelation of fraud did not convince those who were already convinced, citing David Jones's experience with his perpetual motion machine.

The Challenge to Randi and Project Alpha

Project Alpha was Randi's response to challenges from parapsychologists who demanded he demonstrate his ability to replicate alleged psychic phenomena under laboratory conditions. Randi, a conjuror, typically demonstrated that alleged psychic effects could be produced by trickery. However, critics pointed out that his replications did not necessarily prove the original effects were also fraudulent, and that the conditions of his demonstrations might not be truly similar to those of the original experiments.

Randi's past successes, such as fooling the newspaper 'Psychic News' by posing as a psychic named 'Zwinge,' are mentioned as evidence of his ability to deceive. Project Alpha was conceived as a way to address the demand for laboratory demonstrations, though the author notes the inherent difficulty in duplicating the exact conditions of previous experiments and the potential for researchers to be overly guarded when dealing with a known conjuror.

Sociologist Trevor J. Pinch argued that to demonstrate fraud, replication results must be published, a condition that had not been met in previous instances. Project Alpha was an attempt to meet this requirement.

The Nature of Alpha

The author clarifies that Randi introduced trickery into an ongoing research enterprise to expose what he perceived as a lack of proper scientific procedures. The 'fraud' found during Alpha was intentionally introduced by Randi himself, not discovered among the researchers. This is framed as 'sabotage' conducted for a 'good cause' to reveal research incompetence, which Randi viewed as excusable.

The Mac Lab and the Rumors

The article recounts the 1981 Parapsychological Association meetings where Professor Phillips presented tapes of metal bending by Shaw and Edwards, which were met with hostility from fellow parapsychologists. Randi, present at the meeting, acknowledged that while Phillips had been fooled, the skepticism of other parapsychologists was notable. Rumors circulated about Randi and Phillips collaborating on an experiment to test parapsychologists' gullibility.

Randi's complaints about the Mac Lab work focused on these early efforts. The author notes that Phillips argued his lab's best work came later, after incorporating Randi's advice and implementing stricter controls.

The Reactions to Alpha

Project Alpha's success was questioned, with the Mac Lab issuing statements that their research did not endorse the boys' psychic abilities and that their effects could be achieved through normal means. Questions were raised about whether the boys were adequately asked about using trickery. The author also questions Randi's certainty that the boys obeyed his instructions to admit fraud if asked.

The author suggests that Randi's hoped-for 'big fish'—a major psi researcher endorsing the boys' abilities—eluded him. Randi prematurely closed down the experiment, possibly to meet a deadline for a television special. Professor John Hasted, a potential target, reportedly became cautious due to rumors of the boys being fakes.

The article reiterates that the only 'fraud' Randi incontrovertibly exposed was his own. Martin Gardner's characterization of Alpha as 'entrapment' is discussed, with the author distinguishing it from legal entrapment. While Alpha revealed credulity among some parapsychologists, it did not uncover fraud committed by psi experimenters. The author argues that the Mac Lab researchers did not claim scientific validation and that Randi was aware of the criticism of their work.

Randi's Minnows

Dr. Berthold Schwarz, a psychiatrist convinced of Steve Shaw's psychic powers, is presented as a victim of Project Alpha. Schwarz's involvement with Shaw was initially to seek a paranormal cure for his daughter. Randi's actions are criticized for potentially discrediting independent psi researchers, but the author argues this was not a massive indictment of parapsychology as a whole.

Project Beta and Beyond

Randi announced Project Beta, intended as a warning to researchers. This led to increased suspicion within the psi research community. The author details Randi's later claims about Beta's nature and success, suggesting a possible switch in definition or purpose. Randi's announcement that Beta had 'succeeded' because researchers had recognized the need for outside help from conjurors is contrasted with his earlier statements that Beta would fail if proper controls were adopted.

The author conjectures that Randi may have renamed his failed Project Beta as 'Gamma' and created a new 'Beta' to claim success, thus mending fences and taking credit for the PA's initiative to involve magicians. The author insists that Randi bears the burden of proof for his claims of Project Beta's success.

Randi Gets Counter-Hoaxed

Dennis Stillings, director of the Archaeus Project, initiated a retaliatory hoax by issuing a phony announcement of a large grant for PK research. Randi, falling for the hoax, awarded a 'Uri Award' to Stillings, mistakenly identifying a corporation and inflating the grant amount. This incident led to media ridicule of Randi, portraying him as 'Amusing' rather than 'Amazing.' The author suggests this demonstrated Randi's capability for gross distortion of facts.

What Can We Conclude?

The author concludes that the Alpha story is ongoing, with potential for more projects like Gamma. The essay aims to explore facts and raise questions rather than provide definitive answers. The author hopes Randi will respond to correct any factual errors. While acknowledging Randi's effectiveness as a critic, the author emphasizes that Randi is a professional conjuror, not a scientist, and that his methods should not be confused with scientific rigor. The author criticizes scientists and publications for uncritically accepting Randi's pronouncements and for elevating him to a position of authority.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the nature of scientific inquiry, the ethics of debunking, the role of skepticism, and the distinction between conjuring and scientific research. The article strongly advocates for critical evaluation of claims, particularly those made by figures like James Randi, emphasizing the importance of rigorous methodology, transparency, and ethical conduct in both scientific research and skeptical investigations. The editorial stance appears to be one of critical skepticism, urging readers to approach extraordinary claims with caution and to scrutinize the methods and motives of those who investigate them.

This issue of Zetetic Scholar, identified as #12/13 and dated 1987, focuses on the analysis of beliefs surrounding controversial topics, with a particular emphasis on parapsychology and scientific methodology. The cover prominently features an article by Henry H. Bauer titled "DISTRIBUTIONS OF BELIEFS ON CONTROVERSIAL MATTERS," accompanied by illustrative figures and a striking graphic.

Main Article: Distributions of Beliefs on Controversial Matters by Henry H. Bauer

Bauer's central thesis is that subjective probabilities do not always align with facts, especially when facts are not readily established. He proposes a framework for categorizing controversies by examining the distribution of degrees of belief. This involves comparing 'ideal' distributions (representing simple or complex cases) with 'actual' distributions observed in literature or among groups. Bauer illustrates this with Figure 1, showing how belief can be distributed ideally versus actually, and Figure 2, which analyzes belief distributions in literature about the Loch Ness Monster across different types of publications and time periods. He notes that books tend to express a believer's viewpoint, while periodicals show more polarization. Bauer observes that belief in the Loch Ness Monster became more prevalent after 1955, with a near consensus in the late 1960s, followed by renewed polarization and a recent decrease in belief and increase in polarization, mirroring patterns from 1935-54 when little new evidence emerged.

Bauer suggests that controversies can be classified into three types: those within science (where evidence is clear and non-cognitive factors are less influential), anomalous claims (where experts tend towards disbelief due to strong influence of non-cognitive factors, while the population is polarized), and technical matters of sociopolitical importance (where ideology plays a larger role than particulars).

Responses to Commentators and Further Clarifications

The issue includes extensive responses from Gerd H. Hovelmann to various commentators on his previous work concerning parapsychology and scientific methodology. Hovelmann addresses criticisms and clarifies his positions, particularly in response to John Beloff, Susan J. Blackmore, and Hans Jurgen Eysenck.

Response to John Beloff

Hovelmann clarifies that his recommendations were not aimed at merely improving the 'window display' of parapsychology for scientific acceptance, but rather at promoting methodical rigor and sound scientific conduct. He disputes Beloff's assertion that theories never exclude alternative explanations, proposing that an explanation is valid if it allows for the production of a phenomenon. Hovelmann argues that spontaneous cases, while potentially interesting, lack evidential value due to lack of control over conditions. He also addresses Beloff's point about 'mind' versus 'matter,' suggesting that scientific investigation of the mind still relies on material or behavioral changes and that the mind-body problem might be a 'Scheinproblem' (sham problem).

Response to Susan J. Blackmore

Hovelmann expresses pleasure that Blackmore agrees with most of his recommendations. He reiterates his view that there is nothing inherently 'revolutionary' in any science, contrary to some interpretations of Kuhn's theory. He also discusses the question of survival after death, noting a potential decrease in its prominence as a central question for many parapsychologists. Hovelmann strongly supports Blackmore's recommendation to focus on the immediate goals of research, emphasizing that anomalies should be means to an end (improved science) rather than ends in themselves, echoing Marcello Truzzi's sentiment.

Response to Hans Jurgen Eysenck

Hovelmann disagrees with Eysenck's view that terminological problems in parapsychology are inevitable. He argues that scientific terms should be defined by experimental actions and the criteria of measuring tools. Hovelmann also challenges Eysenck's use of Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo as examples of 'revolutionary' scientists, citing historical analysis that suggests these figures operated within existing traditions and that the 'Copernican Revolution' was more a consequence of their work than their explicit intent. He suggests that Eysenck's argument for the revolutionary nature of parapsychology based on these examples is unconvincing.

Response to Piet Hein Hoebens

Hovelmann agrees with Hoebens' assessment that evidence for survival is 'hopelessly weak' and that his recommendations might be ignored by some survival researchers. He reiterates the importance of cooperation between proponents and critics of parapsychology, emphasizing that criticism should not be dismissed. However, he distinguishes his call for cooperation from James Randi's 'Project Alpha,' which he felt was presented in a way that exaggerated its findings and was counterproductive.

Random Bibliography on the Occult and the Paranormal

The issue includes an extensive bibliography listing numerous articles and books related to the occult and the paranormal, covering a wide range of topics from scientific fraud and pseudoscience to specific phenomena like near-death experiences, astrology, and UFOs. This bibliography serves as a resource for further research in these areas.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The overarching theme of this issue is the critical examination of parapsychology and related fields through the lens of scientific methodology and the sociology of science. The editorial stance appears to be one of promoting rigor, clear definitions, and a rational approach to evidence, while acknowledging the complexities and controversies inherent in these subjects. There is a clear emphasis on distinguishing between genuine scientific inquiry and pseudoscience, and on the importance of self-correction and open dialogue within the scientific community, including engagement with critics.

This issue of the Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, Volume 82, Issue October 1985, presents a series of responses from various commentators to a set of recommendations concerning parapsychological research, methodology, and scientific standards. The discussions highlight significant disagreements on the nature of scientific method, the interpretation of evidence, the role of terminology, and the standards for research within parapsychology. The issue delves into detailed critiques and elaborations on the author's proposals, covering aspects such as experimental design, replication, and the distinction between scientific and non-scientific approaches.

Responses to Commentators

The bulk of the issue is dedicated to the author's detailed replies to numerous commentators, including Brian Inglis, Jürgen Keil, Stanley Krippner, Morton Leeds, Walter von Lucadou, Gerald C. Mertens, Robert L. Morris, Carroll B. Nash, Irmgard Oepen, John Palmer, Trevor J. Pinch, Steven M. Rosen, Gertrude R. Schmeidler, Christopher Scott, Douglas M. Stokes, Ulrich Timm, Jerome Tobacyk, Rhea A. White, and Leonard Zusne. These responses address specific points raised by each commentator regarding the author's recommendations.

Response to Brian Inglis

The author disagrees with Inglis on whether psi, if it exists, could modify or subvert scientific method, arguing that demonstrating psi's existence would inherently validate scientific method. The author also reiterates a stance on "behaviorist eccentricity" and "anecdotal evidence."

Response to Jürgen Keil

While agreeing with Keil on some points, the author clarifies that the focus was on "type (2) strategies" (justifiability of scientific actions) rather than "type (1) strategies" (external reactions). The author emphasizes the need for concrete purposes in scientific actions to distinguish successes from failures and links their philosophy of science to the "Erlangen School."

Response to Stanley Krippner

The author expresses pleasure with Krippner's comments and agreement on several recommendations, particularly those concerning the importance of skeptics writing for parapsychological periodicals and joining the Parapsychological Association. The author also acknowledges Krippner's additional recommendations for the future of parapsychology.

Response to Morton Leeds

The author agrees with Leeds on some points but disputes the idea that survival research can be investigated scientifically, citing section III.3. The author also argues that while spontaneous cases may provide "main drive" for research, they lack evidential value, and that developing adequate terminology is crucial, even if the field is underfunded.

Response to Walter von Lucadou

The author disputes von Lucadou's claim that history shows recommendations from philosophers of science are ignored, arguing that such recommendations have rarely been put forth. The author also takes issue with the characterization of quantum theory as a revolution in physics.

Response to Gerald C. Mertens

The author appreciates Mertens' praise but addresses his concerns about methodological restrictions and the potential for fraud. The author agrees that precautions against fraud are necessary, especially with mediums like Uri Geller, and acknowledges the difficulty in this area.

Response to Robert L. Morris

The author agrees with Morris on most points but disagrees that orthodox methods will necessarily lead to revolutionary findings. The author also discusses the concept of "aging Nobel laureates" contributing "ill-founded ideological or metaphysical trash" to their work.

Response to Carroll B. Nash

The author states that many points raised by Nash have already been addressed or will be in section III. The author also takes issue with Nash's arguments regarding the survival hypothesis and the "super-ESP" hypothesis.

Response to Irmgard Oepen

The author thanks Oepen for her comments and acknowledges a past dispute. The author agrees with Oepen on the necessity of conditions for scientific respectability and the lack of "substantial findings" in parapsychology, while also noting the presence of "anomalous" results.

Response to John Palmer

The author agrees with Palmer on the importance of distinguishing between explaining and identifying anomalies and on the challenge of using the same terms for both. The author also clarifies their stance on repeatability in parapsychology, emphasizing that while some degree is necessary, strict repeatability is unattainable.

Response to Trevor J. Pinch

The author disagrees with Pinch's view that they were primarily concerned with public relations, stating the intent was to promote rational action and speech. The author also argues that philosophers of science have an obligation to make recommendations for improving scientific practices.

Response to Steven M. Rosen

The author expresses strong disagreement with Rosen's characterization of their position as "objective realism," stating a clear rejection of this stance. The author also disputes Rosen's assertion that the subject-matter of parapsychology is inherently "revolutionary."

Response to Gertrude R. Schmeidler

The author is pleased that Schmeidler agrees with the last four recommendations but notes that others found them less clear. The author argues against the idea of "arguing against exploring unmapped areas," emphasizing the need for scientific approaches. The author also questions the value of "personal opinions" in assessing evidence.

Response to Christopher Scott

The author believes Scott has misunderstood the paper's purpose, which was not about "window display" but about the importance of language and presentational aspects in science. The author stresses that research and presentation are inseparable aspects of science.

Response to Douglas M. Stokes

The author agrees with Stokes on the unpleasant parapsychologist/critic dichotomy and its consequences. The author also clarifies their position regarding James Randi, acknowledging his contributions while also being critical of some of his statements. The author discusses the term "parapsychology" and its historical context.

Response to Ulrich Timm

The author takes issue with Timm's imputation that parapsychologists "occasionally disregard" the rules of science "out of forgetfulness," arguing this could be used to immunize irresponsible practices. The author also expresses skepticism about the idea that "psi phenomena cannot be explained within the framework of the established sciences."

Response to Jerome Tobacyk

The author agrees with Tobacyk that certain aspects might contribute to a "revolutionary outlook" among parapsychologists. However, the author questions the general applicability of the idea that the need to view oneself as a "hero" is a primary motivator for many people.

Response to Rhea A. White

The author states a strong disagreement with White on several points, particularly regarding the idea that parapsychology will "revolutionize scientific method." The author argues that parapsychological propositions can only be valid relative to existing orthodox scientific standards, making it impossible for them to revolutionize those same standards.

Response to Leonard Zusne

The author expresses amusement at Zusne's identification of them as a parapsychologist, clarifying their position outside the "sheep/goat dichotomy" of parapsychologists and critics. The author emphasizes that their stance is based on a critical analysis of scientific methodology rather than an adherence to a specific camp.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes throughout this issue revolve around the critical evaluation of parapsychological research methodologies, the importance of clear and adequate terminology, and the establishment of rigorous scientific standards. The author consistently advocates for a disciplined, evidence-based approach, emphasizing the need for justifications of scientific actions and propositions. There is a strong undercurrent of skepticism towards claims that lack robust empirical support or are based on subjective interpretations. The editorial stance, as reflected in the author's responses, is one of advocating for a more disciplined, self-aware, and methodologically sound parapsychology, while remaining open to genuine anomalous findings that can withstand scientific scrutiny. The issue highlights the ongoing debate within the field regarding its scientific legitimacy and the best path forward for its development.

This issue of Zetetic Scholar, dated 1987, features a series of articles and discussions primarily focused on the philosophy of science as it relates to parapsychology, scientific methodology, and the challenges of establishing scientific legitimacy for anomalous phenomena. The content includes critical analyses of prominent figures' theories, a detailed examination of scientific explanation and justification, and a book review.

Articles and Discussions

Critiques of Professor Zusne's Distinction

The articles engage with Professor Zusne's distinction between 'demonstrative' and 'dialectic' world views, which he posits as influencing how parapsychologists and critics interpret experimental data. The author expresses strong objections to Zusne's 'dichotomy version' of this distinction, finding it untenable and arguing that it unfairly labels parapsychologists. While acknowledging that Zusne later modified this to a 'continuum' or 'composition of syndromes' model, which is more acceptable, the author still maintains reservations about labeling the 'dialectic' view as typical of parapsychologists. The author emphasizes that their own position is agnostic regarding paranormal explanations and that they are satisfied with any solution, whether normal or paranormal, as long as it is scientifically valid.

The Nature of Scientific Explanation and Justification

A significant portion of the issue is dedicated to exploring the concepts of scientific explanation and justification. The author critiques the reliance on Thomas Kuhn's model of scientific revolutions, arguing that it can become a 'cheap defense of poor science' by prioritizing historical succession over rigorous foundation and justification. An alternative model is proposed that allows for critical reconstruction of theoretical developments and provides a basis for distinguishing well-founded from unfounded propositions. This model emphasizes the importance of exemplary determinations of predicators and the use of examples and counter-examples for constructing a scientific terminology.

The Survival Hypothesis and Scientific Inquiry

The issue strongly objects to research on the survival hypothesis, citing several fundamental reasons. These include pragmatic, mental-hygienic, and language-philosophical grounds. The author argues that empirical scientific knowledge about survival is impossible in principle because it is not possible to methodically introduce the linguistic means necessary for talking about survival in a scientifically justifiable manner. The inherent circularity in defining and proving 'survival' is highlighted, as is the impossibility of obtaining objective proof without pre-existing assumptions.

Book Review: The Enigma of Daniel Home: Medium or Fraud?

The issue includes a review by Eric J. Dingwall of Trevor H. Hall's book, 'The Enigma of Daniel Home: Medium or Fraud?'. The review details Hall's essayistic approach to solving puzzles related to the medium Daniel Home. It discusses Hall's analysis of Home's claimed aristocratic origins, his investigation into the 'mystery of iniquity' concerning an episode in Italy, and his examination of Home's phenomena. Dingwall notes Hall's reliance on various sources and his attempts to explain phenomena through misinterpretation or imagination. The review also points out significant omissions in Hall's analysis, particularly regarding striking examples of Home's mediumship and the lighting conditions during sittings, which could challenge Hall's conclusions. The review concludes by noting Hall's tendency to judge the honesty of a medium by their associates, leading to a potentially flawed conclusion about Home's genuineness.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue revolve around the rigorous application of scientific methodology, the philosophical underpinnings of scientific inquiry, and a critical stance towards claims that lack robust empirical and logical support. The editorial stance appears to advocate for a clear distinction between scientific investigation and belief, emphasizing the need for precise terminology, sound justification, and a cautious approach to anomalous phenomena. There is a consistent effort to dissect arguments, identify logical fallacies, and promote a more critical and self-aware approach within the field of parapsychology and related areas of inquiry.

This issue of Zetetic Scholar, identified as Volume 11, Issue 11, published in 1985, features a collection of reviews and articles delving into various aspects of anomalistic psychology, astrology, cryptozoology, and psychical research. The publication is presented as a platform for critical examination of paranormal claims and the scientific approaches to studying them.

Reviews of Books on Anomalistic Psychology and Astrology

The issue opens with a review by Piet Hein Hoebens of Michel Gauquelin's book "The Truth About Astrology" (UK title) or "Birthtimes: A Scientific Investigation of the Secrets of Astrology" (US title). Hoebens notes that the book focuses almost exclusively on Gauquelin's work in "neo-astrology" and serves as a summary of his research, revealing his intellectual personality. Gauquelin's "passion" for astrology is described as complex, marked by both attraction and repulsion. The reviewer highlights Gauquelin's methodological conservatism, his tendency to seek non-occult explanations for planetary effects, and his occasional questioning of whether he is stripping the planetary effect of its "absurdity." Hoebens finds it difficult to make sense of these planetary effects and places his bets on Gauquelin's data despite the lack of clear explanation. A key hypothesis explored is the correlation of planetary effects with geomagnetic activity, suggesting fetuses might detect magnetic field variations. However, the proto-theory faces challenges in explaining distance effects and planetary sector specificity. The reviewer concludes that Gauquelin is a "skeptical inquirer and a proponent of a Claim of the Paranormal," and the book "gives no unambiguous answer" to the identity problem he faces.

Geoffrey Dean also reviews "The Truth About Astrology," emphasizing Gauquelin's extensive research since 1949 and the book's clarity. He notes the book's aim at the general reader, its inclusion of graphs, tables, references, and a questionnaire for research. Dean highlights Gauquelin's "enthusiasm for his subject, his scrupulously scientific approach, and the sheer mass of evidence accumulated." He counters criticisms of Gauquelin's work (selection of data, wrong statistics, lack of replication) by pointing to his rigorous scientific method, including replication of studies. Dean discusses the "diurnal effect" observed in planetary influences on birth, noting its baffling features and the lack of a clear natural explanation. He suggests that self-fulfilling prophecy is unlikely to explain the findings and wonders how Gauquelin will resolve the identity problem of being both a skeptic and a proponent.

Ron Westrum reviews "Anomalistic Psychology: A Study of Extraordinary Phenomena of Behavior and Experience" by Leonard Zusne and Warren H. Jones. Westrum finds the book useful as an undergraduate text but notes significant reservations regarding its methodological and theoretical adequacy. He identifies three major problems: an inadequate definition of "the extraordinary," a lack of treatment for the psychology of genuinely anomalous perceptual stimuli, and insufficient attention to the sociology of crypto-scientifically anomalous events. Westrum criticizes the book's reliance on popular science writers like Philip J. Klass and Michael Oberg over scientific experts like J. Allen Hynek, suggesting bias in the treatment of UFOs. He argues that the definition of "anomalistic" as "inconsistent with current scientific doctrines" is too broad and that the book essentially equates "basic limiting principles" with "current common sense in science." Westrum points out that the book focuses on how perception and belief can go wrong, neglecting the possibility that perceptions can be correct. He also laments the lack of discussion on genuinely anomalous stimuli and the sociology of anomalous experiences, suggesting that the authors overlook the social processes within science itself and the potential for group interaction to suppress genuine anomalous experiences.

Reviews of Books on Cryptozoology and Psychic Warfare

Henry H. Bauer reviews "Champ Beyond the Legend" by Joseph W. Zarzynski. Bauer acknowledges Zarzynski's efforts in making the study of "Champ" respectable and providing a comprehensive overview of the evidence. The book is described as surveying what has been said and done about Champ, referencing Loch Ness, and placing the matter in the context of cryptozoology. Appendix 4 contains 224 reported sightings. Bauer notes that while the case for Champ has contemporaneous documentation from the 19th century, unlike Loch Ness, it lacks supporting physical evidence like film or sonar. He finds Zarzynski's comparisons with Loch Ness to be lacking in specific justification and suspects they are made for general reasons. Bauer concludes that the existence of Champ remains to be established but recommends the book for those interested in anomalous claims, excluding hardened skeptics.

Bauer also reviews "Superstition and the Press" by Curtis D. MacDougall, describing it as a large resource documenting newspaper coverage of superstitions. He notes that the book provides useful raw material but is critical of its inconsistent structure, alternating between straight reportage and analytical commentary. Bauer finds the analytical commentary less reliable due to MacDougall's strong opinions and potential errors. He points out specific inaccuracies in the Loch Ness section, including the chronology of reports and the interpretation of evidence. Bauer also criticizes the publisher for numerous typographical errors, garbled syntax, and poor production quality.

John Beloff reviews "Psychic Warfare: Threat or Illusion?" by Martin Ebon. Beloff, who admits to believing in psi phenomena, finds the book a sober survey of Soviet parapsychological research. He notes that while the research effort has been minimal, the possibility of a clandestine massive research program cannot be excluded. Ebon's book covers subjects like Nina Kulagina and Rosa Kuleshova, and mentions figures like Edouard Naumov. Beloff suggests that Soviet parapsychology lags behind its Western counterpart, lacking a continuous critical tradition and being encrusted with pseudoscientific notions. He questions the vast sums allegedly spent on Soviet psi research and the indications that it has come under KGB direction, suggesting these might be part of a disinformation operation. Beloff concludes that talk of 'psychic warfare' is premature, more illusion than threat, and that while Russians may be feared, their mastery of paranormal secrets is not yet apparent.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The issue consistently engages with the critical evaluation of evidence, methodologies, and potential biases in the study of paranormal phenomena. There is a clear emphasis on scientific rigor, replication, and the need for clear definitions and theoretical frameworks. The reviews often highlight the challenges of distinguishing genuine anomalous experiences from psychological artifacts, hoaxes, or misinterpretations. The editorial stance appears to favor a skeptical but open-minded approach, encouraging rigorous investigation while cautioning against uncritical acceptance of claims. The publication serves as a forum for detailed critiques of books and research in the field, aiming to foster a deeper and more nuanced understanding of anomalistic phenomena.

This document is a collection of book reviews and annotations from the "ZETETIC SCHOLAR" magazine, specifically the "BOOKS BRIEFLY NOTED" section. The content focuses on publications related to paranormal phenomena, parapsychology, ufology, history of science, and related fringe topics. The reviews are critical and analytical, with a strong emphasis on scientific rigor and skepticism, as indicated by the "Critical annotations are by Marcello Truzzi" note.

Book Reviews and Annotations

The issue presents a wide array of book reviews, each offering a brief synopsis and critical assessment. The annotations often delve into the book's methodology, arguments, and potential biases, providing a scholarly perspective for readers interested in anomalistics and psychical research.

Key themes and topics covered include:

• Parapsychology and Psi Phenomena: Books on ESP, psychokinesis, out-of-body experiences, mental healing, and the general study of psi are reviewed. For instance, Susan Blackmore's "The Adventures of a Parapsychologist" is described as a memoir of her shift from belief to agnosticism, and "Beyond the Body" is noted as an important critical study of out-of-body experiences. "Foundations of Parapsychology" is recommended as a general text for psychologists inclined to dismiss psi research.
• Ufology and Extraterrestrial Life: Several books discuss UFOs and the extraterrestrial hypothesis. "The Extraterrestrial Encyclopedia" is noted for its survey of life in outer space but criticized for equating the "UFO hypothesis" with the ETH. "The Extraterrestrial Life Debate 1750-1900" is highlighted as a scholarly work on the historical roots of the debate.
• History and Sociology of Science: The reviews frequently touch upon the history and sociology of science, examining how scientific ideas develop, controversies arise, and how science interacts with society. "Revolution in Science" is noted for its discussion of failed scientific revolutions. "The Dark Side of Science" is recommended for its papers on fraud and deviance in science. "Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice" is valued for its perspective on the social negotiation of replication.
• Skepticism and Critical Analysis: Many reviews emphasize a skeptical approach, evaluating claims based on scientific evidence and methodology. Books that are deemed uncritical or pseudoscientific are often flagged. For example, George C. Andrews' "Extra-Terrestrials Among Us" is noted for its uncritical discussions that would infuriate serious ufologists and critics.
• Specific Topics: Other reviewed books cover a diverse range of subjects, including the history of medical mycology, mathematical profiles, hypnotism, the anthropic cosmological principle, the Velikovsky controversy, the Loch Ness Monster, witchcraft, the occult, science fiction, spiritualism, psychical research, magic, and even the cultural meaning of popular science like phrenology.

Notable Mentions and Critiques:

• Marcello Truzzi: Serves as the primary annotator, providing critical insights and evaluations.
• Susan Blackmore: Her memoir "The Adventures of a Parapsychologist" is discussed, noting her transition from belief to agnosticism in parapsychology.
• William R. Corliss: His "The Sun and Solar System Debris" and "Earthquakes, Tides, Unidentified Sounds, and Related Phenomena" are praised as essential and outstanding works in cataloging astronomical and geophysical anomalies.
• Paul Kurtz: His book "The Transcendental Temptation" is critiqued for failing to distinguish between the supernatural and the paranormal, leading to a misrepresentation of psychical research.
• J. Gordon Melton: His encyclopedic works on American religions, cults, and sect leaders are noted as indispensable resources.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this section are the critical examination of paranormal claims, the importance of scientific methodology, and the historical and sociological context of scientific and pseudoscientific endeavors. The editorial stance, as represented by the annotations, is clearly one of skepticism and a demand for rigorous evidence. The reviews aim to guide readers through the complex landscape of anomalous phenomena, helping them to distinguish between credible research and unsubstantiated claims. There is a consistent effort to evaluate books not just on their content but also on their approach to evidence, their theoretical underpinnings, and their potential biases. The publication appears to be a valuable resource for those interested in the scientific study of the paranormal and related fields, offering a balanced and critical perspective.

This document comprises pages 198-206 of an issue of "ZS," a publication likely focused on anomalous phenomena, parapsychology, and related scientific and historical inquiries. The content consists primarily of book reviews and information about an organization called CSAR (Center for Scientific Anomalies Research).

Book Reviews

The majority of the content is dedicated to reviews of recent (circa 1986-1987) books. These reviews cover a wide spectrum of topics:

• Ufology and Anomalous Phenomena:
• Randolfo Rafael Pozos' "The Face On Mars: Evidence for a Lost Civilization?" is reviewed, discussing the controversy surrounding a 1976 Viking photograph and concluding that the evidence warrants further objective appraisal.
• Austin Stevens' "Mysterious New England" offers a collection of gothic tales.
• Brad Steiger's "Demon Lovers" is described as a sensationalistic potboiler for the occult marketplace.
• Carol Zaleski's "Otherworld Journeys" examines near-death experiences from medieval to modern times, comparing them to current scientific and religious dialogues.
• Alberto Villoldo and Stanley Krippner's "Healing States" looks at the mind's ability to heal through cross-cultural comparisons of Western medicine with shamanic and spiritual healing.
• Mark Urban-Lurain's "Astrology as Science" attempts a statistical approach.
• David B. Wilson's "Did the Devil Make Darwin Do It?" offers modern perspectives on the creation-evolution controversy.
• Greg Whincup's "Rediscovering the I Ching" provides a new translation and scholarly reinterpretation of the Book of Changes.
• Maury Terry's "The Ultimate Evil" investigates alleged connections between cults and serial killers, described as a conspiracy tale with "many large leaps in logic."

• Philosophy of Science and Psychology:
• Alastair I.M. Rae's "Quantum Physics: Illusion or Reality" is a lucid introduction to quantum physics, discussing consciousness and the many-worlds hypothesis.
• Alexander Rosenberg's "The Structure of Biological Science" is an introduction to an integrated post-positivistic philosophy of biological science.
• Robert Rosenthal's "Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research" is an introduction to combining and comparing research results, noted as relevant to anomaly studies.
• David Stove's "Popper and After: Four Modern Irrationalists" considers Karl Popper and others, with the reviewer finding Stove's position to oversimplify and misrepresent the authors.
• Garyuth L. Wells and Elizabeth F. Loftus' "Eyewitness Testimony: Psychological Perspective" is a collection of readings on experimental literature concerning eyewitness testimony, relevant to witness reports on anomalies.
• Renee Weber's "Dialogues with Scientists and Sages" presents interviews with scientists and mystics.
• Peter A. Sturrock's "Institute for Plasma Research" is mentioned in relation to Brian Vickers' "Occult & Scientific Mentalities in the Renaissance."

• Language and Consciousness:
• David Premack's "Gavagai! Or the Future History of the Animal Language Controversy" reviews the debate surrounding animal language acquisition.
• Benjamin B. Wolman and Montague Ullman's "Handbook of States of Consciousness" is a collection of papers on consciousness studies.
• John White's "What Is Enlightenment?" explores the goal of the spiritual path.

• History and Culture:
• Michel Ragon's "The Space of Death: A Study of Funerary Architecture, Decoration and Urbanism" is an encyclopedic work on funerary customs.
• Brian Vickers' "Occult & Scientific Mentalities in the Renaissance" examines the interaction of occult and scientific thought.
• Albert Van Helden's "Measuring the Universe" traces the history of astronomy.
• Amy Wallace's "The Prodigy" is a biography of William James Sidis.
• William R. Corliss' "The Sourcebook Project" is mentioned in relation to "Haunted Heartland."
• William R. Corliss' "The Sourcebook Project" is mentioned in relation to "Mysterious New England."

• Psychic Archaeology and Psi Research:
• Stephan A. Schwartz's "The Alexandria Project" describes the Mobius Group's adventure in psychic archaeology.
• Ian Stevenson's "Unlearned Language: New Studies in Xenoglossy" examines instances of persons speaking foreign languages they had no opportunity to learn, suggesting past-life learning.
• Francis Vaughn and Roger Walsh's "Accept This Gift" offers selections from "A Course in Miracles."

• Other Topics:
• Jane Reid's "Sorcerers and Healing Spirits" is an ethnographic study of an Aboriginal medical system.
• Jane Roberts' "Dreams, 'Evolution,' and Value Fulfillment, Volume I" is a posthumously published volume dictated by "Seth."
• Gilbert Rouget's "Music and Trance" explores the relationship between music and possession.
• David T. Tansley's "The Raiment of Light" reviews the literature on the human aura.
• Charles T. Tart's "Waking Up" offers a path to awakening from normal awareness.
• Michael Tausig's "Shamanism, Colonialism, and the Wild Man" is an anthropological study.
• Colin Wilson's "Afterlife" examines cases for survival.
• Robert Anton Wilson's "The New Inquisition" critiques "Scientism."
• David Wise's "The Samarkand Dimension" is an espionage novel involving psi research.

Center for Scientific Anomalies Research (CSAR)

Pages 205 and 206 are dedicated to describing CSAR, a private center founded in 1981 by Prof. Marcello Truzzi (Director) and Prof. Ron Westrum (Associate Director). CSAR aims to foster responsible scientific inquiry into anomalies and the paranormal. Its stated goals include:

• Advancing interdisciplinary scientific study of anomalies.
• Acting as a clearinghouse for anomaly research.
• Creating an international network of experts.
• Publishing research (e.g., Zetetic Scholar, CSAR Bulletin).
• Promoting dissemination of reliable information.
• Sponsoring conferences and symposia.
• Improving communication between critics and proponents.

CSAR focuses on evaluating bodies of anomalous observations rather than esoteric theories, emphasizing a scientific approach and requiring proof commensurate with the extraordinary nature of claims. It aims for constructive skepticism.

The document outlines the organization of CSAR, detailing various roles:

• Senior Science and Resource Consultants: Appointed by invitation, these individuals sponsor CSAR and are consultants to it.
• CSAR Consultants: Persons with demonstrated expertise in anomaly research who wish to be listed in the CSAR Directory.
• Consulting Members: Individuals who are both Consultants and Members.
• Members: Provide basic financial support ($35 annual fee) and receive CSAR publications.
• Patrons: Members who provide more active financial support ($100+ annual gift).
• CSAR Monitors: Volunteers who help gather information about anomalies in different geographic areas.
• CSAR Research Associates: Consultants or Consulting Members involved in ongoing research projects.
• ZS Subscribers: Persons who subscribe to the journal Zetetic Scholar without formal association with CSAR.

Contact information for CSAR is provided: P.O. Box 1052, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 USA.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in the book reviews include the evaluation of evidence for anomalous phenomena, the intersection of science with the occult and paranormal, the nature of consciousness, and the history of scientific thought. The publication appears to adopt a stance of "constructive skepticism," as described in the CSAR mission statement, encouraging rigorous scientific inquiry into claims of anomalies while remaining open-minded to the possibility of genuine phenomena that could lead to reconceptualization of scientific theory. The reviews themselves vary in their critical assessment, with some being highly positive and others more reserved or critical of the authors' methodologies or conclusions.