Geraldomania!

I received an email informing me that an "investigation" of paranormal researcher Gary Schwartz would be aired on Fox News Channel this weekend. As best I can tell after perusing the FNC schedule, the program in question is Geraldo at Large, which airs tonight (Saturday) at 8 PM Eastern Time. The  show re-airs at midnight and at 4 A.M. Sunday. It runs 60 minutes.

Geraldo at Large also airs on Sunday at 8 PM, but I'm not sure if it's a repeat or a whole new show with different subject matter.

According to a capsule description on the FNC Web site, the Saturday show will include a segment on the "real-life woman behind the TV show Medium." That would be Allison DuBois, who was tested by Gary Schwartz but later had a falling-out with him. DuBois has just put out a new book and is presumably on Geraldo's program to promote it.

Ordinarily, nothing would convince me to watch Geraldo, but this segment may - emphasis on may - be interesting, if it sheds any light on Dubois' differences with Schwartz.

Comments

[Chris]

I dunno, I get a bad feeling about this. The minute I read this entry, I was struck by the thought that they're going to paint him as a kook.

[Mike D.]

I wonder if there are people who will say that this was predicted in Veronica Keen's automatic writing.

[Ginny]

I saw it. A man says Schwartz contacted him by mail about his deceased son, gave details about son's character and personality, stayed at the man's house, and tried to extract $3.5 million (of which the man paid an installment of $50K) for further communications with the son, who Schwartz claimed was going to start some kind of corporation on the Other Side.

This sounds too audacious and too bad to be true. Since when does Schwartz claim to have psychic abilities himself, as this man implied? So far as I know, all he has ever claimed to do is test those who do purport to have such abilities. The letter from Schwartz was shown, but not its contents, only the date, address, and "Re:" lines.

On the other hand, Schwartz would not come on to rebut, and a debunker was standing by to denounce (along with Geraldo) all mediums as frauds and all believers as gullible fools. And Laurie Campbell told of falling out with Schwartz over allegedly violating confidential communications.

On the OTHER other hand, it's kind of hard (bordering on impossible) to buy Geraldo as a crusader for truth and protector of the innocent. :-)

[Ben]

Did this man report these alleged violations to the University of Arizona? If he didn't, then it's difficult to believe that this man has a serious case.

[Ginny]

I'm going to tape it when it reruns, so I can watch more closely for the details and maybe further research on the parties involved. But they said the prosecutor had told the man that while what Schwartz did was unethical, it was not illegal.

[Ben]

On the other hand, Schwartz is somewhat weird. His book The GOD Experiments was just bizarre. I couldn't believe that the book came from a supposedly serious scientific researcher.

[Ginny]

Oh, and spare me the debunkers' faux pity, too. The condescending out-of-hand dismissal of believers as gullible is bad enough, but topping it off with crocodile tears ... "they are suffering, they so want to believe, the poor things" ... is downright infuriating. These people are frequently psychologists, so you'd think they'd know how badly that plays!

[Michael Prescott]

I just watched it. Okay, here's the thing. I've heard other allegations about Gary Schwartz over the past two or three years. Some of them were similar to the allegations made in the Geraldo report tonight. I'd even been told that Schwartz was under investigation by legal authorities in Arizona, thought I wasn't able to confirm this.

Also, it's a fact that many of the mediums who worked with Schwartz in the early stages of his research have parted company with him - Laurie Campbell and Allison DuBois are only two of them. These mediums have accused Schwartz of unethical behavior.

Last year I followed a long thread on a pro-paranormal site in which various people had very negative things to say about a medium Schwartz recently endorsed. These people, who were probably in a position to know, felt that the medium in question (it's nobody famous) was a fraud, and that Schwartz should have known it.

Occasionally I've criticized Schwartz for not publishing the full transcripts of his sessions. Without the full transcripts, it is impossible to evaluate the data. In a newsgroup, I once raised this concern with Julie Beischel, who worked at Schwartz's lab, and she claimed that putting the transcripts online would be very time-consuming and require all sorts of manpower. Nonsense. It takes almost no effort to upload a text document to a Web server and add a link to that document on a Web page. Hell, with blog software they could just post the transcripts as blog entries.

The bottom line is that I've had doubts about Schwartz for some time. Some people may have noticed that I rarely mention his work and do not include his experiments when discussing the best evidence for an afterlife.

Tonight's brief but damning investigative report only makes me more skeptical. Although the report had its predictably tabloid elements (victim Michael Knopf weeping on camera, slow-motion shots of Schwartz looking creepy), the basic story seems pretty straightforward and hard to argue with. If Schwartz has a convincing rebuttal, why didn't he return the reporters' calls? Also note that investigative reporter Marianne Macy intimated that Schwartz "managed to do this to a lot of people," and that more stories may "come out of the woodwork" now that this story has broken. If there is any truth to these statements, we may be looking at a pattern of misbehavior.

The show claimed that Schwartz received $1.8 million from the National Institutes of Health. If this is true, it is an enormous sum compared to the funding of all other paranormal research combined. $1.8 million should buy one hell of a lot of research. Where is it?

I'd say that this story is quite devastating, and that if Gary Schwartz wants to rescue his reputation, he'll need some better answers than "No comment."

[Michael Prescott]

>a debunker was standing by to denounce (along with Geraldo) all mediums as frauds and all believers as gullible fools.

I didn't take it that way. Although Geraldo is clearly skeptical, he didn't state his opinion directly. As for Marianne Macy, I didn't hear her say that all mediums are frauds, though she clearly believes that Schwartz is a fraud.

>I wonder if there are people who will say that this was predicted in Veronica Keen's automatic writing.

Well, you know what? It kinda was. I still have trouble swallowing the stuff about Moses and Ramses, though.

[Michael Prescott]

One other thing. Here's how Schwartz styles himself on his Web site:

"GARY E. SCHWARTZ, Ph.D., Director of the VERITAS Research Program, is a professor of Psychology, Medicine, Neurology, Psychiatry, and Surgery at the University of Arizona ..."

What appears to be the case is that Schwartz is a professor of psychology, period. He does teach courses in the departments of Medicine, Neurology, Psychiatry, and Surgery at UA, but this is not the same thing as being a professor in all those fields.

A small thing? Sure. But a penchant for exaggeration is not an ideal quality in a paranormal researcher, to put it mildly.

[drew hempel]

Too bad Magnetic Man isn't on there!

http://www.magneticman.org/

[Ben]

"The bottom line is that I've had doubts about Schwartz for some time. Some people may have noticed that I rarely mention his work and do not include his experiments when discussing the best evidence for an afterlife."

I don't blame you. If you read his writing, there is something fishy about the guy (there seems to be a hint of zealousness). He doesn't write with the rigor or seriousness of researchers like William James, Hodgson, or Ian Stevenson.

[Tim]

At the very least, you can surmise from the evidence that Schwartz has a penchant for the spotlight. He's published 3 books aimed at the popular audience that are clearly designed to titillate, with titles that include the words "God" and "Afterlife."

My read on him is that he's dying to be a celebrity and probably wealthy as well, and that's made him do some imprudent things. I'm an author, and Michael knows like I do that when you get into areas like the origins of ideas, revealing confidential information in a book and money, relationships can get strained and people can start sniping at each other. I have no doubt that's the source of the conflict between Schwartz and DuBois and Campbell.

I sincerely hope the allegations of extortion are untrue. I would hate to see Schwartz's research be cast in a bad light by such sordid goings-on. But as Michael says, he needs to do something else to clear his name besides pull a John Kerry.

[Kevin]

Perhaps the most unfortunate consequence of the controversy surrounding Schwartz is that it only gives reinforcement to critics who contend that research in this and related areas is a complete waste of research funds, thus making investigation and understanding all the more difficult. The unsubtle presentation which was broadcast illuminates how corporate media uses psychological warfare techniques to discredit ideas and the people supposedly representing them (Michael cites the shots of the weeping victim and carefully selected images of Schwartz). In no way do I defend Schwartz or his work, both of which will have to stand or fall on whatever their merits, but the presentation style of this and related "informative" programming, especially network "news" broadcasts, demonstrates the reasons for the decline in large media viewership and the parallel increase in use of the internet as sources of "reliable" information. The next obvious step will be to gain control of internet information content. Otherwise, government/corporate agendas are increasingly susceptable to undermining by competing ideas, a problem compounded for the individual because of the difficulty in establishing the veracity of any information acquired. While this goes on, consciousness research and afterlife studies indicate that what we can describe as truly important in our existences is being communicated to us in a variety of ways. All we need to do in order to begin to understand is to pay attention, do our best to separate the good from the bad, and move forward. No easy thing, that, but where's the value in "easy"?

[Eteponge]

Thank you Michael for bringing this to everyone's attention. I had no idea about any of this regarding Gary Schwartz. I'd always heard of him as a high profile researcher of mediumship who performed unbiased triple-blind experiments with mediums that highly suggests that mediumship is very testable and very real.

I'd read criticisms of him before, but they were only directed at his earlier experiments. I'd read rebuttals to these however, showing how his later experiments had fixed everything flawed from his earlier experiments and were greatly stepped up to avoid earlier mistakes and potential problems.

These accusations circling around him, and mediums who have worked with him going against him, and mediums highly suspected of fraud passing his tests, and his apparent "no comment" mentality to all of it, does not paint him in a good light.

[Diego]

It is a true indication of the rational foundation and unbiased nature of this blog to see the same high standards of authenticity applied equally to both paranormal investigators and their critics.

[Alex]

I wouldn't be surprised if this story simply destroys academic research into the "paranormal." If the allegations are true, then there is a serious possibility that universities will try to distance themselves from this type of research (notably UVA). Schwartz is probably going to make it a hell of a lot harder to get funding.

[Tim]

Don't jump the gun, Alex. Remember, what we have so far are a lot of rumors and unverified allegations. Of course, that's all the pseudoskeptics need to point fingers and shout, "See, we told you Schwartz was a fame-grubbing crackpot!"

Rumors do occur and many are false. I think the best way to approach this might be to reach out to other psi researchers and see if they will comment off the record about Schwartz, the rumors and the veracity of his research. I for one was very interested to see the results of his upcoming quintuple-blind mediumship experiments, but unless this controversy is resolved quickly, all of his research will be placed in some serious doubt. After all, if he truly is besotted by fame, who's to say he wouldn't falsify his results in order to gain notoriety? And as Michael says, he hasn't published his transcripts. Can you say, David Thompson redux?

To be fair, let me present a possible alternative hypothesis for the story told by the victim on Geraldo: it was a hoax. Someone reads one of Schwartz's books (which were bestsellers, so a lot of folks read them) gets the idea that he can extort money from people by claiming to be this famous scientist who's in contact with dead people, and sends out letters to some bereaved people. It's actually fairly plausible in this celebrity-obsessed society, and I have to admit the idea that a guy like Schwartz, whose work is already so scrutinized, would be stupid enough to try to extort money from people does defy credulity a little. Not many faster ways to destroy your career. Why risk it?

We shall see.

[Cyrus]

I'm skeptical of these allegations against Schwartz, and Tim's post seems plausible to me. I go to the U of A, so maybe I will look into it myself. I can't imagine he would extort anybody, ruin his career for money, and jeopardize his passion--psi research. He's never struck me as such a person. Unfortunately, whether true or not, this is going to be ammunition for the debunkers.

Though, if true, it certainly does add a little weight to Veronica's predictions/viewpoints (or whatever they are).

[Michael Tymn]

I don't know what to believe about Schwartz, but I am inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and not "hang" him as others seem to want to do. I can certainly understand him refusing to comment on the show as there was no way that Geraldo was going to let him state his case. Schwartz knew that whatever he had to say would be edited and he would still come out of it looking like the bad guy that Geraldo wants him to be. If I were Schwartz's attorney or PR man, I'd certainly advise him not to make any statement to Geraldo.

Schwartz's book The Afterlife Experiments was reviewed by Daryl Bem for the Journal of Parapsychology in 2005. Bem, who is a professor of psychology at Cornell and perhaps parapsychology's most respected proponent, notes "several...troubling errors in the book that one would not expect from someone with Schwartz's background." You can access the review at: http://dbem.ws/Afterlife%20Experiments.pdf.

[Larry Boy]

I don't think this, even if true, will ruin parapsychological research. The field has withstood larger crises for more than a hundred years. Also I don't think large universities will start attacking their parapsychologists just because of a sensational TV show about one already controversial researcher, as if that automatically would invalidate other parapsychologists' reputation. More likely is probably that they will keep silent and let things continue as they do.

[RobL]

I agree that this won't sink parapsychology as a whole, but it could be potentially devastating to research involving mediums. Dirty rumors, whether they're true or not, are like blueberry stains* - they're very difficult to remove. If these claims take hold it could be a long time before mediums are allowed back into the labs again. I'll bet Marcel Cairo is super pissed about this piece.

*Please don't post tips on how to remove blueberry stains.

[Samantha]

I agree with Michael Prescott's posting on Dr. Schwartz's credentials. I have done a little research on this myself and have found that he is not teaching any classes this fall at the U of A. His PhD is only in Personality psychology, he is not an MD or surgeon, psychiatrist, any of those things. One question to ask the U of A is how is he paid, from what Department? This would show where his true appointments are....does he have appointements in all these departments?
I also have questions for the U of A regarding his LACH programs....How is it he is director of a lab with no scientific advisory board? Have those programs been approved by an IRB? He claims so, but I strongly think not....where is this Lab? Who are his subjects?

[JoeMB]

Michael,

That magnetic man seems to have the same ability as the Dutch (alleged) medium Robbert, that I linked to in my emails to you. I had never seen that before and now there are two of them. Supposedly.

From MP's earlier blog entry on Montague and the "prediction..."

* * * * *

In the latest message, "Montague" claims to be assisted in his afterlife adventures by both Moses and Ramses the Great. Since these rather noteworthy names are given, we can only speculate as to the even more noteworthy name that was withheld. I'm guessing Jesus.

The post also contains this none-too-veiled reference to an afterlife researcher:

The dishonest ones will no longer be able to control the field in which we work. All that is needed now is patience for G.S. to slip up and expose the fraud that he is. Our Foundation will step forward as a Centre of Influence to bring people together as never before.

The G.S. in question is presumably Gary Schwartz of the University of Arizona, with whom Veronica had a much-publicized falling-out.

[Jenny]

I find this posting to be very disturbing.

It is only adding to the gossip and not based on any facts. It is not HELPING to further Survival research but feeding into the Scanal driven media of today, just to sell books.

Please look at the peer reviewed date in
January of 2007 describing a triple-blind study conducted by the VERITAS Research Program in EXPLORE: the Journal of Science & Healing.
http://www.explorejournal.com/article/PIIS155083070600454X/fulltext

Keep in mind, We are looking at the foundation of a journalist who once tried to uncover The vault of Al Capone. Talk about shotty investgations- Sensationalism seems to be the fair of Geraldo and it seems Ms. Dubois, and media focused mediums like her, wish to use that same energy to sell her books, promote shows like sensing murder( campbell) ETC

Todays press is a generation that promotes the gossip of Pop stars losing their children . Hotel queens going to Jail on DWI charges and now meet Allison Dubois , The medium who doesnt do Public Lectures on her work but would rather give out chances to win Lunch with her. This scandel is bringing brought to the limelight to bring attention to her Book sales.

Keep in mind this medium is the one who posted on her website that she was to appear on a very brady wedding on VHI as a guest and was seen drunk dancing on Table Tops.

Not the first time she showed up to "work" drunk"

We are looking at a Medium who USED Dr Schwartz to gain attention to her mediumship. Instead of looking at the actions of the people involved lets look at the data.

Sad that this is giving fuel to the professional skeptics

"Jenny"
Former TV Producer

[suzy]

Check out http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/detrm_letrs/YR07/jun07a.pdf

[Michael Prescott]

>It is only adding to the gossip and not based on any facts.

There were facts cited in the Geraldo piece.

>It is not HELPING to further Survival research

Maybe not, but I'm not a propagandist serving a cause. I say, report the facts, whatever they are.

>I can certainly understand him refusing to comment on the show as there was no way that Geraldo was going to let him state his case.

If I were in his position, I would comment. And although I think Geraldo is sleazy, I don't see him as the hatchet man that others make him out to be. If Schwartz was afraid of being edited, he could have come on live.

But I agree that we shouldn't jump to conclusions. The ball is in Schwartz's court now. He needs to issue a statement or take some other action to clear his name. Failure to do so will be pretty damning.

>Someone reads one of Schwartz's books (which were bestsellers, so a lot of folks read them) gets the idea that he can extort money from people by claiming to be this famous scientist who's in contact with dead people, and sends out letters to some bereaved people.

Except that Schwartz allegedly visited Knopft and stayed in the deceased son's bedroom. Also, if it were a hoax, wouldn't Schwartz have wanted to comment on it? And the clear implication of the report was that the Arizona legal authorities did find evidence of unethical (not illegal) conduct on Schwartz's part.

[Tim]

A few points...

I don't believe one has to have a degree in a field or have a professorship in a department to teach courses in that department. The Wikipedia entry on GS says only that he "is a professor of Psychology teaching courses in psychology in the departments of Medicine, Neurology, Psychiatry, and Surgery at the University of Arizona." I can see where a psychologist would be a valuable addition to the curriculum in all those disciplines.

I've read GS's books and found them to be rather sloppy as well, from my investigative journalist's perspective. To me, he seems to be a legit scholar who is nonetheless a survival and paranormal enthusiast and lets his desire for his subject matter to be 100% real invade his writing, if not his work. Remember, these were potboiler books intended to sell lots of copies on the mass market. They were not "Entangled Minds," which while a popular book was quite scholarly.

I suspect the gossip about GS is just that, but the fact remains he seems to be a self-promoter and a bit sloppy in his research, though perhaps he is clearing that up with his later experiments. I read the Explore article on his triple-blind experiments and they looked pretty promising. But again, if he is so self-aggrandizing, how can we be sure the work is legit?

It's unfortunate. I hope he will come forward with transcripts or something, but I doubt it. He wants to be a pop culture figure or something.

[Michael Prescott]

Thanks, Suzy, for the link to the PDF file. This ties in with Laurie Campbell's complaint that Schwartz violated confidentiality agreements.

>I don't believe one has to have a degree in a field or have a professorship in a department to teach courses in that department.

True. But Schwartz claims professorships in all those fields, and this appears to be a case of "academic degree inflation."

[Ryan]

I thought the term 'professor' just meant a college/university teacher, in America?

In the U.K the term is used differently - it refers to the head of an academic department.

[Alex]

"Remember, what we have so far are a lot of rumors and unverified allegations."

True, but you have to remember that universities are already ambivalent about supporting these types of programs. All it takes is rumors and unverified allegations. Combine this with Schwartz's somewhat sketchy reputation and you have a recipe for disaster.

[Michael Prescott]

I don't think very many universities support psi research to begin with, so there may not be much to lose. Wasn't Dean Radin forced out of the University of Nevada after after publication of The Conscious Universe? Princeton shut down Robert Jahn's PEAR lab. The University of Virgina continues to support reincarnation research, but that's about it, at least for American schools.

[drew hempel]

Wait -- there's more than one "magnetic man" -- check out these Magnetic Men videos!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p42JnyypCo0

Get these people on Geraldo pronto!

[Tim]

From reading Jahn's statement a while back (I don't have a link at the moment), I believe he said that the lab's funding had run out. Princeton did not shut them down.

[william]

We humans are an interesting species. Geraldo was upset that Swartz got a 1.7 million dollar grant to study life after death and Geraldo made negative comments about that. We lost 15 billion in Iraq in cash and not a peep from fox noise.

Believe very little from these cable news networks they are corporations in the business of making profits and they know what sells.

If one does research into the paranormal expect this from a very materialistic scientific establishment and a religious society. Paranormal researchers throughout history have been ill-treated.

It will be interesting if Swartz posts anything on his website to counter fox noise.
http://veritas.arizona.edu/

Got to go Britney is on TV.

[Alex]

"Geraldo was upset that Swartz got a 1.7 million dollar grant to study life after death and Geraldo made negative comments about that."

I seriously doubt that the NIH gave a $1.8 million grant for paranormal research. They only fund projects that are within mainstream academia. It was probably for something related to psychology/psychiatry.

[sgrenar]

The grant was from NCCAM to study complementary and alternative medicine. Such grants go to the University, not to the investigator and are heavily audited by the government. There are investigators on this grant other than Schwartz working to prove or disprove the validity of claims made by various CAM technologies, drugs and things like healing by prayer. CAM research will ultimately serve to bust the quacks as well as validate traditional remedies that actually work.

So while psychology and the placebo effect may even play a role in these efforts, it is not the major thrust of the grant mentioned. I agree Geraldo implied this grant was for mediumship research as he parsed his remarks and lowered his voice but he was way off base. Clearly he suceeded in making people believe that Dr Schwartz is the sole beneficiary of this money and that it was being used for mediumship. Neither is true.

Looked at a little differently this is an excellent way to spend the taxpayers' money since so many of us taxpayers get ripped off by CAM scams while others could benefit from new herbal remedies that remain unproven scientifically.

[Michael Prescott]

Steve (sgrenar), I understand you're highly critical of the Geraldo report and have been discussing it in another forum. Would you care to share your critique with us? It would prove useful to get another perspective, as I do not want to indict Dr. Schwartz on the basis of faulty information.

[sgrenar]

Michael:

The information regarding the NCCAM grant is factual whereas Geraldo manages to make a 1.8 million dollar erroneous implication out of it and I felt that this required some clarification.

Because I have spoken with the grieving father (in person) whose pre-taped footage was used on the program and since I was introduced to him as a health care
professional I am unable to comment on any aspect of this.

There is also, however, a dispute between Dr. Schwartz and Campbell, DuBois, Veronica Keen and, apparently, Maria Talcott which involves a breech of confidentiality which I also cannot discuss mainly because I just learnedonly a small part of it. Somehow Dr. John Mack, the Harvard based alien abduction researcher, who was killed by a car in the UK when crossing a street on his way to Veronica Keen's home is also involved in this dispute, at least post-mortem. I don't understand this either, I am sorry.

Clearly it is not your job to indict anyone nor is the proper venue to base such an indictment the Geraldo show.

Beyond the above there was no charge of
academic dishonesty or any criticism leveled at Dr. Schwartz' work itself.

I am sorry I could not be of more help but thank you for asking.

[Don Watson]

My interest in this controversy stems from the harm the "paranormal" scientific community can suffer from exposés of this sort. Many people are eager to discredit evidence of things they don't believe, and it's a serious mistake for our community to play into their hands, either by acting non-credibly or by not exposing false criticisms.

On Geraldo's show, Michael Knopf said that Gary claimed he spoke with Michael’s son while he (Gary) was in the shower. This raises two questions of credibility:

Did Michael lie? If so what did he have to gain by lying?

Did Gary lie to gain money from the Knopfs? Or does he believe he is really a medium while showering? If so, has he subjected himself to a scientific protocol to establish it?

It's important for us to get answers to these questions, because we must police our own community. If we don't, ignorance, prejudice, and folklore will fill the void.

If Gary is guilty of lying, he isn't the first academic to do so. "Bootlegged" research--i.e., research on one project with funds provided for another project--is common, and fairly benign. However, lying to a funding agency--whose members know of bootlegging--is very different from lying to a bereaved family to obtain money from them.

Such an offense is so egregious that, if true, it would disqualify Gary from receiving any kind of research money.

It hurts me to write this, because Gary has been my friend for several years. Nonetheless, when he has erred scientifically, I've pointed it out. For instance, see my review of his book, _The G.O.D. Experiments_ at:
www.enformy.com/GOD_experiments_review.htm

It hurts even more to think that he would jeopardize his career with shady behavior.

[Urban Mystic Dee]

I saw the report on Geraldo and can say I am surprised by what constitutes "news" today. The whole thing seems way too bizzare for me and I happen to think that this is a hoax as well. Gary Schwartz appears out of nowhere and visits some guy who supposedly lost his son in a plane crash, takes a shower and sleeps in his bed? That has to be by a wide margin the least likely story the media has ever concocted. Does he scour over newspaper obituaries for rich people to prey on? The man's not a ghoul, he has better things to do with his time. Then the guy claims Gary is a medium (a claim nobody has made until now) and contacted his likely fabricated son in the shower? Is this the afterlife equivalent of Larry Craig soliciting sex in the men's room? Then Gary supposedly told this guy that him and his son had a strained relationship before he died and the guy says "who the hell does this guy think he is telling me about my son?" If Gary is supposed to be a medium and this guy hired him he is exactly(italic) the guy to be telling him about his son, that's what mediums do, tell people about the dead! And then some nobody radio jock came on and said "we all know this if fake. The media has a vested intrest in death being the end so we can rule people's lives from cradel to grave!" If there were a less likely story I haven't heard it, anywhere, regarding anything(also italic).

[Michael Prescott]

>Gary Schwartz appears out of nowhere and visits some guy who supposedly lost his son in a plane crash, takes a shower and sleeps in his bed?

I believe the story is that Schwartz contacted Knopf and was invited to stay in his home. Schwartz allegedly asked to sleep in the son's bedroom in order to pick up the son's "energy."

>contacted his likely fabricated son

Michael Knopf's son, Paul, was not fabricated. The New York Times covered Paul Knopf's death in a light plane crash in December 2002.

[Kelly]

In response to "Jenny"....Take it from someone who is Psychic and knows Schwartz, it is HE or someone from his camp (which I hear is little to none...Beischel gone)......who wrote was "Jenny".....Notice how he does not have the balls to respond himself, or post anything to his website......that is because his ass is FRIED and he knows it.......

[Kevin]

Following up on Tim's reference to the closing of the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research lab when funding was exhausted, Dr. Robert Jahn noted in his closing remarks that he and Brenda Dunne had rigorously and successfully demonstrated psi effects in their experiments and, to his mind, had nothing left to "prove". Here's hoping that their results stimulate other researchers to further investigation into mind/matter interaction. And, regarding the mention of the placebo effect by "sgrenar"(Steve), here is a phenomenon which has to be accounted for in virtually ALL experimental studies involving the human host, yet the placebo effect is completely unexplained. How does it work? How does the mind turn the "belief" in the efficacy of a sugar pill or distilled water injection masquerading as a "new miracle drug" into physical healing? The effect itself is a fascinating mystery.

Regarding Dr. Schwartz, I share the amazement many have posted here concerning the professor's seeming conduct. As Michael points out, staying at the home of someone who subsequently is moved to alleging the actions claimed does strike many of us as a "red flag" moment. The professor's silence in the face of the allegations is not only troubling, but shows a considerable lack of good judgement in the arena of public perception: when claims of any kind are made against a person or organization, it is imperative, even crucial, to counter those claims publically in as strong a manner as is possible, and quickly. The dubious history of politics offers too many examples of this.

[sgrenar]

Michael Knopf is definitely real as was his son who tragically died in a small private plane crash which was covered in the NY Times as cited above. The FAA's investigation is also on their website and when this all came up, I visited the FAA site to read their accounts. The FAA report indicated the engine had caught fire, the plane then burned and crashed.

As I indicated above I met and conversed with Michael Knopf. This was at a lecture on mediumship Mr. Knopf, his wife and daughter attended. The lecture was not given by Dr. Schwartz, who attended, but by a NY area medium and which was followed by a demonstration.

I am afraid, however, we are all being naive if we do not know that asking for donations and raising money is a part of a university researcher's job description. Dr. Schwartz' bosses at UA would want him to do this as would the brass at any institution that is fueled by grants and donations to stay afloat. Funding, as a rule, doesn't levitate in over the transom by itself. Especially in this field.

I am not sure how Gary was introduced to Mr. Knopf but it was probably through other donors and/or people interested in the research. I believe this is called networking.

The argument/question that Don brings up is whether Dr. Schwartz conveyed feelings of mediumistic contact with deceased son Paul as an inducement to obtain funding. And if true it begs a further question as to whether this is ethical or appropriate.

I have to stop here because I would be getting into areas that would breech Mr. Knopf's privacy.

[william]

I think I remember that some enlightened Hindus believe that god creates because god loves a good play with lots of drama.

Spending time watching the news one must admit that god certainty knows how to direct, produce, and create some interesting characters in its play.

The phenomenal world just keeps on giving great performances in drama.

[Ben]

"I am afraid, however, we are all being naive if we do not know that asking for donations and raising money is a part of a university researcher's job description."

Who the hell brought up this point? Every college graduate has probably experienced receiving several emails a week from the alumni association attempting to solicit donations. The point we're discussing is whether he manipulated the Knopf family into donating money so their son could set up some sort of corporation on the "other side." I'm not implying that the allegations are true, but get with the program.

[Michael Prescott]

>The argument/question that Don brings up is whether Dr. Schwartz conveyed feelings of mediumistic contact with deceased son Paul as an inducement to obtain funding. And if true it begs a further question as to whether this is ethical or appropriate.

The Geraldo report claimed that Schwartz said the deceased Paul Knopf was trying to set up a corporation in the afterlife and somehow required $3.5 million to fund it (!). If - I stress if - Dr. Schwartz made any such representations, I would say his behavior goes far beyond simple fundraising and is definitely inappropriate and unethical, not to mention bizarre.

It is hard to see how Michael Knopf could have been taken in, even temporarily, by such a crazy suggestion, but unfortunately the history of mediumship offers many examples of grieving people who parted with enormous sums under similarly dubious circumstances. (Here's one such case.)

[Michael Prescott]

Ben's comment and mine posted simultaneously and made the same point, though he made it more briefly.

[Ben]

"...more briefly"

Hehe...and more bitingly.

[Arthur]

Okay, now I suppose I'm going to have to trade in my Gary Schwartz books, The Afterlife Experiments, The G.O.D. Experiments, The Living Energy Universe at the used Bookstore for trade credit? As well as my Dean Radin's books and Rupert Sheldrake's books which I'll never read again because it took me months to wade through them the first time. Reading those through once was enough. Man, I'm going to have a LOT of trade credit next time I go into Nashville. We've got a huge used bookstore where I trade old books for trade credit. http://mckaybooks.com/

[Suzy]

People in great pain my not do what they normally would when dealing with such a matter. The papers shown are real, and many people have seen them. That is why GS is not saying anything.

[Pearl]

In Veronica Keen's latest Sunday communication there is an interesting paragraph on this subject.

The letters have said on several occasions that "GS" would be found out.And so it has come to pass.

Personally I feel very disappointed .

www.montaguekeen.com/articles/montague/oct7.htm

[ScienceGuy]

Arthur,

I think it is unfair to compare Gary to Rupert or Dean.

Dean and Rupert may be fringe scientists but they are still scientists. Their conducts are dignified.

Gary's conduct cannot be said to be appropriate even for a learned man, much less a doctor of philosophy (even for a soft science like Psychology).

[Truthteller]

I am responding to Michael's posting regarding "if" Dr. Schwartz actually pursued Michael Knopf for, $3.650,000.(actual amount) that was asked for in the documents on U of A stationary. Having personally seen a copy I read the full 8 page "proposal" for the money, I can tell you it exists, and is highly disturbing! Perhaps it will be posted in full soon. I can also attest that this is NOT an isolated case, that there were MANY very wealthy people and organizations approached by GS, often on the immediate heals of someone's dealth....and always they were either rich or famous.
There is so much to this story, so many characters, and I can tell you this is just the beginning.
One point I would like to make about why the district attorney could not prosecute him criminally is because of the language in the original gift letter from the Knopfs for 50K....the money was gifted to the U of A for 50K true, yet GS spent it on himself, flying back and forth to NYC to visit a girlfriend....he used none of it for research, claimed Knopf "bought out his semester...".....
The Truth will out itself in the end. It is most unfortunate that things are unfolding as they are, as the multitude of complainants all tried to go through the system, get help from the U of A, as they are mandated to do, but all they cared about was covering their own asses....they see the multitude of legal cases that can come down on them, not to mention the PR.....the U of A is as responsible for his conduct as he is personally, they have done nothing to make it right with the people he deeply injured and abused!

[Matthew C]

Frankly I feel kind of "had" here.

I always felt a bit uncomfortable with Schwartz's earlier methodologies and his breathless language. But when Bieschel came up with the triple-blind experiments I bit the worm on the hook and reported about this research positively on AMNAP.

But I've been feeling weird about Schwartz for some time, mostly due to his over-the-top "VERITAS" - we are so full of truth and honor routine. It also has bothered me that he seems not to be able to work on a long-term basis with anyone. However I didn't have anything concrete, so I didn't air any of my misgivings.

Now it appears that Schwartz might well be a complete sleaze-bag. These allegations, if remotely true, mean we cannot take any of the research coming out of his lab seriously, even if the research was completely legitimate. For someone practicing as a professional funeral-chaser and shaking down grieving family members for money to contact their loved ones is the worst kind of dirtball, and we can trust nothing they said.

Shame on me for not paying attention to my intuition. Anyone who harps so vociferously about their "honesty" and "integrity" is someone who needs to be watched like a hawk. I knew this and yet I didn't practice it. Congratulations to Michael for showing better sense than I did.

Of course, it is entirely possible that Gary Schwartz is innocent of all these charges. But I am finding that possibility increasingly unlikely. Gary, do you have anything to say in your defense?

[Arthur]

Arthur, I think it is unfair to compare Gary to Rupert or Dean. - Scienceguy
********************************************

Oh, I wasn't really comparing them to each other. Other than they are big fat rather unintersting & difficult books to read. It's just that I found all their books equally difficult to read and enjoy. I've got a small two shelf bookcase next to my bed where I keep all my "life-after-death" books, and all the above authors are shelved in that bookcase. I've read through their books one time and I doubt I'll go through them again. For one thing they are NOT that interesting; and I found them rather tedious to read. I've digested what I could out of them. I am 54 years old and at this stage of the game in my life I'm trying not to accumulate a whole bunch of clutter in my life. I am not much of a collector. Being interested in life after death, and having read a lot of books about death and dying, I am all too aware of how fleeting this life is and how illogical it is to collect stuff. No one (meaning my relatives) will want it when I'm gone. When I try talking to them about life after death, NDE's, death bed visions, the holographic universe, etc. they just roll their eyes. They just don't get it. They have no interst in the topic and most likely think I'm nutty. One of my wife's aunts came right out and called me a "kook." Sigh! So, I might as well trade in those books which I know I will never read again. Radin's books, while very educational, were rather tedious to read, and are not really about life after death, which is where my real fascination lies.

[sgrenar]

Gary did not see Geraldo. He was away from home last week and over the weekend and returned to all this today.

He has responded to the allegations of confidentiality breeches on testing mediums.

Knopf was a client of Campbell's

Mr. Knopf, I have now learned, was a sitter of Laurie Campbell's, who introduced him to Gary He is more difficult to discuss because
there may be confidentiality issues involved and these are being checked.

I confirm once again that I did meet Mr.Knopf several years ago at a mediumship lecture.

But as I am also a HCW I feel some of my discussion with him may be construed as privileged. While there is no doubt Dr Schwartz solicited him for a donation (GS does this to everyone) the argument here seems to hinge on what he said to Mr. Knopf that made this particular solicitation objectionnable.

What is not covered by confidentiality in my discussion with Mr. Knopf concerns the fact that he told me, my sister and others at that time that he had owned a medical school. Yes there are things like private medical schools that are privately owned. A few examples are in the West Indies. This may be true and if so that should make him pretty astute on academic matters, donations tax deductions and so forth. On Geraldo, however, he was described as someone in the auto parts business. I suppose he could be both. Do I understand this? No, but there are now people who aim to find out.

[sgrenar]

Geraldo's producer has spoken with GHary and has agreed to provide a tape of the show for Gary to watch by mid-week. Since today is a holiday in NY, it couldn't go out until tomorrow or maybe Wednesday.

Therefore I suggest that people save their collective breaths in demanding comments or responses until after Dr Schwartz has at least had the chance to view the material.

Thanks

[Dave]

Michael wrote: "In a newsgroup, I once raised this concern with Julie Beischel, who worked at Schwartz's lab, and she claimed that putting the transcripts online would be very time-consuming and require all sorts of manpower. Nonsense. It takes almost no effort to upload a text document to a Web server and add a link to that document on a Web page."

Sure, putting a text document onto a website is easy, if you already have it in that format. However, I don't think the same is true for transcribing audio speech into that text document to begin with. Medical transcription is still done, I believe, by people listening and typing, and that is, indeed, time-consuming and labor-intensive. I don't think there is software available that can reliably and accurately do this transcription. Is there?

[sgrenar]

None of the dictation (speech) to typed text programs works well. First they have to be tuned to the speaker and in mediumship there are two and they can't be tuned to both.

The speech/audio has to be spoken into the PC via a mic. I dont think this would work too well in a mediumship session either.

Secondly even if tuned to a single speaker we found they made so many mistakes the editing took up even more time then typing from scratch. So our transcriptionists put on ear phones and yes,type medical dictations from the doctors all day long.

It is very expensive but the programs designed to solve this are just not that good.

[Michael Prescott]

>Sure, putting a text document onto a website is easy, if you already have it in that format.

I don't see how the sessions could be evaluated for hits and misses without a transcript.

However, I think sgrenar makes a good point. We should give Dr. Schwartz time to actually view the Geraldo story and prepare a response.

I'm uncomfortable with one or two of the comments which make allegations that so far have not been proven. It's one thing to voice doubts or suspicions, but another thing to say, as Truthteller did, "I can also attest that this is NOT an isolated case, that there were MANY very wealthy people and organizations approached by GS, often on the immediate heals of someone's dealth....and always they were either rich or famous."

Unless there is some evidence that can be produced to support these allegations, it would be better not to report them as if they were proven facts.

>Congratulations to Michael for showing better sense than I did.

Thanks, Matthew - but as I recall, I linked to your AMNAP piece on Schwartz, so I guess I didn't show any better sense, after all!

[sgrenar]

What bothered me also about Truthtellers post was the implication that Dr Schwartz approached families of deceased rich people and this was how he found Michael Knopf. This was not true as I have indicated above Mr. Knopf and his wife and daughter turn out to be clients/sitters of Laurie Campbell which in my mind could translate to friends of Laurie Campbell. Laurie Campbell, of course, is part of the breakaway group of mediums who have a dispute with Schwartz.

Their dispute according to Don Watson is that in the book Truth About Medium Dr. Schwartz allegedly reveals confidential information about Laurie's daughter. Laurie was on Geraldo in the anti-Schwartz cheering section.

The fact that Knopf is Laurie's client was not revealed on the show and immediately casts Mr. Knopf's allegations into the arena as part of the medium's revenge group, icing on their cake and not as a stand alone problem.

Dr. Schwartz has responded to allegations on testingmediums that he revealed information about Laurie's daughter in Truth About Mediums. He points out the information had been made public before the book was written and that the draft of the book was vetted by Alison herself before publication. Alison, Laurie's friend, therefore actually gave an okay on the text even though after it was published she decided to criticize it.

If I get any more relevant information I will pass it along.

[suzy]

If a child is underage do you not have to have the parents permission to talk about them?

[suzy]

sgrenar seems to know personal info on all of these people! Who is sharing this with him?

[sgrenar]

Michael:

I have been a subject sitter in research (not at UA) and have been required to read and rate readings to see if I could spot the one which was for me and those which were not. I was not present and proxies were used. The medium was shown a picture of the deceased and said they have him/her.The ratings are what is important. If the investigator knows a particular reading is for a particular sitter and is rated poorly then that is enough in my mind to invalidate the process, or at least that particular medium.

These rating sheets are not word for word transcripts but rather have "facts" given by the medium line by line. They would be meaningless to anyone but the person for whom they were intended unless the sitter's ratings were included. I agree that once such data was rated and tabulated it would not be difficult to put them onto a website
but what for? Morbid curiosity?

Explain to me what exactly would be the value or purpose of a verbatim transcript online that would be worth violating the sitter's rights to confidentiality if their identity would be included or could be surmised by the information. Thanks.

[sgrenar]

1. Re underage child being mentioned in a book, specifically The Truth about Medium. The medium being ALison DuBoid, the author being Gary Schwartz.

You do not need permission from parent or guardian if the information being mnentioned has previously been made public. There are folks who say that it has. A complaint against Gary was filed with the Federal government about this and they responded by
admonishing Gary to make sure he follows all Federal regs on this in the future. Much of the copy of that letter I saw was redacted.

2. Who is sharing this information with me?

Dr. Gary Schwartz, much of which he has already been posted on another list at yahoogroups calling testingmediums.

My other source of information given above is Don Watson, M.D., who is a member of testingmediums as well as a scientific advisor to a new research initiative being launched. Details are on Laurie Campbell's website, feel free to visit there and click on Research.

I also have two off-line sources of information who do not want to be publicly involved.

I am also my own source of information having met and talked with Michael Knopf several years ago at a mediumship lecture held at the Hilton in Staten Island, NY.

I hope that answers your question. It was a good one.

[suzy]

I would think you'd still ask the parents to write about their CHILD out of RESPECT for that person.

[sgrenar]

I don't disagree with your sentiment suzy.

The facts are a legal complaint was lodged against Dr Schwartz and the University and the Federal government felt it was legally a gray enough violation to warrant a warning rather than a huge fine.

In this instance Dr. Schwartz published information that was not only previously made public, however, but which came from a dear friend, colleague and co-worker. The last thing he would want to do would be to hurt her child in this case. In addition that text was approved by Alison DuBois who was also a friend and colleague of the mother.

As you will see in Dr. Schwartz' formal response to the Geraldo show there were other reasons that caused the child's mother in this case to become disaffected and unhappy with Dr. Schwartz.

[Arthur]

sgrenar seems to know personal info on all of these people! Who is sharing this with him? Posted by: suzy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When I first became interested in the question of life after death, about 7 or 8 years ago, there was a site called "Survivalscience.org" that I absolutely loved. I think the moderator of that site was some guy named Steve Grenar. I'm wondering if sgrenar is that same person, and if so, whatever happened to the Survivalscience website? It was absolutely excellent. It was the first place I ever heard about the holographic universe and was what led me to reading Michael Talbot's book "The Holographic Universe." What a difference it's made in my life. If sgrenar is that person I'd just like to say "thank you".

[suzy]

I can't believe that he had a falling out with the mediums, then he goes and write's about the family of that person. What's next? He was slapped on the hands by OHRP! AG's office as well.

[Michael Prescott]

>Explain to me what exactly would be the value or purpose of a verbatim transcript online

To rule out cold reading, for one thing. I know that Schwartz's protocols (now) are designed to prevent cold reading, but this was not true of his earlier work.

Also, to indicate the specificity of the information, the number of variations on a particular detail ("I'm getting a J name, John, Joe, Jane, Jeff, Jake ..."), etc.

Some of this may be covered in the tabulated lists. But even this unedited material rarely shows up online.

[Jerry]

I'm new to this site, but saw GERALDO and was impressed at the growing body of evidence that shows that this Gary Schwartz is a sloppy scientist at best. It's becoming clear because of former associates' testamonials that he's interested in self-promtion at anyone's expense. People who have suffered loss. Are they all wrong? Are they all ganging up on this man for no reason? I hear there's a blog on another medium's website that speaks about these issues, does anyone know which blog it is?

[sgrenar]

You're welcome Arthur ....

Suzy: The "falling out" as you call it occurred after the book in question was written and published. You have the time lines skewered. You make it sound he wrote this afterwards. Not true.

Again, when Dr. Schwartz agrees to release his formal response you will see the reason for the "falling out."

[sgrenar]

The best way to prevent cold reading is to not allow the medium any verbal or visual contact with the sitter and/or to use a proxy.

Since the recent readings I have had were done by a medium 600 miles away who didn't know me, never saw me (and I didn't know the medium either)and couldn't speak to me
cold reading would be moot.

I agree cold reading is used, consciously or unco9nsciously, in face to face sittings where the medium cannot only ask questions but size up the sitter through appearance and body language.

[Don Watson]

>sgrenar: As you will see in Dr. Schwartz' formal response to the Geraldo show there were other reasons that caused the child's mother in this case to become disaffected and unhappy with Dr. Schwartz.

I'm not sure Gary's response will explain anything. Here's an exchange between Gary and me on the testingmediums website:

> [Gary] You may not remember this, but Laurie Campbell and Allison DuBois were very proud of their personal exploration in this particular demonstration, and before they became famous, they enjoyed my sharing this intriguing evidence of their gifts.

[Don] Laurie's interest from the onset of our relationship was not to become famous, but to use her gifts to advance science. After we had many discussions about this, I decided to introduce her to you because of your emerging interest in mediumship research. Then, when she and I went to Tucson where we, you, and Linda discussed setting up the experimental program, her motive was unchanged. In short, Laurie's objective was not to become famous, but to contribute to a scientific research program.

> [Gary] In fact, Laurie's daughter was featured in a teen psychic magazine, and I was asked to confirm this.

[Don] You're raising more questions than answers. You were asked by whom? And what were you asked to confirm? And why were you asked?

> [Gary] Hence the key information was already public before I expanded up it in my book.

[Don] That doesn't matter. Confidentiality belonged to the parents, because their daughter was a minor at the time, and no one else can legally waive it. The daughter chose to reveal certain personal information to the writer for the magazine. Then, before the article was published, she was given the opportunity to review it and correct any errors. Do you claim you did this, too?

> [Gary] Only later has Laurie tried to make the claim that I did not have her permission to share material that she herself made public before I wrote the book.

[Don] This raises many more questions:

1. If Laurie is wrong on claiming this, can you produce her written permission?

2. What do you mean by her making the information public?

3. Did you receive information about Laurie's daughter in a "public"
conversation with Laurie or in a private phone conversation, as your book states?

4. So you consider Allison's reading "public" because it occurred in a Mexican restaurant?

5. Was Laurie naïve in trusting you with personal information about her daughter?

(I'll share Gary's responses if they become available.)

[Greg Taylor]

Matthew C. said:

"Now it appears that Schwartz might well be a complete sleaze-bag....For someone practicing as a professional funeral-chaser and shaking down grieving family members for money to contact their loved ones is the worst kind of dirtball, and we can trust nothing they said."

Matthew, while the allegations on the Geraldo show are certainly serious, I think it's worth stepping back and checking for tabloid hype before we throw too many accusations about. Sgrenar pointed out that Schwartz's first hookup with this client was through Laurie Campbell - this raises faint alarm bells for me considering the falling out between Schwartz and Campbell.

It's not a big jump between meeting someone enthusiastic about survival research, who is willing at the time to donate some money but later falls out with Schwartz, and a tabloid story about fleecing someone of money using their dead child.

The only thing we can be sure of is that it's all bad publicity for the (almost non-existent already) reputation of mediumship.

[sgrenar]

Don wrote above: "I'm not sure Gary's response will explain anything. Here's an exchange between Gary and me on the testingmediums website:..."

Gary's response will be Gary's response Don.
Everyone is calling for it and yet you have the temerity to say it will be useless before ever seeing it. I assume this means you are psychic.....and have set up a protocol to validate that?

[Roger K]

Steve, the "cold reading" concept nowadays include "the Forer effect" also called Barnum statements.
This type of statements seem personal, yet apply to many people, like:
"I sense that you are sometimes insecure, especially with people you don't know very well."
"You have a box of old unsorted photographs in your house."
"You're having problems with a friend or relative."
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading
for more examples.

Transcripts with many details can refute such accusations from sceptics/pseudosceptics, if the data given in the readings is specific enough. Names of sitters and the people mentioned in the reading can be altered/witheld for anonymity.

[sgrenar]

I didn't get any of those generalizations. What I got were specific facts that were completely incorrect, hence the medium who was supposed to be reading me, er, failed.

[Matthew C.]

Greg,

I said that Schwartz "might well be" a complete sleazebag. Not that he definitely is one.

In any event, I still feel foolish for my (previous) very positive statements about Schwartz's research, given the red flags I sensed at the time. Anytime someone goes on an extended spiel about how honest and trustworthy they are, check your wallet! I should have been much more qualified in my enthusiasm about his research.

However, Schwartz still has an opportunity to salvage his reputation if he can come up with a very convincing rebuttal.

[Michael Prescott]

FYI, at some point Typepad will probably split this comments thread into two pages because of its length. If this happens, click "Next page" or "page 2" (whatever it says) at the bottom of the thread in order to see newer comments.

[suzy]

OHRP and AG's office findings mean nothing to any of you wake UP!

[Matthew C.]

OHRP and AG's office findings mean nothing to any of you wake UP!

Suzy,

Can you elaborate? Better yet, link?

[Eric]

" [Gary] ... Laurie Campbell and Allison DuBois were very proud of their personal exploration in this particular demonstration, and before they became famous, they enjoyed my sharing this intriguing evidence of their gifts.

[Don] Laurie's interest from the onset of our relationship was not to become famous, but to use her gifts to advance science. "

Not quite sure what you're getting at here. Schwartz never said that the Laurie's goal was to become famous, only that the two *did* become famous. He doesn't even imply that their fame had anything to do with the experiments.

I'll wait and see how the facts play out here, but on the topic of 'red flags', I personally find it interesting that whenever I read Schwartz's position on the dispute, he speaks quite reservedly and with (at least seeming) respect for the people involved. The opposite is not true. There seems to be a great deal of emotion involved on the other side of the issue, which gives me pause.

[Don Watson]

> sgrenar: Gary's response will be Gary's response Don. Everyone is calling for it and yet you have the temerity to say it will be useless before ever seeing it. I assume this means you are psychic.....and have set up a protocol to validate that?

Not psychic, just perceptive--and that's been validated by many years of psychiatric practice.

I illustrated by my post that Gary doesn't always answer questions. Those he doesn't like, he evades. I wish, for everyone's sake, that Gary would simply accept responsibility for his own behavior, and stop pointing fingers at others to explain his difficulties.

In the case of his disclosing personal information about Laurie's daughter without permission, for instance, he could simply say, "I'm sorry. I made a mistake. I could have shown a draft of the chapter to Laurie and her daughter for approval, but I didn't. Or I could have referred to the magazine article, but I didn't."

I'm eager to see Gary's response to Geraldo's program, too.

Maybe I can help him. I'm hoping that my confronting postings will help Gary face his many critics and answer honestly and candidly.

Indeed, to salvage his reputation, Gary needs to credibly explain why he has so many critics.

[Tony M]

Terrific thread with lots of insightful comments. sgrenar's contribution is particularly interesting given his access to so many of the people involved.

I don't have anything to say of direct bearing, but I will share a couple of second hand stories.

One is that I talked to a well known parapsychologist with an excellent reputation who told me about watching the tape of John Edward's session in GS's original experiments. The conversation was about mediums in general and he said that he was impressed by the tape, that Edward gets on a streak where he fires off apparently correct fact after fact. I bring this up because it suggests GS at least at times has shared original research. (I have not named the parapsychologist because I don't want the remark to be construed as an endorsement of GS experiments. That was not the context of the conversation.)

The other is about Alison DuBois. A good friend of mine is a television producer who was involved in a television pilot featuring DuBois. His specific role was to secure a reading subject and to establish as much as possible that the subject was unknown to Dubois. My friend is a fairly cynical guy and by no means a 'believer' The pilot was shelved so there is no reason to make false claims about it (which he would have have done to me in private in any case). Well, he was "blown away" (his words) by the reading, saying she was very specific and detailed - and that she reduced the subject to tears. The point here? That the case for mediumistic abilities doesn't rely on GS alone.

Even if GS's personal integrity is impugned, it doesn't necessarily impugn his research (which can be audited, etc., by others). And if his research is impugned, there are other sources of confirmation. It would be a blow - but hardly a death blow.

[suzy]

Check out http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/detrm_letrs/YR07/jun07a.pdf please read this for new people on this site

[Cyrus]

Suzy,

Your post illustrates the point that mediumship is a very real phenomenon. What worries me is that people will see a scandal like this erupting, and dismiss the entire subject. What can be done?

[sgrenar]

As the millionaire (part) owner of a medical school there was no way he could be taken in. On the other hand a three million+ donation endows a Chair at the University and this is more likely what the proposal was for, not to set up a corporation in the afterlife which is utterly ridiculous on so many levels. Mr.Knopf was interested in doing this. The chair may've been named after his deceased son, e.g. The Paul Knopf Chair in Parapsychology or some such thing.

[RodMcK]

How was the money supposed to get to the other side?

[william]

Arthur if they are calling you a kook you are in some good company when it comes to paranormal research.

sgrenar your comments make sense. It is amazing how we humans can jump to conclusions before the facts come out. ie duke case.

give the guy a chance to respond. I heard Gary speak and he had some very good insights.

he appears to have learned a lot from his research but when money, fame, and power is involved morality can fly right out the window. Fly to New York to see his girl friend anyone here ever been in love. Maybe he saw a medium while there. Almost Everyone does those kinds of things.

the history of mediumship has taught us that money can encourage fraud. God works in mysterious ways look at all the interest this has created on this blog. The history of paranormal research is full of this type of publicity and will continue.

Religion, science, and the media folks will jump on this to support their cherished beliefs.

[suzy]

Funny to see people who do not know GS only from web sites they go on act as if they do! Ask the ones who realy were around the man such as Allison, and the others that's when you get to the truth. Strange that they all left the lab at about the same time.

[laurie]

The issue only emerged after we raised the ethics standards and requirements for the laboratory, and Laurie and some other mediums choose not to do the work necessary to remain being part of the laboratory (e.g. taking key portions of the ethics exam we scientists take before conducting research)....I respect their choice....however, I could not claim they were Integrative Research Mediums if they were uninterested in increasing their knowledge in areas such as ethics and research findings in mediumship research....Laurie's interest in the science seemed to decrease around the time that the requirements for doing the science increased....She was at a different stage in her career and development....I trust she is happy in her current role....blessings, Gary

NOT TRUE! THIS NEVER TOOK PLACE.

Please elaborate, Laurie?

[Marcel Cairo]

Thank God I was away in New York celebrating my birthday and missed all this fun, I might have spent my big 4-0 blogging instead of whooping it up with friends at the Cowgirl Hall of Fame on Hudson Ave.

I lost my confidence in Dr. Schwartz's ability to select mediums when one particular medium (whose name will go unmentioned) was endorsed. I know that medium's work well, and their work ethic is highly questionable.

Like Michael, I also was waiting to read actual transcripts. Listening to Dr. Schwartz describe the level of hits from his remote viewing experiments, I was very curious to see the real time process vs. the retelling of the process. Unfortunately, no transcripts ever came to light.

More disturbing to me than the Dr. Schwartz controversy, is the show on LifetimeTV Lisa Williams - Life Among The Dead.

It seems that there is nothing Lisa Williams won't do or claim in order to make herself famous and loved. I'm not saying that she doesn't possess some skill, but her posturing for the camera, overtly forced dramatic gestures and borderline cold-reading techniques are just begging for debunkers and skeptics to attack.

[Greg Taylor]

Taking time out from the serious discussion for a second...

Happy birthday Marcel! :)

Surely you meant big 3-0?!

[sgrenar]

Laurie it would be helpful if you elaborate.

Specifically are you saying:

1. You and the other mediums were never asked to take the ethics rating exam?

or

2. You did not refuse to do so?

Thanks.