Talk:Telekinesis/Archive 1

Old text
Assuming spooky action at a distance has to do with EPR and Bell, then the explanation given is common but wrong. The result has to do with the observation-determines-reality stuff built into quantum mechanics: an observation on one particle collapses the wave functions for both. It has nothing to do with the ability to actually exert forces on particles far away. Any page on Bell's inequality would have to deal with this...I'd edit this but I'm not sure if the telekinesis explanation relies on the mistaken notion or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josh Grosse (talk • contribs) 23:47, 21 March 2001 (UTC)

The "explanation" is meaningless pseudo-scientific hogwash. EPR no more "explains" a possible mechanism of telekinesis than does magnetism or gravity or any other action-at-a-distance physical phenomenon. It's just a convenient hard-to-understand thing to point to to make people think you know something they don't. Aspect's experimental confirmation of Bell's inequality implies one of two things: either (1) Some measurable physical properties of entangled particles do not have objective existence until measured, or (2) entangled particles really do act upon each other from a distance at greater than the speed of light. Which one you choose to believe is "real" is a matter of personal preference. In any case, physical location--the property purportedly affected by telekinesis--is not an entanglable quantum state. --LDC

My concern is mostly just that people don't walk away misunderstanding EPR, I'm not actually that worried about telekinesis. I don't think version 2 is really all that tenable, or at least it has to have the strong caveat that particles can only communicate their state collapses to each other. No info can be sent by EPR, and I would hate to have people think that it could just because the couldn't find the knife between truth and pseudoscience. ...And actually, I'd like to call numerous studies into question, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josh Grosse (talk • contribs) 00:14, 22 March 2001 (UTC)

It would make me happy to see some of this edited and place on the main page. I personally don't think that skepticism about telekinesis requires us to debate very much -- we can simply explain the scientific consensus and indicate exactly what LDC indicated above -- that just because some explanation uses scientific jargon that most people don't understand, doesn't mean that it is correct or even plausible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.210.13.xxx (talk) 00:09, 22 March 2001 (UTC)

Bad link
This page (as well as Parapsychology) links to Helmut Schmidt, but clearly a different Helmut Schmidt is meant. Perhaps someone should create something like Helmut Schmidt (Parapsychologist) and link to that instead? -- Timwi 22:18 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Films
Why not collect films about this topic? I'll post those I know and whoever knows more, add them. Mine are:

-Matilda

-X-men 2

-Carrie

-Carrie 2: The Rage

-Star Trek:The Next Generation (TV series), most notably the "Q" character

-Bewitched (TV series)

-Sabrina The Teenage Witch (TV series)

List by: ProClub


 * A link has been provided under External Links that meets this suggestion. Please consider deleting this subject from Discussion. Thanks.

Two changes, why I made them, and what should be done before reverting/reinserting
I changed
 * Reportedly, over 100 de-bleated goats were shipped to Fort Bragg along with a significant quantity of hamsters, to facilitate this research

to
 * According to Ronson, over 100 de-bleated goats were shipped to Fort Bragg along with a significant quantity of hamsters, to facilitate this research.

If I'm mistaken and there is a verifiable source other than Ronson, it should be provided. Saying "reportedly" gives the reader no way to judge the credibility of the reporter.

I removed


 * a number of those involved have provided on camera interviews to Ronson, screened on national television in England to an audience of millions. Therefore, many of the goat lab project claims are to a certain extent verifiable...

It can be reinserted if a suitable reference to the television program is provided, again one that enables the reader to judge the credibility of the information.

It is NPOV, and properly sourced, to say "The National Enquirer reported XYZ" (the Enquirer being a U. S. publication famous for tales of alien abductions, predictions of the end of the world, etc) reported XYZ. It is also NPOV to say "The New York Times reported XYZ." It is neither NPOV nor properly sourced to say "Reportedly" or "shown on national television." For all we know, the "national television" could have been a paid infomercial for Ronson's book. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:48, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Probably not. There are lots of known ways how people delude themselves into believing in correlations where there is only random chance. To avoid those errors, you have to do a lot more than just look. --Hob Gadling 12:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

RI is NOT Psychokinesis
Ronson's book The Men Who Stare at Goats has now gone into a second edition, hardcover, 272 pages, Simon & Schuster, ISBN: 0743241924. Definitely not self published as one WIKI editor tried to claim to make the source sound bad. I've seen the video, in fact I have it recorded on MPEG on my home PC. I have now provided a link to the website of the production company World of Wonder in the text. Ronson is a recognised award winning investigative journalist. There are multiple first hand interviews with ex military figures who participated in the RI project in his video – on record. Glenn Whaton would appear to have been one of the ex Fort Bragg RI team members.

The definition of PK as per the dictionary is thus: The production or control of motion, especially in inanimate and remote objects, purportedly by the exercise of psychic powers. RI concerns the influencing of biological entities, especially as regards health, moods, and thoughts. Making someone feel depressed does not actually involve the physical movement of an object, so re-directing RI to PK on the basis they are the same phenomena, is a somewhat sloppy use of language. WIKINFO provides a recognised outlet for chopped articles, so I have moved the original deleted WIKI article to that location, so people can pursue the legitimate, documented, history of remote influencing. If an editor wishes to re-create the original WIKI RI page, feel free to copy the content back - its my article. Timharwoodx 01:03, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I believe.
I believe in hamsters. I do not, however, believe in midgets. I refuse to.

O-kay... Eric 55673  19:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not so sure about hamsters, but midgets are certainly for real.--BZ(Bruno Zollinger) 08:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Better Term, Scientific Study
There are a few scientists researching the ability for people's thoughts to remotely affect machine behaviour (such as probabilty). The wired article linked previously reminded me of this issue, but @Discovery.ca (now called Daily Planet) on the canadian discovery channel had a small segment on it.

Does this fit into this article? It seems something apart from the old view of PK and much more subtle (i.e. things arent moving around) if it indeed does exist. I'd be willing to do an indepth section on the *scientific* studes and articles done on this issue but were should it go here or is there a better term? --ShaunMacPherson 13:51, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Seriously POV article
This article is completely credulous of any claim regarding PK and biased in its favor. It favorably refers to many supposed studies, and only gives the barest mention to the extremely convincing refutations of them.

No attempt is even made to explain how PK is supposed to work other than the essentially meaningless "generalized quantum mechanics" throwaway remark.

I'm seriously thinking about both putting npov and dispute on this article. (Unsigned comment by 216.254.126.167)


 * Personally, I agree. I don't think a "dispute" tag is appropriate, though, since I don't think there's any ongoing dispute, and I think an "npov" tag is premature until you've tried and failed to add balance to the article . Why don't you write up some material challenging the reality of PK and create a section, perhaps entitled "skepticism?" If you don't feel you're experienced enough to edit the article itself, draft some stuff and put it here. Or, at least, assemble the source citations you think best present the skeptical side. Dpbsmith (talk) 12:56, 27 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree that as the article stands there are some POV issues. But here's a more specific question: To me, the second paragraph or so: "As with all psi phenomena, there is wide disagreement and controversy within the sciences and even within the field of parapsychology as to the very existence of psychokinesis and the validity or interpretation of PK-related experiments. To date, there has never been a scientifically demonstrated instance of psychokinesis..." is itself a problem. I think "wide disagreement and controversy within the sciences" would be a mischaracterization of "there has never been a scientifically demonstrated instance of pyschokinesis." Does this need to change? I ask here because this sort of issue -- popular claims yet unsuported by science -- comes up often, and I'm curious if there's a standard wiki way to deal with it. I suspect in such cases one can safely talk about "popular disagreement" or suggest that "some believe..." but to call it a controversy within the sciences gives the impression that there is substantial debate among scientists, which in the case of pk, at least today, is not the case.

PK is possible it is all a matter of learning how to use it
I used to be a skeptic of PK until I was 14 years old. I was furious at everyone around me. I sat down when strange things started happening. It was 7 days till Christmas and the X-mas tree was up. I stared at it for about 3 seconds and it began shaking until it eventually fell over. I had another similar instanc when I was 15 and a water bottle was sent flying across my bedroom. Whether you believe in it or not, I believe PK is something that all people can do we just need to find out how. It probably happens when emotions are at an extreme.

Not that I am saying that your PK experiences are not real, but there could be another explanation for these phenomena that you have experienced. It could possibly be that your house has a poltergeist. To comment on this discussion, I agree with you that PK and other psi ablities are possible. For some people, they use a larger percentage of their brain, so they sometimes tap into their psi ablities and/or have found rudimentary control of these ablities. In some cases of Magicians and occualt members, they gain greater control of their ablities through the help of demons. Also, I also believe during great times of stress and emotions that ones psi ablities are more readily used. Most of the psi ablities that I have experienced has been precognition and I have also experienced some telepathy. LordRevan 06:51 Febuary 2 2006 (UTC)

Ok first of all the large percent of your brain that isnt used is actually being used subconsiouly to make your heart beat and pump blood through you body, the large percent of your brain controls all involentary functions your body performs. but i still beleave PK is possible


 * There is no &amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;large percent of your brain that isnt used&amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;. That's an urban legend. See . --Hob Gadling 18:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

&amp;amp;amp;quot;10% of our brains&amp;amp;amp;quot; means we're not using all our potential. Urban legend?--Tufelix 12:41, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. Hob Gadling gave you the link... and it's a very good discussion. Here it is again: http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percnt.htm Dpbsmith (talk) 16:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

So the people at snopes.com have no reserves that they could tap. So what. Who's talking about them?--Tufelix 08:51, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * We're talking about sources for the statement that &amp;quot;we only use 10% of our brains,&amp;quot; and the Snopes article gives good reasons for questioning this. Hob Gadling has provided a good, reputable source for the opinion that the statement is an urban legend. Have you got a good, reputable source for the opinion that &amp;quot;we only use 10% of our brains&amp;quot;--preferable a recent research paper, a medical or physiological or neuroanatomy textbook or something like that? Dpbsmith (talk) 14:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Taking common sense statements literally in order to shoot them down is one of the favorite tactics of all fundamentalists. Do you need sources for this?--Tufelix 18:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Quote from another page on here:
 * Not only is there nothing "untapped" in the brain, but trying to "tap in" to more would be harmful to you. 69.161.13.68 05:25, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, 69.161.13.68. Dpbsmith (talk)

Harmful? So don't tap yours. Who asked you to?--Tufelix 14:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Calling Mr. Randi's bluff
If it is true that nobody can move part of Mr. Randi's body without touching him, then this would say something about Mr. Randi's virility but nothing about PK.--Tufelix 08:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Telekinesis
The bit on President GeorgeW.Bush and the pretzel incident is POV. Marek bek(?) isn't proven to save president Bush.Please cite the sources for it. As for telekinises i belive its poorly understood ability (due do mainstream science thinking) which some humans possess.about the utility of telekinesis ? Its easier to influence objects directly so it would have limited applications in daily life for a telekinetic. But training to control such ability would an immense benefit to people (who can use the ability).Think of typing at speed of thought,remote control activation, precise short-range manipulation (of anything),telekinetic based games,etc.

Comments on Style
The phrase "There are critics of this analysis." is a complete waste. There are critics of every study done since the beginning of time regardless of the substance of any claims. It contributes in no way to the balance of the article and is either a poor attempt to highlight the other side, or a lazy attempt to add skepticism.

The last roughly 1/3 of this article is very POV against Psychokinesis, by virtue of only discussing instances of psychokinesis which are not only short on credibility, but downright ridiculous in some cases. Claiming Bush's problems after choking (which were normal medical results of choking) were an attack by a psychokinetic, reduces the credibility of the rest of the argument by lumping it in with the clearly false (or very unlikely to be true) assertions.

Star wars
Star wars needs to be on the cultural refrences section. there is certainly alot of telekenisis in star wars. I don't know enough about it to add it. I did however enhance the Stargate part. Tobyk777 05:07, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I concur. LordRevan 19:48, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

1. Telekinesis more common a term. 2. Randi quote.
1. Google search conducted April 3, 2006:

Psychokinesis: 358,000. Telekinesis: 1,200,000.

Telekinesis is the older term, has far greater usage, and is a companion term for telepathy and teleportation. Note that the person (Henry Holt apparently) who coined the term "psychokinesis" did not also try to rename "telepathy" as "psychopathy"; for example, a telepath becomes a psychopath. I have personally heard hostile skeptics use the insulting phrase "more psycho than psychokinesis."

In my opinion, this Wikopedian entry should be renamed Telekinesis and the redirect should be from Psychokinesis, not the other way around. [Update July 12, 2006 - I am preparing brief origins for the two terms, coinage, dates, sources, etc. and will be adding them to this entry sometime soon.]

2. Regarding the quote attributed to James Randi, 2002, about the raising of one's hand if you believe in telekinesis, here is a 1994 email posted on a skeptic's website that offers a possible differing origin. Scroll down to the bottom of the page:

www.skepticfiles.org/evolut/theoryon.htm

... How many of you believe in telekinesis? Raise MY hands. Blue Wave/Max v2.12 Origin: The BandMaster, Vancouver, BC (604-266-7754) (1:153/7715) (note: these apparently are message board IDs, not a quote source; I contacted the above site and they cannot come up with a further source for the quote)


 * For what it's worth... I find it interesting that the American Heritage Dictionary has entries for both and does not cross-reference them as synonyms:


 * tel·e·ki·ne·sis NOUN: The movement of objects by scientifically inexplicable means, as by the exercise of an occult power.


 * psy·cho·ki·ne·sis NOUN nflected forms: pl. psy·cho·ki·ne·ses (-sz) abbr. PK The production or control of motion, especially in inanimate and remote objects, purportedly by the exercise of psychic powers.


 * Do you see an actual distinction there? I may be straining... as I read these two definitions it seems as if it's "telekinesis" if you believe it is scientifically inexplicable and "psychokinesis" if you believe that parapsychology is a science and that psychokinesis is one of the phenomena subject to scientific explanation by parapsychology. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:05, 4 April 2006 (UTC)


 * 'Telekinesis' is the more common term, but the literal meaning of that term is just a more specific form of psychokinesis (movement at a distance vs. movement via the mind). All telekinesis is psychokinesis; not all psychokinesis is telekinesis. -Sean Curtin 02:10, 4 April 2006 (UTC)


 * UPDATE: here is a posting from the James Randi talk page.
 * Misattribution Watch:


 * James Randi's JREF office confirmed in an email on July 11, 2006 that he did not coin the saying "Everyone who believes in telekinesis, raise my hand" and he doesn't know where it originated. It should not be included if anyone attempts to add it to his entry, as it is often misatributed to him elsewhere on the Internet. the saying can be traced back to a skeptics message board in 1994, but even that may be mere use. It may be from a cartoon caption. If anyone ever locates the source, please update it at the entry for psychokinesis.


 * I think I've seen it attributed to him in print, but I don't know where. So it is an error to attribute it to him, but it is a good quote.  Bubba73 (talk), 20:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, he didn't originate the sentence, but he did use it in 2002. Bubba73 (talk), 21:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * - I removed the quote because I didn't think it would be allowed with just "unknown" as the source. I'm glad it was restored. It is a good quote. (--original poster of this topic)

De-bleated?
I'm not aware of the term de-bleated (as in "de-bleated goat"). Does this word mean anything to anyone that perhaps I'm just not aware of? If not, should it be removed from the article? -SocratesJedi | Talk 00:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I've heard of de-bleated uranium, but not goats. Anyhoo... an article like this screams out for words like "unproven", "alleged" and "claimed".BryanEkers 20:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Presumably it is the same devocalization operation called Debarking when it is performed on dogs. But that's just my guess, and since it doesn't affect anything important in the article, I don't care whether or not it is in there. Dpbsmith (talk) 22:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC) P. S. It was User:Timharwoodx who was very insistent on the existence of "remote influencing"&mdash;he originally had created a separate article under that title,, which was nominated for deletion and ultimated turned into a redirect and merged here. He cited the Ronson material as convincing evidence of the reality of remote influencing, whereas it appears as if the Ronson material actually presented it as an indication of ludicrous credulity on the part of U. S. officials. Dpbsmith (talk) 22:40, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Can I correct the above? My text says 'claims in this area.......' The word 'claims' has a different meaning to 'it is proven as a fact to be true.' Is the writer confused? Timharwoodx 22:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Apologies, I misrepresented the material you inserted without checking the history. However, see comments below re the Ronson book. Dpbsmith (talk) 13:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Getting back to de-bleating: according to Ronson's book, the goats were indeed de-bleated. "The covert nature of the goats was helped by the fact that they were de-bleated; they were just standing there, their mouths opening and closing, with no bleat coming out," p. 7. The reason is that "Special Forces were concerned that a hundred bleating goats on base could come to the attention of the local ASPCA" p. 19.

Some honest-to-God research on the phenomenon
Some thoughts, but most importantly, some hard research for the ambitious who want to work on this...

First, though -- on science vs. pseudoscience

The problem with things like PK is they can't be reliably replicated in a controlled setting. If something is indeed a natural phenomenon, it should be able to be replicated reliably. Or at least, that's how the scientific method looks at it (sorry about the anthropomorphism there).

There are some really bizarre things that happen in the world, but so many of them can be reliably replicated. For example, on the subject of the power of the human mind, there are many people, most notably sufis and the like, who can affect their own bodies so much that they can make hives or boils rise and then go back down at will, or who can keep themselves from bleeding, even from a large wound.

Most of us just don't have control over it.

The thing that's interesting about this seemingly supernatural power is that it can reliably be replicated in a laboratory setting--therefore, we know it's "for real," not just some cool thing that can't reliably be repeated.

"In a classic experiment, Japanese physicians Ikemi and Nakagawa* hypnotized volunteers and told them that a leaf applied to their skin was a toxic plant, such as poison ivy. The plant was harmless but the subjects' skin became red and irritated. The same experimenters applied the real toxic plant to other subjects' skin after telling them it was innocuous. The expected biological reaction did not take place." Grossbart, T. (1992). Skin Deep. http://www.grossbart.com/sd/Skin_Deep2.html


 * Ikemi, Y., & Nakagawa, S. (1962). A psychosomatic study of contagious dermatitis. Kyoshu Journal of Medical Science, 13, 335-350.

(More on the same topic: http://www.apa.org/books/431730As.html)

It would also be helpful if those who are going on about "psi abilities" could operationalize "psi abilities." (Operationalize=provide a concrete definition. For example, operationalization of "hot" would be, say, "90 degrees F and above".)

I couldn't find a single legitimate journal (and I did use an academic search engine that looks at thousands of journals) that validated PK as a psychological phenomenon (as opposed to a parapsychological phenomenon, and they are so not the same, since psych is a science and parapsych a pseudoscience--because parapsychs can't replicate this stuff in a lab...)

There does seem to be some interesting research in quantum physics that is tentatively being used to explain some of the PK phenomena. My understanding of quanta isn't great enough to unravel the mystery, but here are some places the ambitious might start, and I did manage to locate the entire article for some of the sources. Each of these was found using an academic research engine. I think it's okay to provide the references as I found them, as long as I say that these are the search results, word for word:

Resource:   	  Academic Search Premier Author:  	Leder, Drew Add.Author / Editor:  	Leder, Drew Citation:  	Journal of Alternative & Complementary Medicine Oct2005, Vol. 11 Issue 5, p923 Year:  	2005 Abstract:  	Over decades, consciousness research has accumulated evidence of the real and measureable existence of "spooky actions at a distance"--modes of telepathy, telekinesis, clairvoyance, and the like. More recently scientists have begun rigorous study of the effects of distant healing intention and prayer vis-a-vis nonhuman living systems and patients in clinical trials. A barrier to taking such work seriously may be the belief that it is fundamentally incompatible with the scientific world view. This article suggests that it need not be; contemporary physics has generated a series of paradigms that can be used to make sense of, interpret, and explore "psi" and distant healing. Four such models are discussed, two drawn from relativity theory and two from quantum mechanics. First is the energetic transmission model, presuming the effects of conscious intention to be mediated by an as-yetunknown energy signal. Second is the model of path facilitation. As gravity, according to general relativity, "warps" space-time, easing certain pathways of movement, so may acts of consciousness have warping and facilitating effects on the fabric of the surrounding world. Third is the model of nonlocal entanglement drawn from quantum mechanics. Perhaps people, like particles, can become entangled so they behave as one system with instantaneous and unmediated correlations across a distance. Last discussed is a model involving actualization of potentials. The act of measurement in quantum mechanics collapses a probabilistic wave function into a single outcome. Perhaps conscious healing intention can act similarly, helping to actualize one of a series of possibilities; for example, recovery from a potentially lethal tumor. Such physics-based models are not presented as explanatory but rather as suggestive. Disjunctions as well as compatibilities between the phenomena of modern physics and those of psi and distant healing are explored. HERE'S THE FULL ARTICLE: http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1089/acm.2005.11.923?cookieSet=1
 *  Title:  	"Spooky Actions at a Distance": Physics, Psi, and Distant Healing.

Resource:   	  Electronic Journal Center Author:  	de Beauregard, O. Costa Citation:  	Foundations of Physics Volume: 31, Issue: 5, May 2001. pp. 837-848 Year:  	2001 Abstract:  	A derivation by Frohner of non-relativistic quantum mechanics via Fourier analysis applied to probability theory is not extendable to relativistic quantum mechanics because Schrodinger's positive definite probability density ψ*ψ is lost (Dirac's spin 1/2 case being the exception). The nature of the Fourier link then changes; it points to a redefinition of the probability scheme as an information carrying telegraph, the code of which is Born's as extended by Dirac and by Feynman. Hermitian symmetry of the transition amplitude 〈φ [mid] ψ〉 between Dirac representations expresses reciprocity of preparation and measurement (the quantal coding and decoding), two equally active interventions of the physicist; as "the measurement perturbs the system" retrodiction implies retroaction evidenced in "delayed choice." Reciprocity of knowledge and organization vindicates Wigner's claim that "reciprocal to the action of matter upon mind there exists a direct action of mind upon matter": psychokinesis, branded by Jaynes as "a psychiatric disorder of the Copenhagen school." As for factlike irreversibility, it is expressed by the enormity of the change rate from information to negentropy: while gain in knowledge is normal psychokinesis is paranormal. Stapp's recent discussion of psychokinesis in a quantum context should be resumed in association with an EPR correlation; an experimental test is proposed.
 * Title:  	Relativistic Quantum Mechanics as a Telegraph

Resource:   	 Academic Search Premier Author:  	Arnst, Catherine Add.Author / Editor:  	Arnst, Catherine    	Tiplady, Rachel Citation:  	Business Week 11/15/2004 Issue 3908, p91 Year:  	2004 Abstract:  	Reports that Project MAIA in Switzerland has unveiled technology that allows people to guide a robot wheelchair by thought, through a cap that reads brainwaves. Statement that human thoughts create impulses in specific areas of the brain; Use of electroencephalograms to convert the impulses into an action in the wheelchair. FULL ARTICLE (scroll down): http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_46/c3908081_mz019.htm
 *  Title:  	THIS WHEELCHAIR RUNS ON BRAINWAVES.

Resource:   Academic Search Premier Author:   Brown, Michael Add.Author / Editor:   Brown, Michael Citation:   Atlantic Monthly Oct78, Vol. 242 Issue 4, p95 Year:   1978 Abstract:   Focuses on the concept of occultism during the old times. Attempts of the parapsychologists to prove power of the minds; Emergence of telekinesis in the Victorian period; Details about the process of radioactive decay of atomic nuclei.
 *  Title:   GETTING SERIOUS ABOUT THE OCCULT. 


 * There's also a book called: Debunked! ESP, Telekinesis, and Other Pseudoscience, by physicist George Charpak.

And finally, for a somewhat flaky but fascinating discussion of all kinds of this stuff (some of which is supported by real research and some of which is hearsay):
 * The Holgraphic Mind

Katsesama 06:29, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

External verifiability
There seem to be people editing the WIKI, who can not be bothered to read the guidelines. See Verifiability, if you've not yet done so. The important point about material nominated for inclusion in the WIKI, is that it is EXTERNALLY VERIFIABLE. More so than being strictly true.

Now, I have read the Jon Ronson book, and watched the TV series. There is no doubt, through extensive interviews, that the claims made are well referenced, and conform to all WIKI guidelines on external verifiability. There is therefore no reason for reference to the 'goat lab' claims not to be made in the WIKI.

I also wonder if some of the above posters actually read the page before making comments / edits! What I wrote was 'Claims in this area.....' That is rather different to saying 'It is proven as a fact........' As to de-bleated, I told the person it probably should read 'sheared.' No big mystery.


 * (The book says they were indeed de-bleated, i.e. surgically rendered mute, to avoid calling attention to the existence of the goats and attracting the attention of the ASPCA. Dpbsmith (talk) 13:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC))

Please read the WIKI guidelines before making changes. The WIKI is a community project, and deleting something that is externally referenced, because you just don't happen to like it for some reason, is not proper etiquette. I'm not saying remote influencing is true, simply that there are detailed claims in this area, which as per WIKI editorial guidelines, can be legitimately referenced. Timharwoodx 20:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The goat issue is already on Wikipedia on Jon Ronson's page, the author who wrote the book on the subject. A link is provided to his page from this psychokinesis entry. There is also a separate entry for his book on Wikipedia, The Men Who Stare At Goats awaiting someone to write an article about the goats. Duplication of the subject here is unnecessary. The history of psychokinesis research goes back over 100 years. We cannot included everything ever written on the subject. No encyclopedia can or should. As I said, the goats can be found in two places already on Wiki and are linked here. I hope that's a reasonable position.


 * But do keep in mind that Wikipedia is not paper. We can put in as much high-quality, well-sourced, encyclopedic information as we can muster. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:48, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I have to respectfully disagree. When entries start to fill up, someone "locks" them (go look at the entry for George W. Bush). The role of an editor is to see that the best info is put in the least amount of space possible so that people don't get information overload. Note that Uri Geller and Nina Kulagina, two alleged superstars of PK and with tons of media material to cite, simply have a link to their own Wikipedia entries and are not given any special discussion in this PK article. All you have to do is write your material or book/research review on The Men Who Stare at Goats page, make sure it somehow pertains to PK or TK at least a little, and then add the link to the See Also section. 208.50.10.5 15:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

But, what is Jon Ronson's book actually verifying?
Your points on verifiability are correct; I'm not the one who removed the material.

But. The jonronson.com website characterizes "The Men Who Stare At Goats" thus:


 * Defying all known accepted military practice - and indeed, the laws of physics - they believed that a soldier could adopt the cloak of invisibility, pass cleanly through walls and, perhaps most chillingly, kill goats just by staring at them. Entrusted with defending America from all known adversaries, they were the First Earth Battalion. And they really weren't joking. What's more, they're back and fighting the War on Terror. 'The men who stare at goats' reveals extraordinary - and very nutty - national secrets at the core of George W Bush's War on Terror.

Ronson, or whomever wrote that description, characterizes the project as "nutty."

Judging by that description, Ronson's book would seem to be a verifiable source for the U.S. having such a lab and attempting to kill goats by psychokinesis. It would also seem to be a verifiable source for high-placed U. S. officials believing in the existence of remote influencing.

But does Ronson's book claim that the experiments succeeded? If so, why does his website call the project "nutty?" What's the tenor of the book? Is it very different from the website's blurb?

Is the sentence "It is claimed skilled remote influencers can stop the hearts of goats and hamsters long enough to cause death" Ronson's claim?

One could cite this Time Magazine article to support a statement that Nancy Reagan believed in astrology, but not in support of a statement that "Time magazine claims that astrology successfully enabled Reagan to avoid further assassination attempts." Dpbsmith (talk) 13:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Having watched the TV series, unlike every other poster on this page it would seem, I can vouch that yes, Glenn Wheaton was interviewed on camera, and he did specifically claim a goat was killed (once only).

Upon further investigation, Ronson was able to corroborate the fact that 'goat lab' existed at Fort Bragg in the early 1980s, and that psychic experiments along the lines described by Wheaton were undertaken.

Ronson was further able to track down and interview Guy Savelli, who led the original experiments, and Guy was able to provide video tape of marines in the present time period, starring at goats, while under vetinary supervision. Validating the claims made off camera, that 'goat lab' had been re-established by Donald Rumsfeld.

Guy also produced a tape of a hamster lying motionless at the bottom of the cage for an extended period of time, while a second hamster climbed all over it. He claimed he killed the hamster a short while later, but would not produce that tape because the thought Ronson was a 'bleeding heart liberal.'

Guy stated that while he has never killed a goat, he did participate in 'goat lab' type experiments described by Glenn Wheaton, and that he 'dropped' at least 2 goats, on different ocassions, but did not actually kill them.

See also Guy Savelli's bio. His work with the military and mind / matter is documented in various forums / publications. he is a known, and some woudl say notable, figure.

http://www.worldkungfu.com/Master.html

I mean we can go through this however many times you like, but the claims for goat lab have multiple sources verified and documented on film and in writing by Ronson, and as per the WIKI editorial gudielines, there is no reason for externally verfiable material not to be included.

Once again, can I PLEASE point out, my text says 'claims in this area.' This, again, is quite different to stating 'it is proved as a fact the American military uses psychics to kill goats.' Timharwoodx 12:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * You and I are in agreement. The existence of the goat lab is verifiable, via Ronson's book, and Guy Savelli's statements that he believes he "dropped" a goat and killed a hamster are verifiable. And Ronson's claim that Rumsfeld is involved makes the incident important.


 * I changed:


 * It is claimed skilled remote influencers can stop the hearts of goats and hamsters long enough to cause death.


 * to:


 * Ronson interviewed a man named Guy Savelli who stated that "I did drop a goat" at the lab, and that he said, in a "sorrowful and distressed" voice, that just the week before the interview he had unintentionally killed his own pet hamster by remote influencing.


 * I did this because it makes it clear who is making that claim (not Ronson), and ties it to a specific source citation. Dpbsmith (talk) 13:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I've got the whole show recorded on video cd. Actually Michael-Echanis is credited with killing a goat. The only person reputedly to do so. But because he died some years ago, so Ronson was unable to validate the claim. I don't recall Savelli being sorry about killing the hamster. Not in the tv interview. I guess the goat stuff is just too wacky for people to get their minds round. The idea the American military on orders from Rumsfeld himself, gets grown men to stare intently at hamsters and goats, trying to alter heart rates, just freaks most folks out. Timharwoodx 22:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced material
The following material contains no source citations whatsoever and does not meet the verifiability policy, which requires that all Wikipedia content be traceable to published, reliable sources. These can be moved back into the article one at a time as references are found. For example, assuming that there is a passage in Stephen King's novel Carrie which states in so many words that she is psychokinetic, this item can be reinserted with a proper book citation. Dpbsmith (talk) 18:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Inserting a citation for each of these entries would be overtly time-consuming and likely leave the references section just as long as the article itself. The majority already link to a page about the topic.


 * I beleive you are interpreting the verifiability policy too literally. Not every fact needs a link to an extra-wikipedia source. For example, the line "Uri Geller, the Israeli famous for his spoon-bending demonstrations" exists in the article without any evidence that Mr. Geller is indeed famous for bending spoons. It is linked to the page about this person, however, where one can find other sources discussing his spoon-bending prowess. The same thing applies here.


 * I hope this settles the issue, and will offer to go over the section and clarify any that do not link to other Wikipedia pages before moving them back in. Liu Bei 15:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * No, you can't consider a linked article to be an implicit reference, because Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source. If a linked article does contain a source for the fact being supported, then that source should be copied here. Dpbsmith (talk) 16:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * You can't be serious. Take a look at the first paragraph for any article. In this example, The Sun:


 * The Sun is the star at the center of our solar system.
 * The Earth and other matter (including other planets, asteroids, meteoroids, comets and dust) orbit the Sun
 * which by itself accounts for more than 99% of the solar system's mass.
 * Energy from the Sun—in the form of sunlight, supports almost all life on Earth via photosynthesis
 * and, via heating from insolation—drives the Earth's climate and weather.


 * None of these facts are referenced, because it's common knowledge and would be silly to have to prove each of those sentences to be true. Liu Bei 17:02, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Have you read the policy? Please read it again and point out to me the part of the verifiability policy that says that facts do not need to be referenced if they are "common knowledge."
 * That said, as always, not everything in Wikipedia is what it should be. Many articles need improvement, and in fact references is one of the area in which improvement is most needed.
 * Nevertheless, if you check any of the "featured articles," I think you'll see that they are well referenced. And that having a long references section is not considered to be a problem. Today's featured article, Ku Klux Klan, has fifty-six. Dpbsmith (talk) 20:48, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Are you talking about the Cultural references? KillerChihuahua?!? 17:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I was drawing a comparison to another article that each fact is not necessarily referenced. That should be the case for the Cultural References section in this article as well. Liu Bei 17:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * So sorry but no, two wrongs do not make a right. If I were to see an article with a serious error, that does not make it "ok" to ignore the same types of errors on other pages.
 * Point blank, almost the entire "Cultural references" section is TriviaCruft, bloating the page without adding anything of value. My opinion? Dump it. KillerChihuahua?!? 17:48, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, my personal view is that I have no objection whatsoever to popular culture material as long as it is encyclopedic; that is, as long as someone spends a few minutes to check facts, and shows that they did so by saying where they got those facts. My objection to typical "in popular culture" sections is that they at least give the appearance of coming off the top of peoples' heads, from their personal knowledge. I'll accept almost anything as long as it meets the verifiability policy. "I'm pretty sure I remember this from when I saw the movie six months ago" doesn't hack it, because nobody else can verify the fact from a statement like that.
 * On the other hand, I agree that the value of these items is marginal, and if you want to dump the three referenced items currently in the article, references and all, I would have no objection to that, either. Dpbsmith (talk) 20:47, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Cultural references
'''Please do not add new entries to the list below! Add them to the main article at the above link.'''

A B
 * Altered States (1980) was a movie about researching sensory deprivation with unintended mental power effects, such as shape-shifting, as experienced by actor William Hurt’s character and unintendedly, that of actress Blair Brown. Based on the novel by Paddy Chayefsky.
 * In the TV series Angel, the episode Untouched shows Bethany Chaulk, a telekinetic girl whose powers were developed due the trauma of being sexually abused by her father. Other characters of the Angel/Buffyverse, specially ghosts and witches, such as Willow Rosenberg and Amy Madison, display telekinetic powers.
 * Babylon 5 TV series, episode Mind War was about various psychic powers, including PK/TK. The last scene had the psychic character Talia Winters, played by Andrea Thompson, alone in her quarters on the space station moving an (ancient) U.S. penny an inch or so across a tabletop using telekinesis as a test to see if she had that advanced power. Also guest starred Walter Koenig of "Star Trek" fame.
 * In the classic TV series Bewitched, Samantha, played by Elizabeth Montgomery, and her daughter Tabitha, as witches, used telekinesis on occasion. The TV series inspired a theatrical film of the same title that starred Nicole Kidman and a spinoff TV series "Tabitha" that starred Lisa Hartman as the adult Tabitha.
 * Bible-based movies such as The Ten Commandments (1956) and Jesus of Nazareth (1977) usually include a display of divinely powered psychokinesis.
 * In Bionicle storyline, a Kanohi mask called Matatu allows the user the power to moved objects and beings for mind power.
 * In the TV series Buck Rogers in the 25th Century, the episode "Twiki Is Missing" (1980) had actress Anne-Marie Martin with PK power.
 * In Buffy the Vampire Slayer, witches are shown to be telekinetic as a whole.

C
 * Movie: Carrie, the telekinetic high-school teenager played by Sissy Spacek. Based on the Stephen King novel. There was also a TV movie remake "Carrie," 2002 that starred Angela Bettis and Emilie de Ravin and a sequel "The Rage: Carrie 2."
 * In Charmed, telekinesis is a power possessed by most witches, warlocks, upper level demons and angels. Prue Halliwell and Paige Matthews are best known for having this charmed ability. (INCLUDED in main article)
 * On the French animated television series Code Lyoko, Yumi Ishiyama has the power of telekinesis in Lyoko.

D
 * In the Nickelodeon show Danny Phantom, the main character battles many ghosts with several Psychic abilities, including telekinesis.
 * In the Darkstalkers video game series, the vampire hunter Donovan Baine, and a young girl Anita who accompanies him, use telekinesis to a large extent. Donovan's main weapon is a giant spirit sword known as Dhylec, which he mostly wields with just the power of his mind.
 * In Destroy All Humans!, the Furons have the psychokinesis ability. This ability gives them an advantage in winning a war against a homeworld enemy.
 * Movie: Dreamscape (1984). It starred Dennis Quaid as one of two medical research center operatives who could enter a patient's fantasy-filled dream and affect the person physically for good or ill in the real world. Also starred Max von Sydow, Christopher Plummer, Eddie Albert (as the U.S. president), and Kate Capshaw.
 * In the Doctor Who episode "The Empty Child" a small boy who has been brought back to life by nanogenes has the power to close a door, make phone calls and set clockwork toys working with his mind.

E
 * In EarthBound, PK or PSI is the primary form of 'magic' in the game, however this variation also includes manipulation of full energy with the mind. EarthBound's PSI was popularized by the appearance of Ness in Nintendo's Super Smash Brothers series, whose special moves included PK Fire, PK Thunder, and later PK Flash.
 * In Elfen Lied, the diclonius species display telekinetic-like powers in the form of long, translucent arms called vectors.
 * Movies: Escape to Witch Mountain and Return from Witch Mountain. Two young children levitated objects. Disney films.
 * In E.T. The Extraterrestrial (1982), the title alien could make bicycles with their riders fly through the air.

F
 * In F.E.A.R., the silhouette we know as Alma was genetically engineered by the government to have vast, uncalculated amounts of psychic power. Among them are telekinesis and pyrokinesis.
 * In the movie Firestarter (1984), the child character played Drew Barrymore had pyrokinesis with fireballs directed by TK and her father used PK to make two of the villains blind. Based on the Stephen King novel.
 * 4D Man (1959). Two future"Star Trek" alumni, Robert Lansing and Lee Meriwether, star in this film about a serious research scientist who discovers a way to walk through walls using psychokinesis, ostensibly by speeding up the atoms in his body in space-time and slipping through. However, this caused a side effect of aging in the process. In the first minutes of the film, a pencil is successfully pushed through a block of metal. Later, accidentally, a hand is pushed through, which gets painfully stuck! Child actress Patty Duke also has a minor role in one of her earliest performances.
 * In Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood, the main character accidentally resurrects Jason Voorhees with her psycokinetic ability. In the end, she also uses her ability to fight him.
 * The Fury, a 1978 film about young people with deadly PK powers. It starred Kirk Douglas, Andrew Stevens, and Amy Irving.

G
 * In the Ghostbusters universe, ghosts and other supernatural creatures are composed of negatively charged psychokinetic energy. This energy, called PKE, was featured and mentioned extensively in both movies and animated series. Furthermore, the Ghostbusters developed a device called a PKE meter for the purpose of measuring the amount of psychokinetic energy in an area.
 * In the game series Golden Sun, the ability to use powers granted to the mind, ingame called "Psynergy", does exist. Adepts are naturally born knowing they have these powers, though, anyone can use them if they put their mind to it. Four kinds of psynergy exist, Venus (Earth), Mars (Fire), Jupiter (Wind), and Mercury (Water). Amongst these, the most notable is Jupiter and Mercury; Jupiter adepts are naturals at reading minds and being able to pick up on future events, and Mercury can heal through prayer and concentration. Venus have the ability to manipulate objects with their mind, giving them such powers as "Move" and teleporting "Retreat", while Mars can gain abilities that are a mixture of three, knowing "Move" and healing moves are natural to them.
 * In the Gundam meta-verse, there is a type of evolved human being known as a Newtype, predominantly in the Universal Century timeline. This happens when humanity begins to migrate to space, and to adapt to the new environment humanity begins to slowly evolve to adapt to space. Although Newtypes mostly exhibit enhanced senses and varying degree's of heightened mental awareness, they have sometimes performed amazing feats that are very Telekinetic. For example, the main protagonist of Zeta Gundam, Camille Vidan has his titular Mobile Suit perform far beyond its expected performance with the power of his mind during instances where he becomes deeply enraged. There are also Newtype only weapons known as "Funnels" which are psychically controlled modules which are used to remotely attack enemies mentally.

I
 * In the classic TV series I Dream of Jeannie, Jeannie, played by Barbara Eden, had TK abilities.

L
 * In the TV series Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman, the series finale episode "The Family Hour" (1997) featured a big-headed villain named “Fat Head,” played by comedian Harry Anderson, who had TK powers.

M
 * In the Japanese manga Akira (and its subsequent animated film) telekinesis is a subject of secret government research, culminating in extremely powerful individuals such as the main antagonist, Tetsuo, and the titular character, Akira.
 * The title character in the 1936 movie The Man Who Could Work Miracles was given incredible PK powers by gods. Based on the short story by H.G. Wells. (INCLUDED in main article)
 * In the children's novel Matilda by Roald Dahl, the protagonist, Matilda Wormwood, develops telekinetic abilities as a result of untapped intellectual ability. (INCLUDED in main article)
 * Richard Burton played a man with telekinetic powers in the film The Medusa Touch. His character, Robert Morlar, has the ability to cause catastrophes and induce death with his mind alone. Also stars Lee Remick. A research scene in the film uses footage of Nina Kulagina.
 * In Metal Gear Solid, the main character, Solid Snake, does battle with Psycho Mantis, a member of FOXHOUND who has the powers of both telepathy and telekinesis. In Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty, the character Fortune possesses both real and imagined psychokinetic abilities.
 * "Mind Killer" (1987) was a low budget movie with a PK plot. It starred Joe McDonald.
 * A young Courteney Cox played a telekinetic teenager in the short-lived TV series, Misfits of Science. Other characters had different powers.
 * Modern Problems, 1981, Chevy Chase is exposed to nuclear waste in this comedy and develops telekinesis. In one scene he makes a model airplane fly around.
 * Movie: Momentum) (2003), was about TK and starred Louis Gossett Jr, Teri Hatcher, and Grayson McCouch.
 * In the video game series Mortal Kombat the enigmatic ninja Ermac and the blind swordsman Kenshi can both use Telekinesis.
 * In the classic TV series My Favorite Martian, Uncle Martin (the Martian), pointed his finger to cause objects to move.

O
 * In the The Sixth Finger (1963) episode of the original Outer Limits, a scientist's experiment transforms actor David McCallum's character into a super-advanced human. One of his powers is telekinesis. In the fourth-season television episode "Monster" (1998) of the modern series, Harry Hamlin starred and it was about a group of government psychic assassins who could kill a human target anywhere in the world by watching him on live television and activating their PK ability in a jointly concentrated effort. Also, the fourth season episode "Josh" (1998) was about a man who had miraculous paranormal powers. In the opening scene a blonde reporter and her cameraman record footage of the 30-something man miraculously healing a collapsed man in the woods with the familiar hand-to-body light-glow effect. The footage is shown on the news, the man is captured by the government, and by episode's end, he is back in the woods rising into the sky. The narration and script overall posit the question, was this an alien god who returned to earth after 2,000 years? The character Josh was played by actor Alex McArthur.

P
 * Movie: "Patrick" (1978) a film with a PK plot that starred Robert Helpmann.
 * In the Phantasm movies, the Tall Man exhibits Psycokinetic abilities, often using them to trick or kill people. In Phantasm Oblivion, Mike gets psychokinetic abilities from the Sentinel Sphere embedded in his head. He tries to use these abilities to kill the Tall Man and fails.
 * Movie: Phenomenon (1996), John Travolta had telekinetic powers, making a pen spin, a book cover to open, and wooden boards move. A TV movie sequel "Phenomenon II" (2003) starred Christopher Shyer and Jill Clayburgh.
 * In the Pokémon game/show, many of the Pokémon wield telekinesis and many other psychic gifts.
 * Movie: Powder (1995). Profoundly white-skinned Sean Patrick Flanery had various psychic powers, including control over electromagetic forces.
 * In the Power Rangers universe, inhabitants of the planet KO-35 have innate telekinetic abilities.
 * In the video game Psi-Ops: The Mindgate Conspiracy by Midway, Nick Scryer uses many different abilities to defeat enemies (pyrokinesis, telekinesis, etc.).
 * The Power was a 1968 movie about a group of scientisits with PK powers. It was based on the novel. Starred George Hamilton and Michael Rennie. French title: The War of the Brains.
 * Movie: "Project Human Weapon" (2000), was about TK and starred Judge Reinhold and William Zabka.
 * Movie: "Psychic Killer" (1975), a low budgeter that starred Jim Hutton (father of the actor Timothy Hutton) as a prison inmate who psychically teleports himself to the outside to seek revenge. Also starred Paul Burke, Julie Adams, and other familiar character actors.

R
 * Movie: The Rage: Carrie 2 (1999), a theatrical sequel to "Carrie" starring Emily Bergl as a telekinetic teen relative of the original Carrie.
 * Movie: Resurrection (1980), a film about a woman who develops miracle healing powers after a car accident. It starred Ellen Burstyn and Sam Shephard.*In the TV series Roswell (1999) and the book series on which it was based, all three young adult human-looking aliens had various types of psychokinetic powers.

S
 * Scanners was a 1981 film about people with deadly PK abilities. It starred Michael Ironside. There were numerous sequels: “Scanners II: The New Order” (1991), “Scanners III: The Takeover” (1992), “Scanner Cop” (1994),  an “Scanners: The Showdown/aka Scanner Cop II.”
 * In the game Second Sight, the hero, some bad guys, and several children display various psycokinetic abilities.
 * In the TV show The Secret World of Alex Mack, Alexandra "Alex" Mack gains telekinesis after being drenched in the chemical GC-161.
 * In the Next-gen Sonic Game, SILVER, the hedgehog is a timetraveller with psychokinetic powers.
 * In the Philippine TV show SPIRITS, a boy named Red develops psychokinesis and levitation when exposed to a mysterious light from an alien source.
 * At the end of Andrei Tarkovsky's film Stalker (1979), the Stalker's young daughter is shown apparently moving objects across a table by telekinesis.
 * Various use in the TV show Stargate SG-1:
 * The Ori Priors in the TV show Stargate SG-1 have psychokinetic abilities that are strong enough to lift a man, or to hurl him several kilometers. Their abilities can be neutralized by specific sound frequencies which interrupt the function of highly evolved sections of their body.
 * The DNA resequencer can give any human or Ancient telekenisis in addition to other powers. Several characters in the show obtained telekenisis this way, including Khalek (who was given his abilities by Anubis), and several unamed villagers (who were given their abilities by Nirrti).
 * Ascended beings possess telekenisis.
 * In the movie Starman (1984) and the Starman (TV series) (1986) the alien visitor in the body of a human had the PK ability to heal and move objects.
 * Star Trek TV series episodes which featured TK/PK: Original series &mdash; Where No Man Has Gone Before (1966), Charlie X (1966), and Plato's Stepchildren (1968). The 1969 episode Whom Gods Destroy starred actor Steve Ihnat as a shape-shifting former starfleet captain Garth of Izar. The Next Generation &mdash; True Q (the word "telekinesis" is also specifically used by Q in the episode) and The Survivors (1989), which starred John Anderson as an alien who recreated his wife and home on a destroyed planet and who made an entire species of bad aliens, the Husnock, disappear.
 * In the TV show Static Shock, Madelyn Spaulding develops telekinesis after Static sends a surge of electricity through her brain.
 * In the fictional universe of Star Wars, Jedi have, among other powers, psychokinetic abilities due to their mastery of "the Force". (INCLUDED in main article)

T
 * TV series: The title character in the half-hour comedy Tabitha (1977), played by blonde-haired Lisa Hartman, had the powers of a witch, which included TK. This was a spinoff of the earlier TV series "Bewitched." Tabitha was Samantha's and Darren's half-human, half-witch daughter. In this comedy whe was an adult. In the original series, she was a baby who then grew into a young child during the show's run.
 * In Teen Titans, both Raven of the Titan team and Jinx of H.I.V.E. Academy wield telekinetic powers.
 * Movie: "The Tempest" (1982). Included scenes of psychic weather control. It starred John Cassavetes, Gina Rowlands, and Susan Sarandon. Based loosely on Shakespeare's play.
 * The Tomorrow People TV series features characters possessing psychokinetic abilities.
 * In the classic The Twilight Zone episode It's a Good Life (1961), the child character played by Billy Mumy had incredible psychoketic powers. He revived the character in a sequel episode of the new "Twilight Zone" titled "It's Still a Good Life" (2003). The original series episode The Mind and the Matter (1961) was about a man who developed strong PK.
 * Movie: Twitches. Twin teen witches had the power to move objects. Disney, based on the best selling series of children's books.

V
 * Vampires in popular fiction often have a form of telekinesis. Usually it is the older, more powerful vampires who exhibit this. Vampires usually acquire power the longer they stay alive. In Vampire: The Masquerade the Tremere Clan posseses the Rego Motus, a derivative of the Thaumaturgy discipline which lets them move objects in a psychokinetic fashion.

W
 * In the TV series Walker, Texas Ranger, an usual episode for this otherwise straight drama show titled "Brainchild" (1997) was about Walker rescuing a child who had TK powers from a research center.
 * In the anime Weiss Kreuz, Naoe Nagi of the assassin team Schwartz displayed psychokinetic abilities many times throughout the series.
 * Movie: The Witches of Eastwick. Jack Nicolson's character had telekinesis. The movie was based on the novel by John Updike.
 * In Witch Hunter Robin, certain witches have the power to control the movement of objects such as trash cans at will.

X
 * In the TV series The X-Files, Scully's baby, William, is shown in the two-part episode "Nothing Important Happening Here Today" to have telekinetic powers as he makes a mobile move that is hanging over his crib. Other PK/TK-related episodes (there may be more): "Shadows," "Fire," "Miracle Man," "Born Agian," 'Excelsius Dei," "D.P.O.," "Syzygy," and "Sunshine Days."
 * In X-Men, Jean Grey and many other mutants, such as Magneto and Kitty Pryde, have specialized telekinetic or psychokinetic abilities. (INCLUDED in main article)

Z
 * In Zapped! a teenage high school whiz kid discovers a formula for telekinetic powers and uses it for various mischief, including undressing girls, and in the sequel Zapped Again! a new generation of high school kids find the old potion and perform similar pranks.

PROPOSED ENTRIES TO BE RESEARCHED (by anyone):


 * Buck Rogers in the 25th Century. US TV series. There was an additional episode with a villain who had TK. He was part of a dup or trio of bad guys. The character actor who played him had a rough-looking face and typically played bad guys in minor roles. This was a larger role for him. Need episode title. 5Q5 15:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Space Precinct, UK TV series. There was a bug-like alien character in at least one episode who had TK abilities. Need episode title.5Q5 15:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Were there any episodes of Futurama or The Simpsons that had PK/TK in them? Maybe one of the Halloween episodes of the "The Simpsons"? 5Q5 15:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * In the movies Conan the Barbarian (1982) and Conan the Destroyer (1984), the Wizard character played by Asian actor Mako I am nearly certain had telekinetic power that he could summon by meditating briefly. Didn't he cause a stone dragon head secret chamber to open in the latter film? Need verification by someone who has the DVDs. 5Q5 15:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Cultural references list comments:


 * COMMENT: I'm in favor of keeping this extensive research list here on the discussion page. We should keep the list in the article brief with the best classic examples. Here, people can add to the list easily. Whoever initiated the above list apparently wishes to remain anonymous, so thanks to whomever included it. 208.50.10.5 15:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I alphabetized this list and included many new titles today. I suspect that if we included this longer list in the main article, our well-meaning, friendly flagger would add to every single entry or flag the entire section. :) Better to keep it here informally then for researchers, at least for now. It is rather overwhelming considering the lack of actual science input in the main article.5Q5 18:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * This list now looks like it qualifies to be placed on its own article page and then linked to from the PK main article's Cultural Reference section. Suggested article name: List of psychokinesis cultural references. That would free it from this talk page. I alphabetized this list and may do this one day when I get the time. In the meantime, if anybody wants to create the page, you've got my support. Remember to remove the bold "Included"s. 5Q5 15:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Removing unsourced pro-PK comment
I'm removing
 * Psychokinesis is steadily becoming more and more popular online. Websites such as http://www.psipog.net/ are teaching people how to achieve and preform Psychokinesis and other skills. Though very controversial and generally denied by scientists, Psychokinesis is becoming widespread and accepted among people in general.

because it is unsourced and non-neutral.

Well-sourced statements (from published reliable sources showing that PK is "becoming widespread and accepted among people in general" would be acceptable.

As phrased, "Websites such as http://www.psipog.net/ are teaching people how to achieve and preform Psychokinesis" clearly implies that these sites are successfully teaching PK. Dpbsmith (talk) 09:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

a "should" to go with the "shouldn't"s
I am of the school of thought that what we SHOULD do is at least as helpful as what we SHOULDN'T do. (I'm having a Glamour magazine Dos and Don'ts moment, I think.) In that spirit, I'm thinking of a more appropriate approach to wording...

BEFORE: Psychokinesis is steadily becoming more and more popular online. Websites such as http://www.psipog.net/ are teaching people how to achieve and preform Psychokinesis and other skills. Though very controversial and generally denied by scientists, Psychokinesis is becoming widespread and accepted among people in general.

AFTER: Interest in psychokinesis is reflected in the number of websites available online. Some websites, such as PsiPog.net claim to teach visitors how to "do psychic things."

Can I write here how appalling I found the website when I looked at it? They're even using the psychology symbol to make things look more "official." And they're kind of rude in their FAQ. I thought this one was better, because it's polite, better credentialed, and interactive! http://www.mdani.demon.co.uk/para/pk2test1.htm#Instructions

That doesn't make it more verifiable. Just nicer. :-)

I suppose that, using this kind of reference, you could also write something like,

AND MAYBE: Some Jungian and transpersonal psychologists, like Michael Daniels, have ventured into the realms of parapsychology and are attempting to explore alleged phenomena using studies.

On that one I think the Jungian aspect is important--those Jungian folks are all about the mystical.

Ok, my 10c, but I hesitate to touch the actual entry with a 10-foot pole at the moment.

Katsesama 04:10, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Notes on The Men Who Stare At Goats
Because I've just read this, and because it's been cited as a source, I want to put some notes here for possible future reference.

First, to be perfectly clear: I think this book is a completely valid citation to cite in support of

a) the existence of the "Goat Lab,"

b) the premise that the possibility of psychokinesis has been taken seriously by the U. S. government both at times in the past, and by the current administration.

That doesn't mean of course that what Ronson says is true, but it's unquestionably a print book, not self-published, by a respectable publisher (Simon and Schuster), with a respectable Amazon sale rank (about #18,000 as I write this) that has been reviewed by The New York Times and other serious reviewers. And the review by the New York Times characterizes Ronson as a "journalist". (Wait, it actually received two reviews... one by Ron Rosenbaum which does not appear to be freely available online. )

What I want to discuss is the tone and content of the book.

I find no place where Ronson says plainly whether or not he personally believes that any of the people he interviewed actually can perform psychokinesis or remote influencing.

Here his how his tone of voice strikes others:

Amazon's reviewer says that the book "strikes a perfect balance between curiosity, incredulity, and humor."

The New York Times review opens "The journalist Jon Ronson appears to be looking for furtive, paranoid quacks who play mind games. He seems to have hit the mother lode."

The cover of the book says it describes what happens when highly placed men "began believing in very strange things."

In the book, Ronson uses language such as "information that would soon lead me into what must be among the most whacked-out corners of George W. Bush's War on Terror."

Many of the incidents he describe read to me as ludicrous failures. The book opens (pp. 1-3) describes, in an account Ronson says is based on a circa-2003 interview, how during the 1980s, a General Stubblevine, convinced of the psychic possibility of walking through walls, seriously attempted to do so personally. "General Stubblevine bangs his nose hard on the wall of his office. ... [he] is confounded by his continual failure to walk through his wall."

Later on page 71-2 he offers to disperse a cloud for Ronson, which according to the General is one of the easiest powers to demonstrate. "Anyone can see it and anyone can do it." He begins, and while Ronson is "trying to work out which cloud the general was trying to burst," his wife Rima shouts "It's gone!" and the General confirms "The cloud appears to have gone." Then the general says he isn't sure, it wasn't possible to prove 100% that he was the cause. Apparently he does not attempt another demonstration. So, Ronson did not see the cloud vanish, but he heard the General and his wife say it had vanished and heard the General say he was not sure whether it was because of his mental powers. (It's not clear why he does not attempt a second demonstration).

The chapter in which Guy Savelli claims to have killed his own pet hamster is equally ambiguous. He shows Ronson a home video of two hamsters in a cage, one of whom is the target. The target hamster shows behavior which Savelli says is unusual. Ronson says it "did indeed seem suddenly mistrustful of its wheel." "Usually the hamster loves its wheel" says Savelli. Ronson opines that "emotions such as circumspection and wariness are not that easy to discern in hamsters." Suddenly the target hamster falls. "Its legs were in the air." "I'm accomplishing my task," says Savelli. Then the other hamster falls, too. "You're dropped both hamsters," says Ronson. "No, the other one has just fallen over," says Guy. The target hamster remains motionless for fifteen minutes, then "it shook itself down and began eating." Ronson comments that the hamster "did appear to be behaving unusually in comparison with the control hamster, but on the other hand, it definitely didn't die. I thought you said I was going to watch it die." Savelli and his wife says this is edited tape of the first two days, and the hamster dies on the third day, but that because they don't know enough about Ronson&mdash;"he might be a bleeding-heart liberal"&mdash;they won't show him that.

Describing Jim Channon and the concepts of the First Earth Battalion, Ronson says (p. 49)
 * The army leaders... offered him the opportunity to create and command a real First Earth Battalion. But he turned them down. Jim had higher ambitions than that. He was rational enough to realize that walking thorugh walls, sensing plant auras, and melting the hearts of the enemy with baby lambs were good ideeas on paper, but weren't, necessarily, achievable skills in real life.

The closest thing to Ronson actually directly reporting a psychokinetic or remote influencing experience involves his own encounter with Pete Brusso (pp. 138-140) whom he depicts as "maestro of violence." Brusso challenges Ronson to try to choke him, and asserts that he'll "interrupt your thought process... I'm going to touch you and that's it. I'm not ogoing to move even my feet. But I'm going to project myself into you, and you will fly." Ronson says "I didn't see Pete's hands move. All I know is that both my armpits, my neck, and my chest began to hurt enormously, all at once, and then I was flying." Russo says "You felt fear, didn't you? Beforehand?" "Yes, I was debiliated with fear." "Would you say the amount of fear you felt was abnormal for you?" "The amount of fear I felt in the runup to the choking seemed unusual," Ronson acknowledges. "It was my thought projection. I was inside your head," says Pete.

My point here is just to convey the flavor of the book... because I think it's relevant. Does the book support the idea that people in the U. S. Government believe in psychokinesis? Yes. Does it support the actual existence of psychokinesis? I think not. Dpbsmith (talk) 14:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Article and Talk Page Clean Up
A rewrite of the psychokinesis article occurred on July 16, 2006. Most of the comments here on this talk page no longer applied and were safely moved to the archive section to keep this discussion fresh. Thanks for everyone's understanding. Trying to keep it concise. 208.50.10.5 15:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)


 * At present it is severely lacking. Nothing more than a definition and a bunch of pop-culture trivia. DaveWF 04:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Where is the review, where is the archive? It looks as if someone just wiped this page because they felt like starting over. Liu Bei 03:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * To see the archive, click on the "history" tab at the top of this page or any page, scroll down to any past date you are interested in and click the date at that location. The archived page will come up with past entries. To see what changes were made, check the circle box for any history logged item and click the "compare selected versions" button" at the top or bottom of the page. The article page had I believe four different prominent flags at the top, including one requesting an "expert" in the field to do a complete rewrite, which I initiated with referenced sources. After the rewrite, a lot of the material on this discussion page, which was quite long, no longer applied and so were removed, which archived them. The article continues to be a work in progress. One must remember that skeptics (I am a member of a skeptics organization myself) are ready to edit any attempts at including an overly pro point-of-view on newly added history, past and current research, etc., sections, so even I am hesitant to waste my time composing such material, only to see it shot down by my fellow skeptic editors. So that is why there are a lot of links to other places where information can be obtained. Perhaps because PK/TK are not yet accepted fully by mainstream science, the article awaits a major breakthrough to complete it. 208.50.10.5 14:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

"That's Telekinesis, Kyle" quote - why I removed it - discussion
Regarding the submission below that was in the Quotes section that was removed Tues Aug 8, 2006:

"that's telekinesis, Kyle" — Tenacious D (1994-Present) Origin; Song: Wonderboy December 24, 2002

Don't you think, realistically, this line from the song Wonderboy by Tenacious D is not well known enough to be in the same class as the other three quotes presented? It doesn't really mean anything on its own. It only means something to the people who have heard the song, which arguably measures likely only in the many thousands. According to the above Wikipedia entry: "The song peaked at #34 in the UK and #48 in Australia."

There are many quotes using the word telekinesis from entertainment works. We don't include them, though. In the 1996 movie Phenomenon seen by millions worldwide, there's a famous scene where, after John Travolta's character makes a pen spin on a table top, Robert Duvall's physician character backs away slightly in his chair and says, "Whoa -- that's telekinesis." That scene was also used in advertising for the film. It's a much more famous quote than "That's telekinesis, Kyle." The song's complete lyrics can be found on this webpage: http://tenaciousd.lyrics.info/wonderboy.html.

A quote should have reached some sort of classic status appreciated by the masses before being included. A quote can become an instant classic, but, remember, this is supposed to be a scientific entry, not one overwhelmed by entertainment references. I propose that the original poster of the quote place it on the Wiki Wonderboy page, perhaps with the rest of the lyrics from the song, and then just place a link to that page in the See Also section in this PK/TK article. Sound good to everybody? 208.50.10.6 18:07, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Ali2234 - Fair enough, you have a point, it's wikipedia so anyone can enter whatever they like and remove it freely; I won't do it again hehe.

Survey Clean-up Tag
Maybe the title can be cleaned up.100110100 00:25, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I originated the survey section in the article. A clean-up tag there is very prominent. Can you please address what the concern is? The report was published and made the news nationally in the U.S. and is available online, a pdf reference link is provided. Would any of these titles be better:

"Published survey - the public's belief in telekinesis - United States"

"Published survey on paranormal beliefs - telekinesis"

5Q5 15:34, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The editor 100110100 who flagged the section above has not responded for further input, so I revised the section title to "Belief in telekinesis - published survey." This is similar to a section title for the wiki article paranormal. In a week, I'll delete (archive) this section, since it has been resolved. 5Q5 14:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Follow-up from 5Q5. Wiki editor Psyphics reverted my removal of this outdated resolved section (and did so without including an explanation on this page) because he is in favor of the archiving method of talk page management, even though there is already a built-in archive by clicking on the History tab and then clicking on any date to see an archived past page. An accepted Wiki alternative to creating a separate archive page is refactoring a talk page (see Refactoring talk pages), which I felt I was doing, and by giving advance notice of any proposed removal of outdated resolved content, and the chance for anyone to comment. Fine. If Psyphics wants an archive at some date, I will not interfere. By the way, over 90% of the main article as of this date was researched, referenced, and written by me under my registered username and prior to that using various IP numbers for computers I was using at the time. Thanks everybody for tweaking my hard work. It looks great. See also: How to archive a talk page. 5Q5 15:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Promotional links
I'm removing the following links because

a) on inspection they all appear to be essentially promotional in nature,

b) all are highly non-neutral,

c) none is even close to being an unbiased source of encyclopedic information, and

d) nobody has yet cited any good source or other objective criterion for determining who should count as a "noted individual in the PK / TK field."

Including a list like this would be like including a list of links to commercial websites of "noted Christian Science practitioners" in the Church of Christ, Scientist article, links to commercial websites of ophthalmologists offering LASIK treatments in the LASIK article, etc. Wikipedia is not a directory. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:09, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I created the list and I see your point, so I support it's removal from the main article. The reason I included it, I guess, is that the article was pretty slim and those experts listed are known for being publicly available to media researchers to talk about the subject. There are many "Lists of... [scientists, etc.] as wiki entries, but not like "directories" with contact information. However, some of the people listed below (my name is not among them) have their own wiki articles, so they should be included on the "See also" list in the article: Loyd Auerbach, Stephen E. Braude, Jeffrey Mishlove, and Dean Radin. I'm taking a break from working on this page . Good luck stopping the vandals. 5Q5 19:42, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree with putting them in "see also," which I've just done. Dpbsmith (talk) 22:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Names and official websites of noted individuals in the PK / TK field

 * Loyd Auerbach (California, USA) parapsychologist; author of the book Mind Over Matter.
 * Stephen E. Braude (USA) parapsychologist; author of the book ESP and Psychokinesis: A Philosphical Examination.
 * Pamela Rae Heath (California, USA) parapsychologist; author of the book The PK Zone: A Cross-Cultural Review of Psychokinesis.
 * Jack Houck (USA) aeronautical and astronautical engineer who founded the PK metal-bending parties.
 * Jeffrey Mishlove (USA) author of the book The PK Man: A True Story of Mind Over Matter.
 * Cynthia Sue Larson (USA) author of the book Reality Shifts: When Consciousness Changes the Physical World.
 * [ Dean Radin] (USA) parapsychologist; author of the book The Conscious Universe.
 * Uri Geller (UK) a well-known claimant.
 * Dr. Joe Gallenberger (USA) Manifestation and Abundance through psychokinesis. Leads workshops throughout the USA and Europe.

Website Promotion Removed
I found "We must not believe in psychokinesis we would have understood. www.psychokinesis.it marmartino@psychokinesis.it martino martini" appended to the section regarding Baylor's paranormal and PK study.

As far as I can tell, it neither pertains to the Baylor article nor meets Wikipedia's standards. This is my first time editing Wikipedia, so please fix it if I've made an error. Thank you.

Two useful changes in the works
1. I intend to create a new article for the lengthy Cultural references list on this talk page. I will then provide a standard "Main article" wiki link to the new list page at the top of the abbreviated list in the PK article. This is how it's down on all other wiki articles. To see examples of other list pages, do a wiki search for the phrase "cultural references." I will also put a link to the new list page on this talk page to keep people from adding new entries here. I will copy and paste the "to be researched section" to the talk page of the new list article.
 * Okay, I just finished creating the new page List of cultural references to psychokinesis and telekinesis. I moved all the appropriate material over to there and added some flags at the top regarding unsourced material. I will begin work on creating an Archive 1 of this page, but it may not be ready until after the Thanksgiving holiday. 5Q5 19:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

2. This talk page will then need to be archived. I will create an Archive 1 page (a new subpage), clear this page and provide a wiki link to the Archive 1 page at the top of this talk page. Basically, this talk page will look empty, except for a section with a link to the Archive 1 page. My plan is to do these things time permitting. Note the "too long" flag at the top of this page (see edit the entire page).5Q5 15:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)