Ancient Aliens and The Mysterious Origins of Man

I've had mixed feelings about the History channel show Ancient Aliens over the course of its run.  When the original special aired a couple of years ago, I thought it was interesting and presented the information well.  I'm not a believer of the ancient astronaut hypothesis it presented, but I'm open to the possibility (at least certain aspects of it).  So when they decided to turn it into a series, I figured I would give it a shot.  After watching a couple of episodes though, I lost interest.  I thought they were just getting silly about it, seemingly assuming aliens had something to do with almost any ancient mystery.  Although inspired by writers like Zecharia Sitchin and Erich von Daniken, ultimately, all they are doing is inserting science fiction concepts that have been developed primarily over the last 60-70 years into history.

But I did catch some second season episodes that sounded like they might be interesting when I didn't see anything better on.  My impression of the show didn't change much, but I did realize that the information they were presenting was interesting, even if their analysis of it could be a bit silly at times.  So I've decided to watch the third season just to see what they bring up.  I figure whatever they bring up will be interesting, even if I don't agree with their theories.

On the other hand, I was surfing around on Youtube today and came across a video called The Mysterious Origins of Man.  It was obviously pretty old since Charlton Heston was the presenter (from 1996, according to Wikpedia), so there isn't any new information in it, but I thought the information was presented well.  It covers topics such as out of place artifacts, Tiahuanaco, and ancient Egypt.  If you're interested check it out below.



Here is a shortened version of that video: http://youtu.be/nne_-j08yMo

Qi and Prana on Nat Geo

I typically don't watch that much on the National Geographic channel because a lot of their programs are very predictable.  Nat Geo is very biased in favor of establishment materialism and atheistic thinking, so I know if the program is about something paranormal in nature or religious, the program is going to have a debunking stance.

I did watch an episode of Is it Real? the other night though, and I thought it was interesting.  They were investigating spiritual energies, including what the Chinese call qi (pronounced "chee") and what the Hindu's call it prana.  

One of the people they featured was martial artist George Dillman, who can not only knock people out using pressure points but also without even touching them by using his qi.  Dillman is no fraud or stage magician though, he is a legitimate black belt in Ryukyu Kempo Tomari-te and has even trained with Bruce Lee and Muhammad Ali.  He was not only shown knocking people out without touching them, but he was also shown to be able to make a line of people move without even being able to see them (and them not being able to see him).  

Two scientists who were skeptical of his ability to knock people out with his qi were bought on the show, and they felt his ability had more to do with hypnotic suggestion than qi.  They thought the people being knocked out were expecting it to happen, so therefore, it happened.  One of the skeptical scientists even let one of Dillman's top students attempt to knock him out with his qi (I'm not sure why Dillman himself didn't try; they may have been filming the scientists in different location where Dillman wasn't present).  Dillman's student failed to knock the scientist out with his qi.  Afterwards, Dillman said if a person was holding their tongue a certain way, it wouldn't work, or if they press one big toe against the floor while raising the other big toe up, it wouldn't work.  Dillman did appear to have an impressive ability, but in the end, he sounded like he was just making excuses.

Another person featured in the episode was a clinical psychologist named Howard Hall who is also a hypnotist.  He went to Baghdad in 1998 to investigate whether or not a sect of Sufi Muslims who perform self mutilations without any apparent ill effects and then heal almost instantly were under some sort of hypnotic suggestion.  The Sufis shown had blades in their chest, head, and mouth.  According to their belief, a sheikh channels the energy and 'protects' them.  Dr. Hall did not think the faithful who were mutilating themselves were under any sort of hypnotic suggestion and was so impressed by what they were doing that he asked the sheikh if he could have 'protection' too.  The sheikh said he could, and Hall stabbed a pointed object through his cheek with no ill effect.  

After that experience, Hall began studying the Sufi religion and agreed to repeat the mutilation for National Geographic.  He and another doctor used some sort of machine that supposedly shows a person's aura (something similar to Kirlian photography, but more updated).  After Hall stabbed an ice pick through his cheek from inside his mouth, a gap was shown in what was alleged to be his aura where the ice pick had been in his cheek.  He bled very little and the wound closed up quickly.

The skeptics brought in to counter Hall's claims didn't think the machine that supposedly shows an aura could be trusted, and they had their own machine that they claimed was similar and showed why the machine Dr. Hall used couldn't necessarily be trusted (although their machine that they claimed was similar seemed to be quite different to me...I'm not sure if it was really an accurate comparison).  Another doctor said that the wound Hall inflicted on himself was small and he wasn't surprised that it didn't bleed much.  He also said putting pressure on it afterwards probably helped to close the wound up quickly.  So he wasn't impressed with how quickly the wound healed; he thought the healing seemed normal.  

The show also featured a Hindu version of a shady televangelist who was setup by a debunker with a group of people with problems that they made up.  The shady Hindu holy man, who I don't doubt was a fraud -- he was deceiving the poor and making himself wealthy (and he had a shady looking smirk on his face too) -- didn't catch on to the deception being played on him and he was considered debunked...and this case, I think the debunker was right on.

The show also featured a guy who could inflict self mutilation without ill effects who claimed it was just mind over matter.  I think the program basically just featured that guy because he didn't claim to use any spiritual energies -- in other words, they were just showing more evidence of their bias against the concept of spiritual energies.  

They also featured some yogic flyers who don't really fly, but just sit in the lotus position and then start hopping quickly across the floor.  Apparently they get really happy and just start hopping.  It looks hard to do, but I'm assuming Nat Geo took the stance that there wasn't really any spiritual energy involved and just included it as part of their bias against the belief in spiritual energies.  

But anyways, lets look and Dillman and Hall again, who were the two most intriguing people featured in the episode.  In the end, it looked like Dillman's ability may have had more to do with hypnotic suggestion than qi, and Dillman was left making excuses.  I've often wondered if hypnotic suggestion may be how televangelist Benny Hinn is able to knock people down with a light touch.  However, hypnotic suggestion still doesn't explain how Dillman was able to make a line of people move without them being able to see him.  In the end, it may have appeared that the skeptics won in Dillman's case, but I'm not thoroughly convinced.  I think it may still be possible that Dillman really does know how to use his qi to make people move (or knock them out).

In Hall's case, I don't even think the debunkers did a very good job of debunking it.  The doctor may have been correct in saying he thought the wound closed up and healed in a normal way, but it still doesn't explain how Hall was able to jab an ice pick through his cheek without feeling pain.  And even if you think the machine that supposedly can show a person's aura is hokey, it still doesn't explain how Hall could jab an ice pick through his cheek without feeling pain.

In the end, Nat Geo took the position that the abilities had less to do with spiritual energies and more to do with the power of the mind and the belief in an ability.  And although I agree that the mind and belief can be very powerful, I'm not convinced that spiritual energies don't exist.  I think there is ample evidence to suggest that spiritual energies do exist, even if little of that evidence was present in that particular Nat Geo program.

Destination Truth didn't ask enough questions in Petra

In last night's (4/14/10) episode of Destination Truth, the team went to the ruins of Petra in Jordan to search for djinns (a type of spirit, which is the word that our word "genie" is derived from).  At one point, Josh was doing an EVP session and asked out loud if anyone was there with them, and almost immediately afterward, the team heard what sounded like a voice saying "yes."  This wasn't something they heard on the recording after the fact, they actually heard the "yes" out loud.

For some reason, they seemed to be content with just getting that "yes."  You'd think that if someone asked if anyone was around and someone -- whether it's a person, djinn, or something else -- responds, they'd ask for more details.  Instead of settling for a single answer to a question, they should have also asked other questions such as who it was, why it was hanging around Petra, can it grant wishes, etc.  For all they knew at the time, it might have just been a lost tourist wandering near them!

I love Destination Truth, Josh's sarcasm as well as the adventures the team goes on seeking the truth about the unknown give it a real-life Indiana Jones feel that makes for a very entertaining show.  But I think they might have dropped the ball at Petra.  They should have asked more questions!

TV Show Idea: Investigating Psychics

There are a lot of paranormal themed television shows out there these days.  We have shows that investigate myths and legends, shows that look for monsters, shows researching UFOs (or at least we did...bring back UFO Hunters!!), and a whole bunch of shows looking for ghosts.

So what about psychics?  I think a show where investigators attempt to determine if a psychic has a legit ability or is merely a cold reader would be an interesting show.  

So here's how I think an episode would go.  First off, their would be a lead investigator who would be accompanied by a couple of assistant investigators.  At the beginning of the episode, the investigators would do an on screen interview with the psychic.  They would ask general questions about the psychic's background and ask the psychic to describe their method of psychic reading.  After this, the two assistant investigators would each receive an individual reading from the psychic (the lead investigator would never get a reading, I'll explain why shortly).  The two readings for the assistant investigators would be preliminary data.

After the two assistant investigators have their readings, a control subject would be brought in.  The control subject would be different for every episode.  The reason for this is because if the show was a success, there would be the potential for psychics featured in future episodes to base their reading on something from an earlier episode.  To help avoid this, the reading for the control subject would be the primary piece of evidence used in determining the legitimacy of the psychic.  The preliminary readings for the investigators would mainly be used to analyze the psychic's method.  

After the readings are complete, the investigators would analyze the data.  The analysis would focus on things such as accuracy, whether or not the psychic's claims could be confirmed, how generic the claims are, and the investigators would also try to determine whether or not the psychic was responding to facial expressions and body language.  To help eliminate the possibility of a cold reader taking queues from body language or a person's appearance, the control subjects may be asked to wear a generic 'uniform' and possibly even a mask.  Alternatively, the investigators may allow the control to wear they whatever want and behave however they want and then try to focus on whether or not the psychic is basing their reading on the control subject's behavior.  Additionally, the psychic would never meet the control subject until it was time for the reading to occur.  They would know nothing about the subject's heritage, background, age, or gender.

Now someone may say something like, "But eventually the psychics would be able to gather enough data about the investigators ahead of time to do a good cold reading and then just try to wing it with the control subject."  Well, this is why the lead investigator would never receive a reading.  If the show was successful, the assistant investigators would have to change each season.  Since the lead investigator never receives a reading, he would stay on as the 'face' of the show.  That way the show would be able to maintain a certain personality and tone and still be able to keep the data fresh and new.

Most episodes would focus less on predictions of the future and more on background readings.  Since predictions for the future would probably need some time to play out, it would be difficult to really verify whether or not the predictions were accurate.  Future predictions would probably be relegated to a season finale but filmed far in advance, so as to give the predictions time to play out.  Some episodes may feature psychometrists who read objects instead of people.

Ideally, it would be nice if the investigators would state whether they feel the psychic is legitimate or a cold reader, similar to how Mythbusters confirm or 'bust' a myth.  If the results of the data are somewhat ambiguous, they could just consider the psychic's ability to be plausible.  However, this method probably wouldn't work for a show like this.  If the investigators declared a psychic to be a cold reader and the cold reader has made a 'career' out of doing cold readings, the show could face lawsuits.  Realistically, the investigators probably wouldn't be able to declare their actual opinion of the psychic's credibility on air, they would probably just have to make a few notable observations and let the viewer decide for themselves.

Also, from an investigative standpoint, it would be better if the control subject went in first without TV cameras and without the psychic knowing the subject was the control subject.  But if it wasn't filmed, that wouldn't make for very interesting TV would it?  It's possible that the control subject could go in wearing a hidden camera, but after revealing the true purpose of the visit, the psychic may decline to appear on TV and the investigators would have just wasted their time.  And if they waste too much time, it would drain their budget and they wouldn't have anything to show.

As for a lead investigator, it would be really awesome if Josh Gates could fill that role.  J

Introverted Ghosts?

Electronic voice phenomena (EVP) is commonly used as evidence of ghosts trying to communicate audibly. You can find EVP clips on the internet or listen to them on TV shows like Ghost Hunters. I've listened to various clips of alleged EVPs, and some of them are rather intriguing. Sometimes they seem to say a person's name or respond to a question out loud.

But they aren't very clear. They usually just sound like blips of static to me. Once the ghost hunters suggest what they think the static says, I do think to myself, "Oh yeah, it does kind of sound like that I guess." But is it really saying that? Or is it just the power of suggestion? Are we just trying to hear what were told to hear? I don't know, maybe I'm just not good at interpreting EVPs.

But lets go ahead and assume for a moment that EVPs are communications from the spirit world. Why are they so brief? Why don't the ghosts ever seem to give many details? Why don't they say more? Is it difficult for them to communicate via sound waves? Do they have to muster up a lot of energy just to make a sound that an electronic device will pick up that will sound like a spoken language understandable to the listener?

Someone might argue that the ghost hunters can't hear the ghost say anything at the time, so they aren't able to carry on a conversation with them. But if that were the case, why not just explain to the ghost that they can't hear them now but that they are going to leave a recording device running and ask the ghost to give them a full dissertation on who they are, what the 'other side' is like, and what they do all day and that they will check back on the recording device later for any messages.

What if the ghosts have another reason for not saying that much though? What if they are intentionally vague because they don't think we can fully comprehend their answers? Sometimes ghost hunters sound like they are talking to a scared toddler when they talk to a ghost. Maybe they should consider the possibility that the ghosts know more about being ghosts than they do. Maybe they should consider that the ghosts are not confused and are fully aware of what is going on. Maybe the ghosts think we wouldn't be able to understand what its like on the 'other side' yet. Maybe it's like how a parent waits until a child reaches a certain age before they tell them about the birds and the bees. Maybe the ghosts think we're just to 'young' to understand.

But actually, I think it's probably more likely that the ghosts find it difficult to communicate via electronic recording devices. People have communicated (or at least appeared to communicate) with spirits via Ouija boards for years (Ouija boards are not recommended though!). Psychic mediums have claimed to communicate with spirits in another way. Ghost hunters have apparently carried on conversations with spirits via K2 meters (either that or they've gotten really really lucky with getting the device to light up right after asking questions out loud). So it's not necessarily that ghosts are always short on words, they just don't seem to be to fond of saying a lot on electronic recording devices.

 Of course, I can't dismiss the possibility that the static is just static from a random radio wave passing by. But there's still plenty of other types of evidence to suggest that ghosts do exist. I'd still believe in ghosts even if EVPs were just static.

Staging Evidence for Ratings

I used to enjoy the show Mysteryquest, but I won't be watching anymore.  I found out yesterday that a MUFON State Director named Mark Easter admitted to "misleading the public" in an episode of Mysteryquest.  Apparently, in an effort to boost ratings, the producer of the Mysteryquest episode obtained some debris from an old test rocket and had it planted in the desert.  Easter was aware of this and knew what the debris was but proceeded to comply with the producer's request to pretend to discover it.  Here is an excerpt from an article on the subject:

The producer, the crew, area 51 advisors and Mark all met at the Rachael, Nevada Little Alien Inn. As they were talking about the day's shoot. up pulls a man named Peter Marlin with a jeep full of wreckage. "It's the remains of a nose cone to a test rocket from Area 51 launched in 1967". Not only did Peter have the debris but he also had"1000 pages of tech information on the rocket". This debris was not mysterious at all. They all knew what it was, when it was launch and by whom. The producer had hired Peter as part of the show. But, here is where it got really tricky. They all go out to the crash site where the wreckage was found and:.....

"When we arrived at the destination the producer proceeded to explain how the sequence would be shot. We had to pull the huge pile of debris out of Peter's Jeep…and plant it in the desert so on camera we could drive up and discover it. In the shot Peter and Mark are kneeling next to the debris and pulling pieces out talking about them as they pretend they are looking at it for the first time."

The producer instructed Mark to interject certain words about the debris into the dialogue like "alien", "extraterrestrial" and the word "UFO". They all then proceeded to go searching the site for other debris. When they didn't find any, the producer again came up with a brilliant, if less than ethical, solution. They would plant a piece of the debris and act as if they just found it. This farce even went to the extent where the show sent the material out to a Rutgers' scientist for analysis.

Read the rest here.  The subject has also been written about on UFO Media Matters and Phantoms and Monsters.

To say that staging the evidence is "misleading the public" is putting it mildly.  That not only looks bad for MUFON but for Mysteryquest too.  I'm not surprised though.  I don't condone it and I'm nonetheless disappointed by it, but I'm not surprised.  TV shows are about ratings, because ratings sell ads.  But when a show portrays itself as a documentary series performing real investigations, then staging the evidence tarnishes its credibility.

This revelation has left me wondering if other shows similar to Mysteryquest have also staged evidence just to make an episode more interesting.  I guess part of the problem with having a whole series that focuses on any sort of mystery or paranormal topic is that the producers run the risk of spending a lot of money investigating something only to find nothing of interest.  In the Mysteryquest episode, if they had gone out into the desert and didn't find anything, they would have wasted time and money in doing so and still had a deadline to meet to get the show ready to be aired.  A couple of guys wandering around in the desert not finding anything wouldn't be that interesting, and it wouldn't fill up much of the time slot.

So if Mysteryquest has staged evidence, how many other shows may have done the same thing at some point?  As much as I enjoy watching paranormal themed documentary style shows, I'm beginning to wonder which ones (if any) are really worth watching.  Probably the best one out there now in my opinion is SyFy's Destination Truth.  I think some of the other networks may do well to try and adopt Destination Truth's lighthearted format for their documentary series'.  Josh Gate's keeps Destination Truth entertaining by narrating the team's journey to the various locales they visit and making it funny.  The Destination Truth team could probably go on an investigation and find nothing and still make finding nothing entertaining.  The team always seems to have a good time wherever they go.

I don't think the problem is just an effort to get better ratings though.  There are so many documentary style series' now, I think some of the producers may be finding it difficult to efficiently produce a whole season of episodes and make them all interesting and entertaining.  We'd probably get better documentaries if the networks focused more on individual documentaries or mini-series.  But maybe that wouldn't fill up enough time slots - I don't know.

I know this revelation was only about a single episode of Mysteryquest, but it's caused me to lose interest in watching the show or similar shows again because it's left me wondering how often these shows may have staged evidence just to make an episode more entertaining.  When I watch a documentary series that portrays its episodes as serious investigations, then I want to see a serious investigation - not just be 'entertained'.  If I want to be entertained, then I will watch a fictional program or Destination Truth.