Thanks for the replies and the full programme of the investigation into David Mandell's ability is certainly a very intriguing one (so shame I can't
find it
) - I managed to find a couple of links with an article written by the Paranormal research society found at the bottom of
this page which states his claims 'merit serious consideration' - there's
also lots of replies and opinions featured at the blog below although many of the posted links are now defunct.
The man that paints the future.
Watched this programme on Channel 5 last night, not expecting a great deal, but it was one of the most balanced shows about a paranormal
subject that I've ever seen.
The background: David Mandell, a retired lecturer, claims to have visions of the future that come to him in dreams. For years, he has painted pictures
of these visions and made a photographic record of the paintings by taking photos of himself holding the pictures, beneath the wall clock of his local
bank. He claims that some of these pictures have predicted in detail events like the Tokyo sarin gas attack, and the destruction of the WTC. His
claims have made him little money or publicity, at least until now.
The scientific methodology employed by the makers of the programme was far and above anything usually seen in these kinds of TV shows, which usually
pay only lip service to genuine investigation. Here, though, they did all the right things. They checked the photographic negatives, which showed no
signs of tampering, and put the artist through a polygraph test, which he passed. They did surveys of interpretation, and they brought up possible
holes in the story, like the fact that the bank's clock didn't show the year, or the possibility that the paintings had later been doctored (some of
the paintings contained text recording additional details of the vision, which could plausibly have been added later). They talked about statistics,
and the number of paintings done in total, and the fact that the artist's 'hits' were self-selected and chosen after the fact. Scientific tests were
undertaken, all described on camera, and experts were consulted, including scientist and arch-sceptic James Randi (the inclusion of whom made me watch
the show in the first place).
The case was fascinating and the artist did seem sincere in his beliefs; there was no evidence that he was trying to perpetrate a hoax, but the
programme did fairly represent the views of experts that thought the matches were nothing more than vague coincidences coupled with flexible
interpretations. The bottom line was inconclusive: there was no strong evidence that the man's gifts were real and not imaginary, but there was also
no success in uncovering a deliberate hoax or a falsehood. James Randi, at the end of the show, seemed genuinely interested and invited the man to
take on the JREF's $1m challenge. I hope he agrees, because I'd like to see more..
link
Cheers.
edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12 because: (no reason given)
