Nat Geo channel

[Dr B]

UKS members on Nat Geo prog right now and repeated at 10:00pm.

Some good looking doctor fellow.....;D;D...oh, and Teek of course O0

[bindeweede]

UKS members on Nat Geo prog right now and repeated at 10:00pm.

Some good looking doctor fellow.....;D;D...oh, and Teek of course O0

Sorry, being thick is one of my many faults, but can you explain "Teek" please?

And is the "good looking doctor" male or female? ;)

EDIT OK , the word "fellow" might just be a bit of a hint.

[Dr B]

Sure thing...Teek is our (UKS) Tracy, one of the the moderators

[Dr B]

it covers a number of cases of a haunting - including some famous Hollywood ones and one of mine....O0

It gives a nice scientific balanced approach.

[Parascience]

it covers a number of cases of a haunting - including some famous Hollywood ones and one of mine....O0

It gives a nice scientific balanced approach.

I would question the use of an ordinary compass to test for residual magnetic fields as surely the compass would be affected by the presence of any ferrous metal such as the bed frame nearby - perhaps it would have been better to use a gausemeter, models specifically designed to measure static magnetic fields within structures ferrous or non-ferrous are available for the cost of a decent compass and would I think be a more acceptable method of determining magnetic field strength. I thought at first this was purely to illustrate the point for the benefit of the TV viewers until I read in the published paper describing this case that the same technique was used for the primary experiment too. Bit lax I thought.

[Admin]

Hi, Parascience.

Any news on the infrasound experiment's results?

Sorry, not trying to change subject but I've been wondering about them.

[Dr B]

I would question the use of an ordinary compass to test for residual magnetic fields as surely the compass would be affected by the presence of any ferrous metal such as the bed frame nearby

I see you still dont really understand the research. The compass was used to illustrate to the cameras the principal that the bed is magnetised and inducing a large deviation in the Earth's field - so its ideally suited to show that in a visible and non-too-technical manner. We did baseline beds as well and there is no effect there - but that was edited. So its not quite in line with your suggestion.

You see the bed is not just ferrous....its highly magnetised from what we can tell.


- perhaps it would have been better to use a gausemeter, models specifically designed to measure static magnetic fields within structures ferrous or non-ferrous are available for the cost of a decent compass and would I think be a more acceptable method of determining magnetic field strength.

The research actually does that - as well you should know. In fact, our research is the only research that does that and we make these very claims about why it is important. The compass test was purly for illustration - in both the pilot work and the TV programme. I think its always best to evaluate things while not misrepresenting them...dont you?



I thought at first this was purely to illustrate the point for the benefit of the TV viewers until I read in the published paper describing this case that the same technique was used for the primary experiment too. Bit lax I thought.

Not true - a survey was used with the compass purely to see if a coarse deviation was there (no mention of sources or contributions - it is discussed as nothing more than that, there are about two sentences devoted to it) - the rest of the paper is based on comprehensive magnetometer surveys separating AC / DC contributions etc...as well you know - but hey, dont let the facts get in the way of your attempts O0

did you note the lack of mediums? ;D;D You obvious find them more useful than magnetometers or compasses....O0

[Dr B]

Just to reiterate

No detailed claims were made concerning the compass test in either the papers or the TV programme (which Parascience is implying) - other than the magnetic field is distorted in that region (to a degree greater than that seen in any of the baseline regions).

The academic papers detail the magnetometer surveys and only allude to a precursory survey with a compass (again no specific or detailed claims were made on the back of that). This was also discussed for the programme but they never used it.

Parascience then went on to outline the very procedure we have been devising for the last few years....so its difficult to see what the point is (assuming there is one of course) :cheesy:

[bindeweede]

it covers a number of cases of a haunting - including some famous Hollywood ones and one of mine....O0

It gives a nice scientific balanced approach.

There's a prog on Nat Geo at 11pm tonight called "Hauntings". Is it the one you referred to, or might it just be one in a series?

[bindeweede]

There's a prog on Nat Geo at 11pm tonight called "Hauntings". Is it the one you referred to, or might it just be one in a series?
Well, all I can say is BUM! I set the video to record the prog, but decided to stay up and watch it. It wasn't the prog Dr.B referred to - mostly about Amityville, and a castle somewhere in England.

Really disappointed not to have seen himself.

Anyway, I have a copy of the prog on tape if anyone wants it. Free.

[Dr B]

I would like a copy!!!!

I think that was the prog. If you watch closely most of the cases are explained by science - which is the refreshing thing. There will always be some dramatisation - you cant get away from that - but a healthy acknowledgement of science goes a long way. O0

An important scientific tonic in light of the pseudo-nonsense of most haunted.

[bindeweede]

I would like a copy!!!!

I think that was the prog. If you watch closely most of the cases are explained by science - which is the refreshing thing. There will always be some dramatisation - you cant get away from that - but a healthy acknowledgement of science goes a long way. O0

An important scientific tonic in light of the pseudo-nonsense of most haunted.

Well, I've just watched the whole thing again - high on entertainment, but not much else. Still, if you want to borrow the tape, I'll pop it in the post. I don't have an way to copy it, I'm afraid. Perhaps you could PM me your address, or email.

[Dr B]

Will do O0

Shame you dont find the psychological interpretations proposed that informative....usually they dont even make it past the edit room....

[bindeweede]

Will do O0

Shame you dont find the psychological interpretations proposed that informative....usually they dont even make it past the edit room....

It's not that the psychological bits weren't informative, just that I would like to have heard more about that, than all the woo stuff repeated over and over.
So was that you sitting in the castle doing the analysis?

[Dr B]

I agree with you. However, on balance it is a really refreshing take on it as what it is really saying is, scientists have a better answer than Hollywood....which is good.

Every case it covers - it offers a scientfiic explanation - which is good.

I'm the good looking one (;D;D)........not surrounded by mediums, psychics and emf meters;D;D.......my avatar gives me away......

[Parascience]

I see you still dont really understand the research. The compass was used to illustrate to the cameras the principal that the bed is magnetised and inducing a large deviation in the Earth's field - so its ideally suited to show that in a visible and non-too-technical manner. We did baseline beds as well and there is no effect there - but that was edited. So its not quite in line with your suggestion.

You see the bed is not just ferrous....its highly magnetised from what we can tell.

Oh, but I do understand. Use of a compass to illustrate an iron bed-frame being magnetic is misleading as any ferrous metal regardless of whether or not it is itself magnetised will cause deflection of a compass - a problem mariners have had to deal with since the invention of the iron ship. Your comment about the bed being highly magnetised is simply not demonstrated by the use of a compass.




Not true - a survey was used with the compass purely to see if a coarse deviation was there (no mention of sources or contributions - it is discussed as nothing more than that, there are about two sentences devoted to it) - the rest of the paper is based on comprehensive magnetometer surveys separating AC / DC contributions etc...as well you know - but hey, dont let the facts get in the way of your attempts O0

It is a key specific claim of the Research Note that the bed is magnetic but the paper contains no measurement of how magnetic the bed is - it is claimed for example that the compass test "indicates a strong localised static anomlay" but we have already determined that the compass will react strongly in the presence and any Ferrous material. The data measurements that are presented are Gross field measurements of the static and fluctuating magnetic fields at 3 points of the bed and unusually for someone who is claiming that magnetic field fluctations are key to inducing some form of unusual experience within the brain of percipients the only data graphs that are presented are taken from the bed centre sensor position. I contend that it would have been better to have measured and documented and presented the data measurements that demonstrate HOW magnetic the bed is, and from my recollection of the operation of the MADS sensor this should be possible - it certainly is with our HMR2300 sensor and is a simple test to perform.


did you note the lack of mediums? ;D;D You obvious find them more useful than magnetometers or compasses....O0

I would not dismiss their contribution so readily either - as I recall Mediumship has been and remains an area of ongoing interest to academic parapsychology. Perhaps you should be more objective in your work. BTW, if you take the time and trouble to watch the Discovery Programmes we have been involved with - of which there are several to chose from you will note a complete lack of mediums there too - and also the lack of a compass as we rarely lose our way when conducting serious research:spank:

[Cuddles]

it is claimed for example that the compass test "indicates a strong localised static anomlay" but we have already determined that the compass will react strongly in the presence and any Ferrous material.

And these two facts are in no way contradictory. The compass reacts to the presence of any ferrous material precisely because any ferrous material causes a localised static anomaly. As Dr. B has already said, the compass was just a way to see if there was anything there at all, proper measurements were made to actually investigate. It's like using a spectometer to measure light. The spectometer is far more accurate than my eyes, but I'm not going to bother using it unless my eyes say there is actually something there to measure.


I would not dismiss their contribution so readily either - as I recall Mediumship has been and remains an area of ongoing interest to academic parapsychology.

They are of interest to parapsychology because no-one has managed to show that they actually exist. This is like using the Higgs particle to investigate how the Sun works. Yes, the Higgs particle is of interest to physics, but only in the sense that we're trying to find out if it exists, it certainly can't be used for any investigative work.

[Dr B]

Oh, but I do understand.

No you dont and the comments that follow show this quite clearly.


Use of a compass to illustrate an iron bed-frame being magnetic is misleading as any ferrous metal regardless of whether or not it is itself magnetised will cause deflection of a compass

True - the point is the compass test was never used to make a claim of 'magnetised' - this is your fundamental flaw. It shows the presence of a large 'anomaly' in a coarse manner. It does not matter, at that stage anyway, what the source was - the important point is to demonstrate it's presence first - something you clearly don't understand.

Indeed, across the papers we made these points between ferrous and magentised before. A magnetic field is a magnetic field.


Your comment about the bed being highly magnetised is simply not demonstrated by the use of a compass.

Again this is a fundamental logical fallacy in your reasoning - because we never claimed the bed is magnetised on the basis of the compass. We said that (i) it suggests a large deviation / localised anomaly in that region that is consistent with it being ferrous and / or magnetised. No claims at all were ever based on the use of the compass. We then went on to do a survey of the area with proper magnetometers. You are misrepresenting / misunderstanding the research here - but dont worry.....i know why O0



It is a key specific claim of the Research Note that the bed is magnetic but the paper contains no measurement of how magnetic the bed is

No - its a suggestion for future research.



- it is claimed for example that the compass test "indicates a strong localised static anomlay" but we have already determined that the compass will react strongly in the presence and any Ferrous material

a ferrous material and magnetic one would produce a distortion (though arguably to different levels) - so the suggestion was that there is a distortion in the localised field - which is true. No more no less.



The data measurements that are presented are Gross field measurements of the static and fluctuating magnetic fields at 3 points of the bed and unusually for someone who is claiming that magnetic field fluctations are key to inducing some form of unusual experience within the brain of percipients the only data graphs that are presented are taken from the bed centre sensor position.

Not entirely true. Firstly, time-based measurements are detailed in two prior publications (i note you ignore them and have chosen to focus on a short research note which is always going to be limited in scope). Secondly, they are also fully analysed in this paper using a 'moving-window' approach and Short-term Fourier Transforms - these are measures of time-based variability which clearly you do not understand. Your comment seems directed only at some of the Figures....well fine, but the other figures speak to the issue and the data presented do measure time-based variablity as well (you missed that) ;D



I contend that it would have been better to have measured and documented and presented the data measurements that demonstrate HOW magnetic the bed is, and from my recollection of the operation of the MADS sensor this should be possible - it certainly is with our HMR2300 sensor and is a simple test to perform.

Of course, and this has been done and new experiments are underway. That small study had a different aim - to detail AC-time varying and DC localised anomalies separately. You clearly dont get it...ah well....




I would not dismiss their contribution so readily either - as I recall Mediumship has been and remains an area of ongoing interest to academic parapsychology.

as i recall there is no evidence......move on.......unless you have some evidence you would like to share :cheesy:



Perhaps you should be more objective in your work.

Steve, I am being objective, you just dont understand what you are talking about. I am objective enough to tell you that.



snip....you will note a complete lack of mediums there too - and also the lack of a compass as we rarely lose our way when conducting serious research:spank:

I have never read any of this serious research.....you have lost your way in reading and analysing what other people are doing - we never used the compass in the way you suggest. Do try harder. O0

[Dr B]

For those without access to the paper the abstract states the following (the paper is a short research note (around 2000 words) published in the European Journal of Parapsychology):



“Field-based investigations of haunt-phenomena have revealed that magnetically remarkable signatures may exist in specific locations associated with strange experiences. However, no field-study to date has carried out a detailed assessment of both magnetic frequency and amplitude components present in such environments. In the present study, we carried out a follow-up investigation that further examined a recently documented magnetic anomaly from a reputedly haunted English castle. We report the first field-based investigation of amplitude and frequency-based (FFT) analyses of a magnetically remarkable microenvironment associated with repeated instances of striking anomalous experiences. Both the existence of a large static inhomogeneous magnetic field and complex temporal distortions in the time-varying (AC) magnetic fields were measured. Implications for anomalous perceptions are discussed”.

Note the complete lack of any claims of beds being magnetised!!!


Here is a section from the methods which Steve struggles to understand:



“………We carried out a preliminary magnetic survey of the Tapestry room (TR) bed using a Silva navigational compass, which was repeatedly passed over and around the bed area. This was then followed up by taking a series of precise measurements using the Magnetic Anomaly Detection System (MADS) which employs two separate digital fluxgate magnetometers interfaced directly to laptop computers. To do this we divided the bed up into 3 discrete reference points placed along a central dividing line. These were (i) the pillow area, (ii) the middle of the bed, (iii) the foot of the bed. One sensor (Sensor A) was placed on the pillow and remained there for the whole experiment. The other sensor (Sensor B) was moved to the different bed reference points and produced a series of time-linked synchronised magnetic measurements from those locations. We also ran two separate baseline estimates which included (i) a condition measuring the pillow with all the lights turned off to assess how the nearby bedside lamps, and their demand on the AC power supply were contributing to the overall AC magnetic fields measured (no-lights), and (ii) a mid-room measurement which represents an area localised to the bed, but existing outside of any static anomaly (as determined by prior surveys and repeated here by the compass survey). The approximate mid-room point was located 3 - 4m distance from the TR bed. Each location was measured for 10mins duration. All frequency-based and FFT analyses were carried out using Sigview signal analysis software.....snip.

Frequency-spectrum analysis (FFT / STFT) configuration
The time-varying components of the amplitudes measured were separated by applying Fourier Transforms to the data. We carried out two separate forms of Fourier Transform. Firstly, we applied a standard frequency-only Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) on complete 10min sessions. This revealed how much of the magnetic energy was contained within what major frequency components (between DC -125Hz). Coupled to this we also carried out a Short-Term Fourier-Transform (STFT) based on a ‘moving window’ approach where peak amplitudes were measured at discrete temporal intervals through the signal. Furthermore, a Short-Term Fourier Transform analysis which provided a time –frequency and amplitude representation of the fields measured was also carried out. This showed not only what frequency components were present, but also when in time they occurred and to what magnitude.


As you can see – the compass is mentioned in a sentence and for anyone to arrive at the conclusion we were making strong claims of ‘magnetised beds’ from the above – well, they must be reading something else...or drinking something else....

The opening section of the Results section of the paper states:



“The compass test revealed a strong deflection in the magnetic field around the bed. The compass needle was being considerably deflected by the bed up to a distance of around 2-metres, this deflection being more than 90-degrees close to the iron mesh bed support itself. This indicates a strong localised static anomaly (note: the beds in nearby rooms showed no magnetic reaction at all when tested).”

Still no strong claims being made about magnetised beds based on the compass ;D…..


When we get to the discussion section we state;



“The largest contribution to the localised anomaly is clearly a static field. This static ambient magnetic field is distorted in a major way....snip... The largest distortion found, was over 70,000nT, implying that the metal mesh may well be magnetised and not just highly permeable. The large static field variability between the bed areas surveyed and the rest of the room will result in high magnetic gradients around and across the TR bed. If an occupant of the TR bed were to move their head frequently in such a steep magnetic gradient it could potentially induce highly variant magnetic distortions around their skulls. The distance from the pillow and the centre of the bed is around 1m. Based on estimations from the present data, there is an implied gradient of at least 70nT / mm. Thus, relatively modest movements in either the head of someone on the bed or of the metal mesh itself would easily expose the head to changes well in excess of 100nT.


The opening sentences seem to be what Steve wants to misrepresent. However, all we do here is ‘suggest’ something which could be implied in the data. This is what steve refers to as a hard claim ;D. It is certainly not hard evidence for the bed being magnetised and more to the point, the evidence cited above has sod all to do with a compass test! However, fields in excess of 70,000nT suggest it may have become magnetised as these are well in excess of the geomagnetic field in the room (around 47,000nT) - and we isolated all artificial 50Hz components. Indeed – the strongest fields we have measured (in more recent detailed surveys) is around 80,000nT – 90,000nT – so it seems our previous estimates still underestimate the size of the distortion. Permeable distortions of these magnitudes are possible - but are dependent on many factors - besides we merely discussed and entertained the possibilities. It was also suggested that future research should look into this (which is what we are doing). The important point is no big claims were made on the back of a basic compass test and I am sure that is clear to see from the text here..

Now, here is the killer that Steve missed.

We noted across our studies that, if the bed was responsible for the distortion, then individual movement by bed occupants would induce vast time-variant and complex changes in the fields directly surrounding the individual. Therefore, time-varying changes can occur here in the complete absence of any electrical supply or equipment and, as such, does not need a power source in order to produce significant distortions. So you see – you do get time-based variability from something causing a distortion in the ‘static’ field. :cheesy:


On another point - Steve was right that we do argue for time-based variability being important (see comments above) but he does not understand how we are arguing for it. It has taken me and others years to get him to try to understand Persinger's stuff – I remember when Steve use to think it was all about high-levels – it was not and that was yet another fundamental misunderstanding of the literature. I always think if you are going to argue against something in a scientific manner you are obliged to represent that research in its proper context. Otherwise all you do is generate confusion, propagate nonsense and build straw-men.

Maybe thats how you do things in parapsychology......:-\.....but i doubt it 8)

[Dr B]

Steve

My co-author Maurice has read the discussion here and I post his helpful musings below. Note - these are his points, not mine.




Maurice states....


Regarding static fields: The MADS sensor measured the overall field, including AC and static components, in real time. We then used the average overall field values at different points to determine the static gradient. Since the measured AC component never exceeded an amplitude of 40nT, it was negligible compared to the static components (ranging between 23000nT and 93000nT). Thus, the overall values were so similar to the static values that they did not need to be measured separately.


Regarding magnetic/permeable: Since the key point is that the bed induces a magnetic distortion that can, when there is physical motion within it, induce EIFs, it is not important whether the bed is magnetised or merely highly magnetically permeable. It was therefore a slightly academic question. It would not, in any case, be trivial to determine whether the bed is magnetised or not because the distortion is similar in magnitude to the geomagnetic field. To properly answer the question you would need to do a comprehensive, fine mesh survey of static magnetic values and then attempt to model the distortion using field lines derived from the resulting vectors. Once the distortion was modelled you would then need to subtract the geomagnetic field vectors to see if the resulting field resembled a distortion due to mere permeability or an actual magnet. Luckily the question is academic.




This is the third independent person now (after myself and Cuddles) who has identified that the permeable / magnetism issue is largely irrelevant to the actual presence of EIFs. Note also - all of Maurice's points are based on MADS data - not a compass. O0



I hope you appreciate the efforts we have gone to, to help clear up the confusion.




Kind Regards


DrB




PS - a detailed spatial survey is underway so that we can model - with 3-dimensional computer modeling software - the distortion in the field around the bed. With his expertise in physics Maurice is instrumental in directing that part of the work. What we want is as comprehensive an understanding as possible of the spatio-temporal magentic environment of that area (irrespective of its cause).


Edit - I should point out that I currenty think the bed is magnetised (and not just permeable) - based on evidence which we have yet to publish as well as that which is already published. Others here are at a disadvantage in that respect as they are not yet privy to the new stuff (which I fully respect). However, this is irrelvant to the main claim that we (Maurice and Myself) made BIG claims based on a compass survey - we did nothing of the sort. The compass survey does nothing other than show the presence of a huge distortion which could be due to ferrous or magnetised material (as we have explained above). This is crucial - without the distortion there is no effect to be had (irrespective of whether it is based in ferrous distortion or direct magnetism). The MADS data measured massive distortions which might imply the presence of something more than mere permeabilty - that is all we suggested in the past. The newer stuff, which is not yet finished is more in line with this latter view.

[Parascience]

The spectometer is far more accurate than my eyes, but I'm not going to bother using it unless my eyes say there is actually something there to measure.

So I guess you have no interest in either Infrared or Ultraviolet light then as your eyes would never know it's there although a Spectrometer would!!!




They are of interest to parapsychology because no-one has managed to show that they actually exist. This is like using the Higgs particle to investigate how the Sun works. Yes, the Higgs particle is of interest to physics, but only in the sense that we're trying to find out if it exists, it certainly can't be used for any investigative work.

Of course mediums exist - I have met plenty, although we have no objective data that their claimed ability i.e. Mediumship (which is what I said) exists. Jung however comments on your attitude to Mediums and Mediumship far more eloquently so I will quote from him ""I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud." - C.G.Jung"

[dalriada]

Of course mediums exist - I have met plenty, although we have no objective data that their claimed ability i.e. Mediumship (which is what I said) exists. "

I have also met a few people who define themselves as "mediums" however as there is no substantial proof that their claimed ability "mediumship" exists, can we really say we have really met "mediums" as opposed to just people who say* they are?


* and we can only use the word "say" as we can't totally be sure that they actually think/believe this themselves- they may be tricksters..

[median]

So I guess you have no interest in either Infrared or Ultraviolet light then as your eyes would never know it's there although a Spectrometer would!!!

Parascience, the point was there had to be a basis for something to measure in the first place, otherwise we are back in to 'blanket measurement' which can often be irrelevant and misleading.


Of course mediums exist - I have met plenty, although we have no objective data that their claimed ability

???

Carl Jung, eh? Anyone else..possibly in the less esoteric domain?

[Parascience]

A highly spirited defence but flawed: Allow me to quote from the ASSAP website - an article authored by Maurice Townsend

"The bed in the Tapestry Room is, it turns out, highly magnetic! Investigation revealed an iron mesh supporting the mattress. Other beds in the castle, which are not associated with anomalous experiences, were checked but were found not to be magnetic. It certainly appears possible that this magnetic bed may be responsible for some anomalous experiences reported by people using it. It is not known how old the bed is, but it is certainly old. Could other similarly designed beds have given people ghostly night-time experiences in the days of candle-lit bedroms" http://www.assap.org/newsite/htmlfiles/MADS%20haunted%20bed.html (http://www.assap.org/newsite/htmlfiles/MADS%20haunted%20bed.html))

And on another part of the same website is the following:

"Jason Braithwaite, who devised the MADS project, has given the name EIF (experience inducing fields) to the weak, complex magnetic fields required to produce hallucination.
In early research at Muncaster Castle in Cumbria, suitable conditions were discovered for the production of EIFs at a haunted location. If anyone moved slightly in the 'haunted bed (http://www.assap.org/newsite/htmlfiles/MADS%20haunted%20bed.html)' (where several independent witnesses have reported hearing a child crying) they could induce EIFs in their brain. This is because the bed was found to be strongly permanently magnetic." http://www.assap.org/newsite/htmlfiles/MADS.html

So it is clear that the claim that the bed itself is magnetic was not something I imagined. So now we return to the point I have been making all along - You failed to carry out a single objective measurement of the magnetic field of the bed except by waving a compass around and over it, which as we all agree will react strongly regradless ofwhether of not the bed frame is magnetised because it is a ferrous metal. Stop trying to say that I don't understand - unless of course you are simply misleading and misrepresenting what you claim.

[Cuddles]

So I guess you have no interest in either Infrared or Ultraviolet light then as your eyes would never know it's there although a Spectrometer would!!!

I believe that whooshing you heard was the sound of the point flying far above your head.


Of course mediums exist - I have met plenty, although we have no objective data that their claimed ability i.e. Mediumship (which is what I said) exists. Jung however comments on your attitude to Mediums and Mediumship far more eloquently so I will quote from him ""I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud." - C.G.Jung"

I assume you must have misread my post, because I'd hate to think you were deliberately claiming I said things that I never actually did. No-one mentioned fraud except you. However, if you really think it is stupid to avoid treating something which hasn't even been shown to exist as a meaningful analytic tool then I can only suggest that your investigations will be about as useful as a six year old with some bricks and a plastic hammer.

[MRT]

This is Maurice (yes, I've registered!). Thanks for your comments Steve. I've now updated those pages on the ASSAP website to make them more technically accurate, if a little more convoluted.

The reason I referred to a 'magnetic bed' in those articles was simply to make them more readable. I should, probably, have put 'magnetic bed' in quotes in the articles! Most readers would not appreciate the difference between a magnetised bed and one that merely causes a similar magnitude magnetic field distortion through being permeable. As has been said repeatedly, the difference is of no importance whatever in terms of inducing EIFs. If any reader was interested in the original papers, where all the details are available, they only needed to go to the official MADS website for which there are links on the two pages.

[MRT]

"So it is clear that the claim that the bed itself is magnetic was not something I imagined. So now we return to the point I have been making all along - You failed to carry out a single objective measurement of the magnetic field of the bed except by waving a compass around and over it, which as we all agree will react strongly regradless ofwhether of not the bed frame is magnetised because it is a ferrous metal. Stop trying to say that I don't understand - unless of course you are simply misleading and misrepresenting what you claim."

I don't understand this point at all, Steve! We made several measurements (each of many minutes) of the overall magnetic field, using the MADS sensors, at various points on and near the bed. These revealed a small AC component, caused by electric mains fields, and a large static component. You would, of course, expect a large static component, due to the pervasive geomagnetic field. However, in addition, we discovered that the static component was severely distorted compared to the expected geomagnetic field. We noted the iron component present in the bed that was an obvious cause of the distortion. However, of far greater significance was the fact that the field distortion caused a high magnetic gradient, so that someone moving even slightly within it would experience EIF magnitude fields. Whether the bed is magnetised or merely magnetically permeable is essentially academic. Had it turned out that the field distortion was caused by a horseshoe magnet buried in the mattress or iron girders in the floor below the bed, it would have had exactly the same effect! It is the high field gradient that is the vital point here!

I believe the MADS sensor readings to be an objective measurement of the field distortion found around the bed.

[Dr B]

A highly spirited defence but flawed: Allow me to quote from the ASSAP website - an article authored by Maurice Townsend

No - steve you are seriously flawed and here is why. You are now floundering (again) by recruiting irrelevant information to this debate. You started out making claims about my papers. I have shown that you are incapable of reading and understadning them by demonstrating - as fact - that your earlier claims are demonstrably false. Now this is quite important in complex debates like these - where someone makes a claim that is clearly untrue.

I cited the sections from the proper article. I note you dropped that line of argument like a brick :-[

What you are now doing is jumping onto the ASSAP website (geared for the general public) in an attempt to justify your argument that was directed towards the TV programme and my independent scientific papers. Unfortunately for you - I spot this style of thinking and argument all too easily. You are riggling because your points are utter tosh. It is, like all your other forms of argument - a logicall flawed approach.




"The bed in the Tapestry Room is, it turns out, highly magnetic!

I believe it is possible for it to be acutally magnetic, based on the prior evidence and what we have yet to publish - but it is, as I also said (yet you ignored) irrelevant. It does not matter - your very original claims about the compass have been shown to be false. Now - it is irrelevant whether the bed is ferrous or magnetic - however, academically speaking it would be nice to know for sure (but it adds nothing to the debate being made thats the point). The papers and the programme state that a distortion in a magnetic field is present due to the bed - this is true.

As Maurice has pointed out - it is a complicated affair separating the accounts - and as it is not directly relevant to the debate - we have waited until much later to try to tackle it.



So it is clear that the claim that the bed itself is magnetic was not something I imagined.

It was in relation to the claims you directed at me - I never wrote those articles and Maurice has defended them appropriately. Is this really all you have to say? You are using general public educational material - designed only to engage, to try to build an argument against peer-reviewed research - is that right? :cheesy:



You failed to carry out a single objective measurement of the magnetic field of the bed except by waving a compass around and over it, which as we all agree will react strongly regradless ofwhether of not the bed frame is magnetised because it is a ferrous metal.

You are still wrong for all the reasons everyone else has highlighted - I never made the claim in the papers that the bed was highly magnetic - i did in this discussion above here (qualified with other statements which you ignore) but that is based on emerging new evidence AND the old evidence. The published evidence is not inconsistent with the suggestion.


Stop trying to say that I don't understand - unless of course you are simply misleading and misrepresenting what you claim.

But you don't understand at all and you are flapping all over the place to try to scamble your argument - and you just keep digging yourself into a hole 8)

[Dr B]

The official MADS website (for which Maurice should be thanked for - it is he that set it up) is here

http://www.apaw71.dsl.pipex.com/MADS/

Links to papers and generic overviews can be found there.

You will not find any claims of the bed being magnetic based on compass readings ;D;D;D;D

[bindeweede]

I would like a copy!!!!

I think that was the prog. If you watch closely most of the cases are explained by science - which is the refreshing thing. There will always be some dramatisation - you cant get away from that - but a healthy acknowledgement of science goes a long way. O0

An important scientific tonic in light of the pseudo-nonsense of most haunted.

Right - I don't do subtle. Do you want me to send it in a para-telepathic way or wot?

[Dr B]

I will pm my details across to you - sorry forgot about this....got side-lined into an irrelevant discussion above O0

[bindeweede]

I will pm my details across to you - sorry forgot about this....got side-lined into an irrelevant discussion above O0

I'll be posting it off later today.

[Dr B]

A friend told me that over at the JREF the programme received a welcome and warm reception....tough crowd that JREF lot.....;)

[bindeweede]

A friend told me that over at the JREF the programme received a welcome and warm reception....tough crowd that JREF lot.....;)

I assume it arrived OK, without there being a bomb-scare.;)

[Dr B]

Just picked it up now....many thanks indeed O0