OFFICIAL REPORT: SOCIETY OF AMERICAN MAGICIANS, ASSEMBLY 30,
ATLANTA CHAPTER
by The Occult Investigations Committee,
Artur Zorka,
Chairman.
Artur Zorka is a professional magician and member of the
Society Of American Magicians. He is founder of the Junior Magic Club of
Atlanta, past Vice-President of a division of the International Brotherhood of
Magicians, and Chairman of the Atlanta Occult Investigations Committee. He was
voted by his Atlanta peers the Magician of the Year in 1974.
When the
report by Zorka was made public, and material from it picked up by the press,
Zorka and fellow magician Abb Dickson came under critical attack by many members
of the Society of American Magicians. They argued, among other things, that the
report was not "official" because it did not go through the appropriate internal
channels of the n-magicians' fraternity, and that both Zorka and Dickson were
"relatively inexperienced investigators." Following Zorka's report here are four
letters that shed light directly and peripherally on the investigation and on
the attitudes of some magicians toward Uri Geller.
The first letter
is addressed to Geller and is signed by Frank Bullock, President of the Atlanta
Society of Magicians, and by five of the society's members. The letter denounces
the "official" nature of the Zorka report and claims that "the findings were
totally inconclusive, being merely opinions of relatively inexperienced
investigators. " Concerning this latter contention, Zorka's biographical
credentials speak for themselves - he is an experienced, competent magician, a
fact that is ironically reinforced in Bullock's own letter, in which he states
that Zorka is the Chairman of the Atlanta Society's Occult Committee. Mr.
Bullock, in personal communications of November 1975, stated that Zorka is
indeed a competent magician and a specialist in occultlike magic, and regretted
the derogatory statement the society had earlier made against Zorka and
Dickson.
The second letter is from Zorka to the National President of
the Society of American Magicians, William P. Dunbaugh. Zorka states what he
feels was the real focus of the attacks on him and Mr. Dickson: "I sincerely
believe," he states, "that had Mr. Dickson and I discovered Mr. Geller at some
sort of trickery, and released that information, there would have been no
concern." His letter is followed by Dunbaugh's reply.
The fourth and
final letter is from Zorka to Milbourne Christopher, a magician, and the
National Chairman of the Occult Investigations Committee of the
Society of American Magicians. It is of interest because of the experimental
details it adds to Zorka's Official Report. Where the report summarizes the
results of the investigation of Geller, the letter to Christopher gives a
sequential account of the tests that Zorka and Dickson tried with Geller,
including Geller's failures as well as his successes. All of the experiments
were done on June 2, 1975.
The following material is published for
the first time, with the permission of Artur Zorka and Abb Dickson.
As
CHAIRMAN of the Occult Investigations Committee of this society, I hereby submit
the findings of this committee regarding its investigation of Uri Geller.
On
June 2, 1975, I, Artur Zorka, and several fellow magicians witnessed a taping of
a television program in which Mr. Geller was interviewed as a guest. Unknown to
Mr. Geller, five magicians were seated at various locations in the audience for
the purpose of detecting the methods by which he claims to be able to produce
his "phenomena." Although we were impressed by his ability as an entertainer,
conditions were less than ideal for making any final judgement. Following the
taping, however, Mr. Abb Dickson, [Abb Dickson is a professional magician who
was selected master of ceremonies and performing magician for a State
department-sponsored tour of eleven European countries in 1966. He has published
several articles on magic in publications of the International Brotherhood of
Magicians and the Society of American Magicians, and served as a consultant for
the popular New York City production of The Magic Show.] a member of this
committee, and I were able to meet with Uri Geller privately for a personal
interview and some controlled experiments. I italicize controlled because
the type of control put on by a magician is different from that of any other
investigator. It is a control designed specifically, by those who are trained
for a profession in the art of deception, to prevent fraud.
Being a
specialist in that particular area of magic which deals in the psychic, I took
special care to set up tests under conditions that, I believe, could not produce
results through trickery.
The tests took place in a room that contained no
mirrors, no windows, and one door, by which we entered. The door was locked
behind us. Mr. Dickson, Mr. Geller, and I sat facing each other. No one else was
present or in the near vicinity of the testing area.
The first test involved
Uri Geller's attempt to bend a fork that I provided. The fork was made of forged
steel, with a nylon-reinforced handle. I specifically selected this fork because
of its extreme resistance to physical stress. I placed the fork in Mr. Geller's
outstretched left hand. His fingers curled around it, and in moments, without
the fork's leaving my sight for even an instant, it literally exploded, sending
fragments of the handle across the room. (See Plate 45.)
For the tests of
Uri Geller's telepathic abilities, he was asked to turn his back while members
of the committee, in turn, made simple drawings. The object was for Mr. Geller
to duplicate the drawings without having seen them. After a few false starts,
Geller was able to make remarkably accurate facsimiles of the target drawings.
The target drawings were made on plain sheets of white paper, and when the
drawings were finished they were covered. While each target drawing was being
made, Geller was being carefully watched by the other member of the committee to
make sure that there was no way for him to see the drawing. The person making,
the drawing was extremely careful as to what paper was used and how the pen was
held; he kept hand and arm movements to a minimum. In later tests, Geller was
able to duplicate on paper target designs of which I merely thought. No
drawings, in these later tests, were made by me. (See Plate 46.)
In another
test, I watched, from a distance of no more than five feet, as a key bent
beneath Geller's touch. I was able to see, under these controlled conditions,
the bending process actually taking place.
Therefore, it is the unanimous
finding of this committee that although we, as magicians, can duplicate each of
these test results using methods known by us, under the proper conditions . . .
there is no way, based on our present collective knowledge, that any method of
trickery could have been used to produce these effects under the conditions to
which Uri Geller was subjected.
Letters
Dear Mr. Geller: August
14, 1975
It has come to our attention that you received a copy of a series
of tests placed on you by the chairman of our local Occult Committee, Mr. Arthur
Glick (a.k.a. Artur Zorka). As a copy of this report was received by you before
the original was presented to the Atlanta Society of Magicians, it is an
unauthorized copy of the findings and in no way represents the opinion of our
Society.
The report was presented to the Society in an Executive Committee
meeting where it was determined that the findings were totally inconclusive,
being merely opinions of relatively inexperienced investigators.
Considering
the above findings of the Executive Committee, the Atlanta Society of Magicians
respectfully requests that you do not use the report in any of your publicity.
Mr. Glick does not have the official authority to commit the Atlanta Society
of Magicians.
Sincerely,
(signed) Frank Bullock, President Atlanta
Society of Magicians Julian V. Boehm, Assembly #30
(signed)
Harold R.
Martin, Vice-President
Joe T. Gattis, Secretary
Walter J. Harris,
Treasurer
John W. White, Sgt.-at-Arms
Calvin W. Tooles (Past President)
Dear Mr. President [William P. Dunbaugh, August 13, 1975
I have been
asked by the Board of Director of Assembly 30 to respond to a recent inquiry of
yours concerning my report on Uri Geller.
It was the decision of the Board
of Directors that the only wrong done by me was to release an official report
without the consent of the Society. If, indeed, it was wrong to give Mr. Geller
a copy of a report concerning him, then I indeed apologize, and stand corrected.
However, I sincerely believe that had Mr. Dickson and I discovered Mr.
Geller at some sort of trickery, and released that information, there would have
been no concern. If this is so, then I'm afraid there is a contradiction here.
Be that as it may, if I have caused the Society any embarrassment, I am
truly sorry. I only ask that your opinion of the content of the report not
disguise the real issue.
I am enclosing a copy of a letter to Milbourne
Christopher. It may answer some of your questions also.
Yours in magic,
(signed) Artur Zorka
August 19. 1975
Dear Mr. Zorka:
Thank you
for your kind and courteous letter regarding the Uri Geller incident, but would
like to point out the only reason I got into the picture was through a telephone
call from Reader's Digest as to whether you were speaking as the National
Occult Chairman of the Society of American Magicians. This led me to make two
inquiries of your Assembly's Secretary and National Deputy, as I, personally,
could not express an honest opinion regarding any action you took pertaining to
your belief in Mr. Geller.
They informed me you were not speaking for the
National Office of the S.A.M. and it was an internal or local problem. I so
informed the Reader's Digest that your opinion was not that of the
Society of American Magicians and if any report you submitted implied that you
were speaking for this organization, it certainly was in error. This was the
extent of my contact with the people from Reader's Digest.
You have
not, in any way, caused the Society any embarrassment and inasmuch as you were
thoughtful enough to inform Milbourne Christopher of your experience with Uri
Geller, and your recognition that any report submitted by members of the S.A.M.
for public consumption should not be submitted in the name of our Society
without National Council approval should close this incident. Mr. Christopher, I
might add, is the National Chairman of our Occult Committee.
I certainly do
appreciate your concern in the matter, the respectful manner in which you
outlined the entire situation to me and your compliance in the future with our
regulations. In conclusion I must say that in no way am I questioning your
personal opinion in this matter as we are all certainly entitled to that without
criticism.
Sincerely,
(signed) William P. Dunbaugh
National
President
The Society of American Magicians
Dear Milbourne,
Forgive
me for taking so long to answer your letter. I have been on the road performing
and have had very little time to keep up with correspondence. This incident with
Geller has caused many people to write to me and I found a mountain of mail
waiting for me when I returned home.
I really don't know what I can add to
what was written in the report. I do know that talking with you and reading your
latest book was a great help in setting up conditions for the tests. I was
prepared to nail the guy, but as Abb Dickson can testify, the results were quite
another story.
To begin with, I was present during a taping of a TV program
for educational television, to be aired this fall. When I heard that Geller was
to be at the station, where there would be a live audience, I contacted as many
local magicians as I could and asked them to be in the audience. I am quite
friendly with the people out at the Georgia ETV network and was able to do this.
I was even asked to help make up the questions the narrator was to ask Geller.
The majority of them were questions you posed in your book.
The magi were
seated at various locations throughout the audience. Most of them,
unfortunately, were novices and probably could have been fooled by even a
mediocre sleight-of-hand man and so most of what they had to say must be taken
with a mountain of salt.
However, prior to the taping, Geller walked through
the audience collecting key rings. With the lighted stage behind him, and him
standing in the shadows, there would have been ample opportunity for him to do
most anything with the keys he collected on his way back to the set. For this
reason, all results occurring during the program must be discounted due to lack
of control.
Following the taping, Geller was surrounded by members of the
audience asking him to bend one of their keys for them. I was able to make my
way next to him, and between demonstrations I was able to tell him that I needed
to talk to him in private and that it was very important. He asked where we
could go to talk. Abb Dickson and I escorted him to the office of one of the
directors, and I closed the door behind us.
I had been hoping to get Geller
alone, so I had come prepared. I handed him a fork and asked him if he could
bend it for me. He looked puzzled, as if wondering why we needed to be alone.
Why couldn't I have given him the fork out in the hallway? I told him I would
explain in a moment. The fork was part of the table service we used when you had
dinner with us. It has a black nylon-reinforced handle, and is stamped "forged
stainless - Japan" on the back. I tested a similar fork the day before. I could
not bend it by hand. When I put the fork in a vise and tried again, the handle
cracked, as it did with Geller, but with one significant difference. The metal
rod which extends from the tongs of the fork and is inserted into the nylon
handle was not affected. The handle cracked before the metal could give. With
the fork Geller used, the handle cracked and the metal rod inside the handle was
bent.
The sound that came from Geller's hand after he closed his fingers
around the handle was not unlike the sound ice makes as it cracks in warm water.
The hand, with the ends of the fork protruding from either side, was in sight at
all times.
It was at this point that I told Geller that I am a magician. I
told him that I am very interested in what he is doing. His first reaction was
to accuse me of doing something to the fork to make the handle crack. I told him
that I am a mentalist, that while on stage I have had many experiences I am
unable to explain, and that for this reason I am not close-minded when it comes
to the existence of psychic phenomena. I told him that I am the chairman of the
Atlanta Society of Magicians' Occult Investigations Committee, S.A.M. Assembly
30, and in that capacity, along with committee member Abb Dickson, would like to
give him some tests. I told him that I was not out to get him, that Mr. Dickson
and I would be honest and fair with him. I told him that if, after the tests, we
were unable to detect any trickery, I would give him a copy of the report I
would be submitting to the Assembly. He agreed. He told me the reason why he
decided to agree was that in the past every
magician who ever approached him
for testing had been hostile. He knew that they would be uncooperative. He said
that there was a big difference between being a skeptic and being hostile. And
for this reason, and because he believed me when I said I would be honest with
him, he agreed to the tests.
I asked him what sort of accuracy he had been
having with telepathy. He said he'd like to try some tests. There were three
chairs in the room, so we formed the chairs into a circle and each sat down. I
asked Geller to turn his head, and while he did, with his hands acting as
blinders on either side of his eyes, Abb watched him closely. We made sure he
was wearing no rings and had nothing in his hand which could act as a shiner. I
picked up a book I had with me and made a drawing on the inside back cover. I
held the book upright, just in case he might have had some method of seeing
behind him. After I closed the book, Geller turned back to face me.
Following some time of concentration, he guessed. He was wrong. We repeated
the experiment. Wrong again. Another try; again no results. Finally he told me
not to write anything. Just think of some object. Some time passed as I
concentrated on one of my dogs at home. He made some drawing on a pad I had
given him, then became unsure of what he had drawn and discarded the paper. He
said he was not getting anything definite. He suggested we go back to the
original method of my drawing the object I was "sending." I drew a picture of a
dog bone. Then Geller turned around and told me to think. I did. Nothing. He
told me that I should stare at his forehead as I thought. I did. Nothing. Then
he held up the pad I had given him earlier. He told me, to imagine the object
was drawn on it. Again nothing. Next he drew what looked like the outline of a
TV screen on the paper. He told me to imagine that the object was inside the
screen. After a short while, he drew four dots on the paper, forming the four
corners of a rectangle. Another few moments passed and he connected the two
upper dots with a horizontal line. I said, "Good." He told me not to say
anything, and then connected the two lower dots, making two horizontal parallel
lines on the paper. He said that if this looked anything like what I had been
thinking of, that I should complete the drawing in my mind. I thought of two
opposing threes at the ends of the lines. He drew the threes. They were a little
out of alignment for a perfect bone, but close enough to indicate to me that
that is what it was. Afterward, when I showed him my drawing, he made some
sketches on his paper describing what had gone through his mind.
In making
my original drawing of the bone, I kept in mind the various methods of trickery,
i.e., pencil reading, impressions, etc., making sure to take the necessary
precautions, even though his back was turned. We made several other tests of a
similar nature with the same results.
We then tried some metal bending with
no success. It was getting late and I had a dinner engagement. Abb offered to
drive me to my appointment, and Geller asked for a ride to his hotel, since his
party had left long before. They had been waiting, with the security guard, in
the lobby of the TV network, and when it looked as if Geller would be some time,
they went ahead to the hotel.
As I was straightening up the office before we
left, I picked up the paper Geller had discarded in one of the first tests. The
one where I had not drawn the "target." On it was a rough drawing of what looked
like a dog. I had merely thought of that dog. I had not mentioned to him, at any
time, that I had been thinking of my dog or that I even had a dog. I was careful
not to show him any of the misses. I only told him that he was incorrect.
On
the way to the Regency Hyatt House, where I was to meet my father for dinner, I
showed Geller some sleight-of-hand magic. He seemed impressed. Upon arriving at
the hotel, Geller got out of the car with me to say goodbye. I asked him to try,
one more time, to bend a key for me. I gave him a very short key which I chose
because its length might make it difficult to get a good grip on. He didn't even
take it from me. He told me to hold it between my thumb and forefinger. As I
did, he stroked it with his finger and it started to bend. I placed the key into
my palm and watched as it continued to bend. I cannot explain it.
We shook
hands, said goodbye, and Abb drove Geller to his hotel. I kept my promise and
had a copy of my report in the mail to him within several days.
That's all I
can tell you of what happened. I have never claimed that Geller was authentic,
or that the Society had any opinion as to Geller's authenticity. I only said
that I know of no way that he could have used trickery to do these things. That
is a fact.
I don't believe I was fooled. The only way I will change my
thoughts about this matter is when some magician comes along and duplicates what
I saw Geller do, under the same rigid conditions.
I'm sorry that there had
not been any more magicians present for the tests. I really tried to get as many
as possible. I called all over the city, inviting everyone I could reach to
come. Only Abb and a few novices showed up. It's too bad.
I hope I have
answered your questions. I really only regret that such a disturbance has been
caused. However, at no time did I say anything to indicate that it was the
opinion of the Society that Geller is authentic. Only that, if trickery was
used, neither Abb nor I were familiar with the method.
In any case, if there
is anything more you would like to know, please contact me.
Yours truly,
(signed) Artur Zorka
Back to books list.
Back to main index.
Back to Uri Geller's home page.