I had briefly met Dr. Gertrude Schmeidler in September at Zelda's Virgo
party, and later encountered her at a gathering given by Bert and Sharon McCann
of the infrared photo fame. Schmeidler was a noted psychologist,
parapsychologist and researcher. She was also a wonderful and sensitive human
being.
Schmeidler's credentials as a psychologist were distinguished and her
interest in parapsychology dated from the winter of 1934-35. In 1942, she began
her famous "sheep-goat" experiments.
Those experiments involved a quite
large sample of people who believed in ESP (the "sheep") and an equal sample of
people who didn't believe (the "goats.")
Both groups were identically
subjected to a number of standard ESP tests under controls which passed muster
regarding psychological testing.
The eventual results "suggested" that those
who believed in the possibility of ESP did better at ESP scoring than those who
did not. The disbeliever (skeptical) group had lower, sometimes very lower,
scores regarding the tests, while the believer group had higher scores.
I
was already familiar with Schmeidler's work, having read up on it, and I had
longed to meet her, but had never found a way to do so. To me, the sheep-goat
results were consistent with my door of perception idea. Obviously, the
believers in ESP had some doors open along those lines, while the goats had some
doors closed.
To me, this was a very simple concept -- since it is quite true
that those who cannot or haven't experienced something usually can't believe it
exists.
This, of course, doesn't make them less of a person -- except
possibly in the case where the non-experienciers try to destroy the
experiencers.
As it was, Schmeidler's experimental results had caused a
humorous brouhaha to erupt among various scientific and psychological circles --
probably not because of the experimental results, but because the results were
evidence that skeptical disbelief in ESP somehow stigmatized skeptics as
dysfunctional regarding it.
This challenged the self-esteem of skeptics
for two rather obvious reasons.
First, most skeptics based their rejection
of ESP not on evidence or experience, but on the basis of "scientific logic and
reason" -- THEIR versions of those. So if evidence for ESP seems positive, THEIR
logic and reason held that there MUST be something wrong with the experiments
via which the "so-called evidence" was obtained.
Second, in a major and
very brilliant strategy, Schmeidler had subtly changed the rules of the
skeptical game by encouraging skeptical disbelievers to take part in ESP
testing.
In talking with her in later years, I asked why the disbelievers
had consented to participate. Most of them, she said, did so because of their
firm conviction that the tests would show no deviations from the statistical
"chance expectation" regarding either the sheep or the goats.
Although the
deviations were sometimes NOT very large in the cases of some sheep-goat
individuals, the combined statistics of all of them did significantly depart
from chance expectation.
This clearly indicated that belief and disbelief
played some kind of psychological role regarding positive and negative
manifestations of ESP. And this was implicitly taken to mean that disbelief had
something to do with ESP dysfunctionality -- the possible existence of which had
never dawned on the disbelievers.
To my own way of thinking about this, it
was just that certain of their doors of perception were closed, the ESP doors,
leaving them as non-experiencers of ESP-like perceptions.
That the basis
for rejecting and debunking ESP might not reside in logic and reason, but in the
fact that disbelievers were dysfunctional regarding it, came as something of a
bombshell.
Skeptics and disbelievers, of course, very much desired not to be
seen as dysfunctional regarding something they were trying to debunk. Therefore,
there must have been something wrong with Schmeidler's experimental protocols.
And so the experiment was replicated a number of times and by other researchers
-- more or less with similar statistical results.
And thereafter skeptics and
disbelievers decided NOT to take part in ESP tests.
In any event, here
was something to be swept under mainstream carpets, since within mainstream
contexts, opposed as they were to ESP and psi, nothing could be done to
encourage belief in ESP.
However, along with her subsequent and voluminous
work, the sheep-goat experiments elevated Schmeidler to a leadership position
within parapsychology -- a position which was reinforced in that she was the
acknowledged protégé of Dr. Gardner Murphy, the distinguished pioneering figure
in psychology and in psychical research and parapsychology as well.
At
the McCann gathering, Schmeidler and I talked a lot, not only about technical
matters and larger overview of things, but regarding common-sense ones. She was
the first, and one of the very few, parapsychologists to confess herself
surprised by my "articulateness."
So, of course, I promptly fell in love with
her, and still am to this day.
This "articulateness" now needs to be
explained, because it has a special meaning in parapsychology -- and in the
future was to have something of an important role when I discussed matters with
government officials or their representatives.
Early psychical researchers
had examined many kinds of psychics, and of course the researchers were
interested in questioning them about the processes that went on in their heads.
When psychical research was transformed into parapsychological research,
this kind of inquiry soon ceased and it was apparent that parapsychologists were
no longer interested in the matter.
I asked Schmeidler about this, and
her answer was as follows.
Almost all of the psychic subjects said different
things, and in ways which were largely inarticulate to the researchers, and
which made it difficult for the researchers to understand.
Most subjects did
not possess a functional background regarding psychical research, parapsychology
or the routines of science. And so the basis for direct communicating was very
wobbly.
This ultimately created a morass of "inarticulateness" which was hard
to negotiate by the researchers, and (in Schmeidler's words) "everyone just gave
up trying to do so."
ARTICULATE means "to give clear and effective
utterance to or about something." But it also means to discuss things in ways
which permit OTHERS to comprehend what one is uttering.
In other words, one
may be articulating something quite clearly within one's own head and within
one's own realities. But the whole of this may be quite confusing, even alien,
to others.
One may well be uttering something quite clearly. BUT even so, if
another person is simply not understanding it anyway, then one has to sense that
this is so and adapt one's utterances to the other's level of understanding.
Otherwise all that will transpire is that the utterer will think the other
person an idiot, while the other person will think the utterer an inarticulate
fool.
Thus, being articulate not only has a logical definition, but is one of
those things which must be deployed as an art.
I was not very good at this
art during my childhood and college years. But I got quite good at it during my
Army years, and during the twelve years I worked at the United
Nations.
The "art" of articulateness therefore consists of uttering in
ways which others can understand or at least grasp at.
Articulateness within
psychical research and parapsychology thus depends on whether someone can, with
precision and depth, talk in the communal terms of those two fields -- and, I
suppose, can otherwise express themselves in clear and concise ways regarding
affiliated matters.
Schmeidler had thus extended to me a very great
compliment -- something of which meant that I could speak parapsychologese.
Zelda was also at the McCann gathering, and thereafter said that I'd be
impossible to live with now that the eminent Gertrude Schmeidler had extended
this very flattering compliment.
And, yes! I may as well admit that my ego
did pump up.
I have perhaps over-emphasized this articulateness thing,
and it may seem merely egocentric to have done so. But it was to play a very
important role in the years ahead when talking with various idiots and psi
illiterates within government and the intelligence community.
And, in those
realms, if one is not articulate in more ways than one, one is soon made
mincemeat of. And, indeed, although I had no suspicion of it at the time, my
"articulateness" was to become my first line of defense in the years
ahead.
Schmeidler had a lot of common sense, a valuable element somewhat
lacking among others here and there. She had, of course, heard of the
"repeatable experiments" in Cleve Backster's lab and she and I discussed in
detail how they had been conducted.
She then asked me if I thought I could
influence or induce temperature changes of a thermistor (a kind of thermometer)
sealed in a thermos bottle. This would eradicate the possible criticism that the
effects "could have been" because of random temperature changes around the
targets.
A THERMISTOR is a small electrical resister made of a material
whose resistance varies sharply in a well-known manner with the temperature it
is exposed to. It can be hooked into a recorder and the temperature fluctuations
recorded on a paper graph out-put.
If the thermistor is sealed in a thermos
bottle which is heat-cold resistant from the outside, it should register the
temperature ONLY within the thermos. If, as a result of "mind-over-matter,"
temperature changes could be induced into the thermistor sealed within the
thermos bottle, such would be evidence of psychokenisis.
I said I didn't
know if I could do it or not -- but that I would try. Considering Schmeidler's
eminence in parapsychology, I boldly asked that her experimental protocols be
submitted in advance to her peer community to discover any possible flaws in the
experiment. She said that she already had intended to do so, but was gratified
that I recognized the need for that pre-experimental process.
After that, I
and my inflated ago then proceeded to imbibe a copious amount of the quite good
brandy the McCanns had made available.
As we became quite cheery, someone
asked me to make some psychic predictions. I had never tried to do so before,
and protested that I was not psychic. But I was tanked up on the brandy, and
with a little more encouragement made some predictions.
I remember only
one of them -- largely because it was so strange and out of left field.
At
the time, there existed on Broadway near the corner of East Third Street in
Manhattan a rather large structure of many floors -- the Broadway Hotel -- which
had been elegant and fashionable in decades gone by, but which was then
low-class and somewhat dilapidated.
I had never been in this hotel, but knew
it had a reputation regarding nefarious activities, and otherwise I'd never
given it a thought.
I was quite surprised when images of this hotel arose in
my "mind's eye" and which images were quite out of context with anything at the
McCann's party. "Gosh," I said. "I think the Broadway Hotel is going to collapse
at some time in the future."
No one made any comment about this, and soon the
party broke up.
About four years later (as I recall), I was in California
working on the basic elements of "psi spying" when the hotel suddenly collapsed
killing some twenty people.
I immediately flew back to New York to see (as
feedback) what had been seen in my mind's eye. As I stood looking at the ruins
and the gaping hole, you can well imagine that I wondered about how this very
out-of-the-way thing had occurred in my head.
I was very much into the
concept of MIND-DYNAMIC PROCESSES by then -- as contrasted to merely being
interested in the phenomena which resulted FROM or BECAUSE OF those processes.
In other words, I was beyond results and deeply into the processes which had to
exist in order to produce them.
The early natural and spontaneous formats of
remote viewing had shown that our species does possess faculties to transcend
space.
But in the case of the Broadway Hotel, time had been transcended, and
this with regard to a topic in which I had absolutely no interest in the first
place.
Yet the whole of this was something like what the oracles of
antiquity did -- in ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome.
Of course the topics
of prediction and prophecy have always been big ones throughout human history.
But no one has ever comprehended how they come about -- except in some vague way
which depends on the concept of intuition. However, except for the use of the
word, no one understood how intuition was possible either.
It was while
standing before the ruins of the Broadway Hotel that I first got the glimmerings
of a new idea.
In its preliminary outlines, the new idea consisted of
this:
We utilize a few words to categorize so-called "paranornormal
phenomena" into separate categories -- and then assume that the categories are
distinct.
Yet, the categories define the different kinds of results of
processes, but not the processes themselves. For example, we accept that there
are differences between, say, intuition and telepathy and clairvoyance.
But what if, I began wondering, the categories were NOT really separate
ones, but only parts of a larger SPECTRUM of superfaculties indwelling in our
biological species.
If the spectrum was the case, then the different
categories would not be independent and distinct categories. They would be
MODULATIONS of and within the spectrum.
In other words, if the SPECTRUM
could be understood, then it would be seen that its sets of superfaculties could
be modulated to result in different kinds of processes and their resulting
phenomena.
It was well understood that the tones or colors of sound and light
spectra can be modulated to produce different sound or color phenomena.
If
this concept was applied to the paranormal powers, then one could NEVER learn,
for example, how to be telepathic by studying "how to become telepathic," since
telepathy was a result of a modulation of the spectrum.
In other words, the
Mother Lode regarding DEVELOPMENTAL ESP was in the superfaculty spectrum, not in
bits and pieces of it washed down stream and conceptually found far distant from
the Mother Lode itself.
But I'm getting far in advance of the story here,
so I'll pick up this conceptually advanced topic ahead in its proper place.