Comments
(20 Responses)
Recent comments
- Hannah said:"This is so interesting… You wonder what they’re going to find next. I have always thought..."
- Hannah L B said:"Jos Nugent says: 24/09/2010 at 10:20 AM No Welsh dates I see! Hmmm………………forgotten country yet..."
- Hannah L B said:"That’s really cool. I find things like this so fascinating, and I’m very interested in..."
- GjWorner said:"Did you see the recent BBc4 doc covering this topic? awsome viweing http://dalen7.wordpress.com..."
- Shaun Banks said:"@Berber Anna: I had assumed that since you were an Atheist that you had read this book. A lot of..."
- Shaun Banks said:"alan: Schadenfreude is part of the Richard Dawkins Memetic Science"
Categories
Archives
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- September 2008
© Derren Brown 2005 - 2012. All rights reserved. No work may be reproduced elsewhere without prior consent.
I never really believed in any of this sort of thing anyway (stigmata etc,), so I didn’t need much of an explanation of the methods used here for me to feel vindicated.
Good episode, enjoyable to watch and understand as always.
LC x
You say so yourself Derren Its all a load of Bollocks,I will never trust anything like this agian, Oh Hello again Derren long time no tweet Julie xxxx
The video is just the Intro for Science of Scams. Is this some sort of scam to prove a point?
Msg from Abeo: Whooops, fixed
Well, Kat I beat you to this one! Your tweet earlier in the week was a good clue. Did you see my comments on the Episode Three page?
Hi all,
Interesting part but do you think that this stuff was used in past? I am sceptic about stigmata and etc. but this was not really convincing part for me. Anyway nice idea. Keep impressing guys.
Martin
Unfortunately I have to admit, I did believe in this for a little while, years ago. Nice to see this going up online for all those youngins (and old fools alike) being sucked into this fantasy ability. Nice jorb.
Oh, and it’s good to see my pal Bryan in the clip!! He’s a fine chap, isn’t he!
Thanks Michael, I lost a few pounds filming that clip!
Interesting. However…perhaps in a modern era.. but these things come from ancient beliefs (in some respects) that would not have had exclusive access to such a repository of fully explored goodies to trick with.
I think this site, like many falls into the trap of being too black and white. The implied presumption of scientific principle being infallible and correct is equally as ignorant a belief as hoping for greater forces in the universe such as God and beyond. Need I throw the world being flat and the continuously changing theories on the Universe expansion into the fold?
A good intention lost with lack of objectivity.
wow ! thats really clever witht the blood on hands. it looks cool too
Interesting comments on here. Don’t forget foks that combustion reactions and other chemical reactions would have been easily achieved using naturally occuring substances. It would have been the most enquiring minds among early civilisations that would have discovered the ability to simulate the effects of fire or the appearance of “blood”. These people were then considered mysterious and in possession of supernatural powers, becoming the witch doctors and “gods” of their day. People have always had the ability to trick and decieve sometimes non intentionally or non maliciously.
Please remember that the chemicals we use today as scientists (whether synthetic or otherwise) are just labelled and packaged and treated in ways that make it easier for us to manage – they are derivatives of naturally occuring materials. It is really very easy to trick someone into believeing what you want and sadly back in the day when people knew less, many people needlessly lost their livelihoods and sometimes their lives!, If anyone has any questions though, get in touch via twitter and I will be happy to point you in the direction of other sources on info! Kat (@katakingbade1)
Hi Jonny8, will comment on Ep 3 page. Kat
Chemistry is indeed a sneaky science.
Making newspaper burst into flame has absolutely nothing to do with Chi energy. I’m not sure what’s more shameful, using a natural internal energy as an explanation of magic tricks or using these retarded parlour tricks to glibly put down a principal that an entire nation’s medicine is based around.
I mean, really, if you were trying to debunk Chi then you should learn an internal martial art and only focus on internal form. The control subject should learn at the same level yet focus on the internal form (ie chi cultivation) and then see who is healthier and most effective in their combat. Or try and fail to dubunk all chinese medicine.
Here’s a video of the infamous John Chang demonstrating his FIRE POWER!
They don’t show the full clip of him handling the newspaper (edited) then, when he stomps it out he keeps his left foot in one place (hiding anything that isn’t burnt paper) as he stomps with his right and the camera cuts out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXTir6cISA8
I’d like to see science of scams do his version of the chop stick through the table! Pretty neat effect.
“a principal that an entire nation’s medicine is based around. ”
That’s funny; I thought it was based around the ingestion of obscure parts of endangered species.
As much as I admire Derren, I also agree with what V says. Science cannot explain the existence of the universe, Black holes cannot theoretically exist, yet the Universe cannot theoretically exist in it’s current form without them. I have seen what would be called a ghost, with my own eyes, in my own house. Modern Science can’t explain it, Derren Brown won’t be able too either. I’m not saying I’ve seen a restless spirit, I’m saying I had a conscious shadowy entity in my house (by shadowy I mean in appearance which consciously moved when ‘it’ realised i was aware of it and looking directly at it,) I know it’s very implausible I am overly logical person, a former agnostic I can even explain the existence of God using logic, (I think Derren might like it, I doubt the church would though)
“Science cannot explain the existence of the universe,”
How do you know?
“Black holes cannot theoretically exist, yet the Universe cannot theoretically exist in it’s current form without them.”
Black holes were predicted by theory before any evidence for them was observed; how can they be theoretically impossible?
“It would have been the most enquiring minds among early civilisations that would have discovered the ability to simulate the effects of fire or the appearance of “blood”. These people were then considered mysterious and in possession of supernatural powers, becoming the witch doctors and “gods” of their day. People have always had the ability to trick and decieve sometimes non intentionally or non maliciously.”
Wow, that really is ignorant.
Why are you talking from an apparent position of authority about things you know nothing about?
Please do yourself and everyone else a favour by sticking to your science and stop trying to cross over into areas in which your opinion is invalid.
although i dont believe in this stuff and never have i think everybody needs to remember that just because similar results can be produced like this it doesnt mean that these this dont exist in reality. think off it like burping, burping is realising of air trapped in the digestive system, and yet, you can create a similar result as burping by swallowing air into your throat and releasing as we all learned to do in the playground if then we were to apply your logic to this it would prove that burping is fake