The Earliest Accounts of Out-of-Body Experiences (Part 1)

 A recent scientific study "Out-of-body experiences: interpretations through the eyes of those who live them" gives us two cases of what we may call veridical out-of-body experiences. We read this:

"Participant 5 described an out-of-body experience where she visited the hospital to see her aunt in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The following day, upon visiting the hospital in reality, she was deeply surprised to find that the hallway, the door, and the ICU where her aunt was located were exactly as she had seen during the OBE. Participant 10 reported that during her OBE, she visited a village in Scotland. As she flew in, she observed a bridge and a specific landscape, and upon 'landing' in the village, she noticed the village's name. Later, she confirmed on a map that both the river and the village existed."

Many similar cases of veridical out-of-body experiences can be read in my post  here, where we read many cases of people who seemed to learn about some details of physical reality during an out-of-body experience, with the details later being confirmed through regular observation.  The authors of the "Out-of-body experiences: interpretations through the eyes of those who live them" paper erroneously state this:

"Given the complexity and subjective nature of OBEs, analyzing and explaining them within the scientific paradigm is an extremely complex task. It is not surprising, therefore, that the first publications on this phenomenon appeared in parapsychology journals (Alvarado, 1982; De Foe et al., 2013; Irwin, 2000)." 

To the contrary, out-of-body experiences were thoroughly documented in many publications much earlier than 1982. Reports of out-of-body experiences date back to 1845. Let us look at some of the earliest writings on this topic. 

On this page and the next one in the 1845 book The Seeress of Prevorst by  the physician Justinus Kerner. We read that Frederika Hauffe (the subject of the book) had out-of-body experiences (like many others):

"She was frequently in that state in which persons, who, like her, have had the faculty of ghost-seeing, perceive their own spirit out of their body, which only enfolds it as a thin gauze. She often saw herself out of her body, and sometimes double. She said, ' It often appears to me that I am out of my body, and then I hover over it, and think of it ; but this is not a pleasant feeling, because I recognize my body.' "

Frederika Hauffe (1801-1829)

One of the earliest out-of-body experience ever recorded in a first person account was the account given on pages 44-47 of the 1864 book Incidents in My Life by Daniel Dunglas Home. 

Home undergoing tests supervised by William Crookes

Here are some excerpts from a much longer account by Home:

"One evening I had been pondering deeply on that change which the world calls death, and on the eternity that lies beyond, until wearied I found relief in prayer, and then ill sleep. My last waking consciousness had been that of perfect trust in God, and a sense of gratitude to Him for the enjoyment I received from contemplating the beauties of the material creation. It might have been that my mind was led to this by the fact of my having watched a beautiful star as it shone and twinkled in the profound stillness of the night. Be this as it may, it appeared to me that, as I closed my eyes to earthly things, an inner perception was quickened within me, till at last reason was as active as when I was awake. I, with vivid distinctness, remember asking myself the question, whether I was asleep or no? when, to my amazement, I heard a voice which seemed so natural, that my heart bounded with joy as I recognised it as the voice of one, who while on earth was far too pure for such a world as ours, and who, in passing to that brighter home had promised to watch over and protect me. And, although I well knew she would do so, it was the first time I had heard her voice, with that nearness and natural tone. She said, ' Fear not, Daniel, I am near you ; the vision you are about to have is that of death, yet you will not die. Your spirit must again return to the body in a few hours. Trust in God and his good angels : all will be well.'...I was at this instant brought to a consciousness of light, by seeing the whole of my nervous system, as it were, composed of thousands of electrical scintillations, which here and there, as in the created nerve, took the form of currents, darting their rayons over the whole body in a manner most marvellous ; still this was but a cold electrical light and besides, it was external. Gradually, however, I saw that the extremities were less luminous, and the finer membranes' surrounding the brain became as it were glowing, and I felt that thought and action were no longer connected with the earthly tenement, but that they were in a spirit-body in every respect similar to the body which I knew to have been mine, and which I now saw lying motionless before me on the bed. The only link which held the two forms together seemed to be a silvery-like light, which proceeded from the brain ; and, as if it were a response to my earlier waking thoughts, the same voice, only that it was now more musical than before, said, 'Death is but a second birth, corresponding in every respect to the natural birth, and should the uniting link now be severed, you could never again enter the body.' "

The long account might be dismissed as some fantasy, but it actually holds high credibility, coming from a witness of unblemished integrity, who very many reported as levitating during seances, with the witness passing with flying colors an investigation by the world-class scientist William Crookes, as described here. 

On page 67 of the February 9, 1877 edition of The Spiritualist, we have an account that should interest those who study near-death experiences and out-of-body experiences. We have an account by William Q. Judge claiming that he was able to willfully produce out-of-body experiences or telepathic interactions with others. He states this:

"In my sleep at night, through intense desire and will, I have gone long distances. Once, while down in New Jersey, sixty miles from here, I have come up to this city, and been visible to friends in Mdme. Blavatsky’s house. To her house in spirit I have frequently gone.....Now here I have to take the evidence of others. They say that while my body snored, my double, or simulacrum...or whatever you may name it—that is, a visible counterfeit presentment  of me—could be seen walking down the passage to the kitchen."

In an 1892 edition of the Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research (Volume VIII, page 196), we have an account by L. J. Bertrand of an out-of-body experience he had 30 years earlier. He states this:

" 'Well,'  thought I, 'at last I am what they call a dead man, and here I am, a ball of air in the air, a captive balloon still attached to earth by a kind of elastic string and going up and always up. How strange ! I see better than ever, and I am dead—only a small space in the space without a body ! . . . Where is my last body ?  Looking down, I was astounded to recognise my own envelope. ' Strange ! ' said I to myself. 'There is the corpse in which I lived and which I called me, as if the coat were the body, as if the body were the soul ! What a horrid thing is that body ! —deadly pale, with a yellowish-blue colour, holding a cigar in its mouth and a match in its two burned fingers ! Well, I hope that you shall never smoke again, dirty rag ! Ah ! if only I had a hand and scissors to cut the thread which ties me still to it."

The report of something like an elastic string or elastic band connecting the body and a kind of astral body or spirit body floating above the physical body is one that would reappear many times in future accounts of out-of-body experiences. 

One of the earliest reports of an out-of-body experience is an 1899 report made by a Dr. Wiltse. According to the page here, the account "was printed in the St. Louis Medical and Surgical Journal,  November, 1889, and in the Mid-Continental Review, February, 1890." The account is quoted at length in my post here, which quotes from the Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research edition here (Volume 8, page 180, from the year 1892).  We have in the account quite a few of the classic aspects of out-of-body experiences and near-death experiences. 

On page 288 of the July, 1894 edition of the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, which can be read here, a witness reported being an observer above his own body, with an "elastic force" preventing him from floating too far away from his body. He reported he could not rise higher than "two yards" above his body. On page 34 of the January 17, 1903 edition of the periodical Light, which can be read here, George Wyld MD describes having an out-of-body experience in which his "soul-form" was "six or seven feet" above his body. 

On pages 254 to 255 of the 1895 book Brown Studies by George H. Hepworth, we have a description of an out-of-body experience, one that includes an account of being able to pass through matter. We read this:

"While sitting with my right hand resting on the arm of the chair I seemed to step out of my body, and stand beside it, looking upon it with mingled curiosity and astonishment. I felt as light as air, and said to myself, 'This must be what St. Paul calls the spiritual body.' It is true that I looked on what sat in the chair with a kind of tenderness, but the sense of freedom which I soon became conscious of was almost ecstatic, and it seemed as though I would not go back into those narrow quarters again for worlds. The body was so clumsy, so heavy, so uncomely, so uncouth and ungraceful, while this other body, on the contrary, was a delight, a dream, a poem....I moved away from my body toward the door, thinking to open it and go out into the starlight ; but to my surprise I found that the door was no obstruction whatever. I simply passed through it as the sun's rays pass through a pane of glass."

Around the time of about 1900 there appeared some newspaper accounts describing out-of-body experiences. You can read about them in my post here. In a 1901 newspaper article you can read this reference to out-of-body experiences:

"The. theory which Count de Rochas puts forth after ten years' investigation is that a subject under hypnotic influence can exteriorize the astral body, make it depart a certain distance from the material body, and when the air is grasped, as one would grasp an arm where the astral body is, it will be felt in the material or physical. It has been verified by eminent seers that the breath of this projection or astral-body carries sensibility with it."

In the very interesting 1907 book The Psychic Riddle by Isaac Funk (the same Funk of the famous Funk and Wagnall's dictionary), we read this account on pages 179 to 184 by a person who Funk tells is a " well-known gentleman in New York, a man whose veracity would be questioned by no one who knows him, a physician of standing, also an editor and publisher of reputation."  We read this account:

"As the movement continued upward, all at once there came a flashing of lights in my eyes and a ringing in my ears, and it seemed for an instant as tho I had become unconscious. When I came out of this state, I seemed to be walking in the air. No words can describe the exhilaration and freedom that I experienced. No words can describe the clearness of mental vision. At no time in my life had my mind been so clear or so free. Just then I thought of a friend who was more than a thousand miles distant. Then I seemed to be traveling with great rapidity through the atmosphere about me. Everything was light, and yet it was not the light of the day or the sun, but, I might say, a peculiar light of its own, such as I had never known. It could not have been a minute after I thought of my friend before I was conscious of standing in a room where the gas-jets were turned up, and my friend was standing with his back toward me, but suddenly turning and seeing me, said, 'What in the world are you doing here? I thought you were in Florida,' and he started to come toward me. While I heard the words distinctly, I was unable to answer. An instant later I was gone, and the consciousness of the things that transpired that memorable night will never be forgotten. I seemed to leave the earth, and everything pertaining to it, and enter a condition of life of which it is absolutely impossible to give here any thought I had concerning it, because there was no correspondence to anything I had ever seen or heard or known of in any way. The wonder and the joy of it was unspeakable, and I can readily understand now what Paul meant when he said, 'I knew a man, whether in the body or out of it I know not, who was caught up to the third heaven, and there saw things which it is not possible (lawful) to utter.'...I may add here that the friend referred to having been seen by me that night was also distinctly conscious of my presence and made the exclamation mentioned. We both wrote the next day and relating the experiences of the night, and the letters corroborating the incident crossed in the post....If the whole world was to rise up and say that there was no life after one left the physical organism, it would not make one particle of difference in my mind, as I am absolutely certain that I have been as free from my physical body as l ever will be, and that my life apart from it was far more wonderful than any life I have ever experienced in it."

In the article "Astral Excursions" by Franz Hartmann MD, which appears on page 159 of the March 1908 Occult Review, which can be read here, Hartmann describes an out-of-body experience. He says that during this experience "when I tried to lift one of the instruments on a little table next to the chair, I could not do so, as my fingers passed through it."  

On page 480 of the October 7, 1911 edition of the journal Light, we read Mary Hamilton state this:

"The articles on ‘ Bilocation’ have been very interesting to me, and I think with ‘B. C. W'  that this phase of mediumship ought to be studied, for it is undoubtedly a form of mediumship, and in my own case I have had so many experiences of this kind that I never think of the physical body as myself. It is difficult to write on this matter, but I have been shown how the body is linked to the spiritual and sustained by it just as simply and naturally as the unborn child is by the mother. I have stood by my body fully conscious and been given this lesson by an Egyptian friend just as naturally as a teacher in the body could give it, and I have been overjoyed at the beauty and order of all things spiritual."

On the previous page of the same edition, we have a letter by Vincent N. Turvey of "Marrington, Branksome Park, Bournemouth." He quotes an account of an experience he had that could be an out-of-body experience. But the wording is too vague for us to tell whether what is going is an out-of-body experience or telepathy or clairvoyance. 

An important fact for anyone researching for the earliest literature on this topic is that before the phrase "out-of-body experience" became widely used, it was more common to use the slightly different phrase "out-of-the-body experience." Anyone searching for the earliest literature needs to search for all of these terms:

• Out-of-body experience
• Out-of-the-body experience
• Astral journey (an early term for an out-of-body experience)
• Astral projection (a term meaning a willfully produced out-of-body experience)
• Bilocation (a term meaning to be in two places at once, one sometimes used to describe a soul existing in a spot outside of the body)

The second part of this two-part series will take us from 1911 to the year 1930. 

The Martian Student: A Science Fiction Story

In the year 2126 young Josh lived in a tall tower on the planet Mars. His mother Lucy hoped that the education of Josh would be a breeze, and that he could learn all he needed to learn by the "brain downloads" that scientists had long promised.  But the hype about "brain downloads" had never materialized into a product anyone could use. So Josh did his studies in a pretty old-fashioned way, assisted by AI tutors which showed up in the form of talking life-like human-sized holograms. 

One day his mother Lucy gave young Josh a hard assignment relating to biology. 

"So I've seen how much you've learned about biology," said Lucy.

"Yes, Mom, I know so much," said Josh. "I can name many types of animals that live on that distant planet Earth I have never seen."

"But now I want you to go deeper," said Lucy. "This will be an assignment much harder than things like learning the names of animals."

"Uh, oh," said Josh, fearing some hard work was ahead. 

"What I would like you to do is research the topic: how did you and people like you ever get here? How did the human race ever arise? And how did your body ever arise? And how did your mind arise?"

"No problem, I'll just ask one of my holographic AI tutors," said Josh. 

"For this assignment, I don't want you to use a holographic AI tutor," said Lucy. "I want you to read a book to get the answers."

Josh groaned, realizing the assignment was a hard one. Using the very extensive electronic facilities of his Mars colony, he selected a book on biology, and began reading, trying to get the answers to the questions his mother had asked. 

The next day Lucy asked about how we doing. 

"I'm all done," said Josh. "I got the answers to those tough questions." 

"So tell me, Josh: what answers did you find?" said his mother. 

"The first question was how did the human race arise," said Josh. "The book told me the answer. It said every species arose because of random mutations in DNA that were saved and accumulated, because they were beneficial." 

"Random mutations?" said Lucy. "You think humans and bears and lions and whales arose from random mutations?"

"That's what the book said," said Josh. "It said they arose because of accumulations of random mutations such as copying errors."

"But that makes no sense," said Lucy. "The problem is that the bodies of creatures like us are enormously organized. A human body is as organized and fine-tuned as the spacecraft that first brought humans to Mars from Earth. In a human body there are organ systems that are built from organs, which are built from tissues, which are built from 200 types of enormously organized cells, which are built from many types of very complex organelles, which are built from superbly organized protein complexes, which are built from more than 20,000 types of proteins, which are each a special arrangement of hundreds or thousand of amino acids, fine-tuned to achieve some functional result. You can't accumulate your way to that kind of organization."

"But accumulation explains some things, doesn't it?" asked Josh. 

"Sure," said Lucy. "It explains the drifts of red dust we see piled up outside of our windows. But it doesn't explain things that are fantastically organized like rocket ships and human bodies. Now let's look just at you. What explanation did you find about how your body arose?"

"The book says I started out as a tiny little speck in your body," said Josh. 

"Well, at least the book got that right," said Lucy. "That is how you started out. That little speck is called a zygote, and it's all that you were just after I got pregnant. But how did that tiny little speck turn into a big smart boy like you?"

"The book explained it," said Josh. "It said that inside each of my cells is something called DNA, and that DNA is a blueprint for building a body. It seems that my cells read the blueprint, and so they knew how to build my body."

Lucy started laughing. "What a ridiculous tale!" she exclaimed.  "DNA has no blueprint for building bodies. DNA has only low-level chemical information like which amino acids make up cells. DNA and its genes do not even know how to make a cell. And cells don't have the smarts to read and understand blueprints on how to build a body, even if such blueprints existed." 

"But I thought it made sense," said Josh. "the idea of me getting built from a blueprint in my cells."

"Why would that make sense?" asked Lucy. "Do blueprints build things? Of course not. If you dump some construction materials at a spot and also dump a blueprint, that won't cause a new building to get built."

"I guess you're right," said Josh.

"Things only get built from blueprints if there are construction workers smart enough to read blueprints, and follow their instructions," explained Lucy. "The human body is so complex and so highly organized that a blueprint for making a body would be fantastically complicated. Were there any construction workers inside my body smart enough to read a blueprint for building a body, so that your body could be built from a tiny speck-sized zygote, and so that all of the 200 types of cells would know how to find the right place in the body to go to?"

"I guess not," said Josh. 

"You're not just a body, but also a mind," said Lucy. "What did your book tell you about how your mind arose?"

"It said my mind arose just from the electricity and chemicals passing around in my brain, and that my brain is like a computer that produces my mind." said Josh.

"How ridiculous an explanation!" said Lucy. "There's basically nothing in the brain that can explain the mind. And brains are not computers. Computers have an operating system and application programs. Brains have no such things."

"The book said my memories are stored in my brain," said Josh. 

"That was nonsense," said Lucy. "Brains do not have any component that can explain learning. Brains do not have any component that can explain instantly recalling a memory, as soon as you hear some name spoken you haven't heard in years.  I remember things very well from decades ago, but the proteins in brains are very short-lived, having an average lifetime of only a few weeks or less. And no one has ever found the tiniest bit of learned information by microscopically examining brain tissue." 

"So how could the book have been so wrong?" asked Josh. 

"When was it written?" asked his mother Lucy.

"In the year 2026," answered Josh.

"Oh THAT explains it," said Lucy, laughing. "Lots of people had foolish ideas way back then, a century ago. Around 2026 many people thought and did the stupidest things. They were so foolish they filled the Earth with nuclear missiles that could have caused the whole planet to be ruined. People have much better ideas now. So I have another tough assignment for you."

"Oh, no," said Josh, groaning. 

"The assignment is: get some answers to my questions from books that were written in recent years, books written in the 22nd century," said Lucy. "And if you think that none of them gave you answers that held up to your scrutiny, then tell me you didn't find any answers that made sense." 

"Mirror Life" Risk Means You Just Might Get Killed by a Mars Sample Return Mission

 Scientists and doctors have a long history of paying inadequate attention to very serious risks that are hard to quantify. Here are some examples. 

• When the first atomic bomb was being developed,  there were concerns that its explosion would cause an uncontrollable chain reaction that would set the Earth's atmosphere on fire. Anyone familiar with the way in which an atomic chain reaction occurs may understand why such a concern was reasonable. A nuclear chain reaction occurs in a way roughly comparable to how a fast-spreading virus spreads, with the reaction passing on very quickly between nearby units, which themselves cause the same reaction to be passed on to other nearby units, and so on and so forth. It was reasonable to fear that an atmosphere filled with oxygen molecules might allow a nuclear chain reaction to pass on endlessly from one molecule to the next. Chapter 17 of Daniel Ellsberg's book The Doomsday Machine makes quite clear that physicists still thought there was a significant chance of such a planet-killing event when the first atomic bomb was exploded in July, 1945. At one point Enrico Fermi estimated the chance at 10 percent, according to one source. Scientists basically shrugged off the risk that the whole atmosphere might burn up when the first nuclear bomb exploded, and approved the first atom bomb test. It was like playing Russian roulette with the survival of mankind. 
• After nuclear weapons were invented, there were all kinds of concerns about the testing of nuclear weapons. Critics said that the tests were creating radioactivity that would increase the cancer risk for very many people. Scientists assured us incorrectly that the risks were very small. This post  states that there were between 340,000 to 690,000 US deaths caused by atomic testing. The result was probably more US deaths than from the bombs dropped on Japan. 
• Many people pointed out the hazards of scientific experimentation modifying the genomes of viruses and bacteria. But scientists recklessly kept up "gain of function" experiments.  Three US intelligence agencies have concluded that the COVID-19 epidemic surging in early 2020 was caused by a lab leak from a laboratory doing gain-of-function research. 
• A health resource web page states this: "For over two decades, the United States has experienced a crisis of substance abuse and addiction that is illustrated most starkly by the rise in deaths from drug overdoses. Since the year 2000, over 1 million people died from drug overdoses in the United States. The annual number of drug deaths exceeded 100,000 for the first time in 2021, beginning a disturbing trend that has continued in both 2022 and 2023." How did this happen? For many years, doctors not paying adequate attention to the risks of opioid medicines went about casually writing prescriptions for such drugs, acting like they were blind to the risks of overdoses and prescription drug addiction. 
• The radiation hazards of CT scans were obvious from the beginning. But countless millions were encouraged to get such scans, often where there was no clear medical necessity for such a scan. Referring to CT scans in the United States, a scientific study stated, "The 93 million CT examinations performed in 62 million patients in 2023 were projected to result in approximately 103, 000 future cancers." Extrapolating, we can assume that millions of people worldwide have got cancer because of unnecessary CT scans. 

Scientists have recently discussed a type of risk that few have imagined previously. It is the risk called "mirror life."  To understand the idea, you have to understand the important idea of homochirality. 

A protein molecule typically has hundreds of amino acids. Chemicals such as amino acids and sugars can be either left-handed or right handed. A left handed amino acid looks like a mirror image of the right-handed amino acid, and a right-handed sugar looks like the mirror image of the left-handed sugar. Homochirality is the fact that in living things essentially all amino acids are left-handed, and all sugars in DNA are right-handed. But when such things are synthesized in a laboratory, or produced in experiments simulating the early Earth, you see equal amounts of left-handed and right-handed amino acids and equal amounts of left-handed and right-handed sugars.

But what if life had arose on Mars long ago? Such life might have a type of homochirality the exact opposite of the type we see in earthly life. For Mars life it might be that all proteins used right-handed amino acids, and all sugars were left-handed.  Such a theoretical form of life is called "mirror life." Recently articles have pointed out a great danger in trying to create such mirror life through laboratory experiments. If such mirror life escaped a lab, it might act like an unstoppable virus. Theoretically if mirror life were unleashed in the earthly biosphere, it might wipe out all or a large fraction of earthly life. 

So there is a danger in returning samples from Mars that might contain life. Such life might be mirror life. And if such mirror life escaped the lab, it might act like some unstoppable virus. The result might be a pandemic that might make the COVID-19 pandemic look like "a walk in the park" in comparison. 

The possibility I am mentioning is not some weird speculation I dreamed up myself. The possibility of a mirror life pandemic was raised recently in an article published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. The article had the title "Black swans from the Red Planet—Could NASA bring back 'mirror life' from Mars?" The subtitle read this:

NASA and the European Space Agency plan to bring samples back from Mars. Could they harbor a type of life that scientists warn could trigger mass extinctions on Earth? 

Later in the article we read this: "With perhaps a 50-50 chance that any Martian life developed from a mirror biology, the return of samples from Mars has transformed from a scientific opportunity to a potential existential risk."

The possibility of a mirror life pandemic after a Mars sample return mission is another reason why such a mission should not be funded. The main reason is the very low likelihood of detecting life or traces of dead life, given that no type of amino acid has ever been detected on Mars. Amino acids are the building components of protein molecules, which (along with protein complexes)  are the building components of the simplest one-celled life. 

A more intelligent approach would be to send to Mars robotic instruments with whatever equipment is sufficient to detect life, if it exists. Or, simply wait until a manned expedition reaches Mars, a mission including a competent biologist with all the tools needed to detect whether life on Mars exists or ever existed. 

Oops, it was deadly "mirror life"

Trying to Explain Human Development, Physicists Offer Only the Emptiest Hand-Waving

 The marvel of human development is a miracle of organization a thousand miles over the head of today's scientists. Somehow a speck-sized zygote existing just after impregnation progresses to become something a trillion times more organized: the internally dynamic structure of the human body. Scientists have long told a childish lie to try to explain this wonder so very far beyond their understanding: the tall tale that human bodies grow because there occurs a constant reading of a specification for how to make a human body, one stored in DNA or its genes. Such a specification has been called a blueprint, a recipe or a program. This tall tale is a lie because no such specification for how to make a human body exists in DNA or its genes. Instead of having a blueprint or recipe or program for building a body or any of its organs or any human cell, DNA and its genes merely have very low-level information such as which amino acids make up a protein. 

The very childish nature of the "DNA blueprints build bodies" tall tale may become clear to you once you realize that even if such a blueprint were to exist inside DNA, it would never explain how a human body gets built, for the simple reason that blueprints don't build things. Dump a blueprint for a house and the construction materials at a vacant lot, and that will never cause a house to get built. Things get built with the help of blueprints only when there are intelligent agents around smart enough to read blueprints and get ideas about exactly how to build things. A human body is so enormously organized and has such fantastically intricate biochemistry and internal dynamism that any blueprint for making a human body would be a specification so complex that only a superhuman mind could understand it. There is in the human womb nothing like a mind capable of interpreting and understanding instructions so complex, if they happened to exist in DNA and its genes, where there is no such specification for building a body or any of its organs or cells. 

There is therefore an ocean-sized explanation shortfall in explaining the physical origin of any full human body. Strip them of their lies about what is in DNA and its genes, and our developmental biologists stand empty-handed before us, "with their pants down." To make it look like the explanation shortfall is not so enormous, discussions of morphogenesis sometimes appeal to physics.  The maneuver is futile. Physics does pretty much nothing to explain the origin of a human body. 

In Quanta Magazine in late 2025 there was an example of one of the misleading articles we get when someone is trying to persuade us that physics does much of anything to explain human development. We have an article entitled "Genes Have Harnessed Physics to Help Grow Living Things." 

Early on the writer states this:

"Typically, biologists try to characterize growth, development and other biological processes as the result of chemical cues triggered by genetic instructions. But that picture has often seemed incomplete."

We get no explanation of why "that picture has often seemed incomplete." The reason is that genes do not give any instructions more complex than instructions for how to build a polypeptide sequence (a chain of amino acids) that is the beginning of a protein molecule. But constructing a human body requires many types of higher level organization such as building protein molecules into protein complexes, building protein complexes into organelles, building organelles into cells, building cells into tissues, building tissues into organs, and building organs into organ systems consisting of an organ and many other parts.  Genes cannot explain how such building occurs, because genes have no instructions on how to perform such operations. 

The writer's next sentence starts to tell us the very misleading story of "mechanical forces" that "steer" human development, saying, "Researchers now increasingly appreciate the role of mechanical forces in biology: forces that push and pull tissues in response to their material properties, steering growth and development in ways that genes cannot."  The story is baloney. You cannot explain any of the marvels of the construction of a human body by appealing to blind "mechanical forces" and the claim that such forces are "steering." Constructing a human body is a task almost infinitely harder than the simple task of steering a car.  And blind mechanical forces don't do steering anything like the steering that occurs when a driver with vision and an idea of a desired destination is steering a car. 

There is almost always the same kind of misleading word trickery in discussions of this type. They include the following:

(1) There is the extremely misleading trick of trying to shrink the problem of explaining the arising of a human structure to a mere problem of explaining a shape. Within a human body is the most enormous organization of matter, a degree of organization that dwarfs the level of organization inside an automobile or computer. The problem of morphogenesis or human development is the problem of explaining how so gigantically organized an arrangement of matter arises. Such a problem is more than a billion times greater than a mere problem of explaining a human shape. 

(2) There is the extremely misleading trick of trying to speak as if a mere "sculpting" or "shaping" could explain the origin of a human body, which is just another way of trying to make an explanation problem look a billion times easier than it is. Any action of "sculpting" or "shaping" could merely explain a shape, not an internal structure that is vastly organized.  So it is always misleading to speak as if some kind of "sculpting" or "shaping" action could explain the arising of a human body or any of its cells or organs.

(3) There is extremely misleading personification language in which mindless and blind mechanical forces are described as "steering" or "sculpting" as if such mindless and blind mechanical forces were intentional agents who could see and will.

(4) Here and there there are sprinkled a few references to mechanical forces such as pulling or pushing or stretching. Using "give me an inch and I'll take a mile" tactics, some attempt is made to make such references sound like mechanical forces are helping to explain the origin of a human body, something that is not true in any substantial way. 

The Quanta Magazine article employs all of those misleading tricks. Nothing of any real substance is discussed in explaining how blind mechanical forces can help explain the miracle of the arising of a gigantically organized human body having a special arrangement of parts far more impressive than the special arrangement of parts in an automobile or a jet aircraft. All that we have is the emptiest of hand-waving, combined with a few gossamer threads of speculation, which (even if true) would explain no more than a thousandth of the marvel of the origination of a human body. 

We have in the article scientist Alan Rodrigues engaging in very empty hand-waving by saying this: 

" 'What’s really amazed us is that you might be able to get by with a relatively simple amount of instruction from the genetic and molecular level,' said Rodrigues. 'Because you have additional emergent processes and properties happening at other levels.' ”

No, you can't "get by" with a "relatively simple amount of instruction" from DNA and its genes merely telling low-level chemical things like which amino acids make up a protein. Constructing something as enormously organized as a human body (with so many layers of organization and so many interdependent components) requires a causal reality enormously greater, which cannot be mere "instruction," because instructions don't engineer things. 

See here for more on this issue

In articles such as these in Quanta Magazine, we almost always see photos of smiling, confident-looking scientists, having some "I got this" look on their face. Were such scientists to be photographed with appropriate body language matching the limits of their knowledge, the photos would show them looking like this:

And were such scientists to give quotes matching how little they know, we would read quotes such as this:

I don't understand this stuff. It's all a mystery a thousand miles over my head. How do proteins ever form very complex three-dimensional shapes needed for their function, shapes not specified by DNA or its genes? I don't understand that. Why do proteins constantly form into just-right functional teams of proteins: protein complexes so well-engineered they are often called "molecular machines," complexes that sometimes use literal motors, forming the most astonishingly well-arranged machines? I don't understand that. How do organelles ever form from proteins and protein complexes? I don't understand that. How do cells of such enormous complexity ever form? I don't understand that. How do cells ever find the right positions in human bodies, with the right types of cells ending up in the right type of organs? I don't understand that. How do cells ever reproduce, something as astonishing as one automobile splitting up into two functional automobiles? I don't understand that. How do cells ever form into organs and organ systems as complex as the human cardiovascular system? I don't understand that. I don't understand these things, and neither do any other scientists. 

Very rarely we will get the truth on this matter from scientists, such as in the quotes below:

• "Yet while these are several examples of well-understood processes, our study of animal morphogenesis is really in its infancy." -- David Bilder and Saori L. Haigo1, "Expanding the Morphogenetic Repertoire: Perspectives from the Drosophila Egg." 
• "Fundamentally, we have a poor understanding of how any internal organ forms." -- Timothy Saunders, developmental biologist (link).
• "An adult human body is made up of some 30 to 40 trillion cells, all of which stem from a single fertilized egg cell. The process by which the right cells appear to arrive in their right numbers at the right time at the right place -- development -- is only understood in the roughest of outlines." -- Five scientists (link). 
• "Our understanding of how our organs form is still in its infancy" -- A research project abstract written by scientists (link). 
• "Biochemistry cannot provide the spatial information needed to explain morphogenesis...Supracellular morphogenesis is mysterious...Nobody seems to understand the origin of biological and cellular order."  -- Six medical authorities (link).  "
• "Understanding the rules underlying organismal development is a major unsolved problem in biology. Each cell in a developing organism responds to signals in its local environment by dividing, excreting, consuming, or reorganizing, yet how these individual actions coordinate over a macroscopic number of cells to grow complex structures with exquisite functionality is unknown." - Five scientists (link). 
• "However, our understanding of the molecular and physical basis of morphogenesis in plants or in any other eukaryotic system [e.g. mammals] is still in its infancy due to the complexity and non-linearity of processes involved in morphogenesis dynamics (or Morphodynamics)." -- A description of a 2017-2021 scientific project, presumably written by scientists (link). 
• "Understanding morphogenesis in vertebrate tissues in development and disease poses one of the most significant challenges in the life sciences. Despite the impressive technical advances aimed at cellular and subcellular characterization and manipulation over the past half century, a clear picture of how form is created still remains in its infancy." -- Four scientists in 2025 (link). 
• "We don't know what dark matter is, we don't understand how the brain works or consciousness, we don't understand morphogenesis, we don't understand the origin of life." -- Physics PhD Michael Nielsen (link). 
• "You start off as a sperm and an egg, and nine months later [your body has been built], through a magical process of morphogenesis, which we don’t understand." -- Donald Hoffman, Professor Emeritus of Cognitive Sciences at the University of California, Irvine (link). 
• "We take it for granted that we go to bed with two sets of fully functional kidneys and that we wake up with them the next morning but we don't understand the fundamental processes that give rise to this very well choreographed maintenance of an organism's form and function." -- Scientist Sanchéz Alvarado (link). 

Postscript: It seems I am not the only one who realizes the severity of this Missing Specifications Problem.  On this day I read of a long essay  by developmental biologist Michael Levin, entitled "Platonic space: where cognitive and morphological patterns come from (besides genetics and environment)." Levin makes use of Plato's theory of the Eternal Forms (or a theory like it), claiming that physical systems are "pointers to patterns in that Platonic space."  Plato basically said that each man is an instantiation of an eternal Idea of a Man, and each  house is an instantiation of an eternal Idea of a House, and each rock is an instantiation of an eternal Idea of a Rock. Long ago I read every one of Plato's many dialogues, but I cannot recall him ever credibly explaining how such instantiations of transcendent forms could occur for anything that is as complex as a human body.  And we get the same failure in Levin's essay, which has some tangled metaphysics, but does not do anything to explain how cell specifications and protein complex specifications and organelle specifications and organ system specifications could ever have arisen in some "Platonic space" of eternal transcendent forms. In his essay, Levin makes the severe error of claiming that "we, ourselves, are patterns." While the behavior of someone can follow a pattern, you are not a mere pattern or a pointer, but something gigantically more, both physically and mentally. 

The Latest Example of an Expert Group Thinking Stupidly

 I have published a series of 29 short videos on the topic of the errors of experts, which you can view by using the link here.  

My best post on this topic is my post "Disastrous Blunders of the Experts," which you can read here. The post discusses the following examples in which experts produced the most disastrous blunders:

Expert Fiasco #1: The Bay of Pigs Invasion

Expert Fiasco #2: The Vietnam War

Expert Fiasco #3: Eugenics

Expert Fiasco #4: The Housing Bubble of 2005, and Financial Meltdown of 2008

Expert Fiasco #5: Blunders of the Psychiatrists

Expert Fiasco #6: The Iraq War

Expert Fiasco #7: Vioxx

Expert Fiasco #8: The Opioid Overdose Epidemic

Expert Fiasco #9: Nuclear Weapons

The post also discusses quite a few other cases of the most disastrous blunders by experts, including the atomic testing fiasco (in which we were assured by experts that atomic testing was safe, with as many as 500,000 people dying from cancer caused by radiation from such testing), and also the COVID-19 blunders that probably resulted in more than 300,000 unnecessary deaths because of incompetent responses.  It is an open question whether the entire COVID-19 pandemic that killed millions was the result of overconfidence by gene-fiddling biology experts recklessly monkeying with viruses. 

It is not hard to find recent examples of blunders by experts.  One example is all the US military and US foreign policy experts who have unwisely supported providing super-destructive bombs to the State of Israel as it has engaged in an appalling bombing campaign in Gaza, resulting in more than 70,000 civilian deaths, mostly deaths of women and children, with innumerable other women and children being maimed or crippled, and as many as 500,000 put at risk of starvation, homelessness, severe malnutrition or severe lung damage from breathing dust from all the destroyed buildings.  With the help of such a blunder the appalling horrors of the October, 2023 Hamas attack have been dwarfed by a savage slaughter fifty times bloodier. Another example can be found in the recent World Economic Forum meeting. 

The World Economic Forum provides an annual report on global risks. After a meeting in Switzerland two years ago, this expert group  released its 2024 report on global risks.  Early 2024 was a time when the situation in the Middle East seemed like some time bomb that might explode, leading to a new world war, with the situation in Ukraine posing a similar danger. So what did the World Economic Forum list as the biggest current economic risk in early 2024?  The group of experts decided that the biggest global risk over the next two years was: misinformation and disinformation. 

Below is a visual from the 2024 report.  We see "misinformation and disinformation" at the top of the list of 2-year global risks.

Here is the report's description of this "misinformation and disinformation" risk, which fails to make it sound like anything to lose much sleep over:

"Misinformation and disinformation (#1) is a new leader of the top 10 rankings this year. No longer requiring a niche skill set, easy-to-use interfaces to large-scale artificial intelligence (AI) models have already enabled an explosion in falsified information and so-called ‘synthetic’ content, from sophisticated voice cloning to counterfeit websites. To combat growing risks, governments are beginning to roll out new and evolving regulations to target both hosts and creators of online disinformation and illegal content. Nascent regulation of generative AI will likely complement these efforts. For example, requirements in China to watermark AI-generated content may help identify false information, including unintentional misinformation through AI hallucinated content. Generally however, the speed and effectiveness of regulation is unlikely to match the pace of development." 

This sounds like nothing much to worry about, compared to threats such as nuclear war, pandemics arising from labs engaging in reckless gene-splicing, and global warming. So what on Earth were these experts thinking when they decided to proclaim "misinformation and disinformation" as the #1 global risk? In early 2024 Eve Ottenberg speculated about a possibility:

"The assorted billionaire geniuses and official intellectual luminaries who gathered in Davos Switzerland January 15-19 proved, for those who doubted, that neither singly nor as a group could these...find their way out of a paper bag. Weighing the world’s fate in their well-manicured fingers, did they seem concerned about the Ukraine War morphing into nuclear catastrophe, or ditto for a wider Middle East war? They did not. Did they tear their beautifully coiffed hair and rend their designer ensembles over the prospect of the earth heating up like a pancake on a griddle due to uncontrolled climate change? A disaster caused by rich countries gobbling up and belching out burnt fossil fuels? Or did they mouth vague platitudes about extreme weather? Yes, bromides were their plat du jour.

The most immediate threat to humanity, according to this assemblage of well-groomed ... (who paid $52,000 apiece to join the World Economic Forum and then $19,000 each for a ticket to the Davos shindig), is misinformation or disinformation – you pick. After all, these bigwigs can take to their pate de foie gras-stocked bunkers if the planet succumbs either to nuclear winter or high temperatures inhospitable to human life. So of course, they regard speech, that is, free speech, as the main threat to their luxurious creature comforts. After all, someone might say something bad about these oligarchs! "

After a meeting in Switzerland in January of this year, this same expert group recently released its 2026 report on global risks.  A long-standing nuclear arms treaty between Russia and the United States has recently expired, raising the threat of a nuclear arms race. Very many are worried about the health, stability and judgment of the frequently-ranting man whose finger is on  the nuclear button of the United States, who has made a long series of outrageous-sounding statements, threats and decisions that have caused many to wonder if he is fit for the grave responsibilities of being US president. 

So what has the World Economic Forum listed as the biggest current global risk?  The group of experts has decided that the biggest global risk over the next two years is: geoeconomic confrontration. 

What are they talking about by using such a term? We get an inkling in one part of the report:

"In highlighting Geoeconomic confrontation, respondents are indicating a deepening and broadening of their concerns: after a year of heightened uncertainty over trade policy there is now a growing recognition of the escalating use of other economic and political instruments, from sanctions and regulations to capital restrictions and weaponization of supply chains, as tools of geoeconomic strategy."

Figure 24 of the report has a big font boldface caption of this: Executive perceptions of Geoeconomic confrontation (sanctions, tariffs, investment screening etc.), Later in the report we have this definition of "geoeconomic confrontation." 

"Deployment of economic levers by global or regional powers to reshape economic interactions between nations, restricting goods, knowledge, services or technology with the intent of building self-sufficiency, constraining geopolitical rivals and/or consolidating spheres of influence. Includes, but is not limited to: currency measures; investment controls; sanctions; state aid and subsidies; and trade controls."

What did the group of experts list as the second most worrying global risk over the next two years? It was "misinformation and disinformation." Unbelievably (as shown in Figure 2 on page 8 of the report), the percentage of experts who listed "geoeconomic confrontation" as an economic risk was 18 times greater than the number who cited "biological, chemical or nuclear weapons or hazards" as an economic risk, and 18 times greater than the number who listed "infectious diseases" as a risk, and 9 times greater than the number who listed "critical changes to Earth systems" as a risk. And the number of experts who listed "misinformation and disinformation" as a risk was 7 times greater than the number who listed "biological, chemical or nuclear weapons or hazards" as an economic risk, and 7 times greater than the number who listed "infectious diseases" as a risk.

Once again, prestigious elite experts have acted in a way that makes us suspect that they are blind, bungling and biased, less likely to judge correctly than high-school dropouts.  

Asked to name the biggest global risk in the next two years, experts have stated a worry that only some fat-cat investor or some hopelessly out-of-touch clique member might list as his biggest worry. Our World Economic Forum experts have spoken as if they were vastly more worried about some red tape than about oceans of red blood being spilled. Our group of experts has utterly failed to perceive the severity of the biggest risk facing the world: a risk of nuclear war that helped cause the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists to recently set its famous doomsday clock to be only 85 seconds before midnight.  

Experts tend to exist in "echo chambers" where groupthink and herd effects may predominate. Often involving way-too-narrow and way-too-specialized fields of study (sometimes called silos), such echo chambers can be found in the ivory towers of academia or the ideological enclaves that are the Pentagon and the White House. Within such an echo chamber people will tend to hear only people who belong to the same belief community, people who share the same ideology. Existing in such an ideological enclave, absurd or immoral or unwarranted opinions may be voiced, and may be regarded as great wisdom by anyone who looks around and sees other members of the belief community nodding in agreement. 

Postscript: Tragically this post of February 16, 2026 has turned out to be rather prophetic. I said on that date, "Very many are worried about the health, stability and judgment of the frequently-ranting man whose finger is on  the nuclear button of the United States, who has made a long series of outrageous-sounding statements, threats and decisions that have caused many to wonder if he is fit for the grave responsibilities of being US president." At the end of that month Trump proved his poor judgment and unfitness for office by launching an illegal and immoral war against Iran, in an unprovoked act of aggression, before any such action had been sanctioned by the US Congress or the UN Security Council. The war started off with atrocities such as the horrendous bombing of a girl's elementary school in Iran, resulting in the death of more than 150 people, mostly small girls. 

In 1923 an Editor of Scientific American Confessed the Reality of Telepathy and Mind Over Matter

Nowadays it seems that whenever the leading publication Scientific American discusses the topic of telepathy, we get statements by ESP denialists, despite centuries of evidence for the reality of psi phenomena such as extrasensory perception (ESP) and clairvoyance. But it wasn't always this way. In earlier years the editors of Scientific American confessed that telepathy was proven. 

In my post "In 1941 the Editors of Scientific American Confessed That Telepathy Was Proven," which you can read here, I documented how the editors of Scientific American had publicly confessed that telepathy was a proven fact. 

On this same page of the April 1941 Scientific American, we had a box describing an offer of the magazine to pay $15,000 for proof of the paranormal. Here is part of that box:

Note well item 6 in the list of conditions. We read, "Since experiments by Dunninger and others have proved telepathy to an acceptable degree, demonstrations of this nature are not eligible for the award."  That is a confession that the reality of telepathy had been proven. At the time this was written, the person who had done the most to prove telepathy was Duke University professor Joseph Rhine (whose laboratory experiments are discussed here), and other researchers such as Professor Riess (whose enormously convincing experiment is discussed here). Later researcher Louisa Rhine documented very many cases of telepathy outside of laboratory settings, in her book Hidden Channels of the Mind, which may be read here. Sally Rhine Feather documented very many other cases of telepathy outside of laboratory settings, in her book The Gift: ESP, the Extraordinary Experiences of Ordinary People, which can be read here.

So why in so quite a few decades after the 1940's have Scientific American writers and Scientific American editors misled us by claiming that there is no good evidence for ESP? Nothing happened to warrant such a change. To the contrary,  experiments after 1941 using the Ganzfeld protocol provided extremely well-replicated evidence for the reality of ESP. A paper on the Cornell Physics Paper server gives this summary of the telepathy evidence from the ganzfeld experiments run in recent decades, in which the success rate expected by chance is 25%:

"From 1974 to 2018, the combined ganzfeld database contained 117 studies. Of those, studies using targets sets with 4 possible targets included 3,885 test sessions, resulting in 1,188 hits, corresponding to a 30.6% hit rate. With chance at 25%, this excess hit rate is 8.1 sigma above chance expectation (p = 5.6 × 10^-16). Analysis of these studies showed that similar effect sizes were reported by independent labs, that the results were not affected by variations in experimental quality, and that selective reporting biases could not explain away the results. The Bayes Factors (BF) associated with the last 108 more recently published ganzfeld telepathy studies was 18.8 million in favor of H1 (i.e., evidence favoring telepathy). Given that BF > 100 is considered 'decisive' evidence, this outcome far exceeds the 'exceptional evidence' said to be required of exceptional claims.[48,49] By comparison, in particle physics experiments effects resulting in 5 or more sigma are considered experimental 'discoveries.' ”

The probability of 1 in 5.6 × 10^-16  cited is a likelihood of less than 1 in a quadrillion. 

Researching old newspaper articles, I found an earlier confession by an editor at Scientific American that telepathy had been proven.  The confession occurs in the 1923 newspaper article you can read here. 

In an article entitled "Spirit Messages Declared Frauds," we read the opinion of J. Malcolm Bird, who the article describes as "editor of Scientific American."  Bird declares that he does not believe in messages or manifestations from spirits after investigating them. But he casts doubt upon his qualifications as an objective judge of this topic, by confessing that he has an "emotional preference against the idea that spirits come back and produce physical effects upon our physical plane.”

But later in the article we read this confession from Bird:

"He concedes, first, that what scientists call subjective phenomena, under the head of which come hypnotism and telepathy, do occur, and he cites instances in support of the belief. He concedes, also that he has been impressed with objective phenomena, such as objects moving about at high velocity, weaving themselves, in dark rooms, in and out of chandeliers and other furnishings without contact. His theory is that, with the brain giving off energy, with other brains as the receiver, it is possible also to reach the point of concentration where physical objects may also be the receivers and may be controlled by the brain. If such is true, he holds, It is an entirely human process and not spirits working through the medium."

The underlined part of the statement is a confession of the reality of telepathy. The other part of the statement amounts to a confession of the reality of mysterious movements of matter seeming to be what is called psychokinesis, telekinesis or mind-over-matter. The Scientific American editor Byrd attempted to account for these incredibly spooky movements of matter (including "objects moving about at high velocity, weaving themselves, in dark rooms, in and out of chandeliers and other furnishings without contact") by advancing a theory that remote objects can be moved around by brains giving off energy. 

We know of no energy from a brain that can explain mysterious movements of matter outside of a person's body. We should have a low opinion of Byrd's attempt to create a mechanistic theory to account for the spooky movements of matter he saw. But at least we got from Byrd a confession of the reality of mind over matter, something like psychokinesis or telekinesis. 

In the news article we then read this statement from the Scientific American editor:

"In support of his admission that telepathy is existent, Mr. Bird points to the case of a Scottish woman. Her husband was a seafaring man and at the time was at sea and not expected home for several weeks. She was observed to rush out of the door of her house, with her arms extended, and to walk thus a distance of about one hundred yards on the moor In front of her cottage. She suddenly folded her arms as if about an object and fell In a faint. When she revived, she said, 'my husband is dead.' It was later established that at about that exact moment her husband had been drowned at sea."

We then read in the newspaper article about Bird's interaction with a British medium of the early twentieth century (Gladys Osborne Leonard), who seemed to produce psychic or paranormal results so impressive she was often called "the British Leonora Piper."  (Piper's prowess is discussed here.) The most impressive existing record of the results of Gladys Osborne Leonard is the 1916 book Raymond, or Life After Death by Sir Oliver Lodge, which can be read online for free here. The book is a meticulous account of interactions Lodge had with mediums after the death of his son Raymond, which occurred on September 14, 1915. The book has transcripts of quite a few sessions Lodge had with mediums such as Leonard.  

We read this about how the Scientific American editor Bird had two seemingly paranormal encounters with Gladys Osborne Leonard:

"In one of his sittings with the clairvoyant medium, Mrs. Leonard, she told him that he had booked passage on two separate ships when he left America for England. Mr. Bird had told no one in England of this, but as a matter of fact, he had done so as a precaution.

Through her 'control' (the spirit working through the medium’s
mouth), she told him also of the existence of a picture of three women, taken by the seashore. One of the women, now a spirit, was supposed to be communicating with him through the medium. Mr. Bird recalled no such picture at the time, but upon his return to America his mother verified its existence. It was a picture of his grandmother and two of his woman relatives taken by the seashore. He attributed this to the workings of telepathy, the explanation being that the medium had taken in through this source the workings of his subconscious mind."

Here Bird is not merely assuming the reality of telepathy, but actually assuming the existence of a kind of super-super-telepathy, in which a mind reader cannot merely detect what you are thinking at the current moment, but also kind of dive into your memories, extracting things you may have seen, but are not currently thinking about, and cannot even currently remember. We have here an example of the infinite explanatory flexibility of those trying to explain away evidence of some mysterious spirit beyond their ken. It kind of goes like this. 

Cannot explain what you saw? Try to explain it as thought-reading and maybe also brain-caused telekinesis.

That still is not enough? Explain the results as super-telepathy involving the ability of someone to read not just your current thoughts but also your memories. 

That still is not enough? Explain the results as super-super-telepathy involving the ability of someone to read not just your current thoughts and also your memories but also something locked in your subconscious mind that you cannot remember if you try. 

Bird seems to have failed to ever convincingly back up his claim that one of the mediums he investigated was involved in fraud.  You can read about the case using the links here, here and in another account you can read below. 

What seems to have happened is that Bird and his Scientific American committee got baffling results while testing Josie K. Stewart, results that originally impressed them (as described in the article above). Later Bird and his men devised a theory of fraud to explain away the results. But none of the later news stories seem to discuss any convincing evidence to back up such a theory of fraud. The accusation was vigorously denied by Stewart.  

We read in the article here some claim of a measurement backing up the claim of fraud. But it does not sound like very reliable evidence at all, as it hinges upon a supposed difference of paper thickness reported as being merely two ten-thousandths of an inch. With a difference that small, the possibility of measurement error is too high, particularly when someone making a measurement may be motivated to get some particular result. 

Postscript: On the morning of this post's publication, I observed a spooky effect I have seen more than 28 times, in addition to another spooky effect, both of which I discuss in my post here. The effects  may suggest some "mind over matter" interaction going on.