But Ron Ruiz of Oro Valley, Arizona, has gone one better, offering for sale at a Tucson gem show for $69,000 a potato-sized green rock that supposedly came from the crash of a liquid-hulled alien spaceship that crashed in St. Joseph, Missouri, in 1947. “It seems like an awfully high amount, but there is very little of it," Ruiz told the Arizona Daily Star (February 5, 1999). Smaller pieces were available for $100 per gram, and at least four pieces were actually sold. However, skeptic James McGaha checked out the remarkable evidence, and suggests that it was probably a piece of slag, the refuse from metal smelting. You can decide for yourself what it is by looking at www.wehug.com/crashsitedebris.html. Actual pieces of supposed Roswell crash debris were on sale at the Bay Area UFO Expo held near San Francisco over the Labor Day holiday but seemed to generate little enthusiasm, probably because even the credulous UFO buffs in attendance found them unconvincing.

But you've got to give credit to Jose Escamilla of Roswell, New Mexico, who seems to have worked out a whole new angle in the crowded field of paranormal claims. They're called “Roswell Rods," and they allegedly zip through the air, never seeming to stop or slow down. Supposedly first discovered at Roswell, the Rods have now been seen almost everywhere that anyone has bothered to look for them. Seldom seen visually, the best way to spot them is to take a video or movie camera and point it at the sky. Sooner or later some little dark spot will be seen to zip across at high angular velocity, and when it does you will have a Rod sighting. "Rods have never been slow,” Escamilla explains. “These things travel at extremely high velocities and can barely be seen as they pass by. We have never seen a Rod hover or fly slowly as reports of cigar UFOs suggest. Most footage of Rods lasts from one to five frames in duration. What we consider to be the slowest Rods we have ever seen on video last a full ten frames before flying off screen. These ten frames equal one-third of a second.” I attended his lecture and video presentation. Some of his “rods” were obviously insects zipping across the field at a high angular rate. Others appear to have “appendages” in stop-frame video, apparently birds' wings blurred in zipping across the frame. Escamilla is convinced he's onto something really big here. His Web site, www.roswellrods.com, claims to have had more than 7 million visitors in the past three years, and he says he's now aggressively pursuing movie and television deals.

The charismatic and controversial UFOlogist Steven Greer (see this column, September/October 1999) recently revealed on his Web site http://www.cseti.org the real reason for the death of Marilyn Monroe. Greer claims to have an "authenticated CIA wiretap document of Marilyn Monroe signed by legendary Counter-Intelligence Chief James Angleton the day before her death detailing that she knew about the crashed spacecraft and dead bodies from Jack Kennedy and was planning a Press Conference to tell all-and more!” Unfortunately, if you want to read the full story, you'll have to buy Greer's new book.

Another wild-and-wooly UFO group, Citizens Against UFO Secrecy (see this column, September/October 1998) has filed a lawsuit complaining that the U.S. Government and the State of Arizona jointly are failing to protect citizens against a foreign invasion, specifically, abduction by extraterrestrials (see http://www.caus.org/crindex.html). The state, not surprisingly, has filed a motion to dismiss the case. However, its response deals with the suit not by showing that it is unsubstantiated and ridiculous, but instead claiming the state has “Qualified Immunity” and that the suit would “interfere with public administration,” even if the state's citizens were actually being abducted. Another lawsuit was directed against the Department of Defense for allegedly withholding UFO secrets requested under the Freedom of Information Act. Still in the works are planned lawsuits against the FBI and the CIA.

Still another UFOlogist, Larry W. Bryant of MUFON, recently filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the medical center at the Andrews Air Force Base, as follows:

Word has come to me that your facility routinely administers medical care (including counseling services, on both an in-patient and an out-patient basis) to servicemembers (and their family members) exhibiting symptoms of having undergone abduction by “extraterrestrial biological entities” (a.k.a. UFO-borne aliens).

Accordingly, under terms of the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, I hereby request that you send me a copy of the following records:

1. The standard treatment plan pursued by your personnel in caring for these above-defined victims.
2. All statistical-survey reports produced to date on the demographics, etiology, treatment protocols, long-term prognosis, and forensic evidence relating to your care of these victims. . . .

There is, as yet, no word about any deep secrets he may have pried loose. James Moseley reports in Saucer Smear (http://www.martiansgohome.com/smear) that Bryant is considering a lawsuit similar to that filed by CAUS against the state of Virginia, where he resides, charging that it, like Arizona, has failed to protect its citizens against alien abduction. But MUFON is leaning on Bryant to nix the suit, as MUFON considers it abysmally bad public relations.

However, according to one very earnest group of SETI researchers, the most promising way to detect extraterrestrial intelligence is not using sophisticated radio equipment or even ordinary telescopes, but instead setting up a Web page and waiting patiently for ET to log on. The group, sixteen of whom are members of the International Academy of Astronautics SETI Committee, calls itself “Welcome ETI.” It has set up a Web page (http://members.aol.com/WelcomeETI/) and seriously expects to receive an e-mail message from a highly advanced alien intelligence that has figured out a way to hack into a terrestrial Internet connection.

This, however, is more difficult than it sounds, assuming that the ETs must abide by the same laws of physics as us Earthlings. The Internet protocols require the assignment of unique network addresses-even to ETs-and are inherently bi-directional. This means that ETs cannot just passively surf the net, but must enter data into the Internet in order to receive data from it. As for tapping into communications channels, we know that this is something that terrestrial intelligence agencies routinely can do.

However, if the ETs have placed an intelligent probe somewhere in our solar system that wishes to somehow insert data into one of our terrestrial microwave data links that is not expecting to receive it, because of delays of seconds if not minutes in the information round-trip at the speed of light, the un-hacked data would have reached its destination long before any extraterrestrial hacking could be accomplished (unless the ETs are precognitive and know what data will be transmitted in the future).

After I exchanged several e-mails with the group's organizer, Allen Tough, he agreed that because of these and other difficulties a successful alien hacker would have to have a presence on Earth instead of in space, which as I explained sounds very much like the plot for an episode of The X-Files. This suggests that the proper equipment for a SETI researcher might not be expensive telescopes and radio spectrum analyzers, but a hand-held scanner and a four-wheel drive vehicle. The group says that it has already received thirty replies claiming to be from ETs, however “none have yet come close to persuading us of their authenticity.”

The National Enquirer reported in its September 14, 1999, edition that Jackie Stallone, Sly Stallone's mom, has given up astrology for an even more bizarre form of fortunetelling: “rumpology," reading the imprint of a person's posterior. Clients remove their pants, sit on an ink-coated paper, then creating an impression in which the prognosticator interprets the lines and wrinkles. “It's all written on your behind who you're going to marry, love affairs, health-and most important of all in Hollywood, whether you're going to have a successful career,” she told the Enquirer.

In the past several years, a researcher named David Oates has been advocating his discovery of a most interesting phenomenon. Oates claims that backward messages are hidden unintentionally in all human speech. The messages can be understood by recording normal speech and playing it in reverse. This phenomena, reverse speech, has been discussed by Oates in a number of books (Oates 1996), magazines, newspapers, and radio programs, and even on television with Larry King and Geraldo Rivera. His company, Reverse Speech Enterprises, is dedicated to profiting from his discovery. The basics of Oates's theory are outlined in his book Reverse Speech: Hidden Messages in Human Communication. He also outlines his theories on Reverse Speech Enterprise's large and detailed Web page (http://www.reversespeech.com). The following quotes taken from that page define the main characteristics and implications of reverse speech; similar statements can be found in his publications.

Human speech has two distinctive yet complementary functions and modes. The Overt mode is spoken forwards and is primarily under conscious control. The Covert mode is spoken backward and is not under conscious control. The backward mode of speech occurs simultaneously with the forward mode and is a reversal of the forward speech sounds.

These two modes of speech, forward and backward, are dependent upon each other and form an integral part of human communication . . .

Covert speech develops before overt speech. Children speak backwards before they do forwards . . .

Reverse speech is the voice of truth and it is complementary with forward speech. The two modes occur simultaneously yet are formed in different areas of the mind. Simply, forward speech is from the left brain and Reverse Speech is from the right brain. . . . If a lie is spoken forwards, the truth may be spoken backwards. Any thought that is on a person's mind has the potential to appear in Reverse Speech . . . it can reveal hidden memory and experiences. . . . Employers can use it for employee selection, lawyers for deposition analysis, reporters for politicians' speeches. Its applications are endless. . . . Put simply, the discovery of reverse speech means that the human mind is no longer private. Any thought, any emotion, any motive that any person has can appear backwards in human speech. The implications are mind boggling because reverse speech opens up the Truth.

Where Is the Evidence?

The very existence of reverse speech is ecologically invalid. "Backwards” language does not convey meaning to a listener-in other words it does not make any sense. This has been put to empirical test. Subjects who hear recordings of words played backwards are unable to report what words they heard (Vokey and Reid 1985). The ability to communicate through language is an incredibly complex marvel of evolution. If reverse speech existed, it would not be comprehensible and would have no practical value. Therefore, there would be no selection mechanism by which it would evolve. It would truly be a “miracle.” And, as for all miracles, we do not have a shred of supporting evidence.

Hearing Things

After such strings of nonsense syllables were arranged, they were played for subjects at barely audible volume levels. After repeatedly listening to these sounds, subjects reported “hearing" the phonograph or the tape “say” things. These sentences, or sentence fragments, did not actually exist and, as such, were considered to be utterances that were already strong in the subject's repertoire. Put another way, they were “projecting” their own thoughts onto the sounds they were hearing.

Oates frequently plays examples of reversed-speech phrases in which the listener can hear what appears to be meaningful speech. It is not difficult to hear something that sounds like English phrases when they have been pointed out. However, as in messages heard from the verbal summator, the phonemes may sound similar to a meaningful phrase but are really sound salad. A listener expecting to hear a certain phrase will likely do so. In their critique of Oates's theories, Newman and Curtain (1998) conducted a simple experiment in which subjects under various conditions tried to detect examples of reverse speech from Oates's audiotapes. As expected, they found that subjects who were told what to listen for were much more successful in hearing the phrases than those not expecting what they would hear. This is analogous to seeing a certain image in a cloud formation only after another person has pointed it out. Fortunately, most of us recognize that a cloud that looks like Elvis is not really Elvis. Backward phonemes, however, may convincingly sound like a real sentence and are not as readily dismissed as coincidence.

Potential for Harm

Hopefully the questionable validity of reverse speech will be recognized before history repeats itself. Not so long ago, belief in facilitated communication, another invented form of communication, led to witch-hunt investigations based on information that had absolutely no basis in reality. In facilitated communication, a nonspeaking individual receives assistance from a "facilitator” who guides his or her hands across a keyboard so that a message can be typed. Curiously, many nonspeaking individuals who seemed to benefit from facilitated communication did not have motor deficits. Therefore, it was unclear why motor assistance would help them communicate. Controlled studies repeatedly demonstrated that the facilitator in fact manifested the messages communicated by the nonverbal individuals either intentionally or unintentionally. (See James A. Mulick, John W. Jacobson, and Frank H. Kobe, “Anguished Silence and Helping Hands: Autism and Facilitated Communication," Skeptical Inquirer, 17(3): 270-80, Spring 1993.) As stated by Gorman (1998), “When the assisting facilitator could not see or hear the questions presented, autistic individuals could not communicate correct answers, and what was typed was actually what the facilitator saw” (64).

Far from being innocuous, facilitated communication led to false accusations of sexual abuse and resulting court trials that severely disrupted the lives of innocent people. (For a comprehensive history of facilitated communication see Gorman 1998 or Jacobson, Mulick, and Schwartz 1995.) It is easy to see how reverse speech has the same maleficent potential as facilitated communication. The person trained to hear reverse messages could intentionally or unintentionally report that speech contains hidden incriminating evidence. Many people are not prepared to refute such contrived evidence.

The danger of facilitated communication was recognized, and it is no longer considered to be scientifically valid by most professionals working in the disability field (Gorman 1998). In 1994, the American Psychological Association adopted a resolution stating that facilitated communication is a controversial and unproved communicative procedure with no scientifically demonstrated support for its efficacy. We advocate a similar stance on reverse speech. Without validation of its existence, the potential for harm greatly exceeds any benefits. Until that time, we should not allow the use of reverse speech in any situation in which important decisions must be made.

Other Issues

Another simple investigation could test the claim that reverse speech can be used for lie detection. Researchers could arrange for confederates to lie on tape about some verifiable personal information (e.g., age, height, weight, etc.), and tell the truth about other similar information. If reverse speech always detects the truth, the subjects should be able to separate facts from lies at rates better than chance.

Both of these studies could be conducted with minimal cost and effort. If Oates is truly interested in the truth, he could set aside a few hundred dollars (much less than the cost of enrollment at one of his training programs) and fund an independent researcher.

Numerous other claims of doubtful validity can be found in Oates's writings and on the Reverse Speech Web page. Because the very existence of reverse speech is likely invalid, we will not address each of the minor points here. However, two assertions are particularly amusing and cast further doubt on Oates's credibility. Although Oates does not use specific neurological terminology, he claims that the left hemisphere of the cerebral cortex produces forward speech, and the right hemisphere produces reverse speech. He offers no evidence for this. Years ago, it was discovered that both forward and reverse speech sounds are identified most accurately by the left hemisphere (Kimura 1968). Regardless, hemispheric lateralization is not that specialized even for normal speech. Often people who sustain damage to the left hemisphere early in life develop some speech control by the right hemisphere, and some language deficits can occur after right-hemisphere damage (Springer and Deutsch 1993). Furthermore, speech production is controlled by the right-hemisphere in a segment of the left-handed population. Oates's appeal to neuroscience is uninformed and unsupported. In another example, Oates claims that children learn to speak in reverse before they speak in the typical forward fashion. As stated by Newbrook and Curtain (1998), this is contrary to everything we know about language development.

The reader may notice we gathered much of our information from the Internet. This was not done by choice. Information on reverse speech (aside from that authored or championed by Oates) does not appear frequently on the printed page. This suggests that reverse speech has for the most part escaped scientific scrutiny. It also suggests that the Internet supplies a means to distribute pseudoscience under the pretense of science. Of course, researchers do not have the time to investigate every fantastic claim that pops out of the woodwork. However, in this case the potential for the abuse of an untested theory is considerable. If reverse speech enters courtrooms and therapists' offices, lives may be seriously affected. We hope that readers can help expose this potential disaster before damage is done.

References

1. Brombacher, S. 1996. Review of reverse speech: Hidden messages in human communication. Library Journal 116: 126.
2. Gorman, B.J. 1998. Facilitated communication in America: Eight years and counting. Skeptic 6: 64-71.
3. Jacobson, J.W., J.A. Mulick, and A.A. Schwartz. 1995. A history of facilitated communication: Science, pseudoscience, and antiscience. American Psychologist 50: 750-765.
4. Kazdin, A.E. 1982. Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings. New York: Oxford.
5. Kimura, D. 1968. Neural processing of backwards-speech sounds. Science 839: 395-396
6. Lamorte, C. 1997. August 6. Reverse psychology. Houston Press [Online] Available: http://www.houston-press.com/extra/www/ramsey.html [12/ 30/98]
7. Newbrook, M. and J. Curtain. 1998. David Oates' theory of reverse speech. [Online] Available: http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/revspeech1.htm [12/30/98]
8. Oates, D.J. 1991. Reverse speech: Hidden messages in human communication. Indianapolis, IN: Knowledge systems.
9. Reverse Speech Enterprises. The official reverse speech Web site [Online] Available: http://www.reversespeech.com [12/30/98]
10. Skinner, B. F. 1936. The verbal summator as a method for the study of latent speech. Journal of Psychology 2: 71-107.
11. ---. 1957. Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
12. Springer, S.P., and G. Deutsch. 1993. Left brain, right brain. New York: Freeman.
13. Vokey, J.R., and J.D. Reid. 1985. Subliminal messages: Between the devil and the media. American Psychologist 40: 1231-1239

The Saga

Briefly, the story is that in 1795 a young man named Daniel McInnis (or McGinnis) was roaming Oak Island when he came upon a shallow depression in the ground. Above it, hanging from the limb of a large oak was an old tackle block. McInnis returned the next day with two friends who-steeped in the local lore of pirates and treasure troves-set to work to excavate the site. They soon uncovered a layer of flagstones and, ten feet further, a tier of rotten oak logs. They proceeded another fifteen feet into what they were sure was a man-made shaft but, tired from their efforts, they decided to cease work until they could obtain assistance. However, between the skepticism and superstition of the people who lived on the mainland, they were unsuccessful.

The imagined cache continued to lie dormant until early in the next century, when the trio joined with a businessman named Simeon Lynds from the town of Onslow to form a treasure-hunting consortium called the Onslow Company. Beginning work about 1803 or 1804 (one source says 1810), they found oak platforms “at exact intervals of ten feet” (O'Connor 1978, 10), along with layers of clay, charcoal, and a fibrous material identified as coconut husks. Then, at ninety feet (or eighty feet, according to one alleged participant) they supposedly found a flat stone bearing an indecipherable inscription (see figure 1). Soon after, probing with a crowbar, they struck something hard-possibly a wooden chest!-but discontinued for the evening. Alas, the next morning the shaft was found flooded with sixty feet of water. Attempting to bail out the pit with buckets, they found the water level remained the same, and they were forced to discontinue the search. The following year, the men attempted to bypass the water by means of a parallel shaft from which they hoped to tunnel to the supposed treasure. But this shaft suffered the same fate, and the Onslow Company's expedition ended (O'Connor 1978, 9-16; Crooker 1993, 14; Harris 1958, 12-22).

Again the supposed cache lay dormant until in 1849 another group, the Truro Company, reexcavated the original shaft. Encountering water, the workers then set up a platform in the pit and used a hand-operated auger to drill and remove cores of material. They found clay, bits of wood, and three links of gold chain-supposed evidence of buried treasure. The Truro Company sank additional nearby shafts, but these, too, were inundated with water, and work ceased in the fall of 1850. Other operations continued from 1858 to 1862, during which time a workman was scalded to death by a ruptured boiler (O'Connor 1988, 17-31).

The Oak Island Association followed and attempted to intersect the “tunnel” that presumably fed water to the pit. When that 120-foot shaft missed, another was sunk and, reportedly, a three-by-four-foot tunnel was extended about eighteen feet to the “Money Pit” (as it was then known). However, water began coming in again. A massive bailing operation was then set up when suddenly there was a loud crash as the Money Pit collapsed. It was later theorized that the imagined chests had fallen into a deep void and that the pit may have been booby-trapped to protect the treasure (O'Connor 1988, 29). The Association's work was followed in 1866 by the Oak Island Eldorado Company but without significant results (Harris 1958, 203).

Decades elapsed and in 1897 the Oak Island Treasure Company (incorporated four years earlier) apparently located the long-sought “pirate tunnel” that led from Smith's Cove to the Money Pit. They drilled and dynamited to close off the tunnel. Subsequent borings were highlighted by the discovery of a fragment of parchment upon which was penned portions of two letters (possibly “ri"). They also found traces of a chalk-like stone or “cement" (Harris 1958, 91-98). In this same year Oak Island's second tragedy struck when a worker was being hoisted from one of the pits and the rope slipped from its pulley, plunging him to his death.

After that company ran out of funds, most of the moveable assets were sold at a sheriff's sale in 1900. The new century brought continued searches, with the digging of innumerable drill holes, shafts, and tunnels-so many that “The entire Money Pit area has been topographically demolished, changing completely its original appearance and rendering old maps and charts useless” (Crooker 1978, 190). In 1965 there came yet another tragedy when four men died in a shaft after being overcome either by swamp gas or engine fumes (O'Connor 1988, 143-145).

In 1966 a Florida building contractor named Dan Blankenship teamed up with MontrŽal businessman David Tobias to continue the quest. The partners began an extensive drilling operation, sinking some sixty bore-holes the following year alone, and, in 1968, enlisted a number of investors in what they named Triton Alliance. Unfortunately, mechanical problems, land disputes, the Stock Market crash of 1987, and other troubles, including the eventual falling out of the two partners, stopped their projected $10 million “big dig” (Randle 1995). Once open to tourists, the site sank into neglect.

Over the years the fabled treasure has been the target of dowsers, automatic writers, clairvoyants, channelers, tarot-card readers, dream interpreters, psychic archaeologists, and assorted other visionaries and soothsayers, as well as crank inventors of devices like a “Mineral Wave Ray” and an airplane-borne “treasure smelling” machine-not one having been successful (Preston 1988, 62; O'Connor 1988, 121-136; Finnan 1997, 166-170).

An Investigative Approach

But is there a treasure at the bottom of the “Money Pit"? My research into the mystery of Oak Island dates back many years, and I opened a file on the case in 1982. However, except for periodic updates, I put it on hold, largely because the solution seemed to lie in the same direction as those of some other mysteries (Nickell 1980; 1982a; 1982b). However, when asked to address a forensic conference in nearby New Brunswick, I resolved to place Oak Island on my itinerary (Nickell 2000).

In planning my trip I attempted to contact Triton's David Tobias, who did not, however, return my call, but I did reach Jim Harvey at the Oak Island Inn and Marina on the nearby mainland. Harvey, a retired Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer and licensed private investigator, is in charge of security for Oak Island, and he was adamant that it is no longer open to visitors. Making not-so-veiled references to the legendary temper of Dan Blankenship, the other Triton partner who still lives on the island, Harvey suggested it would not be safe for me to trespass on the island, although he offered for hire his cabin cruiser for a guided circumnavigation.

Harvey may have had in mind an incident of many years ago, involving an altercation between Blankenship and another island resident, Frederick Nolan. According to one source: “One day Blankenship had approached with a rifle in hand and an ugly situation had begun to develop. Eventually the police were called in to calm everybody down and confiscate the gun” (Finnan 1997, 93).

So it was with some trepidation that-on the afternoon of July 1, 1991, after arriving at the village of Western Shore and checking in at the Oak Island Inn-I drove to the causeway leading to Oak Island. This land bridge connecting the island to the mainland was constructed in 1965 so that a great excavating machine could be transported to the “treasure” area. Today it is chained off and marked “Private/No Hunting or Trespassing/Danger.”

Figure 2. Offshore view of Oak Island showing site of Borehole 10X. The “Money Pit” lies just beyond.

A local fisherman responded to my proposal to walk over and talk to Mr. Blankenship, “He won't shoot you, but he will probably turn you back.” In fact, although Blankenship was at first stand-offish, having read a Canadian Press article about the “professional skeptic” who was heading to Oak Island (see Nickell 2000), I soon mollified him, and he graciously invited me to his home. I was there until nearly 11 p.m., being shown artifacts, photos, papers, and a video made by a camera lowered into a borehole-the fruits of almost thirty-five years of treasure hunting that had earned Blankenship the title of “Oak Island's most obsessive searcher" (O'Connor 1988, 145). The video reveals the interior of a “tunnel," graced with an apparent upright timber and what some imagine to be “chests,” a “scoop,” and other supposed artifacts. Blankenship (1999) told me he had located the site of the borehole by dowsing. The next day Jim Harvey took me on our prearranged boat trip, permitting me to view the remainder of the island (see figure 2).

The more I investigated the Oak Island enigma, the more skeptical I became. Others had preceded me in supplying what I came to regard as the two main pieces of the puzzle, although apparently no one had successfully fitted the pieces together. One concerned the nature of the “money pit” itself, the other the source of certain elements in the treasure saga, such as the reputed cryptogram-bearing stone.

Man-made or Natural?

Doubts begin with the reported discovery in 1795 of the treasure shaft itself. While some accounts say that the trio of youths spied an old ship's pulley hanging from a branch over a depression in the ground (Harris 1958, 6-8), that is “likely an apocryphal detail added to the story later” and based on the assumption that some sort of lowering device would have been necessary in depositing the treasure (O'Connor 1988, 4). Nevertheless some authors are remarkably specific about the features, one noting that the “old tackle block” was attached to “a large forked branch” of an oak “by means of a treenail connecting the fork in a small triangle" (Crooker 1978, 17). Another account (cited in Finnan 1997, 28) further claims there were “strange markings” carved on the tree. On the other hand, perhaps realizing that pirates or other treasure hoarders would have been unlikely to betray their secret work by leaving such an obvious indicator in place, some versions of the tale agree that the limb “had been sawed off” but that “the stump showed evidence of ropes and tackle” (Randle 1995, 75).

Similarly, the notion that there was a log platform at each ten-foot interval of the pit for a total of nine or eleven platforms, is only supported by later accounts, and those appear to have been derived by picking and choosing from earlier ones so as to create a composite version of the layers. For example the account in the Colonist (1864) mentions that the original treasure hunters found only flagstones at two feet ("evidently not formed there by nature") and “a tier of oak logs” located “ten feet lower down” (i.e., at twelve feet). They continued some “fifteen feet farther down,” whereupon-with no mention of anything further of note-they decided to stop until they could obtain assistance. James McNutt, who was a member of a group of treasure hunters working on Oak Island in 1863, described a different arrangement of layers (Crooker 1978, 24).

In 1911 an engineer, Captain Henry L. Bowdoin, who had done extensive borings on the island, concluded that the treasure was imaginary. He questioned the authenticity of various alleged findings (such as the cipher stone and piece of gold chain), and attributed the rest to natural phenomena (Bowdoin 1911). Subsequent skeptics have proposed that the legendary Money Pit was nothing more than a sinkhole caused by the ground settling over a void in the underlying rock (Atlantic 1965). The strata beneath Oak Island are basically limestone and anhydrite (Crooker 1978, 85; Blankenship 1999), which are associated with the formation of solution caverns and salt domes (Cavern 1960; Salt Dome 1960). The surface above caverns, as well as over faults and fissures, may be characterized by sinkholes.

Indeed, a sinkhole actually appeared on Oak Island in 1878. A woman named Sophia Sellers was plowing when the earth suddenly sank beneath her oxen. Ever afterward known as the “Cave-in Pit,” it was located just over a hundred yards east of the Money Pit and directly above the “flood tunnel” (O'Connor 1988, 51).

Geologist E. Rudolph Faribault found “numerous” sinkholes on the mainland opposite Oak Island, and in a geological report of 1911 concluded there was “strong evidence” to indicate that the purported artificial structures on the island were “really but natural sink holes and cavities.” Further evidence of caverns in the area came in 1975 when a sewage-disposal system was being established on the mainland. Approximately 3,000 feet north of the island, workmen excavating with heavy machinery broke through a rock layer and discovered a 52-foot-deep cavern below (Crooker 1993, 144). Fred Nolan insists that, earlier, in 1969, while drilling on Oak Island, Triton broke into a cavern near the fabled treasure shaft at a depth of 165 feet. “Blankenship and Tobias figured that the cavern was man-made,” said Nolan, “but it isn't, as far as I'm concerned” (Crooker 1993, 165). And Mark Finnan (1997, 111), writing of “the unique geological nature of Oak Island,” states as a fact that “naturally formed underground caverns are present in the island's bedrock.” These would account for the flood “booby-traps” that were supposedly placed to guard the “treasure” (Preston 1988, 63).

Today, of course, after two centuries of excavation, the island's east end is “honey combed with shafts, tunnels and drill holes running in every imaginable direction” (Crooker 1978, 190), complicating the subterranean picture and making it difficult to determine the nature of the original pit. In suggesting that it was a sinkhole, caused by the slumping of debris in a fault, one writer noted that “this filling would be softer than the surrounding ground, and give the impression that it had been dug up before" (Atlantic 1965). Fallen trees could have sunk into the pit with its collapse, or “blowdowns” could periodically have washed into the depression (Preston 1988, 63), later giving the appearance of “platforms” of rotten logs.

Just such a pit was in fact discovered in 1949 on the shore of Mahone Bay, about five miles to the south of Oak Island, when workmen were digging a well. The particular site was chosen because the earth was rather soft there. Reports O'Connor (1988, 172-173): “At about two feet down a layer of fieldstone was struck. Then logs of spruce and oak were unearthed at irregular intervals, and some of the wood was charred. The immediate suspicion was that another Money Pit had been found.”

The treasure seekers and mystery mongers are quick, however, to dismiss any thoughts that the “shaft” and “tunnels” could be nothing more than a sinkhole and natural channels. Why, the early accounts would then have to be “either gross exaggerations or outright lies,” says one writer (O'Connor 1988, 173). For example, what about the reported “pick marks found in the walls of the pit" (O'Connor 1988, 173)? We have already seen-with the oak-limb-and-pulley detail-just how undependable are such story elements. Then what about the artifacts (such as the fragment of parchment) or the coconut fiber (often carried on ships as dunnage, used to protect cargo) found at various depths? Again, the sinkhole theory would explain how such items “worked their way into deep caverns under the island” (Preston 1988, 63).

Secrets Revealed

By the early 1980s I had become aware of parallels between Oak Island's Money Pit and the arcana of the Freemasons. Theirs is not, they insist, a “secret society” but a “society with secrets." Carried to North America in the eighteenth century, Masonry has been defined as “a peculiar system of morality veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols” (Masonic Bible 1964, 26). One of the essential elements of any true Masonic group is “a legend or allegory relating to the building of King Solomon's Temple" ("Freemasonry” 1978). And an allegory of the Secret Vault, based on Solomon's fabled depository of certain great secrets, is elaborated in the seventh or Royal Arch degree. Among the ruins of the temple, three sojourners discover the subterranean chamber wherein are found three trying-squares and a chest, identified as the Ark of the Covenant (Masonic 1964, 12, 37, 63; Lester 1977, 150; Duncan 1972).

No doubt many readers have encountered Secret Vault symbolism-which pertains to lost secrets, buried treasure, and the grave (Macoy 1908, 445; Revised 1975, 64 n.22)-without recognizing it as such. For example, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, a Freemason, not only employed Masonic allusions in several of his Sherlock Holmes stories (Bunson 1994, 84) but penned three that evoke Masonry's hidden vault itself. For instance, Holmes uncovers dark secrets in “The Adventure of Shoscombe Old Place.” Beneath an old chapel on the Shoscombe property, accessed by stumbling through “loose masonry” (an obvious pun) and proceeding down a steep stairway, Holmes finds himself in a crypt with an “arched . . . roof" (evoking the Royal Arch degree of Masonry). Accompanied by his client-a “Mr. Mason"!-Holmes finds the key to a series of strange mysteries. Similarly allusive Holmes stories are “The Red-Headed League” (featuring a client who sports a Masonic breastpin), and the suggestively titled “The Musgrave Ritual.”

In addition to the Sherlockian Secret Vault allegories there are several examples of the genre that many people have taken at face value, believing them true accounts. One, for example, is the tale of Swift's Lost Silver Mine of eastern Kentucky. In his alleged journal, one “Jonathan Swift” explored the region prior to Daniel Boone, marking a tree with “the symbols of a compasses, trowel and square"-Masonic emblems-and discovering and mining silver (which geologists doubt exists in the region). Leaving to seek backers, Swift says he stored the treasure in a cave and “walled it up with masonry form.” Later he became blind and unable to find his fabled treasure (although still capable of writing in his journal!). This evokes Masonic ritual wherein a candidate must enter the lodge in complete blindness (i.e. blindfolded) to begin his quest for enlightenment (Nickell 1980).

Another such lost-treasure story is found in the purported Beale Papers which tell a tale of adventure, unsolved ciphers, and fabulous treasure. This was “deposited” in a stone-lined “vault" (using language from the Select Masters' degree) in Virginia. The papers were published by a Freemason (Nickell 1982b).

Then there is the “restless coffins” enigma of the Chase Vault of Barbados. According to proliferating but historically dubious accounts, each time the vault was opened, between 1812 and 1820, the coffins were discovered in a state of confusion. After they were reordered the vault was closed by “masons.” Yet the coffins would again be found in disarray. At least two of the men involved were high-ranking Freemasons. In 1943 another restless-coffins case occurred on the island, this time specifically involving a party of Freemasons and the vault being that of the founder of Freemasonry in Barbados! (Nickell 1982a)

It now appears that another such tale is the legend of Oak Island, where again we find unmistakable evidence of Masonic involvement. There are, of course, the parallels between the Money Pit story and the Masonic Secret Vault allegory. The “strange markings” reportedly carved on the oak adjacent to the Pit suggest Masons' Marks, inscribed signs by which Masons are distinguished (Waite 1970, xx; Hunter 1996, 58). The three alleged discoverers of the Pit would seem to represent the Three Worthy Sojourners (with Daniel McInnis representing the Principal Sojourner), who discover the Secret Vault in the Royal Arch degree (Duncan 1972, 261). In that ritual the candidate is lowered on a rope through a succession of trap doors, not unlike the workmen who were on occasion hauled up and down the (allegedly platform-intersected) Oak Island shaft. The tools used by the latter-notably spades, pickaxes, and crowbar (O'Connor 1988, 2; Harris 1958, 15)-represent the three Working Tools of the Royal Arch Mason (Duncan 1972, 241). Indeed, when in 1803 workers probed the bottom of the Pit with a crowbar and struck what they thought was a treasure chest, their actions recall the Royal Arch degree in which the Secret Vault is located by a sounding blow from a crowbar (Duncan 1972, 263). The parallels go on and on. For example, the soft stone, charcoal, and clay found in the Pit (Crooker 1978, 24, 49) are consistent with the Chalk, Charcoal and Clay cited in the Masonic degree of Entered Apprentice as symbolizing the virtues of “freedom, fervency and zeal” (Lester 1977, 60; Hunter 1996, 37).

Then there are the artifacts. Of course many of these-like the old branding iron found in the swamp (Crooker 1993, 175, 176)-are probably nothing more than relics of the early settlers. Some are actually suspicious, like the links of gold chain found in the Pit in 1849. One account holds that they were planted by workers to inspire continued operations (O'Connor 1988, 177-178).

Other artifacts are more suggestive, like the cipher stone (again see figure 1) which disappeared about 1919. Its text has allegedly been preserved, albeit in various forms and decipherments (Rosenbaum 1973, 83). For instance zoologist-turned-epigrapher Barry Fell thought the inscription was ancient Coptic, its message urging people to remember God lest they perish (Finnan 1997, 148-149). In fact, the text as we have it has been correctly deciphered (and redeciphered by several investigators, me included). Written in what is known as a simple-substitution cipher, it reads, “Forty Feet Below Two Million Pounds Are Buried" (Crooker 1993, 23). Most Oak Island researchers consider the text a hoax (O'Connor 1988, 14), but as Crooker (1993, 24) observes, an inscribed stone did exist, “having been mentioned in all the early accounts of the Onslow company's expedition.” Significantly, a cipher message (with key), found in the Secret Vault, is a central aspect of Freemasonry's Royal Arch degree (Duncan 1972, 248-249).

Other artifacts (Finnan 1997, 67, 80, 83) that appear to have ritualistic significance are the stone triangle and great “Christian Cross” as well as “a handworked heart-shaped stone"-Masonic symbols all. Crooker (1993, 179) notes that “a large amount of time and labor” were spent in laying out the cross, but to what end? Could it have been part of a Masonic ritual?

An “old metal set-square” found at Smith's Cove may simply be an innocent artifact, but we recall that three small squares were among the items found in the Secret Vault (Duncan 1972, 243). Indeed, the square is one of the major symbols of Freemasonry which, united with a pair of compasses, comprises the universal Masonic emblem.

Explicitly Masonic, I believe, are certain inscribed stones on the island. These include one discovered at Joudrey's Cove by Gilbert Hedden in 1936. It features a cross flanked by the letter H, said to be a modification of the Hebraic letter for Jehovah, and a prime Masonic symbol known as a Point Within a Circle, representing mankind within the compass of God's creation (Morris n.d., 47; Finnan 1997, 66, 151). Another clearly Masonic stone is a granite boulder found near the Cave-in Pit in 1967. Overturned by a bulldozer it bore on its underside the letter “G” in a rectangle (what Masons term an oblong square). G denotes the Grand Geometer of the Universe-God, the central focus of Masonic teachings-and is “the most public and familiar of all symbols in Freemasonry," observes Mark Finnan (1997, 152). He continues: “The presence of this symbol on Oak Island and its location in the east, seen as the source of light in Masonic teachings, is further indication that individuals with a fundamental knowledge of Freemasonry were likely involved.”

Indeed, the search for the Oak Island treasure “vault” has been carried out largely by prominent Nova Scotia Freemasons. I had an intimation of this years ago, but it fell to others, especially Finnan who gained access to Masonic records, to provide the evidence. Freemasonry had come to Nova Scotia in 1738 and, concludes Finnan (1997, 145), “it is almost a certainty that organizers of the first coordinated dig . . . were Masonicly associated.” Moreover, he states: “Successive treasure hunts throughout the past two hundred years often involved men who were prominent members of Masonic lodges. Some had passed through the higher levels of initiation, and a few even held the highest office possible within the Fraternity.”

They include A. O. Creighton, the Oak Island Association treasurer who helped remove the cipher-inscribed stone from the island about 1865, and Frederick Blair, whose family was involved in the quest as far back as 1863. Blair, who formed the Oak Island Treasure Company in 1893, was a “prominent member” of the lodge in Amherst, Nova Scotia. Treasure hunter William Chappell was another active Mason, and his son Mel served as Provincial Grand Master for Nova Scotia from 1944 to 1946 (Finnan 1997, 145-146). Furthermore, discovered Finnan (1997, 146):

The independently wealthy Gilbert Hedden of Chatham, New Jersey, who carried out the treasure search from 1934 to 1938, and Professor Edwin Hamilton, who succeeded him and operated on the island for the next six years, were also Freemasons. Hamilton had at one time held the office of Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts. Hedden even made it his business to inform Mason King George VI of England about developments on Oak Island in 1939, and Hamilton corresponded with President [Franklin D.] Roosevelt, another famous Freemason directly associated with the mystery.

(Roosevelt actually participated in the work on Oak Island during the summer and fall of 1909.) Other Masonic notables involved in Oak Island were polar explorer Richard E. Byrd and actor John Wayne (Sora 1999, 12; Hamill and Gilbert 1998).

Significantly, Reginald Harris, who wrote the first comprehensive book on Oak Island at the behest of Frederick Blair, was an attorney for Blair and Hedden. Himself a thirty-third-degree Mason, Harris was provincial Grand Master from 1932 to 1935. Among his extensive papers were notes on Oak Island, scribbled on the backs of Masonic documents and sheets of Masonic letterhead. The papers show that at least one Oak Island business meeting was held in the Masonic Hall in Halifax, where Harris had an office as secretary of the Grand Lodge (O'Connor 1988, 93; Harris 1958, vii; Finnan 1997, 143; Rosenbaum 1973; 154).

One investigator, Ron Rosenbaum (1973, 154), discovered that among Harris's papers were “fragments of a Masonic pageant” that were apparently “designed to accompany the rite of initiation into the thirty-second degree of the Masonic Craft.” The allegory is set in 1535 at the Abbey of Glastonsbury, where the Prime Minister is attempting to confiscate the order's fabulous treasures. But one item, the chalice used at the Last Supper-the Holy Grail itself-is missing, and secret Masons are suspected of having hidden it for safekeeping. The allegory breaks off with them being led to the Tower for torture.

Given this draft allegory by Harris, it may not be a coincidence that some recent writers attempt to link the Holy Grail to Oak Island. They speculate that the fabled chalice is among the lost treasures of the Knights Templar, precursors of the Freemasons (Sora 1999, 180, 247-251).

In any event, the evidence indicates a strong Masonic connection to the Oak Island enigma. Others have noted this link but unfortunately also believed in an actual treasure of some sort concealed in a man-made shaft or tunnel (Crooker 1993; Finnan 1997; Sora 1999; Rosenbaum 1973). Only by understanding both pieces of the puzzle and fitting them together correctly can the Oak Island mystery finally be solved.

In summary, therefore, I suggest first that the “Money Pit” and “pirate tunnels” are nothing of the sort but are instead natural formations. Secondly, I suggest that much of the Oak Island saga-certain reported actions and alleged discoveries-can best be understood in light of Freemasonry's Secret Vault allegory. Although it is difficult to know at this juncture whether the Masonic elements were opportunistically added to an existing treasure quest or whether the entire affair was a Masonic creation from the outset, I believe the mystery has been solved. The solution is perhaps an unusual one but no more so than the saga of Oak Island itself.

References

1. Atlantic Advocate. 1965. Article in October issue, cited in Crooker 1978, 85-86.
2. Blankenship, Dan. 1999. Author interview, July 1.
3. Bowdoin, H. L. 1911. Solving the mystery of Oak Island. Collier's Magazine, August 18. Cited and discussed in Harris 1958, 110-120; O'Connor 1988, 63-66.
4. Bunson, Matthew E. 1994. Encyclopedia Sherlockiana. New York: Barnes & Noble.
5. Creighton, Helen. 1957. Bluenose Ghosts. Reprinted Halifax, N.S.: Nimbus, 1994, 42-59, 118-120.
6. Crooker, William S. 1978. The Oak Island Quest. Hantsport, N.S.: Lancelot Press.
7. --. 1993. Oak Island Gold. Halifax, N.S.: Nimbus.
8. Duncan, Malcolm C. 1972. Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Monitor. Chicago: Ezra A. Cook, 217-265.
9. Faribault, E. Rudolph. 1911. Summary Report of Geological Survey Branch of the Department of Mines. Quoted in Furneaux 1972, 110.
10. Finnan, Mark. 1997. Oak Island Secrets, rev. ed. Halifax, N.S.: Formac.
11. “Freemasonry.” 1978. Collier's Encyclopedia.
12. Furneaux, Rupert. 1972. The Money Pit Mystery. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co.
13. Hamill, John, and Robert Gilbert. 1998. Freemasonry. North Dighton, Mass.: J. G. Press, 228, 241, 245.
14. Harris, R. V. The Oak Island Mystery. Toronto: Ryerson.
15. Hunter, C. Bruce. 1996. Masonic Dictionary, 3rd ed. Richmond, Va.: Macoy.
16. Lester, Ralph P. ed. 1977. Look to the East! rev. ed. Chicago: Ezra A. Cook.
17. Macoy, Robert. 1908. Illustrated History and Cyclopedia of Freemasonry. New York: Macoy.
18. Masonic Heirloom Edition Holy Bible. 1964. Wichita, Kansas: Heirloom Bible Publishers.
19. Morris, W. J. Pocket Lexicon of Freemasonry. Chicago: Ezra A. Cook, n.d.
20. Nickell, Joe. 1980. Uncovered-The fabulous silver mines of Swift and Filson, Filson Club History Quarterly 54 (October): 325-3445.
21. --1982a. Barbados' restless coffins laid to rest. Fate, Part I, 35.4 (April): 50-56; Part II, 35.5 (May): 79-86.
22. --. 1982b. DISCOVERED: The secret of Beale's treasure, Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 90, no. 3 (July): 310-324.
23. --. 2000. Canada's mysterious maritimes. Skeptical Inquirer 24(1), Jan./Feb.: 15-19.
24. O'Connor, D'Arcy. 1988. The Big Dig. New York: Ballantine.
25. Preston, Douglas. 1988. Death trap defies treasure seekers for two centuries. The Smithsonian. June. 53-6

Read Rupert Sheldrake's response

According to parapsychologists, a commonly reported form of distant mental influence on human beings is “the feeling of being stared at,” which is closely related, historically, to the notion of the “evil eye.” Considerable folklore endorses the idea that gazing at someone carries special powers, favors, or influence. Folklore aside, contemporary opinion polls confirm that the feeling of being stared at is known in all cultures (Radin 1997).

A typical occurrence is that of a woman eating alone at a diner who suddenly becomes agitated. Then the hair on the back of her neck raises and she gets the feeling that someone is watching her-someone behind her. She turns and, sure enough, a young woman is staring directly at her. This type of situation is reported over and over and raises the question: Can a starer's intense focus affect the human nervous system?

According to some parapsychologists it not only can but does, and they insist that it has been confirmed in several laboratory studies, (e.g., Braud, Shafer, and Andrews 1993a; Braud, Shafer, and Andrews 1993b; Schlitz and LaBerge 1994 and 1997; and Peterson 1978). Wiseman, on the other hand, in a series of studies (Wiseman and Smith 1994; Wiseman, Smith, Freedman, Wasserman, and Hurst 1995) as well as a study carried out with Schlitz (Wiseman and Schlitz 1997) found no evidence of psychic functioning. In fact, psi (extrasensory perception) proponents are the only ones who seem to obtain evidence for psi while skeptics do not and, as Wiseman notes (Wiseman and Schlitz 1997), this fact may provide strong support for “the experimenter effect” (Palmer 1989), i.e., the experimenter somehow controls the outcome of the study. Such an effect, however, would be as mysterious-if not more so-than the alleged “staring effect” itself. In another context Wiseman (1999) suggests that the positive results might well represent a “file drawer” effect, i.e., people who failed to obtain impressive positive results simply filed the study away and didn't bother to report it. Nevertheless, Blackmore, who is a severe critic of parapsychology in general (Blackmore 1996), has stated that most contemporary parapsychologists believe this phenomena to be true and offer it as valid proof of psi.

Unquestionably the most vocal supporter of this claim is the British biologist Rupert Sheldrake who, in chapter four of his book Seven Experiments That Could Change the World: A Do-It-Yourself Guide To Revolutionary Science (Riverhead Books, New York, 1995), argues that not only do our minds “extend beyond the body” but also suggests, “If our minds reach out and 'touch' what we are looking at then we may affect what we look at just by looking at it. If we look at another person, for example, we may affect him or her by doing so” (107). Sheldrake, moreover, insists that the sense of being stared at is not only very “well known” but in informal surveys in both Europe and America, “I have found that about 80 percent of the people I have asked claimed to have experienced it themselves.” Sheldrake also notes it is accepted as a premise in countless works of fiction and it plays an important part in the relationship of people with animals and their pets.

It is, therefore, of considerable importance and significance to determine if such “mental influence,” independent of other possible material means of human-to-human communication, does exist.

Demonstration One

Methods and Procedures

Rather than carrying out a rigidly controlled laboratory experiment, the author decided to test this claim under ordinary, real-life conditions in the form of a demonstration. The author was convinced at the outset that people who are cognitively focused (i.e., mentally engrossed in an activity), will never, under normal circumstances, attend to such a weak, nonintrusive, nonmaterial, competing sensation as that of “being stared at.” Showing that people are not aware they're being stared at is a demonstration of “common sense,” not an experiment with an unpredictable outcome. To carry out this demonstration the author, on several occasions over a two-month period, took up a physical position no closer than five feet and no farther away than twenty feet behind forty individuals-twenty-one women and nineteen men (of the forty, twenty-two were University of Kentucky students and eighteen were Lexington, Kentucky, citizens)-and for a period of time between five and fifteen minutes stared intently at the back of each individual's head. Both the viewing distance and the time spent staring varied because of the situational requirements for each subject and the conditions prevailing at the time of the observations. The mean age of those who were stared at was 29.5 years.

Considerable care was taken with each subject to ensure that the starer was not noticed by the person being stared at when the starer took up his physical position behind the subject. Care was also taken to ensure that the subject was not physically aware of the starer's presence during the observation period. Further care was taken to ensure that no third party was aware of the author's staring behavior and then communicated this to the person being stared at during the staring period. The author made sure his staring behavior went undetected not only by the subject but by other people in the environment. No communication between the subject and any other “watchers” took place during the staring sessions. When the subjects completed the activities in which they were engaged, they were approached and questioned. All subjects were seated during the time they were observed. No subject was ever interrupted by the experimenter during the staring period, and the staring period was continued until the subject clearly shifted his or her attention to another task. For example, those subjects stared at while they were eating or drinking were not approached and questioned until they had left their table and had moved toward the cashier or exit.

Seven of the subjects were stared at while they were eating or drinking. Nine subjects were observed while they were reading or studying at the University library or one of the Lexington city libraries. Eight subjects were observed while they were watching TV and the remaining fourteen were observed while they were working at a computer video terminal. Results from two other subjects were discarded.

During each of the forty observation periods the experimenter tried to maintain a steady and unrelenting gaze at the subject's back and head and to ensure that the experimenter's presence and position went undetected during the period of observation.

Following each observation period the experimenter approached the subject, introduced himself, handed the subject his business card, explained the purpose of the investigation and asked them to check and sign a prepared response sheet (figure 1). This response sheet asked them to indicate whether or not they were aware of being stared at and to give their permission to use their results. The mean time of all the subjects being stared at was 8.6 minutes (standard deviation 2.7) and the mean distance behind the subjects was approximately twelve feet.

Figure 1. 'Sense of being stared at' experiment response sheet.

Results

For the thirty-five subjects who reported that they were unaware of being stared at it is important to stress the fact that each of these subjects was totally involved and attentive to the activity they were engaged and focused on. They were seldom if ever distracted by surrounding activities during the period of observation.

Demonstration Two

Methods And Procedures

To test this hypothesis fifty University of Kentucky students, thirty-six women and fourteen men from the Freshman Introduction To Psychology Course, served as volunteer subjects. Each of the fifty volunteers served both as an experimenter, i.e., starer; and as a subject, i.e., the person being stared at.

Figure 2. View of subject at table with digital clock. This is what the experimenter saw when staring at the subjects through the one-way mirror.

Two adjoining, sound-proofed rooms connected by a one-way vision window in the psychology building at the University of Kentucky were used for the observations. Working in pairs, the subject being stared at was seated at a table in the observation room with his or her back to the one-way mirror. A digital clock with large hour and minute numbers was placed at one end of the table with the subjects at the other end. The clock was located so that it could be seen from the observation side, i.e., the other room, by the two observers doing the staring, (the author experimenter and the student experimenter) as well as by the person being stared at (figure 2).

On the observer side of the window the two doing the staring were seated at a table in a position where the clock was clearly seen but the view of the subject was blocked by a small cloth partition. To stare at the subjects both the experimenter and the student had to stand up and look over this partition and stare at the back of the subject at the required time for the full one-minute interval (figures 2 and 3).

Figure 3. This is the view of the digital clock that the experimenters saw through the one-way mirror during those time intervals in which the subjects were not being stared at.

Before each twenty-minute staring session the subject was furnished with a time sheet on which they filled in their name, date, and time of the experimental staring session. Subjects were told to write “yes” on the minute-by-minute time line whenever they believed someone was staring at them. Next, they entered the time shown on the digital clock after their “yeses.” The subjects also marked his or her degree of certainty that they were being observed in the appropriate column on the right hand side of the time sheet. They were also informed that they could check only five “yeses” in the first column-since no one would be stared at more than five times, i.e., more than five minutes during the twenty-minute session. If, however, the subject filled in five lines before the twenty minutes were exhausted but felt that during the last few minutes of the session they were more certain they were being stared at, they were allowed to cross out earlier “yeses” and fill in the later minutes with a “yes” of a higher degree of certainty (figure 4).

Figure 4. Sample of subject's time sheet used
to guess times they were being stared at.

On the observer side of the mirror the experimenter and the student experimenter used an identical twenty-minute Experimenter Time Sheet in which the five individual minute observation periods were pre-selected and marked on the experimenter's time sheets. The five one-minute staring periods for each of the fifty student subjects were randomized by putting fifteen white poker chips and five red poker chips in an opaque bowl. After shaking the bowl, for each of the fifty Experimenter Time Sheets the chips were drawn one at a time, with the red chips used to designate the minutes for staring. The only restriction imposed on this method of randomization for the minute staring sessions was that in the event five red chips were drawn successively this draw was rejected and and the randomizing procedure was started afresh.¹ All subjects were informed of these randomizing procedures and all questions regarding exactly what they were supposed to do and the precise requirements of their task were answered before each twenty-minute period began (figure 5).

Figure 5. Sample of time sheet used by the experimenters to determine exactly when subject would be stared at. “X” indicates the five specific one-minute periods during which this particular subject was stared at.

Results

Since the four subjects who exceeded chance by correctly guessing three out of the five one-minute periods in which they were being stared at might well be “psi stars” or “psychically gifted,” each of these four subjects was retested under the same experimental conditions three separate times. None of the four accurately identified more than one one-minute period in which they were being stared at. The mean retest score for all three retest sessions for the four “stars” was .025 for each session-less than chance. The mean of their original score plus the three retest scores was used in the distribution.

Discussions of the Results of Both Studies

These results are not surprising when it is remembered that most industrial and business security systems are based on the premise that the cashiers, dealers, croupiers, et. al., are not aware of exactly when they are under surveillance, i.e., being stared at by security personnel from one-way mirrors or monitoring cameras. The TV series Caught On Tape (Real Life Productions) is also based on the fact that people frequently commit crimes when they assume no one is looking. CBS's very popular Candid Camera TV show also assumes people are not aware of the fact that others are looking at them.

Why Braud and the other parapsychologists resorted to the use of indirect physiological measures, e.g., electrodermal activity, rather than more direct, above-threshold methods is puzzling. Opportunities for the play of bias, i.e., “the experimenter effect,” are maximized in the notoriously unreliable recording and reporting of these highly sensitive and quixotic subthreshold measures. In fact, in a recent study using electrodermal measures (Wiseman and Schlitz 1997), Wiseman, a skeptic, found no evidence of psi whereas Schlitz, a believer, found positive and significant effects.

Accordingly, a simpler, more direct approach to the study of such alleged effects seemed both more reasonable and more reliable, especially since the claim that people know they're being stared at is an “above threshold” phenomenon.

Sheldrake's contention that such studies as the two reported here cost very little to carry out, can be done by most anyone without special training-including amateurs-and can yet provide good scientific answers to big questions are points well taken. A recent example of what Sheldrake calls “small science” is the work of eleven-year-old Emily Rosa and her study of Therapeutic Touch (Sarner 1998). Because two studies reported here are also good examples of small science, the author strongly recommends that other interested skeptics replicate these studies. The second study does not require connected rooms with a one-way mirror. A cardboard partition with two holes-one allowing the experimenter to see only the digital clock and the second allowing the experimenter to see both the clock and the person being observed-would serve adequately. Both the experimenter and the subjects could carry out such a study in a single room with the subjects at one end and the observer at the other. In the present study when subjects were asked not to turn around or stare at the one-way mirror all of them complied. In the first study, obviously no special equipment of any sort is required.

A note of caution is in order to those who would replicate the first demonstration. As noted earlier, two subjects, once they learned that the experimenter was an investigator of paranormal phenomena, did their best to persuade the experimenter that they were special people with special gifts badly in need of scientific attention. This behavior is not unusual. Many ordinary individuals desire attention and publicity and will do anything to get it. The opportunity to establish themselves as psychically gifted and in possession of paranormal powers and, therefore, worthy of further study is a chance they find difficult to pass up.

Summary and Conclusions

To determine if people can tell when they are being stared at, two demonstrations were completed. In the first, forty individuals were stared at for an average time of 8.6 minutes while they were eating, reading, or watching a computer screen or television. When they finished they were asked if they were aware they were being stared at. Of the forty a total of thirty-five reported they were “totally unaware that anyone was looking at them.” For the other five there is good reason to believe they also were not aware they were being viewed. In the second demonstration fifty students sat at a table in front of a one-way mirror and were observed by two experimenters, one minute at a time, five times during a twenty-minute observation period. The students' task was to try to guess when they were being stared at and report their degree of certainty. None of the fifty were able to correctly guess when they were being stared at. The mean accuracy score for the group was 1.24; the chance score for guessing was 1.25 out of a total of five guesses.

Despite the parapsychologists' contentions, unless replications of these two studies prove otherwise, it is prudent to conclude that people cannot tell when they are being stared at. If experimental purists question either the validity or the reliability of the outcome of these two demonstrations, I suggest they repeat them and see for themselves. If people somehow know they are being stared at-but only at a subthreshold level (which at the moment is unproven and only speculative), this “fact” is of theoretical value only and is far too weak, and unreliable to be of any practical use to modern man.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Dr. Melody Carswell of the University of Kentucky Psychology Department, Dr. William Raynes of the UK Statistics Department, and Mr. Fred Bach of Video Hits, Lexington, Kentucky, for their assistance and support in carrying out these studies.

Note

This is a simple, quick, and legitimate way to randomize such a presentation. Even if the series were biased, subjects would still be expected to detect the stares when they occurred. [Return]

References

• Blackmore, Susan. 1996. In Search of The Light: The Adventures of a Parapsychologist. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books.
• Braud, W., D. Shafer, and S. Andrews. 1993a. Reactions to an unseen gaze. Journal of Parapsychology 57: 373-390.
• ---. 1993b. Further studies of autonomic detection of remote staring: Replications, new control procedures, and personality correlates. Journal of Parapsychology 57: 391-409.
• Palmer, J. 1989. Confronting the experimenter effect. Parts 1 and 2. Parapsychology Review 1-4 and 1-5.
• Peterson, D.M. 1978. Through the looking glass: An investigation of the faculty of extra sensory detection of being stared at. Unpublished Thesis, University of Edinburgh, Scotland.
• Radin, Dean I. 1997. The Conscious Universe: The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena. San Francisco, Calif.: Harper Edge, Harper, 29-30.
• Sarner, Larry. 1998. The Emily Event. Skeptic 6(2), 32-37.
• Schlitz, M.J., and S. LaBerge. 1994. Autonomic detection of remote observation: Two conceptual replications. In Proceedings of Presented Papers 37th Annual Parapsychological Association Convention. Ed. by D.J. Bierman, 352-360. Parapsychological Association, Fairhaven, Mass.
• ---. 1997. Covert observation increases skin conductance in subjects unaware of when they are being observed: A replication. Journal of Parapsychology 61: 185-l96.
• Sheldrake, Rupert. 1995. Seven Experiments That Could Change The World: A Do-It-Yourself Guide To Revolutionary Science. New York, N.Y.: Riverhead Books, Chapter 4.
• Wiseman, R., and M.D. Smith. 1994. A further look at the detection of unseen gaze. Proceedings of Presented Papers 37th Annual Convention. Ed. by D.J. Bierman, 465-478. Parapsychological Association, Fairhaven, Mass.
• Wiseman, R., M.D. Smith, D. Freedman, T. Wasserman, and C. Hurst. 1995. Two further experiments concerning the remote detection of an unseen gaze. Proceedings Of Presented Papers 38th Annual Convention. Ed by D.J. Bierman, 48-492. Parapsychological Association, Fairhaven, Mass.
• Wiseman, R., and M.J. Schlitz. 1997. Experimenter effects and the remote detection of staring. Journal of Parapsychology 61: 197-207.
• Wiseman, R. 1999. Quoted in Robert Matthews, I know you're looking. New Scientist 17 April.