Will She Be Staying In A Hotel With...
News4 mins ago
The Blitz Witch
46 Answers
Did anyone watch this last night? Tony Robinson investigated a psychic called Helen Duncan, and whilst he came to the conclusion that some of her seances were probably 'fixed', he could not explain how, in 1941, she revealed that HMS Hood had sunk - a fact that even the Admiralty was unaware of. Since her claim sunsequently proved to be accurate, MI5 became involved and she was seen as a threat to national security. She was arrested and tried at the Old Bailey under the Witchcraft Act of 1735, and sentenced to a period of imprisonment.
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
rojash, I didn't think you were criticising. I simply offered that information since you said you wondered where the TV programme got it from.
Chakka, yes I did watch last night's programme and I agree - it was absolute nonsense. Nevertheless, whether Tony Robinson is gullible or not, or intelligent or not, there isn't an explanation for how this woman could have known so soon after the event that the ship had been sunk - and it clearly worried the authorities who never came up with a rational explanation either. You're such a sceptic, Chakka, old chap, even if it was proven that there was no way she could have known about it, you'd still insist that there was. Maybe there are more things in heaven and earth........ etc. How can any of us possibly say that we know for sure there aren't?
Chakka, yes I did watch last night's programme and I agree - it was absolute nonsense. Nevertheless, whether Tony Robinson is gullible or not, or intelligent or not, there isn't an explanation for how this woman could have known so soon after the event that the ship had been sunk - and it clearly worried the authorities who never came up with a rational explanation either. You're such a sceptic, Chakka, old chap, even if it was proven that there was no way she could have known about it, you'd still insist that there was. Maybe there are more things in heaven and earth........ etc. How can any of us possibly say that we know for sure there aren't?
naomi, I am certainly a sceptic, as I have explained before, and am proud of it.
You insult me by claiming that if it were proved that there was no way she could have known about I'd "still insist that there was".
On what basis would I so insist? We have no idea how many ways there were by which she could have known about it without knowing every movement she made and every person she was in contact with after the Admiralty knew. How could I insist on one particular way when we just don't know?
As always, it is for those who claim a supernatural explanation to prove it, or at least supply some evidence.
This programme produced none.
A leak from one of the many people in Whitehall, from scuttlebutt from knowledgeable sailors, from interception by radio amateurs, from foreign stations which had picked up the triumphant signals from Bismarck, from ....well, use your own commonsense to add others.
All of these have to be eliminated before we have to face the possibilty of the supernatural. That's what we sceptics insist on when trying to get to the truth.
The programme wasn't anywhere sceptic enough - except, of course, for the intelligent lady.
I don't think I'll watch it tonight. I can't face the thought of Tony Robinson getting all wide-eyed about reincarnation.. I'll record it just for reference in case it becomes a subject for discussion on AB.
You insult me by claiming that if it were proved that there was no way she could have known about I'd "still insist that there was".
On what basis would I so insist? We have no idea how many ways there were by which she could have known about it without knowing every movement she made and every person she was in contact with after the Admiralty knew. How could I insist on one particular way when we just don't know?
As always, it is for those who claim a supernatural explanation to prove it, or at least supply some evidence.
This programme produced none.
A leak from one of the many people in Whitehall, from scuttlebutt from knowledgeable sailors, from interception by radio amateurs, from foreign stations which had picked up the triumphant signals from Bismarck, from ....well, use your own commonsense to add others.
All of these have to be eliminated before we have to face the possibilty of the supernatural. That's what we sceptics insist on when trying to get to the truth.
The programme wasn't anywhere sceptic enough - except, of course, for the intelligent lady.
I don't think I'll watch it tonight. I can't face the thought of Tony Robinson getting all wide-eyed about reincarnation.. I'll record it just for reference in case it becomes a subject for discussion on AB.
Ni Naomi, my mate (the one who suggested you read the Hiram Key) has worked with Tony Robinson and noticed that, like most other media folk he has a talent for
re-wording or context-changing for 'sensational' effect. I have had dealings with the press and they are also very good at it as you know.
I have an elderly neighbour who's father was aboard HMS Barham and apparently she / her mother / someone else had some kind of premonition around the time the ship was lost, I heard the tale years ago and only recall the gist of it now but it was along those lines.
Another story I read some time ago concerned an Officer aboard the R101 Airship. You probably know the story of the problems the vessel had so I won't go into it here. This particular officer had grave misgivings aboard the safety of the airship and predicted he would not return, and the story goes that his distinctive knock was heard on his house door just before the ship crashed in France.
In my own experience, a few years ago I was sitting in my office at work when I was suddenly overwhelmed by a sensation of shock and distress, a few minutes later I had a phone call to say that our driver had just smashed up our new truck and was petrified at the thought of telling our boss in addition to the stress and trauma of the accident.
So it seems to me that these emotions are detectable at a distance, or can be 'transmitted' by those involved.
re-wording or context-changing for 'sensational' effect. I have had dealings with the press and they are also very good at it as you know.
I have an elderly neighbour who's father was aboard HMS Barham and apparently she / her mother / someone else had some kind of premonition around the time the ship was lost, I heard the tale years ago and only recall the gist of it now but it was along those lines.
Another story I read some time ago concerned an Officer aboard the R101 Airship. You probably know the story of the problems the vessel had so I won't go into it here. This particular officer had grave misgivings aboard the safety of the airship and predicted he would not return, and the story goes that his distinctive knock was heard on his house door just before the ship crashed in France.
In my own experience, a few years ago I was sitting in my office at work when I was suddenly overwhelmed by a sensation of shock and distress, a few minutes later I had a phone call to say that our driver had just smashed up our new truck and was petrified at the thought of telling our boss in addition to the stress and trauma of the accident.
So it seems to me that these emotions are detectable at a distance, or can be 'transmitted' by those involved.
Chakka, dear Chakka, if I thought you'd taken anything I said as an insult I would be absolutely mortified. No insult is ever intended, I assure you, and my apologies if you read it as such. It was merely a tongue in cheek comment - and something that, had I been with you when it was said, would have been accompanied by a chuckle and a light elbowing in the ribs. Poke!
I've recorded last night's programme, and will watch it. I hope you do too. If it turns out to be rubbish, as the previous night's was, we won't bother to pursue it. However, remembering our previous discussion on reincarnation, if it turns up some additional questions, it could be interesting. What say you?
Blackthorn, whilst I can't produce the evidence Chakka seeks, and it seems neither can anyone else, I think there are times when we have no alternative but to concede that there is more to life - and to the human mind - than we are aware of. Perhaps we under-estimate our abilities?
I've recorded last night's programme, and will watch it. I hope you do too. If it turns out to be rubbish, as the previous night's was, we won't bother to pursue it. However, remembering our previous discussion on reincarnation, if it turns up some additional questions, it could be interesting. What say you?
Blackthorn, whilst I can't produce the evidence Chakka seeks, and it seems neither can anyone else, I think there are times when we have no alternative but to concede that there is more to life - and to the human mind - than we are aware of. Perhaps we under-estimate our abilities?
I'm happy to accept your last point, I'm just very dubious about people who make a living out of this trade.
Often in life an event can occur and we reverse engineer it to suit our own prejudices (guilty, bus versus boy) this show is similar (same sh1t different shovel).
For example, a man called Percy Hefford was a close friend of James Bissett (later Sir) whilst in Egypt they both bought a picture of the brand new ship Lusitania dreaming that one day they'd serve on her.
They both went their separate ways within the Cunard line but stayed in touch. One day Percy visited James at his mothers house and after everyone had retired to bed they sat up drinking and talking, when, without warning and for no apparent reason the picture of the Lusitania fell from the wall and glass cracked. They both took it as an omen, but of what they did not know.
07/05/1915 Captain Turner ordered Second Officer Hefford to close the watertight doors on the stricken Lusitania, Hefford said to QM Johnston to "sing out" if she lists any further, he was never seen again.
Coincidence or fate?
Or was the warning a piece of divine intervention or even a spectred relative trying to save his life?
Often in life an event can occur and we reverse engineer it to suit our own prejudices (guilty, bus versus boy) this show is similar (same sh1t different shovel).
For example, a man called Percy Hefford was a close friend of James Bissett (later Sir) whilst in Egypt they both bought a picture of the brand new ship Lusitania dreaming that one day they'd serve on her.
They both went their separate ways within the Cunard line but stayed in touch. One day Percy visited James at his mothers house and after everyone had retired to bed they sat up drinking and talking, when, without warning and for no apparent reason the picture of the Lusitania fell from the wall and glass cracked. They both took it as an omen, but of what they did not know.
07/05/1915 Captain Turner ordered Second Officer Hefford to close the watertight doors on the stricken Lusitania, Hefford said to QM Johnston to "sing out" if she lists any further, he was never seen again.
Coincidence or fate?
Or was the warning a piece of divine intervention or even a spectred relative trying to save his life?
For those of you who don`t quite understand cold or hot reading, or how fraudulent mediums work, watch this 6 part interview of Derren Brown by Richard Dawkins.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Xswt8B8-UTM&feat ure=PlayList&p=55A986E56B106611&index=0&playne xt=1
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Xswt8B8-UTM&feat ure=PlayList&p=55A986E56B106611&index=0&playne xt=1
So how can you so quickly dismiss one event as a coincidence but say another is'nt?
It appears plain to me that your intepretation of the Hood incident fits snugly into your own prejudices and notions, and by definition becomes worthy of contempation.
The absences of fact, reason and logic are defered for a conclusion that fits your own belief.
This conclusion however illogical and erratic is just as worthy as mine (bus versuses child) or anybody else notion of a the supernatural, is it not?
It appears plain to me that your intepretation of the Hood incident fits snugly into your own prejudices and notions, and by definition becomes worthy of contempation.
The absences of fact, reason and logic are defered for a conclusion that fits your own belief.
This conclusion however illogical and erratic is just as worthy as mine (bus versuses child) or anybody else notion of a the supernatural, is it not?
naomi, re your first paragraph, no problem. I had a smile on my face too.
Regarding the generality, the fact is that the programme made no attempt to research its subject properly, so intent was it on mooting the supernatural.
As a documentary film-maker myself (who has worked quite a lot with the Royal Navy) I could give you a long list of the matters that I would have researched in great detail, regarding the signals following the sinking in particular.
How many people witnessed the sinking? (Certainly some hundreds.) How did the signals get to Admiralty? (That could easily be traced.) In short, how many military and civilian personnel knew about the sinking in the process of forwarding the signals to Admiralty and then on from there?
What connection might Helen Duncan have had with any of these people? Or was it the simple case of cold reading as described above?
Tony Robinson (or rather, his researchers and writers) neglected all of this. It was shabby work.
As for the idea that there was a delay before the Admiralty knew, I have already found signals ordering the destroyers that were on station to pick up survivors. It is timed at 0637. Hood sank at 0553.
Until all possible rational explanations have been exhausted there is simply no need to assume special powers in a woman who, on every other occasion that she had been investigated, had proved to be a fraud.
Regarding the generality, the fact is that the programme made no attempt to research its subject properly, so intent was it on mooting the supernatural.
As a documentary film-maker myself (who has worked quite a lot with the Royal Navy) I could give you a long list of the matters that I would have researched in great detail, regarding the signals following the sinking in particular.
How many people witnessed the sinking? (Certainly some hundreds.) How did the signals get to Admiralty? (That could easily be traced.) In short, how many military and civilian personnel knew about the sinking in the process of forwarding the signals to Admiralty and then on from there?
What connection might Helen Duncan have had with any of these people? Or was it the simple case of cold reading as described above?
Tony Robinson (or rather, his researchers and writers) neglected all of this. It was shabby work.
As for the idea that there was a delay before the Admiralty knew, I have already found signals ordering the destroyers that were on station to pick up survivors. It is timed at 0637. Hood sank at 0553.
Until all possible rational explanations have been exhausted there is simply no need to assume special powers in a woman who, on every other occasion that she had been investigated, had proved to be a fraud.
Chakka, I'd never heard of this woman until I saw the programme, and had no idea she was a well-known fraud, so assumed that the programme had been thoroughly researched and took the information given at face value. However, having followed this discussion and having since looked at the internet once or twice, I have to say had I been researching the evidence for the programme, I would (also for very good reasons) have conducted it very differently. I therefore concede that you're probably accurate in your conclusions. I can only presume she had an inside informant and was acquiring and passing on information that the admiralty desperately wanted to keep under wraps - and that's why she was imprisoned. Case solved. I'm pleased I posted the question now. Thanks Chakka, you've been a great help.
Lots of love.
Miss Marple. x.
I still think there are more things in heaven and earth though. (I'm going to watch the offering on reincarnation shortly - despite the growing lack of enthusiasm). :o)
Lots of love.
Miss Marple. x.
I still think there are more things in heaven and earth though. (I'm going to watch the offering on reincarnation shortly - despite the growing lack of enthusiasm). :o)
Latest Posts
Crosswords25 mins ago
Transfer Photos Samsung Phone To...
Technology27 mins ago
Are The West In The Grip Of The Woke...
News27 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles30 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.