If you believe in the paranormal, or life after death, you better watch out. The cops might show up at your door, the PSI COPS, members of the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal, or CSICOP. These skeptics spend a lot of time and energy debunking anything scientifically off-beat or extra-sensory in nature. They work tirelessly, trying to enforce the unenforceable law that says no phenomena can exist beyond the notion of a purely physically based reality. Phonetically, their acronym suits them, PSI being the nickname scientists use for extra-sensory phenomena; hence, PSI COPS. And they have their hands full these days, what with all those best-sellers about near-death experiences, angels and lost civilizations.

Crime has really gotten out of control.

Books about the universe having conscious origins, the new consciousness-based physics, has CSICOP chairman Paul Kurtz in a dither too. At a recent skeptics conference in New York city, he stated that post modernists (the new physics movement) deny absolute scientific knowledge is possible, the result being an erosion of the cognitive process, which may undermine democracy [emphasis added]. Sounds awfully serious.

Recognizing the paranormal, according to Kurtz, questions the prevailing scientific world view, and that's just too scary for his PSI COPS to think about. At a CSICOP meeting featuring Harvard's John Mack, a renowned psychiatrist who researches claims of alien abductions, the debate took on an inquisitional tone. To Mack's surprise, a skeptic announced she had infiltrated his pool of abductees, good PSI COP that she was, the idea being that Mack's acceptance of her charade diminished his credibility. Mack took a lot of heat that day, and it was surely embarrassing. But he questioned the PSI COPS vehemence and dogma, reminding them that other cultures have always known about other realities, other beings, other dimensions ... that can cross over into our own world. Doing so, Mack irked the skeptics even more. Paul Kurtz later lamented, if we allow Mack's suggestion, then we have to allow for angels and past lives. Where does it all stop?

Crime in the streets, no doubt.

Reincarnation, astrology, and spirituality have no place in the debunkers world view, likewise homeopathy and Linus Pauling, and the list goes on and on. Even conspiracy theories about the assassination of JFK frazzle a debunker's sensibilities. As champions of Francis Bacon's scientific method, a system of drawing conclusions from observable fact, rather than from assumption, these skeptics present themselves as priests of pure science. But it turns out they practice what they condemn most, a belief system, known as scientific materialism, the doctrine to which Bacon's method devolves when scientists trade free thought and inquiry for the dogma of absolute materialism.

A scientific materialist believes matter is the only truth, that everything in the universe, including consciousness, can be explained in terms of physical laws, no transcendent cause, no purpose, no meaning to life. In short, our thoughts, feelings, inspirations, identity, the universe itself, are merely highly evolved chemical reactions. The soul, of course, does not exist to the scientific materialist, no awareness beyond the brain, nor anything vaguely spiritual in nature, acceptance of which they disparagingly refer to as superstition. This cynicism is extended to any area that challenges the prevailing academic view, including theories of advanced lost civilizations, alternative medicine and the paranormal. The theory advanced by Boston University's Robert Schoch and author John Anthony West, for instance, the Sphinx may be far older than previously thought, as evidenced by water erosion, meets with a hail of criticism, not necessarily on scientific grounds but because the implications challenge the prevailing assumptions about pre-history. From consciousness-based reality to theories about advanced lost civilizations, paradigms that force a reevaluation of our origins, it's all hogwash. All evidence to the contrary, they deem to be fraud or flawed, violating the cardinal rule of Bacon's method by making A Priori assumptions, all the while claiming the highest standard of intellectual purity.

How did Wayne and Garth put it? We are not worthy ... We are not worthy.

To give their movement pizzazz, the PSI COPS enlist the likes of Carl Sagan, ex-magician turned debunker James Randi, comedian Steve Allen and an assortment of academics who share their nihilistic beliefs. Their purpose is to convince the superstitious that belief in anything but nuts-and-bolts materialism is hokum, thereby saving us, and democracy, from our better instincts. Their skepticism is absolute and, of course, unproven, yet advanced as fact by much of the academic and scientific communities. This absolute skepticism is the hidden premise behind every position the debunkers take, never mind nagging problems like, where did all that Big Bang energy come from in the first place?

The problem, says John Beloff, a Scottish psychologist at the University of Edinburgh, lies in their skeptical position'. To his credit, Kurtz published a paper Beloff wrote for CSICOP's journal, the Skeptical Inquirer. In that Beloff is well known in the field of parapsychology, this was an admittedly unusual occurrence for that publication. In his paper, Beloff discusses the skeptical position, revealing that A Priori beliefs exclude the validity of phenomena inconsistent with known, or assumed, physical laws, that means the PSI COPS put the fix in from the start. Beloff summarizes their skeptical position, stating: Parapsychological findings (to Kurtz) may... in due course be taken at face value but always with the tacit understanding that they can eventually be reconciled with a physicalist world view. Beloff goes on, saying, Hence, he (Kurtz) specifically rejects the term paranormal if this is taken to imply any kind of spiritual, mental, or idealistic dimensions. Dr. Beloff also tells us that Kurtz's position of absolute skepticism is by no means unusual. Rather, it is widely shared in the academic and scientific communities. But it's running into trouble.

Ironically, advancements in the field of medicine have precipitated a body of evidence suggesting, perhaps proving, that consciousness exists after death. Similar testimony from hundreds of people, originally compiled by Dr. Raymond Moody in his book Life After Life, testify to a transcendent-beyond-the-body reality. Case after case of clinically dead people coming back to life in hospital emergency rooms challenge the skeptics to apply their materialist views in new and creative ways. TV programs dealing with near-death experience trot out skeptics who condescendingly relegate the profound, spiritual episodes of resuscitated patients to the realm of neurotransmitters, hallucinations and fraud, certain that the brain alone is the source of consciousness. Rather few in number, these skeptics surface in the media frequently. Presenting the obligatory opposing viewpoint, they ignore evidence that contradicts their assumptions, such as clinically dead patients recalling conversations in the waiting room, after they, the patients, expired in the emergency room and then came back to life.

Dr. Kenneth Ring's Life at Death, A Scientific Investigation of the Near-Death Experience, points toward a paradigm shift leading to recognition of the primary role of consciousness in reality. His conclusions strike at the heart of scientific materialism and absolute skepticism, pulling the rug out from under the PSI COPS. The world of modern physics and the spiritual world seem to reflect a single reality [his emphasis], Ring states. He also admonishes that material science has its limits, that the pursuit of absolute knowledge lies in the realm of religion, philosophy, and spirituality. And his position isn't new. Mystics, intellectuals and influential scientists have made the same point. Albert Einstein put it poetically, saying, The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, is as good as dead: his eyes closed ... To know what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms, this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness.

The debunkers challenge us to be more like Einstein, seeking out the mystery of life, in spite of the nagging voices of scientific materialism which may simply reflect our own collective mistrust of intuition and inspiration. Moreover, we should not ignore what the skeptics have to offer, a rigorous application of critical thinking in areas prone to superstition and charlatanism. The scientific method has and will serve us well if properly understood. It got us out of the dark ages and into the space age, cured polio, etc. (although science recognizes that discovery often results from accident). But a troubling marriage sometimes aligns scientific materialism with those who attack anyone embracing non-traditional systems. As the cult of absolute materialism finds its way into our lives, schools, and the court room, we run the risk of diminishing personal liberty and free thought, real threats to democracy. In the name of science, debunkers, skeptics, and experts suddenly don hats of authority, seemingly with the imprimatur of the scientific community.

The Jan/Feb '95 issue of the Skeptical Inquirer features such an expert. In that issue, Joseph Szimhart writes disparagingly about James Redfield's best-selling novel, The Celestine Prophecy, which Szimhart evaluates, for some reason, as if it were a work of non-fiction. Had Szimhart simply not liked the book or its content, there would be little to say. Had his background been accurately represented by the Skeptical Inquirer, again, there would be little to say. But Szimhart not only impugns Redfield's character without any supporting evidence, suggesting his only motive for telling his story is money, but Szimhart also assaults religious and mystical traditions and their exponents, including the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, Baird Spalding, Guy Ballard and Carlos Castaneda. As in Redfield's case, he implies money is their only motive. He calls Nicholas Notavitch's account of Jesus Christ's journey to India bogus, maligning a tradition that has existed for two-thousand years, though only more recently in the West. He then describes the widely popular A Course in Miracles as a Reactionary ... dictatorial tome .

Lighten up, Joe.

But Szimhart's intellectual prejudice is not his only problem. His background as a self-styled deprogrammer presents a deeper set of concerns. He has reacted to New Age belief systems maniacally, forcibly detaining and intimidating people involved with what some scholars call New Religious Movements. Charged with kidnapping in an Idaho case, Szimhart narrowly escaped conviction while his accomplices did not. Subsequently, ex-co-workers have denounced his fanatical methods. His is a profession which, according to a Syracuse University study, may induce Traumatic Stress Syndrome in the people he coerces and detains, doing far more damage than if they had been left alone. His diary, seized by the authorities, reveals his motive for working with kidnappers, money. His article in the Skeptical Inquirer reveals yet another motivation, his peculiar antipathy for anything resembling awaken[ing] to this inner reality, or gnosis (his own words). His intolerance and unsavory dealings somehow earn him the title Specialist in Controversial New Religions in the footnote to his article. The Skeptical Inquirer's editor, one would think, might apply his skepticism more evenly.

Fortunately, few skeptics share Szimhart's tactics or fanaticism. He is no scientist, and genuine skeptics may wonder why his work appeared in the Skeptical Inquirer in the first place. Moreover, many scientists, some calling themselves skeptics, approach claims of paranormal phenomena with genuine objectivity. Others actively investigate the mysterious, the off beat, and the transcendental. Theories and evidence of consciousness-based reality have captured the attention of notable scientists and professionals, like Harvard's John Mack, as mentioned, and physicist/Nobel Laureate, Brian Josephson, who writes about The Next Grand Union, Physics and Spirituality. Skeptics come unglued, of course, when distinguished professionals cross over into the forbidden zone of consciousness exploration. John Mack had the audacity to study claims of alien abduction, bizarre accounts of people claiming to have been kidnapped by extra-terrestrials and experimented on while under telepathic control, accounts that suggest a merging of subconscious and physical realities. After exhausting all other explanations, Mack took the accounts, recalled under hypnosis, at face value, theorizing that reality must be more that it seems. As a result, his tenure at Harvard is under review and he has been denounced by some of his peers, while other professionals salute his courage.

Brian Josephson stunned his colleagues when he turned to consciousness exploration, after having discovered the magical quantum property called the Josephson Effect (at the tender age of twenty-two) at the University of Cambridge. He then received a tenured position at Cambridge's legendary Cavendish Laboratory. That was in 1972. He won a Nobel Prize a year later. Subsequently, he renounced the world of orthodoxy for the pursuit of mystical understanding. The scientific community considered Josephson a genius, until he too crossed into the forbidden zone. But his inclinations showed up early on, when as a graduate student he revealed his appreciation for invisible realities. He theorized that electron tunnels might pass through insulating barriers in superconducting circuits the same way ghosts pass through walls in the movies. Based on his reading of quantum mechanics, the inner workings of the universe, he guessed that the current in such a circuit could actually flow in both directions at once, creating a kind of standing wave that would be especially sensitive to magnetic and electrical influences. Bell Laboratories validated Josephson's theories, adding to his already growing reputation as an innovator and a prodigy. In a recent issue of Scientific American, he says quantum mechanics allows for synchronicities that produce the appearance of psychic phenomena. Decoded, that means consciousness-based physical reality as opposed to the other way around. Lecturing at the Cavendish Laboratory, his views are well received, he says. In the same article, Josephson suggests scientists can improve their abilities through the practice of meditation.

One might say it is Josephson's subtlety of mind that hard-and-fast skeptics lack. This is not to say that all skeptics reject out of hand what Josephson represents. To the contrary, some pursue the truth in earnest, wherever it leads, such as Dr. Michael Epstein, a chemist and the vice president of a skeptics group. Epstein commented in a news release for the Society for Scientific Exploration, that Debunkers often call themselves skeptics. However, a real skeptic is one who is willing to look critically at all of the evidence for extraordinary claims, and that's what SSE is here to do.

The Society, a group of scientists and academics, met in Huntington Beach, California in June. Topics discussed ranged from NDEs to evidence for cases of reincarnation, enough to frazzle any PSI COP. Other topics dealt with biological responses that may predict earthquakes, the effect of the moon on human behavior, artificial structures on Mars, the age of the Sphinx, sacred sites and sacred science, acoustical properties of ancient ceremonial sites, archaeo-astronomy, alternative energy, inertia loss in spacecraft and other topics dealing with telepathy and psychokinesis. Society members do not necessarily subscribe to the positions presented. Rather, they apply a scientific standard that neither rejects nor accepts theories out of hand. Professor Lawrence Frederick, for instance, secretary of the society and former secretary of the American Astronomical Society, rejects the methodology used to gather evidence for artificial structures on Mars, but does not rule out the theory altogether. Frederick speaks candidly regarding the monuments on Mars theory, saying, I can't show that it isn't true, but it sounds goofy. Without a double-blind test, he says, using other locations on Mars against which to compare the geometry of the supposed artificial structures, a scientific conclusion cannot be drawn. Yet Frederick and society members investigate with an open mind that which others will not. They champion free inquiry into a wide range of theories and claims, no matter how strange. In their voices, one hears a blend of fascination and skepticism, perhaps the ideal mixture of scientific rigor and human wonder. Speaking about one member, who shall remain nameless, Frederick describes him as an informative and lovely person tenured at a major polytechnic institute. The reason he shall remain nameless: while he sides with the PSI COPS on most issues, he's convinced the Loch Ness monster really exists. ...Honest. His position, of course, presents a serious problem. It makes you wonder.

What will become of democracy?