The Hutchison Effect

[MsEVP]

As a young man, John Hutchison of Vancouver, was interested in Tesla`s research and he had a strong interest in anti-gravity, levitation and electronic invisibility and he is now known for the discovery of a complex mix of frequencies united in a matrix known by his name. It`s a name applied to all the peculiar and startling effects that his plethora of machinery can produce, seemingly powered by zero point free-energy, a few of which are:

ANTI-GRAVITY objects levitate, move abour, hover or off at a high speed at a tangent

TRANSMUTATION Various metals morph their single atomic structure into multiple atomic structures

FUSION Dissimilar materials meld together as if they were the same atomic structure

JELLIFICATION Metals become as squishy as jelly

His equipment includes Tesla coils, RG generators, van De Graaf generators and the wavelengths created by these machines interplay to create astonishing effects.

On the net, Gian Quasar has article and video of JH

[chrisrob]

Not sure how much of Hutchison's work is validated or if any is "conjuring tricks" but it's not all new. Professor Eric Laithwaite (who invented the linear motor and magnetic levitation ("MagLev")) was pilloried by theRoyal Institution for his work on "anti-gravity". http://www.rense.com/general42/genius.htm

[MsEVP]

Hey, thanks for that Chris. (have you seen Hutchison at work, quite fascinating) I can sympathize with Laithwaite. I know what it`s like to come up against the establishment (in my case the SPR et al). Fear of something new, fear of being taken in. I`ve been on a Maglev train in Japan. That was something. What happened to Alex Jones, I wonder.

[jake-the-peg]

No

You see the point is that extraordianry claims require extraordinary evidence.

If I do a piece of research and find an interesting but none the less not unremarkable effect people will probably in general accept this with probably a bit of collaborating work.

If I turn around and say I've discoverred anti-gravity I'd better have some pretty convincing evidence that others can reproduce.

So questions and answers

Is there a mechanism to explain these observations - No

Has anybody been able to independently reproduce these effects - No

there are a lot of claims that it's supported by a report by the Stanford Research Institute - but oddly nobody can reproduce the report and SRI (Nothing to do with Stanford University) have nothing about it on their website.

Hutchinson also is a campaigner of UFOs and the parnormal.

I don't know if he goes around in a bicorn hat with his hand in his vest introducing himself as Bonepart but frankly I wouldn't be at all surprised.

Science is based on reproducible and independant evidence.

Not on home made videos of conjuring tricks

[MsEVP]

Hi Jake, I can understand what you`re saying. I just throw out things that I find fascinating to see other people`s thoughts. I never mean to imply that I`m an expert obviously. However, I have seen UFO`s and in the last 30 years I`ve seen many `paranormal` events. And from what I`ve seen and experienced I believe that the universe is so flexible I tend to accept that events people describe probably did happen. Also, I am proficient in one subject, which is highly reproducible, and is, on a daily basis worldwide. Sometimes, in discussions with unbelievers, we reach a certain point where they want evidence, and when it`s offered they`re gone.

I think the main reason people shy away from the so-called `paranormal`, possibly, is fear of being `taken in`, altho there are other reasons.

I also often wonder why more people don`t have an urge to investigate some of these unfathomable subjects for themselves: psychometry, OOBE`s, telepathy, PK, but now I digress.

Cheers

[jake-the-peg]

How are theses things reproducible?

Someone seeing a ghost and then someone else saying they saw one too is not reproducibility.

If you see a ghost and it appears every night and I can get up there with equipment and film and measure it with a bunch of independant observers is reproducibility.

You know what - that never seems to happen.

Still if you're so sure why not get rich?

James Randi has an outstanding prize of $1 million for such evidence of paranormal phenomina.

http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/docs/a ssault-against-the%20person.pdf

It has been unclaimed for years

[chrisrob]

i am a scientist (used to be a science adviser) but am also open to the idea we may not know everything. I was inspired by a lecture I saw by Eric Laithwaite (whom I mentioned above).
I have experienced some weird "telepathy(?)" coincidences with my identical twin brother.
I have experimented with things like sharpening razor blades under model pyramids and using telepathy to move a compass needle.
But to really believe or "know" something requires reproducable validation.
I would love to believe in many of the reported paranormal phenomena.
The one truth of science is we will be proved wrong by future history.

[chakka35]

MsEVP, scientists (and even non-scientist rational people like me) are not afraid of something new. I suspect that science would go head-over-heels if anyone were to discover (for example) a new method by which humans can communicate, presently called telepathy. The sad fact is that those subjects that you list have been investigated and found to have no basis.
You say that you have experienced paranormal events but you don't enlarge on that or tell us what investigations were made into them.
You say you have seen UFOs, but so have we all. A UFO is merely an object in the sky which is unidentifiable by that particular person watching it. To someone else it might be a PEFO - a Perfectly Explicable Flying Object, as they usually are.
chrisrob, you say you have experimented with those things but you don't say what the results were, so it's a dead-end really. Nor do you tell us what your 'telepathic' experiences were and what steps you took to ensure that they weren't just coincidence.
I must say that for a scientist your methods aren't as rigorous as they should be. What is your field?

[jake-the-peg]

Just noticed I posted the link from a different answer it should have been

http://www.randi.org/joom/challenge-info.html

[MsEVP]

Hi there:

Jake, if you re-read you`ll see I said that the one thing I`m proficient in is reproducible. (EVP). and Randi is something else again, he has no intention of paying out to anybody. Even if we did some recording for EVP together and Class A voices were captured, he`d either say he couldn`t hear them, even though everyone else could, or he`d get out of it in some way. Don`t hold your breath there.

Chris, a man after my own heart. At least you`ve put your feet in the water. Twins are know for their telepathy but I can`t see how you can use it for moving a compass needle? Surely you meant PK?

Chakka: What proof have you got that telepathy, psychometry, OOBE`s and PK have been disproved! There is no such evidence (unless it `s supposedly reported from a very biased quarter), in fact, there is much in the literature to substantiate the truth of these fields.

I have experienced the first three and have seen PK at work.

[chakka35]

MsEVP, you make the common intellectual mistake of assuming that rational people are obliged to disprove every weird claim made by the irrational. If that were true then we would spend all of our lives disproving every daft idea that anyone cared to dream up.
The right approach is for those who moot a strange phenomenon to prove it - or at least to supply enough evidence to make it likely and worthy of investigation. None of the phenomena you list has ever stood up to investigation.
James Randi is a meticulous fair-minded man and his challenge is genuine. Often when he uses his skill as a magician to expose the way in which charlatans have been fooling people, those peope turn on him because they don't like their illusions being debunked.

Please tell us of your experiences so that we can judge them. Also please point us towards the literature you claim exists, so that we can assess it for ourselves.

[MsEVP]

Chakka, why do you assume that it`s you who are rational and I am the irrational one?

[chakka35]

From your original question and subsequent posts.

[naomi24]

If this machinery and these techniques genuinely work, I can't understand why science hasn't pounced on them, tested them, and lauded them. Imagine the implications of work such as this. It seems odd that such enormous discoveries and inventions haven't made world headlines. It makes no sense to me.

[chakka35]

Exactly, naomi.
Why should science decide that certain phenomena are worth investigating and, if valid, including in the text-books, but that others should automatically be excluded?
The answer, of course, is that such claimed phenomena are found not to be valid and so are not worthy of inclusion.

[naomi24]

I would hope that science deems anything it isn't aware of worthy of investigation, but these claims are so extraordinarily .phenomenol, they most certainly wouldn't have been ignored or dismissed without thorough investigation. If they were genuine, it stands to reason that this man would have been world famous and awarded every possible accolade.

[commonsense]

Whats the question u need answering

[MsEVP]

Commonsense, if you were talking to me then I haven`t asked a question. I just like to throw out these titbits for those who might be interested but unaware of them. I always assume that if someone is interested, and I haven`t given links, then they will Google for themselves.

[MsEVP]

http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/11 2/1/Hutchison-Effect-Video/Page1.html

(Thanks Naomi, it works)

Here`s one link.

[naomi24]

By Jove, I think she's got it! Well done, Tina. Just need to practice with the bold and italics now. :o)