Here is factual, critical information on the unethical attacks (including the concealing of corroborating supportive evidence) by CSICOP (Committe for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal) against the statistician Michel Gauquelin, discoverer of the controversial "Mars Effect" planetary influence upon human behavior, who eventually committed suicide after years of outrageous harassment by the organized skeptics. The skeptics had not only wilfully misrepresented his research findings, but went after Gauquelin personally in a publc manner which eventually left him unemployed and despondent; the article was written by Dennis Rawlins, who also details how CSICOP willfully concealed positive evidence supporting Gauquelin. Here and here is found additional information exposing the unethical irrationality of the "skeptics" in their attacks against Gauquelin. And here is another site documenting the breakthrough research of various pioneering scientists, including the French immunologist Jacques Benveniste, who was attacked and censored in the most unethical and underhanded manner by the organized "skeptics" working in collusion with the editors of Nature magazine. The former senior editor of Nature (John Maddox) responsible for smearing and censoring Benveniste, was the same individual who regularly censored Peter Duesberg's articles critical of the "infectious HIV" hypothesis of AIDS. Similarly Maddox barricaded the doors of Nature against any published evidence critical of Big Bang cosmology, or of so-called "hot fusion" theory. Upon retiring his post in 1995, Maddox subsequently was a guest speaker at CSICOP's First World Skeptics Congress.. The Gauquelin Affair, Benveniste Affair, and Duesberg Affair, are but three case examples of the many anti-scientific attacks by the organized skeptics, similar in nature to the anti-scientific attacks against Wilhelm Reich and contemporary natural scientists following in his path. CSICOP has been a leader in this unethical, antidemocratic process, and is active in attacking nearly every natural scientist who has made claim of an unusual discovery or observation, portraying themselves to the public as "defenders of scientific rationalism" but in reality using, behind the curtain, dirty tricks and deception, completely at odds with their public self-portrayal.
For more information, also see:
1. "CSICOP and the Skeptics: An Overview" by George P. Hansen, published in the Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, Vol.86, Jan.1992, p.19-63. (It is available here.)
2. "CSICOP, Time Magazine and Wilhelm Reich", by John Wilder, published in Heretic's Notebook, J.DeMeo, Ed., OBRL, p.55-66, 2002.
3. Tim Bolen's discussions on the "skeptics", who are shown to be an organized hate-group, dominated by perverts. See here and here.
Note that we are not opposed to a healthy and genuinely honest skepticism regarding new scientific claims, which ultimately must be proven and objectively documented. What we are against is the use of unethical smears and deceptive disinformation tactics used to personally attack and destroy natural scientists making new and challenging claims, while the basic fundamentals and specifics of their work are totally ignored or willfully misrepresented.
Return to the "Response to Skeptics" Page
Return to Home Page