AOH :: GARDNER.TXT|
Response to Martin Gardner's Attack on Reich and Orgone Research in the Skeptical Inquirer by James DeMeo, Ph.D
Response to Martin Gardner's Attack on Reich
and Orgone Research in the Skeptical Inquirer
by James DeMeo, Ph.D.
Director, Orgone Biophysical Research Lab
PO Box 1148, Ashland, Oregon 97520 USA
Copyright (C) 1989
All Rights Reserved by James DeMeo
(This article was originally presented to the editors of Skeptical Inquirer
in response to Martin Gardner's article. Unfortunately, the editors of SI
refused to publish it, nor even a shorter rebuttal letter. In fact, the
editors of SI refused even to acknowledge that I had sent them a letter and
article rebutting Gardner treating this author with additional contempt, as
if they were the Bishops of Rome, and I was some ordinary peasant, to be
disregarded completely. Such attitudes are, of course, completely
anti-scientific, undemocratic, and highly unethical. Subsequently, I
published this Rebuttal in Pulse of the Planet #1, 1989.)
The journal Skeptical Inquirer is the official publication of CSICOP, the
"Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal".
The organization has a reputation for debunking many popular beliefs of
either a metaphysical or folk-lore nature. Among their favorite targeted
subjects are astrology, ESP, UFOs, psychokinesis, faith-healing, and
psychic surgery. CSICOP has made the headlines in recent years for its
attacks on advocates of "paranormal" phenomena, and for actual unmasking of
a few deceptive "faith healers". But its membership has also expressed
opposition to any unusual ideas that do not fit within a very narrow,
mechanistic world view, such as solar-terrestrial correlations,
acupuncture, and dietary treatments for degenerative disease. In recent
months, the organization was itself publicly tarnished following their
attack upon Jacques Benveniste, a French scientist whose experiments
provided some evidence for the principle of homeopathic dilutions.(1) Given
their apparent reluctance to rely upon fair and open discussion, or
honestly-conducted research as a means of resolving scientific
controversies, CSICOP has since been labeled the "Truth police", "science
cops", and other names by various members of the scientific community.
Attack Against Wilhelm Reich and Contemporary Scientists
Most recently an article attacking Wilhelm Reich and orgonomy, by CSICOP
leader Martin Gardner, appeared in the Skeptical Inquirer.(2) Titled "Reich
the Rainmaker: The Orgone Obsession", the article takes aim at Reich
primarily for his discovery of the orgone energy. To Gardner, Reich was a
man gone mad, a "paranoid egoist". In the article, Gardner also recounts a
small bit of my own research with the cloudbuster, which he attempts to
condemn via association with the distorted picture of Reich he has painted.
The article reeks with contempt for Reich, and for the whole concept of
energy in space, and contains so many falsehoods, distortions, and
half-truths that rebuttal requires some lengthy documentation. Only someone
unread about the facts of Reich's life and works will find Gardner's
Gardner mentions a few of Reich's research findings, but in such a manner
as to invite disbelief, without any attention to details, or mention of the
specific experiments which led to his conclusions. The article makes
cartoons out of serious experimental work, and Gardner calmly asserts that
the orgone is "an energy no physicist outside orgonomy circles has
detected". This is quite a bald statement, but is completely false. Many
examples will be given below of researchers who made little or no mention
of Reich, who often strongly disliked him and the whole notion of the
orgone energy, but who nevertheless unexpectedly detected an unusual,
orgone-like energy in living creatures, in the atmosphere, or in space.
First, however, let us briefly review what evidence has been gathered by
Reich and his coworkers on the orgone question. I must reject Gardner's
attempt to place automatically anyone who obtains positive evidence for the
orgone within a suspect (and non-existent) "orgonomy circle". This is a
dishonest attempt to cast suspicion and a taint upon anyone who actually
does obtain positive evidence favoring Reich's claims. It is a method of
ostracism common to cliques of schoolchildren on the playground, but has no
place in scientific investigations. Furthermore, there has never been, to
the best of my knowledge, any researcher who has ever carefully reproduced
Reich's experiments and obtained clearly negative findings. Even Einstein
confirmed one of Reich's experimental findings, the temperature
differential within the orgone accumulator,(3) but unfortunately without
completing the necessary control tests which demonstrate its
orgone-energetic origins. Indeed, there are dozens of qualified researchers
who have duplicated Reich's experiments, obtained positive confirming
evidence, and published their findings in various journals.
Several years ago I produced a detailed Bibliography on Orgone
Biophysics,(4) which covered the period of research from 1934 to 1986. It
contains over 400 separate citations by more than 100 different authors,
most of whom possessed the M.D. or Ph.D. degree. Besides my own thesis and
doctoral dissertation,(5) which were presented to and accepted by a group
of respected scholars at the University of Kansas, I have listed in this
Bibliography 17 other theses and dissertations which drew heavily from
Reich's works, confirming various aspects of his bioenergetic formulations.
There are 38 indexed citations in the Bibliography covering Reich's bion
and biogenesis experiments, including Professor du Teil's 1938 confirming
presentation on the bions to the French Academy of Sciences. The
Bibliography also contains more than 80 indexed citations on the
electroscopical, thermical, and biological effects of the orgone energy
accumulator. This includes some 22 studies on plant-growth responses, and 6
on cancer retardation or wound-healing in laboratory mice. Another 12
citations discuss or evaluate the Reich bioenergetic blood test. More than
50 citations focus on cloudbusting, with 20 or so papers discussing methods
for direct visual observation of the atmospheric orgone. Of particular note
is the most recent German dissertation on "The Psycho-Physiological Effects
of the Reich Orgone Accumulator",(6) which was a double-blind, controlled
study, confirming many details of Reich's original assertions on the
parasympathetic stimulation of concentrated orgone energy on the body, and
the weather-dependent pulsation of the orgone in the accumulator.
But Gardner says nothing about this research, as if it was wothless, the
workers involved being somehow deluded into forgetting their research
training, or worse. I ask, can he specifically cite anyone, even a single
person, who has duplicated any one of Reich's experiments and obtained a
fully negative result? Has he ever personally attempted to reproduce a
single one of Reich's experiments, or even the more simple observational
tests? Can he demonstrate even a cursory knowledge of this body of positive
research evidence, which extends back some 50 years, or give a convincing,
rational reason for his contrived and easy dismissal of it all? Does
Gardner, a master with math games, card tricks, and use of the English
language, have any research training or credentials to support his
self-proclaimed authority over this matter? Does he not care a whit for the
facts in his overwhelming drive and passion to skewer Reich and the orgone?
The answer appears to be NO on all counts.
What Gardner fails to mention is also telling. For example, one would not
know from his article that Reich had his books and research journals banned
and burned by an American court of law, with five actual episodes of
court-ordered book-burning taking place, most recently in the 1960s. He
mentions the fact that Reich was, in 1932 and 1933, disowned by both the
International Psychoanalytic Association (IPA) and the German communists,
but failed to mention that he was likewise attacked, and put on death
lists, by both the Nazis and Stalinists, who also burned his books. After
fleeing from Hitler's Germany, Reich was welcomed by the Norwegian
analysts, who liked his writings, and disagreed with the
politically-motivated actions of the IPA.(7) But Gardner is not concerned
with details, as he considers Reich's work, and that of his coworkers, to
be "religion". He compares orgonomy, which makes no claim to metaphysical
truths or salvation, and has no gurus, churches, and the like, to
Scientology, a self-proclaimed religion with churches, sunday services, and
a messianic leader widely know for his science-fiction writing. One would
not know, for example, that orgonomy is a research discipline developed
from new natural scientific observations and experimental findings.
Gardner's History of Attacking Reich
Gardner's first attack against Reich appeared in the Antioch Review of
1950,(8) though he was then more restrained in his linguistic distortions
and vituperation. In 1952 he attacked Reich, with similar clever wit and
fervor, in a chapter in Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science.(9) His
articles helped fuel the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA)
pseudo-investigation, which has since been demonstrated, through at least
three different Freedom-Of-Information-Act searches of FDA files,(10) to
have been conducted in a most shabby, antiscientific "get Reich" manner.
Today, we know that there is no credible evidence contained in FDA files by
which they could have justified their actions.(See the article on Page 18
in this issue of the Pulse.)
Reich, of course, was outraged that various hack journalists had slandered
him, and put false words into his mouth about the effects of the
accumulator.(11) Gardner incautiously repeats some of these falsehoods in
his recent article, such as "The concentrated orgone is said to relieve
symptoms of almost every illness from cancer to impotence."(2:26) He was
more cautious in his earlier articles on Reich. In the Antioch article he
also asserted that no competent scientist would bother to refute Reich's
findings, condemning them with a wave of the hand. Gardner was obviously
wrong in that Reich has not been ignored since the 1950s, by either
scientists or laypeople. But Gardner continues to deny and ignore the
experimental, empirical nature of Reich's findings, which have guaranteed a
continuing, growing interest in them for over three decades. Having failed
in his 30-year mission to distort the facts, Gardner's latest attack
reveals a harsher, more frustrated tone. Interestingly, in his early
articles the younger Gardner made at least passing mention of Lysenko, a
Stalinist bureaucrat who put many scientists to death for their research
findings; but not so the elder Gardner, who has lost sight of the lessons
of history, and seems glad that Reich died in jail, his books condemned to
flames. I believe this is because Gardner, and other politically-powerful
media-darlings of the CSICOP gang, have been quietly and consistently
asserting a deadly new form of Lysenkoism in the USA, for at least 30
years. Is there anyone who would deny the fact that academic freedom is
almost non-existent in the USA if one wishes to seriously study certain
questions, such as the orgone energy, or, for that matter, anything which
challenges the assertions of "empty space", "every cell from a cell", or
non-genetic mechanisms for heredity? My files grow increasingly full of
recent examples of American researchers and medical pioneers who have been
trounced into silent submission, into jail, or prematurely into their
graves, for doing nothing more than exploring such questions!
CSICOP claims, on the back cover of its publication, that it investigates
"fringe-science claims from a responsible scientific point of view", and
also does "not reject claims on a-priori grounds antecedent to inquiry, but
rather examines them objectively and carefully". However, from the above,
we have seen that the Gardner article, at least, has violated these
high-sounding goals in an extreme way. The detailed scientific research of
Reich and his coworkers is flippantly ignored, as if it does not really
constitute "research", their experiments somehow failing to be real
"experiments". But he, Gardner, writes as if he had examined all the facts
and evidence, when the truth is that he has done little or no examining at
all, other than to select quotes cleverly here and there from a few books.
CSICOP and Gardner have set a pattern for themselves. They proclaim
expertise over matters where they have none, and condemn it where it
exists. It is not so much different from the 1950s, when the FDA
substituted rumor and gossip for "evidence", granted "expertise" only to
those scientists who had demonstrated the proper quanta of ignorance,
contempt, and prejudice, and concocted "experiments" which bore no
resemblance to those previously published.
What Are the Facts About Wilhelm Reich's Discoveries?
Dr. Reich's findings have not died with him because his experiments, when
carefully conducted under the original conditions, produce the same results
now as when he first developed them. They yield clear evidence for a
pulsatory, weather-active and biologically-active energy continuum. It can,
and has been, measured and photographed, and found to exist in high vacuum
as well.(4) Reich called this energy continuum the orgone, but other
scientists, working completely independent of Reich, and usually without
knowledge of his works, have likewise measured or strongly inferred the
existence of such an energy.
For example, there is Dayton Miller's work on the dynamic aether drift,(12)
Halton Arp's work on energy/matter bridges between galaxies in deep
space,(13) Giorgio Piccardi's work on solar influences upon the physical
chemistry of water,(14) Frank Brown's work on cosmic modulation of
biological clocks,(15) Harold Burr's work on the electrodynamic
characteristics of creatures and the natural environment,(16) Hannes
Alfven's work on streaming plasmas in the depths of space,(17) Thelma Moss'
work on energy-field photography,(18) Bjorn Nordenstrom's work on x-ray
phantom-images and circulation of bioenergy,(19) Robert Becker's work on
mammalian bioelectrical limb regeneration,(20) Rupert Sheldrake's work on
morphogenetic fields,(21) Louis Kervran's work on bioenergy-driven
biological transmutations,(22) Berkson, Emergy, Anderson and Spangler's
works on non-constant, continuum effects in nuclear decay processes,(23)
and Paul Dirac's observations on the "neutrino sea".(24) And yes, we must
not forget the work of CSICOP target Jacques Benveniste,(1) who
demonstrated a non-molecular, likely energetic phenomena long known to
homeopathic physicians. Each of these workers discovered or argued for a
force conceptually similar to orgone: mass-free, yet capable of affecting
or being bound to matter, participating in physical chemistry, metabolism,
and heredity in some way, possessing measurable biological, meteorological,
and cosmic components, reflectable by metal shielding, yet also amplifiable
(and not extinguishable) through use of solid metal enclosures. Only in the
case of Moss do I recall orgone being mentioned as a possible mechanism,
but the properties and behavior of the phenomena independently identified
by these researchers were orgone-like in many ways. So much for the
assertion that no one "outside orgonomy circles" has detected these
Other aspects of Gardner's attack on Reich focus upon his personal life,
and his observations of UFOs. Here, highly selective quotes and
exaggerations paint an awful portrait of Reich; one would never guess that
he was admired by his coworkers for being an emotionally honest, patient,
and gentle man. But is this really an issue? Could we condemn the telephone
or the light bulb if it were proven that Bell or Edison somehow behaved in
an "unlikable" way? Reich's personal life has no bearing at all on the
question of whether or not the accumulator or cloudbuster really function
as described; similarly regarding UFOs, which Reich, and a host of other
reliable witnesses have seen from time to time. Unless we wish to focus
specifically upon the question of UFOs, or upon Reich's Arizona
experiments, his speculations about the nature of the UFO are of only
Gardner is also very selective when discussing the childhood recollections
of Reich's son, Peter.(25) He cites the passage where Peter Reich helps his
father work the cloudbuster in the Arizona desert, where UFOs were
observed, but says nothing of the child's recollections of Government
Agents invading his father's Maine laboratory, putting accumulators to the
axe, and carrying away crates of books for burning in incinerators. And
likewise regarding Reich's writings in Contact With Space.(26) The UFO
observations are mentioned again and again, but nothing is said of Reich's
successful experiment for bringing moisture to the deserts. Gardner brands
Reich paranoid for his speculative, and forlorn writings from this time
when he was working almost entirely alone in the middle of the desert, and
under malicious attack by the popular media, by academics, and by the
Government. The diagnosis of "paranoia" is only correct in circumstances
where there is no real threat to the individual in question, only a falsely
perceived one. In Reich's case the threats were real.
Gardner's Attack Against James DeMeo
Gardner's discussion of my work was in many cases either only partly true
or incorrect. This may be due to the fact that he relied on dubious sources
for information on my research. Rather than write me for details on my
published experiments,(5, 27) Gardner relied on a National Enquirer article
I know nothing about. He also relied on second-hand, word-of-mouth
recollections of a lecture I gave to the Association for Arid Lands
Studies,(28) or a clandestinely recorded version of that lecture. I learned
about the Skeptical Inquirer article not from its editors, from CSICOP, or
Gardner, but via an anonymous phone call. Such intrigue! Whatever, the
figures Gardner cited, of my engaging in 13 successful cloudbusting
operations out of 15, are several years out of date. As of October 1988, I
have participated in or directed over 30 different cloudbusting operations,
more than half of which took place during mild to severe drought
conditions, or desert conditions. Approximately 80% of these operations
were successful in that significant rains, and other major and distinct
atmospheric changes, developed within 48 hours after onset of operations.
This success rate is preserved for the drought-desert operations, as
assessed independently. These latter experiments include work during the
1986 Southeastern drought, which did dramatically end shortly after our
cloudbusting operations began, and a most recent cloudbusting operation
(mid-September 1988) in the drought zone of the Pacific Northwest. Another
successful cloudbusting operation recently took place in the harsh deserts
north of Yuma, Arizona, confirming the desert-greening possibilities raised
by Reich in Contact with Space over 30 years ago. For the record, all my
cloudbusting operations since 1980 have been preceded by a documentary
telegram to NOAA (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration).
They are documented and evaluated via ground photos, satellite imagery, and
National Weather Service data.
(Addendum 1989: Following unethical and probably illegal destruction and
purging of cloudbusting-related documents from files at NOAA offices, and
discovery of a policy of unethical disinformation by NOAA officials
regarding my research, under protest I ceased sending them any documentary
materials. See the article on "Disinformation" posted at this web site.)
Gardner implies that I make a lot of money from the orgone research, when
the truth is that it costs me a lot of money, and returns nothing
financially. It costs thousands of dollars to launch a cloudbusting
operation of any magnitude, and because of the hatred towards Reich's works
which currently exists, funding is not available through ordinary sources.
The orgonotester, which I import but do not manufacture, is made by the
Marah SA company, which also makes top-notch air ion measuring equipment.
Apparently Dr. Walter Stark, the Swiss ion expert who developed these
instruments, is also interested in orgone energy.
I started giving workshops on "The Bioenergetic, Orgonomic Basis of Life
and Weather" after I saw the need for factual education on these subjects.
For the record, the workshops are attended by many enthusiastic young
students, often the brightest and best, who usually already know a lot
about Reich, and feel deeply offended that so many of their professors put
him down without the slightest notion of what they are talking about.
What Is the Real Reason Gardner Attacks Reich and Orgonomy?
We come to a point of consideration, namely why it is that Gardner attacks
Reich in such a blind way? He is decidedly upset that the orgone question
did not lay down and die with Reich in 1957:
"One might have thought that today's orgonomists...would confine themselves
to Reich's youthful contributions to psychoanalysis, which are reasonably
sane and still greatly admired by many psychiatrists, but no -- most of
them buy it all."(2:28)
The thought that these younger orgonomists might have been persuaded to
accept Reich's findings by weight of evidence does not pass into Gardner's
pen. However, a clue to his own motivations for attacking and distorting
the record is found in Gardner's own writings. In The Whys of a
Philosophical Scrivener,(29) Gardner finally makes known his own world
view. And what do we see? One reviewer puts it so:
"...not what we might expect from an apostle of the rational. Gardner
announces that he believes in the existence of God -- not the pantheistic
God of Spinoza or Einstein, but an omniscient creator who would be
recognizable to anyone immersed in the Judaeo-Christian tradition. Gardner
is deeply convinced of the possibility of a soul and an afterlife, if not
of a conventional heaven and hell. He writes movingly about the benefits of
prayer, not merely for its possible psychological value, but also because
God might actually heed it."(30)
Now, Mr. Gardner is fully entitled to believe whatever he wishes, but we
must note that Reich's functional, bioenergetic works stand in clear
opposition to both a dead, machine-like universe, and a dualistic,
"spirit-versus-flesh" anthropomorphic deity. Indeed, Reich argued
persuasively that the mechanistic-mystical world view was the result of a
perceptive splitting-off of organic sense functions, caused by the chronic
damming-up of emotional-sexual energy within the body of the observer.(31)
For these reasons, he argued, animistic peoples, who lived a more vibrant
and uninhibited emotional and sexual life, and who consequently remained
relatively free of neuroses,(32) could feel, with their sense organs, the
tangible energetic forces which shaped and created the universe. To them,
the spirit-forces were dynamic, alive, in the "here and now", and not
divorced off into some intangible "heaven" or "hell". Reich also pointed
out the essentially mystical nature of many concepts of modern physics,
wherein, like deistic religion, the basic forces which shape and structure
the universe, are also not tangible, not directly measurable, and not
observable through the senses. Mystical physics of today says we can't
possibly touch or see these forces directly, given that they expended their
influence billions of years ago,or are woven into the fabric of an
unobservable "space-time continuum". According to this view, the central
creative event which put the whole universe into motion occurred in a
primordial "big-bang", which only by "accident", we are told, conforms to
the biblical Genesis. This point of view might be convincing were it not
for the fact that plenty of contrary empirical evidence exists. In addition
to the evidence cited above, we may ask: what do Reich's functional
discoveries do to such a world view?
Reich's orgone is a spontaneously pulsatile, excitable, and
negatively-entropic energy. It is an active, creative principle which is
tangible, real, measurable, and in the "here and now". Through experiment,
it was found that concentrated, excited orgone in high vacuum absorbs and
diminishes electromagnetic excitations transmitted through it. As such, it
provides a mechanism for the red-shifting of galactic light, through a
means other than doppler effects.(13, 31) These findings completely
undermine the theoretical basis of the "expanding universe", the
"big-bang", "relativity", and popular notions such as "black holes", etc.
Indeed, any astrophysical theory which requires a constant light speed and
"empty space" is undone by Reich's findings. And if Reich is correct about
the streaming, pulsatile, superimposing nature of the orgone continuum in
space,(33) it would also fulfill the requirements of prime mover, putting
the anthropomorphic deity into the unemployment lines, and preserving
Genesis only as historical literature, and not important natural
philosophy. Who will deny the growing speculative tendency in certain
quarters of astrophysics for linkage between the big-bang and the book of
Genesis? This connection has not even been lost on the Pope!
But there is more. Reich also argues that the spontaneous aspects of life,
namely those governing emotion and sexuality, are not only natural and
biologically necessary, but also measurable and tangible.(31, 34) Sex is
not a sin to Reich, and Original Sin is psychopathological myth. The sexual
impulse is not intrinsically devilish but an aspect of bioenergetic
superimposition and charge, striving for natural release, even among
adolescents and the unmarried.
All this harkens back to a similar, historically important difference
between the world views of Galileo, history's greatest empiricist, and
Newton, a man who was preoccupied with theology. Galileo looked to the
energetic aether as probable prime mover, at work in the here and now. He
was antagonistic towards "revealed truth", and demanded that his critics
reproduce his experiments before making judgments, to "look into the
telescope". But not so Newton, who argued for dominance of the Church over
matters of experimental science.(35) He proclaimed the aether to be static
and immobile, without a shred of evidence in order to eliminate its
participation in the ordering and movements of the Heavens. That role, he
believed, belonged only to the Christian anthropomorphic God. Newton's
theological restraints on scientific inquiry have remained to this day, and
are even championed by a scientistic community bent on a near total denial
of the bioenergetic in the natural world. In the late 1800s, Michelson and
Morley searched for but did not detect Newton's static aether. But their
student, Dayton Miller, did detect and fully document a moving, dynamic,
metal reflectable form of it.(12) And so did Reich, who discovered this
same dynamic energy as the sensible and measurable sexual-biological-cosmic
orgone energy.(4) Reich's works not only undermine many popular "facts"
regarding human behavior and the origins and functioning of life, but also
all the various mechanistic and mystical theories of science which demand
the absence of a dynamic energy in the natural world. Gardner and the
CSICOP gang oppose Reich not because he failed to provide good empirical
evidence for such an energy, but for just the opposite reason, because he
"When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign:
that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him."
1) E. Davenas et al, Nature, 333:832, 1988; J. Maddox, et al, Nature,
334:287, 1988; J. Benveniste, ibid, p.2; J. Benveniste, Science, 241:1028,
2) M. Gardner, "Reich the Rainmaker: the Orgone Obsession", Skeptical
Inquirer, 13(1):26-30, Fall 1988.
3) W. Reich, The Einstein Affair, Orgone Institute Press (xerox avail. from
Wilhelm Reich Museum, PO Box 687,Rangeley, Maine 04970), 1953.
4) J. DeMeo, Bibliography on Orgone Biophysics, Natural Energy Works (PO
Box 1395, El Cerrito, CA 94530), 1986.
5) J. DeMeo, "Preliminary Analysis of Changes in Kansas Weather
Coincidental to Experimental Operations with a Reich Cloudbuster", U. of
Kansas thesis, Geography-Meteorology Department (xerox avail. from Natural
Energy Works, PO Box 1395, El Cerrito, CA 94530), 1979; J.DeMeo, "On the
Origins and Diffusion of Patrism: the Saharasian Connection", U. of Kansas
dissertation, Geography Department (xerox avail. from University
6) S. Muschenich & R. Gebauer, "Die (Psycho-) Physiologischen Wirkungen des
Reich'schen Orgonakkumulators auf den Menschlichen Organismus", U. of
Marburg (FR ofGermany) dissertation, Psychology Dept. 1986. (Published as
Der Reichsche Orgonakkumulator, Nexus Press (avail. through Natural Energy
Works, PO Box 1395, El Cerrito, CA 94530) 1987.
7) M. Sharaf, Fury on Earth, a Biography of Wilhelm Reich, St.
Martin's-Marek, NY, 1983.
8) M. Gardner, "The Hermit Scientist", Antioch Review, Winter 1950-1951,
9) M. Gardner, chapter on "Orgonomy" in In the Name of Science (later
titled Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science), Dover, NY, 1952.
10) R. Blasband, "An Analysis of the United States Food and Drug
Administration's Scientific Evidence Against Wilhelm Reich, Part 1: the
Biomedical Evidence", J. Orgonomy, 6(2):207-222, 1972; C. Rosenblum, ..Part
2: the Physical Concepts", J. Orgonomy, 6(2):222-231, 1972; C. Rosenblum,
...Part 3: Physical Evidence", J. Orgonomy, 7(1):92-98, 1972; J.
Greenfield, Wilhelm Reich Versus the USA, W.W. Norton, NY, 1974; J. DeMeo,
"Postscript on the Food and Drug Administration's Scientific Evidence
Against Wilhelm Reich", Pulse of the Planet, 1(1): 18-23, 1989.
11) J. Greenfield, ibid.; T. Wolfe, The Emotional Plague Versus Orgone
Biophysics, the 1947 Campaign, OrgoneInstitute Press, NY, 1947; W. Reich,
Listen, Little Man, Farrar, Straus & Giroux, NY, 1974.
12) D. Miller, "The Ether-Drift Experiment and the Determination of the
Absolute Motion of the Earth", Reviews of Modern Physics, 5:203-242, 1933.
13) H. Arp, et al, The Redshift Controversy, W.A. Benjamin, Reading, MA
1973; H. Arp, Quasars, Redshifts, and Controversies, Interstellar Media,
Berkeley, CA, 1987; cf. C. Rosenblum, "The Red Shift", J. Orgonomy,
14) G. Piccardi, Chemical Basis of Medical Climatology, C. Thomas,
Springfield, IL, 1962; cf. J. Bortels, "Die Hypothetische Wetterstrahlung
als vermutliches Agens Kosmo-Meteoro-Biologischer Reaktionen",
Wissenschaftliche Seitschrift der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin,
15) F. Brown, "Evidence for External Timing in Biological Clocks", in An
Introduction to Biological Rhythms, J. Palmer, ed., Academic Press, NY,
16) H. Burr, Blueprint for Immortality, Neville Spearman, London, 1971; cf.
L. Ravitz, "History, Measurement, and Applicability of Periodic Changes in
the Electromagnetic Field in Health and Disease", Annals, NY Academy of
Sciences, 98:1144-1201, 1962.
17) H. Alfven, Cosmic Plasmas, Kluwer, Boston, 1981; cf. , "The Big Bang
Never Happened", Discover, June, 1988, pp.70-80.
18) T. Moss, The Body Electric: A Personal Journey Into the Mysteries of
Parapsychological Research, Bioenergy, and Kirlian Photography, J. P.
Tarcher, Los Angeles, 1979.
19) B. Nordenstrom, Biologically Closed Electric Circuits: Clinical,
Experimental and Theoretical Evidence for an Additional Circulatory System,
Nordic Medical Publications, Stockholm, Sweden, 1983.
20) R. Becker & G. Selden, The Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the
Foundation of Life, Wm. Morrow, NY 1985.
21) R. Sheldrake, A New Science of Life, The Hypothesis of Causative
Formation, J. P. Tarcher, Los Angeles, 1981.
22) L. Kervran, Biological Transmutations, Beekman, Woodstock, NY, 1980.
23) J. Berkson, "Examination of Randomness of Alpha Particle Emissions",
Research Papers in Statistics, F.N.David, ed., Wiley, NY, 1966; G. Emery,
"Perturbation of Nuclear Decay Rates", in Annual Review of Nuclear Science,
Annual Reviews, Palo Alto, CA 1972; J. Anderson and G. Spangler, "Serial
Statistics: Is Radioactive Decay Random?", J. Physical Chemistry,
24) P. Dirac, "Is There An Ether?", Nature, 162:906, 1951; also see L.
deBroglie, Non-Linear Quantum Mechanics, Elsevier, NY, 1960; H. Dudley, New
Principles in Quantum Mechanics, Exposition University Press, NY, 1959, H.
Dudley, Morality of Nuclear Planning, Kronos Press, Glassboro, NJ, 1976. I.
Asimov, The Neutrino, Avon Books, NY, 1966.
25) P. Reich, A Book of Dreams, Harper & Row, NY, 1973.
26) W. Reich, Contact With Space, Core Pilot Press, NY, 1957.
27) J. DeMeo, "Field Experiments with the Reich Cloubuster: 1977-1983", J.
Orgonomy, 19(1):57-79, 1985; J. DeMeo & R. Morris, "CORE Progress Report
#13, Fighting the Extreme Drought of Spring 1985: Southeast", J. Orgonomy,
19(2):265-266, 1985; J. DeMeo & R. Morris, "CORE Progress Report #14:
Possible Slowing and Warming of an Arctic Air Mass Through Cloudbusting",
J. Orgonomy, 20(1):120-125, 1986; J. DeMeo & R. Morris, "CORE Progress
Report #15: Breaking the 1986 Drought in the Eastern U.S., Phase 3: A
Cloudbusting Expedition into the Southeastern Drought Zone", J. Orgonomy,
21(1):27-41, 1987; J. DeMeo & R. Morris, "Preliminary Report on a
Cloudbusting Experiment in the Southeastern Drought Region, August 1986",
Southeastern Drought Symposium Proceedings, March 4-5, 1987, Columbia, SC.,
South Carolina State Climatology Office Publication G-30, pp.80-87, 1987.
28) J. DeMeo, "Nine Years of Field Experiments with a Reich Cloudbuster:
Positive Evidence for a New Technique to Lessen Atmospheric Stagnation and
Bring Rains in Droughty or Arid Atmospheres", Abstracts of Papers, Program
of the 1987 Meeting of the Association for Arid Lands Studies, El Paso,
Texas, p.6, 1987.
29) M. Gardner, The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener, Quill, NY, 1983.
30) F. Golden, Book Review, Discover, October 1983, pp.88-91.
31) W. Reich, Ether, God and Devil, Farrar, Straus & Giroux, NY, 1973.
32) B. Malinowski, Sexual Life of Savages, Routledge & Keegan Paul, London,
1932; W. Reich, The Function of the Orgasm, Noonday, NY, 1971; W. Reich,
The Sexual Revolution, Octagon Books, NY, 1971; V. Elwin, The Muria and
their Ghotul, Oxford U. Press, Calcutta, 1947; J. Prescott, "Body Pleasure
and the Origins of Violence", The Futurist, April 1975, pp.64-74; J. DeMeo,
"On the Origins and Diffusion of Patrism: The Saharasian Connection", ibid.
33) W. Reich, Cosmic Superimposition, Wilhelm Reich Foundation, Rangeley,
34) W. Reich, The Bioelectrical Investigation of Sexuality and Anxiety,
Farrar, Straus & Giroux, NY, 1982.
35) L. C. Stecchini, "The Inconstant Heavens" in The Velikovsky Affair, The
Warfare Of Science and Scientism, A. deGrazia, Editor, University Books,
NY, 1966; D. Kubrin, "How Sir Isaac Newton Helped Restore Law'n Order to
the West", unpublished monograph, 1972.
Orgone Biophysical Research Laboratory, Inc.
A Non-Profit Science Research and Educational Foundation, Since 1978
Greensprings Center, PO Box 1148
Ashland, Oregon 97520 USA
E-mail to: email@example.com
[Image]Return to Home Page
This page, and all contents, Copyright (C) 1996
by the Orgone Biophysical Research Laboratory, Inc.
The entire AOH site is optimized to look best in Firefox® 3 on a widescreen monitor (1440x900 or better).
Site design & layout copyright © 1986- AOH
We do not send spam. If you have received spam bearing an artofhacking.com email address, please forward it with full headers to firstname.lastname@example.org.