James Randi Responds to an Alan Moore Interview

The James Randi Educational Foundation (http://www.randi.org/) is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1996. Its aim is to promote critical thinking by reaching out to the public and media with reliable information about paranormal and supernatural ideas so widespread in our society today.

This web page is an archive of email I exchanged with James Randi regarding an interview (allegedly) with Alan Moore archived at the Eddie Campbell Comics web site and also archived via the Google cache:

My editorial comments are included in brackets [].

Dear Mr. Randi:

The comment you posted on July 6 [, 2001,]

     I find these "skeletons" being referred to, I've looked in all my
     closets, and there's nary a bone in there to be found.

reminded me of an article posted at the following address:

http://www.eddiecampbellcomics.com/birthcaul/alan1.html

regarding an interview with Alan Moore, who is a talented writer of
comic books, including "From Hell", "V for Vendetta", "MiracleMan", "The
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen", "The Birth Caul", "Promethea", and
others.

The relevant excerpts follow: 
[MDA refers to Matthew de Abuitua for The Idler and AM refers to Alan Moore]

     MDA: But there are lot of recessive genes. The
     Fundamentalist Christians exist to hold the novelty in
     American society in check. In this country, the traditions of
     monarchy and parliament function in a similar way. There is a
     lot of inertia within traditional political and economic
     structures designed to hold culture and society in place,
     where they are now. I can't see how any force of change
     could overcome these historical power bases.

     AM: In terms of almost everything, things are getting more
     vaporous, more fluid. National boundaries are being eroded by
     technology and economics. Most of us work for companies that, if
     you trace it back, exist within another country. You are paid in an
     abstract swarm of bytes. Consequently, the line on a map means
     less and less. The territorial imperatives that until very recently
     have been the main reason for war start to make way. As The
     physical and material world gives way to this infosphere, these
     things become less and less important. The nationalists then go
     into a kind of death spasm, where they realise where the map is
     evaporating, and there is only response to that is to dig their
     hooves in. To stick with nationalism at its most primitive, brutal
     form. The same thing happens with religion, and that is the
     reasons behind the Fundamentalist Christians. If you look at the
     power of the Church, starting from the end of the Dark Ages up
     until the end of the Nineteenth century, you can see a solid power
     base there with a guaranteed influence over the development of
     society. If you look at this century, it is a third division team facing
     relegation. Fundamentalism in religion is the same as the political
     fundamentalism represented by various nationalist groups, or in
     science. Take the Committee for Scientific Investigation for
     Claims of the Paranormal, the ones who hounded Uri Geller, James Randi
     - The Amazing Randi - persecuted Uri Geller and when he found
     he couldn't disprove Geller's claims resorted to suggesting
     Geller was a paedophile, and getting his ass sued, quite justifiably.

     MDA: Was he the man who put up the reward for anyone who
     could perform a paranormal act that he couldn't replicate
     with conjuring?

     AM: Yes. As if that proved anything.

     MDA: It was an amazingly effective stunt though, it lodges
     in their mind and when you talk about paranormal acts, they
     respond with 'well, why hasn't that person taken Randi's
     money?'.

     AM: Randi says he can do it by tricks, so the person making
     the claim must have done it by tricks, which is fallacious.

My understanding is that Uri Geller did sue you, but I have not found
any primary sources indicating that you suggested that Uri Geller was a
paedophile.  I also thought that you actually won the litigation, though
it did exhaust much of your MacArthur Foundation Genius Grant.  Of
course, I never realized that you found that you couldn't disprove Uri
Geller's claims!

Can you provide the firsthand information to refute the allegations
raised in this interview?

Thank you,
Blaise Byron Faint

This posting illustrates quite well how opinions, quotations, statements,
attitudes, philosophies, and actions have been invented for me -- situations
which never existed.  This, so that they can knock down the straw men they
have created.

> [Randi] . . . resorted to suggesting Geller was a paedophile, and getting
his ass sued, quite justifiably.<

Never happened, my accusing UG of any such thing.  Oh yes, Geller has sued
me MANY times, but for things I've said that he didn't like.  Despite that,
I've never paid out a dime to ANY of those who have sued me.

>MDA: Was he the man who put up the reward for anyone who could perform a
paranormal act that he couldn't replicate with conjuring?<

>AM: Yes. As if that proved anything.<

Never happened.  My offer, widely published for decades now, is for the
performance of ANY paranormal, occult, or supernatural ability or event
under proper observing conditions.  Replication by me would prove nothing,
and has never been part of the challenge.  Though, it's true, I can do and
have done the Geller demonstrations by trickery, while he claims he uses
divine powers.

>AM: Randi says he can do it by tricks, so the person making the claim must
have done it by tricks, which is fallacious.<

Never happened.  Fiction.  I have never made such a statement, nor would I.

>I never realized that you found that you couldn't disprove Uri Geller's
claims!<

Proving a negative is not what I do.  No one -- including myself -- can
prove that there is NOT a Barbie doll on the Moon.  I require that the
person making the claim prove the claim, that's all.  I can show that Geller
has been caught doing exactly what a conjuror would do in any demonstration,
but I can never prove that he DID that.  Follow?

>Can you provide the firsthand information to refute the allegations raised
in this interview?<

No, I cannot.  This is a profoundly silly question.  Just think about it.
It would mean providing you with every statement that I ever made, to prove
that the statements claimed, were not made.  In any case,  I will not.  Ask
those making the claims to prove that their claims are true.  Sound
familiar?  I'm not making any claim; they are.  Ask them to prove it.

                            James Randi

> . . .  these statements about you have not been publicly challenged (to my
knowledge).<

I really don't care.  Those who follow my work, know that these are
irresponsible fantasies.  I could spend my whole day just trying to
neutralize the canards, but I'm far to busy to do that, since a new crop
would immediately crop up.  This is my Hydra, and I have to tolerate it.

>Rather than asking you to refute the allegations made in that interview, I
meant to ask you simply to address them, which I believe you did do in your
original response.<

I hope so.

>If you are going to address the Alan Moore interview via the JREF web site,
then you need not respond to this email . . . as I could then simply point
to the archive at JREF to offer a rebuttal to the Alan Moore interview.<

No, I've no interest.

>Otherwise, may I have your permission to post your response to my email to
the web?<

Anything I send out is automatically released for distribution -- unless
specifically embargoed or marked confidential.  Please use it as you see
fit.

>I would not omit a single word of your text, and would simply offer this as
an attempt to rebut the statements made in the Alan Moore interview.<

Though I admire your intent, I assure you that it is a useless endeavor.
These people not only WANT the drivel to be true, they NEED it to be true,
else I have a situation they cannot answer to, and they know it.  They are
busy making and nurturing their straw men, and they will walk right over the
reality as if it were not there.  These are desperate people!  They
constantly claim that the million dollars is not there, but refuse my
invitation to check it out.  They tell of claimants who they say have won
the million and were refused payment, but no names or dates are ever given
as proof.  They bleat that I would design the tests so that the prize could
not be won, and ignore the fact that the tests are designed and carried out
by independent, competent, persons of their own choosing.  They NEED their
lies to be true.

Thank you for your interest, but I think that you can see how impossible it
is for me to prove that I never said something....!

                        James Randi

        Journalists should not invent stories, "fudge" facts, or foster false
        impressions.

        Doing your work means that you do not accept the word of somebody else; you
        check the facts yourself.

I do not have contact information for Mr. Moore, but I will be happy to post his response here if that is agreeable to him.

Last modified by Blaise Byron Faint on: December 29, 2002