'Quest' is a fortnightly publication aimed at children between about eleven and fifteen. It has a scientific and technological basis covering different subjects each issue. Among items so far covered are brain power, transport, money, weather, weapons, and crime busting. In the latter edition they explained how to make a lie detector using a simple electrical test meter. For Christmas they have produced a special edition called 'The Science of Magic'. In theory this was a great idea, to describe and explain magic of all types: conjuring, confidence tricks, the paranormal, and special effects in television and films. Commissioned as a consultant and writer I suggested a number of magic tricks which readers could try and wrote about illusions and famous magicians.
The publishers, Marshall Cavendish, also commissioned Lewis Jones to write about 'the science of illusion' and Bob Couttie (author of 'Forbidden Knowledge') to write on 'sleight of hand (great cons)' and 'magic of the mind'. With a team like this, it looked as though the end product would be rational and responsible. I agreed to validate the copy before publication, believing that this would ensure that no nonsense would be included. In the end though Marshall Cavendish didn't get back to me to validate the copy, possibly because I had disagreed with the editor over their consultancy payment. (The original daily rate I had been promised turned out to be for one day plus two half-days.) Or perhaps, like so many journalists they thought they knew everything. In any case, the finished publication was an example of the very worst in publishing. Lewis Jones and I have written to Marshall Cavendish listing around thirty examples of gullibility and inaccuracy.
Two of our main complaints concern a couple of projects which 'Quest' readers are encouraged to do. The first is to make a cardboard pyramid to show how a piece of butter can be 'preserved outside the fridge'; the second how to 'find hidden objects with your mind' by dowsing. If these projects had been presented objectively there would have been little motive to complain, even though such tests would have been too complicated for 'Quest' readers (and editors?). But the way these projects were positively presented, any negative results would have looked like failures, especially in the dowsing test as readers were informed that 'American research has shown that 99 per cent of the people tested could successfully use dowsing rods to find water or hidden objects'.
The following are a few other examples of the gullible nonsense peddled to children in this dreadful publication:
* Doris Stokes 'heard messages from the dead'.
* Of Uri Geller: 'Apart from reproducing other people's drawings by telepathic means and mending badly damaged watches and clocks, Geller is best remembered for causing metal to bend just by stroking it.'
* Also: He 'could make metal keys, spoons and forks bend just by stroking them - and continue to bend after he had left'. No comment of mine is necessary!
* A caption under a photograph of a man lying face down on a bed of nails states that 'the weight on each nail is less than 10 grams'. This would require a 10 stone person to be supported on about 6000 nails. The photograph showed a bed of only forty or fifty nails, some of which did not support the fakir at all.
* Although the article I submitted on illusions clearly stated that the Indian Rope Trick is a myth, a caption to a photograph claims that it isn't. Quest added two paragraphs to my article, giving possible explanations which I hadn't included because they are so absurd. The sub-editor took these explanations from a book which I had loaned to him. If he thought I had overlooked them he could at least have had the sense to consult me.
* In two places 'Quest' claim that con-men perform the three card trick by palming the queen and replacing it with a different card. Such a move is not only risky, it is totally unnecessary for a successful con.
Having been paid by Marshall Cavendish for my contribution I don't know - or care - whether it is ethical for me to say so, but I can't recommend this or any other edition of 'Quest'. But if the editors and publishers question my ethics, I suggest they get their own house in order first. They have a great responsibility to the young people they earn their living from.
Mark Twain is not exactly well known for his skepticism even though Prometheus Books have published an anthology of his works under the title 'Mark Twain: Selected Writings of an American Skeptic'. An article of his from 1909 passed to me by Lewis Jones included a couple of quotes which I like enough to pass on to you:
'......if it is a Miracle, any sort of evidence will answer, but if it is a Fact, proof is necessary."
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and a seal.'