• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
Roll up for Roland's IOT ouija.

Features USB, Bluetooth and WIFI. Predictive plancheing to assist comms and a ring of emojii as well as alphabet and level of hell indication.

I'm particularly thick at the moment as I just googled it thinking you meant Roland were branching out from making keyboards and other music kit. Then the penny dropped.
facepalm_zpsb1430f21.gif
 
I'm a bit of a sucker for a good biography/autobiography (one of my very favourite examples being Frank Walkley's "Clogs were my Life") and I've just finished the second volume of Danny Baker's memoirs. He has a very good knack of telling stories against himself, plus the reasons why Hoodwink never made it to our screens are entertainingly preposterous. In short, the book, and its predecessor, are well worth your time. Mr Baker reads FT - in the unlikely event that he treads these boards incognito with us, I hope he'll forgive my sharing the following story (pp.242-243 in the Kindle version):

The problem now was that, when you’re ten or eleven, waiting for longer than twenty seconds to engage with a chatty wraith tends to test one’s patience, so most kids would give the sessions a bit of a helping hand by shoving the glass around the letters themselves while feigning shock and panic. You could always tell when one of your mates was manufacturing the mystery because whatever phantom they were pretending to be would have a penchant for words like ‘bum’, ‘bastard’ and ‘tit’, coupled with a curious eagerness to point out who around the table was, in fact, a secret homosexual. Thus 99 per cent of these initially sombre séances rapidly descended into farce.

Thus one day in Stephen Micalef’s house, Mark Jeffries, Tommy Hodges, Peter King and I all promised, promised, promised that we wouldn’t fake it and no matter how long it took we would wait until the glass began to move purely guided by an unseen force. After a few failed attempts at this avowed discipline – I believe a Mr John Arse put in an appearance at one point – we were off again with all our index fingers atop the beaker as it slid around the letters. The name George was forming up and, as usual, as the fourth letter revealed itself we were all noisily accusing each other of ‘pushing it’ and creating the kind of racket that might dissipate the chances of any drifting ghoul wanting to stick around. After the glass came to rest it was decided to ask a question that would flush out any charlatans, but we were momentarily stumped as to what that might be. Our ethereal chum waited patiently while we thrashed this out. Then I came up with the idea that I should remove a coin from my pocket and hold it in my hand without looking at the year engraved upon it. If the spirit guessed this date correctly then we knew we had a live one. I took a penny, one of the pre-decimal large ones, and without so much as glancing at it put it in my back pocket and sat down again.
‘I thought you were going to hold it,’ said Pete.
‘Well, you’d all say I nicked a look at it if I did, so now nobody can, can they?’ I replied. I wanted this thing watertight. Tom remarked that the ghost would be forced to look at my bum now to find out what year was on the coin and after a good chuckle at this we asked the question formally.

The glass began to slide: 1 . . . 9 . . . 1 . . . 3. 1913. Excitedly taking the penny from my pocket, I stared at the numbers beneath Britannia wielding her trident on the reverse: 1913. I showed this around and a strange sickly silence fell over us all. This was a bit weird. Placing our fingers back on the glass we started to ask each other what to request next. Our voices now were low and serious, all the effervescence knocked out by the inexplicable accuracy of the stunt. Before we could agree on a suitable enquiry, the glass began to move again: C . . . H . . . I . . . L . . . D . . . R . . . E . . . N.
‘Children!’ we all gasped as one, searching each other’s eyes for the deeper meaning of this. Then it continued on. S . . . T . . . O . . . P . . . N . . . O . . . W.
We paused and stared at each other, quite terrified. I broke the spell. ‘I don’t like it!’ I said, my voice rising with fear. ‘I don’t like this bit!’ And we all jumped up and ran to the front door to leg it into the square outside.

I have absolutely no explanation for what happened there. All those who were present can confirm the events as recorded, and even if you rationalize the coin revelation as mere subconscious chance, none of us can think of a single reason why any of us would have concocted the mundane yet petrifying phrase that followed it. It really happened and there it is.

Possibly I should have brooded upon this bizarre incident more and allowed it to influence my world view from then on but it was soon made light of and only many years later did we all start to question what we experienced that afternoon. Thankfully, none of us have drawn a single spiritual conclusion from it and, quite sensibly, keep the story in a box labelled Derren Brown rather than a crystal ball named Uri Geller.
 
I'm genuinely scared of Ouija boards and I don't really know why. I have several packs of Tarot cards in the house and they don't bother me, but an Ouija board would go straight on the bonfire.

There's no question of me having been scared by people using one (unless I've suppressed the memory really well) because if someone got one out at a party or whatever I'd be on my bike.

I don't think it matters whether it really contacts dead people or demons or whatever or whether its all in people's hades.

Sorry, I mean heads. That was a genuine mistype that I thought was worth preserving. See how dangerous they are? Even thinking about them can let stuff through. :) sorta...
 
I never felt comfortable with using a Ouija board because the process of creating results (moving the planchette around) seemed to inevitably stress participants into directing their attention toward making something happen and making whatever happened textually coherent (in spelling).

The whole idea was to become 'open' or 'loose' and let whatever-may-be-out-there affect your movements. Once participants start getting concerned about generating any results, or finalizing results in progress, they're no longer operating in such an 'passively open to whatever' mode.

Another thing that bothered me about Ouija was that the purpose of using it wasn't the same (or even clear at all ... ) from one session to the next. Some folks approached it in the original context of communicating with elsewhere. Others approached it as an instrument for personal divination. Ambiguities arising from multiple participants' sometimes obviously conflicting objectives and expectations undermined the confidence one had in the results' coherence, much less their meaning.

I was far more comfortable with the more structured context Tarot cards afforded.
 
Last edited:
So they say. I'm still scared of the bloody things. Dark nights, no problem. Ghost hunts, no problem. Having friends who were variously into the occult - never turned a hair.

Ouija board, problem.

Thing is, even without anything supernatural occurring, stuff can still happen. I gave up doing Tarot readings, which I used to do as a party trick (with the ulterior motive of attracting girls, of course) because despite the fact that I was making it up as I went along, people would start changing what they intended to do based on my readings.

Well, you can't exactly make it up as you go along, because you have to be consistent regarding the basic meaning of each card, though you can spin it based on context. Also everyone thinks Death is the nasty card when actually its the Tower.

Ditto. Same here.
 
I was thinking of a more 'jokey' ouija board. Something with lots of devils, skulls and pac man ghosts on it. As well as the alphabet I'd have the numbers 0 - 13 ;), perhaps a portrait of Crowley and instead of just 'yes' and 'no', I'd want 'wtf?' and 'lol' also. And right in the middle a big sign saying 'Just do it!'.

:clap:
 
Thing is, even without anything supernatural occurring, stuff can still happen. I gave up doing Tarot readings, which I used to do as a party trick (with the ulterior motive of attracting girls, of course) because despite the fact that I was making it up as I went along, people would start changing what they intended to do based on my readings.

A friend of mine, who I'll refer to as P, used to do Tarot readings and, like you, she gave up the practice for that very reason. P grew up in a small community and when she was a teenager her grandmother taught her how to do readings. Some years ago, P was visiting the town while on holiday and she ran into a woman she had known at school. The woman recalled P doing Tarot readings when they were younger and she asked P to do one for her. P agreed despite the fact she was never terribly keen on this woman when they were at school. P gave her a reading which stressed positive things, saying she would enjoy good health, success, happiness, etc., and the two then went their separate ways.

About two or three years later P was once again in the town on holiday and she again crossed paths with this woman, who was very pleased to see her. Apparently the woman was doing very well and was quite happy with her life. She thanked P for having given her such a wonderful reading. P was glad the woman was so happy but she was nevertheless taken aback by the encounter. P said it made her realise the strength of the power of suggestion. It also made her acutely aware that things might have gone very differently if she had given a negative reading that suggested impending unhappiness or misfortune. Although P wasn't keen on the woman she didn't wish her any harm, and she was unsettled by the thought that a negative reading might have sent the woman on a downward spiral. Obviously P wouldn't have been responsible for any unpleasantness the woman might have experienced, but it bothered her to think she had come close to planting a seed of negativity in someone's mind.
 
I have so enjoyed reading this thread, long may it go on :)

We have 2 ouija boards in the house but I must admit they havent been used since our paranormal investigation events nights. I have absolutely no issue working with them as to me, they are just another tool of focus, much like pendulums, crystal balls, tarot cards, angel cards etc. I will say I have my trusted people to work the boards with, those I trust to just go with the flow, even if all we get is gobbledegook. That said, there has been many a night out on an investigation, when the messages that have been spelled out have made sense with reference to the location we have been visiting. I have never yet encountered anything bad either during or after the use of these boards though thankfully!
 
Is this spoiling it? Mystery solved?

Ouija boards. You either love 'em or hate 'em... or you're one of the undead and someone with one keeps calling you back up to chat, sort of like the paranormal equivalent of butt-dialing. Either way, it's been immensely popular since its invention by Elijah Bond in 1890 thanks to its supposed ability to "talk to the dead". Over a century later it's become quite the pop culture staple. Untold thousands of spooked-out kids have toyed with it at sleepovers—and dozens of supposed demonic possessions have allegedly (key word: allegedly!) occurred because of it.

But it turns out there's a far more pedantic explanation of why Ouija boards work. And it's a lot more boring than talking to dead people. Thanks to a landmark Danish study—available here—from the Interactive Minds Centreat Aarhus University, researchers have figured out what makes ouija boards actually work, all because they used what other studies haven't: eye-tracking devices and huge amounts of data analysis.

40 people were asked to participate in the study and play 2 consecutive "games" on the Ouija board. All wore eye-tracking devices for both games: during the first game they were asked separately to spell the word 'Baltimore', and in the second they were asked to play as usual (i.e. without a set phrase in mind to spell). ...

https://bigthink.com/ned-dymoke/new-study-reveals-the-science-behind-ouija-boards
 
Nice to see ideomotor phenomenon proved beyond doubt for Ouija boards... but hadn't this been done already? I'm sure I've read that explanation before.
 
Nice to see ideomotor phenomenon proved beyond doubt for Ouija boards... but hadn't this been done already? I'm sure I've read that explanation before.

So, those Christians who play with ouija boards then lose their sh** and think Beelzebub is after their souls... ideomotor phenomenon says it is all just their own subconscious? That means they were already possessed by the devil!
 
I don't think there's ever been much doubt about the ideomotor effect being implicted in the behaviour of ouija boards, planchettes and improvised variations upon these devices, but does that prove beyond doubt that there might not be something else going on under certain circumstances? Cf. water divining / dowsing.

I'm not saying I personally believe there is (actually I think dowsing is a different matter) and how a discarnate entity might interface with people's nervous systems I've no idea but y'know; 'absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence'...
 
Last edited:
What about the paranormal activity that's suppose to have happened? Is everyone lying?
 
I posted recently about a paranormal investigator who places all ghostly happenings into 3 categories; Hauntings (residual replay where no interaction in possible), Ghost (active entity who can be communicated with and is aware of our presence) and Psychic (our own psychic energies manifesting either in the physical world i.e. poltergeists or just in our minds). I like it. It's neat and all encompassing. Not sure I buy it but it works.

So, given this hypothesis then it "might" be possible (with a huge emphasis on might) that using a Ouija board acts to focus our own inherant psychic energies. By that I mean that the board itself is harmless and cannot be used to communicate with the dead. I have always said so. However, the act of using it, or indeed acting out some other ritual, may allow access to our energies or allow them to focus.

This could then manifest something physical (movement of an object, poltergeist activity) or something more internal (visions, noises, voices etc). Even witnessed by several people who have become "in tune".

This is all wild speculation (both on the reserachers part and mine) but I have also wondered over some of the physical evidence surrounding Ouija boards. The participants unwittingly control the glass on a subconscious level but, if what people claim is true (that they have witnessed other phenomenon; I've never seen any photographs or films - it's all anecdotal) then there must be a reason for that and their own psychic energy creating something seems slightly more plausible to me than dear old departed Aunt Mable coming back to throw a whisky glass around.
 
Doesn't even need to be psychic - the subconscious can be powerful at times, especially when you're at prime suggestibility. The fact that Ouija boards started out as a parlour game is significant, I think - was anybody going on about psychic powers back then? I doubt it. It was simply one of those tricks to make you go, "fancy that!" like "pick a card and I'll tell you what it is", that sort of thing.
 
Doesn't even need to be psychic - the subconscious can be powerful at times, especially when you're at prime suggestibility.

Agreed ... An apparent coordination between actions of the operators (pointer-movers) interpreted as a coherent message means nothing with respect to 'psychic' manifestations or powers unless you ascribe them to the operators or the results.


The fact that Ouija boards started out as a parlour game is significant, I think - was anybody going on about psychic powers back then? I doubt it. It was simply one of those tricks to make you go, "fancy that!" like "pick a card and I'll tell you what it is", that sort of thing.

The patented Ouija board was indeed marketed as a game or pastime. However, 'talking boards' had been widely employed in spiritualist circles and as communication aids for the mute prior to Ouija's arrival. Certain divination aids are analogous to talking boards as well.

Ouija was adopted, and eventually co-opted, by folks interested in spiritualism, psychic matters, and divination within the following decades (in the early part of the 20th century). These applications weren't part and parcel of the original inventor's specification for the board's intended usage - or at least he hadn't emphasized them.

It's never been clear to me whether the inventor (Elijah Bond) really considered Ouija a parlor game device versus a way to formally 'own' and commercialize something he'd discovered spiritualists sometimes used. Did spiritualist practices inspire Bond to deliberately devise, patent, and market a tool they might buy, or did the spiritualist / psychic angle get projected onto the Ouija later?

In general, the evidence indicates the latter interpretation (spiritualist / psychic devotees adopted Bond's game). Whether Bond foresaw this - and perhaps was banking on it - is still a mystery to me.
 
Doesn't even need to be psychic - the subconscious can be powerful at times, especially when you're at prime suggestibility.

Agreed. However, I was referring to collective experiences apart from the planchette/glass moving, such as objects levitating with multiple witnesses, shadow figures etc. By psychic energy, the author I mentioned meant a natural power of the mind which he just coined as psychic energy. The abiity of the mind to manifest thoughts in the physical world. Thus one or more people creating an actual physical event as oppossed to just a mass hallucination.

As I mentioned, I am a strong disbeliever of spirit communication, Ouija borads, seance and spiritism. I am just putting forth a hypothesis I read and that the ritual and mystique surrounding the board, the focused attention and loaded atmosphere being a trigger.
 
Surely it has to be done with at least 2 people, otherwise there's little doubt you've moved it yourself.

If the scientific study is accurate, there's little doubt you moved it yourself anyway.
 
The late famous astrologer and 'Seeress of Washington' Jeane Dixon (she of the 'Jeane Dixon effect', where wrong prophecies are forgotten and only correct ones remembered) was observed to use a ouija board alone.

She made a fortune let's not knock it! :D
 
Oh...and I thought she told fortunes...I can see what's happened there.

Heh, she made a fortune by making up fortunes.

Dixon was famous for apparently predicting the JFK assassination. She didn't, but was able to pretend she did because, she reckoned, nobody would print such a prediction before it happened. Her final words just before dying of a heart attack were 'I knew this would happen.'
 
Back
Top