|
NEXT@CNN
EPA Relaxes Rules On Clean Air; Interview With Fellow Magician About David Blaine' New Stunt; Scientists Use X-Ray's On Ancient Egyptian Grave.
Aired August 31, 2003 - 17:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Well, welcome to NEXT@CNN for this Sunday, the last day of August. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.
Coming up this hour: the EPA relaxes rules on clean air. It's a big move that the Bush administration says will help clean up pollution, but environmentalists say don't hold your breath. We'll hear some conflicting opinions about whether it helps or hurts the environment.
Illusionist David Blaine is set to work his magic in London next week. We'll talk to someone who says he knows the secret behind it all, but will he tell us?
And could this be Queen Nefertiti? How scientists are using x- ray technology to help identify this 3,000 year old mummy.
But first, federal agencies have been ordered to step up efforts to weed out job applicants who tout degrees from so-called diploma mills. The search was prompted by the disclosure recently that a senior official in the Homeland Security Department had a degree from an unaccredited university. Services that will sell you a degree for little or no class work are booming thanks to the Internet.
Joining us with more is former FBI Agent Allen Ezell. He headed a taskforce in the 1980s that busted dozens of fraudulent diploma operations. Good to see you.
ALLEN EZELL, FMR. FBI AGENT: Good afternoon.
WHITFIELD: Well how prevalent is this problem, diploma mills versus places where you can actually get phony diplomas?
EZELL: Diploma mills is a worldwide operation. It's a million- dollar operation now. The Internet has just taken it worldwide.
WHITFIELD: Well, what is the difference between diploma mills and these phony -- or these Web sites where you can kind of get phony diplomas saying you have a Ph.D. or saying you have a Bachelor of Arts and various things?
EZELL: Well, they're two different things. Number one out there are the Web sites that offer you a counterfeit degree from legitimate traditional accredited universities. I have previously purchased a degree from -- a counterfeit degree in the name of the University of North Carolina, where one of my daughters went, and the other, the University of Florida, where my other daughter graduated from. Those Web sites sell you degrees from legitimate, traditional accredited universities, some even offer a transcript service and transcript verification.
WHITFIELD: Go ahead.
EZELL: On the other hand, you have diploma mills, which may only exist in cyberspace or at a mail drop. And there, in essence, they are selling you a degree without making you earning it. And education is really not the issue. It's basically a checkbook degree.
WHITFIELD: Are there some real red flags to look out for? Can you tell the difference? Do they look very similar online?
EZELL: Yes, ma'am, they do. Some of the things to look for, number one, where is it located -- number one, does the Web site even show you the address, does it tell you where it is? Number two, does it have a physical address? Number three, how fast can you get your degree?
Can you get a discount for cash by paying all of your money up front? Take a look at the postmark when you get the literature. Does the postmark -- is that the same as the return address? How fast are you getting the degree? How much is it costing?
WHITFIELD: And sometimes it's a bit misleading, because on some of these Web sites it says "This institution is accredited," but come to find out it's accredited overseas. What's the difference being accredited overseas or in the U.S., and why that piece of paper that you get just may not be legit?
EZELL: Well, as you know, we have legitimate accrediting entities in this country that are set up geographically. What we've seen lately are a significant number of fictitious accrediting entities set up by the same criminals running the diploma mills. And they turn around and accredit themselves or rent accreditation to other diploma mills. I would take a look at the accrediting entity and see if it has bona fide these, if it itself is legitimate.
WHIFIELD: Well, let's talk about one specific institution. It's called St. Regis, and they are accredited in Liberia. And was the subject of our discussion yesterday on this very topic. And they actually have a response coming from the Liberian Embassy out of Washington, D.C. which is justifying why this accreditation is, indeed, legit.
They say, "The fee charged by the National Board of Education, which is a Liberian-approved private accreditation agency, is $20,000 to $50,000. Those are U.S. dollars. Their comparatively low fee covers curriculum development, assistance with catalogue publishing, site visits, and other quality assurance inspections to help Liberian- based schools meet the high standards of official recognition by the Education Ministry."
Is that a good enough explanation as to why anyone should think that their degree coming from an accredited university that may be accredited overseas is OK?
EZELL: No, ma'am, I don't think so, keeping in mind that Liberia has had civil war for the last several years, that the government employees themselves have not been paid for two years. The solicitation that their department of education sent to various unaccredited colleges around the world, let me just read you the last paragraph, and you tell me whether education is what is being sold or a piece of paper.
"Once your university can legitimately gain full government recognized and accreditation, your school will join greater strength and credibility and the value and demand for your degrees will soar." What they're doing is...
WHITFIELD: Go ahead. I'm sorry.
EZELL: What they're doing is selling accreditation so that you can sell more degrees. They're not selling education.
WHITFIELD: Well, if it's so confusing for the consumer out there, is this illegal in any way?
EZELL: Well, you're selling a piece of paper that's worthless. It's really what you do with the piece of paper. Now, sure, if I'm telling you that I am, in fact, a college or university, when I am not, yes, that is illegal and that's fraud. But then what am I doing with the piece of paper?
Have I received a transcript with courses and grades that I have no knowledge and have never taken those courses? And then am I using that for employment? Am I indicating to my employer that I, in fact, attended a legitimate college or university and took these courses?
WHITFIELD: So the consumer is just as responsible as the alleged institutions that are instigating this. Allen...
EZELL: Yes, it's a two-bladed sword, correct.
WHITFIELD: OK. Allen Ezell, thanks very much for joining us.
EZELL: You're welcome. Thank you.
WHITFIELD: Of course, if you really want to get your degree online, you have lots of legitimate options out there. Mara Wilcox has more on this growing trend.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MARA WILCOX, CNN FINANCIAL NEWS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It's another late night at the office for A.J. Triano (ph), but he's not working for his employer. He's working for an MBA and doing it entirely online.
A.J. TRIANO, UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX ONLINE: I'm getting my degree online because the economy that we're in, I have to be marketable. I have the drive, and I've got the ambition, and I can prove that in my performance. But without the education behind it to understand the core concepts, it doesn't help me to be as upwardly mobile as I want to be.
I can stay gainfully employed. I just won't be paid as much as I want to be paid to do it.
WILCOX: In a weak economy, many are having trouble just staying employed. That's one reason adults are going back to school in record numbers.
Another factor in the jump, online degree programs have made education much more accessible. Students can log onto live and pre- taped lectures, e-mail their professors and post comments throughout the day and compare notes with classmates using Instant Messenger.
TRACE URDAN, EQUITY ANALYST, THINKEQUITY: It's absolutely an incredibly powerful trend right now. The ease of access that the Internet provides has really opened up a whole new market opportunity for working adults that would like to get a degree but were not able to actually physically come to a campus and make themselves available in the evenings during the week, can now come online and get a high quality degree program when it suits them best.
WILCOX: Half a million students enrolled in fully online education programs this year, and that number is projected to climb steadily. And as a percentage of total enrollments, the number of students learning online is also expected to grow rapidly.
About 86 percent of colleges now have some sort of online program, and top tier universities are signing up. New York University, for example. Anthony Davidson started teaching online at NYU three years ago, and he says he's seen some of the best work in his 20-year career online.
ANTHONY DAVIDSON, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY: People are more open in an online environment. They're going to be more willing to express their opinions. They're going to be more willing to speak up to raise their hand to critique somebody else's work, whereas in an on-site class, you always have a certain significant percentage who remain silent no matter what you try to do.
WILCOX (on camera): Many corporate managers are viewing online degrees with the same credibility as those from brick and mortar institutions. One survey showed that 79 percent rated a distance degree as good as a residential option. That number is up from 50 percent in 1989. And when the name of the school is immediately recognizable to employers, the rating goes to above 90 percent.
Mara Wilcox, CNN Financial News, New York.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
WHITFIELD: Coming up: we'll talk to a long-time resident of this enchanting place about a unique deal signed this week to protect it. That place right there.
And later, we'll talk to someone who says he knows how illusionist David Blaine does it, but will he tell us? Stay tuned.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WHITFIELD: Well, taking a look at some Next News headlines, the International Space Station got a shipment of supplies from home late last night. A Russian Progress spacecraft delivered food, oxygen, magazines, CDs and new satellite phones. The Progress lifted off Friday from the Russian launch facility in Kazhakstan. The two-man crew on the space station has been there for the past four months now.
Also on Friday, a Delta 4 rocket carried an Air Force communications satellite into orbit. It's the 14th and last satellite in a system that will provide secure voice and data communications for the military. The network carries messages between the White House, defense Department and battlefield commanders.
Saving the swamp. It sounds like a messy business, right? But a unique deal involving the government, environmentalists, local residents, and a Fortune 500 corporation is being called a win-win situation for all. This week, Dupont scrapped plans to open a massive mining project next to the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge. Instead, donating 16,000 acres of the land to The Conservation Fund, a national non-profit group.
Joining us is John Kasbohm, a biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. And he's lived and worked around Okefenokee since 1996. John, good to see you.
JOHN KASBOHM, BIOLOGIST: Well, thanks for letting me be here.
WHITFIELD: Well, let's talk about the beauty of this swamp, because I think a lot of folks when they hear the word "swamp," they think mosquitoes, stagnant water. Tell us about why this swamp really should be valued.
KASBOHM: Well, that's a very common misconception. I think what people see when they come to Okefenokee is a big mosaic of different habitat types. We have Pine uplands, marsh wetlands, Cypress forest. It's a very large place; over 438,000 acres for the swamp in total.
WHITFIELD: A huge place. In fact, let's take a closer look at it right now. And we also have some -- almost like satellite images of it to give us kind of a bird's eye view of it. It's quite massive. And we're talking about an additional 16,000 acres that are being donated now out of the goodness of Dupont's heart, I suppose, or maybe it's as part of a campaign such as the one that you and other environmentalists launched that they're seeing the importance of this very natural habitat?
KASBOHM: Well, what this all stemmed was a proposal about titanium mining on the Trail Ridge next to Okefenokee. And you know Okefenokee is such a special place to most Georgians and to the United States in general. And it's a very sensitive ecological treasure. And I think Dupont really saw the value in that in the mining effort and chose not to pursue the mine because of the consequences that it is might cause. WHITFIELD: In fact, we're talking about the titanium minerals you're saying on the Trail Ridge. In what way would that benefit? I mean, what was that mining really supposed to be for? What were these titanium minerals for?
KASBOHM: There were several different minerals that were going to be mined as (UNINTELLIGIBLE) in the Trail Ridge in a dredge process that would have mined the eastern boundary of the refuge. And really, there were some aspects of what that would do to the swamp's hydrology and water movements, air quality, and impacts of visitors that were really a concern to the Fish and Wildlife Service.
WHITFIELD: What potentially could that mining have done to that environment there?
KASBOHM: It could have degraded water quality, air quality, disturbed the solitude for the 400,000 visitors we have that come to the refuge each year. The swamp is a wilderness area. So it's a place that really we want to keep in solitude and protection.
WHITFIELD: And something people don't think about, there's actually a black bear population there, right, or one that has been watched and really is treasured?
KASBOHM: In the -- it's one of the last four American -- Florida black bear populations left. We have probably around 1,000 black bears in the whole greater Okefenokee system of over a million acres of habitat.
WHITFIELD: And any kind of disruption that mining might bring or just simply so much more foot traffic and machinery being brought in there would not only endanger the wildlife that you have identified, but perhaps there are some real treasured types of wildlife that you haven't even been able to pinpoint yet?
KASBOHM: Well, that's true. And we have five different species that are threatened or endangered animals that live on the area in the swamp and on the Trail Ridge. There are (UNINTELLIGIBLE) woodpeckers, indigo snakes, flatwood salamanders are a few of those. And they all use those upland habitats that we have on Trail Ridge that the mine would have impacted.
WHITFIELD: And you see, quickly, now that Dupont perhaps has set an example and you could see how potentially other large corporations of its magnitude just might be just as generous in the future?
KASBOHM: I think Dupont has set a marvelous example, and they really should be commended for what they're doing here on Trail Ridge next to Okefenokee.
WHITFIELD: All right. John Kasbohm, thanks very much and thanks for introducing us to another view of the Okefenokee swamp. I just like saying it. Now hopefully I'll get a chance to see it.
All right. Thanks a lot, John. Well there's still much more coming up this hour. Deep sea diving with famed oceanographer Jean Michael Cousteau. And how come coral reefs are in failing health.
And what would the king look like if we were alive today? Scientists have created an image using the latest in computer technology, and we'll be exploring that a bit later.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WHITFIELD: Jean Michelle Cousteau's latest voyage to the bottom of the sea yielded spectacular views and some tragic surprises about the state of coral reefs and the world's oceans. Here's Cousteau in his own words.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEAN MICHELLE COUSTEAU, OCEANOGRAPHER: The mission was discovering a new place, which we didn't know, and to continue the process of turning this giant expansive ocean reef's sea mounts (ph) and islands into the number 14 marine sanctuary for the United States. If that happens, it will be as big as the Great Barrier Reef in Australia.
When you go out there, and because of the protection that has been put in place, you're going to find a great abundance of marine life which is very friendly, because there is no threat. They're not used to the presence of humans. So we were able to approach them, Galapagos sharks, giant jacks (ph). At night, we were able to dive with the Galapagos sharks, and for the first time, I believe, observe them feeding and also see how much they live in harmony with everything else, such as the endangered species of monk seals. It was a very moving, touching and comforting experience.
I was prepared to see a kind of trash which is known, hundreds of tons of nets which are coming from everywhere, either abandoned or lost or purposely discarded nets. I was not prepared to see as much other forms of debris as there is on some of those islands. And certainly, the one that shocked me the most was the amount of small pieces of plastic, millions of cigarette lighters, tooth brushes, toys from kids, bottlecaps coming from all over the world, and many, many other objects.
All of that is floating on the ocean and is being picked up by the albatross, and they bring it to their chicks, regurgitate that into the chick. And in many cases, the chicks will be fed but cannot get rid of it and will die. So there are thousands and thousands of birds who are dying because of these plastics. It's a shocking sight.
So we really have to understand that we cannot continue using the ocean as a universal sewer, as a trash can. It is a life support system. We have to educate ourselves not to continue trashing the planet.
Reefs all over the world are, at the moment, effected by global warming. It's not a joke. It's a reality. Coral bleaching is happening at a very fast pace, and the scientific community today agrees that 27 to 30 percent of the reefs of the world are already dead. And if nothing happens in the next 25 years, it can be as much as 60 percent.
We see it all the time. Why should we care? Well, we should care because coral reefs do many things. They feed third world countries.
They are also protecting by creating a barrier, if you like, against wave action, against hurricanes. From an economical purpose, when you look at the countries which have coral reefs, tourism is a very important thing. And finally, there's a great deal of unknown species which can be studied, analyzed and eventually uncover certain compounds which can be used for pharmaceutical products, which can save lives. So we're talking about the welfare of human beings.
Everything is connected, and diversity is synonymous of stability. My father used to say, "People protect what they love." If we protect the ocean, we protect ourselves.
I really believe that the answer is the young generations. Provide them the information in the schools, at home with good television programs, on the Internet, and after they become adults, they will be able to make better decisions.
There are problems. Those problems need to be addressed and taken care of. Until your last breath, it's not too late. And I'm a strong believer that we can turn things around and for the better.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
WHITFIELD: Some unbelievable images there.
Well, coming up in our next half hour: the Bush administration eases air pollution rules on power plants. The EPA says that will help make sure the lights stay on. Environmentalists say it's a dangerous decision.
Back after a break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WHITFIELD: The Bush administration is easing up part of the Clean Air Act. The change means older power stations and industrial plants will be able to add on and make upgrades without having to upgrade their pollution control systems. Industries say this makes it easier for utilities and other businesses to modernize, increase efficiency, and boost production.
Environmentalists, however, say it will mean more pollution. And they say the Bush administration is caving in to business interests. Here to help flesh out the debate, Nat Mund, who works on clean air issues for the Sierra Club and Scott Segal, a lawyer who works with the Electric Reliability Coordination Council. Good to see both of you, gentlemen.
NAT MUND, SIERRA CLUB: Good afternoon.
WHITFIELD: Well Nat, let me begin with you. If these refineries and companies are not expected to use any kind of high-tech means in which to clean up their act, how is this going to directly impact Americans?
MUND: Well, air pollution has been connected to a whole series of health problems, including asthma, heart attacks, and a variety of other serious diseases. This rule change by the Bush administration weakens the protections that we've had that require factories, including power plants, refineries, and chemical plants to reduce their pollution when they make changes that would otherwise increase their pollution.
WHITFIELD: Well, if that's the case, if it's going to weaken any kind of protection of air quality, then Scott, why in the world would the Bush administration sign off on this?
SCOTT SEGAL, ELECTRIC UTILITY ATTORNEY: Well, I don't believe that is the case. The fact of the matter is, the existing program, which is called New Source Review, has created powerful disincentives that keep people from modernizing facilities that improve the efficiency of those facilities. When efficiency declines, it's very difficult to adequately protect the environment, to maintain a safe workplace, or to maintain a reliable electrical power system, which I know consumers are only too familiar with.
WHITFIELD: Well, Scott, another way of interpreting this, some are saying that the Bush administration is simply caving in to big business, and that's what this really is.
SEGAL: I think I can disprove that. The fact of the matter is that the actual standards under the Clean Air Act which force serial reductions in the amount of pollution and have done so -- so much so that we've had massive declines in air emissions over the last 20 years, those protections are completely unaffected by what the administration recently did. Those are reflected in what are called air pollution control permits that set standards for each and every one of the facilities we're talking about.
WHITFIELD: All right. Well, Nat, let me let you respond to that.
MUND: Sure. The simple fact is that, under the old law, that if you made a change that didn't increase the amount of pollution that you were producing, you didn't have to install modern pollution controls. It's that simple.
The change allows people to spend up to 20 percent of the cost of the factory on new -- on replacing equipment without controlling for pollution control. This is readily available technology. It's out there. It's easily -- it's readily available, and we think that companies should be required to install it to protect our communities.
WHITFIELD: Well, Nat, we're talking about mostly impacted are these coal-fired electric plants. And what kind of pollution are they ordinarily emitting, and why should there be some sort of control on just what is coming out of those stacks, et cetera?
MUND: Well, the pollution from coal plants and many of these other factories is, you know, soot and smog-forming pollution that results -- and a variety of other chemicals as well -- that results in those serious health impacts that we talked about just a minute ago. And there's technology out there that's available that these companies can go ahead and put in place on those factories when they make their changes in order to reduce the impact that those pollutants are going to have on the communities that they're in.
WHITFIELD: Scott, there's some feeling that some of these changes are the result of or in some way have been impacted by the latest power outage that affected eight U.S. states and part of Canada. Do you see a direct correlation here?
SEGAL: Well, I really don't, although I do see a direct benefit on reliability of electricity. The reason I don't see a correlation is because these changes in the rules have been under way essentially for 10 years.
Eight public hearings, hundreds of thousands of rule-making comments on the record. So there's a long administrative record that supported timely release of the rules. I would say this, though, it's as simple as this: if you cannot maintain or if there are disincentives to maintaining electric power plants, it only stands to reason that you'll have more outages.
And if you have more outages, that's precisely the type of activity which consumers -- which maximally disadvantages consumers. It's better to maintain the facility, make it a safer workplace and also make it better for consumers.
WHITFIELD: Well, Nat, what's your best guess as to what provoked these changes?
MUND: Well, I mean, if you just look back, the Bush administration, since they took office, have been looking at weakening this part of the Clean Air Act. The Cheney Energy Taskforce issued recommendations on this very topic back in 2001, despite a study by EPA that indicated that this wasn't causing the problem. The same old answers to new problems. You know, they pointed to this with the California blackout, and now we're hearing discussions about this being related to it as well.
WHITFIELD: All right. Scott, you're an attorney. The New York attorney general says that he plans to sue. Does he have a chance?
SEGAL: Well, the fact that Eliot Spitzer said he might sue is surprising to absolutely no one. Eliot Spitzer has sued on almost -- the administrative process on almost every one of the Clean Air Act reforms. None of those lawsuits have resulted in any protection of human health and the environment. By contrast, this rule would, of course, remove that (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
WHITFIELD: And Nat, you're going to have the last word on this. Do you see other states following New York's lead? MUND: Well, we're hearing that other states might be doing so. I know that Maine's congressional delegation in a bipartisan effort sent a leter to the president asking that EPA withdraw this rule.
WHITFIELD: All right. Nat Mund and Scott Segal, thank you, gentlemen, for joining us.
SEGAL: Thank you.
MUND: Thanks.
WHITFIELD: Well, taking a break right now. But when we come back, it's an active weather cycle right now with three different storms stirring. We'll have the very latest on the forecast.
And later, is this Queen Nefertiti? How x-ray technology may help answer that question. Stick around.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WHITFIELD: Also on our beat, the storm watchers are keeping their eyes on three places at once. CNN meteorologist joins us now with the weather of this triple feature for this three-day holiday weekend -- Orelon.
ORELON SIDNEY, CNN METEOROLOGIST: That's right, it's a triple play. And the hurricane hunters are actually on the way out to investigate Hurricane Fabian, which is now up to a Category Four storm. Winds of 135 miles an hour, moving to the West at 12 miles an hour.
Here are the Lesser Antilles. The storm now looks like it's going to start taking more of a northward turn over the next 48 hours, which is excellent news. It's expected to miss the Leeward Islands. Right now it's about 50 00 miles to the east of the Leeward Islands.
There's other good news, too. As we go on into as late as 2:00 p.m. Friday, still looking at a Category Four storm, but somewhere between the Eastern Coast of the U.S. and Bermuda, and it's not expected, at least by most of the forecast models, to hit the U.S. coast.
There is one model that's kind of a holdout and keeps it going a little bit more westward. But all of the rest of them do take the storm and recurve it off the coast, which is certainly good news when you have a storm like this. If it goes over 155 miles an hour, it will become a Category Five. But it's forecast to remain at Category Four through the next 96 hours.
Here is what's left of Grace, still a tropical depression. I'm sure now we'll be talking about the remnants of it. But look at how much showers and thunderstorms we have for Mobile, Alabama, northward through the northern portion of Mississippi, into the southern part of Arkansas, and then curling around the center of low pressure across the western portion or eastern portion of Texas. Heaviest rain now has been generally east of Houston. We've seen in excess of four inches in some locations, and we do have flash flood watches up really right along the Interstate 45 corridor between Houston and the Dallas Fort Worth metroplex. And the rain, of course, could approach up to 10 inches in some areas, especially when you combine it with this stationary front.
This on has already caused problems with flooding across parts of the Midwest. We'll continue to see heavy rain through the great lakes. And of course once all this moisture from Grace combines here, we're going to see quite a washout I think for your Labor Day unfortunately across most of Texas.
Still keeping our eyes, too, on Jimena. This one now is about 305 miles east of Hilo, Hawaii. There are still hurricane watches in effect. Tropical storm warnings also in effect for the big island.
The winds are starting to decrease now, down to 90 miles an hour. And it's expected to keep decreasing. By tomorrow, the center of the storm expected to be about 70 miles south of Hilo and continue pushing on westward.
So you may see some tropical storm force winds, perhaps hurricane force wind gusts. But not expected to make landfall on the island.
So here's your Labor Day forecast. Pretty good for the West, but along this front with the remnants of Grace, the showers and thunderstorms could bring flooding once again to parts of the Mississippi Valley, especially out to the west of Mississippi.
Head in on to the plains states, gorgeous states. High pressure settling in. Kind of hot, of course, for the desert Southwest, and you might see an off and on thunderstorm across parts of Nevada. But the temperatures couldn't get better, especially in the Northeast. Highs will be in the 70s -- Fredricka.
WHITFIELD: All right. Thanks a lot, Orelon. A lot of rain out there.
Well, listen up, Elvis fans. Elvis Presley died 26 years ago. Well, you probably knew that. But if he were alive today, the king would qualify for the AARP discount at the Heartbreak Hotel.
Maybe he wouldn't sound like that, but this computer-generated image seems to imply that this is what he would like. This according to a Scottish university, which says Elvis would look like this today at the seasoned age of 68. They use the latest in aging software to manipulate the king's skin texture, hair line and hair color. So take a long hard look at those older Elvis impersonators next time you're in Vegas.
Well, when we come back, magician David Blaine is set to perform yet another feat this time in London next week. We'll talk to someone who knows how he does it, the Amazing Randi, when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) WHITFIELD: Magician David Blaine has wowed the crowds over the past few years with a series of over-the-top stunts, including having himself frozen inside a block of ice. His next feat staging in London this week, will involve spending 44 days suspended from the tower bridge in a small plexy glass box.
All of this raises the age-old question: can this be for real or is it an illusion? Joining us to talk about that is James Randi, a magician in his own right, and he's quite the skeptic as well of what David Blaine does and what he professes to do. Well, good to see you, the Great Randi.
JAMES RANDI, MAGICIAN: I am not skeptical about what David Blaine does because he does it. That's all there is to it.
WHITFIELD: Oh, yes. OK. Well, you are a fan. In fact, you say that you do respect him for what he does, you do like him, but you do have a bit of criticism about how you define what it is that he does.
RANDI: Well, I look at it as performance art more than anything else. He is a magician, and a magician is simply an actor playing the part of a wizard.
WHITFIELD: All right. And you know, David Blaine, he says maybe it is an issue of word choice. In fact, listen to what he had to say about trying to define what it is that he's about to do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID BLAINE, MAGICIAN: We're not doing it right over the river. We're doing it right next to the river so people could look under and from all sides. It's completely clear glass and will be lit up in the nighttime. And I think it's just a really interesting image as a performance piece. It's not magic, actually, at all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WHITFIELD: So he says it's not magic. It is an illusion. In fact, David Copperfield is calling himself an illusionist. So what's the matter what that?
RANDI: Nothing wrong with that at all. I'm very much in favor of what David does. The only two, oh, pauses that I have on the thing are perhaps his personal safety, because these things are not all that safe. There is an element of danger always present.
The second thing is I don't want young people to go up there and try to do this sort of thing, too. It's the old business of don't do this at home.
WHITFIELD: There is certainly a lot of risk involved. And maybe that's the problem. Do you think that there are an awful lot of viewers out there who see those feats taking place and they actually think that it's magic or they actually think that, you know, there's something supernatural about all of this? RANDI: Well, let's define magic. Magic is using forces that you have, some sort of special forces you have to defeat nature. That's not what magicians do.
The better term that we don't use in America is "conjurors". Those are people who approximate the effects of a real magician. No, it's not magic. It's trickery, it's illusion, it's a presentation, it's a performance.
WHITFIELD: So how do you explain how David Blaine has been able to do what he does? How is he able to be suspended 44 feet from the Tower Bridge, or how do you explain being in this block of ice? People say they've seen it and they are just convinced that's what it is. He's in that block of ice.
RANDI: How does he do it?
WHITFIELD: How does he do it?
RANDI: Very, very well, really.
WHITFIELD: Are you going to give up any secrets here?
RANDI: I'll just say that he does it with a lot of practice and self-determination, and skill.
WHITFIELD: All right. Well this is how David Blaine sort of responds to some of the skeptics out there. Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BLAINE: I think when we get to about day 30, and the last two weeks is going to be something that nobody's ever seen anything like it. And I think at that point, people will have to know that it is what I say it is. And if they don't, I understand that people are skeptical. But, you know, it's a performance art piece and I think it's based on just stripping everything away. So it is what it is.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WHITFIELD: All right. It is what it is, James Randi, so it really is just all in fun and it's pure entertainment, right? Not to be taken too incredibly seriously?
RANDI: It is entertainment. Enjoy it. Take a look at it. Try to figure it out. It's an intellectual exercise as well.
WHITFIELD: All right. James Randi, thanks very much. Good to see you.
RANDI: Pleasure.
WHITFIELD: And we'll all be watching for David Blaine as well, and that's next week.
(REPEAT) WHITFIELD: Well, that's all we have time for now. But before we go, here's a peek at what's coming up next week.
END
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Magician About David Blaine' New Stunt; Scientists Use X-Ray's On Ancient Egyptian Grave.>
|
