Secrets of the Super Psychics
1997 British TV documentary
Secrets of the Super Psychics is a Channel 4 documentary special in the UK, first shown in the Equinox strand in 1997, later reformatted as a shorter The Learning Channel episode in 1998. Staff reporter Henry Mietkiewicz comments on the show in The Toronto Star saying, "Viewers eager to know more about the differences between science and claptrap should tune in". An 11-minute version is available on YouTube.
The 90-minute film, made by Open Media, was first shown in the UK under the title Secrets of the Psychics.
Simon Hoggart wrote in The Spectator that this was
the first show ever to take on the notoriously litigious Uri Geller. They showed how all his parlour tricks could be easily duplicated by jobbing magicians without any help from paranormal powers.
In 1998 the Broadcasting Standards Commission in the United Kingdom rejected a complaint made by Uri Geller. Susan Blackmore summarized the conclusions as saying that it, "wasn't unfair to have magicians showing how they duplicate those 'psychic feats', and experts saying there is no reliable scientific evidence for his psychic powers whatsoever".
The public source identifies “Secrets of the Super Psychics” as 1997 British TV documentary. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Secrets, Super and Psychics.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Secrets of the Super Psychics”, the useful work is to connect “1997 British TV documentary” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 7, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q7444539. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1997 and 1998.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Secrets of the Super Psychics”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Secrets of the Super Psychics primary sources, Secrets of the Super Psychics archive and Secrets research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Secrets of the Super Psychics”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Secrets of the Super Psychics” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.