> I'm not sure exactly what you mean by *just*
>touching [...]

All I meant was that there's more too the whole process then *just* touching the person -- as in there's prayer and other verbal aspects.

> As for the hypnosis aspect, I can say with
>certainty that if there was any sort of
>hypnosis, then it was completely unintentional.

Well, of course. I'm not at all saying that you or any member of your group are intentionally faking anything, that's for sure.

> Where I see the hypnosis argument failing,
>though, is in the results. To the best of my
>knowledge, hypnosis generally creates a state in
>which the subject is more susceptible to
>suggestions; a state of relaxed inhibitions.
>Unless I am grossly undereducated, though, there
>is no communication of information in the act of
>hypnosis itself; generally, words have to be
>used to communicate the suggestions. In the
>situation I describe with Elvis, I can assure
>you that there was no communication of how he
>should react. The moaning and slight trembling
>(which I believe I forgot to mention before)
>were initiated by him with no prompting from
>anyone else involved. This is the part that I
>have trouble explaining through hypnosis. I'm
>curious to hear any ideas you might have on the
>subject, though.

Honestly, I don't know a whole heck of a lot about hypnosis and other suggestive states of mind--I've basically used up all that I know about it. I'm currently trying to research this.
However, when I say that "hypnosis" plays a part, I don't mean the kind of stage show trick we're familiar with. The more you study the power of suggestion and other strange things about the human mind, the scarier things are, I think. Because it's amazing how insanely succeptible we are to such things. Again, I'm currently in the process of trying to find more solid information on this to be able to discuss it more intelligently.

-- Dave