The Telepathy Tapes: What Does the Science Actually Say About Telepathy?

In the fall of 2024, something unusual happened in the podcast world. A documentary filmmaker named Ky Dickens released a ten-episode series called “The Telepathy Tapes.” Within weeks, it had dethroned Joe Rogan as the number one podcast on multiple streaming platforms. It accumulated over 2,000 reviews on Spotify with a 4.9-star rating. People were searching “the telepathy tapes where to watch,” “the telepathy tapes review,” and “the telepathy tapes season 2.”

The premise: nonspeaking autistic children can communicate telepathically with their parents. Not metaphorically. Not as a figure of speech. Literally. Parents would think of a number, and their child would point to it on a board. A mother would visualize a word, and her child would type it out. The podcast presents these moments as evidence of a psychic bond between parent and child.

The show features a former psychiatrist, a camera technician who started as a skeptic and ended as a believer, and a filmmaker who describes herself as a “science nerd.” It is emotionally powerful, expertly produced, and deeply compelling.

It is also one of the most polarizing pieces of media to emerge from the psi research community in years.

The debate is not whether the children are communicating. Parents across the podcast describe real behavioral changes in their children , moments of apparent connection that transformed their understanding of what their child could do. The debate is over what that communication means. Is the parent unconsciously guiding the child's hand through involuntary muscle movements? Or is there a genuine psychic bond between parent and child, one that only manifests when the parent focuses their attention?

Both interpretations fit the available data. Neither has been conclusively proven or disproven. This article presents both.

TL;DR

What Are The Telepathy Tapes?

The Telepathy Tapes is a podcast created and hosted by Ky Dickens, an American documentary filmmaker whose degrees are in communications, fine arts, and sociology (according to The Standard) 🟡. Dickens describes herself as a “science nerd.” She became interested in the subject after hearing former psychiatrist Diane Hennacy Powell speak on another podcast.

The show presents nonspeaking autistic children who are claimed to demonstrate telepathic abilities. The core of most episodes consists of interviews with parents who describe how their children can apparently read their thoughts, guess numbers they are thinking of, and type words their parents visualize in their minds.

Dickens released ten episodes in two seasons between September and December 2024. The show was distributed by Acast. It quickly became one of the most popular podcasts in the United States and the United Kingdom. Joe Rogan promoted it (according to Forbes) 🟡. As of January 2025, it had a 4.9-star rating on Spotify with over 2,000 reviews (according to The Guardian) 🟡.

The podcast's website invites viewers to subscribe to a paywalled section to see videos of the children “reading minds” and to fund further research. Dickens has announced a second season featuring non-autistic telepaths and is raising funding for a television production.

Video: Ky Dickens Discusses The Telepathy Tapes

The Tests: What the Podcast Actually Shows

The heart of The Telepathy Tapes is a series of demonstrations in which a parent thinks of a number, word, or image, and a nonspeaking child apparently identifies it. Viewers can see short video clips on the podcast's website showing these sessions.

In the demonstrations, the parent holds a letter board or communication device near the child. The child points to letters to spell out responses. The parent is physically holding the board. The parent knows the correct answer. The parent can see where the child's hand is moving.

The facilitator may believe they are not the source of the messages due to the ideomotor effect, which is the same effect that guides a Ouija board and dowsing rods. Studies have consistently found that FC is unable to provide the correct response to even simple questions when the facilitator does not know the answers to the questions (according to ASHA Position Statement) 🟢.

After watching these clips, two independent scientists reached the same conclusion. Jonathan Jarry, a molecular biologist at McGill University's Office for Science and Society, and Stuart Vyse, a psychologist, both identified the technique as a variant of facilitated communication, specifically the rapid prompting method (RPM) (according to McGill OSS) 🟢.

This is the central question of the podcast: what does it mean that the child can only communicate when the parent knows the answer?

The same experimental result , children correctly identifying what their parents are thinking, but only when the parent holds the board , supports two fundamentally different conclusions. This is the heart of the debate.

The Case Against

Intellectual honesty requires presenting the strongest objections. Here is what the skeptical literature says about telepathy in nonspeaking children, and where the critique is strongest.

Interpretation 1: The Ideomotor Effect

The ideomotor effect is a psychological phenomenon in which a person makes involuntary physical movements without being aware of them. It is the same mechanism that makes Ouija boards appear to work and dowsing rods appear to move toward water (according to Encyclopaedia Britannica) 🟢.

In this interpretation, the parent unconsciously guides the child's hand to the correct letters. The parent genuinely believes the child is typing, because they are not aware of their own movements. The child is not reading minds. The child is being steered by the parent's involuntary muscle movements.

This is why, in controlled tests where the facilitator does not know the answer, the child cannot produce it. The facilitator's knowledge is necessary because the facilitator is the source of the messages, not the child.

Former facilitator Janyce Boynton, who participated in blinded testing, later rejected FC entirely. She realized that she, not the person she was facilitating, had been the author of all the messages. She described the experience as “devastating.”

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association states that FC is “a discredited technique that should not be used” and that “the use of Rapid Prompting Method is not recommended because of prompt dependency and lack of scientific validity.”

The Case For

The psychic bond interpretation looks at the same data and asks a different question: if the child can only communicate when the parent knows the answer, could that itself be evidence of a telepathic connection?

Interpretation 2: The Psychic Bond Theory

Proponents of the telepathy interpretation look at the same data and reach the opposite conclusion. If the child can only communicate when the parent knows the answer, they argue, that itself is evidence of a psychic connection. The child is reading the parent's mind. The parent's knowledge is necessary not because the parent is unconsciously steering the child's hand, but because the telepathic link requires the parent to be actively thinking about the answer.

In this interpretation, the child's inability to communicate when the facilitator does not know the answer is not evidence against telepathy. It is evidence for it. The psychic bond between parent and child is the channel through which communication flows. Remove the parent's focused attention, and the channel closes.

Diane Hennacy Powell, the podcast's primary scientific voice, has been researching telepathy in autistic children for over a decade (according to OPB) 🟡. She claims to have conducted brain scans and observed neural activity patterns consistent with information transfer that does not rely on normal sensory channels. Powell's own website states that the children's answers have been “astoundingly accurate,” while also acknowledging that “the testing protocol was not optimal, which makes it insufficient to declare definitively that they exhibit telepathy.” (according to Dr. Diane Hennacy Powell) 🟠

Jeff Tarrant, a psychologist featured on the podcast, has stated that “these demonstrations convinced me of the reality of these abilities,” though he also clarified that they “were not structured as formal experimental trials.”

The psychic bond theory also draws on broader research in parapsychology, including the ganzfeld experiments (which have reported above-chance hit rates across multiple meta-analyses) and studies of presentiment (physiological responses to stimuli before they occur). If these phenomena are real, the idea that a parent and child could share a telepathic connection is not as far-fetched as it first appears.

Video: Facilitated Communication Double Blind Test

Facilitated Communication: The History

Facilitated communication (FC) was developed in the 1970s by Rosemary Crossley in Australia (according to Science-Based Medicine) 🟢 and later promoted in the United States by Douglas Biklen of Syracuse University in the early 1990s. The technique involves a “facilitator” who physically supports the hand or arm of a nonverbal person while they point to letters on a board or type on a keyboard.

FC gained enormous popularity in the 1990s. Parents, educators, and therapists embraced it as a breakthrough. Nonspeaking individuals appeared to type complex sentences, express deep emotions, and communicate for the first time. The emotional appeal was overwhelming.

Then the controlled studies began.

The consequences of FC gone wrong were severe. In 1993, a nonspeaking woman in New Hampshire (according to RCSLT) 🟢 was allegedly facilitated to type accusations of sexual abuse against her father. The father was arrested. At trial, the judge ordered a controlled test: the facilitator and the woman were shown different images. The woman could not type the correct image when the facilitator did not know it. The charges were dropped.

This pattern repeated across the country. FC-produced messages led to abuse allegations, criminal charges, and families torn apart. In every case where controlled testing was conducted, the facilitator was found to be the source of the messages. These cases are part of why the scientific establishment takes the FC issue so seriously , the stakes are not just academic.

The FC Debate Is More Complex Than “Discredited”

The story does not end with the 1990s message-passing studies. A growing body of research on nonspeaking autism is challenging the assumptions underlying those studies.

The key insight comes from motor research. Many nonspeaking individuals have apraxia, a neurological disorder affecting intentional movement and motor planning. This makes purposeful physical actions extremely difficult to execute even when cognitive understanding remains intact. Researchers describe this as an “intent-body disconnect”: the individual understands language, forms thoughts, and desires to communicate, but cannot reliably control the motor movements required for speech or conventional communication.

This distinction matters for the FC debate because the 1990s message-passing tests required exact parroting of information without accommodation for motor challenges. Defenders of alternative communication methods argue that the tests were designed with a presumption of incompetence, and that requiring a person with apraxia to perfectly replicate information may measure motor control, not cognitive capacity.

Significantly, a substantial proportion of participants in The Telepathy Tapes did not use traditional FC at all. According to analysis published on the Psi Encyclopedia, nine participants typed directly into an iPad or QWERTY keyboard, without any facilitator holding the device (according to Psi Encyclopedia, citing Weiler & Woollacott analysis). This does not prove telepathy, but it complicates the argument that all the demonstrations were ideomotor artifacts.

Recent research adds further complexity. Jaswal et al. (2026) published findings challenging the deficit model of nonspeaking autism, suggesting that many nonspeaking individuals have sophisticated language comprehension that standard assessments fail to capture. Mossbridge et al. (2025) documented motor control challenges that make standard communication testing inappropriate for this population.

The question is not whether FC was debunked in the 1990s. It was. The question is whether all forms of alternative communication can be dismissed using the same tests, and whether the motor research invalidates the assumptions those tests were built on. That question remains open.

But proponents of FC argue that these cases represent the worst applications of the technique, not its best. They point out that many FC users have produced sustained, coherent communication over months and years, in contexts where no abuse allegations were involved. They argue that the controlled testing conditions , separating the person from their facilitator, showing them different images , may disrupt the very mechanism that makes FC work, whether that mechanism is motor-based or telepathic.

In blinded tests, the facilitator and the person being facilitated were shown different images. When the facilitator did not know the correct answer, the person being facilitated could not produce it. The messages typed through FC matched what the facilitator knew, not what the person being facilitated had been shown. In multiple studies, the person being facilitated typed coherent messages even when their eyes were closed or they were looking away from the board.

The scientific consensus is that FC does not work as an independent communication method. The American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry have all issued position statements against its use. James Todd, a psychologist, called FC “the single most scientifically discredited intervention in all of developmental disabilities.” (according to facilitatedcommunication.org) 🟡

But proponents push back on this characterization. They argue that the testing environment , being separated from the parent, shown different images, placed in a clinical setting , could cause the child to lose confidence or become unable to access the telepathic channel. If the psychic bond requires trust, comfort, and the parent's focused attention, a controlled test designed to separate parent and child may be measuring the wrong thing.

The rapid prompting method (RPM), used in The Telepathy Tapes, is a variation of FC. The parent holds the board. The child points. The parent can see where the child's hand is moving. Systematic reviews have found no evidence that RPM is a valid method of independent communication. But RPM advocates counter that the technique is not designed for independent communication , it is designed to facilitate a connection between parent and child, and that connection may be telepathic in nature.

Video: Critique of Telepathy Tapes Episode 1

What Science Actually Says About Telepathy

Telepathy, the direct transmission of thoughts from one mind to another without known sensory channels, has been studied for over a century. The most rigorous experimental paradigm is the ganzfeld experiment, in which a “receiver” is placed in a state of sensory isolation and attempts to identify images being viewed by a “sender” in another room.

A meta-analysis of ganzfeld studies by Bem and Honorton (1994), published in Psychological Bulletin, reported a hit rate of about 35%, above the 25% chance level. However, a subsequent meta-analysis by Milton and Wiseman (1999), published in the British Journal of Psychology, found no significant effect when only methodologically rigorous studies were included.

The debate was not settled by either side. In 2024, Tressoldi and Storm published a registered report meta-analysis in F1000Research covering more than 40 years of ganzfeld investigation. Registered reports are a rigorous publication format where the analysis plan is peer-reviewed and accepted before data collection, eliminating the possibility of p-hacking or selective reporting after the fact. Their analysis covered 878 hits in 2,832 sessions, yielding a 31% hit rate against a 25% chance level (z=7.37, p=8.59×10^-14). The overall effect size was 0.133 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.06 to 0.18 (according to F1000Research) 🟢.

For context: the average effect size in social psychology is approximately 0.40. The ganzfeld effect (0.133) is roughly one-third the size of typical mainstream findings. It is a small effect, but it is statistically significant and it has been replicated across decades. Neither side has convinced the other.

The Science Vs podcast examined the evidence cited by The Telepathy Tapes (according to Science Vs) 🟡 and found that the claims of a “huge amount of research on telepathy published in peer-reviewed journals” were based on a meta-analysis that relied on studies with poor data controls, including rejecting subjects who “wasn't really concentrating during the experiment.” Research conducted by believers tended to find an effect; research conducted by non-believers did not.

Skeptics see this as evidence of confirmation bias. Proponents see it as evidence that the researcher's mindset affects the outcome , which, they argue, is exactly what you would expect if telepathy is real. If telepathy requires focused attention and belief, a skeptical researcher may be unconsciously blocking the very channel they are trying to measure.

The Ganzfeld: The Longest-Running Argument in Parapsychology

The ganzfeld experiment deserves special attention because it is the closest thing parapsychology has to a replicated finding , and because the argument over it has been going on for over 40 years without resolution.

The word “ganzfeld” comes from German: “ganz” means “whole” and “Feld” means “field.” In the experiment, a receiver sits in sensory isolation , halved ping-pong balls over the eyes, red light flooding the visual field, white noise through headphones. In another room, a sender views a randomly selected image or video clip. The receiver describes whatever impressions come to mind, then chooses from four options which one matches their experience. By chance, the correct answer should be chosen 25% of the time.

Across multiple meta-analyses spanning 1983 to 2024, the hit rate has consistently been reported in the 30-33% range. The Bem and Honorton meta-analysis (1994) in Psychological Bulletin reported 32%. The Storm et al. meta-analysis (2010), also in Psychological Bulletin, found a small but significant effect. A 2024 registered report meta-analysis found statistically significant results even under the strictest methodological conditions.

Skeptics counter that the effect size is tiny , roughly one-third the size of typical findings in mainstream psychology. Ray Hyman, a psychologist at the University of Oregon, has argued that the meta-analyses contain methodological flaws that inflate the apparent significance. The Milton and Wiseman meta-analysis (1999) found no significant effect when only the most rigorous studies were included.

Neither side has convinced the other. The ganzfeld debate has been going on since the 1980s and shows no signs of resolution. What it does show is that the question of telepathy is not as settled as either side claims.

Presentiment: The Body Knows Before the Mind

One of the more intriguing lines of research in parapsychology is the presentiment effect , the claim that the human body shows physiological responses to stimuli before those stimuli occur.

In a typical presentiment experiment, a participant is shown a series of images, some of which are emotionally arousing (violent, erotic, or shocking) and some of which are neutral. The images are randomly selected by a computer, and the participant has no way of knowing which type is coming next. Researchers measure skin conductance, heart rate, and other physiological indicators.

The research began with Dean Radin at the Institute of Noetic Sciences. In 1997, Radin published the first presentiment experiment in the Journal of Scientific Exploration. He predicted that if people unconsciously sensed what they were about to see, their sympathetic nervous system should become activated before they saw emotional pictures but should stay calm before calm photos. The outcome, detected via changes in skin conductance, was statistically significant: participants showed elevated physiological arousal seconds before the randomly selected emotional images appeared (according to Psi Encyclopedia) 🟢.

The effect was replicated and extended. Mossbridge, Tressoldi, and Utts (2012) published a meta-analysis of 26 presentiment studies in Psychological Bulletin and found a small but significant effect across the literature. In 2018, Julia Mossbridge and Theresa Cheung published The Premonition Code: The Science of Precognition, How Sensing the Future Can Change Your Life, a book that lays out the scientific case for anticipatory physiological responses and connects the lab research to real-world precognition experiences (according to Amazon) 🟡.

Skeptics argue that the effect can be explained by inadequate randomization, publication bias, or methodological artifacts. Proponents counter that the effect persists even in studies with rigorous randomization procedures. The debate mirrors the ganzfeld argument: small effect sizes, persistent results, and no resolution.

The presentiment effect is relevant to The Telepathy Tapes because it suggests that the human body may have access to information that the conscious mind does not. If presentiment is real, the idea that a parent and child could share a telepathic channel is not physically impossible , it would be an extension of a phenomenon that some researchers believe is already occurring.

The Numbers

Study / Effect	Effect Size / Hit Rate	Sample	Source
Ganzfeld autoganzfeld (Bem & Honorton 1994)	32% hit rate vs. 25% chance (p < 0.001)	11 studies, 8 experimenters	Psychological Bulletin
Ganzfeld meta-analysis (Storm et al. 2010)	ES ~0.14 (small but significant)	49 studies	Psychological Bulletin
FC blinded tests (multiple studies)	0% correct when facilitator unaware	30+ controlled experiments	ASHA, fc.org
Presentiment meta-analysis (Mossbridge et al. 2012)	Small but significant effect (p < 0.001)	26 studies	Psychological Bulletin
Telepathy Tapes Spotify rating	4.9 stars, 2,000+ reviews	Consumer ratings	Spotify (as of Jan 2025)

For context: the average effect size in social psychology is approximately 0.40. The ganzfeld effect (0.14) is roughly one-third the size of typical mainstream findings. The presentiment effect is comparable. Both are small effects. The FC blinded tests, by contrast, show essentially zero performance when the facilitator is unaware of the answer. The question is whether FC tests are measuring the right thing.

Why This Podcast Became So Popular

The Telepathy Tapes did not become the most popular podcast in America by accident. It became popular because it tells a story that millions of people want to hear.

The story is this: your child is not disabled. Your child is special. Your child has abilities that “close-minded” scientists refuse to acknowledge. Your child can read your mind, and the bond between you is so powerful that it transcends physical limitations.

For parents of nonspeaking autistic children, this narrative is intoxicating. These parents have often spent years fighting for their children's education, medical care, and dignity. They have watched their children struggle to communicate. They have been told their children have limited cognitive abilities. The Telepathy Tapes tells them: your child is more than anyone knows. Your child is extraordinary.

This is not a criticism of the parents. It is an acknowledgment of the emotional reality. When you love someone who cannot speak, and someone hands you a tool that appears to give them a voice, you will use that tool. You will believe in that tool. The emotional stakes are too high to question it.

But the emotional stakes do not change the scientific questions. And the scientific questions remain open.

The Antivax Pipeline: A Real Concern

One concern about The Telepathy Tapes that both sides should take seriously is the documented connection between some of its featured experts and the anti-vaccination movement.

Diane Hennacy Powell, the podcast's primary scientific voice, spoke at a March 2017 rally alongside Judy Mikovits (according to Association for Science in Autism Treatment) 🟢, Del Bigtree, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., all prominent anti-vaccination activists. She objected to vaccinating children at that rally. The podcast also features experts who believe vaccination increases autism prevalence, a claim that has been repeatedly disproven by large-scale epidemiological studies.

Beyond telepathy, the podcast entertains claims that autistic children can communicate with ghosts and that crystals have healing powers. Social psychologist Devon Price has warned that “The Telepathy Tapes is very much part of a pipeline (according to The Times) 🟡 that leads from talking of 'highly sensitive persons' and indigo children all the way down to antivax sentiment.”

This is a legitimate concern regardless of whether telepathy is real. Even if the psychic bond theory is correct, linking it to anti-vaccination ideology and crystal healing puts vulnerable families at risk. A parent who believes their child has telepathic abilities may be more susceptible to other claims that lack evidence , including claims that could endanger their child's health.

It is possible to take the phenomenon seriously while rejecting the pipeline. Not everyone who appears on the podcast shares Powell's antivax associations, and the question of whether nonspeaking children can communicate telepathically is separate from the question of whether vaccines cause autism.

What Nonspeaking Autistic People Actually Need

Regardless of which interpretation is correct, nonspeaking autistic individuals have real communication needs. They need augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices, which have decades of evidence supporting their effectiveness. They need speech-language therapy. They need educators trained in evidence-based communication methods. They need society to invest in technologies and therapies that work.

If FC/RPM gives parents a genuine connection with their children, that connection has value , even if the scientific community cannot yet explain the mechanism. But that connection should not come at the expense of evidence-based communication tools. Both can coexist.

The Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists and the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association have both issued position statements discouraging the use of FC. These organizations are not hostile to the idea that nonspeaking individuals can communicate. They are hostile to a method that has failed controlled testing. If better controlled tests could demonstrate that something real is happening through FC, these organizations would be the first to want to know.

The Deeper Question: What Do We Do With Unexplained Data?

The Telepathy Tapes raises a question that goes beyond telepathy: what do we do when data is genuinely unexplained?

The skeptical interpretation , that parents unconsciously guide their children's hands via the ideomotor effect , is consistent with the controlled test results. But it does not fully explain the emotional experiences of the parents, many of whom describe watching their children produce responses that seemed impossible. These parents are not lying. They are describing their genuine experience. The question is whether that experience reflects telepathy or the ideomotor effect.

The telepathic interpretation , that parents and children share a psychic bond , is consistent with the parents' experiences and with the broader parapsychological literature (ganzfeld, presentiment, remote viewing). But it has not been demonstrated under controlled conditions, and the testing protocols used on the podcast do not meet scientific standards for ruling out alternative explanations.

Both interpretations are incomplete. The skeptical interpretation cannot fully account for the parents' experiences. The telepathic interpretation cannot yet produce controlled, replicable evidence. The honest answer is that we do not know.

What we do know is that the debate matters. It matters because there are real children involved, real families seeking answers, and real stakes. The children deserve communication tools that work. The families deserve honest answers. And the science deserves better experiments.

Key Researchers

Name	Affiliation	Position on Telepathy	Key Contribution
Diane Hennacy Powell	Johns Hopkins, Harvard Medical School, Salk Institute (past)	Proponent	Research on psi in autistic savants; The ESP Enigma (2009); advisory role on The Telepathy Tapes. Member of the Parapsychological Association, affiliated with AAAS since 1969.
Jeff Tarrant	NeuroMeditation Institute	Proponent (with caveats)	EEG recordings during Telepathy Tapes demonstrations. Observed 5 nonspeaking individuals with “near-perfect accuracy.” Acknowledged these were naturalistic case studies, not formal trials.
Julia Mossbridge	Northwestern University (Visiting Scholar), IONS	Proponent	Co-PI on Telepathy Tapes project (mid-2025). Presentiment/AAA researcher. The Premonition Code (2018). PA Honorton Award 2015. Smartphone-based psi testing with thousands of participants.
Dean Radin	Institute of Noetic Sciences	Proponent	Pioneer of presentiment research. First experiment (1997) showed physiological anticipation of future stimuli. Multiple replications across labs.
Jessica Utts	UC Irvine (Statistics)	Proponent (statistical evidence)	Assessed CIA remote viewing data (1996): concluded psychic functioning “has been well established.” Co-author on presentiment meta-analysis (2012).
Ky Dickens	Vanderbilt University (Communications, Fine Arts, Sociology)	Proponent	Creator/host of The Telepathy Tapes. Documentaries shown at White House and Congress. Focus Award for Achievement in Directing. Ford Foundation Change Maker Award.
Ray Hyman	University of Oregon (Psychology)	Skeptic	Evaluated CIA remote viewing data alongside Utts. Concluded Utts’ finding of statistical significance was “premature.” Called for tighter controls.
Robert T. Carroll	Sacramento State University (Philosophy)	Skeptic	Author of The Skeptic’s Dictionary. Criticized FC and parapsychology methodology as pattern matching and selection bias.

Sources

1. The Telepathy Tapes. Psi Encyclopedia, Society for Psychical Research. Psi Encyclopedia. Funding: SPR (non-profit). COI: None. 🟢
2. Tressoldi, P.E. & Storm, L. (2024). “Stage 2 Registered Report: Anomalous perception in a Ganzfeld condition – A meta-analysis of more than 40 years investigation.” F1000Research, 10:234. F1000Research. Funding: None declared. COI: Storm is a parapsychologist. 🟢
3. Utts, J. (1996). “An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning.” Report for the American Institutes for Research. UC Irvine. Funding: CIA/AIR contract. COI: Utts is a parapsychology researcher. 🟢
4. Mossbridge, J., Tressoldi, P.E. & Utts, J. (2012). “Predictive physiological anticipation preceding seemingly unpredictable stimuli: a meta-analysis.” Psychological Bulletin. Funding: BIAL Foundation, IONS. COI: All authors are psi researchers. 🟡
5. Radin, D.I. (1997). “Unconscious perception of future emotions: An experiment in presentiment.” Journal of Scientific Exploration, 11, 163-180. Psi Encyclopedia. Funding: IONS. COI: Radin works at IONS. 🟡
6. Cheung, T. & Mossbridge, J. (2018). The Premonition Code: The Science of Precognition, How Sensing the Future Can Change Your Life. Watkins Publishing. Amazon. Funding: Commercial publication. COI: Authors are psi proponents. 🟡
7. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. “Facilitated Communication.” Position Statement. ASHA. Funding: Professional organization. COI: None. 🟢
8. Mossbridge, J. et al. (2025). Research on motor control challenges and the “intent-body disconnect” in nonspeaking autism. Original research paper. Funding: Unknown. COI: Mossbridge joined the Telepathy Tapes project. 🟡
9. Jaswal, V.K. et al. (2026). Research challenging the deficit model of nonspeaking autism; alternative communication findings. Original research paper. Funding: Unknown. COI: None known. 🟡
10. Inside Stargate: When Psychics Became U.S. Government Assets. Popular Mechanics. Popular Mechanics. Funding: Commercial media. COI: None. 🟡
11. Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR). Psi Encyclopedia, Society for Psychical Research. Psi Encyclopedia. Funding: SPR (non-profit). COI: None. 🟢
12. Tarrant, J. (2025). Defense of Telepathy Tapes involvement and EEG observations. Psychology Today. Funding: Commercial media. COI: Tarrant participated in the podcast. 🟡
13. Association for Science in Autism Treatment. “The Persistence of Fad Interventions.” ASAT. Funding: Non-profit. COI: None. 🟢
14. McGill Office for Science and Society. “The Telepathy Tapes Prove We All Want to Believe.” McGill OSS. Funding: University. COI: None. 🟢
15. What’s the Real Story Behind the ‘Telepathy Tapes’ Families? New York Magazine/The Cut. The Cut. Funding: Commercial media. COI: None. 🟡
16. Roeloffs, M. (2025). Podcast About Telepathic Autistic Children Briefly Knocks Joe Rogan Out of No. 1 Spot. Forbes. Forbes. Funding: Commercial media. COI: None. 🟡

Frequently Asked Questions

Are the children on The Telepathy Tapes really telepathic?

The evidence is genuinely ambiguous. The tests shown use facilitated communication (FC), in which a parent holds a letter board while the child points. Skeptics say the parent unconsciously guides the child's hand (the ideomotor effect). Proponents argue that the child can only communicate when the parent is thinking about the answer, which could indicate a telepathic bond. Neither interpretation has been conclusively proven or disproven under conditions that both sides accept.

What is facilitated communication?

Facilitated communication (FC) is a technique in which a “facilitator” physically supports the hand or arm of a nonverbal person while they point to letters on a board. The scientific establishment has found that in controlled tests, the facilitator , not the child , produces the messages. But proponents argue that the testing conditions may not allow for the telepathic connection to manifest. The debate continues.

What is the ideomotor effect?

The ideomotor effect is a psychological phenomenon in which a person makes involuntary physical movements without being aware of them. It is the same mechanism that makes Ouija boards appear to work and dowsing rods appear to move toward water. In facilitated communication, the facilitator may unconsciously guide the child's hand to the correct letters. The facilitator genuinely believes the child is typing, because they are not aware of their own movements.

Why did The Telepathy Tapes become so popular?

The podcast tells a story that many people want to hear: that nonspeaking children have hidden abilities that mainstream science has not recognized. For parents of autistic children, the narrative that their child can read their minds is emotionally powerful. The podcast was also well-produced and promoted by Joe Rogan. Its popularity reflects both the quality of the production and a deep cultural interest in abilities beyond what conventional science can currently explain.

Did the podcast's own scientists support the claims?

Partially. Diane Hennacy Powell has expressed frustration with her portrayal on the podcast (according to Binge Worthy) 🟡, telling The Cut that some experimental results were misrepresented. Jeff Tarrant has stated the demonstrations “convinced” him of the abilities but acknowledged they were not formal experimental trials. Both remain involved with the project.

Is there any legitimate research on telepathy in autistic individuals?

Diane Hennacy Powell claims a decade of research, but her papers are primarily self-published or published in parapsychology journals. Her own website acknowledges that the testing protocol “was not optimal” and is “insufficient to declare definitively that they exhibit telepathy.” No controlled study under conditions accepted by both skeptics and proponents has found evidence for telepathy in autistic individuals specifically.

Does the podcast have connections to anti-vaccination movements?

Yes. Powell has spoken alongside anti-vaccination activists including Judy Mikovits, Del Bigtree, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The podcast also features experts who believe vaccination increases autism prevalence. This is a legitimate concern regardless of whether the telepathy claims are true.