Tom Baker Sonic Screwdriver SHOCKING EVIDENCE!

[Rylo]

All I know is this new guy (CT) has thrown down one hard-ass, infatic post for his first appearance on the RPF.

Interesting, too!

 

[SurferGeek]

Re: Pictures of suspected emitter greebly!

RougueScout actually identified the magnets as the backside head of the SS several years ago during the Boatbuilder fiasco "research" thread.

http://www.therpf.com/showpost.php?p=98370&postcount=86

Good eye though, great minds think alike. By the way, these are also the same magnets that are used in the Nostromo "Mother" computer key.

 

[SurferGeek]

Yada, yada, yada... ramble, ramble, ramble

Thanks for your info, we'll give it the consideration it deserves.

 

[C.T.]

Re: Pictures of suspected emitter greebly!

And lastly, another compelling piece of evidence on the sonic itself is that you can clearly see the exposed metal on the crescent shaped "tips". Why is this important? Well, from handling these magnets, I can tell you that the red coloring DECREASES the magnetism. It interferes with it somehow. The magnetism is MUCH stronger on those exposed crescent shaped areas. If you put that side of the magnet against something, then flip it around and put a different side against the object, you immediately notice the difference in magnetic "pull".

That is because these magnets are only really magnetic on the exposed metal surfaces. It is basically a horseshoe magnet with the end of the horseshoe where the exposed surfaces are. The paint makes no difference.


These particular magnets have been know about for quite some time now. However, they don't make them in the correct size these days so currently available ones are next to useless for screen accuracy.

 

[C.T.]

Thanks for your info, we'll give it the consideration it deserves.

Two words to that. The second of which is 'off'. :love

 

[Straker]

Good morning gentlemen, at last I finally had the chance to enter and participate in this little corner of the interweb.

Firstly, allow me to categorically state, the Classic Sonic is NOT a chiropractic activator.

How do I know this? It was confirmed by no less of a source than Ian Scoones, art director on Thunderbirds. It was a made item specifically for that one famous sceen.

The other reason I know it is not an activator is that Dr Arlan Fuhr, the inventor of the Activator, and also one of the professors at the AECC who teaches Activator methods also both confirmed it.

The notion that the sonic was a 1967 activator is ludicrous and basic research will show that the dates cannot tally. The original Activator was invented by Dr Fuhr in the US during the sixties. It was not commercially available until the mid-seventies. It is impossible that it could have been bought in the late sixties as a hand prop.

Some excerpts from the emails I received:

(From the Professor at the AECC):

"What can I tell you about the Activator? Well, it was, and still is, a therapeutic tool, a hand-held device intended to deliver a controlled and reproducible force. It was developed by Warren Lee and Arlan Fuhr in the 1960s for chiropractic use. It looks like the Activator in the picture ‘chiropractic-activator’ is a second generation model (Activator II). It just so happens that I have one sitting on the desk in front of me now. I understand that the idea for the original Activator came from a surgical mallet designed to split impacted wisdom teeth. The Activator is widely used by chiropractors today, and a number of variations on the theme exist. "

"As far as I understand it, Activator II did not exist commercially until 1994, and the first Activator did not become available commercially until the mid-1970s. These dates are too late for the Thunderbirds prop. To the best of my knowledge, Lee and Fuhr’s Activator was developed in the United States in the 1960s, and not in Britain. "


Dr Arlan Fuhr also stated the following when shown a pic of the Thunderbird prop:

"I do not believe it is a modified 1967 Activator. It look like a screwdriver not a center punch."

You would think that from the inventor of the device he would instantly recognise it if it was the same device?

I am 110% positive that Jet Beetle is living in cloud cuckoo land if he thinks he has identified the device he has said the classic sonic is based on. It is impossible.

I'll tell you though CT, even if this isn't an activator, i'd still totally mod one with the parts listed here into a sonic screwdriver. :lol I just think it would be neat to kit bash parts that look similar into a prop like that and get one that's totally unique.

 

[SurferGeek]

Two words to that. The second of which is 'off'. :love

meh...

:rolleyes

 

[C.T.]

I'll tell you though CT, even if this isn't an activator, i'd still totally mod one with the parts listed here into a sonic screwdriver. :lol I just think it would be neat to kit bash parts that look similar into a prop like that and get one that's totally unique.

I agree. It is just begging to be turned into a hybrid classic/new series sonic.

 

[Straker]

I agree. It is just begging to be turned into a hybrid classic/new series sonic.

It'd probably look pretty good too. :lol I've been trying to find an activator but the old ones are pretty rare. I read a record player arm piece up above but I'm gonna guess those are also very rare. Cobble all that together with the right magnet and i'll be that would still look bad assed.

A New Series version of a Classic Seris 4th doctor Sonic Screwdriver. I like that!

 

[Jack T Chance]

Good morning gentlemen, at last I finally had the chance to enter and participate in this little corner of the interweb.

Welcome, C.T.! After lurking for a bit, it's nice to see that you were finally able to properly join us and share your insights. thumbsup

Firstly, allow me to categorically state, the Classic Sonic is NOT a chiropractic activator.

How do I know this? It was confirmed by no less of a source than Ian Scoones, art director on Thunderbirds. It was a made item specifically for that one famous scene.

Well, if he made the original prop, he should know! But where did he confirm this? Is this information available on the web, for all to see? If so, link me, man! I'd like to read whatever he has to say about that prop. :cool

The other reason I know it is not an activator is that Dr Arlan Fuhr, the inventor of the Activator, and also one of the professors at the AECC who teaches Activator methods also both confirmed it.

The notion that the sonic was a 1967 activator is ludicrous and basic research will show that the dates cannot tally. The original Activator was invented by Dr Fuhr in the US during the sixties. It was not commercially available until the mid-seventies. It is impossible that it could have been bought in the late sixties as a hand prop.

Some excerpts from the emails I received:

(From the Professor at the AECC):

"What can I tell you about the Activator? Well, it was, and still is, a therapeutic tool, a hand-held device intended to deliver a controlled and reproducible force. It was developed by Warren Lee and Arlan Fuhr in the 1960s for chiropractic use. It looks like the Activator in the picture ‘chiropractic-activator’ is a second generation model (Activator II). It just so happens that I have one sitting on the desk in front of me now. I understand that the idea for the original Activator came from a surgical mallet designed to split impacted wisdom teeth. The Activator is widely used by chiropractors today, and a number of variations on the theme exist. "

"As far as I understand it, Activator II did not exist commercially until 1994, and the first Activator did not become available commercially until the mid-1970s. These dates are too late for the Thunderbirds prop. To the best of my knowledge, Lee and Fuhr’s Activator was developed in the United States in the 1960s, and not in Britain. "


Dr Arlan Fuhr also stated the following when shown a pic of the Thunderbird prop:

"I do not believe it is a modified 1967 Activator. It look like a screwdriver not a center punch."

You would think that from the inventor of the device he would instantly recognise it if it was the same device?

I am 110% positive that Jet Beetle is living in cloud cuckoo land if he thinks he has identified the device he has said the classic sonic is based on. It is impossible.

Very interesting. But they make it sound like there's only a couple models that have been made over the years. But just from pictures in this thread, we see several different designs. Curious.

And C.T., haven't you heard? Nothing's impossible. But there are some things that are very highly improbable. But on the right day, with the right gadget and a nice strong cup of really hot tea, the highly improbable CAN happen!

RougueScout actually identified the magnets as the backside head of the SS several years ago during the Boatbuilder fiasco "research" thread.

http://www.therpf.com/showpost.php?p=98370&postcount=86

Good eye though, great minds think alike. By the way, these are also the same magnets that are used in the Nostromo "Mother" computer key.

Wow. Too bad that thread's useless now. The pictures posted in the thread are long gone... I HATE people that don't leave stuff on their image hosting account in perpetuity! I have hundreds, at this point maybe even THOUSANDS of images on my free Photobucket account, I've been a member since 2002 or thereabouts, and I've still only used 16% of my available storage space! So, it's not like it's particularly hard to keep your hotlinked images active for years! :rolleyes

And the only useful link in the thread, to an online store that sold the magnets in question, is now dead. That product page has been pulled from the site. :unsure

That is because these magnets are only really magnetic on the exposed metal surfaces. It is basically a horseshoe magnet with the end of the horseshoe where the exposed surfaces are. The paint makes no difference.

These particular magnets have been know about for quite some time now. However, they don't make them in the correct size these days so currently available ones are next to useless for screen accuracy.

Wow, I can't believe it never occurred to me that these might be similar to a horseshoe magnet. Feeling a bit foolish at the moment. :$

Thanks for the additional info. Good to know my theory is correct. Too bad this info is hard to come by on the interwebz. And it's a real shame no one wants to make the right magnets in the correct size anymore. I wonder just how hard it would be to track down some old ones of the correct make and size? :confused

I know I, for one, would love to have a sonic screwdriver replica that actually has a working magnet on it, since that was shown in at least one episode. Even if it wasn't the exact model used on the prop in the 1970s, if we could find ones the right size that were close enough, I think most fans would be quite satisfied. thumbsup

 

[Jet Beetle]

Good morning gentlemen, at last I finally had the chance to enter and participate in this little corner of the interweb.

Firstly, allow me to categorically state, the Classic Sonic is NOT a chiropractic activator.

How do I know this? It was confirmed by no less of a source than Ian Scoones, art director on Thunderbirds. It was a made item specifically for that one famous sceen.

The other reason I know it is not an activator is that Dr Arlan Fuhr, the inventor of the Activator, and also one of the professors at the AECC who teaches Activator methods also both confirmed it.

The notion that the sonic was a 1967 activator is ludicrous and basic research will show that the dates cannot tally. The original Activator was invented by Dr Fuhr in the US during the sixties. It was not commercially available until the mid-seventies. It is impossible that it could have been bought in the late sixties as a hand prop.

Some excerpts from the emails I received:

(From the Professor at the AECC):

"What can I tell you about the Activator? Well, it was, and still is, a therapeutic tool, a hand-held device intended to deliver a controlled and reproducible force. It was developed by Warren Lee and Arlan Fuhr in the 1960s for chiropractic use. It looks like the Activator in the picture ‘chiropractic-activator’ is a second generation model (Activator II). It just so happens that I have one sitting on the desk in front of me now. I understand that the idea for the original Activator came from a surgical mallet designed to split impacted wisdom teeth. The Activator is widely used by chiropractors today, and a number of variations on the theme exist. "

"As far as I understand it, Activator II did not exist commercially until 1994, and the first Activator did not become available commercially until the mid-1970s. These dates are too late for the Thunderbirds prop. To the best of my knowledge, Lee and Fuhr’s Activator was developed in the United States in the 1960s, and not in Britain. "


Dr Arlan Fuhr also stated the following when shown a pic of the Thunderbird prop:

"I do not believe it is a modified 1967 Activator. It look like a screwdriver not a center punch."

You would think that from the inventor of the device he would instantly recognise it if it was the same device?

I am 110% positive that Jet Beetle is living in cloud cuckoo land if he thinks he has identified the device he has said the classic sonic is based on. It is impossible.

Yes, and those quotes look to be 100% authentic. I would probably be more open to your suggestions if both myself and Bob had not seen, held and compared one to the actual prop. When you get over 100 posts, check back with me.

Just to add to this-two people who I worked with at Dreamworks were both old dog special effects guys from England who had made the transition from model to computer - one is a great friend of mine who has pictures of the actual Baker prop - never released to the public. the prop is on a table photographed for reference - we are using those pictures as well as a few other items on loan to us to make comparisons and there is no doubt we nailed it. But real life slows things down sometimes.

I'll keep you posted.

 

[defstartrooper]

Why can't you post a picture of the activator model you found ? i understand you want to source the parts for yourself but if the activator looks exactly like the sonic prop what harm is there is posting photo's ?
It's not like you have to reveal the manufacturer or model number or anything important all you would be doing is showing there is an activator that is exact to the prop, which is what you're telling us anyway.
Would save a lot of bickering wouldn't it and it's not like you'd be giving any extra info away than you already have before sourcing some for yourself.

 

[C.T.]

Welcome, C.T.! After lurking for a bit, it's nice to see that you were finally able to properly join us and share your insights. thumbsupWell, if he made the original prop, he should know! But where did he confirm this? Is this information available on the web, for all to see? If so, link me, man! I'd like to read whatever he has to say about that prop.

Thanks for the welcome Jack.

This was through a personal contact. Sadly, I believe that Mr Scoones died a year or so ago however several of his colleagues who worked with him on Thunderbirds can confirm the same information. A little detective work and a telephone should be all you need to track down the relevant people.

But they make it sound like there's only a couple models that have been made over the years. But just from pictures in this thread, we see several different designs. Curious.

Well, actually, the number of models released over the years are probably only a handful. Dr Fuhr still owns the IPR and any Activator released via his own company or licenced to any third party would still need the ok from him.

And C.T., haven't you heard? Nothing's impossible. But there are some things that are very highly improbable. But on the right day, with the right gadget and a nice strong cup of really hot tea, the highly improbable CAN happen! Wow. Too bad that thread's useless now. The pictures posted in the thread are long gone... I HATE people that don't leave stuff on their image hosting account in perpetuity! I have hundreds, at this point maybe even THOUSANDS of images on my free Photobucket account, I've been a member since 2002 or thereabouts, and I've still only used 16% of my available storage space! So, it's not like it's particularly hard to keep your hotlinked images active for years! :rolleyes

In this case, the dates would make it very, very improbable to the point of impossibility. Thunderbirds was released in 1968 or thereabouts. Considering that Dr Fuhr had only developed his device (The Activator 1) in the 1960's and did not make it commercially available until the mid seventies it makes it pretty inconcievable that it was used as a 'found object' back in 1968. The Activator 1 looks even less like a Classic Sonic than the Activator 2 which was released in 1994. If you want to get Humean about it, nothing is certain except doubt. There are other tell tale signs that the Classic Sonic is not an activator including the basic mechanics of the device. Besides, both Mr Scoones and Dr Fuhr's comments are good enough for me.

And the only useful link in the thread, to an online store that sold the magnets in question, is now dead. That product page has been pulled from the site. :unsureWow, I can't believe it never occurred to me that these might be similar to a horseshoe magnet. Feeling a bit foolish at the moment. :$

Thanks for the additional info. Good to know my theory is correct. Too bad this info is hard to come by on the interwebz. And it's a real shame no one wants to make the right magnets in the correct size anymore. I wonder just how hard it would be to track down some old ones of the correct make and size? :confused

I know I, for one, would love to have a sonic screwdriver replica that actually has a working magnet on it, since that was shown in at least one episode. Even if it wasn't the exact model used on the prop in the 1970s, if we could find ones the right size that were close enough, I think most fans would be quite satisfied. thumbsup

The magnets are called 'button magnets' and many, many places sell them. The smallest they do are 12.5mm dia which is too big.


I sense some hostility to me being here. :unsure

Personally, I don't have to be. If you want to take the info I am sharing, fine. If not, that's fine too. ***************** Anyway, I feel right at home :lol

 

[C.T.]

Yes, and those quotes look to be 100% authentic. I would probably be more open to your suggestions if both myself and Bob had not seen, held and compared one to the actual prop. When you get over 100 posts, check back with me.

Just to add to this-two people who I worked with at Dreamworks were both old dog special effects guys from England who had made the transition from model to computer - one is a great friend of mine who has pictures of the actual Baker prop - never released to the public. the prop is on a table photographed for reference - we are using those pictures as well as a few other items on loan to us to make comparisons and there is no doubt we nailed it. But real life slows things down sometimes.

I'll keep you posted.

a) Email me and I will forward you the complete emails including headers

b) You can't have held one and compared it to the actual prop because the prop went missing from JNT's office sometime in the mid eighties.

c) I'm calling you out on it because I know you are talking BS. You have offered no proof. Tell you what. I'll put up $50k of my own money and my house if I have to, right now, if you can post a picture as proof.

 

[Jet Beetle]

a) Email me and I will forward you the complete emails including headers

b) You can't have held one and compared it to the actual prop because the prop went missing from JNT's office sometime in the mid eighties.

c) I'm calling you out on it because I know you are talking BS. You have offered no proof. Tell you what. I'll put up $50k of my own money and my house if I have to, right now, if you can post a picture as proof.

first of all - i don't need 50k - I get along just fine and i already have houses of my own

2nd - the photos we have are not mine to send - they come from friends and I would never do anything to prove something to someone that is simply trying to ease out info.

3rd - If you want to show emails as proof of something - why didn't you say so. I can fabricate as well as the next guy.

Go shake someone else's tree dude. This whole sonic quest was really me helping a friend and in the end providing information here. I never said we have the prop - we have clear pictures of Bakers prop taken at the BBC while he was on the show - that is what we are using. I gain noting from lying about this - nothing. I don't even collect Doctor Who.

By the way - your Avatar is racist

 

[Straker]

first of all - i don't need 50k - I get along just fine and i already have houses of my own

2nd - the photos we have are not mine to send - they come from friends and I would never do anything to prove something to someone that is simply trying to ease out info.

3rd - If you want to show emails as proof of something - why didn't you say so. I can fabricate as well as the next guy.

Go shake someone else's tree dude. This whole sonic quest was really me helping a friend and in the end providing information here. I never said we have the prop - we have clear pictures of Bakers prop taken at the BBC while he was on the show - that is what we are using. I gain noting from lying about this - nothing. I don't even collect Doctor Who.

By the way - your Avatar is racist

Well, I's d still like to see a picture of the activator to compare it too. Can you get permission from the friend that has the picture to post it at least? we've been on pins and needles for months waiting.

By the way, his avatar isn't racist if only because he is in fact Chinese. :rolleyes that would be like calling a black guy racist for saying nigga or calling a Polish person racist for making a Pollack joke :lol

 

[Ectropy]

There's an interesting discussion of the sonic's origins over at the the TARDIS Builders Forum.

First-hand accounts with Ian Scoones and JNT are mentioned, as well as the director of the Thunderbirds movie. The chiropractic activator theory is dismissed for the reasons CT said -- the timeline isn't correct.

Has anyone contacted Mat Irvine to see if he can contribute any info?

 

[AJK001]

Jet Beetle, If you don't mind me asking, what does having 100 posts have to do with anything. Just because someone is new, does not mean he does not know what he is talking about.

This thread has been going for a long time and whenever someone calls you on it, you keep coming up new reasons why you can't show your proof. Instead of calling someone elses proof BS, maybe you should worry about your own proof.

 

[C.T.]

first of all - i don't need 50k - I get along just fine and i already have houses of my own

2nd - the photos we have are not mine to send - they come from friends and I would never do anything to prove something to someone that is simply trying to ease out info.

3rd - If you want to show emails as proof of something - why didn't you say so. I can fabricate as well as the next guy.

Go shake someone else's tree dude. This whole sonic quest was really me helping a friend and in the end providing information here. I never said we have the prop - we have clear pictures of Bakers prop taken at the BBC while he was on the show - that is what we are using. I gain noting from lying about this - nothing. I don't even collect Doctor Who.

By the way - your Avatar is racist

I'm still calling BS on it. You know it, I know it. I cannot believe you have passed on making a quick $50k and a holiday home in China. Surely the satisfaction of wiping the smug grin off my face is worth all this? Where's your pride? Where are your balls? Why are you playing this game? What is the point in this stupid stunt? Jeezussss.....

Ah so, chop chop, number one son, etc etc.....

 

[Asp9mm]

Welcome aboard CT, at least our discussions on here won't be onesided anymore. You've certainly made a splash on your first day here.

So are we back to square one here then? Was it a one off piece just made for production?

And CT, why are you not making this version?