It seems like there's lots of Uri Geller practices evolving from university studies, kind of creating jobs for those who didn't quite make it into the mainstream fields of research. Since not many people could say or judge they're wrong as they simply dispute or talk around average Joe's questions with little facts that do hold scientific ground, but when looking closer they don't really prove their claims. Meanwhile they run away with government money to perform research on fields that make no sense in the first place... if doing research with it at all. Or why else hold this talk full of nonsense to elderly gentlemen where at least some must know the truths and lies?

On the other hand, perhaps there is some truth in his claims, and the facts you stated hold true for him as well, but could not exist without the existence of mass in the universe? Photons have no mass, and have to travel by the speed of light. But can they only exist because there is mass around in the first place? Just coining something up.

If there's one thing I experienced during the first year of physics on university is that there are a lot of explanations for things that seem unreasonable when you start digging deeper. To find such explanations you need new insights and ideas and then prove it with calculations. I failed to master the latter in the time given and had to drop out though :P, and figured understanding the universe in words would suffice over recalculating the facts. But finding out what's true and not is a bit harder without knowing all the basics. That's why we have this forum though .