StopSylviaBrowne - Email: "My Reading With Sylvia's Son Chris"

[RSLancastr]

New article up:

http://www.stopsylviabrowne.com/articles/email_myreadingwithsylviassonchris.shtml
Email: "My Reading With Sylvia's Son Chris"
One woman's account of her phone reading with Christopher Dufresne.

[PBTree]

New article up:

http://www.stopsylviabrowne.com/articles/email_myreadingwithsylviassonchris.shtml
Email: "My Reading With Sylvia's Son Chris"
One woman's account of her phone reading with Christopher Dufresne.

I have never heard of a "scumbag gene" but if they find one, I can bet those two creeps have both got it.

I have been having a great laugh on another thread reading the ravings of a couple of christians (one born again). I am now going to point both of these people to this thread and tell them to read the article and see exactly how someone who has their own church acts.

[Flo]

I have been told that, for some time now, Browne's policy is to only allow one "official" ($750) phone reading per customer, per lifetime. Calls to her radio show apparently fall outside of this limitation.

While the official reason for this policy is to allow more people to "have a turn," I have been told by ex-ministers that the policy was put into place after many people complained that Browne's readings for them would change with each reading: they would be told different names for their "spirit guides," given different numbers of past lives they had supposedly had, different names for their future spouse, etc

That should have told people what a fraud of the most despicable sort she is, and what all her talk about doing good and caring for people is worth. Instead of that, I'm pretty confident that people who have been treated that way keep on praising her and finding excuses for her ...

[rjh01]

Should be compulsory reading for anyone who wants to have a reading from either SB or her son.

With any luck they will be running out of customers soon, thanks to you Robert. SB may be an old bat but Chris is not old.

[Cueshark]

Nice article.

Words can not describe how much I despise Sylvia Browne's actions.

[Locknar]

RSL - Nicely done, and kudos to the woman for coming forward.

[ExMinister]

Great article, Robert!

I'd heard rumors that the job of being Chris' secretary was a nightmare. I never considered it from the credit card angle, though I think it's an excellent point that charging the cards well in advance makes it hard to dispute - I hadn't been aware of that. But as far as Chris cancelling, from what I understand mostly Chris likes to travel, play, and do anything but work, and rescheduling his appointments constantly and having to talk to disappointed clients is part of the nightmare of working for him, especially since one is always having to come up with an excuse like a family crisis or leaking pipes.

[ObscureReferenceMan]

Grrrr! Slimeballs, the both of them!!! :a2: (SB and CD, of course. I don't want to imply anything bad about the poor woman who got the "reading")

Thanks, Robert!

[Empress]

She explained that I'd have to reschedule my reading as Chris had an emergency at home, something about a water leak.

Amazing how he didn't see the emergency coming. :rolleyes:

Another great article, Robert, and I felt the information about charging the credit cards immediately was particularly noteworthy. I've never dealt with an honest merchant that wanted to charge me months before the service was provided, and if a business tried to do that, I would find another merchant.

These people are scum, pure and simple, and I truly admire all you're doing to stop them. Excellent work!

[krelnik]

One possible reason for this: some credit cards have a dispute/refund policy which states that a charge must be disputed within a certain number of days (typically thirty days) from the date the amount is charged to the card, not the date the goods or service is received. So, if the actual reading does not occur until after that "grace period" is over (as appears to be the case here), the customer obviously cannot dispute the charge with the credit card company, putting them at the mercy of the merchant should there be a dispute or a request for a refund.


Now, I'm no expert on this, but maybe someone who is can comment. I was under the impression that there were state and/or federal laws that prohibited a vendor from charging a credit card far in advance of delivery of the goods or services.

Even if this is not the case, the credit card companies (i.e Visa, Mastercard, Amex) often have rules that go beyond what the goverment requires, and might cover this. If Sylvia Browne's companies are not adhering to these rules, they could have their vendor status revoked.

ETA: Yes, the feds seem to agree with that last bit.
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/credit/billed.shtm


In addition, many credit card issuers have policies against merchants charging a credit card account before shipment. If you think a merchant charged your account prematurely, report it to the credit card issuer. Otherwise, the credit card issuer has no way to know that the merchant is not complying with its policies.


If I'm right about this, it seems like this might be a good opportunity to "push back" on the organization. At the very least, their cash flow could be impacted.

Someone who is more knowledgable about specific Visa/MC/Amex policies on this please comment.

[Rolfe]

I have been having a great laugh on another thread reading the ravings of a couple of christians (one born again). I am now going to point both of these people to this thread and tell them to read the article and see exactly how someone who has their own church acts.


But do you know that these people are members of Sylvia's own church? There are many many different denominations within Christianity, and to tar everyone with the same brush as this bunch of heartless frauds seems a little harsh.

Rolfe.

[Kilgore Trout]

Thanks for the article, and thanks to the woman for her email.

It might be nothing, but as I read it and came to the part of charging her credit card followed by a 3-4 month wait, my reaction was that it might be to cash in on a bit of interest. I have no idea, however, what kind of interest or investments may be made with respect to how advantageous it would be.

Having a quick look at your Money article, just .4% of $960,000 is $3,840. Surely that's low (it's not even compounded or calculated quarterly), but in any event probably not worth mention in the article, but I thought I'd toss it out there.

[CFLarsen]

I have never heard of a "scumbag gene" but if they find one, I can bet those two creeps have both got it.

Scumbags do not deserve to be compared to psychics.

[Minarvia]

Great article, Robert!

I'd heard rumors that the job of being Chris' secretary was a nightmare. I never considered it from the credit card angle, though I think it's an excellent point that charging the cards well in advance makes it hard to dispute - I hadn't been aware of that. But as far as Chris cancelling, from what I understand mostly Chris likes to travel, play, and do anything but work, and rescheduling his appointments constantly and having to talk to disappointed clients is part of the nightmare of working for him, especially since one is always having to come up with an excuse like a family crisis or leaking pipes.

I never thought about the credit card angle, either. Slimeballs, both of them, but smart slimeballs.
I often wonder what DuFresne's ex-wife feels about all of this. But, as the mother of his children, she may have a vested interest in protecting Chris and Sylvia and staying silent. Or maybe she's never been asked.

Anyway, I'm glad another this woman came forward. It take guts to admit you've been fooled and to try to help others learn from your mistake.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I'm assuming your correspondent couldn't find the tape. Thank God, I don't think I could have survived listening to that slimeball.

Edit: and good work! and a big thank you to your correspondent!

[Tanstaafl]

But do you know that these people are members of Sylvia's own church? There are many many different denominations within Christianity, and to tar everyone with the same brush as this bunch of heartless frauds seems a little harsh.

Rolfe.



Maybe I misinterpreted this, but I took it that Sylvia is an example of how a person acts when they found and run their own church--not that the christians in question are in the same church as Sylvia. (The idea of the power involved corrupting.) I don't think Sylvia calls herself a christian anyway, though I'm not sure.

[Tanstaafl]

And excellent job again Robert, pointing the reader in the direction of the most damning evidence, but letting them draw their own conclusions! Way to go!

And it was great seeing you pop up in that Anonymous anti-Sylvia video. Shows that the word is really getting around with your help.

[PBTree]

But do you know that these people are members of Sylvia's own church? There are many many different denominations within Christianity, and to tar everyone with the same brush as this bunch of heartless frauds seems a little harsh.

Rolfe.

good point. my apologies to the decent believers. :)

[Brown]

Ugh. The story is sickening.

What got me was the annoying habit of some folks to assume a familiar posture without asking or being given permission to do so. Christopher Dufresne calls people "dear" and Sylvia Browne calls people "honey," but this familiarity is really out of line. It's rude, even if the business relationship were on the up-and-up. The fact that these individuals use such terms of endearment to encourage others to pay for a worthless pack of nonsense is just beneath contempt.

[RSLancastr]

I have never heard of a "scumbag gene" but if they find one, I can bet those two creeps have both got it.Agreed.

Instead of that, I'm pretty confident that people who have been treated that way keep on praising her and finding excuses for her ...I'm sure that many do, Flo. But not all.

With any luck they will be running out of customers soon, thanks to you Robert.Let's hop, rj!

Nice article.Thanks, Cue.

Words can not describe how much I despise Sylvia Browne's actions.I knowthe feeling, believe me.

RSL - Nicely done, and kudos to the woman for coming forward.Thanks, and agreed about the woman.

Great article, Robert!Thanks, EM!

I'd heard rumors that the job of being Chris' secretary was a nightmare.Same here.

I never considered it from the credit card angle, though I think it's an excellent point that charging the cards well in advance makes it hard to dispute - I hadn't been aware of that.Neither was I until I heard it from one of Chris' dissatisfied customers.

Thanks, Robert!You're welcome, ORM!

Amazing how he didn't see the emergency coming. :rolleyes:Don't you know? Browne and Dufresne can't be psychic about themselves! :rolleyes:

Another great article, Robert, and I felt the information about charging the credit cards immediately was particularly noteworthy. I've never dealt with an honest merchant that wanted to charge me months before the service was provided, and if a business tried to do that, I would find another merchant.Thanks, and agreed about any merchant who would do such a thing.

Even if this is not the case, the credit card companies (i.e Visa, Mastercard, Amex) often have rules that go beyond what the goverment requires, and might cover this. If Sylvia Browne's companies are not adhering to these rules, they could have their vendor status revoked.Worth looking into, thanks!

Thanks for the article, and thanks to the woman for her email.Glad you enjoyed it, KT.

It might be nothing, but as I read it and came to the part of charging her credit card followed by a 3-4 month wait, my reaction was that it might be to cash in on a bit of interest. I have no idea, however, what kind of interest or investments may be made with respect to how advantageous it would be.I don't know that the interest is what they are after. I think it more likely that it is the dispute/refund thing, combined with the old "get the mark's money now" mentality.

Scumbags do not deserve to be compared to psychics.Why is it that you always stand up for scumbags, but never for slimeballs, as were similarly impugned in ObscureReferenceMan's post above? I think you need to take a long, hard look at your prejudices, Claus.

I often wonder what DuFresne's ex-wife feels about all of this. But, as the mother of his children, she may have a vested interest in protecting Chris and Sylvia and staying silent. Or maybe she's never been asked.She is certainly welcome to contact me should she have any comments to make, publically or not.

Anyway, I'm glad another this woman came forward. It take guts to admit you've been fooled and to try to help others learn from your mistake.Very much so.

good work! and a big thank you to your correspondent!Thanks, Eeney.

And excellent job again Robert, pointing the reader in the direction of the most damning evidence, but letting them draw their own conclusions! Way to go!Thanks, Tan!

And it was great seeing you pop up in that Anonymous anti-Sylvia video. Shows that the word is really getting around with your help.Yes, and to be grouped with Randi as "Bald old men with beards"! :D

What got me was the annoying habit of some folks to assume a familiar posture without asking or being given permission to do so. Christopher Dufresne calls people "dear" and Sylvia Browne calls people "honey," but this familiarity is really out of line. It's rude, even if the business relationship were on the up-and-up.It's rude, pretentious and patronizing.

As I mention in the article, I've listened to a number of tapes of his phone "readings," and he always uses "dear" in seemingly every other sentence. It also does not seem to "fit" Dufresne, as though it is something his mother instructed him to do. The "dear" thing seems to be common among the more effeminate male "psychics" (Van Praagh, Kingston, Acorah, etc). Dufresne doesn't fit that particular mold, and so it seems even more like an affectation with him than with the others. More than one of my correspondents have remarked on the strangeness of it, although I think this woman was the first to call it "creepy." (I recall one saying "What was up with that?" regarding it).

The fact that these individuals use such terms of endearment to encourage others to pay for a worthless pack of nonsense is just beneath contempt.Projecting a false familiarity with a customer is a time-honored sales gimmick. But doing so while pretending to be spiritual is particularly obnoxious.

[krelnik]

Nevermind Sylvia, I think RSL should get an award for successfully posting a message with that many multi-quotes in it.

[Kilgore Trout]

23, even breaking the number of replies in the thread! Now that's fancy internetsing.

[RSLancastr]

Nevermind Sylvia, I think RSL should get an award for successfully posting a message with that many multi-quotes in it.And that's probably not even a record for me!

23, even breaking the number of replies in the thread! Now that's fancy internetsing.Sometimes I think the multiquote feature was invented just for me... :)

[Brattus]

Grrrr! Slimeballs, the both of them!!! :a2: (SB and CD, of course. I don't want to imply anything bad about the poor woman who got the "reading")

Thanks, Robert!

Hey! Imply away! That email reads like a how to guide for the galacticly stupid. That lady must feel like an utter moron.
But who out there in Internet land wants to bet me one dollar that she's not knee deep this very minute into some other TV psychic?
After all, they can't all be fake. Right?

[RSLancastr]

That email reads like a how to guide for the galacticly stupid.And your post reads like a how-to guide for the galactically smug and self-righteous. The woman who wrote the email eventually woke up and smelled the coffee. I hope that, some day, the same can be said of you.

That lady must feel like an utter moron.If so, she would be being overly-harsh on herself. I would rather hope that she is feeling a bit wiser, a bit less accepting of claims at face value, and a bit less trusting in the good intentions of those who would charge a fee for "spiritual advice."

It's called learning, Brattus. She went through a painful (and expensive) lesson, and was kind enough to try to share that lesson with others, for which you took cheap (and inaccurate) shots at her.

But who out there in Internet land wants to bet me one dollar that she's not knee deep this very minute into some other TV psychic?That is certainly possible, but it is not the impression I got from her. Even if she is, I'd like to think that the seeds of critical thinking on the subject have been planted, and that someone will have to work harder to fool her next time.

[Storm Warning]

Originally Posted by rjh01
With any luck they will be running out of customers soon, thanks to you Robert.

Let's hop, rj!
Careful with all that hopping, you might twist an ankle! :p

Another terrific article RSL. Keep pounding those nails in SB/CD's coffin.

[Minarvia]

Nevermind Sylvia, I think RSL should get an award for successfully posting a message with that many multi-quotes in it.

No kidding. I don't know how to do that. It's probably explained on the forum somewhere but I doubt I'm savvy enough to be able to understand. My only skill is fairly decent typing, I'm afraid.

[Kilgore Trout]

Not to steal some thunder, but... You just click http://forums.randi.org/helloworld2/buttons/multiquote_off.gif for each post you want to quote (it will change to http://forums.randi.org/helloworld2/buttons/multiquote_on.gif) then click http://forums.randi.org/helloworld2/buttons/quote.gif.

[Monza]

Great job again, Robert. I find it interesting to hear stories from the "other side", as it were. It lends credence to my belief that your web site is doing some good and helping some people to develop critical thinking skills.

I don't know the legalities involved, but it would be nice to hear some of the readings (or, if necessary, read the transcripts) from SB and CD. If more people heard what they get for their hundreds of dollars, they make think twice about spending the money.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Hey! Imply away! That email reads like a how to guide for the galacticly stupid. That lady must feel like an utter moron.
But who out there in Internet land wants to bet me one dollar that she's not knee deep this very minute into some other TV psychic?
After all, they can't all be fake. Right?

We've had this conversation before but I'll say the same thing I've said before: although some purveyors of woo are naive, foolish and silly, most don't deserve to be suckered. There will always be those who'll fall for it but most are victims who shouldn't be blamed. Most victims' problem isn't that they are naive or stupid; most would wake up and smell the coffee if they were exposed to the other viewpoint.

Except for my terminally woo-woo pal, who still can't get it through her head she was conned by faith healers and offers increasingly idiotic defenses. I am very fast losing patience with her and by now wouldn't hesitate to call very naive and damned stupid. She's intelligent but she sure isn't smart.

[krelnik]

I agree, as a skeptic one should never blame the victim. After all, these are the people we are trying to help!

[Brattus]

And your post reads like a how-to guide for the galactically smug and self-righteous. The woman who wrote the email eventually woke up and smelled the coffee. I hope that, some day, the same can be said of you.

If so, she would be being overly-harsh on herself. I would rather hope that she is feeling a bit wiser, a bit less accepting of claims at face value, and a bit less trusting in the good intentions of those who would charge a fee for "spiritual advice."

It's called learning, Brattus. She went through a painful (and expensive) lesson, and was kind enough to try to share that lesson with others, for which you took cheap (and inaccurate) shots at her.

That is certainly possible, but it is not the impression I got from her. Even if she is, I'd like to think that the seeds of critical thinking on the subject have been planted, and that someone will have to work harder to fool her next time.

UH. OK. I hate to bust your bubble there Mr. Lancaster. But it clearly states in the email that she was aware of and read your SSB site at the same time she was waiting for her $450.00 phone call. Not only that but listening to Sylvia on the radio and waiting who knows how long on the phone to speak with her on the air.
That should tell you everything you need to know about how effective your SSB site really is.
Nothing written in your site swayed her belief in the dynamic duo one tiny bit.
It wasn't until she had enough first hand contact with them to realize that maybe something wasn't right.
I was very impressed with your StopKaz site, very well done.
But after reading your SSB site I can come to no other conclusion than it is merely a self indulgent seeking of attention from your groupie base on this forum.
You've even gotten so desperate for something to write about you have an article concerning whether SB smokes cigarettes or not.
But that really doesnt matter because no matter what you write about your JREF groupie base will lavish praise upon the great RSL and his stopping of SB.
Truth is though you haven't even slowed her down.
If she was some kind of master cold reader or master showman I could then kind of understand a little how some people might get sucked into her BS.
But she half asses it at best. She is horrible at what she does. Yet these people believe her because she is on TV and the radio. This is not all SBs fault here and that's how you and your groupies pimp it off.
These people are NOT mugging victims! They are not victims at all!
They CHOSE to give her their money! They WANT SB to have it!
Sylvia Browne can not sell anything unless someone is buying!
If your site were truly what it claims to be then you would have a section about being gullible, naive or plain stupid.
You say you are waiting for just one thing that shows SB has psychic powers and you will post it on your site. That's not the truth though is it?
You KNOW that SB has no psychic powers. You KNOW you will never see that one thing ever. That's why your SSB site is nothing more than preaching to the choir.
If you truly created the site for more than you and your groupies then you would fully understand that these are very very stupid people you are writing for.
You can't offer up facts and just expect these idiots to draw their own conclusions.
They believe Sylvia Browne has real psychic powers because she is on TV.
That should tell you everything you need to know about the type of people your dealing with.
You need to spell it out for them. You can't give them a choice. They already made the choice to believe in SBs powers anyway.
You need to come out with it on the home page. Sylvia Browne is a fake! That they might be able to understand but I doubt it.

Here's what I would like to see though. One piece of prove from you that someone anyone came to not believe in SBs powers after reading your SSB site. That this person full on believed everything Sylvia and was just surfing the net and came upon your site and your site alone changed their thinking.
Testimonials from your JREF groupie base doesnt count either.
They will say anything to protect their new Daddy.
You throw the phrase "critical thinking" around like you own the copyright on it. Well here's something to critically think about.

[Kilgore Trout]

UH. OK. I hate to bust your bubble there Mr. Lancaster. But it clearly states in the email that she was aware of and read your SSB site at the same time she was waiting for her $450.00 phone call.

Where, pray tell, does the email "clearly" state this? The first call she received for the reading was October 2006. This was postponed two weeks and rescheduled again, though it is not stated how long she waited. Even if we generously date the first call on October 31st, and she waited two additional weeks, stopsylviabrowne.com would have been up all of one day prior to her reading with Chris.

Since the rest of your rant is based on this fallacy, and quite insulting, I'll not address it.

[Locknar]

UH. OK. I hate to bust your bubble there Mr. Lancaster. But it clearly states in the email that she was aware of and read your SSB site at the same time she was waiting for her $450.00 phone call. You need to read it the article again. From the article:

I stumbled on your web site quite some time ago....
I called in July of 2006 and was told there was a four month waiting list....
October 2006 finally came and I received a call from Sylvia's office to set up a day and time for my reading with Chris.


I'd suggest that "some time ago" is a vague time reference, and could mean weeks, months, etc. Other then your hostile assumption, there is nothing in the e-mail that suggests or otherwise supports your claim (and subsequent rant).

As to the hostility of your posts, yikes! You must either be a SB supporter or someone (or a member of your family) who was once burned by SB or her ilk.

So because this woman fell for SBs con once, she is now beyond redemption according to you...how sad.

[rjh01]

Also Sylvia Browne has reacted several times to the site. Gosylviabrowne is one such example.

[Brattus]

You need to read it the article again. From the article:





I'd suggest that "some time ago" is a vague time reference, and could mean weeks, months, etc. Other then your hostile assumption, there is nothing in the e-mail that suggests or otherwise supports your claim (and subsequent rant).

As to the hostility of your posts, yikes! You must either be a SB supporter or someone (or a member of your family) who was once burned by SB or her ilk.

So because this woman fell for SBs con once, she is now beyond redemption according to you...how sad.

Well I must be psychic myself. I just knew it would take the next one or two post to accuse me of being a SB supporter.
I have no connection with SB at all. Why would I? She's an old con artist. A very bad one at that.
But the times of whatever is NOT what my "rant" was about at all.
It's about accountability. Stupid is as stupid does. I have no doubt the woman has changed her way of thinking about SB. But no thanks to SSB site. She offered her story only after she knew she was conned by SB and company. She reached that conclusion on her own after dealings with them.
I'll bet you didn't even read my entire post.
No one dare say anything bad about SSB or RSL on this forum because then they are in league with the devil.
Hey I know the truth hurts but don't shoot the messenger.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I have read your entire rant, Brattus, and I have to say that I'm baffled and angered at your words towards Mr.Lancaster, a wonderful person I do indeed personally adore and admire very much.

Tell me, because I still don't quite understand: what exactly is your objection to exposing on a dangerous con artist?

I also resent being called a "groupie" and and having my own painstaking and time consuming efforts dismissed. I'm very sorry for trying to do some good in the world for other people who don't deserve to be victimized. Or, as you call it, "pimping it off".

[Locknar]

Well I must be psychic myself. I just knew it would take the next one or two post to accuse me of being a SB supporter.Since I've suggested this before, a rather poor psychic effort (or inductive leap) on your part I'd say.

It's about accountability. Stupid is as stupid does. I have no doubt the woman has changed her way of thinking about SB. But no thanks to SSB site. She offered her story only after she knew she was conned by SB and company. She reached that conclusion on her own after dealings with them.
And your point?

Speaking of accountability...can't help but notice your lack of such. You were, in fact, wrong when you wrote "But it clearly states in the email that she was aware of and read your SSB site at the same time she was waiting for her $450.00 phone call."


I'll bet you didn't even read my entire post.I did, and? Safe to say, everyone has gotten the memo...you don't like the SSB site, you feel it serves no legitimate purpose, etc. Just your typical routine...surly you have something new to offer, some new insight?

Of course, you could always start your own site, write your own articles, etc. as you are so unhappy with RSLs SBB site...but I suspect you won't make the effort; why should you, as it is far easier to irrationally ridicule the work of others.


No one dare say anything bad about SSB or RSL on this forum because then they are in league with the devil.Quite the assumption on your part; if you don't see it posted in a forum I suppose it does not exist?

Actually, I (and others) been rather critical of some of RSLs articles.


Hey I know the truth hurts but don't shoot the messenger.See your above assumptions.

[RSL's better half]

Hmm. After reading Brattus' last two posts, I confess I was at first a bit angry. Of course, that's what he/she was going for. Then I thought about how stupid and naive he/she is and calmed down.

Kaz had a very limited following. She had not been doing what she was doing for decades, nor had she written - what is it now - thirty books Sylvia has written? Kaz did not have "fans." Sylvia has avid fans. Sylvia also has had detractors for years and has weathered them. The SSB website must be civil, level-headed, evidence-based - exactly as it is now - or it will be written off by the believers as so much sour grapes.

I hear more emails than any of you do, and I know I haven't heard them all. There are so many sad stories in them, and many, many, many expressions of appreciation for the site. Yes, and there have been more than a few who have said they were considering contacting SB until they saw the site. Most people who contact Robert are immediately comfortable with him because of his approach, which helps them to open up with their stories. Yes, Brattus, they DO feel like idiots sometimes, and they hope that by telling their story they may be able to save someone else from making the same mistake. I happen to think that is brave.

Compassion breeds trust . . . and more compassion. Hatefulness and judgmentalness (ooo - is that even a word?) is only met with more hostility. The postings on this thread are proof of that. So . . . Get thee behind me, Brattus! You will get nowhere here.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Hmm. After reading Brattus' last two posts, I confess I was at first a bit angry. Of course, that's what he/she was going for. Then I thought about how stupid and naive he/she is and calmed down.

Kaz had a very limited following. She had not been doing what she was doing for decades, nor had she written - what is it now - thirty books Sylvia has written? Kaz did not have "fans." Sylvia has avid fans. Sylvia also has had detractors for years and has weathered them. The SSB website must be civil, level-headed, evidence-based - exactly as it is now - or it will be written off by the believers as so much sour grapes.

I hear more emails than any of you do, and I know I haven't heard them all. There are so many sad stories in them, and many, many, many expressions of appreciation for the site. Yes, and there have been more than a few who have said they were considering contacting SB until they saw the site. Most people who contact Robert are immediately comfortable with him because of his approach, which helps them to open up with their stories. Yes, Brattus, they DO feel like idiots sometimes, and they hope that by telling their story they may be able to save someone else from making the same mistake. I happen to think that is brave.

Compassion breeds trust . . . and more compassion. Hatefulness and judgmentalness (ooo - is that even a word?) is only met with more hostility. The postings on this thread are proof of that. So . . . Get thee behind me, Brattus! You will get nowhere here.

Here, here! :D

Classy response, Susan, and if I can add one more thing that's exactly what many cons depend on: the victims being embarrassed to speak out and warn others for fear of being thought stupid/ feelings of stupidity and embarrassment. Silence is golden- for con artists, frauds and liars.

And that's what Sylvia Browne herself would say: anyone "stupid enough" to believe it deserves to be taken- yes, blaming the victim for believing you.

[Lucky]

UH. OK. I hate to bust your bubble there Mr. Lancaster. But it clearly states in the email that she was aware of and read your SSB site at the same time she was waiting for her $450.00 phone call. Not only that but listening to Sylvia on the radio and waiting who knows how long on the phone to speak with her on the air.
That should tell you everything you need to know about how effective your SSB site really is.
Nothing written in your site swayed her belief in the dynamic duo one tiny bit.
It wasn't until she had enough first hand contact with them to realize that maybe something wasn't right.

Well, no – her email "clearly states" nothing of the sort. Nowhere does it mention her having any knowledge of Robert's site before her phone call with Dufresne. You seem to have some reading comprehension deficiencies to add to your bag of ... erm ... problems.


October 2006 finally came and I received a call from Sylvia's office to set up a day and time for my reading with Chris ... When the day came I waited, and waited, and waited. ... Finally, 5 minutes before the end of my two hour window the phone rang. It was a woman from Sylvia's office. She explained that I'd have to reschedule my reading as Chris had an emergency at home ... I rescheduled anyway since they already had my $450. I would wait two weeks. As my day was once again approaching, I came home to find a message on my machine that Chris would not be available to do my reading on the scheduled day and would, once again, need to reschedule. Third time is a charm. The day was finally here. I will now describe how my reading went and what Chris told me.

So, we are not told how long the correspondent had to wait for her second rescheduling. Unless it was considerably longer than the first delay (which she surely would have mentioned) then the reading took place in November 2006.

The first article on Robert's site was added on 27 November 2006.

So, it really would not be possible for Robert's correspondent to have seen the site before her call with Dufresne (leaving aside the fact that she didn't make that claim – you invented it).

Your statement is utterly false, Brattus. What is this about?


(paraphrasing)
Sylvia Browne's victims are to blame, because they CHOSE to give her their money! They WANT SB to have it!, or alternatively they are gullible, naive or plain stupid
No.

There are a number of reasons, very much more subtle, which some of us would take the trouble to explain to you if we thought there was any chance you were interested in learning.

(paraphrasing)
... and therefore I am so superior.

No.

[rjh01]

Everyone has forgotten this http://www.stopsylviabrowne.com/articles/email_thankyoufromsoccermom.shtml
I am frequently asked by people who follow this site whether I believe that the site is really making a difference.

One of the several ways I know that the site is definitely having an impact is through the emails I receive almost daily from people who tell me that the site has helped them to make up their minds about Browne.

These emails are always very satisfying to me, as they show me that the site is doing its job: giving people information about Sylvia Browne, from which they can come to their own conclusion.

In this article I will share some correspondence from one such person.

No need to be upset about Brattus' posts. You should laugh at its stupidity, the ignorance it shows, not to mention the name calling.

[RSL's better half]

Everyone has forgotten this http://www.stopsylviabrowne.com/articles/email_thankyoufromsoccermom.shtml


No need to be upset about Brattus' posts. You should laugh at its stupidity, the ignorance it shows, not to mention the name calling.

Thank you, rj.

[RSLancastr]

UH. OK. I hate to bust your bubble there Mr. Lancaster. But it clearly states in the email that she was aware of and read your SSB site at the same time she was waiting for her $450.00 phone call. Not only that but listening to Sylvia on the radio and waiting who knows how long on the phone to speak with her on the air.

That should tell you everything you need to know about how effective your SSB site really is.

Nothing written in your site swayed her belief in the dynamic duo one tiny bit.Nope, that isn't clear from the email at all.

Here is apparently the timeline of events in the email:

1. A couple of years before July 2006 - buys some Browne books.
2. Jul 2006 - Talks to Browne on the radio show.
3. Jul 2006 - Calls and schedules reading with Dufresne
4. Oct 2006 - Was asked to pick a date/time
5. Later - Scheduled appointment cancelled
6. Two weeks later - 2nd appt rescheduled
7. Later - has phone reading with Dufresne.
8. Mar 2007 - Talks with Browne again on radio show.

The SSB site consisted of nothing but a "COMING SOON" page (still viewable at www.StopSylviaBrowne.com/oldindex.htm) until November 27, 2006, which it opened with three articles.

So she could not have seen the site until after #4 in the above timeline, and it is not clear whether she had seen it even after #8, as all she says regarding when she first saw the site is "I stumbled on your web site quite some time ago."

But for the sake of argument, let's say she had access to reading the entire web site, as it exists today, before making her first phone call.

So what? I have received emails from others who told me that they were angered by what was on my site, but chose not to believe it until they had an experience with Browne or Dufresne, after which the site started making sense to them. They could see the cold-reading techniques, where they had not before. Would they have noticed them if they hadn't read the SSB site? Perhaps, perhaps not.

Sorry Brattus, my bubble doesn't burst that easily.

I was very impressed with your StopKaz site, very well done.Thank you.

But after reading your SSB site I can come to no other conclusion than it is merely a self indulgent seeking of attention from your groupie base on this forum.I see. Well, you are certainly welcome to any conclusion you wish. I can no more prove that conclusion wrong than I can other conlusions others have come to, such as that I am jealous of Browne's wonderful abilities, or that I am secretly a minister who dislikes Browne revealing "the truth" about Jesus, or that I am another psychic who is trying to steal Browne's client base.

You've even gotten so desperate for something to write about you have an article concerning whether SB smokes cigarettes or not.The article is about whether Browne lies or not. The cigarettes are merely evidence of that. There are fans who think that Browne speaks nothing but the truth. If showing her in an obvious lie will help some of those people to re-examine other things she has said, the article has done its job.

But that really doesnt matter because no matter what you write about your JREF groupie base will lavish praise upon the great RSL and his stopping of SB.I see.

Truth is though you haven't even slowed her down.And you came to this conclusion how? She has certainly slowed down since the site went up. How much of is because of the site? There is no way of knowing.

Here is something which I mentioned during my presentation at TAM5.5, but which I may not have mentioned on the forum: I have been told that people working Browne's office say that emails to the office have slowed down from "thousands every month" to "a handful every month," and that the people in the office blame it squarely on SSB.com. How accurate that is, I have no idea. But it was interesting to hear.

If she was some kind of master cold reader or master showman I could then kind of understand a little how some people might get sucked into her BS.

But she half asses it at best. She is horrible at what she does.Agreed.

Yet these people believe her because she is on TV and the radio.This is indeed how she sucks in a lot of her fan base. And the fact that she is no longer a weekly guest on the Montel Williams Show is another indicator that - whoever or whatever is responsible - she is indeed slowing down.l But back to your point...

This is not all SBs fault here and that's how you and your groupies pimp it off.

These people are NOT mugging victims! They are not victims at all!They are victims, Brattus. You and I have been through this before.

They CHOSE to give her their money!Yes, but under false pretenses. If you CHOOSE to give your money to a car dealer for a Porsche, only to find later that there isn't even a CAR, should the cops say "Hey You're not a victim! Brattus, you CHOSE to give your money to that dealer!"

They WANT SB to have it!Well, that's not even logical. When I pay an attorney for his or her services, or pay the grocery store for my food, it's not because I WANT them to have my money. It is because I want in return what I have been promised for that money. The people who pay Browne $750 for a twenty minute phone reading do so not because they necessarily want her to have the money. They do so because they want what they have been promised in return. And they do not receive it.

Sylvia Browne can not sell anything unless someone is buying!The same can be said of any con-artist. Does that somehow transfer the blame to the people who were taken in by the con?

If your site were truly what it claims to be then you would have a section about being gullible, naive or plain stupid.Oh? First, tell me what my site "claims to be." Next, start your own site in which you tell people how "gullible, naive or plain stupid" they are, and see how many are helped by it.

You say you are waiting for just one thing that shows SB has psychic powers and you will post it on your site. That's not the truth though is it?Where exactly do I say that? I say (repeatedly) that if anyone has any examples of readings for missing/murdered people that she has gotten largely correct (whether through psychic means or not), to please let me know, and I will research it and write it up for the site. Is that what you are talking about?

You KNOW that SB has no psychic powers.I would certainly bet on it, though from a purely skeptical point of view, I would not say that I "know" it.

You KNOW you will never see that one thing ever.Again, give me a quote because I am not sure what you're referring to.

That's why your SSB site is nothing more than preaching to the choir.Then why do so many people contact me and tell me that they no longer believe in Browne after they read the site? Are they all lying to me? Because I hear from people who tell me this almost daily.

If you truly created the site for more than you and your groupies then you would fully understand that these are very very stupid people you are writing for.I think that sentence falls under "false dichotomy," Brattus, and it is wrong on several counts.

I have corresponded and spoken with many people who believe (or once believed) in Browne's scam, and I assure you, they are not "all very stupid people". You are dealing in your own prejudiced stereotypes, Brattus.

And believe me, if I had created the site for the enjoyment of skeptics (which is what I assume you mean by "the choir"), then it would be very different in tone and content.

You can't offer up facts and just expect these idiots to draw their own conclusions.Again, I hear almost daily from people who you would evidently categorize as "idiots" who have read the site and come to the conclusion that Browne is a fraud.

They believe Sylvia Browne has real psychic powers because she is on TV. That should tell you everything you need to know about the type of people your dealing with.There are going to be "true believers" who would not change their mind about Browne regardless of the evidence. But there is a whole spectrum of belief between that extreme and those who are on the fence about Browne. And the site seems to work for many who at various points on that spectrum.

You need to spell it out for them. You can't give them a choice. They already made the choice to believe in SBs powers anyway.

You need to come out with it on the home page. Sylvia Browne is a fake! That they might be able to understand but I doubt it.Again Brattus, if you want to put together that web site, please do. I will even link to it. But that is not the site, nor the approach, that I have decided on.

And it's odd that you liked the StopKaz site, because that is where I first learned to use the very approach you seem to dislike now.

Here's what I would like to see though. One piece of prove from you that someone anyone came to not believe in SBs powers after reading your SSB site. That this person full on believed everything Sylvia and was just surfing the net and came upon your site and your site alone changed their thinking.

Testimonials from your JREF groupie base doesnt count either.

They will say anything to protect their new Daddy.I see.

Well, read this article and see if it meets your criteria: http://www.stopsylviabrowne.com/articles/email_rosannamontage.shtml

You throw the phrase "critical thinking" around like you own the copyright on it.Wow. I didn't realize that.

Googling for the phrase on the SSB site, I find I used it... zero times.

Searching this forum for posts by me where I use both the word "critical" and "thinking," I find... eight posts, in some of which the phrase is in a quote from someone else.

No wonder I lost the copyright...

Well here's something to critically think about.And I have.

[RSLancastr]

By the way, a note to my groupies:

Before my last concert, I noticed that the bowl of M&Ms in my dressing room contained some dark brown and light brown ones, when I have specifically told you people again and again to remove them, because they remind me of Browne!

Not only that, THEY DON'T EVEN MAKE THE LIGHT BROWN ONES ANYMORE, UNLESS YOU SPECIAL ORDER THEM!!

Next time, I'M TRASHING THE PLACE!!!!

Some freakin' groupies... :mad:

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

By the way, a note to my groupies:

Before my last concert, I noticed that the bowl of M&Ms in my dressing room contained some dark brown and light brown ones, when I have specifically told you people again and again to remove them, because they remind me of Browne!

Not only that, THEY DON'T EVEN MAKE THE LIGHT BROWN ONES ANYMORE, UNLESS YOU SPECIAL ORDER THEM!!

Next time, I'M TRASHING THE PLACE!!!!

Some freakin' groupies... :mad:

Absolutely hilarious. :D :D :D And very good rebuttals and responses.

You may not have any groupies but I hope you know I'll always be your Number 1 Fan. :)

(Other than Susan and your children, of course!)

[Kilgore Trout]

March 30, 2008

Dear Mr. Lancaster:

I'm deeply sorry, sir. I understand your position clearly. If you want me to turn in my "Rockin' the Skeptics '08 Tour" t-shirt and "Event Staff" light-weight wind breaker, I will. I can only ask for your forgiveness and tell you how deeply ashamed I am.

I do not know, off hand, who was supposed to take care of the M&Ms, but I take full responsibility for the gross negligence. I assure you the necessary steps are, even now, being taken to rectify the situation. I promise you those in charge of removing the dark brown M&Ms will be dealt with very severely.

I also promise you that security will be increased tenfold at your next venue. Intelligence reports suggest the light brown M&Ms were inserted by a third party that slipped in undetected. A new fingerprinting system is being ordered, at no cost to you. Tapes of the security cameras are also being checked at this very moment.

Again, my most humble apologies, sir.

Yours faithfully,

K. Trout

cc: JR, RSLBH, Groupies
KT/jd

[ExMinister]

Well, I admit Brattus' post seemed particularly aimed at me and the other ex-NSer types, and I wouldn't want to post on a forum where I was specifically unwelcome, so it was nice to read the responses of others who disagree. At least I hope they do.

RSL,

Your response was great and actually made me laugh.

I'll take full responsibility for the M&M issue, so long as I never actually have to call you "Daddy." :rolleyes:

ExM
Senior Groupie
(and Former Idiot Who Formed Own Conclusions Based on RSL's Web Site and Past Experience)

[rjh01]

I'll take full responsibility for the M&M issue, so long as I never actually have to call you "Daddy." :rolleyes:


Would "Mummy" be OK?:boxedin:

[RSLancastr]

You may not have any groupies but I hope you know I'll always be your Number 1 Fan. :)Okay, now you're scaring me. I'm picturing Kathy Bates saying the same thing to James Caan... :boxedin:

I can only ask for your forgiveness and tell you how deeply ashamed I am.I'm hoping we can put the whole ugly incident behind us, Trout. Just make sure it doesn't happen again.

I'll take full responsibility for the M&M issue, so long as I never actually have to call you "Daddy." :rolleyes:No problem there, ExM. :boggled:

Would "Mummy" be OK?:boxedin:Uhhhhh.... No. :eye-poppi

[Hawthorne]

I really appreciate what Mr. Lancaster does.
I'm an ex-SB fan - I read her books for the same reason a lot of folks do: in emotional pain, had nowhere to turn, and they helped at the time. I was raised to believe in the supernatural and other woo-ish things, so had no problem accepting that what SB claimed she could do was possible.
Now, because I'm a pretty savvy and smart chickadee, I began to notice the vast inconsistencies in her books pretty quickly (I figured she was just old and had a bad staff), and once I got a hold of one of those Novus Spiritus, Journey of the Soul books you can only by from her I had to say to myself "Now, this is utter garbage...wtf??? A cataclysm? That's not even original!" And all the bizarre and gross hypocrisies (sp?) of Novus Spiritus really disgusted me immediately. I guess I was one of the few that actually took her at her word when she said "Don't just believe me, go research stuff for yourself" - I did, and discovered not one piece of evidence she uses supports anything she says.
Then I found the SSB site and all the evidence, presented in such a cool and collected manner, really was the last nail in the coffin. So he helped me tremendously.
I don't regret it or feel like I am hopelessly stupid - you could say SB and her crap helped me develop into the skeptic I always wanted to be, deep down inside...and since her mistakes and lies are so glaringly obvious, it has been a good time...it is what it is.
So thanks Mr. Lancaster! I look forward to each new article and I'll be emailing you with anything I think can help.

[ExMinister]

Welcome, Hawthorne. Your post was nicely said. Your point about being raised "woo" making one more vulnerable to the claims of one such as Sylvia Browne is a good one. It would be interesting if more people would post here with stories like yours.

Alas, RSL, you may not have any groupies, but you've got the support of a group of people who think you've done a great job with the web site. There are also other skeptical web sites that I enjoy and would support if new articles were linked to here from time to time. In fact, linking to here is a good idea.

And I will not call you Mummy either. Or Uncle Bob. :D

[Locknar]

By the way, a note to my groupies:

(holding lighter over my head) "Play Freebrid! FREEBRID!!!!!!!!!!"

[RSL's better half]

I really appreciate what Mr. Lancaster does.
I'm an ex-SB fan - I read her books for the same reason a lot of folks do: in emotional pain, had nowhere to turn, and they helped at the time. I was raised to believe in the supernatural and other woo-ish things, so had no problem accepting that what SB claimed she could do was possible.
Now, because I'm a pretty savvy and smart chickadee, I began to notice the vast inconsistencies in her books pretty quickly (I figured she was just old and had a bad staff), and once I got a hold of one of those Novus Spiritus, Journey of the Soul books you can only by from her I had to say to myself "Now, this is utter garbage...wtf??? A cataclysm? That's not even original!" And all the bizarre and gross hypocrisies (sp?) of Novus Spiritus really disgusted me immediately. I guess I was one of the few that actually took her at her word when she said "Don't just believe me, go research stuff for yourself" - I did, and discovered not one piece of evidence she uses supports anything she says.
Then I found the SSB site and all the evidence, presented in such a cool and collected manner, really was the last nail in the coffin. So he helped me tremendously.
I don't regret it or feel like I am hopelessly stupid - you could say SB and her crap helped me develop into the skeptic I always wanted to be, deep down inside...and since her mistakes and lies are so glaringly obvious, it has been a good time...it is what it is.
So thanks Mr. Lancaster! I look forward to each new article and I'll be emailing you with anything I think can help.

Well said, Hawthorne. And, I might add, I know where you're coming from. I, too, was raised to believe in woo. Particularly in ESP - telepathy, clairvoyance and the like. It was so ingrained in me that I am still open to the possibility of ESP - just not the way SB, JE, UG or JVP claim to have it. Past unexplained experiences leave me now seeking other explanations. So far, a few alternative answers have hurt me to my soul.

But I digress. Welcome, Hawthorne. You are in a good place.

[RSL's better half]

March 30, 2008

Dear Mr. Lancaster:

I'm deeply sorry, sir. I understand your position clearly. If you want me to turn in my "Rockin' the Skeptics '08 Tour" t-shirt and "Event Staff" light-weight wind breaker, I will. I can only ask for your forgiveness and tell you how deeply ashamed I am.

I do not know, off hand, who was supposed to take care of the M&Ms, but I take full responsibility for the gross negligence. I assure you the necessary steps are, even now, being taken to rectify the situation. I promise you those in charge of removing the dark brown M&Ms will be dealt with very severely.

I also promise you that security will be increased tenfold at your next venue. Intelligence reports suggest the light brown M&Ms were inserted by a third party that slipped in undetected. A new fingerprinting system is being ordered, at no cost to you. Tapes of the security cameras are also being checked at this very moment.

Again, my most humble apologies, sir.

Yours faithfully,

K. Trout

cc: JR, RSLBH, Groupies
KT/jd

:wackybiglaugh::big:


Oh, my! (Takes a breath.) I laughed so hard I started coughing! You are too funny, KT! Too, too funny!

[Hawthorne]

Well said, Hawthorne. And, I might add, I know where you're coming from. I, too, was raised to believe in woo. Particularly in ESP - telepathy, clairvoyance and the like. It was so ingrained in me that I am still open to the possibility of ESP - just not the way SB, JE, UG or JVP claim to have it. Past unexplained experiences leave me now seeking other explanations. So far, a few alternative answers have hurt me to my soul.

But I digress. Welcome, Hawthorne. You are in a good place.

Thank ya, ma'am!

[Hawthorne]

and thanks ExMinister!

I think a lot of SB's "true believers" are afraid - if SB, their "spiritual leader" is wrong that means that they are wrong, their whole belief system is false, and that is hard pill to swallow.

[Locknar]

I think a lot of SB's "true believers" are afraid - if SB, their "spiritual leader" is wrong that means that they are wrong, their whole belief system is false, and that is hard pill to swallow.Unlike others who are just silly with their hostile rants and not worth getting mad about, I think it takes a brave person to take that step. Kudos to you, and others who have done the same.

As to the others, keep in mind they are all talk and little action. They talk of things like accountability, yet won't admit when they are wrong....they trash other folks efforts, yet take no action of their own, they leap to baseless conclusions, etc. Sure, on the surface their comments may hurt...but when you take into account who is making them, well....just they come off as just plain silly. That said, maybe one day they will take that brave first step in admitting they were wrong too....not likely, but never say never :)

[Tanstaafl]

Well I must be psychic myself. I just knew it would take the next one or two post to accuse me of being a SB supporter.
I have no connection with SB at all. Why would I? She's an old con artist. A very bad one at that.
But the times of whatever is NOT what my "rant" was about at all.
It's about accountability. Stupid is as stupid does. I have no doubt the woman has changed her way of thinking about SB. But no thanks to SSB site. She offered her story only after she knew she was conned by SB and company. She reached that conclusion on her own after dealings with them.
I'll bet you didn't even read my entire post.
No one dare say anything bad about SSB or RSL on this forum because then they are in league with the devil.
Hey I know the truth hurts but don't shoot the messenger.


So you apparently know how effective SSB is or is not, based entirely on the experience of one person?

Impressive.

ETA: Didn't notice the second page of posts, I'm late to the party, as usual...

[Kilgore Trout]

Welcome, Hawthorne. Thanks for sharing that and very well said.

And glad you liked it, RSLBH. I'll be here all week, and don't forget to tip your waiter!

[RSLancastr]

No need to be upset about Brattus' posts. You should laugh at its stupidity, the ignorance it shows, not to mention the name calling.Speaking of name-calling, let's not imply that he's stupid.

I think he's wrong about this, and that he could use healthy dose of empathy, but it's no more accurate to call him stupid than for him to call all Browne followers stupid.

I really appreciate what Mr. Lancaster does.Thanks, Hawthorne, and welcome to the forum!

So thanks Mr. Lancaster! I look forward to each new article and I'll be emailing you with anything I think can help.I look forward to hearing from you.

And I will not call you Mummy either. Or Uncle Bob. :DAppreciated. :)

(holding lighter over my head) "Play Freebrid! FREEBRID!!!!!!!!!!"Freebrid? Is this like "cow-orker?"

ETA: Didn't notice the second page of posts, I'm late to the party, as usual...Welcome to the party! The soggy potato chips and stale beer are on the kitchen counter.

[Locknar]

Freebrid? Is this like "cow-orker?"
Hey now...I'm holding a lighter over my head yelling...I think I'm due a little slack.

*Note to self: Order more brown M&Ms*

[rjh01]

Speaking of name-calling, let's not imply that he's stupid.

I think he's wrong about this, and that he could use healthy dose of empathy, but it's no more accurate to call him stupid than for him to call all Browne followers stupid.


I make no judgement about him, just his stupid post. If you are going to make strong criticisms of a person then at least be partly right.

[dahduh]

Chris... It's becoming clearer dearie... I see an 'I'! It's a name! It's going to get you! No wait... ends in an 'S'! Only three letters long? ... I see... 'R'! Whatever can that mean? And wait, I see an 'F', ends in a 'd'! Squad! The 'F...d Squad' is also going to get you! Oh my dear, you really must be careful!

[wahrheit]

Thanks for another excellent addition to your website, Robert. This article is one of my favorites.

I had no idea that these phone readings are so incredibly dull. I would have expected a much more skillful act from such a "famous" psychic. Have your teeth checked... you will meet a Steve in two years... Hello?! A bag of fortune cookies is a library of wisdom compared to this reading by Dufresne.

[Locknar]

Thanks for another excellent addition to your website, Robert. This article is one of my favorites.

I'd go along with that, it was one of my favorites as well....makes me feel real guilty wrt the whole M&M thing.

[JoeTheJuggler]

I respected RSL's work for a long time, but didn't become a groupie until reading his thread on that pro-SB forum. Where I'd have been foaming at the mouth, he was calm and polite to a bunch of lunatics none of whom could write beyond about the 3rd grade level.

As far as actually stopping SB, I agree with Brattus. On the other hand the StopSylviaBrowne site has given plenty of her victims a source for a true perspective on her, and I believe it has helped many of them to come to their senses. I also think there can be a time lag in this process. In the case in question, I could see the woman getting the seeds of doubt from reading a very early version of the SSB site before making her phone call. That perspective no doubt colored her perception (or rather removed the filters with which she might have otherwise perceived it) to see it for what it was.

Further, as horrible and hateful as SB is, I believe there are much greater ills in the world, even if you limit it to damage caused by manipulation of people by means of supernatural belief. (I'm thinking about conventional religions, in particular.)

I think RSL's sites are still laudable because even people not particularly taken in by SB can see the clear and overwhelming case against her claims of supernatural abilities and apply the same standard of thinking in other areas. I also think somewhere on the SSB site, Robert gives the reasons for the site, among which is the fact that there is little or nothing to redeem the bad stuff SB does. (In other words, as much as I think conventional religions are to blame for greater ills in society, there are also many sincere believers who do a lot of good. StopIslam or StopBaptists websites would be unthinkable.)

By the way, Brattus, what's with the smoking thing? It's pretty important in New-Agey circles, and it also goes to the point that SB is a flagrant liar. (Many years ago a good friend of mine was angry when he learned that Richard Bach, author of Jonathan Livingston Seagull, Illusions and other similar inspirational books was a smoker.) You join T'ai Chi in thinking that that article is a cheap shot or that it makes an inconsequential point.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I have a friend exactly like Brattus. My friends doesn't believe in psychics or mediums and most supernatural phenomena but isn't what you'd call a skeptic.

He says that he and his father used to watch SB on Montel frequently just to laugh at her and it's beyond him that some people actually take her seriously. He doesn't believe that anyone would actually believe her, just like Brattus.

He also can't fanthom why I decided to become Robert's self-appointed de facto research assistant. He thinks that all we do is "give her more attention". Yeah, Zach, telling the truth about liars and frauds really helps liars and frauds.

He also says that if we "put all that effort and energy into politics, war, crime, poverty and disease, we'd get somewhere". Now, I agree with him- there are greater problems in the world than what woos do, yes, and I've always thought so, even at the height of my disgust wih mediums.

Then you think of all the people SB has hurt and that there's no one telling the truth about her besides a handful of people and you see that it is making a big difference. And- unlike in political activism, where it's unlikely that you personally will change lives-it's one of the few things you and a handful of friends can do to make a real difference.

Just because she's doesn't victimize millions of people doesn't mean that what she does isn't evil.

Eeney, Proud Groupie

[DrDisco]

After reading your article, RSL, something struck me. And I hope I'm not repeating something that has already been brought up before.

But, have calculations been done on the number of people who are getting these readings? I can't believe that this many people really flock to Browne and her goods. In the article it states that Browne has a 2-year waiting list for a simple 30-minute reading. Her son has a 4 month waiting list for the same. If they're doing readings x-number of times a day for x-number of days in a year and (most importantly) no single person can get a reading MORE THAN ONCE, then how many people are standing in that line?

It would seem to me that this "wait list" is a fabrication to enhance Browne's supposed popularity. I just can't imagine that many people are waiting to get a reading. Would seem like the figure would out-score the population of some nation.

[krelnik]

After reading your article, RSL, something struck me. And I hope I'm not repeating something that has already been brought up before.

But, have calculations been done on the number of people who are getting these readings?

Robert has done some articles on this very topic:

http://www.stopsylviabrowne.com/articles/brownesmoney.shtml

[Tressa]

You are still THE Man RSL and your SO is THE Woman!

PS
Those weren't M&Ms and you need to call Pest Control.

[Flo]

I have a friend exactly like Brattus. My friends doesn't believe in psychics or mediums and most supernatural phenomena but isn't what you'd call a skeptic.

He says that he and his father used to watch SB on Montel frequently just to laugh at her and it's beyond him that some people actually take her seriously. He doesn't believe that anyone would actually believe her, just like Brattus.

I didn't know about SB and the like before visiting the USA back in 1999, I was left speechless when I realised that such an obvious fraud had that much of an audience. Having never, ever, lent any credence to such nonsense, my first reaction was of course to blame the victims for their credulity. Then I met a few of them, and I realised I was dealing with people who had been severely hurt by life (and death), often lacked family or social connections in their time of grief, and were at most guilty of being too trusting and unguarded, which is perfectly understandable in such a situation. Of course, the easy way would be, like the Brattus of the world, to mock and debase them, or to bask into my intellectual superiority and just leave them to be further fleeced by those con artists.

I prefer it the SSB's way ...


He also says that if we "put all that effort and energy into politics, war, crime, poverty and disease, we'd get somewhere". Now, I agree with him- there are greater problems in the world than what woos do, yes, and I've always thought so, even at the height of my disgust wih mediums.

But woos, mediums, and assorted cons, do prevent a lot of people to put efforts and energy into politics, war, crime, poverty and disease.

Then you think of all the people SB has hurt and that there's no one telling the truth about her besides a handful of people and you see that it is making a big difference. And- unlike in political activism, where it's unlikely that you personally will change lives-it's one of the few things you and a handful of friends can do to make a real difference.

Just because she's doesn't victimize millions of people doesn't mean that what she does isn't evil.

Well said !


Florence, one more groupie.

[PastBrowneFan]

Welcome to the forum Hawthorne.

You'll find there are many ex-Sylvia Browne followers here, though not all post that often.

Glad to see another person who escaped the claws of Browne and Companies.

[RSLancastr]

You are still THE Man RSL and your SO is THE Woman!Thanks, Tressa!

PS - Those weren't M&Ms and you need to call Pest Control.:eek:

Florence, one more groupie.:D

You'll find there are many ex-Sylvia Browne followers here, though not all post that often.Yup. Familiar new avatar! :)