Mrs. Leonard's mediumship

[Mike D.]

(Continuing TLN's education about great mediums of the past!)

Mrs. Leonard is often mentioned along with Mrs. Piper as one of the outstanding mediums of the past. I don't know that much about her, but in case anyone wants to discuss her, I am sharing here a summary I wrote of Stephen Braude's introduction to her mediumship in his book, Immortal Remains. I didn't include all of Braude's points in the summary, so it shouldn't be regarded as representing everything he said about her in his book.

If there is no interest, this thread can cross over into thread heaven!


Braude, Chapter 3, Section 4: Mrs. Leonard's Mediumship

The mediumship of Mrs. Gladys Osborne Leonard (1882 - 1968) is the topic of this section.

As a child, Mrs. Leonard had visions, but these were discouraged by her parents. As a young adult, she pursued a career as an actress, and discovered her abilities as a medium during a table tilting session with fellow actresses, when she fell into a trance. On that occasion, a control personality named Feda spoke through Mrs. Leonard, and Feda remained as Mrs. Leonard's principal control. Feda claimed to have been a young Hindu woman who married an ancestor of Mrs. Leonard, but her existence was never verified. However, Mrs. Leonard remembered her mother mentioning something along those lines. At any rate, Braude writes that Feda "spoke in a high, squeaky voice, with occasional errors in grammar, misunderstandings of words, and consistent eccentricities of pronunciation… . Her personality was distinctively childlike (if not childish), and her relationship with Mrs. Leonard was less than cordial." (Braude, p. 71)

While there are a number of similarities between the mediumship of Mrs. Leonard and the mediumship of Mrs. Piper, Mrs. Leonard was particularly famous for "book tests." Feda, rather than the investigators, is the one who suggested these tests, and they are considered particularly interesting from the standpoint of issues surrounding the issues of survival, telepathy among the living, super-psi, etc.

In a typical book test, Feda, ostensibly speaking on behalf of another spirit communicator, would direct sitters or investigators to a particular location and ask them to look on a certain page in a certain book on a particular bookshelf, and Feda would give the gist of what was supposed to be written on that particular page. A successful book test was supposed to be significant in that it was held that if the sitters did not have prior familiarity with the book used in the test, that that would seem to effectively rule out simple telepathy between Mrs. Leonard and the sitters.

Braude, however, goes on to detail a number of problems with the idea of successful book tests being conclusive evidence for survival. But the notion of super psi seems almost as incredible when we consider the best examples of book tests, unless we take seriously an almost "magic wand" super-psi hypothesis. Furthermore, some book tests involved spirits apparently accurately conveying the locations and contents of books that they themselves would have not had the opportunity to know about while they were alive, so the ability of a spirit to know what was on a particular page in a particular edition of a book would mean that the spirits themselves would have to have some pretty formidable clairvoyant abilities to be able to read the contents of closed physical books on shelves.

Regarding the results of these book tests, we should not assume that they were always successful. For example, during one series of Mrs. Leonard's séances that involved 532 separate book tests, 92 of these were completely successful, and 100 were partially successful. There were 204 total failures, 40 almost complete failures, and 96 were classified as "dubious." However, non-medium control groups were also used, and one control group, for example, was only able to achieve a 2% success rate.

Beyond the statistics, however, lies the impressiveness of the details of the best of the successful cases, and Braude describes some of these.

[CFLarsen]

Thanks for the thread.

I would like to see the "strict protocol" that was used to test Piper with. Does anyone know where we can find a description of it?

[Darat]

The "book tests" sounds like a variant of a trick I've seen several magicians perform.

Any of you amateur magicians out there care to comment?

[Clancie]

Hi Mike,

Your writing about Mrs. Leonard reminds me of an experience that RC described having in a psychic development workshop that he took.

The medium pointed to a tall stack of magazines in the corner of the room and asked one student to choose a number to identify which magazine in the stack they would use for the experiment (tenth, fourth, etc.)

Students knew nothing about the magazine other than its position in the stack. The medium then asked someone to select a page number and everyone was to jot down his or her impressions of what the content of that page was

RC did the experiment, drew a picture on his paper, and said that he was getting impressions of yellow and brown spots and an animal sort of like a tiger but fluffier. He saw a face and oval shapes which he drew on the page.

When they compared his drawing to what was actually on the page (a large fluffly yellow and brown teddy bear with oval paws), it was quite similar and RC himself was surprised that the image he had seen in his mind had looked very much like the bear.

Now, of course, non-believers here will say you could draw face...ovals...describe a fluffy brown and yellow animal and probably get lucky. My comment to them is, "Try it and see for yourself!" :eek:

[voidx]

Originally posted by Clancie
Hi Mike,

Your writing about Mrs. Leonard reminds me of an experience that RC described having in a psychic development workshop that he took.

The medium pointed to a tall stack of magazines in the corner of the room and asked one student to choose a number to identify which magazine in the stack they would use for the experiment (tenth, fourth, etc.)

Students knew nothing about the magazine other than its position in the stack. The medium then asked someone to select a page number and everyone was to jot down his or her impressions of what the content of that page was

RC did the experiment, drew a picture on his paper, and said that he was getting impressions of yellow and brown spots and an animal sort of like a tiger but fluffier. He saw a face and oval shapes which he drew on the page.

When they compared his drawing to what was actually on the page (a large fluffly yellow and brown teddy bear with oval paws), it was quite similar and RC himself was surprised that the image he had seen in his mind had looked very much like the bear.

Now, of course, non-believers here will say you could draw face...ovals...describe a fluffy brown and yellow animal and probably get lucky. My comment to them is, "Try it and see for yourself!" :eek:
Did anyone else in the class draw something similiar? Has RC ever replicated this performance again? Ever tried? This is pretty silly I'm sorry. I'm sure everyone could think of of an incident in their life where they were thinking of something odd, and then it happens. Or your watching a movie and you just know what their going to say next or any number of other scenario's. Is it weird, sure it is. Hard to explain, perhaps. Is it indicitive of paranormal psychic powers whatsoever being an isolated incident? Not at all.

[LTC8K6]

So we had one page of one magazine selected at random.

All of the students were trying to draw what was on that one page and one of the students came pretty close.

I am unimpressed.

[renata]

If the book test and magazine page are considering impressive-or indicators of "something", I am very glad Banachek does not claim to be a psychic- he would be a head of a religion by now.

[Valmorian]

Originally posted by Clancie
Now, of course, non-believers here will say you could draw face...ovals...describe a fluffy brown and yellow animal and probably get lucky. My comment to them is, "Try it and see for yourself!" :eek:

Actually, as a non-believer, I'd have a few other things to say:

1. How do you know this actually happened? From what you've said here, RC himself claims it happened, but is there any verification of this?

2. It sounds very much like a magic trick to me. Seems like the only difference between this feat and the same thing performed by David Copperfield would be that one would claim it was because of supernatural powers. ;)

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Valmorian
1. How do you know this actually happened? From what you've said here, RC himself claims it happened, but is there any verification of this?

None whatsoever. It is a simple tale.

However, it is not to be seriously questioned at all. Seriously questioning an event that can be interpreted as paranormal is the first step towards rationality, and believers cannot risk that.

Originally posted by Valmorian
2. It sounds very much like a magic trick to me. Seems like the only difference between this feat and the same thing performed by David Copperfield would be that one would claim it was because of supernatural powers. ;)

It could very well be a trick. "Planting" a certain image is a very effective trick in magic. I've seen Derren Brown do it on TV - to me, as a viewer! I had to study the tape several times before I caught on.

[Clancie]

Well, re: RC. I can understand people dismissing it as "coincidence". Or people who don't know him thinking that it was a trick.

But since I know RC personally and have zero doubt of his integrity (for some people that -is- possible), the latter reason simply isn't a factor to me. (And, Valmorian, the medium documented it to me, not that that probably convinces you any more of its veracity, either. :) ).

As for "luck", well, RC consistently "got" more information than other students during other exercises they were doing as well. ( He had written here before about how he "saw" the names of the medium's grandfathers during a meditation. He didn't make any claims of mediumship, telepathy, etc. for the experience, but others have seen it as that.)

But, I didn't mean to derail this from the subject of Mrs. Leonard--only to give an example of a friend's similar experience.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Clancie
Well, re: RC. I can understand people dismissing it as "coincidence". Or people who don't know him thinking that it was a trick.

Trust is irrelevant, Clancie. History is littered with accounts of people being fooled by "friends".

Originally posted by Clancie
But since I know RC personally and have zero doubt of his integrity (for some people that -is- possible), the latter reason simply isn't a factor to me. (And, Valmorian, the medium documented it to me, not that that probably convinces you any more of its veracity, either. :) ).

It is interesting that you place so much faith in another person's integrity, when you have been fooled by a medium.

Originally posted by Clancie
As for "luck", well, RC consistently "got" more information than other students during other exercises they were doing as well. ( He had written here before about how he "saw" the names of the medium's grandfathers during a meditation. He didn't make any claims of mediumship, telepathy, etc. for the experience, but others have seen it as that.)

A common story. John Edward has claimed something similar, before he went pro. However, since RC "consistently" gets more information than other students, where can we see this data? It certainly sounds as if RC has collated data and compared it to the other students.

Originally posted by Clancie
But, I didn't mean to derail this from the subject of Mrs. Leonard--only to give an example of a friend's similar experience.

An experience which is nothing but an anecdote. Worthless as evidence.

[Clancie]

Just to get back on track....

I find the last sentence of Mike's summary so definitive (imo--and I know you all don't agree!!!!) of the puzzle of mediumship--inconsistent results that continue to make mediumship intriguing to me. It seems that, if it exists, mediumship appears in mountains of anecdotal evidence, but is not consistent enough to lend itself to replicable testing.

There is a wealth of demonstrated successes that, to me, look like something other than "cheating" or "lucky guesses". And yet, there is not enough consistency there (i.e. complete consistency) and not enough control possible (imo) over the conditions of sucessful performance that we can -definitely- conclude, "something paranormal is happening here." This is the frustration faced--not by believers or non-believers--but by those of us who feel, "there may be something to this."
Posted by Mike D.

..Regarding the results of these book tests, we should not assume that they were always successful.

For example, during one series of Mrs. Leonard's séances that involved 532 separate book tests, 92 of these were completely successful, and 100 were partially successful. There were 204 total failures, 40 almost complete failures, and 96 were classified as "dubious."

However, non-medium control groups were also used, and one control group, for example, was only able to achieve a 2% success rate.

Beyond the statistics, however, lies the impressiveness of the details of the best of the successful cases, and Braude describes some of these.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Clancie
Just to get back on track....

I find the last sentence of Mike's summary so definitive (imo--and I know you all don't agree!!!!) of the puzzle of mediumship--inconsistent results that continue to make mediumship intriguing to me. It seems that, if it exists, mediumship appears in mountains of anecdotal evidence, but is not consistent enough to lend itself to replicable testing.

There is a wealth of demonstrated successes that, to me, look like something other than "cheating" or "lucky guesses". And yet, there is not enough consistency there (i.e. complete consistency) and not enough control possible (imo) over the conditions of sucessful performance that we can -definitely- conclude, "something paranormal is happening here." This is the frustration faced--not by believers or non-believers--but by those of us who feel, "there may be something to this."


And...?? Where does this lead us? Where do we go from there?

Sure, there are differences in perception, we all are aware of that. But what, then? It is not enough just to establish a fundamental disagreement over interpretations, we have to determine whether the data is strong enough to support the claim that a paranormal phenomenon has occurred - or not.

Hey, it may be just me, but I am not satisfied with the very shaky data we have seen so far, over the course of more than a hundred years.

Actually, it is not just me. The scientific world is not swayed by these data either. We can claim that what we know is not just defined by science, but what is "knowledge", then?

Superstition? Belief in unicorns? Psychic surgery? Witchcraft?

[magicflute]

ABOUT BOOK TESTS
Book tests are part of the typical diet for a magician performing mentalism. Many of the effects can be quite puzzling and startling to the uninitiated. While I cannot divulge the methods of any particular book test, I VERY highly recommend '13 Steps to Mentalism" by Corinda. This has information about book tests, sealed predictions, cold reading, secret word codes, and just about anything you would need to know about this field. A must have for any skeptic or believer for that matter. Just about any magic shop online will carry it. It will explain alot!

[magicflute]

Originally posted by Clancie
This is the frustration faced--not by believers or non-believers--but by those of us who feel, "there may be something to this."

In order to determine if 'there is something' to anything, you have to learn to recognize when there is nothing. The best way to do this is to learn as much as you can about how these kinds of things are done thru trickery. Then you will be better informed. What one must avoid is making the assumsion that if you can't explain it, then it has to be supernatural. I drive my doctor nuts cause I stop my pulse and he can't figure out how I do it! There is nothing to it, it is really a simple trick, but with a little misdirection and a little slight of hand it is easily accomplished.
Who knows, maybe one day I will find something I will believe in, but until now, I have been disappointed. Early in my teens I used to believe in a lot of weird stuff! Well that is a good story for another time.
If anyone would like I can give you a list of books that should be part of the arsenal of anyone interested in this type of phenomena. Don't go into a battle unarmed!

[Garrette]

For the book test and other mentalist feats, I second magicflute's recommendation of Corrinda.

I would add, very strongly, Barrie Richardson's, Theatre of the Mind.[I]

Clancie, it appears more and more to me that the old saw about psi/mediumship/ac/whatever possibly being real but not consistent enough for testing is just that: an old saw.

First, if it's not consistent enough, then you have [I]absolutely nothing to legitimately supports its validity.

Second, the inconsistency card is only played when someone asks questions. JE thinks he's consistent enough to do a daily show. George Anderson thinks he's consistent enough to schedule expensive sessions. Piper thought she was consistent enough to do thousands of readings and seances.

There is consistency out the wazoo when it comes to psi and the paranormal. Except, tellingly enough, when someone asks questions.

Bunkum.

[Oleron]

Originally posted by Clancie
Just to get back on track....

I find the last sentence of Mike's summary so definitive (imo--and I know you all don't agree!!!!) of the puzzle of mediumship--inconsistent results that continue to make mediumship intriguing to me. It seems that, if it exists, mediumship appears in mountains of anecdotal evidence, but is not consistent enough to lend itself to replicable testing.




You are factually correct in saying there exists mountains of anecdotal evidence for mediumship. It is your conclusion that puzzles me.
You use this to say that because of this we cannot rule out the possibility of mediumship. You're right, we can't. What we can do is use the anecdotes to attract the attention of science in order for the claim to be tested thoroughly.
It is at this point that mediumship has consistently failed to demonstrate replicable results. You then say that even so, we mustn't rule out mediumship.
OK we won't but we will look on the anecdotes a lot more skeptically the next time around - surely that attitude is reasonable? In fact I would argue it is even reasonable to form the assumption that, at least for the time being, mediumship does not exist. Not for any other reason than, as humans living in the real world, we need to know what we can trust and what we can't.
Otherwise what do we do? Believe in everything until it has been definitively disproved, which we know it can never truly be? At some point we have to make a mental cut-off and use our common sense. I personally hit a 'cut-off' long ago with mediumship.
As regards further testing of claims - well why not. I'm pretty sure I know what results we will get but hey - I'm prepared to be wrong.

[The Mighty Thor]

The book tests being described are tricks. The Mrs Leonard version is a very lame and obvious one. The technique has much improved since her time, but it is basically the same con.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by Clancie
Hi Mike,

Your writing about Mrs. Leonard reminds me of an experience that RC described having in a psychic development workshop that he took.

The medium pointed to a tall stack of magazines in the corner of the room and asked one student to choose a number to identify which magazine in the stack they would use for the experiment (tenth, fourth, etc.)

Students knew nothing about the magazine other than its position in the stack. The medium then asked someone to select a page number and everyone was to jot down his or her impressions of what the content of that page was

RC did the experiment, drew a picture on his paper, and said that he was getting impressions of yellow and brown spots and an animal sort of like a tiger but fluffier. He saw a face and oval shapes which he drew on the page.

When they compared his drawing to what was actually on the page (a large fluffly yellow and brown teddy bear with oval paws), it was quite similar and RC himself was surprised that the image he had seen in his mind had looked very much like the bear.

Now, of course, non-believers here will say you could draw face...ovals...describe a fluffy brown and yellow animal and probably get lucky. My comment to them is, "Try it and see for yourself!" :eek:

This is simply a magic trick. It is quite a sophisticated one, and I agree that it looks impressive. But IT IS A TRICK. I can do this trick, and I'm sure Garrette and magicflute can do it too. I'm afraid you were fooled, Clancie. Most people cannot figure out how this is done, but they don't think 'not knowing how it is done' is equal to 'it must be paranormal'.

[Garrette]

Clancie,

malcolmdl is correct. RC's magazine experience is a magic trick.

It's not related in the slightest to cold reading or generalizing from pictures to create a hit where there really was none.

It's a trick. The magician knew the outcome before hand because the magician set it up.

I myself have never performed this trick, but I am aware of at least one way it can be done.

[The Mighty Thor]

In a typical book test, Feda, ostensibly speaking on behalf of another spirit communicator, would direct sitters or investigators to a particular location and ask them to look on a certain page in a certain book on a particular bookshelf, and Feda would give the gist of what was supposed to be written on that particular page. A successful book test was supposed to be significant in that it was held that if the sitters did not have prior familiarity with the book used in the test, that that would seem to effectively rule out simple telepathy between Mrs. Leonard and the sitters.


This confirms my suspicions about the so-called investigators. They are confused by belief in telepethy that 'Feda' sees in the book and 'gives it' to Mrs L. via telepathy. The telepathy is misdirection, but it is perceived to be the miracle effect.

What we actually have is:

Mrs L. directs subject to a particular bookshelve.

Mrs L. Says what book to pick.

Mrs L. Says what page in that book.

Then Mrs L. says something from the page she picks, from the book she picks, from the shelf she picks.

Well, erm, what is wrong with this picture?

[Clancie]

So, Garrette,

Assuming you're right and it's a trick, I have two questions. The first is, are these steps consistent with doing the trick you're thinking of:

10 students sit at the table. The medium points to a stack of 20 magazines in the corner of the room. One student says which number they will work with ("eighth from the top")

Another student chooses a page number ("77")

The students each get blank paper, pencil, crayones and write or draw what they "see" on the page

They describe and show the class what they've drawn or written.

A student gets the magazine from the pile and opens to page 77. It is a brown and gold teddy bear and looks much like the drawing my friend did, which he'd described as a gold and brown fluffy tiger.[/QUOTE]
So...

Q1: Ruling out collusion, are these steps consistent with the magic trick you have in mind?

Q2: In the trick, does the medium have the role of the "magician"?

Q3: Would it make any difference to the trick you have in mind, if everyone in class had brought a magazine, wrapped in paper, random names were drawn and those students stacked their magazines in the corner of the room to use for the "exercise" and then did not participate further? Would it make a difference if the "magician" was unable to see the magazines in advance just like the students who chose the page number couldn't see them in advance?

I had expected someone to mention the "making it fit" idea applied to this activity. But, if there's a trick like this, without revealing any "secret", can you describe the steps as they would appear to an audience?

[Garrette]

Clancie:

Assuming you're right and it's a trick, I have two questions. The first is, are these steps consistent with doing the trick you're thinking of:


Yes.


Clancie:

Q1: Ruling out collusion, are these steps consistent with the magic trick you have in mind?

Q2: In the trick, does the medium have the role of the "magician"?


Yes and yes.


Clancie:

Would it make any difference to the trick you have in mind, if everyone in class had brought a magazine, wrapped in paper, random names were drawn and those students stacked their magazines in the corner of the room to use for the "exercise" and then did not participate further? Would it make a difference if the "magician" was unable to see the magazines in advance just like the students who chose the page number couldn't see them in advance?


To the method I had in mind? Yes, it would make a difference, but these are overcomable, too.
'
Are you suggesting this is the way it was done or are you throwing controls in that were not there?

[Garrette]

Clancie:

But, if there's a trick like this, without revealing any "secret", can you describe the steps as they would appear to an audience?

Like this:

Clancie:

The medium pointed to a tall stack of magazines in the corner of the room and asked one student to choose a number to identify which magazine in the stack they would use for the experiment (tenth, fourth, etc.)

Students knew nothing about the magazine other than its position in the stack. The medium then asked someone to select a page number and everyone was to jot down his or her impressions of what the content of that page was

RC did the experiment, drew a picture on his paper, and said that he was getting impressions of yellow and brown spots and an animal sort of like a tiger but fluffier. He saw a face and oval shapes which he drew on the page.

When they compared his drawing to what was actually on the page (a large fluffly yellow and brown teddy bear with oval paws), it was quite similar and RC himself was surprised that the image he had seen in his mind had looked very much like the bear.


There are lots of ways to make it "appear." This is as good as any.

[Clancie]

Posted by Garrette

Are you suggesting this is the way it was done or are you throwing controls in that were not there?
No, I was adding in controls that I think the medium would be willing to use and wondering if it would make a difference with the trick you had in mind. (I think he'd be willing to randomize the number selection of the magazine and page as well...I'm just wondering if adding those kinds of controls would make a difference in ruling out your trick.

[Garrette]

Fair enough. Sorry for the implication and tone of that question.

To answer what I think the thrust of it is, though, here are the controls that would make it impossible for me to do something along these lines:

1. A location to which I have no previous access (it need not be much access, either)

2. No knowledge of or control over what magazine or book will be used

3. No confederates

4. No direct conversation with any of the audience or participants

5. Never allowed to touch the magazine or book. Ever.

6. Never allowed to touch anything associated with the effect, including the pen, the paper, the stand on which the magazine is placed, etc.

7. No subjective judging of the how well the drawing matches the chosen magazine/book.

Remove just one of those controls, any one, and you re-introduce the possibility that I can fool you. Granted, some are more important to others, but the lack of any of them makes for a flaw.

Remember, I am not a good magician when it comes to technical skills. I've never performed professionally, I haven't truly practiced in years and years. Still, I could probably get away with this one.

Pick someone like magicflute or Brown or any of several other more experienced people here and I imagine they could perform miracles in circumstances that would leave me stymied.

[Mike D.]

See this link for more on Mrs. Leonard's book tests. Includes excerpts from transcripts, etc.

http://www.enformy.com/LeonardCh06.htm

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Mike D.
See this link for more on Mrs. Leonard's book tests. Includes excerpts from transcripts, etc.

http://www.enformy.com/LeonardCh06.htm

Ah, good ol' Don Watson's site....ah, the memories... :D

Edited to add:

Don Watson is the man behind the theory of enformed systems. He does not feel it is necessary for him to come up with a positive hypothesis for his theory, nor does he think it important to have a falsifiable hypothesis. He prefers to leave that to somebody else. Even though his theory is by his own acclaim "not only the most fundamental, but the most abstract, scientific theory ever introduced", he doesn't feel the need to spend too much time on it.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by Garrette
Fair enough. Sorry for the implication and tone of that question.

To answer what I think the thrust of it is, though, here are the controls that would make it impossible for me to do something along these lines:

1. A location to which I have no previous access (it need not be much access, either)

2. No knowledge of or control over what magazine or book will be used

3. No confederates

4. No direct conversation with any of the audience or participants

5. Never allowed to touch the magazine or book. Ever.

6. Never allowed to touch anything associated with the effect, including the pen, the paper, the stand on which the magazine is placed, etc.

7. No subjective judging of the how well the drawing matches the chosen magazine/book.

Remove just one of those controls, any one, and you re-introduce the possibility that I can fool you. Granted, some are more important to others, but the lack of any of them makes for a flaw.

Remember, I am not a good magician when it comes to technical skills. I've never performed professionally, I haven't truly practiced in years and years. Still, I could probably get away with this one.

Pick someone like magicflute or Brown or any of several other more experienced people here and I imagine they could perform miracles in circumstances that would leave me stymied.

Absolutely! Those controls would foil my method, and I'm just a hobbyist.

But Clancie might start by asking:

1. Why does the magician need to know the 'number' of the mag in the pile?

2. Who arranged the pile? I guess the magician would freak if someone shuffled the pile, or disordered it -- although this is 'recoverable'.

3. Did the picker actually pick a page number at random. I don't think so. It might 'look like they did' however.

4. Did anyone else in the group get anything near as good as the medium/magi?

But, I'm getting dangerously close to exposing the method, and I must remember that I am not Clancie's teacher and neither is she my pupil :)

But enlightenment begins with asking: "What is wrong, or unusual, about this picture?" And trusting someone to the extend Clancie does this fellow is, I'd say, almost dangerous.

[magicflute]

The basic problem with trying to describe a trick that someone else did from a second hand description is next to imposible. You can only give a few suggestions. The reason for this is obvious. Even when it is a first hand description it is still difficult, because a good performer can misdirect you in such a way, that you will remember only that the he wishes you to remember. To demonstrate to people that their memory can be manipulated, I often do a very easy trick, at the end I have everyone describe what what they saw. Then show them what I really did. There is NO slight of hand involved in this simple trick, only verbal misdirection. Yet this is enough to make people forget something they all saw!
I will not try to provide solutions to things that never happened as described. I can only offer opinions based on what I have personally experienced. I can only guess if I did not see it myself, based of the general description and my knowledge of the methods in which similar tricks are performed.
Again, Clancie; please arm yourself with some knowledge on how these things are done and you will be able to analyze many of these tricks yourself. Get the "13 steps to mentalism" By Corinda this explains everything from, books test, to secret codes to cold_reading. If you get this book lots of your questions will be answered.

For the magicians: This can also be done with a swamy gimmick

[The Mighty Thor]

Who is RC?

[Clancie]

4. Did anyone else in the group get anything near as good as the medium/magi?
The medium/magi didn't do anything (other than point out the mags), so I don't understand the question
.
Who is RC?
RC is someone who used to post here (and who's a friend of mine and a couple of others here--not just the "believers"). In the example above, RC was the student in the mediums' psychic development class who drew the picture of the page in the magazine.

[The Mighty Thor]

magicflute: Even when it is a first hand description it is still difficult, because a good performer can misdirect you in such a way, that you will remember only that the he wishes you to remember.

Exactly, magicflute. You are my kind of skeptic!

I think Clancie is describing the methodology (quite well, too) as it looks, not as it actually is. The subtleties are, of course, what make this 'booktest' look so impressive and apparently random.

I saw Geller do the same trick for some footballers in his home (mansion, I might say) and they were all truly freaked. Of course, he didn't say it was a trick!

[The Mighty Thor]

Clancie: RC was the student in the mediums' psychic development class who drew the picture of the page in the magazine.

OIC.

So, you don't think he was 'in on the trick', then?

[Clancie]

Posted by Malcolndl

So, you don't think he was 'in on the trick', then?
No. (Nor do I think it was a trick, knowing the participants as I do).

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Clancie
No. (Nor do I think it was a trick, knowing the participants as I do).

Perhaps it is time to mention that RC believes that blinking lamps is a paranormal phenomenon (as a message from the dead). He also believes in mediums.

[magicflute]

The most basic principle of doing magic tricks is "Make it seem like REAL magic" If you can't do this then you can't be a magician! And unless you know the tricks of the trade, you are not qualified to detect what is real and what is not. I have a select group of tricks that I do in for believers that seem like miracles (No cards, they associate cards with tricks) they are not easily explained because they depend on misdirection and little known ways in which people react to stimuli. Mind Magic if you will. I tell them that there is nothing supernatural about what I do even if it they are a a loss to explain what happened. I explain that had I wished to present myself as the real thing, they would have believed me. Then I submit to them that those that do present themselves as such may not be as honest. It does not convince everyone but at least I get them thinking, and once in a while I get a few converts.

[magicflute]

Posted by Clancie
No. (Nor do I think it was a trick, knowing the participants as I do).
Clancie make sure you read my previous post. This is your basic problem. You are accepting second hand anecdotal accounts without subjecting them to any analytical scrutiny. This is why people here will not accept your arguments. They are not based on reality.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by Clancie

No. (Nor do I think it was a trick, knowing the participants as I do).

Not much more I can say, then, Clancie. I don't want to get in to stormy seas.

Like Mrs Piper and the rest, there are *many* variations on this effect. I admit I did slightly misread your description. But I'm sure it is the same trick with a slight slant.

Other than reproducing the effect in front of you, I guess there is no way to convince you.

[Clancie]

Posted by magicflute

Clancie make sure you read my previous post. This is your basic problem. You are accepting second hand anecdotal accounts without subjecting them to any analytical scrutiny. This is why people here will not accept your arguments. They are not based on reality.
Oh! I think I've just been...

"DISMISSED!"

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by CFLarsen


Perhaps it is time to mention that RC believes that blinking lamps is a paranormal phenomenon (as a message from the dead). He also believes in mediums.

Oops! OK, thanks. I begin to see. Group re-inforcement???

[Clancie]

He also believes in mediums.
malcolmdl,

Re: your post (quoted) that RC "believes in mediums". Actually that's not true.

He's about 99% convinced of ADC (direct communication), because of his own experiences.

He's on the fence about mediums.

[magicflute]

Actually Clancie I would NEVER dismiss you. You see, I respect the fact that your are willing to stay here and slug it out with us. Unlike people like WWu who comes here and dumps a post and never hangs around to defend his points of view. Even though I do not agree with you, I do not dismiss you.
Besides you do help the cause by your arguments, they permit us to see how a believer's mind works and where the faults in logic or lack there of can be found. This is good training for the new skeptics and believers and for the many that only lurk and do not post. I consider you a valuable asset to this forum and I do NOT say this sarcastically.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by Clancie

malcolmdl,

Re: your post (quoted) that RC "believes in mediums". Actually that's not true.

He's about 99% convinced of ADC (direct communication), because of his own experiences.

He's on the fence about mediums.

Fair enough, Clancie. I would say that for my method, he would have had to be 'in on' the trick. Sometimes people think that 'a little white lie' or 'innocent prank' is OK, if it furthers 'the cause.' Or, even if it convinces others that they have burgeoning super powers, to get them a bit of 'credo'. I can't say if RC might be like that -- only you can.

I still have to ask why the 'number' of the mag was asked for?

Could not someone just pick any mag in the pile without announcing its position?

But, I leave it at that.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Clancie
Re: your post (quoted) that RC "believes in mediums".

It was my post, Clancie. You can say that it was mine. You won't die from it.

Originally posted by Clancie
Actually that's not true. He's about 99% convinced of ADC (direct communication), because of his own experiences.

He's on the fence about mediums.

Oh, really? Well...let's see: The "communication" part that RC believe in is about..what? Blinking lamps, right? And RC does not believe in mediums? Need I remind you of RC's and your little tete-a-tete with psychic medium Brian Hurst?

There was no ADC on RC's behalf? His dead partner did not come through?

And...Clancie? The "D" in ADC is "DEATH", not "DIRECT". ADC is "After Death Communication". We are talking about DEAD people here, COMMUNICATING. Not "direct".

[CFLarsen]

(Emphasis mine)

(RC) 198.81.26.232 10-31-2002 08:36 PM
... In both of my readings I got much more detailed info. With Karen, the word "Clarendon" which refers to an inside joke between my partner and me, plus a reference to Amsterdam where we had just had our goodbye trip, and the leak in my ceiling which was a huge deal at the time. With Brian, I got a physical description including ethnicity, plus a reference to something I had just told a friend the week before. Not to mention the old brass phone.
Source: TVTalkshows

That's RC believing in mediums providing ADC. After Death Communication.

Clancie, I cannot believe that you try to claim that RC does not believe in mediums. He is your friend, but you f*ck him over, just so you can claim that I am wrong.

Some friend you are.


Edited to comply with Fair Use, as per Forum rules.

[Clancie]

Posted by malcolmdl

I can't say if RC might be like that -- only you can.
Right. And I'm satisfied he's not. (Yes, I'd even stake my life on it with no qualm at all about doing so. I can't say that about a lot of people, either). But I don't expect anyone to take my word for it. Just perhaps think of how they'd think about a similar experience if it was told to them by someone -they- had equal confidence in.

I still have to ask why the 'number' of the mag was asked for?

Well, I assume it was because if you're remote viewing something you need a target to look at. If they just said, "Page 83" without saying which magazine in the pile it was for, we could just look through 20 magazines at "Page 83" and see if any of our drawings matched.

Having a student specify the location of the "target" magazine in the pile, and having another specfy the page, gave them a specfic page to try to "get" something from.

Could not someone just pick any mag in the pile without announcing its position?
They could. I doubt it would make any difference to the teacher if they each thought of a magazine and a page number and then wrote down what they thought was there.

Having everyone do the same page works better from a teacher/pacing point of view, but I think the medium would have been perfectly willing to have them try it your way.


btw, magicflute and malcolmdl,

I understand you both have some background in magic. Could I ask a bit about your experiences with mediums? Have you ever had one (or more) recommended to you and had a reading?

Just curious what your personal experiences with that aspect of this have been like.

[The Mighty Thor]

Claus: There was no ADC on RC's behalf? His dead partner did not come through?

I'm getting impressions of a kind of Psychic Lonely Hearts Club.

I guess there is money to be made there. I suppose the dead partners could 'vet' the new loves.

"I'm sorry! My late husband does not approve of your inappropriate touching so early in this affair."

That would do it for me :) I'd be off!

[CFLarsen]

Hey, one more:
(RC) 198.81.19.31 10-21-2002 07:22 PM
You know, what I've found interesting about the two readings I've had is that the messages were mainly about things that were happening at the time, or had just happened. Like with Karen, my messages were about the leak in the ceiling and the trip my partner and I had taken right before he died. With Brian, the message was about a trip that I was planning at the time. I didn't have to search my memory too much like many JE sitters do. The "old brass phone" has an immediate connection to my grandfather. Granddad didn't show Brian something that I had done at his house 25 years ago that I probably wouldn't even be able to remember.

Maybe my spirits are a lot more thoughtful for coming through with extremely relevant messages and images, but I continue to think that my readings are way better than many I've seen by JE.


Hey, one more:
(RC) 198.81.19.46 10-16-2002 09:54 AM
For example, the fact that for three months after my partner died, whatever lamp was next to me in the apartment would flicker. If I was in the living room, the living room lamp would flicker. When I was reading in bed, the lamp next to me would flicker. No other lights would flicker. Brand new light bulbs in all lamps. Then it all stops. Then the weekend of the anniversary of his death, I'm reading in bed and the lamp flickers. Hasn't flickered since.

Yes, this proves nothing...but it is interesting to me that this kind of activity happened during these particular times and it is more interesting to me that it doesn't happen during other times. Add that to experiences related by many others and I think there's reason for me to consider the ADC theories.


Hey, here's RC's account of his experience with medium Brian Hurst:
(RC) 66.134.45.132 06-25-2002 12:09 PM
Okay, quickly, here is my experience with Brian Hurst:

I thought Gryphon did a nice job explaining the beginning of the seance.

...

Brian then asked "who's Don". I said I didn't know a Don. He then said he was seeing an old-fashioned brass phone, and went on to describe it a bit. I replied that my grandfather, whose name was Dan, was a phone installer and had given a phone exactly how Brian described to my family several years ago and it remains with the family.

Brian then passed on a message from my partner that I'm choosing not to post because it's quite personal, but it related directly to a conversation I was having with a friend in Maryland one week earlier, and it was a correction by my partner of something I had said. He still has to be right, even from the other side!

That was it. Nothing earth-shattering, no "amazing hits", but very similar to my experience with Karen last year. A nice combination of bringing through some details letting me know he's aware of what's going on right now, and conveying personality.

...

What I also liked about Brian is that he didn't try to provide "amazing" readings for everyone. He literally threw out everything he was seeing/hearing/feeli ng and left it at that. In fact, one woman didn't get a reading at all and he wasn't afraid to say that just wasn't getting anything for her. I think that's how mediumship works.

I highly recommend Brian, especially at a bargain $40. He's up there with Karen as one of my favorite mediums and it's too bad the more "showy" mediums get all the attention.

All from TVTalkshows. I think it is fair to say that RC believes in mediums.

I simply can't believe you, Clancie. You lie at the expense of a friend.

Edited to compy with Fair Use, as per Forum rules.

[The Mighty Thor]

btw, magicflute and malcolmdl,

I understand you both have some background in magic. Could I ask a bit about your experiences with mediums? Have you ever had one (or more) recommended to you and had a reading?

Just curious what your personal experiences with that aspect of this have been like.


__________________

Nah, Clancie. To be honest, I'd have no desire to line the pockets of charlatans. I can't say there isn't 'one white crow' out there, but from what I've read and seen on TV and heard about from others, I very much doubt it. I do know there are plenty of black crows who make *a lot* of money scamming vulnerable folk.

And, before you bring it up, I have *never* believed the 'they don't do it for money' scenario. They all end up at least 'taking donations' of some sort after establishing the slightest of reputations.

[Clancie]

Posted by malcolmdl

They all end up at least 'taking donations' of some sort after establishing the slightest of reputations.
You're wrong on this, malcolm. Quite a few people who feel they can do this, do it for free. Many who are trying to "develop" their abilities, but don't feel they are good enough to charge (or aren't comfortable charging) do it for free.

You may or may not be right that everyone is a black crow. But you are wrong if you think that everyone who does this is knowingly fraudulent and only in it in order to bilk grieving people out of their money.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Clancie
You're wrong on this, malcolm. Quite a few people who feel they can do this, do it for free. Many who are trying to "develop" their abilities, but don't feel they are good enough to charge (or aren't comfortable charging) do it for free.

You may or may not be right that everyone is a black crow. But you are wrong if you think that everyone who does this is knowingly fraudulent and only in it in order to bilk grieving people out of their money.

Quite so. They do it for power. Sheer, raw power over grieving people, that are so eager to believe that they will suck up to the mediums, sometimes without ever even knowing anything about the mediums.

Just like you yourself once sucked up to a self-proclaimed medium, in the desperate hope that the medium would give you a reading, Clancie.

Power. That's what drives them. And they are not short of possible victims, all too willing.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by Clancie

You're wrong on this, malcolm. Quite a few people who feel they can do this, do it for free. Many who are trying to "develop" their abilities, but don't feel they are good enough to charge (or aren't comfortable charging) do it for free.

You may or may not be right that everyone is a black crow. But you are wrong if you think that everyone who does this is knowingly fraudulent and only in it in order to bilk grieving people out of their money.

Again, fair enough. But these mediums sound like the 'hobbyist' magicians who do stuff for friends etc. If somebody offered me money to do it, I wouldn't refuse :) On second thoughts, I would -- just not a good enough performer. (So, my wife says, anyway. Oh, er, was that about the magic . . .???):)

I'm sure there is a 'social' benefit in mixing with people who hold the same, or very similar, beliefs. And there is the 'credo'. And there is the 'comfort' element that there is an afterlife. It all seems so innocent, but I'll give you a quote:

When people start to believe they have super powers, it won't be long before they begin to believe that you, and I, and anyone who disagrees with them, are inferior beings who are to be used and abused or, ultimately, are to be extinguished by them and their fellow Ubermenschen.

Godwin's Law does not apply.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by CFLarsen


Quite so. They do it for power. Sheer, raw power over grieving people, that are so eager to believe that they will suck up to the mediums, sometimes without ever even knowing anything about the mediums.

Just like you yourself once sucked up to a self-proclaimed medium, in the desperate hope that the medium would give you a reading, Clancie.

Power. That's what drives them. And they are not short of possible victims, all too willing.

Blimey! That was creepy -- I was just thinking the same thing.:D

[magicflute]

Clancie. It has been my experience that people that do readings and do not charge, do it for attention. Let me tell you a personal story. I mentioned before that I used to believe in a lot of this stuff, when younger. It came from growing up in an environment where "brujeria" (witchcraft) was accepted as a part of life. I used to pretend that I had powers also because I knew I had none and everyone else around me claimed to have them. This made me feel inadequate, so I pretended that I had had paranormal experiences so that I could "belong to the club" much like a kid will take up smoking and drinking to belong to a group if their friends do. I began to 'wake up' after attending a Santeria meeting. This is a ritual where the sitter is taken possesion of by a spirit and begin to prophetize to others, often questions can be asked and answered, prayers offered and spells cast. The possession will often manifest itself by convulsions and spasmodic dancing to the Bata drums. Often the dancer has to be carried away and 'treated' to allow the spirit to leave his body. This 'has' to be done because the spirits are often reluctant to leave the body of the sitter. This meeting was held by a well know 'Babalao' or high priest. The place was packed! Hundreds attended.
As often happens bodily functions must be attended to. I ran over to the bathrooms but they were all full. Needing to relieve myself urgently I ran to the side of the house where a dark corner provided me with some privacy. While taking care of business I heard noises and laughter coming for a nearby window. Curiosity made me peek thru the window where I saw the previous sitter who had been in a trance and the babalao laughing it up making comments on how great the performance had been and making fun of the believers in general. Needless to say I was shocked, and also afraid. These people are often very violent and will not think twice about killing someone. So I very carefully retreated out of there! (I was 16 or 17 years old at the time)
This experience made me reason that maybe I was not talentless but that maybe everyone else making claims was faking like me. I began to investigate on my own. Whenever I attended events like this I would try to sneak around and see what I could find out. Basically I saw the same ruses used over and over again. Many of these ruses are used by mediums now a days with slight variations as I am sure many of them are copied from the brujos.
As time went on I became more skeptical of such claims because the ones I personally investigated had no substance to them. Eventually I started to read books about magic performance and learned about tricks and methods used to achieve what seemed like miracles before. My personal research has not provided with anyone that I could consider even close to being genuine. I certaily would not stake my life on anyone veracity, not even randi!! :D
BTW flickering lights can be easily caused by an airconditioner a refrigerator or any other large appliance, or any small appliance during an electrical brown-out.

Edited to add: This place would hold about 50 to 60 people at one time. But they held meeting two or three times on the weekends. This is how the 'hundreds attended' is arrived at. Although I have been to meetings on the countryside that was attended by hundreds at one time.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by magicflute
BTW flickering lights can be easily caused by an airconditioner a refrigerator or any other large appliance, or any small appliance during an electrical brown-out.

Yeps.

Spiritual Lights - Phase Control (http://www.skepticreport.com/tools/phasecontrol.htm)
By Hans Egebo

[Clancie]

Malcolm, your post quotes this...



Just like you yourself once sucked up to a self-proclaimed medium, in the desperate hope that the medium would give you a reading, Clancie.
I assume this is a reference to Brian Hurst, a man who's been a medium for 40+ years and who used to be a poster at the JE/TvTalkshow boards (before Claus's constant badgering, imo, just wore him down. Sadly, they didn't have an "Ignore" feature then. :( ).

Anyway, I liked Brian (who does an interesting demo on the A&E tape about psychics). And, since we were lucky imo to have a working medium to talk with at that board (a mix of skeptics, believers and fence-sitters), I was interested to find out more about Brian's thinking, how he would descibe his work, about his "process"....opportunities that were not fostered by the hostile tone of some responses to him.

Anyway, no "sucking up" was required since Brian gave weekly small group readings in the living room of his home. RC and I merely had to (anonymously) pay $40 for the two hours just like everyone else did.
Posted by malcolmdl

Blimey! That was creepy -- I was just thinking the same thing.
Malcolm,
You can quote Claus, (if you must). But please, please, don't start to channel him! :p

[The Mighty Thor]

magicflute,

All I can say is: Wow! You have become very astute under adverse circumstances. I applaud you!

I'm just watching Fox News (long story -- kinda 'know your enemy') and there seems to have been a cult killing -- two adults, seven children in CA.

[Clancie]

magicflute,

You describe an interesting experience that was eye-opening for you both in terms of fraud and religion. I usually like people who have shown the capability to "think out of the box" in life...so maybe there's hope for us to "disagree but get along" yet (yes, it's the kaffee klatch, Bill! :) ).

I agree a skeptical outlook is always good. (We only disagree, I'm sure, that I have one, too).

And, just fyi, I'm atheistic in terms of religion and have only been on the "maybe there's something to this" side re: mediumship and ADC for the last 2 + years as I've been looking into it in many, many different ways.

[The Mighty Thor]

RC and I merely had to (anonymously) pay $40 for the two hours just like everyone else did.

There's that Mammon-factor, again though, Clancie. Yeah, I know, the guy is giving up his time, needs to be compensated etc. Heard it all before.

Why 'anonymously'?

[Clancie]

Posted by malcolmdl

Why anonymously?
Well, you always try to be anonymous whenever possible to prevent hot reading.

Beyond that, we didn't want him to use anything we'd posted online to have prior knowledge in the readings.


(And I thought $20/hr. was really cheap--even if you didn't get read yourself, it was cheaper than an evening out, quite interesting to observe in person, and quite "different" as an experience).

[The Mighty Thor]

Clancie: I usually like people who have shown the capability to "think out of the box" in life...

You have to be sure thay are not actually 'out of their box', though.:(

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Clancie
I assume this is a reference to Brian Hurst

Nope. I am referring to this medium, on the SpiritDiscovery board:

Posted by sharon on 07-28-2002 12:37 AM:
Dear spirit discovery friends,
...

There are those mediums that don't charge. I am one of those people, and would consider it a privilege to help your friends and family on the other side give you specific messages so that you will have your proof that they still exist on the other side so to speak...



And your reply (you post as "Irene"):


Posted by Irene on 07-28-2002 01:14 AM:
Sharon,

... but if you are really available for readings, I would be very appreciative of the opportunity to have one.

If this is a possibility, please let me know the next step.
Many thanks,
Irene

So, you suck up to a medium of which you know nothing, which is interesting because you also have this to say:

Posted by Irene on 09-28-2002 01:04 AM:
Yes, internet testimonials are always somewhat suspect, unless you have experience with the people posting and some confidence in their credibility...


Originally posted by Clancie
Well, you always try to be anonymous whenever possible to prevent hot reading.

I find this comment rather incredible, since you chastised me for not going to a reading with Brian Hurst, because I did not want to reveal my personal info.

Edited to comply with Fair Use.

[magicflute]

Clancie, believe it or not Iam not trying to convince you of anything. You are entitled to your beliefs as I am to mine. What I have been trying to do is to recommend to you that BEFORE you start investigating supernatural phenomena make sure that you are aware how the effects are often achieved thru natural means. From your posts I can see that you are not familiar at all with these methods. You would not try to explore undersea life first hand without first learning to scuba dive. I can tell you from personal experience that unless you are well versed in the knowledge required, you will be fooled! I can be fooled by a performance, but I know what to control for under test conditions that would make it difficult for trickery to be used. I you come away with anything from our discussions then come away with realisation that you should at least read the books I suggested.

[Clancie]

Posted by magicflute

Clancie, believe it or not Iam not trying to convince you of anything. You are entitled to your beliefs as I am to mine
We agree on that. (And, just to repeat, for clarity's sake, my belief is, "There might be something to mediumship.")
What I have been trying to do is to recommend to you that BEFORE you start investigating supernatural phenomena make sure that you are aware how the effects are often achieved thru natural means.
Well, I think both can be ongoing, not "either...or". And, frankly, I think I'm at least as familiar with cold reading techniques and theory as anyone here but the practitioners of it (although I -did- have one chance to try to do it myself).

From your posts I can see that you are not familiar at all with these methods
Please list the methods that you can see from my posts I'm not at all familiar with. Seriously. I'm interested to see what you have in mind.

[The Mighty Thor]

Please list the methods that you can see from my posts I'm not at all familiar with. Seriously. I'm interested to see what you have in mind.

Well . . . how booktests work, for one. And you had no suggestions as to how Mrs Piper might have gained information on sitters, other than by paranormal means. (in the Mrs Piper Mediumship thread.)

It's when you *think* that, and become *convinced* that you've ruled cheating out, that you get caught out. Don't you see this? The charlatans are always a step or two ahead of you, Clancie.

Sound a bit like you are fishing for 'mentalism' secrets here.

The books recommended previously are excellent sources.

[magicflute]

Posted by Clancie
Please list the methods that you can see from my posts I'm not at all familiar with. Seriously. I'm interested to see what you have in mind.
Clancie, remember when you mentione the "one ahead method" of reading letters? As other people pointed out. including me; this was not the appropriate method to use in this instance. While I pointed out, thru analysis of the results and thru knowledge of known methods; a probable solution. Had you been familiar with how mentalist accomplish this, you would have offered something more apropos. You even dismissed the method I offered as being "too dificcult" when it is actually very easy to accomplish. If you had read any of the books I suggested you would not even be asking me this question.

[Clancie]

Posted by magicflute

Clancie, remember when you mentione the "one ahead method" of reading letters? As other people pointed out. including me; this was not the appropriate method to use in this instance.
Yes, I was just giving it as an easy way (imo, an easier way) that people use to read supposedly secret info from an envelope when there are several.
. You even dismissed the method I offered as being "too dificcult"
Did I say "difficult"? Well it seemed convoluted to apply something onto the envelope to read through it--and an easier method to detect than some other ways of getting info from an envelope, like the "one envelope ahead" (which is why I mentioned it)
. If you had read any of the books I suggested you would not even be asking me this question.

Nice dodge.

You said "From your posts I can see that you are not familiar at all with these methods." Methods of what? Cold reading? Tricks?

I'm not asking for a list of how they do tricks. I'm asking for the types of things related to mediumship that you think I'm not familiar with.

[The Mighty Thor]

it seemed convoluted

And RV is what? The simple explanation?

People will go to extraordinary lengths to fool others, like in the Scole 'experiment' séances.

[The Mighty Thor]

Clancie: Did I say "difficult"? Well it seemed convoluted to apply something onto the envelope to read through it--and an easier method to detect than some other ways of getting info from an envelope, like the "one envelope ahead" (which is why I mentioned it)


But the method you suggested was totally inappropriate for the circumstances and the effect Mrs Piper was achieving in the case that was under examination. Three people pointed that out to you, but you just ignore this.

magicflute's method was appropriate and fitted the circumstances exactly, even explaining why the reading of the letter was partial and sketchy.

Personally, given the way she was holding the papers to her head with one hand and tossing them aside while her other hand was held suggests simple 'glimpseing' perhaps with the aid of a simple, easily concealed gimmick that you can buy from most magic shops.

You see, even another technique to achieve the same effect without help from an imaginary Dr Phinuit.!!!

[Pyrrho]

A post in this thread has been reported for possible copyright violation, because posts from a message board have been copied and posted. Copyright law is anything but clear on this issue. I cannot make a determination about it at this time. I have been privately asked, by another person, if it would be permissible to post extensive content posted elsewhere, and I informed the person that such material is protected by copyright law, that relevant portions could be posted, with a link to the rest. In addition, Winston Wu was publicly informed by me that such posts are protected by copyright.

In the case here, I have no link to follow, so I cannot determine if complete posts were copied, and I cannot determine the context of the original posts, nor can I determine if permission to use the posted material is explicity denied at the originating website.

I would suggest, however, that persons wishing to copy posts from other message boards consider the possibility that such materials are protected by copyright. Quote relevant portions for discussion, provide a link to the rest, and there is no question regarding fair use. Post messages in full, and we enter a quandary. Or a Gordian Knot, maybe.

[magicflute]

Posted by Clancie
I'm not asking for a list of how they do tricks. I'm asking for the types of things related to mediumship that you think I'm not familiar with.
That's just it Clancie! It's all tricks! But you refuse to even consider this. There are many ways of doing what was described, we have already mentioned several ways in which this can be accomplished. The books I mentioned will show you even more ways. One example, you know NOTHING about book tests, slates, center reads, glimpsing. etc. need I go on?
Just admit to yourself that you need to learn more and you will be the better for it.

[Clancie]

Posted by Pyrrho
Copyright law is anything but clear on this issue. I cannot make a determination about it at this time....

I would suggest, however, that persons wishing to copy posts from other message boards consider the possibility that such materials are protected by copyright.
Hi Pyrrho,

Thanks for addressing this so quickly.

Actually, Pam Blizzard (from Friends of John Edward and Spirit Discovery board) does make it clear that everything posted to her board is copyright protected

Now that I think of it, though, I believe that TVTalk's webmaster says that people can use the info as they wish, as long as they always credit the board.

That said, there seems something somewhat unethical...unsavory...something highly unpleasant...about posting people's posts from other message boards, without their knowledge or consent, here, as Claus has done. (It seems to take it a step farther to attributing posts to them from other boards even when they've posted under a different screen name).

And he gives no links, particularly so there's no way for anyone here to check the original context of anything he quotes.

I don't know if that violates the rules, but imo, it should.

As for the copyright issue, as I say, Pam's board -is- copyright protected. I'm surprised Claus isn't required to delete all of these quotes for that reason--or at least be required to provide a link to it, at a very very minimum.
Posted by Pyrrho

In the case here, I have no link to follow, so I cannot determine if complete posts were copied, and I cannot determine the context of the original posts, nor can I determine if permission to use the posted material is explicity denied at the originating website.

Re-reading this, I don't know why it is acceptable for someone to post quotes like this here, for all the reasons that you list. (And, just to make it clear, neither RC, nor I, nor the owner of the SD board have given Claus any permission to use their quotes out of their original context--posted to other boards--in any way whatsoever).

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by Clancie

Hi Pyrrho,

Thanks for addressing this so quickly.

Actually, Pam Blizzard (from Friends of John Edward and Spirit Discovery board) does make it clear that everything posted to her board is copyright material.

I think Trevor Rieger at TVTalk says people can use it as they wish, as long as they credit the board.

That said, there seems something somewhat unethical...unsavory...something...of posting other people's posts, without their knowledge or consent, here and attributing posts to them even when they're under a different screen name.

I don't know if that violates the rules, but imo, it should.

As for the copyright issue, as I say, Pam's board -is- copyright protected. (And I think the Spirit Discovery board hasn't even been up for months).
I don't think it's likely that we're going to proscribe unethical behavior, or even attempt to define it.

Also, I think a case could be made that the posts fall under "fair use". I personally have no idea where the posts came from; I can't view them in their original context; they are not being used for profit, although that does not grant license for use. All I can really do at this point is what I have done.

[Clancie]

Thank you, Pyrrho.

I will appeal.

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by Clancie
Thank you, Pyrrho.

I will appeal.
As you wish. It would be helpful if I could see the Terms of Use for the message boards in question.

[magicflute]

Gee Clancie, if you are supposed to have Claus on IGNORE, how are you able to see that he is posting messages from other boards????? Somehow it does not surprise me, you seem to trifle with truth.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Clancie
Actually, Pam Blizzard (from Friends of John Edward and Spirit Discovery board)...

Who, other than me, said anything about Spirit Discovery?

Originally posted by Clancie
...does make it clear that everything posted to her board is copyright protected

Sorry, Clancie: Pam can not nullify international law.

Originally posted by Clancie
Now that I think of it, though, I believe that TVTalk's webmaster says that people can use the info as they wish, as long as they always credit the board.

Sorry, Clancie: TVTalkshow's webmaster can not nullify international law.

Originally posted by Clancie
That said, there seems something somewhat unethical...unsavory...something highly unpleasant...about posting people's posts from other message boards, without their knowledge or consent, here, as Claus has done. (It seems to take it a step farther to attributing posts to them from other boards even when they've posted under a different screen name).

Who has reposted what I posted, Clancie? Don't tell me that you have taken me off ignore again?

Originally posted by Clancie
And he gives no links, particularly so there's no way for anyone here to check the original context of anything he quotes.

Unfortunately, Pam has put SD together with JohnEdwardTalk.org. That does not mean that you never said what you said, though.

I have the threads in question saved, just as I have the old JREF (well, most of them) saved, too. For reference.

Originally posted by Clancie
I don't know if that violates the rules, but imo, it should.

Of course you think so. It is very embarrassing for you.

Originally posted by Clancie
As for the copyright issue, as I say, Pam's board -is- copyright protected. I'm surprised Claus isn't required to delete all of these quotes for that reason--or at least be required to provide a link to it, at a very very minimum.

Bullsh1t. Again, Pam can not nullify international law.

Originally posted by Clancie
Re-reading this, I don't know why it is acceptable for someone to post quotes like this here, for all the reasons that you list. (And, just to make it clear, neither RC, nor I, nor the owner of the SD board have given Claus any permission to use their quotes out of their original context--posted to other boards--in any way whatsoever).

Perhaps you should worry more about explaining why you can read my posts, without anyone reposting them, or even referring to them.... ;)

Originally posted by Clancie
Thank you, Pyrrho.

I will appeal.

So, it was you all along.... ;)

[The Mighty Thor]

Clancie said: . . . there seems something somewhat unethical...unsavory...something highly unpleasant...

Funny thing, Clancie. These are the exact words I would use about those who profess to be mediums in order to con gullible and emotionally unstable folk out of their hard-earned cash or to try to gain power over them. The ones that magicflute is talking about can be especially 'unsavory', and indeed extremely vicious. I hope he takes care when dealing with them.

It seems to me that people here have put a lot of effort into looking at your proposals, analysing and critiqueing them, and trying to show where you are in error. For example, I had never even heard of Mrs Piper, until you brought her up. I now have a fairly large file on her and the late Victorian/early Edwardian Spiritist Movement. As an academic historian, this has been of great interest to me and helps me to complete a picture of those times, although that period is not my speciality.

As magicflute has said, there has been a great upsurge in this kind of chicanery and charlatanism in recent years. Even my local newspaper has a 'Letters to a Psychic Medium' page -- a full page in a small newspaper that would not carry a small Astronomy (the Sky Tonight, type of thing) section for amateur astronomers for supposed lack of space!

All I have seen from you has been puerile stubborness, dissembling, intransigence, evasion, equivocation, and not a little hostility. You seem to be unwilling to challenge, or accept a challenge to, your irrational belief system. Yet you call yourself a skeptic, which is, in itself, an untruth.

As these threads on Mrs Piper and Mrs Leonard amply demonstrate, you are unable or unwilling to 'go down the path' of testing some of the most outrageous claims for their validity. Do you ever go back and re-read a thread and think 'Well, I was certainly wrong there', or do you just trudge on regardless, repeating the same false claims over and over?

So, what really is your agenda here? If you are thinking of starting a 'mentalist' act dressed up as mediumship, you have even been given what are probably the best references as to how to achieve these effects. If not, I can't think why on earth you are here, because you just don't take anything in that we offer.

I'm sorry if that is a bit brutal, but you are either in denial about this paranormal mumbo jumbo, or you have an agenda that I haven't figured out. I don't think it is unfair for Claus or other experienced board users to point out to new users and lurkers that you don't always tell the truth. And he has backed up his assertion with evidence, although you claim not to read his posts.

Sorry -- but there it is!

I'm thinking: cat . . . pigeons, and an album by Jethro Tull.

[Garrette]

Clancie:

Nor do I think it was a trick, knowing the participants as I do

You knew the medium? I thought this was RC’s story, and you were only someone he told it to.
You knew the other people in the class, too?

All that aside, since you now know that this can be replicated via mundane means (unless you think that I and magicflute are lying—we don’t require a confederate to pull off this stunt) then why do you persist in believing that it was legitimate psi?

There is no explanation I can think of except that you want to continue believing.



Clancie:


No, I was adding in controls that I think the medium would be willing to use and wondering if it would make a difference with the trick you had in mind. (I think he'd be willing to randomize the number selection of the magazine and page as well...I'm just wondering if adding those kinds of controls would make a difference in ruling out your trick.

Let me get this straight, then:

You have second hand information for how it was presented. You have now learned that the manner in which you described the incident can be explained via mundane means.

You now resort to saying that – even though you don’t know the medium and have never seen or heard tell of him operating under more rigorous conditions – you think he’d still be able to do it?

What, exactly, do you base this supposition on? What possible support can you give it?

Does this not demonstrate to you how you are blinding yourself to your bias? I’m biased, but I admit it and work not to let it influence my decisions. Your bias has control, Clancie, and I say this as someone who recognizes you as being intelligent and as being skeptical in other areas.

[The Mighty Thor]

Garrette: All that aside, since you now know that this can be replicated via mundane means (unless you think that I and magicflute are lying—we don’t require a confederate to pull off this stunt) then why do you persist in believing that it was legitimate psi?

I think we three are thinking of the same trick. My method would not NECESSARILY need a confederate, but if the medium stacked the pile and RC did the 'RVing', he would have to be in on the trick and know that it was a trick, methinks.

Do you agree, or am I missing a vital clue? Perhaps Clancie should look into this, since she presents RC as a paragon of virtue and integrity. If she was intentionally deceived, perhaps that would be a starting point in her questioning the motives of her friends.

BTW, was the method revealed in "Theatre of the Mind", one of Penn and Teller's (Playing in Traffic??) books, or in "Magic for Dummies"? :)

[Garrette]

malcolmdl,

I'll pm in a bit with a few specifics (not much, though; I don't have my stuff with me).

Regarding RC: I've never met him personally but engaged in discussions with him and/or involving him on and off for about two years, I suppose.

My opinion matches Clancie's. I do not think RC would like about his impressions. However, I also think he was not fully aware of how he could be fooled.

To his credit, RC did change his mind about John Edward. He began as a fairly staunch defender of JE and eventually came to the conclusion that JE is "probably" fake or at least uses methods close enough to cold reading and other cheating ways that there's no point in making the difference.

RC did not, though, conclude that all mediumship is fake.

He's worth conversing with. He's intelligent, engaging, polite, and honest.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by Garrette
malcolmdl,

I'll pm in a bit with a few specifics (not much, though; I don't have my stuff with me).

Regarding RC: I've never met him personally but engaged in discussions with him and/or involving him on and off for about two years, I suppose.

My opinion matches Clancie's. I do not think RC would like about his impressions. However, I also think he was not fully aware of how he could be fooled.

To his credit, RC did change his mind about John Edward. He began as a fairly staunch defender of JE and eventually came to the conclusion that JE is "probably" fake or at least uses methods close enough to cold reading and other cheating ways that there's no point in making the difference.

RC did not, though, conclude that all mediumship is fake.

He's worth conversing with. He's intelligent, engaging, polite, and honest.

Thanks.

It is difficult to glean from Clancie's original description exactly what happened. As magicflute said people's descriptions of such a trick are often confused. They often see only what they want to see, and with expert misdirection, that is exactly what the magician wants them to think they saw.

But the stacked, numbered pile, the need for the page number to be revealed, and a few more subtle details give it away, IMO.

[magicflute]

Posted by Malcolmdl:
I'm thinking: cat . . . pigeons, and an album by Jethro Tull.
Ooooh!! I hope its the one with "Bourre" my favorite piece!

[Luke T.]

Hey, if someone posts stuff they claim came from somewhere else without posting a link to the source, you can always assume they made it up! :D

Rules of evidence as well as rules of international law are at play here. ;)

[magicflute]

Posted by Luke T.
Hey, if someone posts stuff they claim came from somewhere else without posting a link to the source, you can always assume they made it up!
While you could certainly make that argument, it's not always possible to put a link up. The reason is that sometimes the posts are deleted, or aged out. Sometimes the posts are removed simply because the moderators do not like the content, this happens quite often when skeptics are involved in other non-skeptic boards. In this case there is no dispute of the quotes having been made up. As a matter of fact, they ARE validated by the fact the the original poster is not contesting their validy, but the copyright. You certainly cannot claim a copyright on something that never existed!! ;)

[Clancie]

Posted by magicflute

As a matter of fact, they ARE validated by the fact the the original poster is not contesting their validy, but the copyright. You certainly cannot claim a copyright on something that never existed!!
Actually magicflute, I -do- contest everything about quoting this. I am known for not liking quotes out of context (much less from another board)...I have never said I am this person Claus claims me to be...Claus never participated in discussions at the board in question...and, finally, the Spirit Discovery board has been non-existent for months so, yes, he can make up anything he wants to and post it here and attribute it to me and there is absolutely no way to verify or discredit or check it at all.

Here's an example. How would you feel if I wrote here that you've posted at a now non-existent board as "Raymond" and then I quoted all kinds of vulgar things I say that you've written about over there, with no way for anyone to check if it's true or not...to look at the original context and discussion...nothing. And you can deny it all you want, but we all know that once an accusation's been made, it often has a life of its own. Why is this kind of thing acceptable?

I think using posts from another board against someone here is an outrageous tactic, personally. That the message board doesn't even exist any more just makes it all the worse.

I object to it vehemently in every possible way. Desperate and ugly tactics like this do so-called "skeptics" no favors, and, imo, should be repudiated completely.

[The Mighty Thor]

Clancie said: Here's an example. How would you feel if I wrote here that you've posted at a now non-existent board as "Raymond" and then I quoted all kinds of vulgar things I say that you've written about over there, with no way for anyone to check if it's true or not...to look at the original context and discussion...nothing. And you can deny it all you want, but we all know that once an accusation's been made, it often has a life of its own. Why is this kind of thing acceptable?

Well, there are no 'vulgar things' being quoted in this case, Clancie. Claus was just backing up his argument that RC believes in mediumship, and that, therefore, you sometimes tell little porky pies when it suits you.

It's not really 'life or death' in this instance, is it?

Just tell us if RC tends toward the believer side of the spectrum, or is he a 'real hard-nosed skeptic' -- since you seem to know the difference between a real skeptic and a 'slightly woo-challenged skeptic' who is not, therefore, a skeptic.

Playing with the meanings of words is another dishonest tactic, IMO. Calling yourself a skeptic about mediumship is like saying Randi is overcredulous because he says we cannot prove conclusively that there is absolutely no such thing as psi phenomena. Does that make him a believer?

[The Mighty Thor]

magicflute,

Funny enough, it was the album 'Aqualung' that started me doubting and challenging things as a teenager.

"So to my old headmaster, and to anyone who cares,
before I'm through, I'd like to say my prayers:
I don't believe you, you got the whole damned thing all wrong
He's not the kind you have to wind up on Sunday."

And the line:

"Well, you can excommunicate me, on my way to Sunday school"

was just . . . well, brilliant, to a hippy schoolboy wannabe poet who was always being told to get his hair cut:) oooo - Locomotive Breath was HEAVY, man :)

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Clancie
Actually magicflute, I -do- contest everything about quoting this. I am known for not liking quotes out of context (much less from another board)...

Thread: No general seating at John Edward Seminars

Posted by Clancie on 05-21-2003 03:49 PM:

Claus,
Oh, where to begin? lol. Well, at least you got to trot out some of that database of quotes you keep on me, neo and Steve. I'm glad that kind of weird obsession of yours hasn't gone totally to waste!

Re: JE. Please find a quote in your database where I say, "I am definitely certain that JE is the real deal, no doubt whatsoever." (Actually, if you're honest, I think you will find quite a few examples where I say exactly what I claim to have said).

Oops..

Posted by Clancie on 06-11-2003 03:43 PM:
But if you are referring to your posts at TVTalkshows, yes, when you came to TvTalkshows you made claims about JE, but gave no evidence in discussing JE that you had any familiarity at all with his work, CO or his book.

Originally posted by Clancie
I have never said I am this person Claus claims me to be...

Liar.

Posted by Clancie on 02-01-2004 07:36 PM:
Claus, I hope you will think about why, really, you are so obsessed with me, even following me to a board you never post to, like Spirit Discovery.

...

I will say, that from my point of view, your obsession with my posts, with me, in this forum, the other JREF forums, and at two other boards feels very creepy.
Source (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/printthread.php?s=&threadid=34775&perpage=415)

"Irene" from SD is you.

Originally posted by Clancie
Claus never participated in discussions at the board in question...and, finally, the Spirit Discovery board has been non-existent for months so, yes, he can make up anything he wants to and post it here and attribute it to me and there is absolutely no way to verify or discredit or check it at all.

I don't be-f*cking-lieve this... You are accusing me of making up whole posts?? I have invented everything you said on SD?

Why didn't you use this excuse when the SD board was up? Simple: Because people could check it themselves. Now, they can't, so you sow doubt that the posts are real at all.

You really are a piece of work, Clancie.

Originally posted by Clancie
Here's an example. How would you feel if I wrote here that you've posted at a now non-existent board as "Raymond" and then I quoted all kinds of vulgar things I say that you've written about over there, with no way for anyone to check if it's true or not...to look at the original context and discussion...nothing. And you can deny it all you want, but we all know that once an accusation's been made, it often has a life of its own. Why is this kind of thing acceptable?

But even if it does not exist anymore does not mean it did not happen.

Originally posted by Clancie
I think using posts from another board against someone here is an outrageous tactic, personally. That the message board doesn't even exist any more just makes it all the worse.

It is obvious why you think such a "tactic" is "outrageous".

Originally posted by Clancie
I object to it vehemently in every possible way. Desperate and ugly tactics like this do so-called "skeptics" no favors, and, imo, should be repudiated completely.

Your hypocrisy is really mind-blowing.


Edited to comply with Fair Use.

[The Mighty Thor]

Claus,
Oh, where to begin? lol. Well, at least you got to trot out some of that database of quotes you keep on me, neo and Steve. I'm glad that kind of weird obsession of yours hasn't gone totally to waste!


I thought that Claus made it clear that he archives all this stuff. A service to us all, I would think. Of course fibbers don't like 'records', because they get caught out!

Anyway, what are we talking about here? Someone identifying and quoting one fantasy nickname with another fantasy nickname??? Seems kind of petty, don't you think? And the tantrum avoids the issues at hand, of course. Do I detect a pattern here?:p

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by malcolmdl
I thought that Claus made it clear that he archives all this stuff. A service to us all, I would think. Of course fibbers don't like 'records', because they get caught out!

Anyway, what are we talking about here? Someone identifying and quoting one fantasy nickname with another fantasy nickname??? Seems kind of petty, don't you think? And the tantrum avoids the issues at hand, of course. Do I detect a pattern here?:p

I do believe that Clancie has relied on my archives before.

[The Mighty Thor]

New Commandment:

"When Judgement Day comes, you will be judged only on what you posted on the Internet."

Oh, sh-ugar! There goes my pass to Paradise.:)

[The Mighty Thor]

"Infamy! Infamy! They've all got it infamy!"

A Carry On Film.

[CFLarsen]

malcolmdl,

I am actually somewhat surprised that some people are not more careful - or consistent - with what they post.

Sure, they can be just blabber-brains, but personally, I don't think it is the case with most of the posters here. Grenard, Clancie, Lucianarchy, T'ai Chi, etc...they are intelligent enough to know what they are doing.

Trickery and deceit seems to be an integrated part of having a paranormal belief. All the more reasons to keep track.

And again, just because it isn't online does not mean it didn't happen... ;)

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
malcolmdl,

I am actually somewhat surprised that some people are not more careful - or consistent - with what they post.

Sure, they can be just blabber-brains, but personally, I don't think it is the case with most of the posters here. Grenard, Clancie, Lucianarchy, T'ai Chi, etc...they are intelligent enough to know what they are doing.

Trickery and deceit seems to be an integrated part of having a paranormal belief. All the more reasons to keep track.

And again, just because it isn't online does not mean it didn't happen... ;)

Yep! Look how Lucianarchy totally blew it in the Fortean Times board. You could, and tried to alert them, but they had to see for themselves. Now they think: 'Maybe those hard heads at the Randi Forum are not as unbalanced and cruel as we thought.' Ersby and Desperado and JamesM did a good job there! But it was Lucianarchy who totally blew it all by himself. Of course, he still claims victory, the snake.

What bothers me is it looks like Luci is the person Luci often quotes who has a PhD. That is kind of frightening, but then we know intellect has nothing to do with being fooled -- or wanting to fool others.:(

[Interesting Ian]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
[B](Emphasis mine)



That's RC believing in mediums providing ADC. After Death Communication.



How so? I see nothing in that which you quoted where he affirms he believes in ADC's.

[The Mighty Thor]

Looking at the FTMB again, I can't help but think that I was taking part in somebody's "Great Experiment" -- and it wasn't Lucianarchy's!

OK, who is the darned Professor here, then?:) :) :)

:dl:

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by Interesting Ian
How so? I see nothing in that which you quoted where he affirms he believes in ADC's.

I'm sure you don't.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by malcolmdl
Looking at the FTMB again, I can't help but think that I was taking part in somebody's "Great Experiment" -- and it wasn't Lucianarchy's!

OK, who is the darned Professor here, then?:) :) :)

:dl:

Ah ha! The Professor is Ian, 'posing as a superior intellect.':D

[The Mighty Thor]

Come on, Ian. I set the joke up for you. Say it!:D

[The Mighty Thor]

Clancie, if RC admitted he was taking part 'in a little joke' to get a bit of extra psi cred, would you tell us?

[magicflute]

Clancie, Clancie, Clancie.....hmmmm cought in your own web again...
I consider myself a good judge of character. I always try to see below the surface. I trust my abilities because I have had to bet my life on them more than once. I was raised in NY's South Bronx from 11 to 19 years old. This part of NY is known as one of the worst neighborhoods in the US. Most of my old friends are either dead or in jail. This abilities were developed as a survival skill.

I will not dissect you, but suffice to say had you known that the posts were fictitious, for most people and particularly you; this would have been the major point of the interaction with Phyrro, instead you concentrated on the copyright issue. You are only now making noise about it after Luke T. made a point of it, and I followed-up with my post. You are trying to retrofit the facts to serve yourself. Anyone can see that. It's one of you habits.

Just like when discussing the medium, instead of applying controls to her performance, you were applying them to our explanations, using "what if's" to change the story until we could no longer dispute it. That is why I stopped playing your game and told you that I only investigate things first hand. I did not want to help you improve your stories for the next telling.

I donot need Claus' inputs to formulate my opinion of you. I only truly trust my own. What I have formulated in my mind about you has been based on your postings on this board and it's not a pretty picture.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by magicflute
Clancie, Clancie, Clancie.....hmmmm cought in your own web again...
I consider myself a good judge of character. I always try to see below the surface. I trust my abilities because I have had to bet my life on them more than once. I was raised in NY's South Bronx from 11 to 19 years old. This part of NY is known as one of the worst neighborhoods in the US. Most of my old friends are either dead or in jail. This abilities were developed as a survival skill.

I will not dissect you, but suffice to say had you known that the posts were fictitious, for most people and particularly you; this would have been the major point of the interaction with Phyrro, instead you concentrated on the copyright issue. You are only now making noise about it after Luke T. made a point of it, and I followed-up with my post. You are trying to retrofit the facts to serve yourself. Anyone can see that. It's one of you habits.

Just like when discussing the medium, instead of applying controls to her performance, you were applying them to our explanations, using "what if's" to change the story until we could no longer dispute it. That is why I stopped playing your game and told you that I only investigate things first hand. I did not want to help you improve your stories for the next telling.

I donot need Claus' inputs to formulate my opinion of you. I only truly trust my own. What I have formulated in my mind about you has been based on your postings on this board and it's not a pretty picture.

Clancie had a tantrum, and stamped her little feet;
She screamed 'How dare they! Someone spare me!"
When caught out in deceit.

[Ceinwyn]

No rebuttal from Clancie?

Oh well. Guess I'll wait until the next "paranormal" thread.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by buki
No rebuttal from Clancie?

Oh well. Guess I'll wait until the next "paranormal" thread.

Yep! See:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=37410

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by buki
No rebuttal from Clancie?

Oh well. Guess I'll wait until the next "paranormal" thread.

And see http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=37643&perpage=40&pagenumber=1

Same old same old from Clancie.

[Clancie]

malcolm,
Frankly, I didn't think buki's insults to/about me (here and elsewhere) merit any response.

And I thought your little jingle was frankly sort of idiotic, malcolm. (Just my opinion, of course. I'm sure someone else might have found it devastatingly clever).

Free choice who to interact with here, folks. So, I hope you don't mind too much, malcolm and buki, but I think I'll stick with people whose posts I feel are of more interest, less insulting and more on topic.

But...at least, you always have each other! :)

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by Clancie
malcolm,
Frankly, I didn't think buki's insults to/about me (here and elsewhere) merit any response.

And I thought your little jingle was frankly sort of idiotic, malcolm. (Just my opinion, of course. I'm sure someone else might have found it devastatingly clever).

Free choice who to interact with here, folks. So, I hope you don't mind too much, malcolm and buki, but I think I'll stick with people whose posts I feel are of more interest, less insulting and more on topic.

But...at least, you always have each other! :)

Very good, Clancie.

However, it was you who insulted everyone in this thread when you rudely 'walked out of the room' just because things were not going your way. It's your right not to read posts that challenge your position. But that will not stop people from posting challenges.

So, on topic:

Do you think that the mundane methods I, and others, listed whereby Mrs Piper might have obtained information about sitters, even 'anonymous' sitters, are more plausible than any paranormal explanation.

Are you impressed by Mrs Leonard's book test?

Did you ask RC if he played a little trick on you?

[magicflute]

Nothing new here, same old pattern for Clancie. When things don't go her way, she claims persecution and storms out. She seems to be a person who needs to believe and no amount of evidence will change her mind. Unfortunately her knowledge of the subject is severely limited, which leaves her exposed to all sorts of trickery.
Even more unfortunate is that she won't recognize this and will not do anything to improve the situation. Almost seems afraid of finding the truth.
Malcolmdl, I am sure RC was in on a gag. I read the description again and selecting a number then picking a magazine from a nice convenient stack smacks of a mentalist trick which you can find in most books on mentalism. If you know the secret then anyone can do it. It takes no skill.
I am sure we will find Clancie in another thread, grasping at straws, and running away when there are none to be had. I hope she wises up and realizes that she is looking for pretty fish in a pool of sharks. If she does not learn to tell the difference, one day they are going to eat her up.

[The Mighty Thor]

Originally posted by magicflute
Nothing new here, same old pattern for Clancie. When things don't go her way, she claims persecution and storms out. She seems to be a person who needs to believe and no amount of evidence will change her mind. Unfortunately her knowledge of the subject is severely limited, which leaves her exposed to all sorts of trickery.
Even more unfortunate is that she won't recognize this and will not do anything to improve the situation. Almost seems afraid of finding the truth.
Malcolmdl, I am sure RC was in on a gag. I read the description again and selecting a number then picking a magazine from a nice convenient stack smacks of a mentalist trick which you can find in most books on mentalism. If you know the secret then anyone can do it. It takes no skill.
I am sure we will find Clancie in another thread, grasping at straws, and running away when there are none to be had. I hope she wises up and realizes that she is looking for pretty fish in a pool of sharks. If she does not learn to tell the difference, one day they are going to eat her up.

Absolutely, magicflute. As I said earlier I saw Geller do the magazine trick for some footballers in his own home. At the time I didn't know the method and I thought it was pretty impressive. So it is no disparagement on Clancie that she was fooled. Trouble is that when she is told it is a trick, she still thinks it was paranormal. It's like saying David Blaine can really read minds and levitate, and Copperfield really can fly.

Clancie is so emotionally caught up in this stuff that no matter how many exposés she is given, she chooses to ignore these. I don't know what her agenda is. I wish I did. Maybe she wants to become a medium, to earn a living at it. If so, she would have to learn all the 'tricks of the trade'. Then she must admit to being one of the sharks rather than a 'seeker after truth'.

And then it's:

"Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive."

More hoops to jump through; more intellectual somersaults.

[The Mighty Thor]

Oh, and to give Clancie some credit, she did describe the magazine test in some detail. So, she only had to ask the impertinent questions to realise it was a trick. As the great Jacob Bronowski said: "You must ask the impertinent questions to get the pertinent answer." But this is where Clancie disconnects.

For example:

Did anyone check to see if the magazines were all different in their content -- not just their outer covers?

Did the medium ask for everyone in the group to shout out a stack position; similarly with page number? Or was it definitely one person chose position and another chose page number?

Who retrieved the magazine from the pile to reveal the image? Was it the medium?

Could the medium see what RC was drawing?

Did anyone check that the mag retrieved was actually from the correct position, and that the page number was as chosen, or did they just look at the image as presented?

Wasn't it rather fo