John Edward Sets Off The Baloney Detector [Archive]

Thanz

12th August 2003, 01:08 PM

Well, first of all, if both Edward and Browne can be fully booked up to three years in advance, sell out seminars and in JE's case, sell books and his tv program without any scientific testing, why bother? You ask the question from the standpoint of "If they are telling the truth, what do they have to lose?" when really, perhaps you should consider "What would they have to gain?"

Next, while I do not want to go into the specifics of the Schwartz experiments and whether they have any validity or not, the fact is that JE did agree to be "tested" by someone at a university who claimed to be doing serious research on mediumship. I suppose it is possible that JE could have failed these tests miserably, and then been exposed by Schwartz. I know this contradicts my first point to a degree, but why did JE do even this?

Lastly, it could just be that they don't give a damn whether the scientific or skeptical community believes them or not. They have a large enough following that it certainly doesn't hurt their bankbook.

In essence, it all comes down to a risk/reward analysis. Even if JE thinks that he is for real, the risk that "the spirits aren't talking" or whatever on test day would be too high for the minimal reward.

TLN

12th August 2003, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by Thanz
Well, first of all, if both Edward and Browne can be fully booked up to three years in advance, sell out seminars and in JE's case, sell books and his tv program without any scientific testing, why bother? You ask the question from the standpoint of "If they are telling the truth, what do they have to lose?" when really, perhaps you should consider "What would they have to gain?"

So much that's a silly question.

How about being a part of one of the greatest discoveries in human history? Can you see Edward as Time Magazine's Man of the Year? "The Man Who Proved It To Us All."

How about credibility? They could silence us cynical skeptics once and for all. Edward could take his disclaimer off of his show.

Originally posted by Thanz
Next, while I do not want to go into the specifics of the Schwartz experiments and whether they have any validity or not, the fact is that JE did agree to be "tested" by someone at a university who claimed to be doing serious research on mediumship. I suppose it is possible that JE could have failed these tests miserably, and then been exposed by Schwartz. I know this contradicts my first point to a degree, but why did JE do even this?

He did it because he claims to care about scientific research.

Prove it John. Where's the replication?

Thanz

12th August 2003, 02:32 PM

Originally posted by TLN
So much that's a silly question.

How about being a part of one of the greatest discoveries in human history? Can you see Edward as Time Magazine's Man of the Year? "The Man Who Proved It To Us All."
I disagree. I don't think that it is the kind of thing that can ever be proven, if what we see him do is the result of his "Abilities". If we assume, just for the sake of argument, that he actually does communicate with the dead. Obviously, it is not the same sort of communication that happens with the living - otherwise he could say the sort of things that skeptics say he should ("Barney is here, used to live 123 Any Street, and he says don't worry about the ham sandwich" or whatever).

Therefore, even if we assume he is real, there seems to be a bunch of grey area involved. To put it as shortly and bluntly as I can, I don't think that any amount of JE guessing letters and sitters validitating them is ever going to convince many skeptics - let alone get him credit as part of one of the greatest discoveries of all time or man of the year.

How about credibility? They could silence us cynical skeptics once and for all. Edward could take his disclaimer off of his show.
See above. I don't think he cares about the skeptics that much. Also, the lawyers would not let him take the disclaimer off anyway.

He did it because he claims to care about scientific research.

Prove it John. Where's the replication?
Well, considering the reception that the first shot at scientific research got, I am not surprised that he is not eager to do it again.

TLN

12th August 2003, 02:39 PM

Originally posted by Thanz
To put it as shortly and bluntly as I can, I don't think that any amount of JE guessing letters and sitters validitating them is ever going to convince many skeptics - let alone get him credit as part of one of the greatest discoveries of all time or man of the year.

That's simply your prejudice against skeptics. There are tests that could prove Edward was speaking to dead people conclusively. I could be turned around. I want to be turned around.

Waiting...

Originally posted by Thanz
Well, considering the reception that the first shot at scientific research got, I am not surprised that he is not eager to do it again.

Then next time pick a scientist that will share his data and there won't be a problem.

No experiment, no proof. Simple.

michaellee

12th August 2003, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by Thanz
In essence, it all comes down to a risk/reward analysis. Even if JE thinks that he is for real, the risk that "the spirits aren't talking" or whatever on test day would be too high for the minimal reward .

You cannot be serious. "the minimal reward"???

TLN stated:

How about being a part of one of the greatest discoveries in human history? Can you see Edward as Time Magazine's Man of the Year? "The Man Who Proved It To Us All."

Do you read posts in their entirety, Thanz?

So far, "the minimal reward" includes:

1. The greatest discovery of mankind in human history.
2. Photo-ops for JE

May I add: JE would never again have to perform those dreary readings. He could, instead, do something actually beneficial to the world like:

3. Tell us where Jimmy Hoffa's body is located.
4. Ask Nicole Simpson who her REAL killer is.
5. Eliminate all criminal trials for murder. JE tells who the killer is, and straight to the chair.
6. Revolutionize life as we know it by revealing "The meaning of life" (assuming that spirits of the dead are privy to this info)
7. Reveal to the world the details, if they exist, of Jesus, God, Heaven and Hell, Satan and the whole religious mantra. Some people may not consider this issue "minimal".
8. Find out if it hurts when you die.
9. Do dead spirits eat or drink? Are they eternal? What about love? Hate? Anger? Sex? Do they age? Where do they reside? Do they sleep?
10. Is Heaven a democracy, autocracy, etc.. If democratic, will my vote be equal to a vote from God?
11. Do all humans that die become spirits? If not, what are the pre-requisites or no-no's we should know about.

Dogwood

12th August 2003, 03:28 PM

Well let's be fair TLN, who else besides Schwartz, has asked him to be tested? Let's leave aside for the moment open challenges like Randi's. What researchers have asked JE to be tested scientificaly? We can't accuse him of refusing to be tested if no one has asked him to.

TLN

12th August 2003, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by mark tidwell
Well let's be fair TLN, who else besides Schwartz, has asked him to be tested? Let's leave aside for the moment open challenges like Randi's. What researchers have asked JE to be tested scientificaly? We can't accuse him of refusing to be tested if no one has asked him to.

True and fair.

Thanz

13th August 2003, 05:58 AM

Originally posted by michaellee
Originally posted by Thanz

You cannot be serious. "the minimal reward"???

TLN stated:

Do you read posts in their entirety, Thanz?
Yes I do. Do you? Is there some sort of distortion in the space-time continuum where you live? I posted my comment regarding minimal reward BEFORE TLN responded to that post with the quote above. I then stated what my opinion of that response was in the very next post.

Before you accuse me of not even reading the posts, perhaps you should get your facts straight.

So far, "the minimal reward" includes:

1. The greatest discovery of mankind in human history.
2. Photo-ops for JE

As I have already stated, I don't think that this would happen. I don't think that mediumship (if all it is is what we see JE doing) will ever be proven to the point of being "the greatest discovery of mankind in human history". I think that the best we would see is that JE scored at a level that was statistically significantly above random chance. Those results would then be debated until the cows come home as to what they actually MEAN.

May I add: JE would never again have to perform those dreary readings. He could, instead, do something actually beneficial to the world like:

3. Tell us where Jimmy Hoffa's body is located.
4. Ask Nicole Simpson who her REAL killer is.
5. Eliminate all criminal trials for murder. JE tells who the killer is, and straight to the chair.
6. Revolutionize life as we know it by revealing "The meaning of life" (assuming that spirits of the dead are privy to this info)
7. Reveal to the world the details, if they exist, of Jesus, God, Heaven and Hell, Satan and the whole religious mantra. Some people may not consider this issue "minimal".
8. Find out if it hurts when you die.
9. Do dead spirits eat or drink? Are they eternal? What about love? Hate? Anger? Sex? Do they age? Where do they reside? Do they sleep?
10. Is Heaven a democracy, autocracy, etc.. If democratic, will my vote be equal to a vote from God?
11. Do all humans that die become spirits? If not, what are the pre-requisites or no-no's we should know about.
I think that a lot of these are just crap. It is lists like these that probably make people like Neo think that skeptics are disappointed in the messages from the "other side". What makes you think, for example, that JE can find out anything like where Jimmy Hoffa was buried? I can talk to the living. That doesn't mean I can find out where Bill Gates puts all of his money by giving him a call.

I don't know why you assume that if one can comminicate with the dead in any fashion that they should be able to do whatever it is you want them to do. This is a faulty assumption. I don't think that anyone who claims to talk to the dead has claimed to be able to do the things that you list. If they could, then maybe they would.

People who claim to talk to the dead, like JE, simply claim that the stuff that we see them do is real. If we assume that what we see is the peak of their abilities, proving that it is an ability rather than a trick will not suddenly open the doors to the things you list.

Thanz

13th August 2003, 06:05 AM

Originally posted by TLN
That's simply your prejudice against skeptics. There are tests that could prove Edward was speaking to dead people conclusively. I could be turned around. I want to be turned around.

Waiting...
I am not prejudiced against skeptics. I am not sure that there are tests that could prove that JE was talking to the dead conclusively. I admit that I have not followed all of the debates on test design in this area, however. Can you give me a short paragraph on a test that would do this?

Then next time pick a scientist that will share his data and there won't be a problem.

No experiment, no proof. Simple.
I do not want to get into the whole scwhartz data sharing thing again. However, I don't think that Schwartz's data sharing policy should be used against JE. From what I understand, the problem is with Schwartz, not JE, and it wasn't JE that picked the scientist anyway.

neofight

13th August 2003, 06:11 AM

Originally posted by Thanz
I think that the best we would see is that JE scored at a level that was statistically significantly above random chance. Those results would then be debated until the cows come home as to what they actually MEAN.

I think you are probably correct on that, Thanz.

I think that a lot of these are just crap. It is lists like these that probably make people like Neo think that skeptics are disappointed in the messages from the "other side". What makes you think, for example, that JE can find out anything like where Jimmy Hoffa was buried? I can talk to the living. That doesn't mean I can find out where Bill Gates puts all of his money by giving him a call.

I don't know why you assume that if one can comminicate with the dead in any fashion that they should be able to do whatever it is you want them to do. This is a faulty assumption. I don't think that anyone who claims to talk to the dead has claimed to be able to do the things that you list. If they could, then maybe they would.

People who claim to talk to the dead, like JE, simply claim that the stuff that we see them do is real. If we assume that what we see is the peak of their abilities, proving that it is an ability rather than a trick will not suddenly open the doors to the things you list.

This is so cool, you have no idea! A skeptic who doesn't, himself, believe that JE is a medium, yet is able to argue from the perspective of "but if he is doing what he says he is doing.....", remembers specific points that believers make, and who makes them, and the best yet, even concedes that their points may be valid. Thanz, you have made my day! Thank you! :kiss: ......neo

Diamond

13th August 2003, 06:19 AM

Because "psychics" exist in the grey area between scientific fact and people's innermost beliefs. And they make a lot of money staying there.

Darat

13th August 2003, 06:23 AM

Originally posted by Thanz

...snip...

As I have already stated, I don't think that this would happen. I don't think that mediumship (if all it is is what we see JE doing) will ever be proven to the point of being "the greatest discovery of mankind in human history". I think that the best we would see is that JE scored at a level that was statistically significantly above random chance. Those results would then be debated until the cows come home as to what they actually MEAN.

...snip...

Your comment seems to be that you are pre-judging the outcome of any results and then using your "pre-judgment" to follow to a conclusion?

"The best we..." - how do you know this? Why shouldn't the results be completely "off the scale" if JE can communicate with the dead?

Originally posted by Thanz

...snip...

I think that a lot of these are just crap. It is lists like these that probably make people like Neo think that skeptics are disappointed in the messages from the "other side". What makes you think, for example, that JE can find out anything like where Jimmy Hoffa was buried? I can talk to the living. That doesn't mean I can find out where Bill Gates puts all of his money by giving him a call.

...snip...

Using your analogy - surely Bill Gates knows where his money is?

If JE can communicate and receive the information he claims he can then many of the points in the list should be possible. If JE can do what he claims he can.

Originally posted by Thanz
...snip...

I don't know why you assume that if one can comminicate with the dead in any fashion that they should be able to do whatever it is you want them to do. This is a faulty assumption. I don't think that anyone who claims to talk to the dead has claimed to be able to do the things that you list. If they could, then maybe they would.

...snip...

Many of the people (to broaden out from JE) who claim they can communicate to the dead do claim they can, for instance, diagnose illnesses, find deceased people and so on.

I would also disagree about the relevance of a list like this - I think these list do demonstrate some of the consequences that follow from being able to communicate with the dead that many believers just don’t seem to address.

Zep

13th August 2003, 06:27 AM

You are all making way too much of a very simple situation. JE doesn't give a rat's ass about the past or the future or the spirit world or whatever.

THIS, in the here-and-now, is what it is all about...

Thanz

13th August 2003, 06:37 AM

Originally posted by Zep
You are all making way too much of a very simple situation. JE doesn't give a rat's ass about the past or the future or the spirit world or whatever.

THIS, in the here-and-now, is what it is all about...

I am shocked at you Zep. How can you think JE would stoop so low? Don't you think he is more about this:

http://usrarecurrency.com/WebPgFl/G00204259A/Final1934A$1000SnG00204259A.jpg

Zep

13th August 2003, 06:48 AM

Indeed, Thanz! Great bunches of the same.

(I don't have any of those myself that I could scan, you see.)

All of JE's antics and thinking completely revolves around the moolah first and only. He has already demonstrated that he has no scruples whatsoever by ripping off crowds of grieving folk for huge fees. I strongly suspect if there was more money to be made in, say, selling his own lemonade by the side of the road, he would do that instead. So the money is king, nothing else. He is, quite literally, laughing all the way to the bank.

Thus the answer as to why he won't go for any genuine challenges of a scientific nature is that they have the possibility of cutting off his income flow, and the JREF's million is nowhere near big enough to compensate him for that. That's it, end of story.

Thanz

13th August 2003, 06:52 AM

Originally posted by Darat
Your comment seems to be that you are pre-judging the outcome of any results and then using your "pre-judgment" to follow to a conclusion?

"The best we..." - how do you know this? Why shouldn't the results be completely "off the scale" if JE can communicate with the dead?
Well, it seems that some people equate comminicating with the dead with communicating with the living, but that doesn't seem to be the case with JE. It seems that communicating with the dead, for JE, is like playing the game of "telephone" - he gets random bits of info, can't tell if someone is a "father" or just a "father figure" etc.

One thing is clear - it is not the same as picking up the phone and giving someone a call. Therefore, I don't think that the results would be "off the charts". IF they are, fine. I would stand corrected. But given his other performances, I think the best he could hope for is statistically significant above chance.

If, however, they were off the charts, and he could do it repeatedly, then yes my opinion would probably have to change. But based on what I have seen, I don't think he can do it EVEN IF he was talking to the dead. Of course, I also don't think he can do it because I think he is cold reading, so that might be affecting my opinion. I just think that we need to take his performances as a sort of base line - and assume that he is doing the best he can. If that is the best he can do, I would not expect "off the charts".

Also, whatever the "hits" are, I thikn they would always be open to debate. If JE gets a hit on a father figure with a "J" name, for instance, what does that mean? How do we score it? Is it just a good guess? The inherent subjectivity in the area makes conclusive results problematic.

Using your analogy - surely Bill Gates knows where his money is?

If JE can communicate and receive the information he claims he can then many of the points in the list should be possible. If JE can do what he claims he can.
Yes, Bill Gates knows. But there is no way I could get him on the phone let alone get him to tell me where his money is.

I think that asking JE to find out where Hoffa is is just as absurd a request as asking me to find out where Bill Gates money is.

Many of the people (to broaden out from JE) who claim they can communicate to the dead do claim they can, for instance, diagnose illnesses, find deceased people and so on.
Then those people should be tested for those abilities. I don't expect any to pass.

I would also disagree about the relevance of a list like this - I think these list do demonstrate some of the consequences that follow from being able to communicate with the dead that many believers just don’t seem to address.
As I said before, it assumes too much on what the communication is. These things do not necessarily follow with being able to communicate with the dead. Some would follow if it was the same as picking up a phone to the spirit world. From what I understand, that is not what people like JE claim, so the list (I feel) is a bit of a strawman.

jim_scotti

13th August 2003, 10:16 AM

Interesting discussion, but I think it goes back to something like TLNs original question. If I were asking the same kind of question TLN did, I would ask: "Why do the methods and results of guys like JE look and sound an awful lot like Cold reading or similar techniques used by huxters and for entertainment purposes by legitimate magicians? Why can't they produce results that a good magician cannot?"

If JE and his ilk were really communicating with the dead, then we should definitely be able to design a test that will definitively prove that. Instead, every properly conducted test I've seen produces results that are not statistically different from (perhaps intelligent) guessing.

Jim.

Thanz

13th August 2003, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by jim_scotti
Interesting discussion, but I think it goes back to something like TLNs original question. If I were asking the same kind of question TLN did, I would ask: "Why do the methods and results of guys like JE look and sound an awful lot like Cold reading or similar techniques used by huxters and for entertainment purposes by legitimate magicians? Why can't they produce results that a good magician cannot?"

The problem here is, I think, that it leads to a kind of circular argument. People who believe that JE is talking to the dead say that the magicians and huxters and cold readers simply copy the style and techniques of the REAL mediums, in order to give themselves more credibility. Sort like a chicken and egg thing. Who is copying who?

Personally, I think that they are all cold reading, but that doesn't stop the argument.

Instig8R

13th August 2003, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by Thanz

I think that a lot of these are just crap. It is lists like these that probably make people like Neo think that skeptics are disappointed in the messages from the "other side". What makes you think, for example, that JE can find out anything like where Jimmy Hoffa was buried? I can talk to the living. That doesn't mean I can find out where Bill Gates puts all of his money by giving him a call.

I don't know why you assume that if one can comminicate with the dead in any fashion that they should be able to do whatever it is you want them to do. This is a faulty assumption. I don't think that anyone who claims to talk to the dead has claimed to be able to do the things that you list. If they could, then maybe they would.

People who claim to talk to the dead, like JE, simply claim that the stuff that we see them do is real. If we assume that what we see is the peak of their abilities, proving that it is an ability rather than a trick will not suddenly open the doors to the things you list.

Hey, Thanz-- Perhaps if you read more of JE's books and watched more of his TV appearances, you would be aware of all of the various powers that he has claimed! Based on JE's exaggerated claims of his abilities, expecting him to do something meaningful, (like finding Jimmy Hoffa's body), is not "crap", as you state.

By his own admission, JE can speak to the disembodied spirits of people, and he says he can often reach them on demand -- This includes famous people. When asked if he could contact the spirit of Elvis, JE claimed that indeed he could, if he was reading Lisa Marie Presley (or another person connected to Elvis).

It logically follows that if one of Jimmy Hoffa's relatives went to JE for a reading, the spirit of Jimmy Hoffa could be reached. JE claims to bring closure to the grieving. If I were a member of the Hoffa family, I can think of no better closure than knowing the location of the body... not, "I'm getting a 'J' or a 'G' name", and he wants you to know that he's alright, and watching over you -- He's showing me a white rose... Oh, he's pulling his energy back now".

TLN

13th August 2003, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by jim_scotti
If JE and his ilk were really communicating with the dead, then we should definitely be able to design a test that will definitively prove that. Instead, every properly conducted test I've seen produces results that are not statistically different from (perhaps intelligent) guessing.

This is the original point of the thread. It has nothing to do with cold reading and cold readers are not necessary in any way.

If Edward can do what he claims he can do experiment can show it.

We can all sit here on these boards and discuss what we think and what our opinions are, but we'll never really know until we can conduct proper tests.

Why isn't this going on with some of the more famous--and therefore one would think, most gifted--mediums of today?

Thanz

13th August 2003, 01:57 PM

Originally posted by Instig8R
By his own admission, JE can speak to the disembodied spirits of people, and he says he can often reach them on demand -- This includes famous people. When asked if he could contact the spirit of Elvis, JE claimed that indeed he could, if he was reading Lisa Marie Presley (or another person connected to Elvis).

It logically follows that if one of Jimmy Hoffa's relatives went to JE for a reading, the spirit of Jimmy Hoffa could be reached. JE claims to bring closure to the grieving. If I were a member of the Hoffa family, I can think of no better closure than knowing the location of the body... not, "I'm getting a 'J' or a 'G' name", and he wants you to know that he's alright, and watching over you -- He's showing me a white rose... Oh, he's pulling his energy back now".
Hey, if he claims that he can do this, then yes - ignore what I said. If he claims theses exaggerated abilities - and not the more limited form I have described - then yes, test it with more specific measures and nail him to the wall.

Nyarlathotep

13th August 2003, 02:19 PM

Darat

14th August 2003, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by Thanz

...snip...

[B]
As I said before, it assumes too much on what the communication is. These things do not necessarily follow with being able to communicate with the dead. Some would follow if it was the same as picking up a phone to the spirit world. From what I understand, that is not what people like JE claim, so the list (I feel) is a bit of a strawman.

A lot of them do claim to see and hear the dead as clearly as they do the living.

I quoted from Doris Stokes, (at one time the UKs best known and most successful medium) in another post and she always claimed to see and hear them as she did living people. A web search will find many other examples that if they could do what they claim to be able to do mediums should be able to bring across a lot more specific information then they seem able to do...

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 01:52 AM

Graham Bishop, currently "operating" in Denmark, also speaks to and hears mediums. Sometimes, he has to tell them not to be so loud!

juninho

14th August 2003, 03:08 AM

Originally posted by michaellee
Originally posted by Thanz
5. Eliminate all criminal trials for murder. JE tells who the killer is, and straight to the chair.

He's hardly likely to do that is he, I mean once they were dead they'd be constantly in contact with him telling him what a complete w@>ker he is. He wouldn't get a minutes peace:D

robbersdog

14th August 2003, 05:05 AM

Mediums claim to get all their info from the spirits. If they can do repeated readings and produce personal info while only getting yes/no answers, surely that's testable.

THEY WON'T ALLOW THEMSELVES TO BE TESTED, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ANY PSYCHIC ABILITIES!

How obvious does this have to be for the general public? Why do so many people poor moeny into the mediums pockets? I despair at humanity, I really do. :rolleyes:

voidx

14th August 2003, 08:13 AM

Originally posted by Darat

A lot of them do claim to see and hear the dead as clearly as they do the living.

...snip...
This is something I still find interesting. Varying mediums, while using the categoires of clairaudience/voyance/sentience to define their abilities seem to rather consistently disagree to how each of these three abilities works for them. Believers account for this by defining different styles of mediumship, for exampe trance mediums or (I can never remember the term) the type of mediumship JE does, or by picking and choosing who they see as authentic or not. For example the Pet Pychic seems to disagree in some of her definitions with JE, oh but thats simple, they tend to agree she's a fraud, so it doesn't count. But at times even mediums definitions of how their abilities work, and then how they do them isn't consistent. JE for example says that it is extremely draining for both medium and spirit to communicate in the fashion he does. So much so that this communication can only be sustained for a matter of a few minutes. Yet he routinely does readings that last between 15-20 minutes. In fact many believers point out that the LKL transcripts are not representative because the readings are too short. Once you start looking at things closely, it just doesn't add up anymore.

KelvinG

14th August 2003, 08:30 AM

Originally posted by TLN

This is the original point of the thread. It has nothing to do with cold reading and cold readers are not necessary in any way.

If Edward can do what he claims he can do experiment can show it.

We can all sit here on these boards and discuss what we think and what our opinions are, but we'll never really know until we can conduct proper tests.

Why isn't this going on with some of the more famous--and therefore one would think, most gifted--mediums of today?

Because he's too busy, nobody has asked him, blah, blah, blah.

As I said in another thread, the fact that no legitimate scientist or organization has asked Edward to be tested speaks loudly about just how seriously his parlor tricks are taken.

HE SAYS HE CAN SPEAK TO THE DEAD, FOR GOD SAKES!!!
And no one seems to really care!!!!

And Edward himself isn't doing anything in his power to encourage the scientific community to test him.

I think those who believe in JE have to stop for a moment and really think hard about just how silly this whole talking to the dead nonsense really is.

Just my opinion, of course.

Clancie

14th August 2003, 09:06 AM

Posted by robbersdog

Mediums claim to get all their info from the spirits. If they can do repeated readings and produce personal info while only getting yes/no answers, surely that's testable.

THEY WON'T ALLOW THEMSELVES TO BE TESTED, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ANY PSYCHIC ABILITIES!
Of all the criticisms leveled at JE, actually this is the one that irks me the most, robbersdog.

He (and 4 others) were tested by a professor researching this at Uof Arizona. Think what you want of the tests, but the mediums did accept and participate (JE participated in all five).

Unless people can cite scientists who have asked JE to test with them, and been refused by him, then I think this criticism is bogus.

(And, as a side note, Mrs. Piper submitted herself to testing for 20 years. You may not like the tests. You may not like the results. But it is INACCURATE to say "they won't allow themselves to be tested").

If you know of researchers they've turned down, please list them. Otherwise, its a total non-issue.
Posted by KelvinG

As I said in another thread, the fact that no legitimate scientist or organization has asked Edward to be tested speaks loudly about just how seriously his parlor tricks are taken
Ummm....nice try to have it both ways, but it doesn't work, KelvinG. Either he's not asked because no scientific researcher takes him seriously (in which case, the onus still isn't on him to test himself). Or he refuses to be tested because he's a phony (in which case names of researchers who've asked and been refused need to be provided).

Either way, when it comes to participating in scientific research, if no one asks, then its not a fair criticism to say he won't do it. If no one is asking, we really don't know if he would or not (Certainly he deserves credit for accpeting the only person so far who has actually asked).

TLN

14th August 2003, 09:12 AM

Originally posted by Clancie
He (and 4 others) were tested by a professor researching this at Uof Arizona. Think what you want of the tests, but the mediums did accept and participate (JE participated in all five).

Clancie, can I see this data?

Originally posted by Clancie
Unless people can cite scientists who have asked JE to test with them, and been refused by him, then I think this criticism is bogus.

Why don't they volunteer?

Originally posted by Clancie
If you know of researchers they've turned down, please list them. Otherwise, its a total non-issue.

The issue is why they don't volunteer. Your thoughts?

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 09:17 AM

Originally posted by Clancie
If you know of researchers they've turned down, please list them. Otherwise, its a total non-issue.

Me. I sent JE an email where I offered to test him. No reply.

Oh, I'm not good enough? Then please list the credentials required to test JE.

Clancie

14th August 2003, 09:31 AM

Posted by TLN

Clancie, can I see this data?

Schwartz used some in his book, TLN. Have you asked to go to Az. and have a look at the rest? If you're a researcher into all this, he might welcome you. Why not ask him? He invited Randi.

Why don't they volunteer?
I'm sorry, but this always strikes me as a ludicrous idea. In JE's position, as a working medium, would you travel the country trying to find a university (somewhere) with a professor (somewhere) who was willing to/interested in/ had the funding and academic support for...research into this?

The issue is why they don't volunteer. Your thoughts?
Volunteer? To whom? :rolleyes:

In JE's situation, no, hunting for someone to test me wouldn't be a priority (especially to me, since I doubt that this can be adequately tested anyway. Validations and information are too subjective, imo, to lend itself to reliable tests).

voidx

14th August 2003, 09:33 AM

TLN Clancies referring to the "Afterlife Experiments" that were conducted by Schwartz. I don't have a link to any of it, but I'm sure someone else does. A critique was in an issue of the skeptical inquirer (or Sci Am can't remember which).

Clancie

14th August 2003, 09:35 AM

Yes, voidx (and the critique was in Skeptical Inquirer/Skeptic).

And TLN here's a link for Schwartz:

http://www.openmindsciences.com/hbo-exp.htm

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 09:56 AM

Originally posted by Clancie
Schwartz used some in his book, TLN. Have you asked to go to Az. and have a look at the rest? If you're a researcher into all this, he might welcome you. Why not ask him? He invited Randi.

"We also explained to the mediums that the raw data of the actual mediumship sessions would become the property of the University of Arizone, not of Lucky Duck or HBO. The videotapes would capture the raw data, collected first and foremost for scientific reasons. And the raw data had to be available for concise scoring. It also had to be available for anyone to see."
Schwartz, "The Afterlife experiments", p. 53
(Emphasis mine)

So, Clancie, why can't "anyone" see this raw data?

Originally posted by Clancie
I'm sorry, but this always strikes me as a ludicrous idea. In JE's position, as a working medium, would you travel the country trying to find a university (somewhere) with a professor (somewhere) who was willing to/interested in/ had the funding and academic support for...research into this?

No need to "travel", Clancie. Just announce it, e.g. via his website, or even Larry King Live.

Originally posted by Clancie
Volunteer? To whom? :rolleyes:

Me. Why not? Who is qualified, Clancie?

Originally posted by Clancie
In JE's situation, no, hunting for someone to test me wouldn't be a priority (especially to me, since I doubt that this can be adequately tested anyway. Validations and information are too subjective, imo, to lend itself to reliable tests).
Which is why we need independent verification of the hits. Can you point to just one incident in ArizonaExp where this happens?

jim_scotti

14th August 2003, 09:57 AM

Originally posted by Clancie

He (and 4 others) were tested by a professor researching this at Uof Arizona. Think what you want of the tests, but the mediums did accept and participate (JE participated in all five).
[/B]

That's all fine, but Schwartz is well known to be not only sympathetic to their cause, but gullible in the extreme. Personally, I'm embarrased to have such a credulous "scientist" work at the same University I do. He does a dis-service to all by not designing proper controled experiments. Here's an interesting URL from our local student run daily paper on Schwartz : http://wildcat.arizona.edu/papers/92/152/01_2_m.html

A few quotes from this article are very telling:

Schwartz acknowledged that a few of the sitters were acquaintances of the mediums. !!!!!

and

The researchers have noticed a link between belief and performance in other tests.

Must be all that negative energy from those mean old skeptics.

Here is :randi: Randis commentary from the JREF regarding Schwartz.

Jim.

TLN

14th August 2003, 10:00 AM

Claus stole all my follow up questions.

renata

14th August 2003, 10:08 AM

Thanks for the article, jim-scotti!

My favorite part so far

In one experiment, people had to guess whether researchers standing behind them were looking at their heads or backs. The subjects guessed correctly nearly 60 percent of the time on average, as opposed to the 50 percent that would be expected from mere guesswork, Schwartz said.

:roll:

KelvinG

14th August 2003, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by Clancie

Ummm....nice try to have it both ways, but it doesn't work, KelvinG. Either he's not asked because no scientific researcher takes him seriously (in which case, the onus still isn't on him to test himself). Or he refuses to be tested because he's a phony (in which case names of researchers who've asked and been refused need to be provided).

I'm not trying to have it both ways. I don't know which way it is. I wish I was in the know enough that I could tell you whether or not JE gets approached all the time to participate in studies or not. How do we know that he doesn't get frequently asked to participate in studies? Hec, Claus has asked him. I'm not particularly familiar with Claus's credentials, but you did ask for names of researchers.

How about all the paranormal studies that Steve Grenard refers to. According to him there have been countless studies with conclusive results that favour paranormal occurences. Why wasn't JE, the world's famous medium involved in any of those (with the exception of the Schwartz study). Did they not ask him? If not, did they think he was not worthy? If they did ask him, why doesn't he agree to participate?
Again, I'm not saying I know either way whether he has been asked to participate, and if he has whether he has refused or not.
I am saying that the current scenarios really seem suspicious to me.

I keep coming back to my central point: Here is a guy who claims that he can talk to the dead. This would be an absolutely remarkable breakthough in the world of science. Yet, he spends his time plying his trade on a cheesy syndicated talk show, instead of participating in research that might revolutionize the way we look at the world, our lives, and hec, everything we thought we knew.

You keep saying "How is he supposed to participate in research if no one asks him." Well, if it was me, I would be breaking down doors to get the scientific community interested in my abilities. I would do whatever it took to prove to the scientific world that I could actually speak to the dead.
But, that's just me. I like to think I'm ethical. I suspect Edward is not.

hgc

14th August 2003, 10:22 AM

Schwartz admits that the research into human energy systems is in beginning stages, and that many details remain a mystery. Er, beginning to look ridiculous, I'd say.

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 10:22 AM

Originally posted by TLN
Claus stole all my follow up questions.
Which Clancie won't "see". She reacts to what I write, though....maybe she's psychic, too! :D

Darat

14th August 2003, 10:42 AM

From the article linked by jim_scotii

"The success of the mediums often depended on the sitters and their belief in life after death. All the mediums were able to get good information while working with a woman who had lost six loved ones in the past nine years, Schwartz said. "

!! :roll: !!

thaiboxerken

14th August 2003, 10:46 AM

Science is the enemy to people such as JE, Browne and Schwartz. When integrity and objectivity is introduced, their claims diminish and their pocket books shrink. That's why they hide from science.

TLN

14th August 2003, 10:58 AM

Summarizing:

There's no public place I can view the raw data for the Schwartz experiment.
There has been no independent replication of the Schwartz study.
There's no proof.

I miss anything?

neofight

14th August 2003, 11:01 AM

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Instig8R
By his own admission, JE can speak to the disembodied spirits of people, and he says he can often reach them on demand -- This includes famous people. When asked if he could contact the spirit of Elvis, JE claimed that indeed he could, if he was reading Lisa Marie Presley (or another person connected to Elvis).

Originally posted by Thanz

Hey, if he claims that he can do this, then yes - ignore what I said. If he claims theses exaggerated abilities - and not the more limited form I have described - then yes, test it with more specific measures and nail him to the wall.

Oh, gee whiz, Thanz. Is that all it takes? ;) I realize that you qualified your response by using the "conditional" tense in responding to Instig8R, but don't you even want to ask her for a direct quote or anything, so we can see in JE's own words exactly what he said on this subject?

Not for anything, but I never remember JE coming off as quite so cocky when discussing what he can, and cannot do, so I would love to see the quote in question. Instig8R? Would you mind?

Just as an aside, is it only me, or do skeptics sometimes allow other skeptics to get away with things that they would never allow a believer to? :eek: .......neo

Thanz

14th August 2003, 11:07 AM

Originally posted by neofight
Oh, gee whiz, Thanz. Is that all it takes? ;) I realize that you qualified your response by using the "conditional" tense in responding to Instig8R, but don't you even want to ask her for a direct quote or anything, so we can see in JE's own words exactly what he said on this subject?

Not for anything, but I never remember JE coming off as quite so cocky when discussing what he can, and cannot do, so I would love to see the quote in question. Instig8R? Would you mind?

Just as an aside, is it only me, or do skeptics sometimes allow other skeptics to get away with things that they would never allow a believer to? :eek: .......neo
Well, when have I ever demanded direct quotes or anything of that nature from you? Or Clancie? Or Steve? I have taken you at your word. I see no reason to not take Instg8r at his (her?) word.

If you dispute what Instig8r has said about JE's claimed abilities, take it up with Instig8r. In the meantime, take careful note that I said "If" (as you have pointed out).

So, now I am left with Instig8r saying A, and you saying B, with neither backing it up with quotes. I think that I'll just stick with what I have said previously.

Thanz

14th August 2003, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by TLN
Summarizing:

There's no public place I can view the raw data for the Schwartz experiment.
There has been no independent replication of the Schwartz study.
There's no proof.

I miss anything?
Yes.

JE makes gobs of cash, and does not need to be tested to make gobs more cash in the future.

neofight

14th August 2003, 11:09 AM

Originally posted by Darat

A lot of them do claim to see and hear the dead as clearly as they do the living.

I quoted from Doris Stokes, (at one time the UKs best known and most successful medium) in another post and she always claimed to see and hear them as she did living people. A web search will find many other examples that if they could do what they claim to be able to do mediums should be able to bring across a lot more specific information then they seem able to do...

But Darat, even if Doris Stokes has ultra-strong clairvoyance abilities, and is able to actually see all the spirits that come through for her clients, (and I'm not sure that is always the case)
that has little or nothing to do with what some other medium's abilities might be......neo

thaiboxerken

14th August 2003, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by Thanz

Yes.

JE makes gobs of cash, and does not need to be tested to make gobs more cash in the future.

Such testing would hurt JE's financial future. Why would someone want to tell the world that they are faking it? Well.. other than the small disclaimer.

TLN

14th August 2003, 11:16 AM

Originally posted by Thanz
JE makes gobs of cash, and does not need to be tested to make gobs more cash in the future.

Who said anything about cash, ever?

neofight

14th August 2003, 11:26 AM

Originally posted by voidx

This is something I still find interesting. Varying mediums, while using the categoires of clairaudience/voyance/sentience to define their abilities seem to rather consistently disagree to how each of these three abilities works for them. Believers account for this by defining different styles of mediumship, for exampe trance mediums or (I can never remember the term) the type of mediumship JE does, or by picking and choosing who they see as authentic or not.

Voidx, JE is a "mental" medium, as opposed to a full trance medium, or a physical medium. But I'd just like to stress that even among several different mental mediums, all of whom work in basically the same manner as JE, i.e. with symbols etc., you will still find varying degrees of the different types of psychic abilities. There is no "cookie cutter" stereotype medium really as far as I can tell.

JE for example says that it is extremely draining for both medium and spirit to communicate in the fashion he does. So much so that this communication can only be sustained for a matter of a few minutes. Yet he routinely does readings that last between 15-20 minutes.

I don't think JE has ever put a specific time limit on how long a reading can go, voidx. He simply explains that it takes an inordinate amount of effort on both the medium's and the spirit's part to accomplish this feat, and that it can indeed be quite draining.

Again, more so for some I would guess, than for others. British medium Brian Hurst only does a few group sessions here and there, and I believe George Anderson also finds that he does not have the energy to do them on a daily basis. I'm sure that after a "CO" taping or seminar event, when the adrenalin rush is over, JE is pretty beat as well......neo

In fact many believers point out that the LKL transcripts are not representative because the readings are too short. Once you start looking at things closely, it just doesn't add up anymore.

Well, speaking for myself, the reason that I do not consider the LKL transcripts representative is because in most JE readings, the initial up-front time is spent in ascertaining exactly which spirit is coming through, and who that is in relation to the sitter. So it's usually not until that is established that the real validations begin to come through.

Obviously then, these short phone readings do not allow too much time for this. Sometimes it's not even enough time for one spirit to make itself known and say all it wants to say, let alone for the multiple energies that come through in an average JE reading.......neo

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 11:39 AM

Originally posted by neofight
I don't think JE has ever put a specific time limit on how long a reading can go, voidx. He simple explains that it takes an inordinate amount of effort on both the medium's and the spirit's part to accomplish this feat, and that it can indeed be quite draining.

What happens to those readings during the taping of CO that are longer than 11 minutes, neo?

You have been ignoring this for a very long time, now. One might think you don't want to answer.

Clancie

14th August 2003, 11:45 AM

Posted by CFLarsen

What happens to those readings during the taping of CO that are longer than 11 minutes, neo?

You have been ignoring this for a very long time, now. One might think you don't want to answer.
Interestingly, Claus, yesterday's CO was basically a joint reading of two people--JE started it in the gallery and then continued with them on the sofa. Their reading lasted the entire 22 minutes (not including JE's brief intro and closing, and some highlights of their validation interviews).

So, in answer to your question...if the reading is longer than 11 minutes, there's apparently no reason they can't just go ahead and...use it.

TLN

14th August 2003, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by Clancie
Interestingly, Claus, yesterday's CO was basically a joint reading of two people--JE started in the gallery and then continued with them on the sofa. Their reading lasted the entire 22 minutes (not including JE's brief intro and closing, and some highlights of their validation interviews).

So, in answer to your question...if the reading is longer than 11 minutes, there's apparently no reason they can't just go ahead and...use it.

None of which is the topic of this thread.

Thanz

14th August 2003, 11:47 AM

Originally posted by TLN

Who said anything about cash, ever?
Well, I am not going to list "ever" as that is a LONG list.

But, here in this thread, I did, and Zep did. And I think that the cash reason is just as valid as any other for JE not to be tested. In fact, it is the root reason.

TLN

14th August 2003, 11:49 AM

Originally posted by Thanz
But, here in this thread, I did, and Zep did. And I think that the cash reason is just as valid as any other for JE not to be tested. In fact, it is the root reason.

If you're a self-serving scumbag, sure.

This is about science and answering very important questions about the nature of life and death. It's also about helping people, something Edward claims to care about.

It's not about money. Your objection is worthless.

neofight

14th August 2003, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by Thanz

Well, when have I ever demanded direct quotes or anything of that nature from you? Or Clancie? Or Steve? I have taken you at your word. I see no reason to not take Instg8r at his (her?) word.

Fair point, Thanz. You do not really demand quotes from anyone, at least not the way others here do. You do seem to be more interested in opinions, and why people believe what they do. I apologize, and withdraw my criticism. :) ......neo

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by Clancie

Interestingly, Claus, yesterday's CO was basically a joint reading of two people--JE started it in the gallery and then continued with them on the sofa. Their reading lasted the entire 22 minutes (not including JE's brief intro and closing, and some highlights of their validation interviews).

So, in answer to your question...if the reading is longer than 11 minutes, there's apparently no reason they can't just go ahead and...use it. [/B]

Ahh....I see you have taken me off "ignore" once again...! :)

OK, fine. They use a 22 minute reading? Fine! Excellent!

....what if it is longer? It can be, according to both Steve and neo.

You're not going to admit that the show is edited for content, are you?

Clancie

14th August 2003, 12:00 PM

Posted by TLN

None of which is the topic of this thread.
It might be nice if you addressed this remark to Claus as well, TLN. Especially since Claus was the one who brought up the question that you feel is guilty of derailing the thread. I only answered it for him.

jim_scotti

14th August 2003, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by TLN

This is about science and answering very important questions about the nature of life and death. It's also about helping people, something Edward claims to care about.

It's not about money. Your objection is worthless.

But JE's motivation is clearly about the money. If it weren't he'd do his readings at cost for the kinds of salaries the rest of us are making. To us, it may be about the science and the possibilities implied if his talent were real, but it is quite clearly not about that to JE himself.

Jim.

Thanz

14th August 2003, 12:04 PM

Originally posted by TLN
If you're a self-serving scumbag, sure.

This is about science and answering very important questions about the nature of life and death. It's also about helping people, something Edward claims to care about.

It's not about money. Your objection is worthless.
It's NOT about money? Are you serious? Of course it is about money. He doesn't do anything for free. He charges for the seminars, private readings, etc. He is in it for the money.

You started this thread with the question of why he hasn't been tested. I answered because he makes enough money not being tested, and probably would not gain much from being tested.

Why should Edward care if YOU (or other skeptics) believe him, or about science, or about answering questions to YOUR satisfaction about life and death? He already fulfills this function for a legion of fans who believe in him. To them, he already HAS answered questions about life and death, and he is helping people individually, one at a time. Why should he give a flying f*** if TLN doesn't believe him?

Further, it seems that he has been tested by the one guy who asked. And no, Claus, I don't consider your request to be on a par with Scwartz's, unless you are connected to a university and have a PhD. I can understand JE not bothering to be tested by some guy who emails him from Denmark.

I am not saying that the Schwartz tests prove anything about his alleged abilities. I am just saying that it should show something about his willingness to undergo testing.

jim_scotti

14th August 2003, 12:05 PM

Originally posted by CFLarsen

You're not going to admit that the show is edited for content, are you?

Whether he admits it or not, there is strong evidence that the shows are indeed edited for content, reference this article. (http://www.skeptic.com/newsworthy13.html) See particularly the comments of one Michael O'Neill, an audience member quoted therein.

Jim.

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 12:07 PM

Originally posted by Clancie
It might be nice if you addressed this remark to Claus as well, TLN. Especially since Claus was the one who brought up the question that you feel is guilty of derailing the thread. I only answered it for him.
Since you didn't answer it in the thread where it was brought up....:rolleyes:

Do you want to take this issue to a new thread, Clancie?

Thanz

14th August 2003, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by jim_scotti

Whether he admits it or not, there is strong evidence that the shows are indeed edited for content, reference this article. (http://www.skeptic.com/newsworthy13.html) See particularly the comments of one Michael O'Neill, an audience member quoted therein.

Jim.
Aw, crap. Now you've done it, Jim. You have mentioned O'Neill and provided a link to the Shermer article. I know that you are a newbie, and therefore don't know what has gone on before, but I don't think that I will shock you when I say that O'Neill and this article have been dissected to death by both sides.

I expect it to happen again here too, however. It is kind of hard to resist commenting on it when it comes up. But when this thread hits 15 pages, don't be surprised. :)

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by Thanz
And no, Claus, I don't consider your request to be on a par with Scwartz's, unless you are connected to a university and have a PhD. I can understand JE not bothering to be tested by some guy who emails him from Denmark.

Why not? What qualifies someone to conduct tests of paranormal phenomena?

If I can find an American person, "connected" to an American university and with a PhD, whom JE has not responded to favorably, will you admit that JE does not want to be tested?

Thanz

14th August 2003, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by CFLarsen

Why not? What qualifies someone to conduct tests of paranormal phenomena?

If I can find an American person, "connected" to an American university and with a PhD, whom JE has not responded to favorably, will you admit that JE does not want to be tested?
I don't know what minimum qualifications there may be. But if a PhD paranormal researcher wants to do tests at his university and is turned down, then I would certainly view that differently than some guy from Denmark. No offense intended. I am sure that I could expect the same response, just being some guy from Canada. I don't even edit a magazine.

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by Thanz

Aw, crap. Now you've done it, Jim. You have mentioned O'Neill and provided a link to the Shermer article. I know that you are a newbie, and therefore don't know what has gone on before, but I don't think that I will shock you when I say that O'Neill and this article have been dissected to death by both sides.

No, not "to death". It has, however, been proved that anyone who dares claim (even by insider information) that JE is not a real medium will be ignored, ridiculed, downplayed, etc.

We dismiss O'Neill, because his account is anecdotal? Then we have to dismiss each and every sitter from each and every show, too.

I can work with that. Question is, why can't the believers?

Oh, and...Thanz? I don't think you can qualify as an old-timer in this ongoing debate...you are very much a newbie... ;)

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by Thanz
I don't know what minimum qualifications there may be. But if a PhD paranormal researcher wants to do tests at his university and is turned down, then I would certainly view that differently than some guy from Denmark. No offense intended. I am sure that I could expect the same response, just being some guy from Canada. I don't even edit a magazine.

"No offense"? I'm sorry, but I have to object. Strongly.

You don't know what it takes, yet you reject me, because I am from Denmark? Just what is it about Danes that disqualify them from participating in this kind of research?

I resent this racist remark of yours, Thanz. Danes are not untermenschen.

I expect a full retraction and an apology.

renata

14th August 2003, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by CFLarsen

We dismiss O'Neill, because his account is anecdotal? Then we have to dismiss each and every sitter from each and every show, too.

Yes, and as Neo showed me that editing can misrepresent a show, we should dismiss Dateline. And, of course CO and boradcasts of seminar readings.

What do we have left, without anecdotal accounts and edited shows? Ahhh, yes the useless cold reading on LKL :)

Oh, and...Thanz? I don't think you can qualify as an old-timer in this ongoing debate...you are very much a newbie... ;)

No picking on Thanz! He at least gets my jokes! :D We are all newbies to something or other.

Darat

14th August 2003, 12:24 PM

Originally posted by neofight

But Darat, even if Doris Stokes has ultra-strong clairvoyance abilities, and is able to actually see all the spirits that come through for her clients, (and I'm not sure that is always the case)
that has little or nothing to do with what some other medium's abilities might be......neo

Of course - what is your point?

renata

14th August 2003, 12:24 PM

TLN

14th August 2003, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by Thanz
He is in it for the money.

Exactly, which is why he's not in it for the research, helping people, the good of all humanity, science, or any other reason. No, you're right Thanz, it's all about the money.

Next subject...

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 12:27 PM

Originally posted by renata
Yes, and as Neo showed me that editing can misrepresent a show, we should dismiss Dateline. And, of course CO and boradcasts of seminar readings.

What do we have left, without anecdotal accounts and edited shows? Ahhh, yes the useless cold reading on LKL :)

Which neo has summarily dismissed. And since neo has a very...shall we say, "plastic" memory, we can't even rely on that.

We can't use O'Neill's account? Then we have nothing.

Originally posted by renata
No picking on Thanz! He at least gets my jokes! :D We are all newbies to something or other.

Then, he shouldn't pose as something he is not.

Thanz

14th August 2003, 12:31 PM

Originally posted by CFLarsen

"No offense"? I'm sorry, but I have to object. Strongly.

You don't know what it takes, yet you reject me, because I am from Denmark? Just what is it about Danes that disqualify them from participating in this kind of research?

I resent this racist remark of yours, Thanz. Danes are not untermenschen.

I expect a full retraction and an apology.
You have misinterpreted what I have written. I called myself just some guy from Canada in the same post. Really, I just meant that JE is not going to know you from Adam and without some other qualification or association, like a PhD or backing of a University, I can understand why he would not respond to your requests to test him. Just as I would understand if he ignored me.

To put it in the strongest possible terms, I do not think that there is anything about Danes that would disqualify them from doing this kind of research, and I apologize if you took offense. None was intended. I do not know what "untermenschen" are, but I will take your word for it that Danes are not it.

In any event, the only possible relevance of Denmark in this question is travel. It would be harder, I imagine, for JE to fit a trip to Denmark into his schedule than to an American institution of higher learning. If nothing else, it gives him an easier excuse.

renata

14th August 2003, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by CFLarsen

Then, he shouldn't pose as something he is not.

I did not think he was! I think he was just tellin Jim_scottii that this topic has been brought up before, several times :)

Wait, there is a joke in here somewhere

A Canadian, a Russki and a Dane walk into a 22 page JE thread...

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by renata
I think Thanz meant that a request for a test from a US based research lab may carry more weight than a request from an unknown foreigner with no stated research credentials.

Dumb Dane.... :)

Not at all. Thanz did not mention the lack of my academic credentials. He only referred to me as a Dane.

I take offense at the term "foreigner". "Unknown", perhaps. "Foreigner" does not detract from my abilities.

What academic degree qualifies me to do paranormal research?

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 12:36 PM

Originally posted by Thanz
You have misinterpreted what I have written. I called myself just some guy from Canada in the same post. Really, I just meant that JE is not going to know you from Adam and without some other qualification or association, like a PhD or backing of a University, I can understand why he would not respond to your requests to test him. Just as I would understand if he ignored me.

Really? Since we don't know what qualifies someone to do paranormal research, I really don't see that as a hindrance.

Originally posted by Thanz
To put it in the strongest possible terms, I do not think that there is anything about Danes that would disqualify them from doing this kind of research, and I apologize if you took offense. None was intended. I do not know what "untermenschen" are, but I will take your word for it that Danes are not it.

Apology accepted.

Originally posted by Thanz
In any event, the only possible relevance of Denmark in this question is travel. It would be harder, I imagine, for JE to fit a trip to Denmark into his schedule than to an American institution of higher learning. If nothing else, it gives him an easier excuse.

Not at all. I travel to the US from time to time. I'm sure that JE goes somewhere at times, too. Cars, trains, and planes have been invented.

Thanz

14th August 2003, 12:37 PM

Originally posted by CFLarsen

Which neo has summarily dismissed. And since neo has a very...shall we say, "plastic" memory, we can't even rely on that.

We can't use O'Neill's account? Then we have nothing.
I think that we can use it, for what it is worth. We just can't accept it as gospel without some critical evaluation of it, that's all.

Then, he shouldn't pose as something he is not.
I simply meant a newbie to this forum. Although jim registered in 2001, he has only 17 posts, and the tone of his post led me to think that he has not been following this.

I have over 1200 posts, and while I would not consider myself an old timer in this debate, I have certainly seen a lot of debate about O'Neill on this board. That's all I was saying.

Sheesh.

renata

14th August 2003, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by CFLarsen

Not at all. Thanz did not mention the lack of my academic credentials. He only referred to me as a Dane.

I take offense at the term "foreigner". "Unknown", perhaps. "Foreigner" does not detract from my abilities.

What academic degree qualifies me to do paranormal research?

And Thanz mentioned himself in the same post, as someone from Canada!

Let me explain it to you this way- if I get a call about an investment opportunity, would I listen more to a professor at Harvard school of business or to a Claus Larsen from Denmark?

You may be emminently more qualified, but as people in the US are unaware of types of research done outside US, and qualification bestowed outside US, it would be more difficult to evaluate a request from outside the US. (I am not saying that is why JE has not answered, though)

Consider that our ego-centrism. If I asked an American to name 50 US universties, they could (University of Alabama,....University of Wyoming:)). If I asked them to name 50 universities outside US, they could not! Oxford, Cambridge, Sorbonne... that would probably be it.

I honestly think you are seeing offense where there was none.

Now... A Cranky Dane, Apologetic Canadian and Silly Russki walk into a 22 page JE thread....:)

Thanz

14th August 2003, 12:45 PM

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Really? Since we don't know what qualifies someone to do paranormal research, I really don't see that as a hindrance.
It doesn't matter what, objectively, a paranormal researcher needs to have. I don't know if JE would even be qualified to tell you. What matters is how a reasonable person would react to a request for testing. And a reasonable person, in my opinion, would view a request from someone with a PhD in psychology, parapsycology or perhaps physics and a connection with a respected University differently than a request from some guy who is just interested in the matter. I do not blame him for not responding to requests from people in the "some guy" category. I would be critical of refusing tests from the other type of people I mentioned.

Apology accepted.
Thank you. Thank you for pointing out your offense rather than stewing silently - I don't like to be thought of as rascist.

Not at all. I travel to the US from time to time. I'm sure that JE goes somewhere at times, too. Cars, trains, and planes have been invented.
I didn't say it was a GOOD excuse. I am just saying that it is easier for him to say that he is too busy if in order to do the tests he has to take out a couple of days just to travel, rather than working them in on a seminar tour or something.

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 12:47 PM

Clancie,

Thank you for that eloquent analysis. You have one more analysis in the works, which we are most anxious to learn about. But, in the absence of that, would you care to answer the questions put to you?

What if a reading is longer than 22 minutes? It can be, according to both Steve and neo.

You're not going to admit that the show is edited for content, are you?

Clancie

14th August 2003, 12:50 PM

Also, Claus, when you said you wanted to test Brian, you said you wouldn't go to him, that he would have to pay his own expenses to New York, etc.

I don't see why anyone would want to incur the expense of going to Denmark just to be tested by someone with no university credentials in this field and no published work in peer reviewed journals. If JE's going to be taking "scientific tests" they'd better be as respected within the scientific community as possible. I'm sure the time and expense and inconvenience wouldn't make participating in tests thought up by any guy from Canada, or Denmark or Cleveland Ohio worth pursuing just as a "fun hobby".

Whatever JE would do, it should have as much respect within the scientific community as possible, from the outset. That's even beyond just having a Ph.D, imo, and means someone who actually has a track record of peer reviewed scientific research in this field. There's no reason to bother with anyone else, if JE really wants to demonstrate scientifically that his abilities exist.

jim_scotti

14th August 2003, 12:50 PM

Originally posted by CFLarsen

Apology accepted.

Hehe... I was expecting the followup sentence as we hear the thump of a body on the deck: "...Captain Needa." :jedi: :roll:

Jim.

Clancie

14th August 2003, 12:52 PM

Posted by CFLarsen

What if a reading is longer than 22 minutes? It can be, according to both Steve and neo.

edited: Okay, I see you've changed the question. Yes, they would edit it (we could speculate whether for content or length) or use parts of it in different shows. Do we know for certain that such situations have happened? No.

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by Thanz
It doesn't matter what, objectively, a paranormal researcher needs to have. I don't know if JE would even be qualified to tell you. What matters is how a reasonable person would react to a request for testing. And a reasonable person, in my opinion, would view a request from someone with a PhD in psychology, parapsycology or perhaps physics and a connection with a respected University differently than a request from some guy who is just interested in the matter. I do not blame him for not responding to requests from people in the "some guy" category. I would be critical of refusing tests from the other type of people I mentioned.

But, if academic degrees matter, which academic degrees? Would a Ph.D. in chemistry be qualified?

Originally posted by Thanz
I didn't say it was a GOOD excuse. I am just saying that it is easier for him to say that he is too busy if in order to do the tests he has to take out a couple of days just to travel, rather than working them in on a seminar tour or something.

Hey, I'm flexible. But, it does seem as if JE is very allergic to real research.

TLN

14th August 2003, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by CFLarsen
What if a reading is longer than 22 minutes? It can be, according to both Steve and neo.

You're not going to admit that the show is edited for content, are you?

Let's get this thread back on track while simultaneously putting this issue to rest:

Anything that takes place on "Crossing Over" is unequivocally worthless in determining if Edward is actually speaking to dead people.

Anything that takes place on "Larry King Live" is unequivocally worthless in determining if Edward is actually speaking to dead people.

The only thing that matters is empirical data.

Where

Is

It?

renata

14th August 2003, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by Clancie

Whatever JE would do, it should have as much respect within the scientific community as possible, from the outset. That's even beyond just having a Ph.D, imo, and means someone who actually has a track record of peer reviewed scientific research in this field. There's no reason to bother with anyone else, if JE really wants to demonstrate scientifically that his abilities exist.

Ahhh, therein lies the conundrum. Is there such thing as respected peer reviewed research in mediumship? :)

Problem is, any skeptic would likely be rejected for this very reason! So we only have Schwartzes of this world :)

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by Clancie
Did you read my post about this?

Yesterday's show the reading lasted the entire time. So...one thing that happens if it goes over 11 minutes is....they use it.

Thank you for not answering the question:

What happens to a reading that lasts more than 22 minutes?

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 01:00 PM

Clancie

14th August 2003, 01:00 PM

Posted by renata

Problem is, any skeptic would likely be rejected for this very reason! So we only have Schwartzes of this world
I don't think we know that for certain, renata. In fact, I would think parapsychology would be a great field for a skeptic to get into, and do research in.

It's a perfect field for a skeptic, imo, and I don't see why well done research results wouldn't be published in reputable journals (particularly as we're assuming for the sake of argument, that the results would be showing that there is no basis for the claim).

renata

14th August 2003, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by Clancie

I don't think we know that for certain, renata. In fact, I would think parapsychology would be a great field for a skeptic to get into, and do research in.

It's a perfect field for a skeptic, imo, and I don't see why well done research results wouldn't be published in reputable journals (particularly as we're assuming for the sake of argument, that the results would be showing that there is no basis for the claim).

OK, name 5 scientists that satisfy criteria you listed: PHD, University lab, track record of peer reviewed scientific research in this field.

If a scientist's track record was of disproving paranormal phenomena, do you really think JE would agree to be tested by them?

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by Clancie
Also, Claus, when you said you wanted to test Brian, you said you wouldn't go to him, that he would have to pay his own expenses to New York, etc.

The reason I did not go to see Brian was because Valyou insisted on knowing my personal info.

I expect you to provide the full threads for evidence.

Originally posted by Clancie
I don't see why anyone would want to incur the expense of going to Denmark just to be tested by someone with no university credentials in this field and no published work in peer reviewed journals. If JE's going to be taking "scientific tests" they'd better be as respected within the scientific community as possible. I'm sure the time and expense and inconvenience wouldn't make participating in tests thought up by any guy from Canada, or Denmark or Cleveland Ohio worth pursuing just as a "fun hobby".

As I said, I'm flexible, and I travel to the US from time to time. And I take offense at your characterization of SkepticReport being a "fun hobby". Next objection?

Originally posted by Clancie
Whatever JE would do, it should have as much respect within the scientific community as possible, from the outset. That's even beyond just having a Ph.D, imo, and means someone who actually has a track record of peer reviewed scientific research in this field. There's no reason to bother with anyone else, if JE really wants to demonstrate scientifically that his abilities exist.

Who?

Originally posted by Clancie
edited: Okay, I see you've changed the question. Yes, they would edit it (we could speculate whether for content or length) or use parts of it in different shows. Do we know for certain that such situations have happened? No.

What?? I did not change the question! Will you stop lying, please?

Thank you for - finally - acknowledging that the shows are, indeed, edited for both time and content.

That means that we do not see everything that happens.

Progress.

Originally posted by Clancie
I don't think we know that for certain, renata. In fact, I would think parapsychology would be a great field for a skeptic to get into, and do research in.

We do.

Originally posted by Clancie
It's a perfect field for a skeptic, imo, and I don't see why well done research results wouldn't be published in reputable journals (particularly as we're assuming for the sake of argument, that the results would be showing that there is no basis for the claim).

That is what is happening, Clancie. Read Skeptic Magazine. Read what CSICOP publishes. Open your eyes.

voidx

14th August 2003, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by neofight
Voidx, JE is a "mental" medium, as opposed to a full trance medium, or a physical medium. But I'd just like to stress that even among several different mental mediums, all of whom work in basically the same manner as JE, i.e. with symbols etc., you will still find varying degrees of the different types of psychic abilities. There is no "cookie cutter" stereotype medium really as far as I can tell.
And that's the problem, at least your admitting now that their methods are inconsistent even with each other. If this is a process' of any kind I find it hard to believe that the process is subjective, to however each medium wants to decide it will work.

I don't think JE has ever put a specific time limit on how long a reading can go, voidx. He simply explains that it takes an inordinate amount of effort on both the medium's and the spirit's part to accomplish this feat, and that it can indeed be quite draining.

Again, more so for some I would guess, than for others. British medium Brian Hurst only does a few group sessions here and there, and I believe George Anderson also finds that he does not have the energy to do them on a daily basis. I'm sure that after a "CO" taping or seminar event, when the adrenalin rush is over, JE is pretty beat as well......neo

Thanks for establishing that you in fact haven't read the 2 different posts in varying threads in which I've discussed this quote:

Posted by Instig8r::
Here is an excerpt from "One Last Time", written by John Edward (and posted by Neo over at TVTalk last year):

"All of us--we in physical bodies and those in the spirit world--are made up of energy expressed as atoms and molecules spinning and vibrating at certain speeds. The energy of spirits vibrates at a very high rate, while ours goes much slower because we are in physical bodies. How we bridge the gap dictates how well communications traverse these two dimensions. That's the job of a medium.

For spirits to come through, they must slow their vibrational rate of energy. Think of the blades on a helicopter. You can't see that there are four of them because they are spinning too fast. That's how I view the energy of the spirits. What happens during a reading is that as the spirits slow down their energies, I speed mine up. Communication is what happens in that space in between. But because there is that space, that gap, communication is never easy and rarely clear. There is also the fact that spirits no longer have physical bodies to facilitate communication. They have no tongues or vocal cords to pronounce words. Instead, through their energies, they place thoughts and sights and sounds in my mind. I am their mouthpiece. Though I expected to hear a great voice from beyond when I first started this work, I soon realized that it is my own voice I hear--but their thoughts and feelings.

Because both sides must expend so much energy to make this happen, the communication is very difficult and can't be sustained for more than a few minutes. To switch metaphors, it's as if you have to go to the bottom of a twelve-foot-deep swimming pool to meet your loved one. You can do it, but it takes a lot of energy to get there and after a few seconds, you have to float back to the top for air."
Care to comment on this neo? You say you guess it might be harder for some than others, so you don't know, but right here JE explains to us just how hard it is...so draining it cannot be sustained for more than a matter of minutes. Now if he reads longer than that fine, but then lets acknowledge that he made the crap above up, or at least is inconsisten with how he describes his abilities, and how he actually uses them. Here's the link to the thread:
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24602&perpage=40&pagenumber=9)

Well, speaking for myself, the reason that I do not consider the LKL transcripts representative is because in most JE readings, the initial up-front time is spent in ascertaining exactly which spirit is coming through, and who that is in relation to the sitter. So it's usually not until that is established that the real validations begin to come through.

Obviously then, these short phone readings do not allow too much time for this. Sometimes it's not even enough time for one spirit to make itself known and say all it wants to say, let alone for the multiple energies that come through in an average JE reading.......neo [/B]
I've touched on this point before, almost all of JE's information is in regard to just identifying which spirit he's talking too. All the hits are just personal information that would verify that we are indeed talking to "Uncle Sal". No significant message is ever passed on. They relate a personal tidbit of information, and the SITTER validates it and assumes whatever message they want. People need to acknowledge this. And yet again its a major kink in this whole process, the fact that the sitter is required to validate the reading, to validate the "meaning". They already know what they want to hear their relative say, by JE identifying them, they can then assume almost whatever they want. So when you say the phone readings don't allow much time for this, thats also bull. Its shown that JE does get hits on names and other identifying personal information, its just nothing special, its outnumbered by his misses, and its equal to cold reading. But he has to fish for them, giving him more time gives him more time to read body language, to refine his guess' to toss out more info for the sitter to possibly validate. I'll acknowledge your explanation if its all paranormal and he needs more time to connect, if you'll acknowledge mine if he's cold reading and just needs more time to hone in on the sitter, because its 6 of one and half dozen of the other.

Clancie

14th August 2003, 01:40 PM

Claus,

Wow, you got a lot of things wrong in your post.
Posted by CFLarsen

The reason I did not go to see Brian was because Valyou insisted on knowing my personal info.
Apples and oranges and totally inaccurate. I'm not talking about you coming to Brian's LA readings AT ALL. I'm talking about you asking Brian to be tested by you at his own expense in New York.
Posted by CFLarsen

. And I take offense at your characterization of SkepticReport being a "fun hobby".
Wrong again. I never referred to your "Skeptic Report", fun or otherwise. I was referring to it not being a "fun hobby" for JE to go all over at his own expense everytime someone, some place, feels like"testing" him. I think my point was clear-- he should be sure the testing is scientifically credible before spending time on it, that participating takes time and energy and is inconvenient--that its not just a "fun hobby" for him.

Nothing about the Skeptic Report whatsoever, Claus. As you're so fond of saying, "It's not all about you."
Posted by CFLarsen

What?? I did not change the question! Will you stop lying, please?

Yes, you changed it. Originally you referred to "11 minutes". I thought you had repeated that, but you'd changed it to "22 minutes" apparently in response to my recent post.
Posted by CFLarsen
Thank you for - finally - acknowledging that the shows are, indeed, edited for both time and content.
I did not acknowledge this. Yes, they are edited. No, we don't know that its for time and content (i.e. to make JE look better).
Posted by CFLarsen

That is what is happening, Clancie. Read Skeptic Magazine. Read what CSICOP publishes. Open your eyes.
Well, from the discussion of Shermer's cold reading article, I thought I was the only one reading Skeptic magazine. :rolleyes: (And that is what CSICOP publishes). I notice you didn't comment on Shermer's article as if you'd read it. Did you?

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 01:53 PM

Originally posted by Clancie
Wow, you got a lot of things wrong in your post.

It's always somebody else, isn't it? :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Clancie
Apples and oranges and totally inaccurate. I'm not talking about you coming to Brian's LA readings AT ALL. I'm talking about you asking Brian to be tested by you at his own expense in New York.

I see. Which he declined, remember? For what reasons? Why are you so reluctant to tell the whole story?

Originally posted by Clancie
Wrong again. I referred to it not being a "fun hobby" for JE to go all over at his own expense everytime someone, some place, felt like "testing" him. I think my point was clear: he should be sure the testing is scientifically credible before spending time on it.

By people of what academic quality? Has he ever said anything about that?

Originally posted by Clancie
Nothing about the Skeptic Report whatsoever, Claus. As you're so fond of saying, "It's not all about you."

It sure isn't. I am just a bit confused why you seem to make it a personal issue, e.g. constantly putting me on ignore, then changing that decision.

Originally posted by Clancie
Yes, you changed it. Originally you referred to "11 minutes". I thought you had repeated that, but you'd changed it to "22 minutes" apparently in response to my recent post.

No, no, no....an average show consists of about 11 minutes of readings. So, a reading that takes longer...what then? It takes more than 22 minutes? What happens to that?

Originally posted by Clancie
I did not acknowledge this. Yes, they are edited. No, we don't know time and content.

But, if a reading consists of more than 22 minutes of pure, unadulterated content, then what? This never happens? It does, according to both Steve and neo.

Do you reject their testimonies, Clancie?

Originally posted by Clancie
Well, from the discussion of Shermer's cold reading article, I thought I was the only one reading Skeptic magazine. :rolleyes: (And that is what CSICOP publishes). I notice you didn't comment on Shermer's article as if you'd read it. Did you?

Stop changing the subject. Let's focus on what really is essential:

What happens to a reading that takes longer than the actual time slot of a CO show?

Do you know for a fact that this never happens?

Do you know for a fact that the full reading (content-wise) will be shown in a subsequent show?

I'm guessing here: You don't. So how can you be so sure that the show is not edited for content?

voidx

14th August 2003, 01:58 PM

Originally posted by TLN

Let's get this thread back on track while simultaneously putting this issue to rest:

Anything that takes place on "Crossing Over" is unequivocally worthless in determining if Edward is actually speaking to dead people.

Anything that takes place on "Larry King Live" is unequivocally worthless in determining if Edward is actually speaking to dead people.

The only thing that matters is empirical data.

Where

Is

It?
Simply TLN its no where. We have none, the only testing as far as anyone here can tell me that JE has been involved in is the Schwartz experiments which everyone seems to agree are suspect. So we're left sifting through transcripts which I agree aren't objective in proving his abilities, and spinning our wheels all day long.

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 01:58 PM

Clancie,

I have to ask you not to edit your posts so much. It makes it virtually impossible to know what you are saying.

Make up your mind what you want to say. Then say it.

And stand by it.

Clancie

14th August 2003, 02:58 PM

Posted by CFLarsen

Clancie,

I have to ask you not to edit your posts so much. It makes it virtually impossible to know what you are saying.
I like to re-read my posts, correct the formatting, etc. Sometimes it takes a minute or two.

Your "problem" will be solved, Claus, if you just wait, oh, two or three minutes before starting to respond. That shouldn't be too hard to do. :rolleyes:

neofight

14th August 2003, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by Thanz

Aw, crap. Now you've done it, Jim. You have mentioned O'Neill and provided a link to the Shermer article. I know that you are a newbie, and therefore don't know what has gone on before, but I don't think that I will shock you when I say that O'Neill and this article have been dissected to death by both sides.

I expect it to happen again here too, however. It is kind of hard to resist commenting on it when it comes up. But when this thread hits 15 pages, don't be surprised. :)

lol Thanz. I'll take a pass on this, since I just responded to it on the other thread where Jim mentioned it. :) .......neo

neofight

14th August 2003, 04:58 PM

neofight

14th August 2003, 05:12 PM

Originally posted by Darat

Of course - what is your point?

No point, I guess, since you put it that way. :D I just thought, from this quote..........

A web search will find many other examples that if they could do what they claim to be able to do mediums should be able to bring across a lot more specific information then they seem able to do...

.....that you were suggesting that all mediums should be able to bring across a lot more specific information than they seem able to do. Since not all mediums claim the same things,
you obviously then meant that "some" mediums, i.e., the ones that claim to be able to do these things, should be able to bring across a lot more specific information than they seem able to do. I understand. Got it. :) .....neo

neofight

14th August 2003, 05:29 PM

Originally posted by Clancie

edited: Okay, I see you've changed the question. Yes, they would edit it (we could speculate whether for content or length) or use parts of it in different shows. Do we know for certain that such situations have happened? No. [/B]

Clancie, I don't think they've ever broken up a long reading and used it in two different shows, except in cases of a follow-up segment. Do you remember the "Tarnished Silver" reading? There was a young man who was killed in a motorcycle accident that JE brought through to his mom and two sisters in the gallery.

It was a good reading, and one of the sisters, the one I exchange e-mails with who works in law enforcement on Long Island, posted that there was a lot more to her family's reading that she would have loved to have had included in the show that aired, but it was cut out because of time restraints, even though she said there were many good hits in what was cut.....neo

RSLancastr

14th August 2003, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Graham Bishop, currently "operating" in Denmark, also speaks to and hears mediums. Sometimes, he has to tell them not to be so loud! Is Graham Bishop dead? Otherwise, his ability to speak to and hear mediums isn't so impressive.

neofight

14th August 2003, 05:33 PM

Just to be clear, this particular reading was not the only reading to be aired on that half-hour show. They cut out usable tape so that they could fit at least two readings within that 22 minutes of program time.....neo

neofight

14th August 2003, 06:17 PM

Originally posted by voidx

And that's the problem, at least your admitting now that their methods are inconsistent even with each other. If this is a process' of any kind I find it hard to believe that the process is subjective, to however each medium wants to decide it will work.

Voidx, I don't think I agree with your characterization that if this is indeed a true process, that it cannot be subjective. It's highly subjective. And I disagree with you even more if you are assuming that it's however each medium wants to decide it will work". I don't think the medium "decides" how it will work at all. It just works however it works. I don't know how much of this the medium can actually control, if anything.

Thanks for establishing that you in fact haven't read the 2 different posts in varying threads in which I've discussed this quote:

Entirely untrue, Voidx. If it's a thread that I've posted on, you can be fairly sure that I've read all the posts. I like this stuff. The excerpt you quoted, was re-posted here at JREF by Instig8R, but it was originally typed from the book by me, and posted by me over at tvtalkshows.

Care to comment on this neo? You say you guess it might be harder for some than others, so you don't know, but right here JE explains to us just how hard it is...so draining it cannot be sustained for more than a matter of minutes. Now if he reads longer than that fine, but then lets acknowledge that he made the crap above up, or at least is inconsisten with how he describes his abilities, and how he actually uses them.

Sure, I'll comment on it. Voidx, I think you are not taking into consideration that the average JE reading does not, I repeat, does NOT, consist of merely one spirit energy coming through, but several. So your criticism makes no sense to me. If the reading is twenty minutes, it's not twenty minutes with only the one spirit coming through. Capisce?

I've touched on this point before, almost all of JE's information is in regard to just identifying which spirit he's talking too. All the hits are just personal information that would verify that we are indeed talking to "Uncle Sal". No significant message is ever passed on.

We definitely disagee on that one! JE has passed on many significant messages, including advising a young woman to see the grief counselor on the set, because he was told by her dead fiance that she had been considering suicide, which she admitted was indeed true. There are plenty of good examples of important messages.

They relate a personal tidbit of information, and the SITTER validates it and assumes whatever message they want. People need to acknowledge this. And yet again its a major kink in this whole process, the fact that the sitter is required to validate the reading, to validate the "meaning".

I have ackknowledged on a regular basis that John simply passes on to the sitter whatever image he gets, and the sitter is the one who applies it to themselves, and let's everyone know what it means to them. Yes. I acknowledge that. Some messages are more clear to him than others, but still, John only sees the image. Only the sitter knows precisely how it applies to themselves. Yes. You call this a major kink in the process. In any case, it is what it is. A kink to you, a reality of mental mediumship to others.

They already know what they want to hear their relative say, by JE identifying them, they can then assume almost whatever they want.

Many times the sitters are very surprised by who comes through, Voidx, and are not always happy to be hearing from people whom they did not even like or get along with in life. It doesn't stop them from coming through, though, and the sitters certainly didn't know what they wanted to hear from these people, because in truth, they didn't even want to hear from them at all. :confused:

I'll acknowledge your explanation if its all paranormal and he needs more time to connect, if you'll acknowledge mine if he's cold reading and just needs more time to hone in on the sitter, because its 6 of one and half dozen of the other.

Done. Consider it acknowledged then. ;) ......neo

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 10:33 PM

Originally posted by neofight
Clancie, I don't think they've ever broken up a long reading and used it in two different shows, except in cases of a follow-up segment. Do you remember the "Tarnished Silver" reading? There was a young man who was killed in a motorcycle accident that JE brought through to his mom and two sisters in the gallery.

It was a good reading, and one of the sisters, the one I exchange e-mails with who works in law enforcement on Long Island, posted that there was a lot more to her family's reading that she would have loved to have had included in the show that aired, but it was cut out because of time restraints, even though she said there were many good hits in what was cut.....neo

Originally posted by neofight
Just to be clear, this particular reading was not the only reading to be aired on that half-hour show. They cut out usable tape so that they could fit at least two readings within that 22 minutes of program time.....neo

So, the show is edited for content. Progress.

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 10:40 PM

Originally posted by RSLancastr
Is Graham Bishop dead? Otherwise, his ability to speak to and hear mediums isn't so impressive.
Nope, he's alive. His readings are dead, though.

CFLarsen

14th August 2003, 10:52 PM

Summing up:

TVTalkshows, "The "Self-Deluded" Explanation"
(neofight) 64.12.105.44 05-24-2002 10:22 PM
(Cantata)
"In that case, shouldn't you criticize people who believe in JE but haven't seen his performances live? Remember that the shows are edited for content and do not give the full picture."

That's a blatant misstatement, Cantata. The shows are most decidedly NOT edited for content. Talk about a reason to cricitize someone! Here you have NEVER been to the show or to a seminar, and you so cavalierly presume to make such a statement without any personal knowledge whatsoever. Maybe you should examine yourself for hypocrisy, Cantata. You are outrageous!

Besides, many of us who HAVE gone to John Edward seminars have posted on these threads, and have verified that a seminar is not any different from "Crossing Over" except for the fact that the dead air is edited out. Even Instg8R, who is no believer and writes scathing critiques of JE, admitted after seeing him at Westbury that the editing for content criticism is a non-issue. You are indeed a "sloppy skeptic" I am sorry to have to say.
(TVTalkshows)

"Edward says he likes to let his Crossing Over audience in on the fact that he makes mistakes--he contends that the program is edited for time, but never for content. "
www.citypaper.com/2000-10-25/tv.html

We now know that:

The shows are most decidedly edited for content.
The seminars are most decidedly edited for content, as well as making the hits look better.

Both by your own admission, neo. Good to see that you can admit your errors.

We also know that JE is lying about the shows being edited for content. They are.

You had this to say about me:

You are totally unreasonable in your accusations, and are not at all an honest debater. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, the same way you