Lisa Williams: Life among the dead

[h0mesch00led]

Has anyone seen this show on Lifetime? Does anyone know of her? I am trying to seek more information about her. I've seen one episode and I was blown away...

[DouglasL]

I watched one show. Lisa Williams is a complete fraud. She just uses "cold reading" to work her scam.

[Puppycow]

I just downloaded the show on iTunes (it was free) to watch on my new Ipod purchased today. :D

I haven't seen much American TV in years so I'm kind of TV starved now. I don't even have to watch to know she's a fraud. I could figure that out from the blurb. Also downloaded America's Psychic Challenge.

[Puppycow]

Has anyone seen this show on Lifetime? Does anyone know of her? I am trying to seek more information about her. I've seen one episode and I was blown away...

When you say blown away, you don't mean like you believe it, do you?

[Puppycow]

I watched half of the show this morning on my train to work before deciding I had better uses for my time. Cold reading is really pretty boring to watch.

Also, the editing process likely cut out all her misses and emphasised the hits.
Whole readings that didn't go well could have been cut, as well as portions of the readings that worked.

Anyway, why would dead spirits communicate in such a vague way? Why wouldn't they say exactly who they are and something unmistakably specific?

[Tim4848]

That is a good question, did they edit her mistakes and after so many tries, she got the name right. How do you find out such information?

[Puppycow]

That is a good question, did they edit her mistakes and after so many tries, she got the name right. How do you find out such information?

To me it's common sense that they edited it to make it look as convincing as possible by picking and choosing footage. They want to maximize ratings, and to do that they have to convince veiwers that she's really communicating with dead people. How could it be otherwise? Like I said, cold reading is pretty boring to watch if you know what is really happening.

[DouglasL]

That is a good question, did they edit her mistakes and after so many tries, she got the name right. How do you find out such information?


She just kept guessing names until she got a name the other person recognized. Then you edit out all of the wrong guesses. The other person (the one she is cold reading) will say something to the effect of "How did you know that name?" and believes Lisa is talking to their dead relative. The real answer is Lisa just guessed and kept guessing until she got a "hit".

[FramerDave]

I'm not inclined to waste my time watching the show, but I've seen quite a few ads for it whilst watching Will and Grace. The one that really galled me I saw this morning.

Against a background of old pictures of royalty and pomp the voiceover went something like: "During the early years of Queen Elizabeth's (II) reign, so-and-so guided her through the transition after her coronation while channeling the spirit of Queen Victoria. Now her granddaughter Lisa Williams blah blah blah..."

I wonder if Buckingham Palace might have any comment on this.

[FramerDave]

Ok, this is bugging me. I'd really like to see if I could get some sort of official reply as to the claims that she was a confidant and advisor to Queen Elizabeth II. I've checked the official website of the monarchy for contact information.

I could email Her Majesty directly, but I don't care to be so presumptuous. I'm quite sure it would be answered by and aide (if at all) but something tells me it would fall between the cracks just due to sheer volume.

The contacts for the Press Office, Public Relations and the Archivist are all by telephone or snail mail. I don't care to spend a fortune on international calls or wait forever for mail. Anyone have contacts or ideas I haven't thought of?

[Tim4848]

To me it's common sense that they edited it to make it look as convincing as possible by picking and choosing footage. They want to maximize ratings, and to do that they have to convince veiwers that she's really communicating with dead people. How could it be otherwise? Like I said, cold reading is pretty boring to watch if you know what is really happening.

I don't like to assume when it comes to other people talents, but I do know her new season comes on tonight.

http://www.lifetimetv.com/on-tv/shows/lisa-williams

[shalomsteph]

Thanks for the heads up on the free iTunes download. I am downloading it now and will watch when I am bored with the Britney gossip, I guess. (She is below Britney on my rubbish bin, but above Amy Winehouse)

[lister]

Never heard of Lisa Williams, but I did get this email from PalTalk yesterday:

Dear Paltalker,

Join us every Friday at 10pm EDT for a live weekly chat with Lifetime Television's Lisa Williams, a medium and clairvoyant who will be speaking with the dead and taking your live questions!

Lisa Williams is the star of the Lifetime Television show "Lisa Williams: Life Among the Dead" which airs on Lifetime Television every Friday at 9pm.

Room: Lifetime Presents Lisa Williams
Date: Every Friday starting October 12th
Time: 10:00pm EDT/7:00pm PST

Lisa Williams is a gifted Medium and Clairvoyant. She has the ability to communicate with loved ones and give clear accurate messages from those whom have passed on to the "other side."

Now I've only ever used Paltalk extremely briefly so not sure how these things work, but is there any way we could join in the fun? ;)

[baron]

All "psychics" are fraudulent or deluded, without exception.

[Tim4848]

Never heard of Lisa Williams, but I did get this email from PalTalk yesterday:



Now I've only ever used Paltalk extremely briefly so not sure how these things work, but is there any way we could join in the fun? ;)

Great minds think a like, I was thinking about doing that as well, but I wonder how hard it is to get through to ask some good questions?

[Tim4848]

All "psychics" are fraudulent or deluded, without exception.

I agree with you on past mediums, but I am not so sure about this lady, she seams to have a gift that can be measured, and she is not a fraid to take it to the house, maybe even your house.

[thaiboxerken]

These type of paltalk shows are heavily moderated. It's likely a skeptical question will be ignored, deleted or censored.

[baron]

I agree with you on past mediums, but I am not so sure about this lady, she seams to have a gift that can be measured, and she is not a fraid to take it to the house, maybe even your house.

She's just a better quality of fraud. Perhaps she's learned from the numerous mistakes of her peers and has adjusted her act accordingly. I'm all for making assessments on the basis of evidence, but if ten million psychics are proved to be frauds then I'm not about to waste my time investigating the ten million and first.

[sophia8]

I'm not inclined to waste my time watching the show, but I've seen quite a few ads for it whilst watching Will and Grace. The one that really galled me I saw this morning.

Against a background of old pictures of royalty and pomp the voiceover went something like: "During the early years of Queen Elizabeth's (II) reign, so-and-so guided her through the transition after her coronation while channeling the spirit of Queen Victoria. Now her granddaughter Lisa Williams blah blah blah..."

I wonder if Buckingham Palace might have any comment on this.According to Williams, her grandmother was "famous English psychic Frances Glazebrooke" who was "psychic medium to the British royal family and other notable people".
In the 1970s, I was an active Spiritualist in the UK and training to be a medium; I heard and read of many mediums who claimed to be giving psychic sessions to royalty, pop stars and other famous people. But I never heard of this woman.
Checking Google for Frances/Francis Glazebrooke/Glazebrook only brings up variations of Williams' claim. You'd thing that such a well-known psychic would have something written about her somewhere.
ETA: Or even have her name spelled right.

[Tim4848]

According to Williams, her grandmother was "famous English psychic Frances Glazebrooke" who was "psychic medium to the British royal family and other notable people".
In the 1970s, I was an active Spiritualist in the UK and training to be a medium; I heard and read of many mediums who claimed to be giving psychic sessions to royalty, pop stars and other famous people. But I never heard of this woman.
Checking Google for Frances/Francis Glazebrooke/Glazebrook only brings up variations of Williams' claim. You'd thing that such a well-known psychic would have something written about her somewhere.
ETA: Or even have her name spelled right.

Now that would be a good question for somebody to ask her on Friday night, when she is answering anybody questions.

You can only assume, until you get the right information, anything else is just a cop out of the topic at hand.

[genshi]

Ugh, she's on the morning news, KTLA 5 (Los Angeles) right now. She is claiming that the recently deceased Merv Griffin (who gave her her own TV show) literally appears in front of her visually and talks with her often! He apparently gives her advice on her show.

One of the anchor people just asked (in a somewhat skeptical way thankfully) "So, uh, you physically will see a guy pop up in front of you?" she answers gleefully with "Yeah, normally they'd walk through the walls and go 'Hi', but yeah, they'll just pop up anywhere."

Wow, just... wow. How can the "news" give time and credibility to something like this? I just don't get it.

[eir_de_scania]

Checking Google for Frances/Francis Glazebrooke/Glazebrook only brings up variations of Williams' claim. You'd thing that such a well-known psychic would have something written about her somewhere.
ETA: Or even have her name spelled right.
It only goes to show mediums can't get names right, even if it's their own granny. ;)

[sophia8]

She's a Brit who's basically unknown here. Yet she's living in America, with her own TV show. How did she get her Green Card?

Oh right, her granny arranged it.....

[NobbyNobbs]

According to Williams, her grandmother was "famous English psychic Frances Glazebrooke" who was "psychic medium to the British royal family and other notable people".
In the 1970s, I was an active Spiritualist in the UK and training to be a medium; I heard and read of many mediums who claimed to be giving psychic sessions to royalty, pop stars and other famous people. But I never heard of this woman.
Checking Google for Frances/Francis Glazebrooke/Glazebrook only brings up variations of Williams' claim. You'd thing that such a well-known psychic would have something written about her somewhere.
ETA: Or even have her name spelled right.


According to wikipedia, a Sir Richard Tetley Glazebrook, a physicist from Liverpool. was president of the Physical Society early last century. In 1883, he married Frances Gertrude Atkinson. They had a son and three daughters.

Atkinson, eh? I wonder if Rowan is a relative of hers as well.....

[sophia8]

According to wikipedia, a Sir Richard Tetley Glazebrook, a physicist from Liverpool. was president of the Physical Society early last century. In 1883, he married Frances Gertrude Atkinson. They had a son and three daughters.Interesting idea, but the dates don't fit - William's Granny Frances was alive well into the 1970s.
Sir Richard could possibly have been a great-grandparent; but if so, I can't imagine Williams would pass up the chance to boast about it on her show: "And now my great-grandfather, the famous physicist Sir Richard Glazebrooke, will shortly be here to tell us how quantum physics prove the afterlife!"

[Elizabeth I]

What's with the bloomers she apparently seems to be wearing in the promos for her show? Doesn't she have any real pants?

[Azrael 5]

The nice thing with claims of being "in " with the Royal Family,is that they would never comment on it one way or the other.
If for some odd reason they did have involvement with Granny Frances,they are hardly likely to admit it.

[Tim4848]

Thank you for reading my thoughts,

Did you see her show tonight?

She appeared in a one on one with an audience, so I doubt it is the type of situation whee she has retakes, so there must not be any editing.

Every week she is getting better, and every week she is adding weight to My topic "The Department of Positive Out of Body Possibilities", if it keeps going like this, it won't be long where we all can talk to out of body afterlife in a way that can be measured. Everything in life takes it's allotted amount of time, but break through like this, is just perfect timing, and we will all be better for it in the long run.

Thank you,
Tim

[sophia8]

The nice thing with claims of being "in " with the Royal Family,is that they would never comment on it one way or the other.
If for some odd reason they did have involvement with Granny Frances,they are hardly likely to admit it.
It's a tactic that's been used by mediums since at least Helen Duncan's time:
"She gave personal readings to the Prime Minister, and to the King!"
"But there's no proof - there's nothing about seances recorded in their diaries or letters or biographies..."
"Well, of course these people would keep quiet about seeing a medium! So of course there would be nothing written down!"

It's odd how mediums don't see that this tactic diminishes their credibility even further. Besides the ridiculous "no proof equals proof" idea, it's pretty well reinforcing the fact that most people are embarrassed about admitting to visiting a medium. It would be much better for their rep if they admitted that Prime Ministers and Royalty simply don't move in the same social circles as mediums and their clients.

[Skeptic Guy]

Thank you for reading my thoughts,

Did you see her show tonight?

She appeared in a one on one with an audience, so I doubt it is the type of situation whee she has retakes, so there must not be any editing.

Every week she is getting better, and every week she is adding weight to My topic "The Department of Positive Out of Body Possibilities", if it keeps going like this, it won't be long where we all can talk to out of body afterlife in a way that can be measured. Everything in life takes it's allotted amount of time, but break through like this, is just perfect timing, and we will all be better for it in the long run.

Thank you,
Tim

Mmmm, hmmmm....

Perhaps it's just that every week the editing is getting better?

[RSLancastr]

Perhaps it's just that every week the editing is getting better?Or perhaps the hot-reading does.

[Skeptic Guy]

That would suggest that she is resorting to trickery, good sir! I am SURE you are not suggesting that?! ;)

[RC]

Hello,

I have not posted in quite some time. I used to be a firm believer in mediumship. Now I'm more or less on the fence and have lost a lot of interest in the subject. I came to believe that even if mediumship does exist, the information that is given is too vague and too similar to cold reading to prove to me without a reasonable doubt that it is truly coming from spirit. In my opinion, that makes it useless.

I did stumble across Lisa's show a few weeks ago and have now seen about 5 episodes. I find the overwhelming majority of her readings to be obvious (and not even good) cold reading. She starts with extremely vague info (mother figure, or a grandmother, you were daddy's little girl, who had cancer). Suddenly the info gets pretty specific once it is given to her by the sitter. She always takes the sitter's response and says "because that's what they're telling me......".

For example:

Lisa: Is there a brother or a brotherlike figure in spirit?
Sitter: Yes, my brother
Lisa: Because that's what they're telling me, they keep saying "I'm brother".

Yesterday, I saw a reading in which she tried to bring through the sitter's mother after the sitter said she had cancer. The sitter had to tell Lisa that mom was still alive, but very sick. Without missing a beat, Lisa turned it around and pretended like she knew it all along.

It is all so patently obvious.

I'll be honest, once in a while, she does get some pretty specific information. But the show is clearly edited, as they never show a miss. At least John Edward was willing to show the misses. So it's impossible to know how long it took her to get the info and there is always the strong possibility of hot reading. She is much more specific for the sitters that are recruited through the show than her "on the street" interviews.

The big problem I have for her is the kind of information she provides for the sitter. Such as the time she told the sitter that her birth was the result of rape. That is serious stuff and potentially very psychologically damaging. And the time she told the sitter that her cousin had been murdered, that it wasn't accidential. And when she told the sitter that her kidnapped son was in Portugal. It's all really creepy to me.

I actually don't think she is sincere. I think she knows exactly what she is doing and trying to get rich and famous off of her magic trick. Her whole schtick of giving hugs and saying "I'm so sorry" and pretending like she's surprised when people cry is all programmed.

My two cents.

I

[chillzero]

Posts discussing abilities of Tim4848 split to:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=96829

[h0mesch00led]

yeah but there's some things you just can't fake ya know

[Big Les]

I keep returning to the idea that some of these people are actually "professional" mentalists who never break character. Responses like this on MagicCaff (http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=200337&forum=15&25)certainly suggest so. Lots of its residents are backing this Jim Callahan guy who likewise maintains his character out of performance.

Is Williams a mentalist herself? Are they just commenting on her technique, or are they really as morally ambiguous as they seem? Obviously they don't represent all mentalists, but I'm always troubled by what I read there by way of ambiguity, outright claims of paranormal ability, and just plain sceptic bashing.

[panchov]

See, I don't get this - how do you KNOW she's a fraud?
I actually believe that she's a fraud, also very annoying, but I can't say I KNOW she's one. Tell me how you know, then I can stop pulling my hair about why I THINK she is.

[Aoidoi]

yeah but there's some things you just can't fake ya knowLike?

[Big Les]

See, I don't get this - how do you KNOW she's a fraud?
I actually believe that she's a fraud, also very annoying, but I can't say I KNOW she's one. Tell me how you know, then I can stop pulling my hair about why I THINK she is.

Semantics. There's every reason to believe that she is one, and no reason to believe otherwise, unless she'd like to take the challenge of course...

[Big Les]

No? Perhaps I can spell it out. Everything she does can be replicated using mentalism techniques. I even posted a link to mentalists commenting on her technique. Futher, there is no evidence of either the existence of an afterlife, or a mechanism by which people might communicate with its residents. In fact, the very idea runs counter to the laws of physics. Therefore, whilst technically it might be theoretically possible that she's the real deal and will one day prove it to us all, with no evidence to suggest she's anything but one, for all intents and purposes, she absolutely is a fraud. You could argue that she might be self-deluded, and therefore not a knowing fraud.

If you want to be strictly sceptical about it, I can't KNOW she's a fraud. But then I can't KNOW that when I dream, I'm not actually being transported to a magical land where all sorts of weird things happen. I can't KNOW that I'm not the only person in the universe, and everything I experience isn't a product of my solipsist brain in a jar. Or any number of other highly improbable, counter-the-available-evidence scenarios you might care to think of.

[Niobe]

Like?
Genuine stupidity?

[Big Les]

[double post, sorry]

[panchov]

No? Perhaps I can spell it out. Everything she does can be replicated using mentalism techniques. I even posted a link to mentalists commenting on her technique. Futher, there is no evidence of either the existence of an afterlife, or a mechanism by which people might communicate with its residents. In fact, the very idea runs counter to the laws of physics. Therefore, whilst technically it might be theoretically possible that she's the real deal and will one day prove it to us all, with no evidence to suggest she's anything but one, for all intents and purposes, she absolutely is a fraud. You could argue that she might be self-deluded, and therefore not a knowing fraud.

If you want to be strictly sceptical about it, I can't KNOW she's a fraud. But then I can't KNOW that when I dream, I'm not actually being transported to a magical land where all sorts of weird things happen. I can't KNOW that I'm not the only person in the universe, and everything I experience isn't a product of my solipsist brain in a jar. Or any number of other highly improbable, counter-the-available-evidence scenarios you might care to think of.

First off, saying there's no evidence of an afterlife is a bit of a broad statement - how are we even defining afterlife here? Are you saying that because we can't prove that when we die nothing else happens that that in itself is proof that nothing else happens? I beg to differ! How does the idea run against laws of physics? We don't know a fraction of what goes on in this universe or others.

Other than that I tend to agree with you - I can't see ghosts coming to these psychics with the letter J, etc. But even in a court of law, the burden of proof is on the accuser. If you want to accuse her of being a fraud, saying you believe she's a fraud, you don't believe she can communicate with the dead isn't going to help convince people who do believe her. If she was committing fraud with money there would be a way to prove it (of course it doesn't help that we can't force her to undergo close scrutiny).

Too bad we can't pass laws about psychics having to prove their claims. Maybe if someone they actually perpetrated a fraud on took them to court, we could!

[SeekingTruth]

Too bad we can't pass laws about psychics having to prove their claims. Maybe if someone they actually perpetrated a fraud on took them to court, we could!

Yes, wouldn't it be wonderful if somone could convince the Hornbeck's to do just that.

ST

[panchov]

If I was them, I might have. And I would have sued Bill O'Reilly for saying the kid stayed becuase he liked it too.

[Big Les]

First off, saying there's no evidence of an afterlife is a bit of a broad statement - how are we even defining afterlife here? Are you saying that because we can't prove that when we die nothing else happens that that in itself is proof that nothing else happens?

Nope. I'm saying there's no evidence. Because there is none.

I beg to differ! How does the idea run against laws of physics?

Because there is no theoretical mechanism by which the consciousness can be sustained outside the body. Again, technically I can't know that this isn't possible, but that's not what I said. I said it's counter to science, and it is. If any evidence emerges (and there's been over a century of looking for it) I'll be very interested in changing my mind. That's what scepticism is about.

We don't know a fraction of what goes on in this universe or others.

Quite true. What's that got to do with me saying there's no evidence for an afterlife?

Other than that I tend to agree with you - I can't see ghosts coming to these psychics with the letter J, etc. But even in a court of law, the burden of proof is on the accuser. If you want to accuse her of being a fraud, saying you believe she's a fraud, you don't believe she can communicate with the dead isn't going to help convince people who do believe her. If she was committing fraud with money there would be a way to prove it (of course it doesn't help that we can't force her to undergo close scrutiny).

You try introducing supernatural claims into that court of law, and see how far you get. It's a whole different ball game - reasonable doubt doesn't apply when you're claiming to be able to do something beyond known possibility, and simultaneously failing to supply any new evidence for it.

Too bad we can't pass laws about psychics having to prove their claims.

We can. Sort of (http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page13563.asp).

Maybe if someone they actually perpetrated a fraud on took them to court, we could!

I agree - the law is just about in place for this to happen in the UK at least. I really hope someone is one day in a position to do so. Until then, it's caveat emptor and the sceptics will continue to ask for evidence for extraordinary claims. If that seems to be "guilty until proven innocent" to you, that's unfortunate, but we calls it as we sees it. Although there are some more "passive" approaches being attempted by more vocational/professional sceptics, scepticism is a hobby and a personal outlook for me - I feel no compulsion to step back from calling things like this fake, fraudulent, and so on.

[panchov]

Yeah and this is where the problem lies with me. Exactly like you said, it's hard to introduce this kind of "evidence" into court - that's exactly why it's hard for me to call these people "frauds," even though I think they're fake. The people who go to them and believe them and turn their lives over to them have just as much access to the the facts as you and I do, yet they go voluntarily. When I ask "how do the get away with it," my biggest question is, why does anybody believe them? If an adult wants to engage in this kind of stuff knowingly, they are not victims.

I would say it was different if the psychic initiated the contact and tried to scam them, but if they go of their own free will, they're to blame.

(I just spent spent $300 trying to learn how to talk to my cat and have NOBODY to blame but ME! But when I saw she was a hack, I SAW she was a hack).

[panchov]

The other thing is (I forgot) if they use very deceptive means of getting information to give to people, I would call that fraud. If the people are stupid enough tell them things or say things around them that's one thing, but if the psychic secretly investigates their private lives, I would call that fraud too. Or like the trick, switching money for paper money, any of the that would be criminal in my book.

[Big Les]

I see where you're coming from panchov, but exactly the same argument could be applied to any type of fraud. Someone buying a second-hand car has every opportunity to avoid being conned, but with experienced conmen out there they can easily become victims. At the end of the day, it's their choice to buy, and a little knowledge and rational thought would spare them a lot of trouble (though many are not astute enough). Yet people misrepresenting the goods they sell are still subject to laws about fraud and trade description. Why do you think that is?

The situation is even worse with psychics however, because they often take money from the emotionally affected, who are desperate to believe that their loved ones are not truly lost to them (whether or not you believe that one day they will be reunited in an afterlife). Read the Psychics and Missing People thread to understand the severity of this problem. If it was all just entertainment and even willing hippies paying to be defrauded with minimal adverse consequences, then I might be more tolerant of the whole thing.

I suppose it's a question of personal ethics - laissez-faire versus regulation. I don't think vulnerable people should be left entirely to their own devices, and in general, neither does government. But because of the ephemeral nature of psychic claims and the spiritual free pass it gets, the consequences for bilking people out of lots of money and impeding their natural grieving process are pretty minimal. If a default sceptical position was observed legally (as will hopefully be the case with the repealed version of the Mediums Act in the UK), it would be possible to at least fine them for taking money for something that can't be proven to be taking place (to use the flip-side of your own prior argument).

But as I say, I do understand those who shrug and dismiss people that fall for psychics and other woo - this however is quite an elitist attitude to take. We have to remember that without critical thought (and most people don't apply it universally), and especially in fragile emotional states, it's all too easy to fall for something that later on you might kick yourself for.

[panchov]

I agree with you in some respects, but going to buy a second hand car and having someone tell you that it was owned by a little old lady who never drove it, when it fact it was owned by drag racing teen is an entirely different situation from having an adult go to a psychic specifically to get information from a ghost or a crystal or a tarot card and then believing what they are told wholeheartedly w/o using any reasoning.

Here for instance is a story from my past. My brother died of AIDS over 20 years ago. A few years after he died, I picked up a virus and developed a very high fever. While I was ill in bed, I kept waking up with an unmistakable feeling of his presence sitting on the bed with me. Eventually I had to go to the hospital and was diagnosed with AIDS by the head of infectious diseases in a major Houston hospital. Fast forward 5 days later, the AIDS test came back negative. I don't know what it was I had, but obviously wasn't AIDS (to me anyway, ask my Mom and you might get a different story).

Three days after I got out of the hospital, my mom took me to see a famous Houston psychic. His first words to me were "You were very sick, you almost died, an angel by your bed saved you." Now first off, at that time, the death of my brother was very raw still and I really wanted to believe what I felt while in my bed and that what the psychic said proved it. All this time later, I still Really really want to believe it. However, I had a high fever and coincidences happen. I don't know for sure what I believe, but I do know that just because he said it, doesn't mean it's true.

Sorry, was that rambling? DO you understand what I'm saying. People want to believe because it gives them comfort, they are part of the whole process. And I agree with you that it’s horrible that psychics take advantage of people who are grieving, but unless they’re really stupid, they still can reason and listen and decide for themselves.

[sophia8]

Three days after I got out of the hospital, my mom took me to see a famous Houston psychic. His first words to me were "You were very sick, you almost died, an angel by your bed saved you." Now first off, at that time, the death of my brother was very raw still and I really wanted to believe what I felt while in my bed and that what the psychic said proved it. All this time later, I still Really really want to believe it. However, I had a high fever and coincidences happen. I don't know for sure what I believe, but I do know that just because he said it, doesn't mean it's true.No need to invoke 'coincidence' here. Your mother most likely told him that you'd just been very ill, maybe by making a passing reference to it when she booked: "Oh it's for me and my son - he's just been really ill, nearly thought I'd lost him." She probably didn't even remember mentioning it.
As for the bit about an angel at your bedside, that's just standard medium talk; every time you're ill, you have a healing angel at your bedside. If you didn't see anybody at your bedside, the angel was there anyway; if you saw somebody, that was the angel in disguise.

[panchov]

No it was coincidence. I spoke to him before she did and I heard her make the appt, she didn't say anything about us at all. I might have still looked ill though becuase I was in the hospital for 5 days with a very high fever. IT was weird, but hey weirder things have happened. Anyway, he didn't say it had happened recently, so I guess if you just make a statement like that people could interpret it any way they want, even if they hadn't just experienced what I had.

[Big Les]

I agree with you in some respects, but going to buy a second hand car and having someone tell you that it was owned by a little old lady who never drove it, when it fact it was owned by drag racing teen is an entirely different situation from having an adult go to a psychic specifically to get information from a ghost or a crystal or a tarot card and then believing what they are told wholeheartedly w/o using any reasoning.

Here for instance is a story from my past. My brother died of AIDS over 20 years ago. A few years after he died, I picked up a virus and developed a very high fever. While I was ill in bed, I kept waking up with an unmistakable feeling of his presence sitting on the bed with me. Eventually I had to go to the hospital and was diagnosed with AIDS by the head of infectious diseases in a major Houston hospital. Fast forward 5 days later, the AIDS test came back negative. I don't know what it was I had, but obviously wasn't AIDS (to me anyway, ask my Mom and you might get a different story).

Three days after I got out of the hospital, my mom took me to see a famous Houston psychic. His first words to me were "You were very sick, you almost died, an angel by your bed saved you." Now first off, at that time, the death of my brother was very raw still and I really wanted to believe what I felt while in my bed and that what the psychic said proved it. All this time later, I still Really really want to believe it. However, I had a high fever and coincidences happen. I don't know for sure what I believe, but I do know that just because he said it, doesn't mean it's true.

Sorry, was that rambling? DO you understand what I'm saying. People want to believe because it gives them comfort, they are part of the whole process. And I agree with you that it’s horrible that psychics take advantage of people who are grieving, but unless they’re really stupid, they still can reason and listen and decide for themselves.

Yes, I understand, and you're right that my analogy wasn't the best. Suffice to say that legislation and moral outrage protect people from their own ignorance and suspension of disbelief in other cases (e.g. pyramid schemes) but the same doesn't generally apply to psychics who really should have to prove that they can do what they say before they are able to take money for it. The "entertainment only" clause would have to stay I guess, but wouldn't apply in the case of being told things about deceased relatives. It's certainly not easy to legislate for, and a school of thought agrees with you that as it's a matter of faith rather than quantifiable goods or services, people should be left to their own devices to pay money for psychics or not. I happen to fall more on the side that says people can be made victims with minimal failing on their part, especially the bereaved, and therefore the authorities should be able to step in.

But to be honest, authorative intervention is a bit of a pipedream. Instead amateur sceptics like us will keep banging away pointing out the lack of evidence for such things, and the counter evidence that suggests all they are doing is cold and/or hot reading. Which is de facto ethical fraud even if legally it's tough to pin on an individual.

[panchov]

Yes, I understand, and you're right that my analogy wasn't the best. Suffice to say that legislation and moral outrage protect people from their own ignorance and suspension of disbelief in other cases (e.g. pyramid schemes) but the same doesn't generally apply to psychics who really should have to prove that they can do what they say before they are able to take money for it. The "entertainment only" clause would have to stay I guess, but wouldn't apply in the case of being told things about deceased relatives. It's certainly not easy to legislate for, and a school of thought agrees with you that as it's a matter of faith rather than quantifiable goods or services, people should be left to their own devices to pay money for psychics or not. I happen to fall more on the side that says people can be made victims with minimal failing on their part, especially the bereaved, and therefore the authorities should be able to step in.

But to be honest, authorative intervention is a bit of a pipedream. Instead amateur sceptics like us will keep banging away pointing out the lack of evidence for such things, and the counter evidence that suggests all they are doing is cold and/or hot reading. Which is de facto ethical fraud even if legally it's tough to pin on an individual.

THe problem isn't that they can't prove what they're doing its that you can't prove they're not. If you go to a psychic for a psychic reading, it's not fraud when you get one.

Who has to prove they can do what they say before they take money? Doctors? No. I had a doctor treat me for nonexistent AIDS for 5 days.

Mechanics? Yeah right. I can't think of anyone who does.

[Tim4848]

I can prove it, with your help and support.

I live for this type of opportunity, please pick me, I know I can do it.

I would be more than glad to do what i say before I will take any money.

Now that is a deal, don't you think, but i will need the tools to make it happen, and it won't take much.

People who say you can't prove this and you can't prove that, need a long lesson in follow through, wind does it everyday, it goes where it wants to go, and no red tape holds it back, and we all should think about that from time to time, all the pain in balance to pleasure, and all it can offer. Lisa Williams is a tool, just as Einstein was, and after you break it down, us as well, and just as Einstein, Lisa Williams, and you as well know, their is nobody that is going to be tougher on you, than you, and to think that Lisa Williams waves her family in front of the cameras and performs so naturally, speaking of names that fit with peoples life's, is not editing, it is reality, and we need to take advantage of the opportunity we have been given.

I honestly believe she could take this gift of hers to the house, because she is that good, and we just don't have the time to waste on her doing it this way, we need to know if she is the real deal or not, and I will be more than glad to find that out.

I am honest, reliable and have a good attitude, what else do you want?

Thank you for reading some of my thoughts,
Tim

[Lonewulf]

People who say you can't prove this and you can't prove that, need a long lesson in follow through, wind does it everyday, it goes where it wants to go, and no red tape holds it back, and we all should think about that from time to time, all the pain in balance to pleasure, and all it can offer. Lisa Williams is a tool, just as Einstein was, and after you break it down, us as well, and just as Einstein, Lisa Williams, and you as well know, their is nobody that is going to be tougher on you, than you, and to think that Lisa Williams waves her family in front of the cameras and performs so naturally, speaking of names that fit with peoples life's, is not editing, it is reality, and we need to take advantage of the opportunity we have been given.

Tim, I just want, you to know, that Einstein would think, that your overuses of commas, and comparing him, to Lisa Williams, would make you, rather silly.

[panchov]

I can prove it, with your help and support.

I live for this type of opportunity, please pick me, I know I can do it.

I would be more than glad to do what i say before I will take any money.

Now that is a deal, don't you think, but i will need the tools to make it happen, and it won't take much.

People who say you can't prove this and you can't prove that, need a long lesson in follow through, wind does it everyday, it goes where it wants to go, and no red tape holds it back, and we all should think about that from time to time, all the pain in balance to pleasure, and all it can offer. Lisa Williams is a tool, just as Einstein was, and after you break it down, us as well, and just as Einstein, Lisa Williams, and you as well know, their is nobody that is going to be tougher on you, than you, and to think that Lisa Williams waves her family in front of the cameras and performs so naturally, speaking of names that fit with peoples life's, is not editing, it is reality, and we need to take advantage of the opportunity we have been given.

I honestly believe she could take this gift of hers to the house, because she is that good, and we just don't have the time to waste on her doing it this way, we need to know if she is the real deal or not, and I will be more than glad to find that out.

I am honest, reliable and have a good attitude, what else do you want?

Thank you for reading some of my thoughts,
Tim

Tim just kind of proved my point.

[Big Les]

THe problem isn't that they can't prove what they're doing its that you can't prove they're not. If you go to a psychic for a psychic reading, it's not fraud when you get one.

Who has to prove they can do what they say before they take money? Doctors? No. I had a doctor treat me for nonexistent AIDS for 5 days.

Mechanics? Yeah right. I can't think of anyone who does.

You're quite right as far as the practicalities of prosecuting psychics. However tangible goods and services sales of the sort provided by either mechanics or doctors are both covered by law (as technically are UK psychics) and are prosecuted on a regular basis for failing to do so. A lot of censure comes from professional bodies, but there is plenty of recourse to the courts if a doctor mistreats you or a mechanic fails to provide. In the UK the Trade Descriptions Act covers this.

The biggest problem is that victims of psychics are either not willing or not in a position to prosecute.

[panchov]

You're quite right as far as the practicalities of prosecuting psychics. However tangible goods and services sales of the sort provided by either mechanics or doctors are both covered by law (as technically are UK psychics) and are prosecuted on a regular basis for failing to do so. A lot of censure comes from professional bodies, but there is plenty of recourse to the courts if a doctor mistreats you or a mechanic fails to provide. In the UK the Trade Descriptions Act covers this.

The biggest problem is that victims of psychics are either not willing or not in a position to prosecute.


Ah, I'm really not trying to keep aruging with you and in a sense I even agree with you, but my point is that anybody who is not mentally handicapped knows going in that a psychic reading may or may not be true, may or may not be based on fantasy or misbelief. If you ask someone to read tarot cards to you, and they do, they've given you what you asked for. If you ask John Edward to tell you what he's seeing, he's going to do exaclty that and you got what you asked for. Again, as I said, if the "victim" approaches the psychic, I don't think they're victims unless the psychic engages in illegal activities or secretly researches the person to get information. If the psychic approaches the victim, that's a whole different story.

[Big Les]

Ah, I'm really not trying to keep aruging with you and in a sense I even agree with you, but my point is that anybody who is not mentally handicapped knows going in that a psychic reading may or may not be true, may or may not be based on fantasy or misbelief. If you ask someone to read tarot cards to you, and they do, they've given you what you asked for. If you ask John Edward to tell you what he's seeing, he's going to do exaclty that and you got what you asked for. Again, as I said, if the "victim" approaches the psychic, I don't think they're victims unless the psychic engages in illegal activities or secretly researches the person to get information. If the psychic approaches the victim, that's a whole different story.

I take your point, although I think you underestimate the level of credulity in the population at large. And most are not "mentally handicapped" nor even just plain stupid. Very few people, including sceptics, are able to apply critical thought to every aspect of their lives; people buying into the fantasy are just further along the credulity scale than many others. Most people use their subjective assessment of what seems plausible rather than a sceptical approach, which is how they can find ghosts ridiculous but astrology quite believable.

Again how much sleep you lose over willing patrons of psychics that are almost certainly being bilked (regardless of who initiates the transaction) comes back to how much of a social conscience you have and how you see responsibilities being apportioned. I tend to think that psychics should be confounded and challenged at every turn, but that's just me. I would suggest though that you read this article (http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/news/article.php?storyid=406) that deals with the harm that psychics do irrespective of whether they really can contact the dead or not.

[panchov]

I take your point, although I think you underestimate the level of credulity in the population at large. And most are not "mentally handicapped" nor even just plain stupid. Very few people, including sceptics, are able to apply critical thought to every aspect of their lives; people buying into the fantasy are just further along the credulity scale than many others. Most people use their subjective assessment of what seems plausible rather than a sceptical approach, which is how they can find ghosts ridiculous but astrology quite believable.

Again how much sleep you lose over willing patrons of psychics that are almost certainly being bilked (regardless of who initiates the transaction) comes back to how much of a social conscience you have and how you see responsibilities being apportioned. I tend to think that psychics should be confounded and challenged at every turn, but that's just me. I would suggest though that you read this article (http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/news/article.php?storyid=406) that deals with the harm that psychics do irrespective of whether they really can contact the dead or not.

I'm not responsible for the choices people make in their lives when they DECIDE to be deluded. That has nothing to do with having a social conscience . Listen, when I go to the doctor, I go with research about my problems and I am very proactive, I think I’m almost as skeptical about medicine as you are about psychics. I understand people are vulnerable, but they are also responsible for their own decisions regarding their own lives. You are right, they are not mentally handicapped, that's my whole point. IF they aren't thinking critically it's because they choose not to and because whatever the psychic is offering them gives them some level of comfort.

One thing I've noticed (not just me) is that people are so dependent on tv and the internet headline type reading now, the stop reading books entirely and it really renders them unable to think critically to some extent. That's their fault. Stop being mentally lazy, take the time to look, listen, analyze.

I'm sorry, but I have very little sympathy for anyone who isn't mentally handicapped who looks at John Edward or James vp or Sylvia and can't see right off that they're not making a whole lot of sense.

It's harder to be non sympathetic when their kids are missing etc., but even under those circumstances I would assign them a certain amount of responsibility, especially again if they are the ones who initiate contact with the psychic.

[mayday]

Lisa Williams acts like a big goofy kid. I think that is part of the scam, she acts so kid-like she seems genuinely sincere. But as this wise guy said(I don't know who, maybe it was in the Bible, I don't know)the voice of Satan and the voice of God are barely discernible.
And like Ben Franklin said, a word to the wise is enough, and many words won't fill a bushel People who want desperately to believe Lisa Williams' claims are not going to be open to any reason.
I've had "psychic" intuition before, so I understand you can't use it "at will." If it comes to you it comes to you and you can't control it. Also, the intuition I had does not mean it was paranormal. Our minds are just more capable of things than we understand right now. But instead of trying to understand why this happens people get all caught up in a bunch of nonsense gobbeldy goop and believe some British woman with a huge fanny sees their dead relatives all over the place.

People did not come from monkeys, it's the other way around.

[mayday]

One thing I've noticed (not just me) is that people are so dependent on tv and the internet headline type reading now, the stop reading books entirely and it really renders them unable to think critically to some extent. That's their fault. Stop being mentally lazy, take the time to look, listen, analyze.

It's harder to be non sympathetic when their kids are missing etc., but even under those circumstances I would assign them a certain amount of responsibility, especially again if they are the ones who initiate contact with the psychic.

I have noticed, also, that people only comprehend 30 second sound clips like you see on CNN or Fox. TV is the one-eyed brain sucker.

But I do have sympathy for people who have missing children who go to see a psychic. That kind of agony can make a person do some desperate things.

[panchov]

I should be clear, I don't object to people going to psychics. I go to psychics. I don't even object to them believing psychics (although, really c'mon people like John Edward?, but still if that's they feel that's what they feel). What I'm saying I object to is somebody going to a psychic, then complaining because they got a psychic reading. Any person with average intelligence knows that what a psychic reading is, is pretty much gobbetly gook out of the psychic's head. It may come from spiritual sources or it may come from malicious intent to get money or it may come for the psychics own delusions, but EVERY SINGLE PERSON KNOWS THAT GOING IN. That's my only point.

Big Les can be skeptical all he wants, but he can't dismiss people's responsibility to think, act and be responsible for their own actions. If they contact a psychic, they're going to get a psychic reading and that psychic reading is not going to be fraud, it's going to be exactly what they asked for.

Yes, I totally understand that grief can drive a person to do crazy things, and I might go to psychic myself under those circumstances, but even so they still know what a psychic is. It could be all the more horrible because the psychic wants to solve the problem or pretend to solve the problem and might say some really bad stuff. It's a sad truth about humans though that the more vulnerable you are, the more predators will try to manipulate you. People just have to be aware of this.

Anyway, this is why people don't tend to go claiming fraud after a psychic reading. THe judge would laugh them out of the courtroom. It's nonsensical and really has nothing to do with not believing that there is such a thing as psychic powers.

[mayday]

Psychics can be dangerous and there are people stupid enough to do what they say.
I went with my friend to see one (can I post her website on here?) and I was about 4 months pregnant at the time. I asked her if my baby would be okay and she said the baby would not and if I didn't go ahead and terminate the pregnancy myself the baby would die anyway.
So, I agonized for months. What if she wasn't full of it?
The baby was born perfectly healthy. What an evil thing to tell some woman, even if you think you can foresee such a thing.

I said never again.

Also, panchov, there are people who put a lot of faith, time and money into psychics. Why would they do this if they thought it was nonsense and bunk? Why would someone spend $700 for a short conversation with Sylvia Browne when they know she is just spouting off a bunch of crap? If I want to hear lies and pay $700 for it I want to hear it from George Clooney, not some fat old hag.

The psychic industry is big business, and to many it's for more than entertainment purposes, unfortunately.

[panchov]

That's horrible she said that to you.

But see this is my point, and I'm sorry I don't mean to flippant with you because I understand it traumatized you, but why did you believe her? Why does an intelligent person who knows full well that these people may OR MAY NOT have powers believe her w/o substantiation? If someone gives that kind of power over to another person, I just can't make myself hold them as totally unresponsible for what happens. You didn't even know this woman. I mean I sympathize with you, but you asked her what she thought and she told you.

Again if they have all that faith and put all that money into it, that's their choice. They can make a decision based on what the want or they can make an informed decision, but either way it's their decision.

Pychcics don't even pretend to give guarantees. They're the first one's to say it's all interpretation, they may get it wrong, your doubts might affect their powers, and on and on.

The really horrible thing about what that psychic said to you was, again, she knew you were vulnerable and she took advantage of that. Happens all the time in life, not just with psychics, but we can't pass a law to stop that.

I guess your baby is happy and healthy, huh? I'm glad for you! Stupid psychic!

[Big Les]

Anyway, this is why people don't tend to go claiming fraud after a psychic reading. THe judge would laugh them out of the courtroom. It's nonsensical and really has nothing to do with not believing that there is such a thing as psychic powers.

What do you say to this (http://web.archive.org/web/20050214153954/http://www.freep.com/news/locmac/psychic24e_20041124.htm), then? And this (http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/news/032905_nw_psychic.html)? Also this (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/07/12/npsych12.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/07/12/ixuknews.html)?

I totally agree that by and large, securing a conviction is damn difficult, and legal recourse is not the way to go about things. Education is. These people you dismiss as stupid, given access to the right information, delivered in the right way, can be "innoculated" against credulously buying into this stuff. That's the approach sceptics typically take in any case. My objection is to your Social Darwinist take on things - that if people are that dumb, screw 'em.

Many, many people fall for different brands of woo - intelligent people in many cases. It can get to anyone that doesn't apply critical thought to every aspect. Please don't write off people for ignorance and mistake-making; every one of us is guilty of both those things given the right circumstances.

[panchov]

Except that I've said about 15 times, my whole point is that they're not stupid. (I personally think believing John or Sylvia or whatever is an act of stupidity, but who doesn't do dumb things). My point is - can you read it this time as English? - people are responsible the for the choices they make in their lives. Psychics flourish because people want to believe. There is nothing wrong with them believing except in your head. Just because you and I don't agree with it (I don't agree with most of it, but I'm always looking) - does not mean it is wrong. It does not mean they are stupid. It means they are different from you and me!!!

This idea of needing to protect them is fantasy in your head, let go man! They do not want to be protected. There are people in this world that are truly being hurt that you could focus on rather than trying to send everyone to jail who doesn't believe exactly as you do! THe minute one of them commits something that is actual fraud, then you can go protect the victim.

[Big Les]

You're wrong that people are choosing not to think critically. Many of them haven't even considered the idea. How many people have heard of cold reading? You should see the realisation that hits them when someone explains the technique - they realise that they've been fooled. It's about education first and foremost. If people have been exposed to the alternative explanations, then absolutely, I agree with you - horse to water and all that. But the vast majority of people aren't armed with this type of knowledge, and are therefore far more likely to believe what they see and hear, and to invest financially and emotionally in things that they could see were utter bollocks if they had access to the relevant information. It's not a question of protecting them - it's hooking them up such that they can protect themselves. If they read and digest what's written and still choose to believe, only then my thoughts on that individual will coincide with yours. Trust me, I'm cynical about the wilfully ignorant, although even they can realise that they're barking up the wrong tree. We have many members here who used to believe in this stuff, some even peddled it in their time. More pro-active scepticism allowed them to "snap out of it", and it can potentially do the same for many others. Don't get the idea that I'm some uber-sceptic crusader. The internet is pretty much the limit of what little I contribute, though I make my views clear when the subjects come up in real life, I don't try to "convert" anybody as such. It's a slow process in any case - it's snippets of fact and logic that accumulate, one day resulting in that "what the hell was I thinking" moment where the irrationality is rejected.

These entire forums are dedicated to educating people in exactly this way - sometimes passively, sometimes very pro-actively (as with the occasional calls for prosecutions). If you don't agree with either approach, I honestly have to wonder what you hope to gain from reading and posting here.

[panchov]

Ah but I'm not. I never said you should stop researching the subject, I'm doing that myself all the time. And as I said, if they commit fraud by all means, prosecute them. You and I just have a different idea of what fraud is.

People may not know what a cold reading is as a term, but if you want to put forth the argument that people who believe in psychics on the whole don't know that there's a chance these people are frauds or delusional, you really are going to have to argue that those people are stupid. Anyway, I don't want to argue with you anymore (and I got a little snarky before, sorry about that)!! I guess we just disagree. But to me it's like -say you were a huge football fan and during the season all you did was sit around and watch football and I came along and said football was bad for you, we should make them stop playing football. Ok that's a bad example because football doesn't lie (I admit). YOu know what I mean though, people have a right to pursue this if they want, if they're adults and able to take care of themselves and make their own decisions (IMHO).

Basically we are in agreement though and stories like the one Whistlebrictches told us just make you want to go slap these people. I'm all for education though, if there was a way I could PROVE they were lying, I would happily do it. But again here's where you and I differ - you think (at least I think you think) that the fact that they can't prove they're not lying is the same thing as proving they are lying, but I don't. (What a sentence!)

[mayday]

I had been to see this psychic before, and the first time I will admit I was impressed. She was doing cold readings at a New Age fair, 15 minutes for $15. I was highly suspicious (but I'm open to anything) so I sat down and made sure I didn't tell her anything about me other than to ask what my situation was looking like. She told me there was dishonesty about money and she saw someone in a truck driving around on a cell phone with a credit card statement.

I thought, hot damn, this woman must be following me around. Now, this was a terrible time in my relationship; my husband was being a jerk, my father-in-law was living with us and I couldn't stand him and I was on the verge of a mental breakdown. I charged over $4000 for a cosmetic procedure on our VISA card and several days before while I was on my way to work I was on the cell phone looking through the credit card statement as I was driving-in my truck- trying to take care of business where my husband wouldn't find out. She also told me he was about to find out (and he did soon after I talked to her.)

She also described to me what the woman my husband was running around with looked like: about 5'2" tall with dark brown shoulder length hair and about 30 pounds overweight.

I thought, hot damn (again). This was EXACTLY what she looked like.

After telling me a few more things I built up confidence in her somewhat. Actually, it was more like going to a counselor. I'd talk to her about every 6 months or after some very stressful event (mostly by phone.) While a lot of things she told me did not pan out she hit on enough things, in my mind, at least, that I felt it was worth my money to consult with her. But after this deal with my pregnancy, I thought, if she turns out to be wrong I'll never see her again.

Now, my friend is wanting us to go back and see her. I don't know if I will go, I might just go as an excuse for us to go out and spend some time together, because I don't get to see her much since she moved, but I don't know if I will go. I'm still really put off about it.

[panchov]

Oh my. This woman can push your buttons and you know she's not above saying horrible manipulative things to you. I know that cellphone/truck and other stuff really does sound freaky, but I would hate to see you go through something like you did with your pregnancy. I really honestly believe it's possible to have psychic abilities (not that anyone ever has convinced me they do yet), but this woman sounds evil (as in mean human not supernatural devil). If you go, please allow yourself to take whatever she says with a grain of salt.

[Tim4848]

Thank you for reading my thoughts,

If by any chance you get to meet Lisa Williams, please have her send me an e-mail.

MY idea sure could use her help.

Thank you,
Tim

[Big Les]

And I say "Jailed fake psychics? More of them please!" (http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/news/article.php?storyid=451).

[panchov]

Yeah he got it for committing "earthly" fraud though. He was lying about things that it could be proved he was lying about.

[Ouisch]

Hi all, new member here. :) I've been re-watching a lot of Lisa Williams' Life Among the Dead shows in the past few days, and now that I've read up on cold reading techniques, the signs that she uses them jump right out at you. Notice that she never comes right out and says something; she always asks it as a question first: "Is there a father figure in your life? Right, because I'm seeing an older man." "Did she not drink? Because she's saying it wasn't my fault, I wasn't drunk."

In a recent episode, what appeared to be a young Asian couple was getting a reading. When Lisa "contacted" the woman's father, she asked "He doesn't speak English, does he? Because he's babbling in Chinese at me." (Note: Lisa's Spirit Guide translated for her, though.) However, later in the reading the young woman mentioned that her father had returned to Macao when she was a child. (Macao is an island off the coast of China, but it was settled by the Portuguese, and Portuguese is the primary language there.) She also said that her father spoke only Portuguese. Obviously Lisa had taken a guess with the Chinese thing because the couple looked Asian and the young woman spoke heavily accented English.

[Tim4848]

Further, there is no evidence of either the existence of an afterlife, or a mechanism by which people might communicate with its residents. In fact, the very idea runs counter to the laws of physics.

That is not true at all

Science does not know what is inside energy and science knows that energy can change forms and do the opposite of what science might be trying to do with it, because science has not come to terms with the fact that human behavior of all emotions and movement associated with out of body afterlife is still there, but it dances with energy for it size and weight, and some one please show me where we did anything about this idea before that ever made any sense.

First we need to see what different frequencies or music we can use to make BrainGate work with the patients thoughts and use those vibrations with what is going on with them until we find patterns that can be duplicated if we leave our body not much different from the sperm energy that got it all started, because we know the inner energy of any body has to have a location that has a right or left, and it would still enough branches to store any new information, always interacting with the staff on what is working and what is not.

We will then begin to measure every moment of truth with every bit of training done on the machine, comparing it to a new type of option.

Can our thoughts last and grow in one atom?

Why not?

[Big Les]

What in blue blazes are you talking about man?

[Alice Shortcake]

Oh, dear God. Here we go again.

Tim, do remember when we explained to you that there is nothing "inside" electricity? Well, there is nothing "inside" energy either. You seem to have absolutely no understanding of science, and until you make the effort to educate yourself you are wasting your time and ours on this forum.

Brain Gate is not what you think it is.

And I still think that part of your problem is that you're trying to express yourself in English and it isn't your first language.

:bwall:bwall:bwall

[Judge Bean]

...Everything she does can be replicated using mentalism techniques. ...Futher, there is no evidence of either the existence of an afterlife, or a mechanism by which people might communicate with its residents. In fact, the very idea runs counter to the laws of physics. ...You could argue that she might be self-deluded, and therefore not a knowing fraud.


The fact that what she does can be redone must stand as complete proof of being a fraud. Self-delusion is difficult to sustain, I would suspect, in the press of work to delude others: at any rate, it is not a good defense.


If you want to be strictly sceptical about it, I can't KNOW she's a fraud. ...

I don't agree with this. If you can't know it by means of rational demonstration and duplicated results, there is no other technical way you can know it. It is anyway a good tentative conclusion.

I have seen the Edwards routine, and he is very smug and smooth, but also as transparent as the spirits he says he talks to. I would expect someone in contact with the dead to be a bit more shaken and awed, perhaps not able to also be a TV performer simultaneously. But that is not the thing that bothers me. What most bothers me is his cosmology.

That is, his idea of the organization of the universe, including the invisible parts, and humanity's place in it. He operates on a wholly-unexamined system of received ideas-- received from where I can't say exactly-- in which people who die linger in a twilight and then "pass" to "the other side" after achieving peace with a last message.

Of this peculiarly-exact process there is no proof other than the messages received solely by the medium, and no inherent explanation for why these vital messages cannot simply be handed over directly-- or why, indeed, the dead cannot communicate the final intimate message directly to their loved ones. This is not a mystery: it is a convenience to a sideshow performer.

[godless dave]

Who has to prove they can do what they say before they take money? Doctors? No. I had a doctor treat me for nonexistent AIDS for 5 days.

Doctors are licensed. They have to prove, among other things, that they earned an M.D. to be able to practice medicine. If that doctor told you you had AIDS before getting the results of an HIV antibody test, then he was, at best, incompetent and could be disciplined by the licensing board.


Mechanics? Yeah right. I can't think of anyone who does.

There are certifications for mechanics, and legal consequences for doing bad work.

[Little 10 Toes]

Further, there is no evidence of either the existence of an afterlife, or a mechanism by which people might communicate with its residents. In fact, the very idea runs counter to the laws of physics.

That is not true at all

Science does not know what is inside energy and science knows that energy can change forms and do the opposite of what science might be trying to do with it, because science has not come to terms with the fact that human behavior of all emotions and movement associated with out of body afterlife is still there, but it dances with energy for it size and weight, and some one please show me where we did anything about this idea before that ever made any sense.

Proof? Wait, you still haven't proven it.

[panchov]

Doctors are licensed. They have to prove, among other things, that they earned an M.D. to be able to practice medicine. If that doctor told you you had AIDS before getting the results of an HIV antibody test, then he was, at best, incompetent and could be disciplined by the licensing board.



There are certifications for mechanics, and legal consequences for doing bad work.

Alas, this argument is over (you must have missed the whole other thread).


You know what I wonder about though? (This topic shouldn't be too controversial) - Lisa doesn't look too cold or callous, at least not on the level of John Edward or (GF) Sylvia. If they are delusional and really think they're doing the right thing, does that make them nice people? Or like what if they are really nice people and they never say destructive things? And at what point do they get that hard callous shell that most of the really famous ones get? It's like at some point, even if when they were young they really thought they were psychic, they've given up and gone money hungry. Can you not be a psychic (or fake psychic) and be human too?

[Tim4848]

What if she placebo the possibility, because she was learning the fake stuff as she was growing up, but she did create a gift, that only got stronger, but most people could not except that, even though 10% of humans on Earth will have it happen to them at some point in their life, and the inside of energy can not be destroyed, even though the out side of that energy is always changing and protecting that way of thinking, and lives off of other energy in the room, or anywhere atoms are connected.

If change happens in a instance, and the span of that events is so vast, that you would consider adding light years to if, might think about the change to the span of space where the event happened at that time in space, if this math does on add up then everything is connected, but if it don't, then you have different levels that play by different rules like movement, and how that movement is accepted by the receiver.

I took my energy ball that I got at Spencer Gifts, and place a copper wire around it, just wanting to see if I would get shocked, and I did.

Energy wants to communicate, all it is doing is trying to find some body who wants to do it. Be it you or a machine, it can be measured through friction.

People listen through friction and with the right type of thinking you can trick the brain into allowing you to watch a baby be born, to seeing how some people treat animals, and just like those pink energy lines in that energy ball, is what you might be living in.

You will be free to move any direction and at what ever speed you will like.
In your dreams at night you might think that you are able to fly. Your body sees no pain in that, because it knows that will be a good thing for you in the future.

Getting back to that water of energy that is showing it self in that energy ball.

That energy is a constance, but it still have the ability to make friction and by being on the inside of energy, you are in good hands as the insurance company saids.

You are free to think in that state, as if you were living inside the energy ball, and that energy ball is placed anywhere on this Earth it will still work the same way.

So imagine you are in this state, and you can see that your human wife is trying to get your attention, because she wants you to try and communicate with medium Lisa Williams. Since you are a out of body afterlife in this story, then sure the next day you are doing everything you can to get Lisa Williams attention, now if I am right about this having a chance to be possible, then we are going to have to raise the bar on everything to do with this topic, because it is in such bad shape as a topic, that we can't take a break every once in a while and say, what does it hurt to talk about all the "what if,s to this topic"

Thank you for reading my thoughts,
Tim

[Zep]

Please. Have your synapses examined by someone competent.

Or else quit using jargon generators.

[panchov]

I think there must be an actual moment where they realize, hey I'm not psychic this is bull crap, and then they just go about learning everything they can about cold reading and faking

[Tim4848]

I have some things to say about medium Lisa Williams, if you can find the time to try and understand my thought.

I am still waiting on how she is able to say the person name, with out assuming it is in the editing.


Can she do her ability with out talking to the person in the room with her, or does she have to try and sell it.

Al Capone used to believe he was providing a service and I am starting to hear her talk a lot more about that as well. If this her way out in her mind by justifying why she does what she does.

Example: It can't be bad if they are giving me hugs, even though I usually have to start that thought. Maybe she is insecure, or maybe it helps her placebo effect in her mind.

I am open for testing on her, but it has to be done right. A good deal for all parties, and that includes the potential out of body afterlife as well.

What do you think?

[Little 10 Toes]

Here I go again... (sigh)

I have some things to say about medium Lisa Williams, if you can find the time to try and understand my thought.

I am still waiting on how she is able to say the person name, with out assuming it is in the editing. Stop right there. You have already answered your own question. "How can I prove the sun exists without going outside in daylight" would be a better question.


Can she do her ability with out talking to the person in the room with her, or does she have to try and sell it. Why don't you ask her?


Al Capone used to believe he was providing a service and I am starting to hear her talk a lot more about that as well. If this her way out in her mind by justifying why she does what she does. But Al Capone was a criminal who ran liquor, killed people, and didn't pay taxes. He did those things for money and power.


Example: It can't be bad if they are giving me hugs, even though I usually have to start that thought. Maybe she is insecure, or maybe it helps her placebo effect in her mind. John Wayne Gacy was a killer that used to entertain kids dressed up as a clown. He mustn't be that bad.

I am open for testing on her, but it has to be done right. A good deal for all parties, and that includes the potential out of body afterlife as well. I totally agree that she should be tested.

[Tim4848]

i think it was last year or the one before where we were on the cover of Time Magazine, and we can't come up with a way to get Lisa Williams attention about this problem.


In the big sites of sites, how does this site rate?

don't we have enough people here who could figure out a way to get here to try this test.

Is that all you do on the Internet is talk about things?

How do we turn it into action?

At this point in history, we can not afford somebody who is not telling the truth about communicating with out of body afterlife.


I would love for her to be telling the truth, but I still need to know if it is true.

[Little 10 Toes]

Tim4848, why don't you get her tested? She's a big part of your "plan".

[Judge Bean]

Is that all you do on the Internet is talk about things?


Yes.



At this point in history, we can not afford somebody who is not telling the truth about communicating with out of body afterlife.


Then we are flat broke.


I would love for her to be telling the truth, but I still need to know if it is true.

No finer statement of the issue can be found.

[Tim4848]

Can we not all work together to have her tested?

[mayday]

Al Capone used to believe he was providing a service

What do you think?

Al Capone was an outstanding person with a big heart. He turned Chicago around for the better. It was and should have stayed his city.

[Big Les]

Huh?

[Cueshark]

Can we not all work together to have her tested?

I wish everyone had this attitude.

Some people make incredible excuses when asked to prove their incredible ability. Anyone who genuinely believes in their ability should welcome a test to prove it, especially with a nice little 1 million prize as incentive. If they don't need the money then there's their favorite charity or if they don't believe the money exists then what better way to wipe the smile off Randi's face.

[sophia8]

In a recent episode, what appeared to be a young Asian couple was getting a reading. When Lisa "contacted" the woman's father, she asked "He doesn't speak English, does he? Because he's babbling in Chinese at me." (Note: Lisa's Spirit Guide translated for her, though.) However, later in the reading the young woman mentioned that her father had returned to Macao when she was a child. (Macao is an island off the coast of China, but it was settled by the Portuguese, and Portuguese is the primary language there.) She also said that her father spoke only Portuguese. Obviously Lisa had taken a guess with the Chinese thing because the couple looked Asian and the young woman spoke heavily accented English.I notice that Williams' spirit guide didn't tell her which Chinese language the dear departed was speaking.
Mandarin, Cantonese, Wu, Hakka, Portuguese? It's all the same on the other side!

[Judge Bean]

Al Capone was an outstanding person with a big heart. He turned Chicago around for the better. It was and should have stayed his city.

Are you kidding? Al Capone was a serial murderer; worse than that, if possible, he killed and ordered killings for business purposes-- for profit.

In addition, he learned to leave Chicago when it got too hot, setting up his headquarters in and operating for years out of Cicero.

When he left Chicago, Cicero, and Illinois for that big penitentiary in the sky, he left behind a legacy of organized crime that eventually took over most of the national gambling and drug industries and raised the ghastly tasteless criminal spectacle of Las Vegas out of nothing.

If his heart was enlarged, it was cholesterol, not compassion.