Lucky Psychics

[Roadtoad]

In the interest of preventing a further derail, I'm starting a new thread, primarily in reference to this post from Eire...

Quote:

I went to her, she didn't seek me out like these plague of locust psychics that seem to pop out of the woodwork every time somebody goes missing. I paid her $25, which is nowhere near the sums many people pay for crappy "advice", so I guess I'm lucky. This woman told me that my friend was dead, killed by a man she knew and they'd never find her body. She also told me not to worry because he'd be caught "trying to hurt somebody else" and that he'd be put away, but he'd never admit to killing my friend. Of course, I was more devastated by hearing that my friend died at the hands of someone she knew and that they'd never find the body, but I made my peace with it. A few weeks later, I plugged my friend's name into Google and up popped an article about my friend's ex-fiancee and his alleged murder of his new girlfriend. The article said he was a prime suspect in the death of my friend, but he wasn't talking. Well, I thought this psychic chick really knew something. After all, my friend's story was not widely publicized even in Florida much less Pennsylvania. She didn't know my friend's name because I hadn't told her and the reading was a spur of the moment thing not a pre-arranged appointment. She just had to be the real deal right? Wrong. It's taken me years and lots of pain to realize the woman made a lucky guess. My friend was missing for years, of course she's most likely deceased. Women are often killed by someone close to them, a lover or husband for example. A man who would kill or abuse one girlfriend or wife won't likely stop being an abuser. Of course, he may get caught in the future. Only the dumbest of them will confess to other killings when there's no body or no evidence. I did mention Florida to the psychic, so of course she said the body wouldn't be found. Alligators and other meat-eaters are plentiful there, so is swamp land. It was just a string of lucky guesses, no mystical power, no friend talking to her from the great beyond, no link to the other side, nothing. I only wasted $25 and about 20 minutes of my time.

We then had Rodney claiming that it was $25 well spent. Personally, I think it's a load of fertilizer, but I'm open to EVIDENCE. Anyone care to take a shot?

[Kelly]

Rodney, all, I am quite sure there are no sure stats about this situation, however, I have run into it numerous times. In fact, where I live, we just completed a murder trial that sounds just like the psychic's story. Murders without a body are a pretty popular storyline right now.

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

In the interest of preventing a further derail, I'm starting a new thread, primarily in reference to this post from Eire...

Fine, but I would respectfully suggest that my reply to Eire on the other thread was not a derail, but was rather an attempt to set the record straight. Kelly began that thread by stating: "What I want to be able to accomplish by posting here, is to have a very complete collection of links debunking the advantage takers when it comes to missing person's cases."

I was simply nothing that Eire's psychic did not fit at all with Kelly's stated goal of "debunking the advantage takers when it comes to missing person's cases" because: (1) Eire sought out the psychic, not the other way around; (2) The psychic charged Eire a nominal $25; and (3) The psychic appears, at least thus far, to have been on the money.

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

We then had Rodney claiming that it was $25 well spent. Personally, I think it's a load of fertilizer, but I'm open to EVIDENCE. Anyone care to take a shot?

My point is that Eire's psychic went out on a limb to at least some extent by telling her that: (1) Her friend was dead; (2) Her friend's body would never be found; (3) The murderer was a man that her friend knew; (4) The murderer would be caught trying to hurt somebody else; and (5) The murderer would never confess to killing her friend.

Any of the above things the psychic told Eire could have been disproven by now. Of course, one or more of them may still be disproven; e.g., perhaps her friend's body will be found. At the moment, however, it seems to me that the psychic is looking good. Further, consider what would have happened if Eire had sought out a private detective. I'm guessing the charge would have been a minimum of $500, and at best she would have been told that the likelihood is that her friend had been murdered by someone she knew.

[Dave_46]

Originally Posted by Rodney

<snip>

My point is that Eire's psychic went out on a limb to at least some extent by telling her that: (1) Her friend was dead; (2) Her friend's body would never be found; (3) The murderer was a man that her friend knew; (4) The murderer would be caught trying to hurt somebody else; and (5) The murderer would never confess to killing her friend.

<snip>

Why was the psychic going "out on a limb"?

Surely the psychic knew these things, after all they were taking money for the information. Wouldn't it be fraudulent to take money and give false information?

Dave

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Dave_46

Why was the psychic going "out on a limb"?

Because she could have been proven wrong, in which case Eire would have presumably spread the word about her erroneous reading. Considering that the psychic received only $25, the possibility of adverse publicity far outweighing that amount was clearly present.

Originally Posted by Dave_46

Surely the psychic knew these things, after all they were taking money for the information. Wouldn't it be fraudulent to take money and give false information? Dave

Depends what you mean by "false information". Is it "false information" when a stockbroker implores you to invest in a stock that promises to yield a huge profit, but in reality yields a huge loss? I would guess that most psychics and stockbrokers believe what the say to their clients, but they can nonetheless be way off the mark.

[Jon.]

Originally Posted by Rodney

My point is that Eire's psychic went out on a limb to at least some extent by telling her that: (1) Her friend was dead; (2) Her friend's body would never be found; (3) The murderer was a man that her friend knew; (4) The murderer would be caught trying to hurt somebody else; and (5) The murderer would never confess to killing her friend.

All very safe guesses:

(1) most people missing for a long period of time are dead;
(2) many bodies are never found; if the body were found, then it confirms (1) even though it refutes (2), and the psychic relies on confirmation bias;
(3) most women who are killed are killed by a man they know;
(4) and (5) mean that anybody who gets caught trying to hurt somebody could fit the description, even if he never confesses; if he does confess, you've got the old confirmation bias going for you again.

Not exactly "going out on a limb." Going out on a limb would be saying that the murderer was a one-legged man with a Slovenian accent and a scar on his right bicep in the shape of Italy.

[RSLancastr]

Originally Posted by Jon.

Not exactly "going out on a limb." Going out on a limb would be saying that the murderer was a one-legged man with a Slovenian accent and a scar on his right bicep in the shape of Italy.

Uncle Ivan, no!!!!

[Slimething]

Originally Posted by Jon.

All very safe guesses:

(1) most people missing for a long period of time are dead;
(2) many bodies are never found; if the body were found, then it confirms (1) even though it refutes (2), and the psychic relies on confirmation bias;
(3) most women who are killed are killed by a man they know;
(4) and (5) mean that anybody who gets caught trying to hurt somebody could fit the description, even if he never confesses; if he does confess, you've got the old confirmation bias going for you again.

Not exactly "going out on a limb." Going out on a limb would be saying that the murderer was a one-legged man with a Slovenian accent and a scar on his right bicep in the shape of Italy.

Entirely agree.

A police detective would have been able to tell her that for free, except points 4 and 5. Points 1-3 are all playing the odds as the predominant factors in slayings. Points 4 and 5 are completely unverifiable unless the police catch the culprit and they're dumb enough to confess. So, someone made $25 for nothin'. The "reading" did not put Eire any closer to solving the murder that s/he was before.

Any sense of relief is predicated on belief in the veracity of the guesses, and not evidence that the guesses were correct.

[JoeTheJuggler]

I still say these things should be evaluated exactly the same way rewards for information are given out: only information leading to an arrest and conviction is worth anything.

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Jon.

All very safe guesses:

(1) most people missing for a long period of time are dead;
(2) many bodies are never found; if the body were found, then it confirms (1) even though it refutes (2), and the psychic relies on confirmation bias;
(3) most women who are killed are killed by a man they know;
(4) and (5) mean that anybody who gets caught trying to hurt somebody could fit the description, even if he never confesses; if he does confess, you've got the old confirmation bias going for you again.

On the original thread, I asked for statistics to back up the claim that what Eire's psychic said were simply safe guesses, and received none. So, I'll ask again: Do you have any statistics? [And I'm talking about meaningful statistics, such as the percentage of young women that disappear, are presumed dead, but whose bodies are not found; not merely citing three cases to justify the meaningless claim that "many" bodies are never found.]

Originally Posted by Jon.

Not exactly "going out on a limb." Going out on a limb would be saying that the murderer was a one-legged man with a Slovenian accent and a scar on his right bicep in the shape of Italy.

As RSLancaster notes, it wasn't Uncle Ivan: he has an alibi. However, it is interesting to note that the psychic stated that the murderer was a man that her friend knew and now, according to Eire, her friend's ex-fiance is a suspect in another murder. I would have thought the ex-fiance would have been closely questioned about the disappearance of his former girlfriend, but evidently he was never charged in that case.

[Roadtoad]

It's still not going out on a limb. All are so painfully obvious, that anyone who spends any time watching TV during the week would have made nearly the same guesses. Hell, this sort of thing has been a part of the plot line for nearly half the the CSI episodes over the past couple of years!

[Ersby]

Hmm, I couldn't find anything about people missing for a long time being presumed dead, apart from a couple of academic papers with intriguing abstracts but no access to the full paper.

About women being murdered by people they know:

http://www.vpc.org/studies/dv4one.htm

"Compared to a man, a woman is far more likely to be killed by her spouse, an intimate acquaintance, or a family member than by a stranger. More than 11 times as many females were murdered by a male they knew (1,521 victims) than were killed by male strangers (133 victims) in single victim/single offender incidents in 1999."

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Ersby

Hmm, I couldn't find anything about people missing for a long time being presumed dead, apart from a couple of academic papers with intriguing abstracts but no access to the full paper.

About women being murdered by people they know:

http://www.vpc.org/studies/dv4one.htm

"Compared to a man, a woman is far more likely to be killed by her spouse, an intimate acquaintance, or a family member than by a stranger. More than 11 times as many females were murdered by a male they knew (1,521 victims) than were killed by male strangers (133 victims) in single victim/single offender incidents in 1999."

Okay, thanks for that information. It does support the idea that one of the five things the psychic told Eire -- that her friend was murdered by a man she knew -- may have been an educated guess. Again, however, I would have thought her friend's ex-fiance would have been a suspect, but evidently neither he nor anyone else was charged in her friend's disappearance. Further, that still leaves four other things the psychic said to be explained as educated guesses.

[Dave_46]

Originally Posted by Rodney

<snip>

Depends what you mean by "false information". Is it "false information" when a stockbroker implores you to invest in a stock that promises to yield a huge profit, but in reality yields a huge loss? I would guess that most psychics and stockbrokers believe what the say to their clients, but they can nonetheless be way off the mark.

Sorry, I slipped up about three of your five points, as they are predictions, and the psychic cannot be expected to know the future (so shouldn't be making these predictions)

A stockbroker is also giving recommendations about the future, and is understood to be making predictions about the future based on knowledge and experience. That is what they are being paid for.

Two of the points you mention are about past events.

(1) Her friend was dead

(3) The murderer was a man that her friend knew

Surely the psychic would know the truth about these past events, and not be fraudulently guessing?

Dave

[Slimething]

Originally Posted by Rodney

Further, that still leaves four other things the psychic said to be explained as educated guesses.

No, it leaves five things the psychic said that must be proven true for the reading to hold any validity. Be my guest, Rodney.

BTW, merely because no one has been arrested does not mean that there are no suspects. The ex-fiance may indeed be the number one but prosecutors and investigators don't go about posting that information publicly.

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Dave_46

Sorry, I slipped up about three of your five points, as they are predictions, and the psychic cannot be expected to know the future (so shouldn't be making these predictions)

A stockbroker is also giving recommendations about the future, and is understood to be making predictions about the future based on knowledge and experience. That is what they are being paid for.

Two of the points you mention are about past events.

(1) Her friend was dead

(3) The murderer was a man that her friend knew

Surely the psychic would know the truth about these past events, and not be fraudulently guessing?

Dave

To the extent a psychic is infallible, yes, she would know the truth. But few psychics claim to be infallible. And bear in mind that, even among distinguished historians, there is often disagreement about past events, such as historic battles.

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Slimething

No, it leaves five things the psychic said that must be proven true for the reading to hold any validity. Be my guest, Rodney.

First, you have to tell me what would constitute proof from your point of view.

Originally Posted by Slimething

BTW, merely because no one has been arrested does not mean that there are no suspects. The ex-fiance may indeed be the number one but prosecutors and investigators don't go about posting that information publicly.

Fine, but the point is that the psychic said that Eire's friend was murdered by someone she knew, which presumably was also thought to be a strong possibility by police. Nonetheless, it now appears from Eire's account that the police failed to prevent the murderer from taking a second life.

[Cuddles]

Originally Posted by Rodney

Considering that the psychic received only $25,

"Only"? $25 for 20 minutes work. I make that $75 per hour. Just because she doesn't charge as much as some of the more famous frauds doesn't mean that it is cheap.

To put it in perspective, music teachers will have spent a minimum of 5-10 years learning their instrument and learning how to teach. They will have all kinds of qualifications and will usually still be training their whole lives. Very good teachers will usually charge about £15-20 per hour.

Think about it. A highly trained, nationally recognised professional who does a hard job with very clear results can charge half the amount of a second rate nobody for spouting a bit of nonsense. And yet you call that "only" $25.

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Cuddles

"Only"? $25 for 20 minutes work. I make that $75 per hour. Just because she doesn't charge as much as some of the more famous frauds doesn't mean that it is cheap.

To put it in perspective, music teachers will have spent a minimum of 5-10 years learning their instrument and learning how to teach. They will have all kinds of qualifications and will usually still be training their whole lives. Very good teachers will usually charge about £15-20 per hour.

Think about it. A highly trained, nationally recognised professional who does a hard job with very clear results can charge half the amount of a second rate nobody for spouting a bit of nonsense. And yet you call that "only" $25.

Okay, so suppose for the same $25, Eire's psychic had conducted only a 5-minute reading. However, in that reading, she told Eire the name of the man who murdered her friend, and informed her that her friend's body is underneath the man's porch. Based on a tip from Eire, police then find the body underneath that porch. Would you be outraged that the hourly rate for Eire's reading was $300?

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Originally Posted by Rodney

Okay, so suppose for the same $25, Eire's psychic had conducted only a 5-minute reading. However, in that reading, she told Eire the name of the man who murdered her friend, and informed her that her friend's body is underneath the man's porch. Based on a tip from Eire, police then find the body underneath that porch. Would you be outraged that the hourly rate for Eire's reading was $300?

Err. No. If it ever happens, anytime, anywhere , please let us know.

[Rodney]

[Duplicate (more or less) post.

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto

Err. No. If it ever happens, anytime, anywhere , please let us know.

I can't say that exact scenario has ever taken place (that scenario was merely illustrating a point, which you seem to have missed, that being outraged about a psychic's fee of $25 because it translates into a relatively high hourly rate of $75 is illogical), but consider this statement from retired police detective and polygraph expert Jerry Lewis about a case that involved psychic Nancy Orlen Weber:

In her chapter "Murder Close to Home", Nancy writes about a woman who was murdered in her home. Police focused on her daughter and some male friends of the victim because there did not appear to be any forced entry into the apartment. In addition, the murder weapon was from her kitchen. Their conclusions were sound based on the evidence at hand. Nancy told them early on that it was a stranger – a male stalker who lived in Netcong. She told them that he had watched her and had committed other crimes. She said that he had entered through the kitchen window. Investigators did not think that anyone had come through that window. We ended up polygraphing twelve potential suspects – friends and acquaintances who the victim may have let in. I remember one day that a detective told me they had talked to a psychic and she had given the initials of the murderer; "NM". I remember going through the list of people we were testing to see if any of them matched. We cleared everyone we tested. About nine months after the murder, police in Netcong conducted a search warrant on a burglary suspect and found a stack of newspaper articles about the murder in Mt. Olive. They checked the man's fingerprints and matched them to an unidentified fingerprint that had been lifted from the victim's kitchen window. His name was Nicholas Muscio and he was found guilty of the murders. He had not known the victim.

See http://www.nancyorlenweber.com/References.html

[Ersby]

In that testimonial, he said he got hold of her book in 1995. Typing "Nicholas Muscio" into google brings up a special agent's cv that includes a reference to the Nicholas Muscio homocide case, dated September 1995. Pretty fast turnaround for a book to be published.

[Cuddles]

Originally Posted by Rodney

Okay, so suppose for the same $25, Eire's psychic had conducted only a 5-minute reading. However, in that reading, she told Eire the name of the man who murdered her friend, and informed her that her friend's body is underneath the man's porch. Based on a tip from Eire, police then find the body underneath that porch. Would you be outraged that the hourly rate for Eire's reading was $300?

And yet that has absolutely nothing to do with anything. The point is that this psychic did not do that. S/he could not do that. No psychic in the entire history of the whole universe has ever done that. What they do do is charge extortionate rates, far above what highly qualified professionals can, and all you get in return is some meaningless waffle. For the "better" psychics it may be meaningless waffle obtained via cold and/or hot reading. For the majority it is simply waffle.

The point is, if there was actually a service provided it would be a completely different matter. But there isn't. Your claim that $75 an hour is cheap just because the better frauds charge more is almost as ridiculous as all the other claims you make.

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Ersby

In that testimonial, he said he got hold of her book in 1995. Typing "Nicholas Muscio" into google brings up a special agent's cv that includes a reference to the Nicholas Muscio homocide case, dated September 1995. Pretty fast turnaround for a book to be published.

Your search produced a misleading result: Muscio was originally convicted of murder in 1991 and sentenced to life in prison, but that conviction was overturned on appeal in 1994. He was retried and again convicted at a second trial that ended in November 1995, and he was again sentenced to life in prison on January 11, 1996. See the Newark (NJ) Star-Ledger, January 12, 1996.

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Cuddles

. . . Your claim that $75 an hour is cheap just because the better frauds charge more is almost as ridiculous as all the other claims you make.

Only ALMOST as ridiculous? By George, I think I'm making progress!

[Slimething]

Originally Posted by Rodney

First, you have to tell me what would constitute proof from your point of view.

Rodney, I don't have to do anything of the kind. I am of the opinion that the psychic was spouting stuff she didn't know. That opinion is based on the fact that no evidence exists for anything she said. Also, my opinion is based on historical evidence that psychics cannot prove their claims. Sorry, the ball is squarely in your court if you would want me to believe that any of this prediction was based on a paranormal ability to see facts that are not already likely.

Quote:

Fine, but the point is that the psychic said that Eire's friend was murdered by someone she knew, which presumably was also thought to be a strong possibility by police. Nonetheless, it now appears from Eire's account that the police failed to prevent the murderer from taking a second life.

A circular argument destined for the circular file, Rodney. The only basis you have for believing that the murderer has taken a second life if based on your belief that the reading was true. Also, your concept that the police serve a prophylactic is quite bizarre. The police cannot in actuality prevent a crime, only enforce the law.

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Slimething

Rodney, I don't have to do anything of the kind. I am of the opinion that the psychic was spouting stuff she didn't know. That opinion is based on the fact that no evidence exists for anything she said.

The evidence isn't conclusive, but it's pointing in her favor because, according to Eire, Eire's friend's ex-fiance allegedly murdered his new girlfriend and is a prime suspect in the death of Eire's friend.

Originally Posted by Slimething

Also, my opinion is based on historical evidence that psychics cannot prove their claims. Sorry, the ball is squarely in your court if you would want me to believe that any of this prediction was based on a paranormal ability to see facts that are not already likely.

Check out the two testimonials from law enforcement officers to Nancy Weber on her website. She's the real deal.

Originally Posted by Slimething

A circular argument destined for the circular file, Rodney. The only basis you have for believing that the murderer has taken a second life if based on your belief that the reading was true.

Again, Eire states that her friend's ex-fiance is a prime suspect in two murders. None of us here know the details, but I doubt if Eire is trying to make her psychic look good.

Originally Posted by Slimething

Also, your concept that the police serve a prophylactic is quite bizarre. The police cannot in actuality prevent a crime, only enforce the law.

My point is that the consensus here is that any fool should have known that Eire's friend was done in by someone she knew. However, a seemingly logical candidate to have murdered her -- her ex-fiance -- was apparently not charged by police, and now he appears to have killed his new girlfriend.

[Slimething]

Rodney, I'm not going to be drawn out into another interminable thread where you duck the issues and merely insist that you must be right. Neither Eire nor her psychic have been proven right but you maintain that they must be because the police suspect they are. You have unilateraly decided that the ex-fiance is guilty of two murders because the police suspect him (notice you've changed your tune as you originally whined that he hadn't been arrested). And, like I give a flying F as to what a suspected liar says on her website.

Please accept this picture for your thread:

[Rodney]

Originally Posted by Slimething

Rodney, I'm not going to be drawn out into another interminable thread where you duck the issues and merely insist that you must be right. Neither Eire nor her psychic have been proven right but you maintain that they must be because the police suspect they are.

No, I'm just going by Eire's account. Now, if she said the psychic was 100% right, I would be more suspicious of that account. However, she's skeptical of the psychic, so why would she be trying to make the psychic look good?

Originally Posted by Slimething

You have unilateraly decided that the ex-fiance is guilty of two murders because the police suspect him (notice you've changed your tune as you originally whined that he hadn't been arrested).

You continue to miss the point about the ex-fiance not being arrested in the disappearance of Eire's friend. Evidently, the police did not have enough evidence to arrest him, even though he presumably would have been a significant person of interest based on historical statistics. Accordingly, the fact that Eire's psychic told Eire that someone her friend knew was involved in her friend's disappearance was not trivial.

Originally Posted by Slimething

And, like I give a flying F as to what a suspected liar says on her website.

The police seem to believe that this "suspected liar" has been a major help in several cases.

Originally Posted by Slimething

Please accept this picture for your thread:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...7056e7ffca.jpg

I'm glad to see you finally made a worthwhile contribution to the thread.

[rjh01]

Where is my cat? I lost my cat somewhere around here.

[Roadtoad]

Anyone interested in a recipe for a great loaf of bread?

[Slimething]

Originally Posted by Roadtoad

Anyone interested in a recipe for a great loaf of bread?

Hell, yeah! I make my own bread and would love a new recipe..as long as it doesn't involve kittens!