John Edward - psychic or what?

[Joey McGee]

Hey, as Randi told me one time "Enjoy your delusions."

(I didn't enjoy them)

[Resume]

Originally Posted by mike3

And the only way for him to remedy those moral failings of "arrogance and disrespect" is to change his beliefs, right? In other words, merely believing in something can make you a moral wrongdoer as a necessary consequence of that act of belief.

Remains to be seen. But it has been demonstrated that charlatans like cold readers exploit loss, grief, weakness and credulity for their own material benefit.

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by mike3

And the only way for him to remedy those moral failings of "arrogance and disrespect" is to change his beliefs, right? In other words, merely believing in something can make you a moral wrongdoer as a necessary consequence of that act of belief.

Not inferrable from what I wrote, nor close to what I said or meant. Truethat gave a decent response. Start there then re-read what I actually said.

[truethat]

Originally Posted by meg

Most of the people on one side of my family don't use their first name. We are scots, and all the firstborn males are named a particular ancestral name. Second and third borns get named after other family members. None of them use it. They all either have a nickname or go by their middle name.

I told you I'm psychic!

[Robin1]

Originally Posted by truethat

No, first up Robin is a woman. Second, Garrette didn't say anything about moral failings, Garrette stated that the behavior was arrogant and disrespectful. Coming to a site of skeptics and sharing a story that is so full of holes it gives a fishing net a run for its money, and then refusing to accept that we don't believe it's true. Dismissing people as blind instead of providing more details.

Ex. I think in this thread is the first time that we found out that one of the others in the group was Robin's mother. And that is a very important detail. Because if Robin's mother was there, it certainly demystifies the comments about the fingerprints. Reading body language and using details on a person is a warm reading, not a cold reading.

Actually mentioned my Mom was there in the comment section of my blog...which unfortunately just goes to show that people are not really "hearing" me at all. There are no other details I could provide you that would ever prove John is a fake OR prove he is real...if you don't think it is possible for John to have communicated with my Dad by now you never will. I believe I have sincerely tried to listen because I agree with all of you in that there are many ways fake mediums can attempt to trick people...I just don't agree that any of those methods were actually used by John in my reading. Therefore, I don't think the conclusion I've drawn based on my own experience and knowledge is arrogant or disrespectful to anyone who believes differently. For me, it simply represents the truth of what happened that night. I do know, however, that I have a fundamental mindset that is quite different than most of you...you are ALL about the science, the analysis, the proof and yes I agree THAT is very important. And for me ,first and foremost, ALL the analysis and evidence points in one direction...but to be able to truly embrace and accept the Truth that all the evidence has led me to, I do need more than just the science , I need faith... Impossible without it. Ironic, isn't it?

[truethat]

Ok so we've tried reading the blog, you know I did, so let's put out the details here.

Who went with you, you said your brother, your mother and who was the other person? (If you say Valerie Harper or the refrigerator sales man I am really gonna slap you)

You also ignored meg's excellent response.

Originally Posted by meg

Robin,

You and your brother have brought up Occam's razor a couple of times, so let's go with that.

You have also said that you've read all about cold reading while you were doing your "research" on different psychics. *In case you'd like a refresher course, here's a pretty easy to read pdf called Red Hot Cold Reading by *Herb Dewey and Thomas K Seville, Ph.D., written in the mid 1980s, coincidentally right about the time John Edward says he became convinced that he was psychic. *http://www.forum2.org/mellon/lj/Red%...20Readings.pdf

So, here's my question.

If you listen to John Edward and you listen to a magician doing a cold reading gig, John Edward sounds a lot like a magician doing cold reading.

If you watch John Edward and you watch a magician doing a cold reading gig, John Edward looks a lot like a magician doing cold reading.

The kinds of words and images John Edward says he gets are the same kinds of word and images a magician doing cold reading says he gets.


John Edward's "hit" rate is about the same as a magician gets doing cold reading.

We know that cold reading exists.
We know that some people call themselves psychics who perform cold reading.


So, which is the more simple explanation for John Edward's "abilities"?


John Edward is a magician doing cold reading.

OR

John Edward actually really talks to dead people, but really talking to dead people coincidentally looks and sounds a lot like magicians doing cold reading.

The question I'm asking... you keep ignoring.

Let's say John Edward is an honest to god Psychic and he can very vaguely pick up details. Let's say he thinks he is talking to the dead. That's what he honestly believes.

But what evidence did he tell you that proved it was Salvatore? You bought the fridge, your brother had the Valerie Harper connection, Beaver tooth guy had the tooth on him.

These are all details in the "here and now."

How does this connect to the "other side?"

You aren't making that connection clear. If we, for the sake of argument, agree that John Edward is a psychic, how does that prove he's talking to the "other side."

Just give one example. Don't run away again.

[Resume]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

I do need more than just the science , I need faith... Impossible without it. Ironic, isn't it?

It isn't ironic; of course you need more than science. Indeed, faith is essential to believe wherever and whenever objective evidence is lacking.

Unfortunately for your position, that faith is only validation for your experience. And weak at that.

Why would, or should, anyone abandon objectivity in favor of your claim?

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

I do need more than just the science , I need faith... Impossible without it. Ironic, isn't it?

Yeah, woo is science plus faith. It's super-science. Someone like Eienstein is "just" science. That's why his work was so feeble with nuclear bombs and all, whereas once you add woo - then you've really got something with awesome power like saying a relative has a "G" in their name.

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Actually mentioned my Mom was there in the comment section of my blog...which unfortunately just goes to show that people are not really "hearing" me at all. There are no other details I could provide you that would ever prove John is a fake OR prove he is real...if you don't think it is possible for John to have communicated with my Dad by now you never will. I believe I have sincerely tried to listen because I agree with all of you in that there are many ways fake mediums can attempt to trick people...I just don't agree that any of those methods were actually used by John in my reading. Therefore, I don't think the conclusion I've drawn based on my own experience and knowledge is arrogant or disrespectful to anyone who believes differently. For me, it simply represents the truth of what happened that night. I do know, however, that I have a fundamental mindset that is quite different than most of you...you are ALL about the science, the analysis, the proof and yes I agree THAT is very important. And for me ,first and foremost, ALL the analysis and evidence points in one direction...but to be able to truly embrace and accept the Truth that all the evidence has led me to, I do need more than just the science , I need faith... Impossible without it. Ironic, isn't it?

There is nothing ironic here. There is only avoidance.

You keep saying there is nothing you can say to convince us. How do you know when you refuse to actually say anything?

Discuss your claim. Don't just say: "I believe, and you should, too."

I will keep pointing it out: you bring up topics but shy away when you discover we know about them already, so of course we don't believe you. You have provided exactly nothing in the way of evidence and you run from talk of it.

[wardenclyffe]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Actually mentioned my Mom was there in the comment section of my blog...which unfortunately just goes to show that people are not really "hearing" me at all. There are no other details I could provide you that would ever prove John is a fake OR prove he is real...if you don't think it is possible for John to have communicated with my Dad by now you never will. I believe I have sincerely tried to listen because I agree with all of you in that there are many ways fake mediums can attempt to trick people...I just don't agree that any of those methods were actually used by John in my reading. Therefore, I don't think the conclusion I've drawn based on my own experience and knowledge is arrogant or disrespectful to anyone who believes differently. For me, it simply represents the truth of what happened that night. I do know, however, that I have a fundamental mindset that is quite different than most of you...you are ALL about the science, the analysis, the proof and yes I agree THAT is very important. And for me ,first and foremost, ALL the analysis and evidence points in one direction...but to be able to truly embrace and accept the Truth that all the evidence has led me to, I do need more than just the science , I need faith... Impossible without it. Ironic, isn't it?

Robin,

I can be convinced. However here's my question for you. You said that you've been to X number of mediums before (you can fill in the number). Some of them are very financially successful and famous. It seems, though, that you found all of them wanting until this recent reading by John Edward. Fair enough. You've been around the block on this subject. You know a fake when you see it. So, the question is why did you keep going back? Why did you keep trying? I think most of us (and I think most people in general) would have given up after the third or fourth failure in person, especially if we'd done research as you have that shows how many fakes there are and the methods they use. What made you believe that Lucy would not pull the football away on the next psychic reading or the next or the one after that? And if you go often enough, you are bound to run into someone who has done the research or simply gotten a lucky break.

I remember James Randi once told a story about how he* got an incredible hit while he was doing a "reading" once. It's because he just happened to be in a bathroom stall using it for its designed purpose, when he overheard other people in the bathroom having a revealing conversation. They were absolutely amazed and dumbfounded when they got their reading. Perhaps that was their first time or perhaps they had also been searching for a real medium.

So, why keep trying and why this and not bigfoot or aura-reading or any number of other things that can disappoint so often, but every now and then, maybe there's a hit.

At the beginning of this post, I said that I could be convinced. I know that John Edward is rich and doesn't need the money (although he charges for readings). I'd be awfully impressed if he passed Randi's Million Dollar Challenge or any of the other paranormal challenges offered around the world and he gave the money to charity. That would go a long way toward convincing me.

Thanks,
Ward

*I think it was a story told by Randi, but it's possible that it was told by him about another mentalist that he knew and it was not about himself. The memory fails.

[Robin1]

Originally Posted by truethat

Ok so we've tried reading the blog, you know I did, so let's put out the details here.

Who went with you, you said your brother, your mother and who was the other person? (If you say Valerie Harper or the refrigerator sales man I am really gonna slap you)

You also ignored meg's excellent response.






The question I'm asking... you keep ignoring.

Let's say John Edward is an honest to god Psychic and he can very vaguely pick up details. Let's say he thinks he is talking to the dead. That's what he honestly believes.

But what evidence did he tell you that proved it was Salvatore? You bought the fridge, your brother had the Valerie Harper connection, Beaver tooth guy had the tooth on him.

These are all details in the "here and now."

How does this connect to the "other side?"

You aren't making that connection clear. If we, for the sake of argument, agree that John Edward is a psychic, how does that prove he's talking to the "other side."

Just give one example. Don't run away again.

truethat...I want to address that which is most important first...the joke...That whole "if you say Valerie Harper or the refrigerator salesman I am really gonna slap you" ...well, that was hysterical! : )
Ok people with me that night....my brother, my Mom, and my friend Pam.
As far as your other question...assuming as you say in your scenario that John is a psychic and perhaps can read minds or pick up on things...how do I know he wasn't just "reading our minds" vs. communicating with our Dad? Well because my new refrigerator was the furthest thing from my mind that night. And my brother obviously wasn't thinking about Valerie Harper thus his insisting to John he had no connection to her. So for me to believe John was psychic I would also have to believe he can pick up on things that we're not even thinking about...and reach into the recesses of our brains for information. THAT seems crazy : ) The more sane solution obviously is that John is communicating with my deceased father : )
Seriously, I do believe our loved ones are well and able to see what is going on in our lives. Now how is my Dad going to prove that to me through John Edward? It HAS to be something there is NO way John could know and it has to be specific to me, and no generalities thank you. So John telling me about my 3 boys , feral cats, where I live, my job, where i went to school, rabies etc. would prove nothing to me because I KNOW that is all information easily gleaned from the Internet. John telling me my Dad is Ok and loves us and misses us would prove NOTHING to me as well. There is no better way for my Dad to prove he is well and sees what is going on in our lives than by telling us something specifically that is going on in our lives...something relatively unusual...something exactly like... I just bought a new refrigerator. And to Doug... who had just a few hours before been reading about Valerie Harper (and like he said hadn't given her a conscious thought in years) and then called his friend to discuss going to see her show. THAT is the PROOF that my Dad is well and yes can see what is going on in the here and now because he relayed to John what is going on in the here and now! Refrigerator statement made directly to me to validate that the reading was for me. Valerie Harper statement made directly to my brother. Without those 2 validations the hard "G" sounding name and the problem with his brain and stomach and the ST sound etc..would not have convinced me John is real. However, WITH the refrigerator and the Valerie Harper connection the rest of what John said has more credence.

[truethat]

How is that proof that it was Salvatore? It could be a demon haunting you if you're going to open up possibilities. It could be a guardian angel, and alien spy that is sending mind rays to John Edwards.

What utterly convinced you it was Salvatore and no one else?

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Total household appliance sales are between 45 million and 55 million a year, rough order of magnitude. New appliances only. There are about twice as many households. If you add in used appliances then the majority of households are likely to have acquired a "new" appliance recently.

If my Dad wants to communicate with me then he doesn't need a charletan to communicate through, and to tell me I recently bought an appliance.

[AdMan]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Now how is my Dad going to prove that to me through John Edward? It HAS to be something there is NO way John could know and it has to be specific to me, and no generalities thank you. So John telling me about my 3 boys , feral cats, where I live, my job, where i went to school, rabies etc. would prove nothing to me because I KNOW that is all information easily gleaned from the Internet. John telling me my Dad is Ok and loves us and misses us would prove NOTHING to me as well. There is no better way for my Dad to prove he is well and sees what is going on in our lives than by telling us something specifically that is going on in our lives...something relatively unusual...something exactly like... I just bought a new refrigerator.

How does this make any sense? Rather than telling you about something deeply personal, perhaps from your childhood, that you and your dad shared and that nobody else could possibly know about, he tells you you just bought a new refrigerator? And this is convincing?

If true, it's sad that the souls of the departed concern themselves with such mundane trivialities.

[Robin1]

Originally Posted by truethat

How is that proof that it was Salvatore? It could be a demon haunting you if you're going to open up possibilities. It could be a guardian angel, and alien spy that is sending mind rays to John Edwards.

What utterly convinced you it was Salvatore and no one else?

truethat...Because I believe in the power of the Rosary and protection prayers for ex. the prayer to St Michael the Archangel. And after all that, the "convincer" for me...I trust my gut. And after all is said and done and of course analyzed...to "death"...it all rests upon trusting your gut...the proverbial leap of faith..and I do understand why that is not a viable option for some. But for me...well, it fits. And by the way, I will never understand how my Nana's "slippers" validation is so easily dismissed by you...but then again i don't think most people are willing to take that "leap." And i don't think you need to...many paths...And I for one am happy that for a brief moment in time ours have crossed. All the best on your journey...

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

There is no better way for my Dad to prove he is well and sees what is going on in our lives than by telling us something specifically that is going on in our lives...something relatively unusual...something exactly like... I just bought a new refrigerator.

Yet he gets his own name wrong...

Quote:

Refrigerator statement made directly to me to validate that the reading was for me.

It wasn't a statement, it was a question. Edward didn't say "your father says that you've just bought a new fridge", he asked you whether you had and seemed surprised when you said yes.

Look at how your story has changed to make Edward seem more perceptive than he was. Now ask yourself why you're not actually telling the truth about this event. I don't think you're being deliberately deceitful, I think you don't even notice when you change the details like this. I think you're lying to yourself. Perhaps you should ask yourself what this tells you about your account.

Quote:

Without those 2 validations the hard "G" sounding name and the problem with his brain and stomach and the ST sound etc..would not have convinced me John is real.

Your father doesn't have an "ST" sound in his name. Again, what does that tell you about how you're processing this information?

[Pixel42]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

I can't change your mind, and you can't change mine

We've told you exactly what it would take to change our minds. The evidence we require is the minimum it should take to convince anyone, including you, that Edward is a genuine medium. Unfortunately the standard of evidence you've decided is enough to convince you is so low that a mildly talented and/or lucky magician could (and did) reach it. Why you are insisting on setting your standard of evidence so low is a question only you can answer, but whilst you continue to do so you're correct in saying that no-one can ever change your mind.

[Robin1]

Originally Posted by Pixel42

We've told you exactly what it would take to change our minds. The evidence we require is the minimum it should take to convince anyone, including you, that Edward is a genuine medium. Unfortunately the standard of evidence you've decided is enough to convince you is so low that a mildly talented and/or lucky magician could (and did) reach it. Why you are insisting on setting your standard of evidence so low is a question only you can answer, but whilst you continue to do so you're correct in saying that no-one can ever change your mind.

Pixel42.., You're right!! My standard of evidence is " So low that a mildly talented and/or lucky magician could (and did) reach it." Which is exactly the reason that right now you are going to tell me exactly what I purchased in the last 2 weeks that was a "major" purchase on my credit card as well as what my brother Doug was reading about a mere few hours ago that he also felt the need to call and talk to his friend about? I'll be waiting right here for your minimal proof of evidence. Really, Pixel42 , really?

[AdMan]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Pixel42.., You're right!! My standard of evidence is " So low that a mildly talented and/or lucky magician could (and did) reach it." Which is exactly the reason that right now you are going to tell me exactly what I purchased in the last 2 weeks that was a "major" purchase on my credit card as well as what my brother Doug was reading about a mere few hours ago that he also felt the need to call and talk to his friend about? I'll be waiting right here for your minimal proof of evidence. Really, Pixel42 , really?

Robin, it was just an apparently successful cold reading session from a half-competent fake psychic, who also may have used some other methods to gather other information. Why, you've shown you can be convinced by cold readings even in this very thread!

You want another reading like that, I'm sure it can be arranged. It's still fake.

Oh, and remember--the burden of proof is on those making extraordinary claims--in this case, you. Not on someone saying it's all obviously fake.

[Pixel42]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Pixel42.., You're right!! My standard of evidence is " So low that a mildly talented and/or lucky magician could (and did) reach it." Which is exactly the reason that right now you are going to tell me exactly what I purchased in the last 2 weeks that was a "major" purchase on my credit card as well as what my brother Doug was reading about a mere few hours ago that he also felt the need to call and talk to his friend about? I'll be waiting right here for your minimal proof of evidence. Really, Pixel42 , really?

Another poster here already made a few intelligent guesses which you acknowledged were hits. If you go to enough mediums (and you clearly went to quite a few) one is bound to make a few more lucky guesses than the rest. It isn't even necessary to assume hot reading, or that you're remembering the hits as more impressive than they actually were, to account for your experience.

I say again: the only way to find out if Edward is genuine is to test him under conditions where all possible alternative explanations of his perceived accuracy are carefully excluded. That's the "minimum standard of evidence" required for this sort of claim. Anyone who is satisifed with anything less than that, let alone with a single anecdote, simply hasn't understood the lengths it is necessary to go to to compensate for the cognitive biases we all have. Until Edward consents to such a test all we have to go on is the recordings of his readings, and they strongly indicate that he is a bog standard cold reader.

[pakeha]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Yes, I watched the clip. It reminded me of the night I saw John Edward...

Thanks for confirming the video was similar to the JE performance that you attended.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

... I agree with all of you in that there are many ways fake mediums can attempt to trick people...I just don't agree that any of those methods were actually used by John in my reading. Therefore, I don't think the conclusion I've drawn based on my own experience and knowledge is arrogant or disrespectful to anyone who believes differently. For me, it simply represents the truth of what happened that night. ...

Given what we all saw and heard in the video, it's difficult to imagine anyone thinking the performer was anything but a cruel predator feeding on human suffering.
Seriously, Robin, didn't you see how that 'reading' was orchestrated?

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

...There is no better way for my Dad to prove he is well and sees what is going on in our lives than by telling us something specifically that is going on in our lives...something relatively unusual...something exactly like... I just bought a new refrigerator. ...THAT is the PROOF that my Dad is well and yes can see what is going on in the here and now because he relayed to John what is going on in the here and now! Refrigerator statement made directly to me to validate that the reading was for me. ...

Here we come to the point.
In your blog and in your posts you've shown us "Refrigerator statement made directly to me to validate that the reading was for me." is not an accurate reflection of what happened during JE's performance.
Other posters have explained why, Robin.

Remember what AlaskaBushPilot wrote?

Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot

Total household appliance sales are between 45 million and 55 million a year, rough order of magnitude. New appliances only. There are about twice as many households. If you add in used appliances then the majority of households are likely to have acquired a "new" appliance recently. ...

When JE threw out the question about a fridge to the group, he had a reasonable chance of getting a positive reaction to it, didn't he?

I'm not the only one who has noticed this.

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Yet he gets his own name wrong...



It wasn't a statement, it was a question. Edward didn't say "your father says that you've just bought a new fridge", he asked you whether you had and seemed surprised when you said yes.

Look at how your story has changed to make Edward seem more perceptive than he was. Now ask yourself why you're not actually telling the truth about this event. I don't think you're being deliberately deceitful, I think you don't even notice when you change the details like this. I think you're lying to yourself. Perhaps you should ask yourself what this tells you about your account.



Your father doesn't have an "ST" sound in his name. Again, what does that tell you about how you're processing this information?

Ouch.
But I hope you'll give that some thought, Robin.

[wardenclyffe]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Pixel42.., You're right!! My standard of evidence is " So low that a mildly talented and/or lucky magician could (and did) reach it." Which is exactly the reason that right now you are going to tell me exactly what I purchased in the last 2 weeks that was a "major" purchase on my credit card as well as what my brother Doug was reading about a mere few hours ago that he also felt the need to call and talk to his friend about? I'll be waiting right here for your minimal proof of evidence. Really, Pixel42 , really?

Can you imagine what John Edward's reaction would be if you came to him with a similar demand? And he gets paid. Lots. Keep in mind that you did not come to him with specific questions. He threw out vague guesses and you provided the specific answers.

Ward

[eerok]

Robin, sorry to hear that you were emotionally exploited by a charlatan. The world is full of fakes. Next time try harder to see them coming.

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

truethat...Because I believe in the power of the Rosary and protection prayers for ex. the prayer to St Michael the Archangel. And after all that, the "convincer" for me...I trust my gut. And after all is said and done and of course analyzed...to "death"...it all rests upon trusting your gut...the proverbial leap of faith..and I do understand why that is not a viable option for some. But for me...well, it fits. And by the way, I will never understand how my Nana's "slippers" validation is so easily dismissed by you...but then again i don't think most people are willing to take that "leap." And i don't think you need to...many paths...And I for one am happy that for a brief moment in time ours have crossed. All the best on your journey...

This is actually a step forward in your analysis, though whether you apply your insight rationally remains to be seen.

You have admitted in this post that, in fact, you do not have proof at all. Instead, you trust your gut and have engaged in a "leap of faith."

For my part, I will be less abrasive if you say it directly: My thread title is wrong. I do not have proof of life after death.

Can you say that, Robin?

As for your credit card red herring, it has been addressed more than once.

[Robin1]

Originally Posted by Garrette

This is actually a step forward in your analysis, though whether you apply your insight rationally remains to be seen.

You have admitted in this post that, in fact, you do not have proof at all. Instead, you trust your gut and have engaged in a "leap of faith."

For my part, I will be less abrasive if you say it directly: My thread title is wrong. I do not have proof of life after death.

Can you say that, Robin?

As for your credit card red herring, it has been addressed more than once.

Yes...a leap of faith...only AFTER carefully analyzing ALL the evidence. Once again, Garrette, you are not "hearing" what I am saying. And I like my title just fine...Proof of Life After Death...yup, rings true to me. Although I will add a subtitle...Proof of Life After Death: Even Though Some Will Never Ever Ever No Matter What Be Able To Truly "See" It. Can you say that, Garrette?

[meg]

Robin,

Your brother is an actor, is he not? Is it really such a stretch for someone to ask one NY actor if he has a connection to another NY actor?

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Yes...a leap of faith...only AFTER carefully analyzing ALL the evidence.

Not analysing it particularly carefully, if you fail to notice that "Salvatore" doesn't have an "ST" sound, or during the course of your analysis change questions to statements. That's not analysis, that's revision.

[Resume]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Yes...a leap of faith...only AFTER carefully analyzing ALL the evidence. Once again, Garrette, you are not "hearing" what I am saying. And I like my title just fine...Proof of Life After Death...yup, rings true to me. Although I will add a subtitle...Proof of Life After Death: Even Though Some Will Never Ever Ever No Matter What Be Able To Truly "See" It. Can you say that, Garrette?

You haven't presented any evidence to sufficiently validate your thread title. In fact, the more you post the more disingenuous it gets.

[Pixel42]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Yes...a leap of faith...only AFTER carefully analyzing ALL the evidence.

What evidence? A couple of lucky hits and several obvious misses in one session? What about all the evidence of obvious cold reading (not to mention bullying) in the recorded sessions that have been posted? What about Edward's failure to provide the only kind of evidence that would actually mean anything, i.e. the results of proper scientific testing? All he would need to do is apply for the JREF challenge, or any of the other challenges. So why doesn't he?

Quote:

Once again, Garrette, you are not "hearing" what I am saying.

We hear you fine, and we recognise what you're saying as the usual attempt to fit tiny shreds of evidence into a preconceived belief, whilst wilfully ignoring the mountains of evidence that don't fit.

Quote:

Some Will Never Ever Ever No Matter What Be Able To Truly "See" It. Can you say that, Garrette?

We've told you what it would take to convince us that Edward is genuine. What would it take to convince you that he isn't? Can you say that, Robin? Because if not, you are the one who Will Never Ever Ever No Matter What Be Able To Truly "See" what is really going on.

[Robin1]

Originally Posted by wardenclyffe

Robin,

I can be convinced. However here's my question for you. You said that you've been to X number of mediums before (you can fill in the number). Some of them are very financially successful and famous. It seems, though, that you found all of them wanting until this recent reading by John Edward. Fair enough. You've been around the block on this subject. You know a fake when you see it. So, the question is why did you keep going back? Why did you keep trying? I think most of us (and I think most people in general) would have given up after the third or fourth failure in person, especially if we'd done research as you have that shows how many fakes there are and the methods they use. What made you believe that Lucy would not pull the football away on the next psychic reading or the next or the one after that? And if you go often enough, you are bound to run into someone who has done the research or simply gotten a lucky break.

I remember James Randi once told a story about how he* got an incredible hit while he was doing a "reading" once. It's because he just happened to be in a bathroom stall using it for its designed purpose, when he overheard other people in the bathroom having a revealing conversation. They were absolutely amazed and dumbfounded when they got their reading. Perhaps that was their first time or perhaps they had also been searching for a real medium.

So, why keep trying and why this and not bigfoot or aura-reading or any number of other things that can disappoint so often, but every now and then, maybe there's a hit.

At the beginning of this post, I said that I could be convinced. I know that John Edward is rich and doesn't need the money (although he charges for readings). I'd be awfully impressed if he passed Randi's Million Dollar Challenge or any of the other paranormal challenges offered around the world and he gave the money to charity. That would go a long way toward convincing me.

Thanks,
Ward

*I think it was a story told by Randi, but it's possible that it was told by him about another mentalist that he knew and it was not about himself. The memory fails.

wardenclyffe, Why do I keep going back to psychics and mediums when every one I've been to so far in my opinion has been fake? I'll answer your question with another question... Why do people keep playing the lottery? And, I'm fascinated by the subject and always open to the possibilities..and for me, it's fun. A night out with friends or my brother Occam Jr. and always the possibility of "What if.." At the very least I always have a funny story to tell after the fact. OMG, I went to a small psychic gathering last week with friends and learned that in a past life I was a Scottish male midget...a very happy Scottish male midget...my biggest question after that is why must I be short every time I am reincarnated : ) And just to be clear to those of you with no sense of humor, Garrette et al., no, I did not believe it. More happened that night but I digress. Agreed it is NOT fun for people who are desperately seeking comfort and answers and who then end up at a James Van Praaghy event. But what I find just as reprehensible as fake mediums preying on the bereaved are those non-believers who try to convince someone who has found comfort through a medium or personal signs from their deceased loved one that it was not real. Because I know it can be real. And even though I enjoy the debate, there are others out there who can truly be hurt by the insistence that the comfort they've found is an illusion. And what gets me the most about that is non believers think they are helping by spreading their non belief and negativity...when in reality they are just as hurtful as any fake medium. And I know non- believers feel they are enlightening others by showing them that once you are dead you are really most sincerely dead...BUT you're WRONG...and possibly hurting others...and yes THAT annoys me. James Randi annoys me. A lot. And if I were John Edward I would never agree to the million dollar challenge he proposes...I wouldn't trust James Randi as far as I could throw him... and NO matter what the evidence would show the skeptics would attempt to explain it away. Just as they try to do with regard to the testing done in the "Afterlife Experiments." Which by the way , Garrette, Dr. Schwartz does respond to Randi's and your concerns...just google it and you can have your endless debate with him, not me. Ward, I think it's great you are open to the possibility ...and remember for me it is not that big of a stretch to believe John Edward can communicate with those who have crossed over because I absolutely communicated with my Nana that night...she proved it.

[Pixel42]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Why do I keep going back to psychics and mediums when every one I've been to so far in my opinion has been fake? I'll answer your question with another question... Why do people keep playing the lottery?

Because there's a demonstrably non-zero, albeit very small, chance that they might win. No-one has ever demonstrated the ability you were looking for, despite every opportunity to do so.

Quote:

And I know non- believers feel they are enlightening others by showing them that once you are dead you are really most sincerely dead...BUT you're WRONG...and possibly hurting others...and yes THAT annoys me.

And if you're the one that's wrong, it's people like Edward who are hurting others. And all the evidence suggests that you're the one that's wrong.

Quote:

And if I were John Edward I would never agree to the million dollar challenge he proposes...I wouldn't trust James Randi as far as I could throw him

He doesn't need to trust Randi. The protocol is mutually agreed, and can be run without Randi even being present if the applicant so wishes. The whole point of agreeing the protocol in advance is that no-one on either side needs to be trusted, the entire process of testing is transparent.

Quote:

NO matter what the evidence would show the skeptics would attempt to explain it away.

We'll never know will we? On the rare occasions when proper testing has been done, it's always been the applicant who's left trying to explain away the (invariably negative) results.

Quote:

Just as they try to do with regard to the testing done in the "Afterlife Experiments."

Those experiments were fundamentally flawed. Yes Schwartz has tried to justify them, and people who know nothing about the scientific method may find his doubletalk convincing, but you're not amongst such people here.

[GeeMack]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

[...] But what I find just as reprehensible as fake mediums preying on the bereaved are those non-believers who try to convince someone who has found comfort through a medium or personal signs from their deceased loved one that it was not real.

It's not.

Quote:

Because I know it can be real.

No, you believe it, based on faith, with no evidence to support it, and with much evidence that contradicts it. That is how delusion is defined.

Quote:

And even though I enjoy the debate, there are others out there who can truly be hurt by the insistence that the comfort they've found is an illusion.

Tough luck. It's 2012. Humanity progresses. Just because there are some who don't have the honesty or courage to accept the loss of a loved one doesn't mean everyone else should pat them on their little heads and indulge their delusion.

Quote:

And what gets me the most about that is non believers think they are helping by spreading their non belief and negativity... when in reality they are just as hurtful as any fake medium.

I described how I would approach someone close to me if they were suffering the same irrational thinking and delusion as those who believe John Edward is the real thing...

"Your father is dead. Get over it. There are healthy ways to do that. Believing that your dad is magically communicating with you through a minor celebrity who does his stuff on a TV program is not healthy. Again, your father is dead, belly up, deceased, a-gonner, pushin' up daisies, kaput, D-E-A-D dead. He's not coming back, and he's not sending you signs from the other side. Accept it."

Yep, if I had a friend or relative who was so badly duped by a con man like Edward, I'd insist they see a grief counselor.

Quote:

And I know non- believers feel they are enlightening others by showing them that once you are dead you are really most sincerely dead... BUT you're WRONG...

We've been trying to teach you the simple magic tricks John Edward uses to con the gullible, the desperate, and the vulnerable. We can't make you learn.

Quote:

[...] and possibly hurting others... and yes THAT annoys me. James Randi annoys me. A lot. And if I were John Edward I would never agree to the million dollar challenge he proposes... I wouldn't trust James Randi as far as I could throw him... and NO matter what the evidence would show the skeptics would attempt to explain it away. Just as they try to do with regard to the testing done in the "Afterlife Experiments." Which by the way , Garrette, Dr. Schwartz does respond to Randi's and your concerns... just google it and you can have your endless debate with him, not me.

Whining about your failure to make an objective case for your fantasy isn't really solving your problem. Whining about the people who are actually trying to help you isn't getting you anywhere. Listening to the good folks here who are trying to help you might. The only thing that's holding you back is your admitted willful ignorance.

Quote:

Ward, I think it's great you are open to the possibility ... and remember for me it is not that big of a stretch to believe John Edward can communicate with those who have crossed over because I absolutely communicated with my Nana that night... she proved it.

No, nobody proved it. Everyone who has died is dead. There's no communicating from the other side. Once more... dead, belly up, deceased, a-gonner, pushin' up daisies, kaput, D-E-A-D dead, not coming back, and not sending you signs from the other side. It's healthy to accept reality. It's not healthy to so steadfastly reject it.

[dafydd]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

truethat...Because I believe in the power of the Rosary and protection prayers for ex. the prayer to St Michael the Archangel. And after all that, the "convincer" for me...I trust my gut. And after all is said and done and of course analyzed...to "death"...it all rests upon trusting your gut...the proverbial leap of faith..and I do understand why that is not a viable option for some. But for me...well, it fits. And by the way, I will never understand how my Nana's "slippers" validation is so easily dismissed by you...but then again i don't think most people are willing to take that "leap." And i don't think you need to...many paths...And I for one am happy that for a brief moment in time ours have crossed. All the best on your journey...

Now we are at the nub. It's all about your belief in an invisible, undetectable sky daddy.

[Resume]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

James Randi annoys me. A lot. And if I were John Edward I would never agree to the million dollar challenge he proposes...

No worries there. There's no way any of these successful cold readers are going to give up their cash cows to take a challenge that exposes them for what they are. What's a mere million to a guy like Edward?

No, he'll continue to do what he does, and it's quite obvious what that is; and the gullible will continue to line his pockets. Doesn't that bother you in the least?

You know what annoys me? The shameless promotion you're giving this . . . person who is doing nothing more than a cheesy mentalist act.

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Yes...a leap of faith...only AFTER carefully analyzing ALL the evidence.

The two are incompatible. If you have evidence then you do not have faith. If you rely on faith, you do not require evidence.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Once again, Garrette, you are not "hearing" what I am saying.

I have heard it all. I have read it more closely than you. I do not say that lightly. You don't even realize that there are discrepancies in your own descriptions of the events, and you will not acknowledge them when pointed out.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

And I like my title just fine...

I've no doubt that you like it, but accuracy is not related to how pleasing something is.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Proof of Life After Death...yup, rings true to me.

So you have no faith, then, and you choose to ignore facts, and you admit you have no understanding of what proof actually is. Disappointing, really. Sadly, it is not a surprise, but it is nonetheless disappointing.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Although I will add a subtitle...Proof of Life After Death: Even Though Some Will Never Ever Ever No Matter What Be Able To Truly "See" It. Can you say that, Garrette?

I can say pretty much anything, including your willfully inaccurate new title, but that does nothing to make it any less untrue.

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

wardenclyffe, Why do I keep going back to psychics and mediums when every one I've been to so far in my opinion has been fake? I'll answer your question with another question... Why do people keep playing the lottery?

Mostly because people don't understand odds, somewhat because people want the fun of an inexpensive daydream, and partly because the lottery, while ridiculously stacked against any individual, is at least honest, factual, and subject to actual winning. It is also not fraudulent.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

And, I'm fascinated by the subject and always open to the possibilities..and for me, it's fun. A night out with friends or my brother Occam Jr. and always the possibility of "What if.." At the very least I always have a funny story to tell after the fact.

That's actually a fine answer. The subject fascinates me, too, and I have visited psychics and mediums. Visiting them isn't the issue. Even believing in them isn't the issue. Passing off your belief as proof is the issue.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

OMG, I went to a small psychic gathering last week with friends and learned that in a past life I was a Scottish male midget...a very happy Scottish male midget...my biggest question after that is why must I be short every time I am reincarnated : ) And just to be clear to those of you with no sense of humor, Garrette et al., no, I did not believe it.

I'm glad you clarified that, but why do you assume we/I have no sense of humor? Can only those who agree with you have a sense of humor? In all seriousness and without humor: You are jumping to that conclusion with even less evidence than that on which you base your conclusion about John Edward.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

More happened that night but I digress. Agreed it is NOT fun for people who are desperately seeking comfort and answers and who then end up at a James Van Praaghy event.

Really? How on earth can you say that no one at a JVP event is comforted? Don't they believe as strongly as you?

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

But what I find just as reprehensible as fake mediums preying on the bereaved

So you understand some of the ire directed at JE. Good.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

are those non-believers who try to convince someone who has found comfort through a medium or personal signs from their deceased loved one that it was not real.

You mean like you just did with those who believe in JVP. Do you really not see a problem here?

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Because I know it can be real.

The comfort? Of course it can be real, or at least as real as it can be when not addressing truth. Or did you mean the claimed communication with the dead? Then, no, it isn't real. At least it has never been shown to be real, your dodges here notwithstanding.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

And even though I enjoy the debate, there are others out there who can truly be hurt by the insistence that the comfort they've found is an illusion.

Once again the thought that you are the one who can tell the difference, who cannot be fooled, arises, but you add to it the new virtue that you can handle the dispute while others cannot. Where, exactly, does your high opinion of yourself end?

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

And what gets me the most about that is non believers think they are helping by spreading their non belief and negativity...

Like you do with James Van Praagh, right?

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

when in reality they are just as hurtful as any fake medium.

"they" are not monolithic. Skeptics are not a conglomerate speaking with one voice.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

And I know non- believers feel they are enlightening others by showing them that once you are dead you are really most sincerely dead...BUT you're WRONG...and possibly hurting others...and yes THAT annoys me.

Possibly? Can "possibly" apply to you and to John Edward or are you the only one who can dole out "possibly" while everything you claim is certain?

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

James Randi annoys me. A lot.

Who cares? Truth is not contingent upon one's pleasing manner.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

And if I were John Edward I would never agree to the million dollar challenge he proposes...

I wouldn't, either, because I would know I could never pass it regardless how fair it was made. A fraud knows not to place a bet on truth.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

I wouldn't trust James Randi as far as I could throw him...

And I wager you base this distrust on absolutely no demonstrable fact, unless you care to enlighten me.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

and NO matter what the evidence would show the skeptics would attempt to explain it away.

Then you don't know skeptics. Your description applies far better to believers. Show me where in your case we (the skeptics) have not followed the evidence.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Just as they try to do with regard to the testing done in the "Afterlife Experiments."

And you say this without having even discussed it with us. I, at least, read the book and looked at the evidence before I judged it.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Which by the way , Garrette, Dr. Schwartz does respond to Randi's and your concerns...

I have read his responses, too. I'm not a fly-by-night skeptic in this matter. Schwartz's responses are aimed at soothing his audience and have nothing to do with facts. Something which I can demonstrate if you care to actually discuss it.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

just google it and you can have your endless debate with him, not me.

Ah, but of course you won't discuss it. I wager if it had turned out that we are not familiar with Schwartz you would be quoting him left and right. Schwartz is a liar and fraud. His book and his defense of it are full of fundamental flaws that would shame an undergraduate student. He knows this. He also knows it won't matter to those who wish to believe.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Ward, I think it's great you are open to the possibility ...

Why just Ward? Others have expressed that openness. I have expressed it myself. I used to share your belief. It is conceivable that I could share it again. You, however, have made it clear that you are most definitely not oppen to the possibility of being wrong, and yet you claim to be the open midned one.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

and remember for me it is not that big of a stretch to believe John Edward can communicate with those who have crossed over because I absolutely communicated with my Nana that night...she proved it.

No, she didn't. You created an emotional response that supported the belief you wanted.

Or perhaps you are right, and she did communicate with you. Unfortunately, the evidence you have presented falls far, far short of demonstrating it.

[truethat]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

truethat...Because I believe in the power of the Rosary and protection prayers for ex. the prayer to St Michael the Archangel. And after all that, the "convincer" for me...I trust my gut. And after all is said and done and of course analyzed...to "death"...it all rests upon trusting your gut...the proverbial leap of faith..and I do understand why that is not a viable option for some. But for me...well, it fits. And by the way, I will never understand how my Nana's "slippers" validation is so easily dismissed by you...but then again i don't think most people are willing to take that "leap." And i don't think you need to...many paths...And I for one am happy that for a brief moment in time ours have crossed. All the best on your journey...

Oh wow. Neeeever mind then.

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Although I will add a subtitle...Proof of Life After Death: Even Though Some Will Never Ever Ever No Matter What Be Able To Truly "See" It.

This ad hominem is generally the refuge of people who have not shown any reasonable evidence whatsoever.

Some short, shaky home videos of the afterlife perhaps?

[pakeha]

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

...Agreed it is NOT fun for people who are desperately seeking comfort and answers and who then end up at a James Van Praaghy event. But what I find just as reprehensible as fake mediums preying on the bereaved are those non-believers who try to convince someone who has found comfort through a medium or personal signs from their deceased loved one that it was not real. Because I know it can be real. And even though I enjoy the debate, there are others out there who can truly be hurt by the insistence that the comfort they've found is an illusion...

Hi, Robin.
What you are describing is the typical reaction of a scam victim.
Especially the victims of romance scams.
There are cruel predators out there and the video we all saw showed a typical example of the breed.

Originally Posted by Resume

...You know what annoys me? The shameless promotion you're giving this . . . person who is doing nothing more than a cheesy mentalist act.

My viewpoint from day one.
Belief in the power of the Rosary and susceptability to mediums' patter is an odd mix, Robin.
Have you discussed this belief in JE's mediumship with your local priest?

[Robin1]

Originally Posted by pakeha

Hi, Robin.
What you are describing is the typical reaction of a scam victim.
Especially the victims of romance scams.
There are cruel predators out there and the video we all saw showed a typical example of the breed.




My viewpoint from day one.
Belief in the power of the Rosary and susceptability to mediums' patter is an odd mix, Robin.
Have you discussed this belief in JE's mediumship with your local priest?

Pakeha...I took a gamble by ever posting a thread in this forum and here's where I go for broke! As I told Truethat, yes, I do believe that evil spirits may come through...thus the protection prayers. Now remember the psychic party I told you about where I learned that no matter how many times I am reincarnated I will always be short? (I'm still struggling with that...) About 10 people there, I was one of the last people to take my turn...standing at the front of the room in complete darkness with only a candle illuminating my face and eyes closed. In this light your face does seem to change ...little freaky... but for most all in good fun. Psychic said no protection prayers with anyone. Kinda made me uneasy and I really didn't even want to take my turn....but Hey everyone else was doing it
So I go to the front of the room and tell people I believe in the possibility of this "stuff" but I would only do the candle thingy with a protection prayer first...so I said the prayer out loud and took my turn. Did see something that night, though, which would make me never do it again... but again I digress. What I do find really interesting is that the Catholic Church actually believes that contact with the spirit world is possible...albeit NOT a good idea because of the potential of contacting evil spirits. Protection prayers...cover your bases! : )
But Pakeha, you're right , I am going to take your advice and ask a priest his thoughts on mediums...then right after that I'll ask him his thoughts on homosexuality. : )
And with that...it's time for me to walk away from the table.