John Edward - psychic or what?

[ynot]

Originally Posted by RemieV

Because I listened to it and made the early posts when the computer was still working. Since I didn't *transcribe* it, I can't be absolutely positive at this time, and will have to wait until I receive the laptop back from the repair people, which will take about a week.

I am not too close to anyone. That would imply that I care about John Edward, or think that he is really a psychic. I don't, and I don't. I simply want to convey the words with accuracy.

Hope your “computer ill” doesn’t turn in to “files Lost“.

[Ron_Tomkins]

Originally Posted by RemieV

There was actually a very well-circulated clip of Penn on a talk show telling the host that Criss Angel does 'I Dream of Jeannie' magic - meaning that his magic is simply camera tricks. Seems like the ultimate easy way.

Interesting. Well, the quote I posted was from a radio show where Penn interviewed Criss. And I also remember a show where Penn said, right before starting the performance, "This one`s for you, Criss Angel!" in a tone that suggested he didn`t feel a lot of sympathy for him. Could it be Penn is a bit of a... hypocrite?

[Ron_Tomkins]

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

Are you saying you wanna spank the ass?

[ynot]

Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins

Interesting. Well, the quote I posted was from a radio show where Penn interviewed Criss. And I also remember a show where Penn said, right before starting the performance, "This one`s for you, Criss Angel!" in a tone that suggested he didn`t feel a lot of sympathy for him. Could it be Penn is a bit of a... hypocrite?

Some modern magicians like Criss Angel and Derren Brown have gained much of their success by not being overly honest about their performances.

[jadebox]

Originally Posted by RemieV

I am not too close to anyone. That would imply that I care about John Edward, or think that he is really a psychic. I don't, and I don't.

The suggestion is that you were "too close" to this trick, not to a person.

You're thinking the trick is more amazing than it really was because you had met "Joshua" earlier. If you hadn't met him, you probably wouldn't have thought that this part of Edward's show was interesting enough to ask about.

I don't believe that Edward's did anything special during this performance that he doesn't do at other times. I still think a simple cold reading is enough of an explanation, but he may have been fed information. Either way, he made it appear that he psychically devined something. That's what he does all the time.

-- Roger

[Azrael 5]

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

Actually, of all the assumptions needed that particular one would seem the least risky to me. I don't know any male over the age of 18 who would not have a DL in their wallet on their person if out in public. Is this an American thing?

I think it must be.

[ynot]

Originally Posted by RemieV

I simply want to convey the words with accuracy.

I would have expected that a person that ran the JREF MDC for three years and has spent their time and money pursuing cheats etc would have done that from the beginning.

Can we take anything from the OP as being factual and representative of actual events?

When you get your computer fixed please provide an actual transcript of the “Liam” reading.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally Posted by RemieV

I can't clarify it at the moment. My laptop (where the file is stored) took ill and is currently being repaired.

Uh, huh.. The computer version of the old " The dog ate my homework.. " dodge ..

[RemieV]

Originally Posted by jadebox

The suggestion is that you were "too close" to this trick, not to a person.

You're thinking the trick is more amazing than it really was because you had met "Joshua" earlier. If you hadn't met him, you probably wouldn't have thought that this part of Edward's show was interesting enough to ask about.

I don't believe that Edward's did anything special during this performance that he doesn't do at other times. I still think a simple cold reading is enough of an explanation, but he may have been fed information. Either way, he made it appear that he psychically devined something. That's what he does all the time.

-- Roger

For the love of all things holy - my point was not that the trick was amazing, but that it was the only reading he gave that had a solid, verifiable FACT within it, hence my use of it as an example.

[RemieV]

Originally Posted by ynot

I would have expected that a person that ran the JREF MDC for three years and has spent their time and money pursuing cheats etc would have done that from the beginning.

Can we take anything from the OP as being factual and representative of actual events?

When you get your computer fixed please provide an actual transcript of the “Liam” reading.

I DID. I listened to the recording and put a summary in the OP. I don't expect to remember every word, therefore I am unwilling to state exactly how it was AGAIN without LISTENING to it again.

[Dr. Keith]

Originally Posted by RemieV

I DID. I listened to the recording and put a summary in the OP. I don't expect to remember every word, therefore I am unwilling to state exactly how it was AGAIN without LISTENING to it again.

Reeeeally, this is sounding fishy . . . and where exactly did you take that "hard drive" to be "repaired" this time?

[Confidential to ynot: I think you're on to something and she is about to break! Don't let up now!!11!!1!]

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally Posted by RemieV

For the love of all things holy - my point was not that the trick was amazing, but that it was the only reading he gave that had a solid, verifiable FACT within it, hence my use of it as an example.

I think there is clue there somewhere ...

[RemieV]

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

Reeeeally, this is sounding fishy . . . and where exactly did you take that "hard drive" to be "repaired" this time?

[Confidential to ynot: I think you're on to something and she is about to break! Don't let up now!!11!!1!]

Hah

[ynot]

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

Reeeeally, this is sounding fishy . . . and where exactly did you take that "hard drive" to be "repaired" this time?

[Confidential to ynot: I think you're on to something and she is about to break! Don't let up now!!11!!1!]

I have only been asking questions other have also asked. No "breaking" intended or required, just understanding.

[Resume]

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

I think there is clue there somewhere ...

A really big one.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by ynot

Must say I’m somewhat disappointed by this reply as it’s an important point that you should be able to easily remember. Your OP clearly said it was “someone else at the table” that first said “Liam”. Why do you now doubt your own words?

I agree. RemieV. I don;t understand why you have not clarified the question that has been asked a number of times and which is really making everyone confused about what may have happened. In the OP you said:

Originally Posted by RemieV

Edward again said that he had gotten the name 'Joshua', and then said that there was something weird about it, because he had the sensation that the name was LIAM's.

Did you mean that Edward said that

1. he was getting the sensation that the man's name was "Liam"
("I'm getting the name Joshua, but there is something weird about it because I'm getting the sensation that you name is Liam.")

or

2. he was getting the sensation that the man's name was "Joshua"
("I'm getting the name Joshua, but there is something weird about it because I'm getting that is your name.")

I would think you know what you meant to say and could clarify the point. It makes a very big difference in the nature of the trick.

(I don’t see how you could mean option number 1 because there wouldn’t be anything “weird about” a person with a different name standing up when the name Joshua is called. In fact that is generally what is expected that people do at a JE show.)

[ynot]

Originally Posted by Resume

I think so, but then again there are myriad ways to pull this trick off.

I’m not up on the technology but is it possible with a modern directional microphone that someone from a reasonable distance could have heard conversations at individual tables? As you say, the possibilities for cheating are myriad.

[ynot]

From the OP . . .

Originally Posted by RemieV

So, important facts garnered there:
1) I know that Joshua introduced himself as Liam, because that is how he introduced himself to me. He never intimated in any way that it was his middle name.

What he told you in a relatively short discussion has no bearing on what he may have told others before or later. We don’t know what he said to the people at his table. He may very well have said “Liam” was his second name and “Joshua” was his first.

Originally Posted by RemieV

2) Edward pulled, out of thin air, not only the guy's real name, but also the fact that the man wasn't using his real name.

Edward merely pulled a reasonably common name out of the air. He only “got” the name when a person raised his hand. I would like to know what the real “Joshua” name is to see if it’s a name that would commonly be shortened or nicknamed. Not introducing himself as "Joshua" could have meant introducing himself as "Josh". I can’t think of any reason why you shouldn’t provide this name and you shouldn’t need to refer to the recording to know it. Can you do this please?

[Resume]

Originally Posted by ynot

I’m not up on the technology but is it possible with a modern directional microphone that someone from a reasonable distance could have heard conversations at individual tables. As you say, the possibilities for cheating are myriad.

I'd wager that if ever discovered, the method used would turn out to be pedestrian and dissapointing.

[ynot]

Originally Posted by Resume

I'd wager that if ever discovered, the method used would turn out to be pedestrian and dissapointing.

That’s invariably the case. The letter in the envelope trick in the Derren Brown video posted earlier is a good example of the unbelievable having an unbelievably simply method.

[Resume]

Originally Posted by ynot

That’s invariably the case. The letter in the envelope trick in the Derren Brown video posted earlier is a good example of the unbelievable having an unbelievably simply method.

What's funny is that Brown is infinitely more personable and entertaining than Edward could ever hope to be.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by ynot

Seems like some others I have misread the OP. Edward never came up with the name “Liam” a person at the table did. This changes the scenario quite a bit . . .

That’s the way I read it, and I don’t see a cold read out of the question.

Originally Posted by ynot

(1) Edward points to an area of the audience and says he is getting the name “Joshua” (a common name).
Whether Edward pointed directly at “Liam’s” table or not isn’t that important. If no one had responded Edward would have simply expanded the “search area” and if that didn’t work he would have changed the name to something similar (John, Joseph, etc.). This is typically the way “psychics” go “fishing from an audience. Well within normal odds that Edward simply got lucky first time in selecting the correct area.

Exactly. If the name he tossed out was a miss, he would have moved on and it would have been unremarkable. All that Edward has done at this point is call out a name to try to find a mark.

Originally Posted by ynot

(2) A person from a table in that area holds his hand up to indicate an association with that name.
“Liam” may have said something like “That’s me” or “That’s my name” and RemieV may not have noticed. She wasn’t looking directly at “Liam” in the very first instance. Even if he said it quietly Edward may have been able to lip-read it. I doubt Edward would have merely assumed that it was the person’s own name.

Edward found his mark. I actually doubt that Joshua even said anything like “that’s me”, but perhaps. Joshua may have given some “that’s me” type body language. The OP says Joshua stood up, it doesn’t mention him holding up his hand.

Originally Posted by ynot

(3) Edward asked the man (“Liam”) to stand up and he was given a microphone
“Liam“ didn‘t say anything.

The OP says Joshua stood up, and doesn’t mention anything about Edward asking him to stand up, but I think it makes little difference.

Originally Posted by ynot

(4) Edward then said it was weird because “Joshua” was the man’s name but he didn’t introduce himself that way at the table.
The real name may have been a name that is commonly shortened or nicknamed - William = bill, will, willy, etc. Don’t see why RemieV can’t provide the actual first name given as it’s a common name and the surname isn’t required and wouldn‘t be revealing any personal information. Even if it was would “Liam” care?

From the way it is worded in the OP these are two separate things, separated by a pause. Edward says that he is getting the name Joshua, which is weird because he is getting a sensation that the person standing up is Joshua. “Then Edward paused for a moment.” And then, Edward says that that the man’s name is Joshua, but that “he had not introduced himself that way to the rest of his table”.

When Edward calls out a name or initial, the idea is that someone who knows someone deceased with that name or initial stands up for a reading. This is the basic shtick. Of course sometimes when Edward calls out a name or initial a person with that name or initial stands up. This works for Edward either way because he can claim that the name is either the name of the deceased person or the name of the person the deceased person is trying to contact. Sometimes Edward will say, “And who is Joshua?”. The person might say something like “my grandfather” or “I’m Joshua”. Edward can carry on either way. At worst it is about a 50/50 guess as to why the person stood up. But Edward has been doing this a long time and mostly likely can sometimes get a good idea if the person stood up because they want a reading on somebody or if they stood up because it was their name that was called.

Then Edward pauses. Time to read the reactions. I would suspect that Joshua gave some indication that Edward was correct and that he was Joshua—if not a verbal indication, then something else such as a head nod. But some people at the table gave a different message—perhaps people shaking their heads. Edward has probably seen this before and probably guessed that Joshua uses a nickname.

Based on what he saw during the pause, Edward concludes that the man is Joshua but that he didn’t introduce himself to the table that way. What I find curious is that Edward only claims that Joshua used a different name for his introduction at the table. Why didn’t Edward say that Joshua doesn’t usually use the name “Joshua”. Or say that the spirit that he is talking to called Joshua by a different name? Or at least relate the use of a different name to Joshua’s life in general rather than just to the people that happened to be sitting at his table. Why does he relate the different name to the table introductions? Because Edward got the clue that the people at the table were behaving like his guess that the man was Joshua was incorrect. That’s why.

If Edward was wrong about Joshua using a totally different name, it would still be likely that Joshua may have introduced himself as “Josh”, or that he hadn’t introduced himself at all, or that someone at the table misheard the name, or that Joshua sometimes used a nickname, or the deceased spirit sometimes used a pet name, or whatever. He could easily spin it into something unremarkable.

Originally Posted by ynot

(5) Another person at the table was then asked to verify that he had introduced himself as “Liam“.
More theatrical than asking “Liam” but also far more risky unless you already know the answer for sure.

Per the OP, Edward didn’t ask someone to verify that Joshua used the name “Liam”. Per the OP, the name “Liam” hasn’t even come up yet. Edward asked someone else at the table to provide the name that Joshua used when he introduced himself. That person provided the name “Liam”.

Originally Posted by ynot

(6) Edward then asked Joshua to take out his driver's license and show it to everyone else at the table.
Once again theatrical but risky unless you know the person has a license and has it on them. I wonder if Edward asked if he had his license on him first? I don’t think RemieV has given us everything that was said in her short description and some really important bits are likely to have been left out.

Doesn’t seem very risky to me. If the person said that Joshua introduced himself as “Josh” or “JD” or “Junior” or “T-Bone” or something, there would not have been any driver’s license business. I’ve only known two people who are commonly known by a name other than their name, a shortened or common nickname for their name, their middle name or an obvious nickname. One from Africa and one from India. And the guy from India did have his nickname listed on the his driver’s license (as his middle name). And something like “Liam” is not an obvious nickname used by someone who doesn’t have a name “Liam”.

Even if the name “Liam” wasn’t on the license, Edward could have moved on without fanfare and have it forgotten as unremarkable.


So all that really happened, was that Edward called out the name Joshua. A guy stood up. Edward made a reasonable guess that the guy was Joshua. The body language from Joshua seemed to indicate that this was correct but the body language from the table seemed to indicate that this was wrong. That’s it.

[ynot]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

The OP says Joshua stood up, it doesn’t mention him holding up his hand.
The OP says Joshua stood up, and doesn’t mention anything about Edward asking him to stand up, but I think it makes little difference.

RemieV clarified in post #67 - “He raised his hand at his name being called, and then stood when Edward asked him to. I've no idea why he didn't respond with surprise.”

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

From the way it is worded in the OP these are two separate things, separated by a pause. Edward says that he is getting the name Joshua, which is weird because he is getting a sensation that the person standing up is Joshua. “Then Edward paused for a moment.” And then, Edward says that that the man’s name is Joshua, but that “he had not introduced himself that way to the rest of his table”.

I read it as a short pregnant pause for theatrical effect only.

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Per the OP, Edward didn’t ask someone to verify that Joshua used the name “Liam”. Per the OP, the name “Liam” hasn’t even come up yet. Edward asked someone else at the table to provide the name that Joshua used when he introduced himself. That person provided the name “Liam”.

That’s what I meant but worded poorly. The important thing is Edward didn’t provide the name (if the OP is written correctly).

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

So all that really happened, was that Edward called out the name Joshua. A guy stood up. Edward made a reasonable guess that the guy was Joshua. The body language from Joshua seemed to indicate that this was correct but the body language from the table seemed to indicate that this was wrong. That’s it.

Exactly - Which begs the question. Why was a virtually professional sceptic and ex-PI that has the experiences and qualifications of RemieV so impressed with the performances of either Edward or Oliver? This is a question not a criticism.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by ynot

I read it as a short pregnant pause for theatrical effect only.

I read it as a short pregnant pause made to look like theatrical effect but is really Edward waiting for some feedback (verbal or non-verbal) on his guess so that he can choose which direction to continue with his cold reading.

[ynot]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

I read it as a short pregnant pause made to look like theatrical effect but is really Edward waiting for some feedback (verbal or non-verbal) on his guess so that he can choose which direction to continue with his cold reading.

Cold reading to that degree from 60 feet away with lights in his eyes?

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by ynot

Cold reading to that degree from 60 feet away with lights in his eyes?

I can't assess the possibility because I don’t have a video of the event. Was it actually 60 feet? Was the light really in his eyes? Did Joshua start nodding his head up and down in a visible way? Did people at the table start shaking their heads in a visible way?

We don't know. Edward knew what he was going to say and knew what he was going to look for during that pregnant pause and nobody else did, so if he happened to get an immediate very obvious reaction it may have been obvious to him but completely missed by everyone else because they didn't know where he was going. We can't really tell whether it is likely unless we have a video of the event, but it is certainly something that is possible.

The cold reading explanation seems the most likely to me because Edward isn't really known for lots of specific, amazing, verifiable readings that would indicate that he frequently uses tricks and/or hot reading. His act is a cold reading act, so I would expect that it was cold reading and he just happened to pick up enough indicators that Joshua confirmed his guess and the other people at the table thought his guess was wrong.

Of course it could have been hot reading or some trick. I don’t get the impression that Edward typically does that kind of act and RemieV mentioned that she doesn’t usually see Edward do this type of trick. It is possible that Edward just happened to know something about Joshua and used it to his advantage. But I don’t see anything that would eliminate the more likely cold reading possibility.

We just don't have enough information to really make a good guess at how Edward pulled this one off.

[ynot]

One wonders why a “spirit” would have given the name of a live person.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by ynot

One wonders why a “spirit” would have given the name of a live person.

Why would one wonder that?

[ynot]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Why would one wonder that?

In the spirit fantasy the spirit of a dead person is communicating with a live person (usually a relative) via a medium/psychic to assure them everything is okay and that they love them. In this scenario a sprit is apparently telling a medium/psychic the name of a live person and that he doesn’t use his first name. Why, for what purpose? The live person already knows this and the medium/psychic could have asked him directly. Seems to be a waste of the spirit hotline. Perhaps spirits like playing party games? Oh, that’s right, they obviously like playing games like charades - It begins with a “J” or a “K” etc.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by ynot

In the spirit fantasy the spirit of a dead person is communicating with a live person (usually a relative) via a medium/psychic to assure them everything is okay and that they love them. In this scenario a sprit is apparently telling a medium/psychic the name of a live person and that he doesn’t use his first name. Why, for what purpose? The live person already knows this and the medium/psychic could have asked him directly. Seems to be a waste of the spirit hotline. Perhaps spirits like playing party games? Oh, that’s right, they obviously like playing games like charades - It begins with a “J” or a “K” etc.

I’m still not sure I understand what you meant in post #307, but I see what you are saying here.

Spirit: I want to talk to Joshua.
Edward: I’m getting a Joshua.
Spirit: Yes, that is Joshua.
Edward: I’m getting that you are Joshua.
Spirit: Oh, but he didn’t introduce himself as Joshua to the people at the table.
Edward: But you didn’t introduce yourself as Joshua to the people at the table.
Spirit: Have someone at the table tell you what the name he used. Of course I know what name he used, but it will be fun to make it look like a cold reading magic trick.
Edward: Ma’am, how did he introduce himself to you?
Ma’am: Liam.
Spirit: Yeah, you should probably have him pull out his driver’s license just to make sure. I know the name he used is on his driver’s license, but it will be fun to have him pull it out and show it to everyone. After that, then I can get on with the seemingly impossible task of providing my important message from beyond the grave.

[ynot]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

I’m still not sure I understand what you meant in post #307, but I see what you are saying here.

Spirit: I want to talk to Joshua.
Edward: I’m getting a Joshua.
Spirit: Yes, that is Joshua.
Edward: I’m getting that you are Joshua.
Spirit: Oh, but he didn’t introduce himself as Joshua to the people at the table.
Edward: But you didn’t introduce yourself as Joshua to the people at the table.
Spirit: Have someone at the table tell you what the name he used. Of course I know what name he used, but it will be fun to make it look like a cold reading magic trick.
Edward: Ma’am, how did he introduce himself to you?
Ma’am: Liam.
Spirit: Yeah, you should probably have him pull out his driver’s license just to make sure. I know the name he used is on his driver’s license, but it will be fun to have him pull it out and show it to everyone. After that, then I can get on with the seemingly impossible task of providing my important message from beyond the grave.

Make full sense when you put it that way - My bad.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by ynot

Cold reading to that degree from 60 feet away with lights in his eyes?

As I said before, it is possible to light someone on a stage without dazzling them and presumably there would have been a spot on Liam by that stage.

All the same, I imagine that only very obvious expressions and body language could be read from that far away - impressed smiles and amazement maybe.

[Lolly]

Everyone's assuming that Liam is a stranger to Edward.

It is possible that he knows the guy.

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins

Interesting. Well, the quote I posted was from a radio show where Penn interviewed Criss. And I also remember a show where Penn said, right before starting the performance, "This one`s for you, Criss Angel!" in a tone that suggested he didn`t feel a lot of sympathy for him. Could it be Penn is a bit of a... hypocrite?

I can't say what Penn's feelings about Criss Angel are, but I have heard him interviewed (I think at The Amazing Meeting one year) where he made it very, very clear that he and Teller have no problems whatsoever with camera tricks being used for tricks done on television.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by Lolly

Everyone's assuming that Liam is a stranger to Edward.

It is possible that he knows the guy.

Per the OP:

Originally Posted by RemieV

Now, because Edward gave me so much information, I have since been able to track down Joshua Liam. He is convinced that Edward is legit, and that he had no way of knowing the information other than psychic abilities. That, of course, means nothing, but I point it out because I want to note that I performed my due diligence. The guy really is from Canada. The guy's name really is Joshua Liam Smith (or something of that type, since I'm not giving real names).

Originally Posted by RemieV

Since I was able to get in touch with Liam, he told me that he did not speak to anyone on John Edward's staff. He did not, in fact, speak to anyone at length besides me.

So it sounds like Joshua has claimed that he had not previous spoken with Edward or his staff. It is possible that Joshua had previously contacted Edward with a fan letter, email, or on a web site and had forgotten about it or just didn’t mention it to RemieV. However, it seems unlikely that Edward would have remembered the guy. Per the OP, Joshua attended the as a spur of the moment kind of thing, so it wasn’t like he had sent a message to Edward saying “I will be attending you show next week…” Of course Joshua could be lying, which is a possibility that has already been brought up.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally Posted by RemieV View Post

Quote:

Since I was able to get in touch with Liam, he told me that he did not ( knowingly ) speak to anyone on John Edward's staff. He did not, in fact, speak to anyone at length besides me.

Added a possibility.. ( Highlighted )

Not speaking at length, rules out very little..


This may have been brought up before, but it just occurred to me:

The OP said:

Edward said:

Quote:

.... though Liam's name was Joshua, he had not introduced himself that way to the rest of his table.

If he introduced himself to the rest of the table, it leaves all kinds ( many have been mentioned ) of possibilities open.

[Lolly]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Of course Joshua could be lying, which is a possibility that has already been brought up.

Yes. Although it could also be absolutely true - he may not have spoken to anyone on Edward's staff. If he were a mate of Edward's you wouldn't expect him to "out" Edward on the source of the information used in the show by saying, "oh, I know John from college, I was just catching his show while I'm in town". If I had a friend in showbusiness, I wouldn't blab in a way that would undermine their show (not that I'd ever be friends with a liar and a cheat, but in general.) Edward may also just know about the guy somehow. He could have met him at a shared performance venue, at a social event, remember him from school. If this Liam was from Timbuktu it would be less likely, but Canada is the US' next-door neighbour. It's like Australia and New Zealand - an Aussie could easily know a Kiwi.

The bottom line is that speculation isn't going to get anyone any nearer to knowing whether Edward knew the information used (and, if so, how he had the information) or whether it was just dumb luck/a cold reading hit.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by Lolly

Yes. Although it could also be absolutely true - he may not have spoken to anyone on Edward's staff. If he were a mate of Edward's you wouldn't expect him to "out" Edward on the source of the information used in the show by saying, "oh, I know John from college, I was just catching his show while I'm in town". If I had a friend in showbusiness, I wouldn't blab in a way that would undermine their show (not that I'd ever be friends with a liar and a cheat, but in general.) Edward may also just know about the guy somehow. He could have met him at a shared performance venue, at a social event, remember him from school. If this Liam was from Timbuktu it would be less likely, but Canada is the US' next-door neighbour. It's like Australia and New Zealand - an Aussie could easily know a Kiwi.

The bottom line is that speculation isn't going to get anyone any nearer to knowing whether Edward knew the information used (and, if so, how he had the information) or whether it was just dumb luck/a cold reading hit.

Possible, but I think unlikely. If Joshua knew Edward I would actually expect that he would have mentioned that while standing in line with RemieV, or when the name “Joshua” was called he wouldn’t have raised his hand because he didn’t want to interfere with the show, or would have mentioned that he knew Edward, or would have confessed a bit to RemieV that he had met Edward before. Unless Joshua was a close friend of Edward I doubt he would have an interest in weaving a tale of lies and, therefore, probably just would not have volunteered to participate in the show.

(And I don’t think US/Canada is like Australia/New Zealand. Unless someone lives very close to the border, it is unlikely someone in the US knows someone in Canada. Although I’m only a few hundred miles from the border, I’ve met far more people from India, Africa, England, France, Israel, etc. than from Canada. Actually, I’m not sure that I’ve ever knowingly met someone from Canada other than the few times I’ve been to Canada.)

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by Lolly

The bottom line is that speculation isn't going to get anyone any nearer to knowing whether Edward knew the information used (and, if so, how he had the information) or whether it was just dumb luck/a cold reading hit.

I agree. If we had a video we might be able to narrow some things down. As it is there are way too many possibilities to really say how the performance was done.

[Lolly]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Possible,

That's all you need. It could be any number of things from the mundane to the very unlikely.

I mentioned above how I could give a caller a phone number for someone completely different to the name he could give me. I happened to go to school with the guy's daughter. She happened to have mentioned that her dad practised real estate under the different name and told me the name. I happened to remember this information years after I'd left school. Out of the many operators who could have taken his call, he happened to get someone who had personal knowledge that could help him. A complete fluke.

There is a difference trying to figure out how a magic trick is done and trying to figure out how someone has particular information. The magic trick has a specific procedure which can be figured out. The latter has many possibilities, some of which may be extremely unlikely or even outlandish.

If this was a trick, RemieV might get what she's after, if it's the latter, it won't be possible to find out.