Proof of Life After Death!! - Page 4

Garrette · 26th November 2012, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

From Robin's blog

"I searched for comfort wanting to know for sure my dad still existed and was a part of all of our lives. This in turn led me to psychic mediums in search of proof. I attended psychic fairs, conferences, and had some private readings as well. What I learned is something I always knew in my heart...your soul lives on, love truly is eternal, and your deceased loved one is closer than you know!"

So you were not open minded, you wanted it to work. You kept going because...

"What I also learned unfortunately is that there are plenty of fake "psychic mediums" out there pretending to connect with your loved ones. I for one am not easily fooled by the fishing and general statements and questions and answers of fake mediums. The biggest test...I have to be told something very specific to me by the medium that there is no way he could have known unless my father told him."

...so you were not convinced of any of them until....

"....John Edward. His comments directed to me only as I stood there were spot on. He gave a lot of correct information about my dad...."

So finally you met one you were convinced by as he came out with the type of information you were looking for, details you say no one else could know.

But, random on its own could account for that, go to loads of mediums and random says you will meet one who can give you the information you were looking for. Meanwhile others will not have got the information they were looking for from Mr Edward and so will be off finding solace with the mediums you say are fake.

For Mr Edward to be truly convincing he would have to be spot on with way, way more than just you and all the others would have to be wrong all the time. You must understand that and realise that is why you have had the reaction so far you have had.

When you said your initial doubts faded as....

"He gave a lot of correct information about my dad such as family names and that his name has an ST sound...his name was Salvatore. And correct information about my dad having a problem with his brain. Impressive but I was not totally convinced. UNTIL.... He said my dad told him I just bought a new refrigerator....."

..we see a medium doing the usual medium tricks and with you he got on a roll and so you are convinced.

But it is not scientific at all to take that one occasion and to then declare he is a true medium. He needs to do it again and again and again under very rigorous conditions. It is not closed minded to say, we want more evidence before Mr Edward is declared a true medium who really can talk to the dead.

Welcome to a sceptic's forum and see how we function.

Nice summary. It brings up the law of large numbers, too. Even if we discard warm reading and hot reading (and we really can't), then eventually Edward will have one or two or three amazingly accurate hits just by chance. Add in all the mediums who do this and the number of incidents that appear to be irrefutable proof skyrocket; that a number of them appear on blogs or the occasional video is less than impressive.

ETA: I also note, as I did when I visited Robin's blog, that there are exactly zero misses listed. I find this difficult to believe, that absolutely everything John Edward said was a hit. There's the confirmation bias for you.

Garrette · 26th November 2012, 09:38 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

There is nothing else in the psychic realm.

I don't fully agree, except in the literal sense. Like Skeptic Ginger, I do see some value in specific cases regarding grief counseling, but I reserve that for the several I know who were not conscious frauds as John Edward is. Most of those I know whom I believe honestly think they are psychic are legitimately concerned about the emotional well being of their sitters, and their skills at cold reading, their intuition, and their empathy often allow at least temporary improvements in the emotional state of their sitters. I suspect that this benefit is less than the benefit to be expected from coming to grips with reality, but it is still better than sitting home and grieving alone, at least for some.*

*The above is completely unsupported speculation on my part. I have no qualifications as a psychologist or psychiatrist.

dafydd · 26th November 2012, 09:42 AM

I went a counselor after my wife died. He didn't pretend to get in touch with her. That would have been obtaining money under false pretenses.

Garrette · 26th November 2012, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

I went a counselor after my wife died. He didn't pretend to get in touch with her. That would have been obtaining money under false pretenses.

Sorry about your loss. In my hour of need I would not go to someone who thought they were contacting the dead, but you are mixing ethics and results.

Garrette · 26th November 2012, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

--snip--

With regard to pointing people to my blog and ALL the comments...it has mostly all been said and questioned and answered there already so that saves me the time of having to do it all over again!

You came here with a claim; we did not go there. Suppose I pop over to your house and tell you I make the world's best ham sandwich. All you have to do is run down to my house, sort through the refrigerator for the ingredients I refuse to list for you and then put it together with the secret sauce I won't divulge.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Hey cut me some slack I have 3 kids!

And you think we don't have other demands on our time?

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Also I must say some of the comments and back and forth should give a chuckle to anyone interested in the subject.

That's the point. Most comments are not relevant to your argument yet you want us to read through them anyway because you have three kids and can't be bothered to support the claim that you came here to make.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

And no I have personally nothing to gain from people reading my blog.

So the ads I had to close provide no benefit to you at all? You simply allow other companies to put ads on your blog because you're terribly nice that way?

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

But of course if you have a question or point that was not adequately addressed there then we can discuss it here.

Okay. The point that was not adequately addressed is the claim that John Edward is an authentic medium. Please discuss.

Note: This post is a bit snarky, but I did it to demonstrate something. I hope you can decipher what that is.

dafydd · 26th November 2012, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by Garrette

Sorry about your loss. In my hour of need I would not go to someone who thought they were contacting the dead, but you are mixing ethics and results.

It would be fine with me if the counselors who claim to be in touch with the dead actually had to pass a test to prove it. Now where could such a test be found?

Nessie · 26th November 2012, 10:13 AM

Robin, do you really not have any alarm bells ringing from having been to so many false mediums until you found a true one?

Was there anything that Edward did that was completely different from all the other mediums? (I do not mean he was right and they were wrong, I mean in terms of technique)

GregInAustin · 26th November 2012, 10:15 AM

I have a fundamental question: How does one person's personal experience with a psychic "prove" that there is life after death? Even if Edward were a real psychic, it still comes down to his word against yours. Memories and experiences hardly constitute proof of something as extraordinary as life after death.

Before you can even prove life after death, you have to prove 100 other things that we have no evidence for. Such as:
1. Proof that souls exist.
2. wait... where's the proof for #1?
3. see #2
...

Regarding John Edward: I was very sick recently, and could do nothing else but lay on the couch and watch tv. There was a daytime talk show with Edward on it (can't remember which show right now, as I had not seen it before, nor have since.) The host said she was skeptical of psychics and mediums (good for her) but she allowed these 2 "mediums" to do their thing anyway.

During their talk, John Edward admitted that even though he made a living as a psychic, he had NO IDEA that his mother was dying of cancer. He even told his mother's doctor that if she really had cancer, he (John) would know, because he was psychic. Somehow this story was supposed to explain why he learned how to talk to the dead, not show that obviously he did not posses the abilities he claimed to.

He then proceeded to do cold readings of the audience, making vague statements, waiting for a hit, then narrowing his questions down to what seemed like specifics. I didn't take notes, but it his hit to miss ratio was pathetic. Laughable even. I did not watch the rest of the show, so I have no idea how it turned out.

lopeyschools · 26th November 2012, 10:17 AM

Are we talking about the same John Edwards who won biggest douche in the universe award?

I just watched that episode of south park yesterday and I was thinking about how he would be taken apart on JREF forums. Now it is happening.

Does that make me psyhic?

poblob14 · 26th November 2012, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by Garrette

ETA: I also note, as I did when I visited Robin's blog, that there are exactly zero misses listed. I find this difficult to believe, that absolutely everything John Edward said was a hit. There's the confirmation bias for you.

I agree with you in principle, but it seems to me that there was in fact a miss listed: the ST thing. As pointed out before, "Salvatore" has no ST sound, nor anything close to an ST sound. It has the letters ST, but not together, and that (apparently) isn't what was said anyway. That sounds like a complete miss to me.

Also, the two "stomach procedures" . . . we aren't told much about the "feeding tubes" that were put in; some of those could be considered "stomach procedures," some not. I don't know if that's really a hit or not.

Garrette · 26th November 2012, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by GregInAustin

I have a fundamental question: How does one person's personal experience with a psychic "prove" that there is life after death? Even if Edward were a real psychic, it still comes down to his word against yours. Memories and experiences hardly constitute proof of something as extraordinary as life after death.

Before you can even prove life after death, you have to prove 100 other things that we have no evidence for. Such as:
1. Proof that souls exist.
2. wait... where's the proof for #1?
3. see #2
...

Regarding John Edward: I was very sick recently, and could do nothing else but lay on the couch and watch tv. There was a daytime talk show with Edward on it (can't remember which show right now, as I had not seen it before, nor have since.) The host said she was skeptical of psychics and mediums (good for her) but she allowed these 2 "mediums" to do their thing anyway.

During their talk, John Edward admitted that even though he made a living as a psychic, he had NO IDEA that his mother was dying of cancer. He even told his mother's doctor that if she really had cancer, he (John) would know, because he was psychic. Somehow this story was supposed to explain why he learned how to talk to the dead, not show that obviously he did not posses the abilities he claimed to.

He then proceeded to do cold readings of the audience, making vague statements, waiting for a hit, then narrowing his questions down to what seemed like specifics. I didn't take notes, but it his hit to miss ratio was pathetic. Laughable even. I did not watch the rest of the show, so I have no idea how it turned out.

I am not certain, but I think John Edward is the one who pioneered a technique that is becoming more common and which adds to the air of authenticity. He occasionally insists a miss is a hit, not just by glossing over it, but by almost rudely insisting that a certain statement applies to the person he is talking to and they should remember it later (this applies to Robin and the "hit" regarding Valerie Harper and Robin's brother). He knows he is safe for at least three reasons:

1. If it really is a miss, most or all will forget it.

2. The pool of vague connections on which the sitter can draw has suddenly become infinite; the sitter is no longer under pressure to come up with something right there. Instead, they can concoct any connection they like at any time after the show and then turn it in to free publicity such as Robin has.

3. The standard reaction of believing observers is "If he were fake he wouldn't do that," ignoring the fact that conmen are smart enough to know that this is precisely how the marks will think. It is subtly tautological.

Garrette · 26th November 2012, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by poblob14

I agree with you in principle, but it seems to me that there was in fact a miss listed: the ST thing. As pointed out before, "Salvatore" has no ST sound, nor anything close to an ST sound. It has the letters ST, but not together, and that (apparently) isn't what was said anyway. That sounds like a complete miss to me.

Also, the two "stomach procedures" . . . we aren't told much about the "feeding tubes" that were put in; some of those could be considered "stomach procedures," some not. I don't know if that's really a hit or not.

Ah. I agree. I should have said "There is nothing listed that Robin thought was a miss."

Garrette · 26th November 2012, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by lopeyschools

Are we talking about the same John Edwards who won biggest douche in the universe award?

I just watched that episode of south park yesterday and I was thinking about how he would be taken apart on JREF forums. Now it is happening.

Does that make me psyhic?

Yes, but I will emphasize my nitpick again. It is John Edward. There is no S.

Robin1 · 26th November 2012, 10:27 AM

Ok, now my kids are going to be mad...Why are there no presents Mommy?...well darlings Mommy got obsessed and trapped on a life after death thread...
K... NO way for John Edward to know about fridge or Valerie Harper connection or tooth in pocket...no talking about any of it before or during event...NO We did NOT offer ANY info to John or hints while being read...we didn't fill out any forms or talk to anyone there. Seating was random. Fridge and Valerie Harper statements made directly to me and my brother NOT thrown out to the entire group of 75 people just waiting for someone to bite. THAT is the proof...problem is not lack of proof but the lack of ability of some to even entertain the notion of life after death could ever be a possibility...EVER. Cause most certainly if you coud entertain that ridiculous notion you could also entertain the notion that communication is possible. NOW, I gonna go Chris..oh forget it..I gonna sit here and wait for responses...

truethat · 26th November 2012, 10:36 AM

Robin

I read your blog.

Your last name has an ST in it. And you are named Robin and are a blonde American looking for information about your dead father.

You say that they were married for 51 years. Let's see, your father would have been someone who was alive when Pearl Harbor happened. That's like someone doing a reading about me for my kids when I have died and based on their age they say "I'm seeing a 911 connection.'

You could have said something or indicated in some way that you had just bought a new refrigerator without realizing it or it would be a lucky guess.

Valerie Harper connection, based on your father's age, Mary Tyler Moore was a popular show when your father was younger.

Now consider, you don't think it is unusual that this medium happened to know the two things you just recently purchased? Things that would have left a receipt behind?

Seems to me that you may have spoken about these things and been overheard.

Next I have the same question that everyone else does. Your father comes back from the other side to discuss your fridge, tickets to a show and nothing at all about the other side or your life in ways that are meaningful?

Remember the end of the Sixth Sense, when the boy tells his mother what her mother had said, that's the kind of thing that would convince me.

Garrette · 26th November 2012, 10:36 AM

The problem is that we (or at least I) do in fact entertain the possibility. So seriously that some of us have shared that belief. The issue is not that we ignore proof. The issue is that we have looked at what is called proof and find it lacking. You case is the same. You can stridently insist all you like, but without a transcript and without far more info on the show and the lead up to it and without a discussion of things like the Forer Effect and the law of large numbers you cannot legitimately claim this as proof.

So do yo!u want to address specifics about JE or would you rather discuss Schwartz since you brought him up? I trust the fact that we already know about his book has not scared you off the topic.

And now I have to step away for a while.

Cheers

Sledge · 26th November 2012, 10:40 AM

So there are two possibilities here: the first is that our understanding of the universe is almost entirely incorrect, and that the dead hang around communicating with their loved ones via vague messages relayed through John Edward. The second is that John Edward is a calculating conman taking advantage of people's grief to line his pockets via parlour tricks. Which of these is most likely?

truethat · 26th November 2012, 10:42 AM

Let's see if I can do a psychic reading for you.

You are seeking some answer you didn't get from your father when he was alive. You seem to have had a very close relationship with your father. His illness was unexpected and shocking and you weren't able to find some sort of closure with some issues because you couldn't discuss anything with him.

You are worried for your mother and feeling responsible. He died a grusome illness that tore apart his brain and shut down his body. You watched over him as he suffered and always wondered if he could hear you speaking to him.

Your children ask you about him and you want to give a strong answer. This is based on some conversation or discussion you had as a child. I'm picking up on a "life shock" at a young age associated with death. One that you had difficulty understanding.

How am I doing so far?

Resume · 26th November 2012, 10:43 AM

Next time someone attends one of these events, and is "lucky" enough to get a reading, might you please ask about the afterlife? What's it like? Is there a big dog like a god or something? Is there beer? Pizza?

Who gives a **** about the fridge I just purchased? The watch I kept. The picture of us fishing. I know about all that truck already for crissake!

carlitos · 26th November 2012, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by Garrette

I am not certain, but I think John Edward is the one who pioneered a technique that is becoming more common and which adds to the air of authenticity. He occasionally insists a miss is a hit, not just by glossing over it, but by almost rudely insisting that a certain statement applies to the person he is talking to and they should remember it later (this applies to Robin and the "hit" regarding Valerie Harper and Robin's brother). He knows he is safe for at least three reasons:

1. If it really is a miss, most or all will forget it.

2. The pool of vague connections on which the sitter can draw has suddenly become infinite; the sitter is no longer under pressure to come up with something right there. Instead, they can concoct any connection they like at any time after the show and then turn it in to free publicity such as Robin has.

3. The standard reaction of believing observers is "If he were fake he wouldn't do that," ignoring the fact that conmen are smart enough to know that this is precisely how the marks will think. It is subtly tautological.

Great points. Add to this - conmen like Edward have a set of excuses for being caught in lies, and they don't think like a moral person would. You or I think - If I tell a like, I might get caught. Edward is a serial liar; he just moves to the next lie or sucker to be conned.

Anyway, this is possibly the most boring special claim ever.

Robin, your dad wants to tell you something.

(anticipation)

He says that you have a new refrigerator.

I just don't find that compelling or interesting.

GregInAustin · 26th November 2012, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

... NO way for John Edward to know about fridge or Valerie Harper connection or tooth in pocket...no talking about any of it before or during event...NO We did NOT offer ANY info to John or hints while being read...we didn't fill out any forms or talk to anyone there. Seating was random. Fridge and Valerie Harper statements made directly to me and my brother NOT thrown out to the entire group of 75 people just waiting for someone to bite.

How exactly were you and your brother picked out of the 75 other people?

I would imagine John Edward loves doing his show with large audiences. He can say something completely random and SOMEBODY there is going to have a hit. "Has anyone here lost a loved one recently?" Well, SURE. 90% of the audience can relate to that. Then, when he does get a hit, he can throw some more specific but still completely random. "I'm getting something about a car, or car accident, or not going in the car when an accident happened." And so on, knowing that these are things that nearly every person in the room has experienced at one time or another.

I didn't read your story, but tell me, what other common item did you buy recently that he could have asked you about? A TV? Some furniture? Shoes for your kids? The reason I ask is because I think you would have focused on just about anything that he had a hit on, and would ignore the rest.

And just out of curiosity, exactly how many "misses" did he have while talking to you?

Robin1 · 26th November 2012, 10:53 AM

I have nothing to do with the Patch news site other than my blog...ANYONE...no jokes please : )...can blog for free and I get nothing back from it... unless of course you count the sheer satisfaction of knowing I may be spreading a little "Light"....
As far as John Edward goes...my description is accurate ... you think it must not be...so we agree to disagree.
Now if anyone is willing to read my other blog involving my deceased Nana "Is it Just a Dream...Or Something More?"
I would be very curious to hear your explanation of how I knew about the slippers.
Assuming of course you don't think my Nana told me herself. And with this crowd I'd say that's a pretty safe bet! : )
http://yorktown-somers.patch.com/blo...something-more

Pixel42 · 26th November 2012, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

As far as John Edward goes...my description is accurate ... you think it must not be...so we agree to disagree.

Nobody has said that your description is not accurate, though it's almost certainly not complete in that you (as would anyone else) will have tended to remember the hits more than the misses. The point is that there are far more plausible explanations (lucky guesses, surreptitiously obtained information) for the hits than that Edward was comunicating with your dead father.

Sledge · 26th November 2012, 10:58 AM

Is thread purely to give traffic to a couple of blogs?

Resume · 26th November 2012, 10:58 AM

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

I have nothing to do with the Patch news site other than my blog...ANYONE...no jokes please : )...can blog for free and I get nothing back from it... unless of course you count the sheer satisfaction of knowing I may be spreading a little "Light"....
As far as John Edward goes...my description is accurate ... you think it must not be...so we agree to disagree.
Now if anyone is willing to read my other blog involving my deceased Nana "Is it Just a Dream...Or Something More?"
I would be very curious to hear your explanation of how I knew about the slippers.
Assuming of course you don't think my Nana told me herself. And with this crowd I'd say that's a pretty safe bet! : )
http://yorktown-somers.patch.com/blo...something-more

Are slippers really all that unique an item? Do you understand how poor one's memory actually is? Do you understand coincidence?

As long as you refuse to factor these and other explanations into your equation, you aren't really as open-minded as you like to think.

lopeyschools · 26th November 2012, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Garrette

Yes, but I will emphasize my nitpick again. It is John Edward. There is no S.

I dunno. His late mother is coming through to me now and she says he was originally named Edwards, but that his birth certificate was a typo.

(I don't actually know if his mother has passed on, but considering he is 43 it's likely. If she is in fact dead, I will be starting my own tv show soon.)

Agatha · 26th November 2012, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

Ok, now my kids are going to be mad...Why are there no presents Mommy?...well darlings Mommy got obsessed and trapped on a life after death thread...

There's no need to attempt to guilt trip people, you can switch off the computer whenever you choose, and respond to some (any) of the questions at a time convenient to you.

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

K... NO way for John Edward to know about fridge or Valerie Harper connection or tooth in pocket...no talking about any of it before or during event...NO We did NOT offer ANY info to John or hints while being read...we didn't fill out any forms or talk to anyone there. Seating was random. Fridge and Valerie Harper statements made directly to me and my brother NOT thrown out to the entire group of 75 people just waiting for someone to bite. THAT is the proof...problem is not lack of proof but the lack of ability of some to even entertain the notion of life after death could ever be a possibility...EVER. Cause most certainly if you coud entertain that ridiculous notion you could also entertain the notion that communication is possible. NOW, I gonna go Chris..oh forget it..I gonna sit here and wait for responses...

So did JE say with no preamble "you've just bought a new fridge" or was it more like:

JE "I'm getting that you've bought new furniture, new appliance, could be a new appliance, new furniture, maybe for the dining room, bedroom, family room, kitchen, guest room, maybe it's the kitchen but I'm definitely getting a new household item, something like that"

RS "yes"

JE "yes, I knew that, it's something new to do with food, eating, to do with food having seen you react to the word 'kitchen' and keep reacting to the word 'food' it's a new refrigerator, right? Yes, your dad was telling me about your new refrigerator..."

Because although I've just made that conversation up in fifteen seconds flat, having seen John Edward on youtube a time or two that is how he works. He throws out a lot of stuff very quickly so that you cannot possibly pick out all the different misses, so people cling on to the hit which is buried in a whole heap of nonsense and repetition. It's guesswork and cold reading, plus JE does use researchers and hot reading, as has been explained. If you bought a new refrigerator you will have gone to the store or ordered online, you will have had a delivery, maybe the packaging to dispose of, the old appliance to dispose of... Don't underestimate just how far people like JE are prepared to go to find out stuff about their audiences. A quick google search is only the start of it.

I don't understand the tooth guy story, even after reading it in the comments on your blog. Can you explain it?

Slowvehicle · 26th November 2012, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

I have nothing to do with the Patch news site other than my blog...ANYONE...no jokes please : )...can blog for free and I get nothing back from it... unless of course you count the sheer satisfaction of knowing I may be spreading a little "Light"....
As far as John Edward goes...my description is accurate ... you think it must not be...so we agree to disagree.
Now if anyone is willing to read my other blog involving my deceased Nana "Is it Just a Dream...Or Something More?"
I would be very curious to hear your explanation of how I knew about the slippers.
Assuming of course you don't think my Nana told me herself. And with this crowd I'd say that's a pretty safe bet! : )
http://yorktown-somers.patch.com/blo...something-more

In your mind, does this anecdote constitute "evidence" that there is life after death?

RoboTimbo · 26th November 2012, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

I gonna sit here and wait for responses...

Robin, any chance that you'll go back to John Edward for another session? If so, an accurate transcript of exactly what was said would be very helpful in showing others that he isn't simply cold reading, that he is genuinely getting his information from beyond and not pumping you for it. A recording would be awesome.

Nessie · 26th November 2012, 11:18 AM

I don't think Robin is going to answer any of our questions.

truethat · 26th November 2012, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch

I have nothing to do with the Patch news site other than my blog...ANYONE...no jokes please : )...can blog for free and I get nothing back from it... unless of course you count the sheer satisfaction of knowing I may be spreading a little "Light"....
As far as John Edward goes...my description is accurate ... you think it must not be...so we agree to disagree.
Now if anyone is willing to read my other blog involving my deceased Nana "Is it Just a Dream...Or Something More?"
I would be very curious to hear your explanation of how I knew about the slippers.
Assuming of course you don't think my Nana told me herself. And with this crowd I'd say that's a pretty safe bet! : )
http://yorktown-somers.patch.com/blo...something-more

I'm quite interested in your experience and I hope you don't let the rabid dog cynics here throw you off of returning. I really resent the snide attitude that people have towards new members.

So if you want to really share how it went down I'm open to read it. One thing that you might not understand is how easy it is to read a person's body language and detect facial cues and other indications of information.

I am hearing impaired with profound hearing loss and I can detect things about people that my husband never even noticed. Ex A woman twitching her wedding ring is a sign that she is nervous about her relationship.

Fleeting eyes, unwillingness to make eye contact means that something is hurtful or upsetting to the person.

One thing I've done over the years is meet people outside having a smoke and chatting it up knowing nothing and detected that the person is a tourist simply based on the cleanliness of their shoes.

I can detect ethnic origins better than most people because I've familiarized myself with different cultures.

SonOfLaertes · 26th November 2012, 11:42 AM

Robin, did you watch the video linked in post #65? Curious that you haven't commented on it. The fact is, most of us have witnessed a "personal" cold reading by John Edwards - via videos like this.

If you can truly watch that video and state that John Edwards was not fishing for facts with his subject, then you absolutely have blinders over your eyes.

Now, let's be clear, and let us use this to clarify the principals we are operating from on this forum. The video in question shows that John Edwards has used cold reading techniques with at least one of his subjects. It does not prove that he used such techniques with you, though. However, if you don't recognize that this video clearly shows the usage of cold reading techniques, then we are justified in being suspicious of your ability to objectively assess John Edwards.

desertgal · 26th November 2012, 11:49 AM

Proof of life after death...where?

Foster Zygote · 26th November 2012, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Agatha

That video that Foster Zygote posted is very telling. There were no hits at all, everything Edward said was guesswork (and not particularly good guesswork at that) and very clear cold reading. The host appeared to be impressed with the snowglobe but what JE was actually talking about was "something" on the table - his first guess was pink roses - and then he got Ginger to show him it. He never stated what it was at all, and then he used that to make a further guess about Disney.

And before he guessed "Disney" he guessed "Christmas". The video is actually an excellent illustration of why cold readers like Edward or Browne prefer to work with larger groups: It greatly multiplies the odds of a guess being seen as significant to someone.

Nessie · 26th November 2012, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by SonOfLaertes

Robin, did you watch the video linked in post #65? Curious that you haven't commented on it. The fact is, most of us have witnessed a "personal" cold reading by John Edwards - via videos like this.

If you can truly watch that video and state that John Edwards was not fishing for facts with his subject, then you absolutely have blinders over your eyes.

Now, let's be clear, and let us use this to clarify the principals we are operating from on this forum. The video in question shows that John Edwards has used cold reading techniques with at least one of his subjects. It does not prove that he used such techniques with you, though. However, if you don't recognize that this video clearly shows the usage of cold reading techniques, then we are justified in being suspicious of your ability to objectively assess John Edwards.

Which is why I really want Robin to answer the question, did Edward do anything clearly different from all the other mediums you went to see? Or are you just a fan of his because he was the closest to being right?

carlitos · 26th November 2012, 11:55 AM

Maybe she just wanted some professional assurance that the big thing in the kitchen was indeed a refrigerator.

quarky · 26th November 2012, 11:55 AM

I new at this, but the link I watched of JE was like watching really bad slight-of-hand magic. Like, the guy dropped his cards and couldn't guess the one you picked.

It is somewhat disappointing that the messages from the dead are so mundane...though, in itself, that's not cause to reject them.
I had an uncle that mostly talked about golf.

If I could contact him 'on the other side', I could hardly expect him to reveal cosmic secrets. With luck, he'd tell me where some missing golf balls are.

This might sound cynical, but is it possible that guys like JE put people up to this sort of stuff?
With, maybe money, or something like it?
Seems like a cheap form of advertizement.

Does any one know what sort of money a popular psychic pulls down?
I have no idea.

truethat · 26th November 2012, 12:01 PM

That's the thing to me as well. I watched Sylvia Brown do a reading once on Montel Williams and she just threw out letters "I'm getting a person with a M or N in their name" OMIGOD She's talking about Marie, Mary, Melissa, Michelle, Mom, Nana etc.

What is interesting is that your father's name is Salvatore. if you think about it (And I can definitely get the ST reference here even if others don't)

But if you think about it ST Steve, Thomas, STEPfather etc etc etc.

There are a million ways you could interpret ST. If he had said "Sal" I would be more convinced.

A person who makes a living off "reading people" can read for stereotypes very easily. It isn't psychic it's just focus on details that others may have missed.

Another really easy thing to do is to throw out some completely random information that will sometimes stick, like the refrigerator.

Foster Zygote · 26th November 2012, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by quarky

OMG!

I've never actually watched one of these 'readings' before.
I don't know why I checked out your link.
Was that one abnormally bad, or is it more typical?

I've (obviously) never played around with this sort of manipulation, but I honestly feel I could have done much better than JE on that one.

Still, the 'client', or mark, or whatever they are called, seemed OK with his effort.

Good god, man!
Is this normal in the psychic realm?

That's why he prefers to work with crowds. If there had been an audience of fifty to sixty people it's much more likely that he'd have gotten a response from someone regarding his "J-M name" without the minutes of awkward, fruitless fishing. And, unfortunately, it is pretty typical. The most telling thing to me is that the woman seemed, at least outwardly, to accept that Edward had genuinely connected with some deceased loved one.

truethat · 26th November 2012, 12:02 PM

That's the thing to me as well. I watched Sylvia Brown do a reading once on Montel Williams and she just threw out letters "I'm getting a person with a M or N in their name" OMIGOD She's talking about Marie, Mary, Melissa, Michelle, Mom, Nana etc.

What is interesting is that your father's name is Salvatore. if you think about it (And I can definitely get the ST reference here even if others don't)

But if you think about it ST Steve, Thomas, STEPfather etc etc etc.

There are a million ways you could interpret ST. If he had said "Sal" I would be more convinced.

A person who makes a living off "reading people" can read for stereotypes very easily. It isn't psychic it's just focus on details that others may have missed.

Another really easy thing to do is to throw out some completely random information that will sometimes stick, like the refrigerator.

Also keep in mind that he does this for a living. Even if he's not reading you, if he's reading the crowd he'll pay attention to reactions to statements of others in the room. When someone recognizes something as he's talking to another person, if he then moves on to the new person, he's got information.

26th November 2012, 09:33 AM	#121
Garrette Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 10,548	Originally Posted by Nessie From Robin's blog "I searched for comfort wanting to know for sure my dad still existed and was a part of all of our lives. This in turn led me to psychic mediums in search of proof. I attended psychic fairs, conferences, and had some private readings as well. What I learned is something I always knew in my heart...your soul lives on, love truly is eternal, and your deceased loved one is closer than you know!" So you were not open minded, you wanted it to work. You kept going because... "What I also learned unfortunately is that there are plenty of fake "psychic mediums" out there pretending to connect with your loved ones. I for one am not easily fooled by the fishing and general statements and questions and answers of fake mediums. The biggest test...I have to be told something very specific to me by the medium that there is no way he could have known unless my father told him." ...so you were not convinced of any of them until.... "....John Edward. His comments directed to me only as I stood there were spot on. He gave a lot of correct information about my dad...." So finally you met one you were convinced by as he came out with the type of information you were looking for, details you say no one else could know. But, random on its own could account for that, go to loads of mediums and random says you will meet one who can give you the information you were looking for. Meanwhile others will not have got the information they were looking for from Mr Edward and so will be off finding solace with the mediums you say are fake. For Mr Edward to be truly convincing he would have to be spot on with way, way more than just you and all the others would have to be wrong all the time. You must understand that and realise that is why you have had the reaction so far you have had. When you said your initial doubts faded as.... "He gave a lot of correct information about my dad such as family names and that his name has an ST sound...his name was Salvatore. And correct information about my dad having a problem with his brain. Impressive but I was not totally convinced. UNTIL.... He said my dad told him I just bought a new refrigerator....." ..we see a medium doing the usual medium tricks and with you he got on a roll and so you are convinced. But it is not scientific at all to take that one occasion and to then declare he is a true medium. He needs to do it again and again and again under very rigorous conditions. It is not closed minded to say, we want more evidence before Mr Edward is declared a true medium who really can talk to the dead. Welcome to a sceptic's forum and see how we function. Nice summary. It brings up the law of large numbers, too. Even if we discard warm reading and hot reading (and we really can't), then eventually Edward will have one or two or three amazingly accurate hits just by chance. Add in all the mediums who do this and the number of incidents that appear to be irrefutable proof skyrocket; that a number of them appear on blogs or the occasional video is less than impressive. ETA: I also note, as I did when I visited Robin's blog, that there are exactly zero misses listed. I find this difficult to believe, that absolutely everything John Edward said was a hit. There's the confirmation bias for you.
	__________________ My kids still love me. Last edited by Garrette; 26th November 2012 at 09:34 AM.

26th November 2012, 09:38 AM	#122
Garrette Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 10,548	Originally Posted by dafydd There is nothing else in the psychic realm. I don't fully agree, except in the literal sense. Like Skeptic Ginger, I do see some value in specific cases regarding grief counseling, but I reserve that for the several I know who were not conscious frauds as John Edward is. Most of those I know whom I believe honestly think they are psychic are legitimately concerned about the emotional well being of their sitters, and their skills at cold reading, their intuition, and their empathy often allow at least temporary improvements in the emotional state of their sitters. I suspect that this benefit is less than the benefit to be expected from coming to grips with reality, but it is still better than sitting home and grieving alone, at least for some.* *The above is completely unsupported speculation on my part. I have no qualifications as a psychologist or psychiatrist.
	__________________ My kids still love me.

26th November 2012, 09:42 AM	#123
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,456	I went a counselor after my wife died. He didn't pretend to get in touch with her. That would have been obtaining money under false pretenses.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

26th November 2012, 09:46 AM	#124
Garrette Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 10,548	Originally Posted by dafydd I went a counselor after my wife died. He didn't pretend to get in touch with her. That would have been obtaining money under false pretenses. Sorry about your loss. In my hour of need I would not go to someone who thought they were contacting the dead, but you are mixing ethics and results.
	__________________ My kids still love me.

26th November 2012, 10:04 AM	#125
Garrette Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 10,548	Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch --snip-- With regard to pointing people to my blog and ALL the comments...it has mostly all been said and questioned and answered there already so that saves me the time of having to do it all over again! You came here with a claim; we did not go there. Suppose I pop over to your house and tell you I make the world's best ham sandwich. All you have to do is run down to my house, sort through the refrigerator for the ingredients I refuse to list for you and then put it together with the secret sauce I won't divulge. Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch Hey cut me some slack I have 3 kids! And you think we don't have other demands on our time? Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch Also I must say some of the comments and back and forth should give a chuckle to anyone interested in the subject. That's the point. Most comments are not relevant to your argument yet you want us to read through them anyway because you have three kids and can't be bothered to support the claim that you came here to make. Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch And no I have personally nothing to gain from people reading my blog. So the ads I had to close provide no benefit to you at all? You simply allow other companies to put ads on your blog because you're terribly nice that way? Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch But of course if you have a question or point that was not adequately addressed there then we can discuss it here. Okay. The point that was not adequately addressed is the claim that John Edward is an authentic medium. Please discuss. Note: This post is a bit snarky, but I did it to demonstrate something. I hope you can decipher what that is.
	__________________ My kids still love me.

26th November 2012, 10:06 AM	#126
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,456	Originally Posted by Garrette Sorry about your loss. In my hour of need I would not go to someone who thought they were contacting the dead, but you are mixing ethics and results. It would be fine with me if the counselors who claim to be in touch with the dead actually had to pass a test to prove it. Now where could such a test be found?
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

26th November 2012, 10:13 AM	#127
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,785	Robin, do you really not have any alarm bells ringing from having been to so many false mediums until you found a true one? Was there anything that Edward did that was completely different from all the other mediums? (I do not mean he was right and they were wrong, I mean in terms of technique)
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

26th November 2012, 10:15 AM	#128
GregInAustin Scholar Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 91	I have a fundamental question: How does one person's personal experience with a psychic "prove" that there is life after death? Even if Edward were a real psychic, it still comes down to his word against yours. Memories and experiences hardly constitute proof of something as extraordinary as life after death. Before you can even prove life after death, you have to prove 100 other things that we have no evidence for. Such as: 1. Proof that souls exist. 2. wait... where's the proof for #1? 3. see #2 ... Regarding John Edward: I was very sick recently, and could do nothing else but lay on the couch and watch tv. There was a daytime talk show with Edward on it (can't remember which show right now, as I had not seen it before, nor have since.) The host said she was skeptical of psychics and mediums (good for her) but she allowed these 2 "mediums" to do their thing anyway. During their talk, John Edward admitted that even though he made a living as a psychic, he had NO IDEA that his mother was dying of cancer. He even told his mother's doctor that if she really had cancer, he (John) would know, because he was psychic. Somehow this story was supposed to explain why he learned how to talk to the dead, not show that obviously he did not posses the abilities he claimed to. He then proceeded to do cold readings of the audience, making vague statements, waiting for a hit, then narrowing his questions down to what seemed like specifics. I didn't take notes, but it his hit to miss ratio was pathetic. Laughable even. I did not watch the rest of the show, so I have no idea how it turned out.
GregInAustin Scholar Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 91

26th November 2012, 10:17 AM	#129
lopeyschools Critical Thinker Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: West Coast - BC Posts: 372	Are we talking about the same John Edwards who won biggest douche in the universe award? I just watched that episode of south park yesterday and I was thinking about how he would be taken apart on JREF forums. Now it is happening. Does that make me psyhic?

26th November 2012, 10:22 AM	#130
poblob14 Thinker Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 223	Originally Posted by Garrette ETA: I also note, as I did when I visited Robin's blog, that there are exactly zero misses listed. I find this difficult to believe, that absolutely everything John Edward said was a hit. There's the confirmation bias for you. I agree with you in principle, but it seems to me that there was in fact a miss listed: the ST thing. As pointed out before, "Salvatore" has no ST sound, nor anything close to an ST sound. It has the letters ST, but not together, and that (apparently) isn't what was said anyway. That sounds like a complete miss to me. Also, the two "stomach procedures" . . . we aren't told much about the "feeding tubes" that were put in; some of those could be considered "stomach procedures," some not. I don't know if that's really a hit or not.
poblob14 Thinker Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 223

26th November 2012, 10:22 AM	#131
Garrette Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 10,548	Originally Posted by GregInAustin I have a fundamental question: How does one person's personal experience with a psychic "prove" that there is life after death? Even if Edward were a real psychic, it still comes down to his word against yours. Memories and experiences hardly constitute proof of something as extraordinary as life after death. Before you can even prove life after death, you have to prove 100 other things that we have no evidence for. Such as: 1. Proof that souls exist. 2. wait... where's the proof for #1? 3. see #2 ... Regarding John Edward: I was very sick recently, and could do nothing else but lay on the couch and watch tv. There was a daytime talk show with Edward on it (can't remember which show right now, as I had not seen it before, nor have since.) The host said she was skeptical of psychics and mediums (good for her) but she allowed these 2 "mediums" to do their thing anyway. During their talk, John Edward admitted that even though he made a living as a psychic, he had NO IDEA that his mother was dying of cancer. He even told his mother's doctor that if she really had cancer, he (John) would know, because he was psychic. Somehow this story was supposed to explain why he learned how to talk to the dead, not show that obviously he did not posses the abilities he claimed to. He then proceeded to do cold readings of the audience, making vague statements, waiting for a hit, then narrowing his questions down to what seemed like specifics. I didn't take notes, but it his hit to miss ratio was pathetic. Laughable even. I did not watch the rest of the show, so I have no idea how it turned out. I am not certain, but I think John Edward is the one who pioneered a technique that is becoming more common and which adds to the air of authenticity. He occasionally insists a miss is a hit, not just by glossing over it, but by almost rudely insisting that a certain statement applies to the person he is talking to and they should remember it later (this applies to Robin and the "hit" regarding Valerie Harper and Robin's brother). He knows he is safe for at least three reasons: 1. If it really is a miss, most or all will forget it. 2. The pool of vague connections on which the sitter can draw has suddenly become infinite; the sitter is no longer under pressure to come up with something right there. Instead, they can concoct any connection they like at any time after the show and then turn it in to free publicity such as Robin has. 3. The standard reaction of believing observers is "If he were fake he wouldn't do that," ignoring the fact that conmen are smart enough to know that this is precisely how the marks will think. It is subtly tautological.
	__________________ My kids still love me.

26th November 2012, 10:24 AM	#132
Garrette Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 10,548	Originally Posted by poblob14 I agree with you in principle, but it seems to me that there was in fact a miss listed: the ST thing. As pointed out before, "Salvatore" has no ST sound, nor anything close to an ST sound. It has the letters ST, but not together, and that (apparently) isn't what was said anyway. That sounds like a complete miss to me. Also, the two "stomach procedures" . . . we aren't told much about the "feeding tubes" that were put in; some of those could be considered "stomach procedures," some not. I don't know if that's really a hit or not. Ah. I agree. I should have said "There is nothing listed that Robin thought was a miss."
	__________________ My kids still love me.

26th November 2012, 10:25 AM	#133
Garrette Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 10,548	Originally Posted by lopeyschools Are we talking about the same John Edwards who won biggest douche in the universe award? I just watched that episode of south park yesterday and I was thinking about how he would be taken apart on JREF forums. Now it is happening. Does that make me psyhic? Yes, but I will emphasize my nitpick again. It is *John Edward*. There is no S.
	__________________ My kids still love me.

26th November 2012, 10:27 AM	#134
Robin1 Suspended Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 610	Ok, now my kids are going to be mad...Why are there no presents Mommy?...well darlings Mommy got obsessed and trapped on a life after death thread... K... NO way for John Edward to know about fridge or Valerie Harper connection or tooth in pocket...no talking about any of it before or during event...NO We did NOT offer ANY info to John or hints while being read...we didn't fill out any forms or talk to anyone there. Seating was random. Fridge and Valerie Harper statements made directly to me and my brother NOT thrown out to the entire group of 75 people just waiting for someone to bite. THAT is the proof...problem is not lack of proof but the lack of ability of some to even entertain the notion of life after death could ever be a possibility...EVER. Cause most certainly if you coud entertain that ridiculous notion you could also entertain the notion that communication is possible. NOW, I gonna go Chris..oh forget it..I gonna sit here and wait for responses...
Robin1 Suspended Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 610

26th November 2012, 10:36 AM	#135
truethat Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 8,625	Robin I read your blog. Your last name has an ST in it. And you are named Robin and are a blonde American looking for information about your dead father. You say that they were married for 51 years. Let's see, your father would have been someone who was alive when Pearl Harbor happened. That's like someone doing a reading about me for my kids when I have died and based on their age they say "I'm seeing a 911 connection.' You could have said something or indicated in some way that you had just bought a new refrigerator without realizing it or it would be a lucky guess. Valerie Harper connection, based on your father's age, Mary Tyler Moore was a popular show when your father was younger. Now consider, you don't think it is unusual that this medium happened to know the two things you just recently purchased? Things that would have left a receipt behind? Seems to me that you may have spoken about these things and been overheard. Next I have the same question that everyone else does. Your father comes back from the other side to discuss your fridge, tickets to a show and nothing at all about the other side or your life in ways that are meaningful? Remember the end of the Sixth Sense, when the boy tells his mother what her mother had said, that's the kind of thing that would convince me.
truethat Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 8,625	__________________ “Do not argue with an idiot they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.” ― Mark Twain

26th November 2012, 10:36 AM	#136
Garrette Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 10,548	The problem is that we (or at least I) do in fact entertain the possibility. So seriously that some of us have shared that belief. The issue is not that we ignore proof. The issue is that we have looked at what is called proof and find it lacking. You case is the same. You can stridently insist all you like, but without a transcript and without far more info on the show and the lead up to it and without a discussion of things like the Forer Effect and the law of large numbers you cannot legitimately claim this as proof. So do yo!u want to address specifics about JE or would you rather discuss Schwartz since you brought him up? I trust the fact that we already know about his book has not scared you off the topic. And now I have to step away for a while. Cheers
	__________________ My kids still love me.

26th November 2012, 10:40 AM	#137
Sledge Grammaton Cleric Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Swingin' on a star Posts: 7,123	So there are two possibilities here: the first is that our understanding of the universe is almost entirely incorrect, and that the dead hang around communicating with their loved ones via vague messages relayed through John Edward. The second is that John Edward is a calculating conman taking advantage of people's grief to line his pockets via parlour tricks. Which of these is most likely?
	__________________ "The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.

26th November 2012, 10:42 AM	#138
truethat Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 8,625	Let's see if I can do a psychic reading for you. You are seeking some answer you didn't get from your father when he was alive. You seem to have had a very close relationship with your father. His illness was unexpected and shocking and you weren't able to find some sort of closure with some issues because you couldn't discuss anything with him. You are worried for your mother and feeling responsible. He died a grusome illness that tore apart his brain and shut down his body. You watched over him as he suffered and always wondered if he could hear you speaking to him. Your children ask you about him and you want to give a strong answer. This is based on some conversation or discussion you had as a child. I'm picking up on a "life shock" at a young age associated with death. One that you had difficulty understanding. How am I doing so far?
truethat Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 8,625	__________________ “Do not argue with an idiot they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.” ― Mark Twain

26th November 2012, 10:43 AM	#139
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,020	Next time someone attends one of these events, and is "lucky" enough to get a reading, might you please ask about the afterlife? What's it like? Is there a big dog like a god or something? Is there beer? Pizza? Who gives a **** about the fridge I just purchased? The watch I kept. The picture of us fishing. I know about all that truck already for crissake!
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,020

26th November 2012, 10:44 AM	#140
carlitos "más divertido" Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 11,508	Originally Posted by Garrette I am not certain, but I think John Edward is the one who pioneered a technique that is becoming more common and which adds to the air of authenticity. He occasionally insists a miss is a hit, not just by glossing over it, but by almost rudely insisting that a certain statement applies to the person he is talking to and they should remember it later (this applies to Robin and the "hit" regarding Valerie Harper and Robin's brother). He knows he is safe for at least three reasons: 1. If it really is a miss, most or all will forget it. 2. The pool of vague connections on which the sitter can draw has suddenly become infinite; the sitter is no longer under pressure to come up with something right there. Instead, they can concoct any connection they like at any time after the show and then turn it in to free publicity such as Robin has. 3. The standard reaction of believing observers is "If he were fake he wouldn't do that," ignoring the fact that conmen are smart enough to know that this is precisely how the marks will think. It is subtly tautological. Great points. Add to this - conmen like Edward have a set of excuses for being caught in lies, and they don't think like a moral person would. You or I think - If I tell a like, I might get caught. Edward is a serial liar; he just moves to the next lie or sucker to be conned. Anyway, this is possibly the most boring special claim ever. Robin, your dad wants to tell you something. (anticipation) He says that you have a new refrigerator. I just don't find that compelling or interesting.
	Last edited by carlitos; 26th November 2012 at 10:47 AM.

26th November 2012, 10:50 AM	#141
GregInAustin Scholar Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 91	Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch ... NO way for John Edward to know about fridge or Valerie Harper connection or tooth in pocket...no talking about any of it before or during event...NO We did NOT offer ANY info to John or hints while being read...we didn't fill out any forms or talk to anyone there. Seating was random. Fridge and Valerie Harper statements made directly to me and my brother NOT thrown out to the entire group of 75 people just waiting for someone to bite. How exactly were you and your brother picked out of the 75 other people? I would imagine John Edward loves doing his show with large audiences. He can say something completely random and SOMEBODY there is going to have a hit. "Has anyone here lost a loved one recently?" Well, SURE. 90% of the audience can relate to that. Then, when he does get a hit, he can throw some more specific but still completely random. "I'm getting something about a car, or car accident, or not going in the car when an accident happened." And so on, knowing that these are things that nearly every person in the room has experienced at one time or another. I didn't read your story, but tell me, what other common item did you buy recently that he could have asked you about? A TV? Some furniture? Shoes for your kids? The reason I ask is because I think you would have focused on just about anything that he had a hit on, and would ignore the rest. And just out of curiosity, exactly how many "misses" did he have while talking to you?
GregInAustin Scholar Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 91

26th November 2012, 10:53 AM	#142
Robin1 Suspended Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 610	I have nothing to do with the Patch news site other than my blog...ANYONE...no jokes please : )...can blog for free and I get nothing back from it... unless of course you count the sheer satisfaction of knowing I may be spreading a little "Light".... As far as John Edward goes...my description is accurate ... you think it must not be...so we agree to disagree. Now if anyone is willing to read my other blog involving my deceased Nana "Is it Just a Dream...Or Something More?" I would be very curious to hear your explanation of how I knew about the slippers. Assuming of course you don't think my Nana told me herself. And with this crowd I'd say that's a pretty safe bet! : ) http://yorktown-somers.patch.com/blo...something-more
Robin1 Suspended Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 610

26th November 2012, 10:57 AM	#143
Pixel42 Schrödinger's cat Join Date: May 2004 Location: Wiltshire, UK Posts: 4,237	Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch As far as John Edward goes...my description is accurate ... you think it must not be...so we agree to disagree. Nobody has said that your description is not accurate, though it's almost certainly not complete in that you (as would anyone else) will have tended to remember the hits more than the misses. The point is that there are far more plausible explanations (lucky guesses, surreptitiously obtained information) for the hits than that Edward was comunicating with your dead father.
	__________________ "The correct scientific response to anything that is not understood is always to look harder for the explanation, not give up and assume a supernatural cause". David Attenborough.

26th November 2012, 10:58 AM	#144
Sledge Grammaton Cleric Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Swingin' on a star Posts: 7,123	Is thread purely to give traffic to a couple of blogs?
	__________________ "The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.

26th November 2012, 10:58 AM	#145
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,020	Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch I have nothing to do with the Patch news site other than my blog...ANYONE...no jokes please : )...can blog for free and I get nothing back from it... unless of course you count the sheer satisfaction of knowing I may be spreading a little "Light".... As far as John Edward goes...my description is accurate ... you think it must not be...so we agree to disagree. Now if anyone is willing to read my other blog involving my deceased Nana "Is it Just a Dream...Or Something More?" I would be very curious to hear your explanation of how I knew about the slippers. Assuming of course you don't think my Nana told me herself. And with this crowd I'd say that's a pretty safe bet! : ) http://yorktown-somers.patch.com/blo...something-more Are slippers really all that unique an item? Do you understand how poor one's memory actually is? Do you understand coincidence? As long as you refuse to factor these and other explanations into your equation, you aren't really as open-minded as you like to think.
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,020

26th November 2012, 11:00 AM	#146
lopeyschools Critical Thinker Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: West Coast - BC Posts: 372	Originally Posted by Garrette Yes, but I will emphasize my nitpick again. It is *John Edward*. There is no S. I dunno. His late mother is coming through to me now and she says he was originally named Edwards, but that his birth certificate was a typo. (I don't actually know if his mother has passed on, but considering he is 43 it's likely. If she is in fact dead, I will be starting my own tv show soon.)
	Last edited by lopeyschools; 26th November 2012 at 11:09 AM.

26th November 2012, 11:00 AM	#147
Agatha Winking at the Moon Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: UK Posts: 4,216	Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch Ok, now my kids are going to be mad...Why are there no presents Mommy?...well darlings Mommy got obsessed and trapped on a life after death thread... There's no need to attempt to guilt trip people, you can switch off the computer whenever you choose, and respond to some (any) of the questions at a time convenient to you. Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch K... NO way for John Edward to know about fridge or Valerie Harper connection or tooth in pocket...no talking about any of it before or during event...NO We did NOT offer ANY info to John or hints while being read...we didn't fill out any forms or talk to anyone there. Seating was random. Fridge and Valerie Harper statements made directly to me and my brother NOT thrown out to the entire group of 75 people just waiting for someone to bite. THAT is the proof...problem is not lack of proof but the lack of ability of some to even entertain the notion of life after death could ever be a possibility...EVER. Cause most certainly if you coud entertain that ridiculous notion you could also entertain the notion that communication is possible. NOW, I gonna go Chris..oh forget it..I gonna sit here and wait for responses... So did JE say with no preamble "you've just bought a new fridge" or was it more like: JE "I'm getting that you've bought new furniture, new appliance, could be a new appliance, new furniture, maybe for the dining room, bedroom, family room, kitchen, guest room, maybe it's the kitchen but I'm definitely getting a new household item, something like that" RS "yes" JE "yes, I knew that, it's something new to do with food, eating, to do with food having seen you react to the word 'kitchen' and keep reacting to the word 'food' it's a new refrigerator, right? Yes, your dad was telling me about your new refrigerator..." Because although I've just made that conversation up in fifteen seconds flat, having seen John Edward on youtube a time or two that is how he works. He throws out a lot of stuff very quickly so that you cannot possibly pick out all the different misses, so people cling on to the hit which is buried in a whole heap of nonsense and repetition. It's guesswork and cold reading, plus JE does use researchers and hot reading, as has been explained. If you bought a new refrigerator you will have gone to the store or ordered online, you will have had a delivery, maybe the packaging to dispose of, the old appliance to dispose of... Don't underestimate just how far people like JE are prepared to go to find out stuff about their audiences. A quick google search is only the start of it. I don't understand the tooth guy story, even after reading it in the comments on your blog. Can you explain it?
	__________________ People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... timey wimey... stuff.

26th November 2012, 11:00 AM	#148
Slowvehicle Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: ...not where I seemed, nor was calculated to be...but no-one need worry... Posts: 2,157	Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch I have nothing to do with the Patch news site other than my blog...ANYONE...no jokes please : )...can blog for free and I get nothing back from it... unless of course you count the sheer satisfaction of knowing I may be spreading a little "Light".... As far as John Edward goes...my description is accurate ... you think it must not be...so we agree to disagree. Now if anyone is willing to read my other blog involving my deceased Nana "Is it Just a Dream...Or Something More?" I would be very curious to hear your explanation of how I knew about the slippers. Assuming of course you don't think my Nana told me herself. And with this crowd I'd say that's a pretty safe bet! : ) http://yorktown-somers.patch.com/blo...something-more In your mind, does this anecdote constitute "evidence" that there is life after death?
	__________________ "Science is a wall against which we crash all of our ideas. The ones that survive are the ones we keep, but they are still subjected to periodic crash tests." -Foster Zygote "And in science the default is that you're wrong. EVERYONE is wrong. You only can be not wrong if you have evidence to back up your claim." -Dinwar "That is not my circus; those are not my monkeys." -Howard Tayler

26th November 2012, 11:01 AM	#149
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,853	Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch I gonna sit here and wait for responses... Robin, any chance that you'll go back to John Edward for another session? If so, an accurate transcript of exactly what was said would be very helpful in showing others that he isn't simply cold reading, that he is genuinely getting his information from beyond and not pumping you for it. A recording would be awesome.

26th November 2012, 11:18 AM	#150
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,785	I don't think Robin is going to answer any of our questions.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

26th November 2012, 11:35 AM	#151
truethat Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 8,625	Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch I have nothing to do with the Patch news site other than my blog...ANYONE...no jokes please : )...can blog for free and I get nothing back from it... unless of course you count the sheer satisfaction of knowing I may be spreading a little "Light".... As far as John Edward goes...my description is accurate ... you think it must not be...so we agree to disagree. Now if anyone is willing to read my other blog involving my deceased Nana "Is it Just a Dream...Or Something More?" I would be very curious to hear your explanation of how I knew about the slippers. Assuming of course you don't think my Nana told me herself. And with this crowd I'd say that's a pretty safe bet! : ) http://yorktown-somers.patch.com/blo...something-more I'm quite interested in your experience and I hope you don't let the rabid dog cynics here throw you off of returning. I really resent the snide attitude that people have towards new members. So if you want to really share how it went down I'm open to read it. One thing that you might not understand is how easy it is to read a person's body language and detect facial cues and other indications of information. I am hearing impaired with profound hearing loss and I can detect things about people that my husband never even noticed. Ex A woman twitching her wedding ring is a sign that she is nervous about her relationship. Fleeting eyes, unwillingness to make eye contact means that something is hurtful or upsetting to the person. One thing I've done over the years is meet people outside having a smoke and chatting it up knowing nothing and detected that the person is a tourist simply based on the cleanliness of their shoes. I can detect ethnic origins better than most people because I've familiarized myself with different cultures.
truethat Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 8,625	__________________ “Do not argue with an idiot they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.” ― Mark Twain

26th November 2012, 11:42 AM	#152
SonOfLaertes Muse Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: The Area 51 Motel 6 Room 12 Bed 2 Pillow1 Posts: 781	Robin, did you watch the video linked in post #65? Curious that you haven't commented on it. The fact is, most of us have witnessed a "personal" cold reading by John Edwards - via videos like this. If you can truly watch that video and state that John Edwards was not fishing for facts with his subject, then you absolutely have blinders over your eyes. Now, let's be clear, and let us use this to clarify the principals we are operating from on this forum. The video in question shows that John Edwards has used cold reading techniques with at least one of his subjects. It does not prove that he used such techniques with you, though. However, if you don't recognize that this video clearly shows the usage of cold reading techniques, then we are justified in being suspicious of your ability to objectively assess John Edwards.
	__________________ Best concise summary of Intelligent Design's never-changing key argument: “ the improbability of assembly of functional sequence all at once from scratch by brute chance” (Nick Matske, Panda's Thumb).

26th November 2012, 11:49 AM	#153
desertgal Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Virginia City Posts: 3,234	Proof of life after death...where?

26th November 2012, 11:50 AM	#154
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,391	Originally Posted by Agatha That video that Foster Zygote posted is very telling. There were no hits at all, everything Edward said was guesswork (and not particularly good guesswork at that) and very clear cold reading. The host appeared to be impressed with the snowglobe but what JE was actually talking about was "something" on the table - his first guess was pink roses - and then he got Ginger to show him it. He never stated what it was at all, and then he used that to make a further guess about Disney. And before he guessed "Disney" he guessed "Christmas". The video is actually an excellent illustration of why cold readers like Edward or Browne prefer to work with larger groups: It greatly multiplies the odds of a guess being seen as significant to someone.
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it.

26th November 2012, 11:52 AM	#155
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,785	Originally Posted by SonOfLaertes Robin, did you watch the video linked in post #65? Curious that you haven't commented on it. The fact is, most of us have witnessed a "personal" cold reading by John Edwards - via videos like this. If you can truly watch that video and state that John Edwards was not fishing for facts with his subject, then you absolutely have blinders over your eyes. Now, let's be clear, and let us use this to clarify the principals we are operating from on this forum. The video in question shows that John Edwards has used cold reading techniques with at least one of his subjects. It does not prove that he used such techniques with you, though. However, if you don't recognize that this video clearly shows the usage of cold reading techniques, then we are justified in being suspicious of your ability to objectively assess John Edwards. Which is why I really want Robin to answer the question, did Edward do anything clearly different from all the other mediums you went to see? Or are you just a fan of his because he was the closest to being right?
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic