Sylvia Browne contacts the spirit of Agatha Christie

Questioninggeller · 27th May 2007, 03:20 PM

A rather interesting take on Browne:

Quote:

Inside Bay Area (California)
November 2, 2006 Thursday
SECTION: RAY ORROCK
LENGTH: 444 words
HEADLINE: Being frozen in time at age 30 not exactly my idea of heaven
BYLINE: Column by Ray Orrock
BODY:

SOME YEARS AGO, when First Artists Studio made a movie based on an Agatha Christie book, the studio's promotions department thought it would be a nice touch to interview Ms. Christie and get her reaction to the film.

This was not as easy as it might sound, however, since Agatha Christie had died three years earlier.

Undaunted, however, the studio hired a psychic, a Ms. Sylvia Brown, who, by an uncommon stroke of good fortune, was able to contact the spirit of Agatha Christie, who said she thought the movie was terrific and that it would be a big hit. Talk about your lucky breaks.

MS. BROWN claimed she'd had no trouble contacting Agatha, saying it was "like making a phone call to Chicago." But the most startling bit of information to come out of this mini-seance -- for me, at least -- was the revelation that Ms. Christie was no longer 85 years old (her age when she died in 1976), but was now only 30.

And Ms. Brown explained this quite casually. "Everyone," she said, "attains the age of 30 when they pass over."
...
At 30 you are neither young nor old, innocent nor wise, cute nor venerable.

At 30 you have had just enough experience to be expected to do something, but you haven't the faintest idea what it is.

At 30 you are desperately striving to make an impression on the world, and the world keeps springing back to its original shape.

At 30 it seem critically important to find out who you are -- but there doesn't seem to be any place to look it up.

AND NOW I find that, when I kick over, I'm suddenly going to be 30 again. Peachy.
...
If the other side is populated by 30-year-olds, it is a world of political correctness, soft rock, racquetball, fat-free meals, meaningful relationships, astrology charts, designer underwear, latex bike pants and vitamin-enriched shampoos.

And that sure as hell isn't my idea of heaven.

Source: http://www.insidebayarea.com/trivall...ews/ci_4590204 (now a dead link)

RSLancastr · 27th May 2007, 03:51 PM

wahrheit · 27th May 2007, 04:18 PM

HAHAHA

, thanks QG for another link and post from you.

This time it is not only a post showing what a fake Browne is, it was also plain funny!

"like making a phone call to Chicago" my a$$.

ChristineR · 27th May 2007, 04:35 PM

This should be easy to test. Get someone who know Christie well and have the friend write a short series of questions that only Christie and the friend should know the answers to.

Oh, wait....

Locknar · 27th May 2007, 07:35 PM

"MS. BROWN claimed she'd had no trouble contacting Agatha, saying it was "like making a phone call to Chicago." "

With it being so easy, I'm SHOCKED she is not used by police the world over in solving murder cases...let alone gets readings such as Eve Brown or say Holly Krewson (for example) wrong...since they were both dead when she claimed them to be alive.

Everyone is "30" after they have crossed over...not sure how that would work for those that die before that magical age; but hey, what do I know since I don't have her "gift" (yeah, right!)

EeneyMinnieMoe · 27th May 2007, 09:23 PM

Agatha Chrstie died in 1976, according to Wiki, and the film adaptations made at that time were

1972 Endless Night
1974 Murder on the Orient Express
1974/75 Ten Little Indians
1978 Death on the Nile

Murder was made by Paramount, the 1974 German version of Indians has no such production or distribution firm listed on IMDB and neither does Endless Night.

Matter of fact, "First Artist's Studio" brings up no relevant hits on Google.

...Is there something I'm missing here?

Questioninggeller · 27th May 2007, 09:34 PM

Originally Posted by EeneyMinnieMoe

Agatha Chrstie died in 1976, according to Wiki, and the film adaptations made at that time were

1972 Endless Night
1974 Murder on the Orient Express
1974/75 Ten Little Indians
1978 Death on the Nile

Murder was made by Paramount, the 1974 German version of Indians has no such production or distribution firm listed on IMDB and neither does Endless Night.

Matter of fact, "First Artist's Studio" brings up no relevant hits on Google.

...Is there something I'm missing here?

Wikipedia isn't a good source. There are many movies about her. I think the relevant one is Agatha (1979) see: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078736/

According to IMDB: First Artists produced Agatha (1979). see: http://www.imdb.com/company/co0040696/

EeneyMinnieMoe · 27th May 2007, 09:44 PM

Ah. Silly me.

That's too funny that Sylvia Browne was asked to contact Agatha Christie.

If I was in the room when she was doing it, I'd have stopped her and asked her "Ok, if you're contacting her, what are the names of the two husbands Agatha Christie had?" or "Name 100 of the books she wrote!"

Can you hear the long silence?

RSLancastr · 27th May 2007, 09:58 PM

Ms. Christie, what was the original title of Ten Little Indians?

So the newspaper article was inaccurate when it said that the movie was based on a Christie book. If I recall correcly, it was based on - or at least inspired by - a mysterious event in her own life.

EeneyMinnieMoe · 27th May 2007, 10:07 PM

Yes. I've never seen it but it's based on Agatha Christie's 3 day disappearance when she found out her husband was cheating.

It's a fictionalized version of what might have happened when the truth is that the good dame was most likely in a spa the entire time.

Questioninggeller · 27th May 2007, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by RSLancastr

So the newspaper article was inaccurate when it said that the movie was based on a Christie book. If I recall correcly, it was based on - or at least inspired by - a mysterious event in her own life.

According to movies.com

Quote:

...AGATHA is based on a book of the same name by Kathleen Tynan.

http://movies.go.com/agatha/d825498/drama

Complexity · 28th May 2007, 11:28 PM

Agatha Christie wouldn't give Jaba the time of day.

Think what Miss Marple would have to save about SB...

MelBrooksfan · 28th May 2007, 11:31 PM

Is the afterlife populated by a bunch of people approaching mid-life crises?

JeffJ · 29th May 2007, 05:46 AM

This 30 years old in heaven crap is just more proof that Browne is a demented and evil woman who apparently cannot possibly care about the feelings of her victims.
I would imagine that every parent (who believes in heaven) of a baby or young child who has died would much, much prefer the thought of once again holding their baby/child in "heaven" one day rather than looking forward to meeting up with some 30 year old adult and never having the possibility of seeing them as a baby/child again.
Way to go Sylvia for totally destroying that delusion for some more grieving people.

PastBrowneFan · 29th May 2007, 09:45 PM

Is "contacting" Agatha Christie the "Contribution to the Planet", or just some cheap publicity for SB?

EeneyMinnieMoe · 30th May 2007, 11:40 AM

When psychics claim to contact celebrities, like those clowns did with Princess Diana and John Lennon or how Elvis' daughter allegedly hired someone to speak to Elvis or SB and Agatha Christie, someone should seriously stop them and ask them the simplest thing about the celebrity's life that anyone could find but the psychic wouldn't know unless they had looked them up before.

"Diana, what was your mother's name?"
"John, what was your first band's name?"
"Elvis, what are the first 5 notes of "Don't be Cruel" ?"
"Miss Christie, what's your birth name?"

JoeTheJuggler · 30th May 2007, 02:35 PM

So was the movie in question "a big hit"? Seems to me that that's a testable claim.

JoeTheJuggler · 30th May 2007, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by JeffJ

I would imagine that every parent (who believes in heaven) of a baby or young child who has died would much, much prefer the thought of once again holding their baby/child in "heaven" one day rather than looking forward to meeting up with some 30 year old adult and never having the possibility of seeing them as a baby/child again.

Well that's why in the Sylvia universe most of the people on the other side are babbling idiots. Imagine you're a 5 year old sick in bed. You drop off into feverish sleep and die. You suddenly find yourself in a 30 year old body being pestered by a raspy-voiced woman with talons.

TruthBeTold · 31st May 2007, 04:02 AM

Just to clarify the concept of what we are like in Heaven without preaching or whatever.

If you lose a child, then your child will appear to you as you knew them.
Just as if you lost your grandmother, she can appear to you as she was when she left you.

But, the 30 year old concept is just a guideline for what we are like in heaven overall eternally. There is no age in heaven (nor time) but she used 30 to give people an idea of what we're like in our eternal state. We are LIKE we are at 30 here on earth...not a "clumsy" teen or an aching 50 year old.

Zep · 31st May 2007, 06:00 AM

Originally Posted by TruthBeTold

Just to clarify the concept of what we are like in Heaven without preaching or whatever.

If you lose a child, then your child will appear to you as you knew them.
Just as if you lost your grandmother, she can appear to you as she was when she left you.

But, the 30 year old concept is just a guideline for what we are like in heaven overall eternally. There is no age in heaven (nor time) but she used 30 to give people an idea of what we're like in our eternal state. We are LIKE we are at 30 here on earth...not a "clumsy" teen or an aching 50 year old.

Can I respectfully suggest that you don't waste any effort in trying to rationalise and support Sylvia Browne's concepts of "heaven" and "afterlife" to anyone? Clearly she has been and still is making up any old guff out of her fetid imagination, just to have something to say to her gullible audience. So to consider for even one second that her babble makes any sense worth perpetrating is a waste of too much of your (and everyone's) time. Perhaps it might be better if you responded with your own thoughts on the matter...much more interesting!

TruthBeTold · 31st May 2007, 06:26 AM

OK

JeffJ · 31st May 2007, 07:18 AM

Originally Posted by TruthBeTold

Just to clarify the concept of what we are like in Heaven without preaching or whatever.

If you lose a child, then your child will appear to you as you knew them.
Just as if you lost your grandmother, she can appear to you as she was when she left you.

But, the 30 year old concept is just a guideline for what we are like in heaven overall eternally. There is no age in heaven (nor time) but she used 30 to give people an idea of what we're like in our eternal state. We are LIKE we are at 30 here on earth...not a "clumsy" teen or an aching 50 year old.

I don't know... I've never heard her say any of that.

She always plainly says everyone is 30 years old there and so I believe she's simply trying to get people to believe that people (including children of all ages from what I can understand) are all actually 30 earth years old in heaven (regardless of how time and age work there).
A six month old baby in heaven can't be "LIKE" a 30 year old on earth. It either looks and acts just like a clumsy six month old baby or it looks and acts like an adult 30 year old.
So if you lose your baby/it dies and it later appears to you (in heaven when you get there) like you knew it on earth then exactly how is this baby "like" a 30 year old? If it appears like a baby then does it just have the mind of a 30 year old in heaven? And how do you know the answer to any of those questions?

Sylvia is just a lying evil woman and nothing that comes out of her mouth can be believed.
BTW, was it her who originally came up with the 30 years old in heaven idea or do any other religions also believe that?

Flo · 31st May 2007, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by JeffJ

I don't know... I've never heard her say any of that.

She always plainly says everyone is 30 years old there and so I believe she's simply trying to get people to believe that people (including children of all ages from what I can understand) are all actually 30 earth years old in heaven (regardless of how time and age work there).
A six month old baby in heaven can't be "LIKE" a 30 year old on earth. It either looks and acts just like a clumsy six month old baby or it looks and acts like an adult 30 year old.
So if you lose your baby/it dies and it later appears to you (in heaven when you get there) like you knew it on earth then exactly how is this baby "like" a 30 year old? If it appears like a baby then does it just have the mind of a 30 year old in heaven? And how do you know the answer to any of those questions?

Sylvia is just a lying evil woman and nothing that comes out of her mouth can be believed.
BTW, was it her who originally came up with the 30 years old in heaven idea or do any other religions also believe that?

I'm sure she didn't invent the concept, given how she's obviously a graduate of the "Creed-in-a-Cuisinart school of theology". Anyway, it sounds like a variation on the trite sayings people will use when giving condoleances: "remember her when she was at her best, she's happier where she is now, blah, blah, blah".

TruthBeTold · 31st May 2007, 07:46 AM

I think that I will take Zep's advice and not discuss the philosophy but instead do what I came here to do which was to support the other ex-Novus members in exposing Sylvia and Novus' fraudulent & unspiritual ways and by my doing so, hopefully inspire others to comfortably come forward.

TruthBeTold

Flo · 31st May 2007, 07:54 AM

Originally Posted by TruthBeTold

I think that I will take Zep's advice and not discuss the philosophy but instead do what I came here to do which was to support the other ex-Novus members in exposing Sylvia and Novus' fraudulent & unspiritual ways and by my doing so, hopefully inspire others to comfortably come forward.

TruthBeTold

Discussing (your take on) the philosophy, should you want to, would be extremely interesting, but would belong in the Religion/philosophy forum, not here, one reason being, as you rightly note, that we certainly don't want to frighten SB's and Novus' victims ...

Locknar · 31st May 2007, 08:18 AM

TruthBeTold - Discussion of philosophy would be fine. However, you need to better explain your statements wrt the "30 years old in heaven" comments.

SB has clearly stated many times this "everyone is 30 years old in heaven" concept. Your discussion with respect to her comments....is that your personal belief, or do you have documentation that shows where SB states something different (as you explain)?

If it is the later (ie. there is documentation), I think folks here would be VERY interested in seeing the documentation since it contradicts her previous statements.

If it is the former, (ie. your personal belief) I suggest you simply state that; the conversation can then tend toward philosophy vs factual. I'd also add, as Flo mentions, philosophical discussions are probably better suited for the "Religion/philosophy" forum.

TruthBeTold · 31st May 2007, 08:36 AM

All the years I've been studying the concepts I have always understood that there was no time in heaven so it made perfect sense to me that the reference to us being 30 years old at Home was just a way to get people to envision what we are like at Home using human age as a guage.

I just went through the books and you are correct. She simply states that we are 30 years old.

30 years old in a place where there is no time so therefore how could there be an age especially when she states we are eternal.

I honestly didn't think that I was giving my own perspective but I stand corrected.

Locknar · 31st May 2007, 08:52 AM

TBT - No need to stand, sit, relax

Also, thanks for taking the time to look through the books you have.

I wonder if she ever has "clarified" this verbally...say on her many times on Montel. When she is giving a "reading" on someone's child, or anyone under the age of 30, has she ever said anything with respect to their age in heaven or how they appear?

TruthBeTold · 31st May 2007, 09:31 AM

Thanks Locknar, I actually was sitting!

Relax? Hmm...difficult.

It's quite disheartening, all of this. I have studied the concepts for a decade and have seen the philosophy help so many people, myself included but as more information comes out about Sylvia and Novus, there are many who will completely abandon what has helped them because that woman and her cohorts aren't on the up and up.

Much of her philosophy is repeated in many self-help books and Gnostic sources but she wrote it in a "Gnostic for Dummies" manner which made it easier to decipher and spread. If you've seen the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls you understand why many stick with what is easy.

Many of us were able to take what we knew was the basic Gnostic concepts and separate it from what we felt she threw in so that she could put out another book. We called it "fluff".
But, when she screws it up, when Novus is exposed, many will turn their backs forever on something that at one time helped them get through this screwed up world...and the basic concepts, not the trivial crap, are good. (imo)

I have no proof that God exists or that the afterlife exists or that any of this exists but it is what gets me through this insane world. Alot of us found Novus' concepts comforting and they made alot of sense.
Although it is somewhat trivial as to whether we are 30 in heaven where there is no time, it puts doubt in people's minds that can create a very destructive dominoe affect.
It sucks!

And I couldn't say what she has said on Montel as I never watch it but it would be interesting to find out as many of us catch her inconsistancies but managed to keep things in perspective. There aren't many of us who take every word she says as gospel as it's not our style. I will never believe that we are 30 years old in a place where there is no time. There either is time or there's not, you know?

Anyway...I'm in way over my head here and as I said before, I only want to support those who can help bring justice to a group who are unjust as I feel that is the way it should be. Maybe once she is exposed completely, many of us can move on with our spiritual beliefs and pat ourselves on the backs for not abandoning OUR truth just because some woman sitting on a pedestal collecting hundred dollar bills from desperate-for-answers people took a good thing to a bad place.

Questioninggeller · 31st May 2007, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by TruthBeTold

Thanks Locknar, I actually was sitting!

Relax? Hmm...difficult.

It's quite disheartening, all of this. I have studied the concepts for a decade and have seen the philosophy help so many people, myself included but as more information comes out about Sylvia and Novus, there are many who will completely abandon what has helped them because that woman and her cohorts aren't on the up and up.

Much of her philosophy is repeated in many self-help books and Gnostic sources but she wrote it in a "Gnostic for Dummies" manner which made it easier to decipher and spread. If you've seen the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls you understand why many stick with what is easy.

Many of us were able to take what we knew was the basic Gnostic concepts and separate it from what we felt she threw in so that she could put out another book. We called it "fluff".
But, when she screws it up, when Novus is exposed, many will turn their backs forever on something that at one time helped them get through this screwed up world...and the basic concepts, not the trivial crap, are good. (imo)

I have no proof that God exists or that the afterlife exists or that any of this exists but it is what gets me through this insane world. Alot of us found Novus' concepts comforting and they made alot of sense.
Although it is somewhat trivial as to whether we are 30 in heaven where there is no time, it puts doubt in people's minds that can create a very destructive dominoe affect.
It sucks!

And I couldn't say what she has said on Montel as I never watch it but it would be interesting to find out as many of us catch her inconsistancies but managed to keep things in perspective. There aren't many of us who take every word she says as gospel as it's not our style. I will never believe that we are 30 years old in a place where there is no time. There either is time or there's not, you know?

Anyway...I'm in way over my head here and as I said before, I only want to support those who can help bring justice to a group who are unjust as I feel that is the way it should be. Maybe once she is exposed completely, many of us can move on with our spiritual beliefs and pat ourselves on the backs for not abandoning OUR truth just because some woman sitting on a pedestal collecting hundred dollar bills from desperate-for-answers people took a good thing to a bad place.

Please don't say "you're in over your head." Give yourself some credit. You've change your mind about Browne as you started looking objectively at the facts.

Don't you think there is better philosophy and ethical systems out? It seems that people have bought into Browne's because of her celebrity. And that is not a good reason to follow a belief whether it being that Sylvia claims to be a "psychic" or "spiritual teacher".

There are much better philosophical works in which the authors do not treat the readers as cash machines and sheep. Books in which the authors prove their suppositions through logic, and not give them an unprovable fantasy work (like a 30 year old afterlife).

While reading about about an afterlife in which everyone is 30 years old when you are in your late 20s or early 30s maybe comforting, as Randi says, "magical thinking is a slippery slope." I recommend getting Randi's book "The Faith Healers" to see exactly what he means by that statement.

Believing you have a diamond mine in your backyard might be comforting, but is "comfort" a justification for thinking you have a diamond mine?

TruthBeTold · 31st May 2007, 11:39 AM

Hey QG,
Thanks.

Questioninggeller · 31st May 2007, 04:33 PM

Just to clarify, one can go on believing Browne is talking to their dead relatives to make themself feel good. However, as your posts show, you care more about the truth than comfort with Browne.

Piscivore · 31st May 2007, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by Zep

out of her fetid imagination,

Hey now, let's not slander fetid imagination. I have a fetid imagination, populated by all kinds of nasty and foul beasts. They are my friends.

Sylvia's fantasies on the other hand are strictly dull and pedestrian, and thoroughly scoured of anything the remotest bit interesting.

Locknar · 31st May 2007, 06:22 PM

TBT - In over your head? Nah....I don't think so. I think you deserve hearty "well done" & pat on the back. Taking the time to objectively listen to ideas and concepts that are completely counter to core beliefs is tough.

-Fran- · 31st May 2007, 06:35 PM

Originally Posted by RSLancastr

Ms. Christie, what was the original title of Ten Little Indians?

I am swedish, but I have a stack of Christie's books in its original language in my book collection, and among them is this book - with it's original title. I can see why they changed it. Though to re-name books because of an offensive title is a rather complicated issue, I would say. At what time did this come about by the way? Was it Christie herself that changed it? Anyone knows? I think in the swedish translation it still has its original name. The swedish translation not coming off quite as offensive... Though I am not sure about if this is actually still the case. I think I will try to look up a new editition of this book in swedish, and see if it has been changed...

Well, off topic, sorry. I just find the whole thing interesting.

EeneyMinnieMoe · 31st May 2007, 08:50 PM

Fran, it's not just the offensiveness of the word "Injun". It's that the title and idea comes from a song from a minstrel show. It's the link to minstrel shows.

Here's the original, in all of its offensiveness:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Little_Indians

Zep · 31st May 2007, 09:13 PM

Originally Posted by TruthBeTold

OK

Originally Posted by TruthBeTold

I think that I will take Zep's advice and not discuss the philosophy but instead do what I came here to do which was to support the other ex-Novus members in exposing Sylvia and Novus' fraudulent & unspiritual ways and by my doing so, hopefully inspire others to comfortably come forward.

TruthBeTold

Hi - that wasn't an "order" or anything. Please feel free to ignore me if you like! Just that, to me, discussing any of Sylvia's "philosophy" would be completely and utterly pointless. Because it is all made up on the spot and bears no relationship whatever to any other philosophy, etc.

-Fran- · 31st May 2007, 09:25 PM

Originally Posted by EeneyMinnieMoe

Fran, it's not just the offensiveness of the word "Injun". It's that the title and idea comes from a song from a minstrel show. It's the link to minstrel shows.

Here's the original, in all of its offensiveness:

Yes, of course! I'm a bit ashamed that I didn't even think about that the title "Ten Little Indians' is offensive as well. Even so, as I have understood it, that is what they changed it to - go figure. If I haven't misunderstood things totally (and that has happened before

) The original title of 'Ten Little Indians' Is 'Ten Little *******' which comes off as quite offensive, to say the least. At least that is the title of the Christie book I have. I've always thought that that book is the same story as the 'Ten Little Indians' one. I might have got that wrong comepletely though.

Thanks for the link! I was aware of the idea coming from a song but had actually never seen the original in its original language before. But I recognize that first shorter version of it. I remember we had to sing it in school when I was a kid in the 70s, learning English, OY, I hope the teachers of today are more aware!

ETA, OK the forum censored that word (which I don't mind, even if I was only relating a book title here) but it's suppose to be the N-word.

RSLancastr · 31st May 2007, 10:17 PM

Originally Posted by EeneyMinnieMoe

Fran, it's not just the offensiveness of the word "Injun".

EMM, the original title of the book was "Ten Little (N-word)s". Not Injuns, or even indians.

-Fran- · 31st May 2007, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by RSLancastr

EMM, the original title of the book was "Ten Little (N-word)s". Not Injuns, or even indians.

Ah, thanks! I thought that was the case, but I got unsure.

27th May 2007, 03:20 PM	#1
Questioninggeller Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,030	Sylvia Browne contacts the spirit of Agatha Christie A rather interesting take on Browne: Quote: Inside Bay Area (California) November 2, 2006 Thursday SECTION: RAY ORROCK LENGTH: 444 words HEADLINE: Being frozen in time at age 30 not exactly my idea of heaven BYLINE: Column by Ray Orrock BODY: SOME YEARS AGO, when First Artists Studio made a movie based on an Agatha Christie book, the studio's promotions department thought it would be a nice touch to interview Ms. Christie and get her reaction to the film. This was not as easy as it might sound, however, since Agatha Christie had died three years earlier. Undaunted, however, the studio hired a psychic, a Ms. Sylvia Brown, who, by an uncommon stroke of good fortune, was able to contact the spirit of Agatha Christie, who said she thought the movie was terrific and that it would be a big hit. Talk about your lucky breaks. MS. BROWN claimed she'd had no trouble contacting Agatha, saying it was "like making a phone call to Chicago." But the most startling bit of information to come out of this mini-seance -- for me, at least -- was the revelation that Ms. Christie was no longer 85 years old (her age when she died in 1976), but was now only 30. And Ms. Brown explained this quite casually. "Everyone," she said, "attains the age of 30 when they pass over." ... At 30 you are neither young nor old, innocent nor wise, cute nor venerable. At 30 you have had just enough experience to be expected to do something, but you haven't the faintest idea what it is. At 30 you are desperately striving to make an impression on the world, and the world keeps springing back to its original shape. At 30 it seem critically important to find out who you are -- but there doesn't seem to be any place to look it up. AND NOW I find that, when I kick over, I'm suddenly going to be 30 again. Peachy. ... If the other side is populated by 30-year-olds, it is a world of political correctness, soft rock, racquetball, fat-free meals, meaningful relationships, astrology charts, designer underwear, latex bike pants and vitamin-enriched shampoos. And that sure as hell isn't my idea of heaven. Source: http://www.insidebayarea.com/trivall...ews/ci_4590204 (now a dead link)

27th May 2007, 03:51 PM	#2
RSLancastr www.StopSylvia.com Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Salem, Oregon Posts: 15,528
	__________________ Who is "Kaz?" Read about her at www.StopKaz.com. Curious about Sylvia Browne? Read about her at www.StopSylvia.com. Ever wonder "What's the Harm?" with psychics, alternative medicine, etc?

27th May 2007, 04:18 PM	#3
wahrheit Pac-Man Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 5,591	HAHAHA , thanks QG for another link and post from you. This time it is not only a post showing what a fake Browne is, it was also plain funny! "like making a phone call to Chicago" my a$$.
wahrheit Pac-Man Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 5,591	__________________ For a moment, nothing happened. Then, after a second or so, nothing continued to happen. D. Adams -- THHGTTG You're a sick man. The Atheist

27th May 2007, 04:35 PM	#4
ChristineR Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,189	This should be easy to test. Get someone who know Christie well and have the friend write a short series of questions that only Christie and the friend should know the answers to. Oh, wait....
ChristineR Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,189	__________________ Avatar (c) Neopets.com

27th May 2007, 07:35 PM	#5
Locknar Sum of all evils ^tm Deputy Admin Join Date: May 2007 Location: 25.50 N, 77.54 W Posts: 14,130	Humm..... "MS. BROWN claimed she'd had no trouble contacting Agatha, saying it was "like making a phone call to Chicago." " With it being so easy, I'm SHOCKED she is not used by police the world over in solving murder cases...let alone gets readings such as Eve Brown or say Holly Krewson (for example) wrong...since they were both dead when she claimed them to be alive. Everyone is "30" after they have crossed over...not sure how that would work for those that die before that magical age; but hey, what do I know since I don't have her "gift" (yeah, right!)

27th May 2007, 09:23 PM	#6
EeneyMinnieMoe Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 6,660	Agatha Chrstie died in 1976, according to Wiki, and the film adaptations made at that time were 1972 Endless Night 1974 Murder on the Orient Express 1974/75 Ten Little Indians 1978 Death on the Nile Murder was made by Paramount, the 1974 German version of Indians has no such production or distribution firm listed on IMDB and neither does Endless Night. Matter of fact, "First Artist's Studio" brings up no relevant hits on Google. ...Is there something I'm missing here?

27th May 2007, 09:34 PM	#7
Questioninggeller Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,030	Originally Posted by EeneyMinnieMoe Agatha Chrstie died in 1976, according to Wiki, and the film adaptations made at that time were 1972 Endless Night 1974 Murder on the Orient Express 1974/75 Ten Little Indians 1978 Death on the Nile Murder was made by Paramount, the 1974 German version of Indians has no such production or distribution firm listed on IMDB and neither does Endless Night. Matter of fact, "First Artist's Studio" brings up no relevant hits on Google. ...Is there something I'm missing here? Wikipedia isn't a good source. There are many movies about her. I think the relevant one is Agatha (1979) see: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078736/ According to IMDB: First Artists produced Agatha (1979). see: http://www.imdb.com/company/co0040696/

27th May 2007, 09:44 PM	#8
EeneyMinnieMoe Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 6,660	Ah. Silly me. That's too funny that Sylvia Browne was asked to contact Agatha Christie. If I was in the room when she was doing it, I'd have stopped her and asked her "Ok, if you're contacting her, what are the names of the two husbands Agatha Christie had?" or "Name 100 of the books she wrote!" Can you hear the long silence?

27th May 2007, 09:58 PM	#9
RSLancastr www.StopSylvia.com Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Salem, Oregon Posts: 15,528	Ms. Christie, what was the original title of Ten Little Indians? So the newspaper article was inaccurate when it said that the movie was based on a Christie book. If I recall correcly, it was based on - or at least inspired by - a mysterious event in her own life.
	__________________ Who is "Kaz?" Read about her at www.StopKaz.com. Curious about Sylvia Browne? Read about her at www.StopSylvia.com. Ever wonder "What's the Harm?" with psychics, alternative medicine, etc?

27th May 2007, 10:07 PM	#10
EeneyMinnieMoe Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 6,660	Yes. I've never seen it but it's based on Agatha Christie's 3 day disappearance when she found out her husband was cheating. It's a fictionalized version of what might have happened when the truth is that the good dame was most likely in a spa the entire time.

27th May 2007, 10:14 PM	#11
Questioninggeller Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,030	Originally Posted by RSLancastr So the newspaper article was inaccurate when it said that the movie was based on a Christie book. If I recall correcly, it was based on - or at least inspired by - a mysterious event in her own life. According to movies.com Quote: ...AGATHA is based on a book of the same name by Kathleen Tynan. http://movies.go.com/agatha/d825498/drama

28th May 2007, 11:28 PM	#12
Complexity The Woo Whisperer Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Minnesota, USA Posts: 9,263	Agatha Christie wouldn't give Jaba the time of day. Think what Miss Marple would have to save about SB...
	__________________ "It is a great nuisance that knowledge can only be acquired by hard work." - W. Somerset Maugham "Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible; thought is merciless to privilege, established intuititions, and comfortable habit. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid. Thought is great and swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man." - Bertrand Russell

28th May 2007, 11:31 PM	#13
MelBrooksfan Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 1,011	Is the afterlife populated by a bunch of people approaching mid-life crises?

29th May 2007, 05:46 AM	#14
JeffJ Scholar Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 103	This 30 years old in heaven crap is just more proof that Browne is a demented and evil woman who apparently cannot possibly care about the feelings of her victims. I would imagine that every parent (who believes in heaven) of a baby or young child who has died would much, much prefer the thought of once again holding their baby/child in "heaven" one day rather than looking forward to meeting up with some 30 year old adult and never having the possibility of seeing them as a baby/child again. Way to go Sylvia for totally destroying that delusion for some more grieving people.
JeffJ Scholar Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 103

29th May 2007, 09:45 PM	#15
PastBrowneFan Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Indiana Posts: 373	Is "contacting" Agatha Christie the "Contribution to the Planet", or just some cheap publicity for SB?

30th May 2007, 11:40 AM	#16
EeneyMinnieMoe Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 6,660	When psychics claim to contact celebrities, like those clowns did with Princess Diana and John Lennon or how Elvis' daughter allegedly hired someone to speak to Elvis or SB and Agatha Christie, someone should seriously stop them and ask them the simplest thing about the celebrity's life that anyone could find but the psychic wouldn't know unless they had looked them up before. "Diana, what was your mother's name?" "John, what was your first band's name?" "Elvis, what are the first 5 notes of "Don't be Cruel" ?" "Miss Christie, what's your birth name?"

30th May 2007, 02:35 PM	#17
JoeTheJuggler Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 26,696	So was the movie in question "a big hit"? Seems to me that that's a testable claim.
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

30th May 2007, 02:44 PM	#18
JoeTheJuggler Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 26,696	Originally Posted by JeffJ I would imagine that every parent (who believes in heaven) of a baby or young child who has died would much, much prefer the thought of once again holding their baby/child in "heaven" one day rather than looking forward to meeting up with some 30 year old adult and never having the possibility of seeing them as a baby/child again. Well that's why in the Sylvia universe most of the people on the other side are babbling idiots. Imagine you're a 5 year old sick in bed. You drop off into feverish sleep and die. You suddenly find yourself in a 30 year old body being pestered by a raspy-voiced woman with talons.
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

31st May 2007, 04:02 AM	#19
TruthBeTold Thinker Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: NJ Posts: 145	Just to clarify the concept of what we are like in Heaven without preaching or whatever. If you lose a child, then your child will appear to you as you knew them. Just as if you lost your grandmother, she can appear to you as she was when she left you. But, the 30 year old concept is just a guideline for what we are like in heaven overall eternally. There is no age in heaven (nor time) but she used 30 to give people an idea of what we're like in our eternal state. We are LIKE we are at 30 here on earth...not a "clumsy" teen or an aching 50 year old.

31st May 2007, 06:00 AM	#20
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985	Originally Posted by TruthBeTold Just to clarify the concept of what we are like in Heaven without preaching or whatever. If you lose a child, then your child will appear to you as you knew them. Just as if you lost your grandmother, she can appear to you as she was when she left you. But, the 30 year old concept is just a guideline for what we are like in heaven overall eternally. There is no age in heaven (nor time) but she used 30 to give people an idea of what we're like in our eternal state. We are LIKE we are at 30 here on earth...not a "clumsy" teen or an aching 50 year old. Can I respectfully suggest that you don't waste any effort in trying to rationalise and support Sylvia Browne's concepts of "heaven" and "afterlife" to anyone? Clearly she has been and still is making up any old guff out of her fetid imagination, just to have something to say to her gullible audience. So to consider for even one second that her babble makes any sense worth perpetrating is a waste of too much of your (and everyone's) time. Perhaps it might be better if you responded with your own thoughts on the matter...much more interesting!
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985

31st May 2007, 06:26 AM	#21
TruthBeTold Thinker Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: NJ Posts: 145	OK

31st May 2007, 07:18 AM	#22
JeffJ Scholar Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 103	Originally Posted by TruthBeTold Just to clarify the concept of what we are like in Heaven without preaching or whatever. If you lose a child, then your child will appear to you as you knew them. Just as if you lost your grandmother, she can appear to you as she was when she left you. But, the 30 year old concept is just a guideline for what we are like in heaven overall eternally. There is no age in heaven (nor time) but she used 30 to give people an idea of what we're like in our eternal state. We are LIKE we are at 30 here on earth...not a "clumsy" teen or an aching 50 year old. I don't know... I've never heard her say any of that. She always plainly says everyone is 30 years old there and so I believe she's simply trying to get people to believe that people (including children of all ages from what I can understand) are all actually 30 earth years old in heaven (regardless of how time and age work there). A six month old baby in heaven can't be "LIKE" a 30 year old on earth. It either looks and acts just like a clumsy six month old baby or it looks and acts like an adult 30 year old. So if you lose your baby/it dies and it later appears to you (in heaven when you get there) like you knew it on earth then exactly how is this baby "like" a 30 year old? If it appears like a baby then does it just have the mind of a 30 year old in heaven? And how do you know the answer to any of those questions? Sylvia is just a lying evil woman and nothing that comes out of her mouth can be believed. BTW, was it her who originally came up with the 30 years old in heaven idea or do any other religions also believe that?
JeffJ Scholar Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 103

31st May 2007, 07:44 AM	#23
Flo Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Massongy, France Posts: 2,793	Originally Posted by JeffJ I don't know... I've never heard her say any of that. She always plainly says everyone is 30 years old there and so I believe she's simply trying to get people to believe that people (including children of all ages from what I can understand) are all actually 30 earth years old in heaven (regardless of how time and age work there). A six month old baby in heaven can't be "LIKE" a 30 year old on earth. It either looks and acts just like a clumsy six month old baby or it looks and acts like an adult 30 year old. So if you lose your baby/it dies and it later appears to you (in heaven when you get there) like you knew it on earth then exactly how is this baby "like" a 30 year old? If it appears like a baby then does it just have the mind of a 30 year old in heaven? And how do you know the answer to any of those questions? Sylvia is just a lying evil woman and nothing that comes out of her mouth can be believed. BTW, was it her who originally came up with the 30 years old in heaven idea or do any other religions also believe that? I'm sure she didn't invent the concept, given how she's obviously a graduate of the "Creed-in-a-Cuisinart school of theology". Anyway, it sounds like a variation on the trite sayings people will use when giving condoleances: "remember her when she was at her best, she's happier where she is now, blah, blah, blah".
	__________________ "Let me explain the order of things for you. There's the aristocracy, the upper class, middle class, working class, dumb animals, waiters, creeping things, head lice, people who eat packet soup, and then you." (Chef)

31st May 2007, 07:46 AM	#24
TruthBeTold Thinker Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: NJ Posts: 145	I think that I will take Zep's advice and not discuss the philosophy but instead do what I came here to do which was to support the other ex-Novus members in exposing Sylvia and Novus' fraudulent & unspiritual ways and by my doing so, hopefully inspire others to comfortably come forward. TruthBeTold

31st May 2007, 07:54 AM	#25
Flo Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Massongy, France Posts: 2,793	Originally Posted by TruthBeTold I think that I will take Zep's advice and not discuss the philosophy but instead do what I came here to do which was to support the other ex-Novus members in exposing Sylvia and Novus' fraudulent & unspiritual ways and by my doing so, hopefully inspire others to comfortably come forward. TruthBeTold Discussing (your take on) the philosophy, should you want to, would be extremely interesting, but would belong in the Religion/philosophy forum, not here, one reason being, as you rightly note, that we certainly don't want to frighten SB's and Novus' victims ...
	__________________ "Let me explain the order of things for you. There's the aristocracy, the upper class, middle class, working class, dumb animals, waiters, creeping things, head lice, people who eat packet soup, and then you." (Chef)

31st May 2007, 08:18 AM	#26
Locknar Sum of all evils ^tm Deputy Admin Join Date: May 2007 Location: 25.50 N, 77.54 W Posts: 14,130	TruthBeTold - Discussion of philosophy would be fine. However, you need to better explain your statements wrt the "30 years old in heaven" comments. SB has clearly stated many times this "everyone is 30 years old in heaven" concept. Your discussion with respect to her comments....is that your personal belief, or do you have documentation that shows where SB states something different (as you explain)? If it is the later (ie. there is documentation), I think folks here would be VERY interested in seeing the documentation since it contradicts her previous statements. If it is the former, (ie. your personal belief) I suggest you simply state that; the conversation can then tend toward philosophy vs factual. I'd also add, as Flo mentions, philosophical discussions are probably better suited for the "Religion/philosophy" forum.

31st May 2007, 08:36 AM	#27
TruthBeTold Thinker Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: NJ Posts: 145	All the years I've been studying the concepts I have always understood that there was no time in heaven so it made perfect sense to me that the reference to us being 30 years old at Home was just a way to get people to envision what we are like at Home using human age as a guage. I just went through the books and you are correct. She simply states that we are 30 years old. 30 years old in a place where there is no time so therefore how could there be an age especially when she states we are eternal. I honestly didn't think that I was giving my own perspective but I stand corrected.

31st May 2007, 08:52 AM	#28
Locknar Sum of all evils ^tm Deputy Admin Join Date: May 2007 Location: 25.50 N, 77.54 W Posts: 14,130	TBT - No need to stand, sit, relax Also, thanks for taking the time to look through the books you have. I wonder if she ever has "clarified" this verbally...say on her many times on Montel. When she is giving a "reading" on someone's child, or anyone under the age of 30, has she ever said anything with respect to their age in heaven or how they appear?

31st May 2007, 09:31 AM	#29
TruthBeTold Thinker Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: NJ Posts: 145	Thanks Locknar, I actually was sitting! Relax? Hmm...difficult. It's quite disheartening, all of this. I have studied the concepts for a decade and have seen the philosophy help so many people, myself included but as more information comes out about Sylvia and Novus, there are many who will completely abandon what has helped them because that woman and her cohorts aren't on the up and up. Much of her philosophy is repeated in many self-help books and Gnostic sources but she wrote it in a "Gnostic for Dummies" manner which made it easier to decipher and spread. If you've seen the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls you understand why many stick with what is easy. Many of us were able to take what we knew was the basic Gnostic concepts and separate it from what we felt she threw in so that she could put out another book. We called it "fluff". But, when she screws it up, when Novus is exposed, many will turn their backs forever on something that at one time helped them get through this screwed up world...and the basic concepts, not the trivial crap, are good. (imo) I have no proof that God exists or that the afterlife exists or that any of this exists but it is what gets me through this insane world. Alot of us found Novus' concepts comforting and they made alot of sense. Although it is somewhat trivial as to whether we are 30 in heaven where there is no time, it puts doubt in people's minds that can create a very destructive dominoe affect. It sucks! And I couldn't say what she has said on Montel as I never watch it but it would be interesting to find out as many of us catch her inconsistancies but managed to keep things in perspective. There aren't many of us who take every word she says as gospel as it's not our style. I will never believe that we are 30 years old in a place where there is no time. There either is time or there's not, you know? Anyway...I'm in way over my head here and as I said before, I only want to support those who can help bring justice to a group who are unjust as I feel that is the way it should be. Maybe once she is exposed completely, many of us can move on with our spiritual beliefs and pat ourselves on the backs for not abandoning OUR truth just because some woman sitting on a pedestal collecting hundred dollar bills from desperate-for-answers people took a good thing to a bad place.
	Last edited by TruthBeTold; 31st May 2007 at 10:13 AM.

31st May 2007, 10:28 AM	#30
Questioninggeller Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,030	Originally Posted by TruthBeTold Thanks Locknar, I actually was sitting! Relax? Hmm...difficult. It's quite disheartening, all of this. I have studied the concepts for a decade and have seen the philosophy help so many people, myself included but as more information comes out about Sylvia and Novus, there are many who will completely abandon what has helped them because that woman and her cohorts aren't on the up and up. Much of her philosophy is repeated in many self-help books and Gnostic sources but she wrote it in a "Gnostic for Dummies" manner which made it easier to decipher and spread. If you've seen the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls you understand why many stick with what is easy. Many of us were able to take what we knew was the basic Gnostic concepts and separate it from what we felt she threw in so that she could put out another book. We called it "fluff". But, when she screws it up, when Novus is exposed, many will turn their backs forever on something that at one time helped them get through this screwed up world...and the basic concepts, not the trivial crap, are good. (imo) I have no proof that God exists or that the afterlife exists or that any of this exists but it is what gets me through this insane world. Alot of us found Novus' concepts comforting and they made alot of sense. Although it is somewhat trivial as to whether we are 30 in heaven where there is no time, it puts doubt in people's minds that can create a very destructive dominoe affect. It sucks! And I couldn't say what she has said on Montel as I never watch it but it would be interesting to find out as many of us catch her inconsistancies but managed to keep things in perspective. There aren't many of us who take every word she says as gospel as it's not our style. I will never believe that we are 30 years old in a place where there is no time. There either is time or there's not, you know? Anyway...I'm in way over my head here and as I said before, I only want to support those who can help bring justice to a group who are unjust as I feel that is the way it should be. Maybe once she is exposed completely, many of us can move on with our spiritual beliefs and pat ourselves on the backs for not abandoning OUR truth just because some woman sitting on a pedestal collecting hundred dollar bills from desperate-for-answers people took a good thing to a bad place. Please don't say "you're in over your head." Give yourself some credit. You've change your mind about Browne as you started looking objectively at the facts. Don't you think there is better philosophy and ethical systems out? It seems that people have bought into Browne's because of her celebrity. And that is not a good reason to follow a belief whether it being that Sylvia claims to be a "psychic" or "spiritual teacher". There are much better philosophical works in which the authors do not treat the readers as cash machines and sheep. Books in which the authors prove their suppositions through logic, and not give them an unprovable fantasy work (like a 30 year old afterlife). While reading about about an afterlife in which everyone is 30 years old when you are in your late 20s or early 30s maybe comforting, as Randi says, "magical thinking is a slippery slope." I recommend getting Randi's book "The Faith Healers" to see exactly what he means by that statement. Believing you have a diamond mine in your backyard might be comforting, but is "comfort" a justification for thinking you have a diamond mine?
	Last edited by Questioninggeller; 31st May 2007 at 10:32 AM.

31st May 2007, 11:39 AM	#31
TruthBeTold Thinker Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: NJ Posts: 145	Hey QG, Thanks.
	Last edited by TruthBeTold; 31st May 2007 at 12:23 PM.

31st May 2007, 04:33 PM	#32
Questioninggeller Illuminator Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,030	Just to clarify, one can go on believing Browne is talking to their dead relatives to make themself feel good. However, as your posts show, you care more about the truth than comfort with Browne.

31st May 2007, 04:43 PM	#33
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,454	Originally Posted by Zep out of her fetid imagination, Hey now, let's not slander fetid imagination. I have a fetid imagination, populated by all kinds of nasty and foul beasts. They are my friends. Sylvia's fantasies on the other hand are strictly dull and pedestrian, and thoroughly scoured of anything the remotest bit interesting.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen

31st May 2007, 06:22 PM	#34
Locknar Sum of all evils ^tm Deputy Admin Join Date: May 2007 Location: 25.50 N, 77.54 W Posts: 14,130	TBT - In over your head? Nah....I don't think so. I think you deserve hearty "well done" & pat on the back. Taking the time to objectively listen to ideas and concepts that are completely counter to core beliefs is tough.

31st May 2007, 06:35 PM	#35
-Fran- Master Poster Join Date: May 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,581	Originally Posted by RSLancastr Ms. Christie, what was the original title of Ten Little Indians? I am swedish, but I have a stack of Christie's books in its original language in my book collection, and among them is this book - with it's original title. I can see why they changed it. Though to re-name books because of an offensive title is a rather complicated issue, I would say. At what time did this come about by the way? Was it Christie herself that changed it? Anyone knows? I think in the swedish translation it still has its original name. The swedish translation not coming off quite as offensive... Though I am not sure about if this is actually still the case. I think I will try to look up a new editition of this book in swedish, and see if it has been changed... Well, off topic, sorry. I just find the whole thing interesting.