ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 11th March 2019, 12:20 PM   #201
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
You do know what appears on TV is not reality? Criminal Minds is not a documentary following an actual team of FBI investigators with lovely hair tracking down serial killers.

His programme is promoted as entertainment not a documentary.
I've never heard of "Criminal Minds." I don't know what it is, so no comment there. Henry's show is decidedly NOT promoted as "entertainment." He represents what he does as real. And no one watching could possibly believe otherwise.

Can't trust TV? Right now, CNBC is representing that a Boeing plane fell out of the sky yesterday because a Boeing engine failed in Ethiopia. Boeing's stock price is down an astonishing 35 points today. If the engine isn't the source of the crash, if CNBC mis-represented the facts when they broke the news yesterday, CNBC employees could make a fortune buying the stock $35 per share below market and selling once it is revealed the plane went down from pilot error, not Boeing's fault.

You are saying I can't trust this because it appears on TV?

How about the Super Bowl? You think it was scripted? That final missed field goal, which should have been made, rendered the 3.5 spread meaningless.
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 12:23 PM   #202
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
I am not sure what you are talking about. I didn't say anything about Henry. Did you confuse me with someone else.

Sent from my Moto C using Tapatalk
Perhaps. My initial postings, I was expecting argument, got overwhelmed with attempts at ridicule and "Strawman" nonsense so I started posting too quickly. I've slowed down. I apologize.
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 12:29 PM   #203
bytewizard
Graduate Poster
 
bytewizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: In the woods
Posts: 1,984
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
How about the Super Bowl? You think it was scripted? That final missed field goal, which should have been made, rendered the 3.5 spread meaningless.
More strawman nonsense. You do realize the final score was 13-3, and make or miss that field goal didn't change the winner versus the spread?
bytewizard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 12:50 PM   #204
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,709
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
Henry's show is decidedly NOT promoted as "entertainment."
Except for the part where it airs on a network expressly for that purpose. If I pick up a book from the fiction section of the bookstore,

Quote:
He represents what he does as real.
Then why all the disclaimers on the web site? The same dlsclaimers as all the other self-proclaimed mediums use?

Quote:
And no one watching could possibly believe otherwise.
Except, of course, all the people who disagree with you. Again, you're simply begging the question that we should believe the show because it appears to depict a legitimate phenomenon. Elsewhere, the magic show appears to depict a lady legitimately sawn in half.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 12:50 PM   #205
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by 8enotto View Post
Cold reading isn't a dirty trick in itself. It is a useful tool in most relationships in a lifetime.


But like anything else there are those that will abuse it. I have to agree that unless the person doing it makes a promise that endangers your health or finances drastically there is no crime in a legal sense.

Most times the mark chose to visit the reader so the act is voluntary. All the way to the bank for one of them.

Money is powerful motivation and if I could make a decent living just talking, hell yeah. It beats fixing broken cars.
Except Henry and Edwards are not doing cold readings, which is easy enough to see if you just compare their results against someone like Derren Brown, who fakes it as part of his show. He picks an unsophisticated, young unaccomplished audience, and spends 2.5 minutes per person on his reading, getting nothing right with detail. To some extent you have to be gullible just to accept what he's trying to show. He didn't run his ad to solicit at MIT or Wall Street. There is a reason for that.

Here is a NY Times author's transcript of the John Edwards readings he observed. I've got pages and pages of this stuff, this is a sample with more to follow. See if you can explain the following exchanges by cold reading.

Note that Edward isn’t eliciting information from the audience members in these instances like Derren Brown. He’s presenting specific information that is verified only after he says it.

* * *
Edward: Did someone here study with Bob Ross, the TV artist? ... I’m getting Bob Ross. I’m also seeing a picture of a tree, shrunken down. It was big, now it’s small.
Man: My mom took lessons from Bob Ross. One of her paintings was of a tree. It was too big for the album, so I had it reduced.

Edward: Someone in your family went to a farm and drank milk straight from the cow?
Man: That was me. When I was a kid.

Edward: When they marked her skin for the IV, she said it was the closest she’d ever get to having a tattoo?
Man: That’s what she said, exactly.

Edward: And you had to be sort of the “air traffic control” for her passing?
Man: The doc told us that I would be her air traffic controller. That’s the phrase he used.

Edward: Somebody dressed up as a tree?
Man: My dad dressed up as a Christmas tree.

Edward: They’re laughing, sort of teasing you about your leg, your knee.
Woman: I took a hayride, and I fell and twisted my knee a couple of months ago.

Edward: Was there a baby’s toy buried with him [an elderly man]?
Woman: A stuffed bunny. My daughter’s.

Edward: I’m getting the name Maynard.
Man: That’s my girlfriend’s last name. I don’t know how you got that. It’s an unusual name.
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 12:54 PM   #206
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,709
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
...got overwhelmed with attempts at ridicule
If you believe you have been personally attacked, please report the posts for moderation. Otherwise don't suggest as much for rhetorical effect.

Quote:
...and "Strawman" nonsense...
Your arguments rely heavily on straw men. If you don't like your arguments being called out for what they are, change your argument.

Quote:
...so I started posting too quickly. I've slowed down. I apologize.
Civility is a good thing. Let's see if we can get there. Garrette gave you a detailed, dispassionate analysis of the most recent show. It suggests Tyler Henry is simply using standard cold-reading techniques, which you may not have picked up on in your initial viewings. Would you please address his analysis?
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 12:55 PM   #207
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,707
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
I've never heard of "Criminal Minds." I don't know what it is, so no comment there. Henry's show is decidedly NOT promoted as "entertainment." He represents what he does as real. And no one watching could possibly believe otherwise.
If it's on E! it's purely entertainment. The network does intense market research, and they know their viewers well, and since E! is home to the Kardashians it's not a big leap to suggest that their viewers are not the sharpest tools in the shed.

I can't wait for the crossover episodes with the Find Bigfoot guys.

Quote:
Can't trust TV? Right now, CNBC is representing that a Boeing plane fell out of the sky yesterday because a Boeing engine failed in Ethiopia. Boeing's stock price is down an astonishing 35 points today. If the engine isn't the source of the crash, if CNBC mis-represented the facts when they broke the news yesterday, CNBC employees could make a fortune buying the stock $35 per share below market and selling once it is revealed the plane went down from pilot error, not Boeing's fault.
That's because it's just a news report. Someone reported a possible engine failure, and it was repeated on the broadcast. All CNBC is doing is relating the CURRENT INFORMATION, which is subject to change as more information comes forward, and then that information will then be reported.

It is up to the viewer/consumer of real-time news reporting to keep in mind that accurate information is rarely the first information reported, and the wise thing to do is withholding judgement until all the facts are in, and the investigation is completed...sort of like not believing at face value a "psychic" on the E! network.

Quote:
How about the Super Bowl? You think it was scripted? That final missed field goal, which should have been made, rendered the 3.5 spread meaningless.
Not helping your case right now.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 12:58 PM   #208
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,668
Someone who has never heard of "Criminal Minds," and who didn't know the score of the last Super Bowl, is lecturing us on how American television works.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 01:02 PM   #209
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,709
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
He picks an unsophisticated, young unaccomplished audience...
Assumes facts not in evidence.

Quote:
To some extent you have to be gullible just to accept what he's trying to show.
As gullible as people who don't realize Tyler Henry's show is pre-recorded and edited?

Quote:
Here is a NY Times author's transcript of the John Edwards readings he observed.
Okay, you keep going back and forth over whether John Edward is on the table. If he is on the table, will you please provide the citations to the papers you alluded to, from which you claimed his gift had been validated by peer-reviewed science?

Quote:
I've got pages and pages of this stuff...
I'm sure you do, but we're talking about Tyler Henry. Every time someone brings up something about Henry that you can't seem to answer, out comes John Edward. And no, I don't think you've approached Edward critically. You cited a book to support him by Dr. Schwartz, but we didn't have to press you very hard before you admitted you really didn't know the circumstances and venue of it.

Quote:
See if you can explain the following exchanges by cold reading.
You claim Henry isn't using hot or cold reading. Yet Garrett has provided an analysis of Henry's Macklemore reading from the point of view of someone who is suitably trained in the technique, and has pointed out how the technique was employed. Before we go off on another John Edward goose chase, why don't you address the on-topic posts.

Perhaps you simply don't know enough about hot and cold readings to be able to dismiss it as a possibility in Henry's case.

Last edited by JayUtah; 11th March 2019 at 01:11 PM.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 01:07 PM   #210
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by bytewizard View Post
More strawman nonsense. You do realize the final score was 13-3, and make or miss that field goal didn't change the winner versus the spread?
You can't grasp that the point was that a football game could be scripted or manipulated, and the writer I was replying to was claiming that "I can't trust what I see on TV" as a reason to dismiss Henry? My spread was 8.5, made a week before. Writing quickly I said 3.5, not worried because I figured you for a smart enough guy to get the larger point.

Perhaps football games are scripted. Perhaps CNBC slightly alters stories, to affect Boeing or other stocks prices. There is so much money to be made. That's nonsense. But so is claiming Henry is scripted. Too many people involved for Henry to pull that off.


and had the field goal been madeYou do realize that whether or not
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 01:08 PM   #211
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,761
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
Except Henry and Edwards are not doing cold readings, which is easy enough to see if you just compare their results against someone like Derren Brown, who fakes it as part of his show. He picks an unsophisticated, young unaccomplished audience, and spends 2.5 minutes per person on his reading, getting nothing right with detail. To some extent you have to be gullible just to accept what he's trying to show. He didn't run his ad to solicit at MIT or Wall Street. There is a reason for that.

Here is a NY Times author's transcript of the John Edwards readings he observed. I've got pages and pages of this stuff, this is a sample with more to follow. See if you can explain the following exchanges by cold reading.

Note that Edward isn’t eliciting information from the audience members in these instances like Derren Brown. He’s presenting specific information that is verified only after he says it.

* * *
Edward: Did someone here study with Bob Ross, the TV artist? ... I’m getting Bob Ross. I’m also seeing a picture of a tree, shrunken down. It was big, now it’s small.
Man: My mom took lessons from Bob Ross. One of her paintings was of a tree. It was too big for the album, so I had it reduced.

Edward: Someone in your family went to a farm and drank milk straight from the cow?
Man: That was me. When I was a kid.

Edward: When they marked her skin for the IV, she said it was the closest she’d ever get to having a tattoo?
Man: That’s what she said, exactly.

Edward: And you had to be sort of the “air traffic control” for her passing?
Man: The doc told us that I would be her air traffic controller. That’s the phrase he used.

Edward: Somebody dressed up as a tree?
Man: My dad dressed up as a Christmas tree.

Edward: They’re laughing, sort of teasing you about your leg, your knee.
Woman: I took a hayride, and I fell and twisted my knee a couple of months ago.

Edward: Was there a baby’s toy buried with him [an elderly man]?
Woman: A stuffed bunny. My daughter’s.

Edward: I’m getting the name Maynard.
Man: That’s my girlfriend’s last name. I don’t know how you got that. It’s an unusual name.
Did you not read my dissection of the Macklemore reading, or are you simply ignoring it.

You are correct that Henry is not doing a cold reading; it is primarily a hot reading. Edward is the opposite; he is primarily a cold reader.

You specifically mentioned the Macklemore reading. I explained it to you. Address it, please.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 01:09 PM   #212
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,709
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
Too many people involved for Henry to pull that off.
You keep offering this opinion, but you don't seem to understand how NDAs work in the entertainment industry. You seem to think they can be laid aside on a whim.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 01:11 PM   #213
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Someone who has never heard of "Criminal Minds," and who didn't know the score of the last Super Bowl, is lecturing us on how American television works.
Edited by zooterkin:  <SNIP>
Edited for rule 0 and rule 12.
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373

Last edited by zooterkin; 14th March 2019 at 04:54 AM.
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 01:15 PM   #214
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,668
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
You can't grasp that the point was that a football game could be scripted or manipulated, and the writer I was replying to was claiming that "I can't trust what I see on TV" as a reason to dismiss Henry? My spread was 8.5, made a week before. Writing quickly I said 3.5, not worried because I figured you for a smart enough guy to get the larger point.
This is a complete fabrication. The spread opened up at 1 point the other way, then went up and down with New England favored by 2 to 3 points.


Forbes
Quote:
A frenzied rush of New England and sharp money pushed the Pats from an opening one-point underdog to a two-point favorite, which is where the line currently stands.
CBS Sports
Quote:
On the betting market, the Rams surprisingly opened as one-point favorites on Championship Sunday before sharp money streamed in on the Patriots, making them favorites almost immediately after the opening line was posted. By early last week, the Patriots were up to 2.5-point favorites, where the line has mostly stayed at sportsbooks, though Rams +3 and Patriots -2 has been available in certain spots at times as well.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 01:35 PM   #215
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
If it's on E! it's purely entertainment. The network does intense market research, and they know their viewers well, and since E! is home to the Kardashians it's not a big leap to suggest that their viewers are not the sharpest tools in the shed.

I can't wait for the crossover episodes with the Find Bigfoot guys.

That's because it's just a news report. Someone reported a possible engine failure, and it was repeated on the broadcast. All CNBC is doing is relating the CURRENT INFORMATION, which is subject to change as more information comes forward, and then that information will then be reported.

It is up to the viewer/consumer of real-time news reporting to keep in mind that accurate information is rarely the first information reported, and the wise thing to do is withholding judgement until all the facts are in, and the investigation is completed...sort of like not believing at face value a "psychic" on the E! network.

Not helping your case right now.
Your discussion is irrelevant to my case. And I think you miss my point.

The point was that you can't decide that "you can't trust what is on TV" as an argument against Henry (who is on TV). Henry's show could be manipulated, but so could the news. He was comparing (I assume) Henry to some FBI drama. My point, and maybe I need to type slower to be more clear, is that there are shows on TV that are trustworthy (CNBC) and some that are fraudulent (Fox News). E! falls in the middle--they don't do aliens or bigfoot--and you can evaluate Henry or Sean Hannity on the merit, not on where it appears. Fox recently ran a story "Hunters Claim Bigfoot Sightings in Utah." They run a ton of UFO stories.

Most of the cable shows that can't get on the major channels run Ghosts, Bigfoot, Aliens, Stichen, Atlantis all the time. Nat Geo channel did a story on flat earth that reached no conclusion, but presented their side. You can watch on YouTube.

The argument that Henry isn't valid because he is on E! doesn't work for me.
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 01:37 PM   #216
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
This is a complete fabrication. The spread opened up at 1 point the other way, then went up and down with New England favored by 2 to 3 points.


Forbes


CBS Sports
Absolutely not. The spread was 8.5 until about five days before the game when it dropped to 8.0. That is true both on Sportsbook.com and the Vegas line as reported in the Wash Post. I got it at 8.5.
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 01:51 PM   #217
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,709
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
The point was that you can't decide that "you can't trust what is on TV" as an argument against Henry (who is on TV).
No, your point was that Henry's show had to be unequivocally factual. You've made (and discarded) several lines of reasoning attempting to show it would be legally or morally dangerous to do anything else. You've deployed and then ignored several straw-man comparisons. You seem to be the only person taking television so seriously.

Quote:
Henry's show could be manipulated, but so could the news.
Apples and oranges. We know magic shows are manipulated, for example. But their producers don't come right out and say so, nor are they legally required to. I don't see mentalism as anything but a branch of magic. It's all just people appearing to do wondrous feats, according to techniques that don't seem difficult to research, comprehend, and practice. And we're entertained by watching. You keep trying to darken that scenario by comparing it to propaganda and fake news.

Quote:
E! falls in the middle...
You said you don't watch much TV. How can you therefore assure us that this opinion is based on a suitable sample of programming?

Quote:
...they don't do aliens or bigfoot
Straw man. They do gossip and other fan-related "fluff" surrounding celebrities and the genres of the entertainment industry in which celebrities participate. Their intended audience is people who follow the activities of celebrities. That audience would be reasonably entertained by watching their favorite celebrities interact with a medium.

Quote:
The argument that Henry isn't valid because he is on E! doesn't work for me.
I deleted most of your other straw-man arguments. I left this one here because you got it wrong. Your contention is that Henry's show can't possibly be intended as entertainment. The argument is that Henry's show is probably intended as entertainment because it's on a network that specializes in entertainment. "Valid" and "intended as entertainment" aren't exactly the same thing.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 01:58 PM   #218
bytewizard
Graduate Poster
 
bytewizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: In the woods
Posts: 1,984
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
Henry's show is decidedly NOT promoted as "entertainment." He represents what he does as real. And no one watching could possibly believe otherwise.
In order to be "read" by Tyler, you must first agree to the Privacy Policy posted on his website. In part: "The advice, information, services and other content provided on and through this Site, including information that may be provided on the Site and other content provided on any Linked Site, as defined in this Agreement, are provided for informational and entertainment purposes only."

His online/private readings are for entertainment purposes only but his show on the Entertainment channel is not? Jay Utah knows about NDA's and has brought this up numerous times. Do you think the NDA states that Henry actually communicates with the dead and you can sue him if his information is incorrect?
bytewizard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:01 PM   #219
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
You keep offering this opinion, but you don't seem to understand how NDAs work in the entertainment industry. You seem to think they can be laid aside on a whim.
I know how NDAs work because as a consultant with access to a ton of proprietary data I sign them all the time, and I see people violate them all the time, to no consequence. Boy George trashed Henry during the reading, and most especially after the reading was over. It was aired by the production company when they could have dropped it. Presumably George had an NDA. George has not been sued.

An NDA does not affect fraud or whistle-blowing. If you tell me you can heal my cancer. I sign an NDA regarding your secret method with sesame oil, and my cancer does not go away, I can Yelp or call a press conference to my heart's content to say, "this does not work. It is a fraud."

NDA's have a very limited value--ask Donald Trump (or Stormy Daniels). If a celebrity goes public, you think Corbett productions is going to sue that celebrity, and have that fraud on Style section page one for months with all his secrets exposed in court?

Not a chance in a million and everybody knows that. Nobody is going to court, even if Henry is legit, Corbett productions would not do it. Henry or Corbett do not want that publicity.

Corbett productions is not going to provide a celebrity a platform to say "this guy is no good." It would be on national news, AND it would encourage others to come forward. What a mess.

Twenty people at NASA can keep a secret if the Moon landing was fake or if there really was something to Area 51---two hundred people cannot, whether it Henry or NASA. NDA or no. The truth comes out.

My sister saw Theresa Caputo recently and did not have to sign an NDA, and there was no one in the lobby soliciting information. Henry does hundreds of 30 minute to one hour readings of ordinary people who sign nothing.

(for the third time) The point is moot because the celebrities are gushing after the reading, obviously quite happy. If he's a fraud, we should have disgruntled people.
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:01 PM   #220
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,761
Interesting. I am the only person who did exactly what Frank requested in that I watched the video that he himself named (Macklemore) and explained how a magician could do it.

And I am the one he is ignoring.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:03 PM   #221
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,761
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
I know how NDAs work because as a consultant with access to a ton of proprietary data I sign them all the time, and I see people violate them all the time, to no consequence. Boy George trashed Henry during the reading, and most especially after the reading was over. It was aired by the production company when they could have dropped it. Presumably George had an NDA. George has not been sued.

An NDA does not affect fraud or whistle-blowing. If you tell me you can heal my cancer. I sign an NDA regarding your secret method with sesame oil, and my cancer does not go away, I can Yelp or call a press conference to my heart's content to say, "this does not work. It is a fraud."

NDA's have a very limited value--ask Donald Trump (or Stormy Daniels). If a celebrity goes public, you think Corbett productions is going to sue that celebrity, and have that fraud on Style section page one for months with all his secrets exposed in court?

Not a chance in a million and everybody knows that. Nobody is going to court, even if Henry is legit, Corbett productions would not do it. Henry or Corbett do not want that publicity.

Corbett productions is not going to provide a celebrity a platform to say "this guy is no good." It would be on national news, AND it would encourage others to come forward. What a mess.

Twenty people at NASA can keep a secret if the Moon landing was fake or if there really was something to Area 51---two hundred people cannot, whether it Henry or NASA. NDA or no. The truth comes out.

My sister saw Theresa Caputo recently and did not have to sign an NDA, and there was no one in the lobby soliciting information. Henry does hundreds of 30 minute to one hour readings of ordinary people who sign nothing.

(for the third time) The point is moot because the celebrities are gushing after the reading, obviously quite happy. If he's a fraud, we should have disgruntled people.
Reference the highlighted part, you prove your ignorance of the topic yet again. As I said before, you are the non-musical people in your audience judging a talentless person as someone gifted. In this arena, you are the layman, and you have been fooled. At this point it is willingly so.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:05 PM   #222
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,761
There is no more to the argument than this: You (Frank McLaughlin) posted the Macklemore video as something that could not be done except by a real medium.

I showed how it could be done by showing that even Macklemore himself was wrong about what could be Googled.

Anything you say except in response to that is another admission that you have no case.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:16 PM   #223
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by bytewizard View Post
In order to be "read" by Tyler, you must first agree to the Privacy Policy posted on his website. In part: "The advice, information, services and other content provided on and through this Site, including information that may be provided on the Site and other content provided on any Linked Site, as defined in this Agreement, are provided for informational and entertainment purposes only."

His online/private readings are for entertainment purposes only but his show on the Entertainment channel is not? Jay Utah knows about NDA's and has brought this up numerous times. Do you think the NDA states that Henry actually communicates with the dead and you can sue him if his information is incorrect?
I had surgery last year, and as I was being rushed in they had me sign a form that basically said "hey, things go wrong. we're not responsible if after this, you die. You cant' sue us. You know the risk." When I visit an Ayurvedic doctor from India, I sign a similar document claiming he isn't claiming to improve my health--which is ridiculous. That is entirely why I am there. People want to protect against being sued. Especially, a rich, famous guy like Henry who could be setup in a heart beat.

Henry makes it clear every week, and in his book EXACTLY what he is doing, and that his intention is to help people by communicating with people who have passed. It could not be more clear. Do his clients sign something so they can't sue him? I don't know.

Is this what you want to spend your time debating? Whether Henry's clients think he is providing "entertainment."

It would be nuts for Henry as a rich celebrity not to have a protecting document.

Incidentally, my sister saw Theresa Caputo and signed nothing, but she's got the same message. Just spendiing $600 for entertainment. Yeah.
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:18 PM   #224
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,833
The best scammers get away with it by making sure their marks never realise they've been scammed. Nobody is going to yell "fraud!" if they don't realise the information Henry is giving them was obtained by cold or hot reading rather than communicating with their dead relatives.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:18 PM   #225
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,668
I know how football works, I know how TV works, I know how NDAs work, I know....

Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
Absolutely not. The spread was 8.5 until about five days before the game when it dropped to 8.0. That is true both on Sportsbook.com and the Vegas line as reported in the Wash Post. I got it at 8.5.
Why on earth would you continue to lie about something so easily checked?

Super Bowl LIII opening betting line favors Rams by 1.

Here are dozens of the biggest bets placed in Vegas. Find me one with an 8-point spread.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:20 PM   #226
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,761
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
I had surgery last year, and as I was being rushed in they had me sign a form that basically said "hey, things go wrong. we're not responsible if after this, you die. You cant' sue us. You know the risk." When I visit an Ayurvedic doctor from India, I sign a similar document claiming he isn't claiming to improve my health--which is ridiculous. That is entirely why I am there. People want to protect against being sued. Especially, a rich, famous guy like Henry who could be setup in a heart beat.

Henry makes it clear every week, and in his book EXACTLY what he is doing, and that his intention is to help people by communicating with people who have passed. It could not be more clear. Do his clients sign something so they can't sue him? I don't know.

Is this what you want to spend your time debating? Whether Henry's clients think he is providing "entertainment."

It would be nuts for Henry as a rich celebrity not to have a protecting document.

Incidentally, my sister saw Theresa Caputo and signed nothing, but she's got the same message. Just spendiing $600 for entertainment. Yeah.
Still avoiding discussing how the Macklemore reading was a hot one. As I said, a tacit admission on your part.

As to this specific post, it is a complete strawman. I'll leave it to you to figure out how, though I suspect you already know and simply can't address the real position we are positing.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:28 PM   #227
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,709
Originally Posted by bytewizard View Post
His online/private readings are for entertainment purposes only but his show on the Entertainment channel is not?
I pointed this out before, but Frank ignored it. Henry has mostly the same legal boilerplate as all the other professional mediums. He can insinuate whatever he wants for marketing purposes, but the actual agreement that governs what representations have legal force is that one, right there. The thing copiously missing from that list of representations is a legally-enforceable claim that Henry actually talks to your dead relatives. That's essentially precluded by the "meet your expectations" clause. If your expectation is that he will talk to your dead loved ones, and you find out later he did not actually do that, Henry is not liable.

Quote:
Jay Utah knows about NDA's and has brought this up numerous times. Do you think the NDA states that Henry actually communicates with the dead and you can sue him if his information is incorrect?
The NDA that the cast and crew execute may not be the same as the guests'. The cast-and-crew NDA will generally forbid you from revealing anything that's not either general knowledge (e.g., how to mount a Red camera on a Manfrotto geared head), or which hasn't yet been released as public information (e.g., does John Snow die in the last season of GoT). Heavily - and legally bulletproofedly -- included in that sort of thing is any sort of innovation, technique, apparatus, method, or process that the production company identifies as a trade secret. With special respect to magic shows, this expressly covers knowledge of any method the magician might use to appear to perform a miracle, even if such a method or technique might deceive the audience. In most cases the magician's assistants know intimately how the trick is done, and they are legally enjoined from revealing it. In the particular case of Tyler Henry, that might include knowledge that he's purposely using a combination of hot and cold readings. It might include innovative and/or proprietary methods of delivering information to him during a reading. It might include knowledge that the show is scripted. In general, if the information is something that might give a show a competitive advantage in the marketplace, those who know it will be enjoined from disclosing it. They may be enjoined also from disparaging it.

It doesn't matter how many people are involved; they are all under NDA. And it doesn't matter how cold your feet are. You cannot simply break an NDA with impunity just because you are morally uncomfortable what what you see. Now if you are asked to keep secret that involves illegal activity, you may break the NDA. No contract is valid that requires you do an illegal thing, and concealing illegal activity that you know about is itself a crime. But of course nothing that Tyler Henry is doing, or any other magician is doing, is per se illegal.

The guests may or may not have a different NDA. It depends on how they are contracted to appear. If they simply appear as would any other client, then their NDA would be a simple boilerplate "don't talk about what happens behind the scenes" language. But if they are contracted as participants in a scripted dialogue, they may be specifically enjoined not to reveal that they were directed or scripted. I don't know if this is the case with Henry, but it's something that exists on other shows, and it's something we have to consider possible in this case.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:30 PM   #228
bytewizard
Graduate Poster
 
bytewizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: In the woods
Posts: 1,984
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
Incidentally, my sister saw Theresa Caputo and signed nothing, but she's got the same message. Just spendiing $600 for entertainment. Yeah.
Finally, something we agree on!
bytewizard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:34 PM   #229
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,709
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
Henry makes it clear every week, and in his book EXACTLY what he is doing, and that his intention is to help people by communicating with people who have passed.
Do you believe everything that every salesman says?

Quote:
It could not be more clear.
Tyler Henry's actual terms of service could not be more clear. What he says when he's not legally obliged to tell the truth may differ.

Quote:
Do his clients sign something so they can't sue him? I don't know.
Why don't you know?

Quote:
Is this what you want to spend your time debating? Whether Henry's clients think he is providing "entertainment."
Yes. I would rather debate the proffered footing of Tyler Henry's show, since that's infinitely more on-topic than how many John Edward quotes you can pull up.

Quote:
It would be nuts for Henry as a rich celebrity not to have a protecting document.
But the document asks would-be clients to expressly dismiss the claims he might make elsewhere. If people say one thing when there are few if any consequences for exaggeration or deception, and an entirely different thing when those statements become enforceable, what does that tell you?
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:36 PM   #230
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,761
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
I pointed this out before, but Frank ignored it. Henry has mostly the same legal boilerplate as all the other professional mediums. He can insinuate whatever he wants for marketing purposes, but the actual agreement that governs what representations have legal force is that one, right there. The thing copiously missing from that list of representations is a legally-enforceable claim that Henry actually talks to your dead relatives. That's essentially precluded by the "meet your expectations" clause. If your expectation is that he will talk to your dead loved ones, and you find out later he did not actually do that, Henry is not liable.



The NDA that the cast and crew execute may not be the same as the guests'. The cast-and-crew NDA will generally forbid you from revealing anything that's not either general knowledge (e.g., how to mount a Red camera on a Manfrotto geared head), or which hasn't yet been released as public information (e.g., does John Snow die in the last season of GoT). Heavily - and legally bulletproofedly -- included in that sort of thing is any sort of innovation, technique, apparatus, method, or process that the production company identifies as a trade secret. With special respect to magic shows, this expressly covers knowledge of any method the magician might use to appear to perform a miracle, even if such a method or technique might deceive the audience. In most cases the magician's assistants know intimately how the trick is done, and they are legally enjoined from revealing it. In the particular case of Tyler Henry, that might include knowledge that he's purposely using a combination of hot and cold readings. It might include innovative and/or proprietary methods of delivering information to him during a reading. It might include knowledge that the show is scripted. In general, if the information is something that might give a show a competitive advantage in the marketplace, those who know it will be enjoined from disclosing it. They may be enjoined also from disparaging it.

It doesn't matter how many people are involved; they are all under NDA. And it doesn't matter how cold your feet are. You cannot simply break an NDA with impunity just because you are morally uncomfortable what what you see. Now if you are asked to keep secret that involves illegal activity, you may break the NDA. No contract is valid that requires you do an illegal thing, and concealing illegal activity that you know about is itself a crime. But of course nothing that Tyler Henry is doing, or any other magician is doing, is per se illegal.

The guests may or may not have a different NDA. It depends on how they are contracted to appear. If they simply appear as would any other client, then their NDA would be a simple boilerplate "don't talk about what happens behind the scenes" language. But if they are contracted as participants in a scripted dialogue, they may be specifically enjoined not to reveal that they were directed or scripted. I don't know if this is the case with Henry, but it's something that exists on other shows, and it's something we have to consider possible in this case.
I suspect the stronger motivations include a desire to keep one's job and to remain employable by other companies if whistle-blowing at the current job results in firing, even if legally contestable. This is compounded by what we are seeing with Frank here and which we see in so many cases. Say that I am some behind-the-scenes crew member on the show and I have no expertise in magic or mediumship but I lean somewhat toward belief in real mediumship simply because of the culture in which I grew up (I think the floor for belief in the US is about 30% while most polls show a majority or near majority of people believing in psychic phenomenon). During my work I might see things that lead me to believe the show is tilted in Henry's favor and not entirely a straight reading, but, hey, the subjects are happy, no one is harmed, and we all know show business requires bending some rules right? So what's to expose?

It needs no cackling conspiracy to remain quiet. It just requires people to be people.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:39 PM   #231
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,761
Originally Posted by bytewizard
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
Incidentally, my sister saw Theresa Caputo and signed nothing, but she's got the same message. Just spendiing $600 for entertainment. Yeah.
Finally, something we agree on!
Note that Frank McLaughlin is not only ignoring my proof that the Macklemore reading was not as impressive as he claims; he is also ignoring my challenge to support his claim that Caputo is far better than Derren Brown. I ask again: Show me one reading by Caputo that is (a) better than what Brown has done and (b) not repeatable by a non-medium under the same circumstances.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:44 PM   #232
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
There is no more to the argument than this: You (Frank McLaughlin) posted the Macklemore video as something that could not be done except by a real medium.

I showed how it could be done by showing that even Macklemore himself was wrong about what could be Googled.

Anything you say except in response to that is another admission that you have no case.
First, I didn't post a Maclemore video. I recall using his name to establish that Henry doesn't just do D level celebrities. I do not recall making any claim about that specific video (Macklemore). However, I do think what went on between the two of them was valid (ie, not fraudulence), but in this case, it would be very hard to quantify. (I don't have the tape available to check it). There was nothing earth shattering revealed as Mackelmore wanted to focus on his friend, and his friend wanted to talk about the music and the drugs he took, as I remember the show.

I believe Mackemore did contact his friend, certainly that is what and his wife and his brother believe.

>I showed how it could be done by showing that even Macklemore himself was wrong about what could be Googled.

You googled every major statement Mackelmore made and found that information from reading online? Impressive.

Of course, that does not mean that Henry googled the information if you buy the claim he and his production company make that he does not know who he is reading until he shows up at the door. You are accusing Michael Corbett Productions of fraud. Fair enough, thought I'm surprised given their reputation and given your lack of evidence. I can't prove that Henry didn't know.

This has no effect on what I am claiming. Even if there is a reading that bombs, it has no effect on what I am claiming. There could be lots of people who can't connect with their deceased relatives. Maybe the relatives have moved on to the Christian heaven. Maybe they have incarnated back on earth as Hindu's teach. Maybe Henry is just having a bad day.
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:47 PM   #233
Elvis666
Critical Thinker
 
Elvis666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 358
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
Edited by zooterkin:  <SNIP>
Edited for rule 0 and rule 12.
I'm not involved in this discussion, only lurking, but isn't this going a little far, Frank?
__________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick

Last edited by zooterkin; 14th March 2019 at 04:54 AM.
Elvis666 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:55 PM   #234
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
Note that Frank McLaughlin is not only ignoring my proof that the Macklemore reading was not as impressive as he claims; he is also ignoring my challenge to support his claim that Caputo is far better than Derren Brown. I ask again: Show me one reading by Caputo that is (a) better than what Brown has done and (b) not repeatable by a non-medium under the same circumstances.
I don't claim the Caputo Macklemore reading was impressive.

For impressive, I copied instead a small part of transcripts I have on John Edward's readings. He's been around a lot longer than Henry, and he's easier to quantify based on the type of reading he does. Plus, I documented Edwards, I have not done that with Henry. I posted the Edwards stuff earlier today, and you can tell me how it is done.

Really? Caputo can be bad, but Derren Brown was really ridiculous. I mean, common. He assembled a group of young people and spent 2.5 minutes reading three of them in the tape I saw. ("he's giving me a name, but it's not his name. Charles? Thomas?" If it is not his name, how can the subject verify it?"

BTW, Derren was working a crowd of kids HE ASSEMBLED based on, we don't know what. Theresa, as bad as she can sometimes be, works in a public forum where anybody with the $$ can show up.

The Darren reading was really ridiculous so my point was even Theresa is heads and shoulders better than that. Anyway, I've posted a small sample from Edward, as that is what I have. I have lots of Edward exerpts, which I post as I get time.
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:57 PM   #235
Frank McLaughlin
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by Elvis666 View Post
I'm not involved in this discussion, only lurking, but isn't this going a little far, Frank?
>Someone who has never heard of "Criminal Minds," and who didn't know the score of the last Super Bowl, is lecturing us on how American television works.

Don't send me attempted ridicule, and you won't have to deal with my going a little far.
__________________
Formerly known as member frank3373
Frank McLaughlin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 02:58 PM   #236
bytewizard
Graduate Poster
 
bytewizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: In the woods
Posts: 1,984
I'll play along and pretend Henry does communicate with dead. If Henry can really talk to the dead, how about solving some open murder investigations or clearing up missing persons cases?

Henry tells people that their dear departed family members enjoyed making turquoise jewelry or some other mundane thing. Wouldn't it be fantastic to watch Henry/dear departed/ghosts actually name the person that killed them. Something like Henry saying "The coroner said I had a stroke, but guess what! Remember my chef friend Kim? Remember that rare blow fish sushi he served me? He poisoned me!

Now that would be a cold reading.
bytewizard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 03:00 PM   #237
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,709
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
However, I do think what went on between the two of them was valid (ie, not fraudulence)...
You keep inflating the language. I gave you a fairly lengthy analysis on what constitutes fraud. You have predictably ignored it.

Quote:
I believe Mackemore did contact his friend, certainly that is what and his wife and his brother believe.
You're not really addressing the analysis. You're just saying that you persist in your belief despite evidence to the contrary.

Quote:
You googled every major statement Mackelmore made and found that information from reading online? Impressive.
No, he showed that what a skilled and motivated person can find out about a celebrity using ordinary means exceeds what the celebrity himself thinks possible. This casts doubt on the central premise behind Henry's readings, and all similar readings, which is that we must consider supernatural means if we dismiss natural means of discovery as supposedly impossible.

Quote:
...if you buy the claim he and his production company make that he does not know who he is reading until he shows up at the door.
I don't.

Quote:
You are accusing Michael Corbett Productions of fraud.
No, he isn't, and you seem to know less about fraud than you do about the television industry. But you keep frantically trying to shove those words in other people's mouths, apparently to make it seem like they're making a serious allegation. He's done nothing more than accuse television mediums of being typical mentalists, and the show of nothing more than exploiting interest in that.

Quote:
...thought I'm surprised given their reputation and given your lack of evidence.
He doesn't lack evidence. He showed that it's possible to obtain supposedly hard-to-find information regarding a celebrity using ordinary means. It's reasonable to propose that the production company employed similar means. It's neither an accusation of fraud nor a proposition devoid of evidence.

Quote:
This has no effect on what I am claiming.
Of course it does. It cuts off at the knees every premise to your argument.

Quote:
Maybe...
Maybe...
Maybe...
You're full of alternative explanations for hypothetical cases in which Henry fails, but you don't seem willing to accept any alternative explanations for his success. I agree all those are possibilities should Henry fail. Why has it been so hard for you to consider other explanations for his success? Why do you fall all over yourself dismissing them with inflationary straw men and fanciful guesses about how to produce a TV show?
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 03:00 PM   #238
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,761
Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
First, I didn't post a Maclemore video.
I never said you did.


Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin
I recall using his name to establish that Henry doesn't just do D level celebrities. I do not recall making any claim about that specific video (Macklemore).
You recall poorly. Here is what you said:

Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
There is a profound difference between what this magician did picking three receptive people out of a low sophistication crowd, never filling more than a few minutes of air time with each person...

....and what Henry did last night reading the Grammy-nominated Macklemore one-on-one with no false starts, his wife and manager watching and confirming on video from another room with no vague guesses (Brown: "you have lots of hats").
Not just a comment about celebrity types, which is entirely irrelevant, but a statement about comparative quality.

And this is exactly what I said in my first post (or soon after): you're going for whack-a-mole. "Yeah, maybe that one isn't that good, but I didn't say it was the best."


Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin
However, I do think what went on between the two of them was valid (ie, not fraudulence),
I know you think that, just like your non-musical friends thought your other friend was musically talented. You are the magical no-talent in this case.


Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin
but in this case, it would be very hard to quantify. (I don't have the tape available to check it). There was nothing earth shattering revealed as Mackelmore wanted to focus on his friend, and his friend wanted to talk about the music and the drugs he took, as I remember the show.

I believe Mackemore did contact his friend, certainly that is what and his wife and his brother believe.
Just as your friends believed your other friend was musically talented.

Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin
You googled every major statement Mackelmore made and found that information from reading online? Impressive.
It is, actually, given that (1) I did it before I watched the Macklemore video and (2) Macklemore said it couldn't be done.


Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin
Of course, that does not mean that Henry googled the information if you buy the claim he and his production company make that he does not know who he is reading until he shows up at the door.
I don't.

Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin
You are accusing Michael Corbett Productions of fraud.
I'm not the one having the legal discussion with you, and I won't go down your side track of parsing things that you change definitions on midstream.


Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin
Fair enough, thought I'm surprised given their reputation and given your lack of evidence. I can't prove that Henry didn't know.
That's correct; you can't.

Option 1: The laws of physics are not as we know them, and something that has repeatedly failed when tested under laboratory conditions is now suddenly true.

Option 2: Television shows and television star hopefuls are shady in what they are doing and how they present it.

Frank McLaughlin: Option 1, of course.


Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin
This has no effect on what I am claiming. Even if there is a reading that bombs, it has no effect on what I am claiming. There could be lots of people who can't connect with their deceased relatives. Maybe the relatives have moved on to the Christian heaven. Maybe they have incarnated back on earth as Hindu's teach. Maybe Henry is just having a bad day.
A further retreat.

Initial claim: Tyler Henry is the real deal when it comes to medium because television shows wouldn't televise it otherwise, I'm expert enough on NDAs to know they wouldn't keep people quiet, Gary Schwartz proved it with John Edward, and Derren Brown isn't as good as Caputo, and lay people misjudging the talent levels of musicians doesn't apply to lay people and mediums.

Revised claim: Tyler Henry is the real deal, but I never said anything serious about Schwartz or Edward, and I won't show you anything about Caputo, and I'll ignore the musician/medium thing, and I'll demonstrate that I'm not so smart about television shows as I thought.

Revised claim: Tyler Henry might be wrong sometimes, but it doesn't prove anything.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 03:00 PM   #239
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,668
---edit--- deleted repeated stuff from Garrette.

Originally Posted by Frank McLaughlin View Post
I don't claim the Caputo Macklemore reading was impressive.
Not impressive, just "no false starts" and "no fake guesses."

Last edited by carlitos; 11th March 2019 at 03:04 PM.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th March 2019, 03:03 PM   #240
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,668
Apologies for piling on. I'm frankly incredulous that this poster is denying what he posted a page ago, and denying facts about the freaking Super Bowl that took place a mere 5 weeks ago.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:09 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.