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
 

Notices


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.
Tags john edward , mediums , psychics

Reply
Old 26th November 2012, 03:46 PM   #201
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
Well that's true but I'm more of the mind that actually using the details from the actual story we can take it apart as well.

For example people have argued that they did research on her name. What is this based upon? Did she give out her name? If she didn't give out her name then that's a BS argument.

In skepticism we need to be accurate and deal with the facts presented to us. We can deconstruct the information to get at the truth of what happened.

Several people have responded to her with stories of cold reading scams where John Edward threw out information to the audience. But she's already stated several times that this isn't the way it went down.

She also stated that she didn't talk in the room because she was cynical overall. So the idea that someone listened on the microphone is out. She wasn't pickpocketed and she didn't have her new refrigerator warranty in her purse.

Her brother didn't purchase the Valerie Harper tickets himself, a friend got the tickets.

Just blowing her off with answers that do not fit her specific scenario is poor debating across the board.

Since we know that John Edward is a scam artist there must be a logical explanation for what happened.

I'm curious to discover how he did it.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury
truethat 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 26th November 2012, 03:48 PM   #202
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Let's see if I can do a psychic reading for you.

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

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

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

How am I doing so far?
That's me!
dafydd 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 26th November 2012, 03:49 PM   #203
GeeMack
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,237
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
We're all adults here. Reading her blog is simple. Click read and come back and post. If you are not willing to read the blog then you shouldn't bother commenting in the thread.

Nonsense. If the OP isn't able to articulate his/her position in a reasonably understandable way here on this forum, there's no reason to believe he/she is able to articulate their thoughts in a reasonable, understandable way on a blog.

If the OP has proof of life after death, the claim made in the title and opening post, lay it on us. It is highly disingenuous to tell people there is such proof, then ask them to go read a blog post and its accompanying comments and find it for themselves.

And anytime you need more help understanding skepticism, critical thinking, and forum etiquette, you just ask, okay? You're welcome.
GeeMack 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 26th November 2012, 03:51 PM   #204
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 44,969
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Reading the blog is actually interesting, Robin explains more detail.

Here's the thing about the Valerie Harper connection. He said "there's a Valerie Harper connection" not "You just bought tickets to Valerie Harper's show"

Now even if he didn't look up tourists coming in to buy tickets, which I don't think he could have done so quickly, he didn't say tickets.

Valerie Harper was an actress on the Mary Tyler Moore show, she's not a super famous actress but she was on a popular show. The tickets were a coincidence.

Years ago I worked in my ex husband's thrift store and I had an incident like this happen where a couple walked in and were looking around the store. I had never met them before and went up to the man who was looking through shirts. I had just recently moved the "pink men's shirts" to another section. He was looking and not actually looking at the shirts but scanning the rack, so I went up and asked him if he was looking for the pink man's shirts. He did a double take and called his wife up and said it was a sign. He was looking at the shirts but the mother had just died and requested that she be buried in a pink shirt. He took it as a psychic connection.

A sign from mom.
One of our Seattle Skeptics members died suddenly earlier this month and a lot of us went to the memorial service. He was an active member in the atheist group the skeptics overlap with. So everyone at the service including the preacher-turned-atheist who led the event, were atheists.

His brother and sister-in-law were the only relatives there and they were from out of town. They kept finding coincidences that to them, were signs our friend was around in an afterlife. People at the service were torn between saying, he didn't believe or letting the relatives go on with their beliefs. They even found the fact someone referred them to an estate attorney and they found one of those mass mailings on the deceased's table from the same attorney as a sign they were being directed from the other side on what to do.

In the end we glanced among ourselves when they told us of the coincidences but refrained from raining on their parade.
__________________
(*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, Pubbie Party, Repubs "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 26th November 2012 at 03:52 PM.
Skeptic Ginger 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 26th November 2012, 03:51 PM   #205
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,475
Originally Posted by RoboTimbo View Post
There's nothing at all to be done with it. It's an anecdote. It will be forever unfalsifiable. Just as we were to read all of the comments on her blog, no matter what is asked or suggested, there will be additional details which will explain away whatever the doubt is about.

If she has another session with him and records it, we can at least have something to work with.

All you can say about an anecdote is, "Cool story, bro (or sis)."
Pretty much this, though I don't think it is entirely without value to explore anecdotes. For one thing, they can be used to demonstrate issues with flawed memory even if only to introduce the idea to someone who is adamant that her memory is entirely and completely accurate.
__________________
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 26th November 2012, 03:52 PM   #206
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
tsig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 34,747
Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch View Post
Look, I understand not knowing me makes it hard to believe anything I say is true or accurate. Perhaps you all should nominate one truly open-minded trustworthy skeptic from this thread to go to a small event with John Edward (Small thus increasing your chance of getting read.) and then see what happens...but you do need the reading to be a direct one to you and be open to it and be willing to reflect on it later. With regard to pointing people to my blog and ALL the comments...it has mostly all been said and questioned and answered there already so that saves me the time of having to do it all over again! Hey cut me some slack I have 3 kids! Also I must say some of the comments and back and forth should give a chuckle to anyone interested in the subject. And no I have personally nothing to gain from people reading my blog. But of course if you have a question or point that was not adequately addressed there then we can discuss it here. Now I'm off to go Christmas shopping for those 3 kids. Peace.
You should have thought of the kids before you posted here.
tsig is online now   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 26th November 2012, 03:54 PM   #207
GeeMack
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,237
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Just blowing her off with answers that do not fit her specific scenario is poor debating across the board.

Nonsense again. There is no debate. The OP claimed to have proof of life after death. The null hypothesis is that there is no life after death. The OP is responsible for falsifying that null. It's put up or shut up. We don't have to indulge the OP's belief in the supernatural by having a polite discussion about the details of stuff that isn't objective evidence anyway. Rejecting what has been offered so far because it isn't objective evidence is enough. And that has been done.
GeeMack 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 26th November 2012, 03:54 PM   #208
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
http://www.csicop.org/si/show/john_e..._the_bereaved/

Interesting article on John Edward
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury
truethat 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 26th November 2012, 03:55 PM   #209
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 44,969
Originally Posted by GeeMack View Post
Nonsense. If the OP isn't able to articulate his/her position in a reasonably understandable way here on this forum, there's no reason to believe he/she is able to articulate their thoughts in a reasonable, understandable way on a blog.

If the OP has proof of life after death, the claim made in the title and opening post, lay it on us. It is highly disingenuous to tell people there is such proof, then ask them to go read a blog post and its accompanying comments and find it for themselves.

And anytime you need more help understanding skepticism, critical thinking, and forum etiquette, you just ask, okay? You're welcome.
While truethat doesn't have a whole lot of room to talk, and probably neither do I, I thought the initial skepticism in the thread was unnecessarily cynical as well.
__________________
(*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, Pubbie Party, Repubs "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)
Skeptic Ginger 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 26th November 2012, 03:56 PM   #210
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,514
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
Pretty much this, though I don't think it is entirely without value to explore anecdotes. For one thing, they can be used to demonstrate issues with flawed memory even if only to introduce the idea to someone who is adamant that her memory is entirely and completely accurate.
The ufo threads are good for this sort of thing. Here's one of mine.
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 26th November 2012, 03:59 PM   #211
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
While truethat doesn't have a whole lot of room to talk, and probably neither do I, I thought the initial skepticism in the thread was unnecessarily cynical as well.
Skepticism in a skeptic's forum, whatever next? It was just a case of ''Oh no, not another one''. We've been through this so many times before with people who have been fooled by hot and cold readers. Nothing new here.
dafydd 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 26th November 2012, 04:01 PM   #212
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,475
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Well that's true but I'm more of the mind that actually using the details from the actual story we can take it apart as well.
Except that it almost certainly isn't the actual story, regardless how firmly she believes it is.


Originally Posted by truethat
For example people have argued that they did research on her name. What is this based upon? Did she give out her name? If she didn't give out her name then that's a BS argument.
Only if knowingly giving out your name is the only way to obtain a sitter's name. It is not, particularly if the sitter has, by her own admission, been to several sitters already, and particularly if there is reason to doubt that no name was provided; there is, even if she does not remember it.


Originally Posted by truethat
In skepticism we need to be accurate and deal with the facts presented to us.
Ah, but that is the point, or at least one of them. We question what Robin calls facts.

Originally Posted by truethat
We can deconstruct the information to get at the truth of what happened.
Highly doubtful with such a sketchy anecdote, approaching the impossible.

Originally Posted by truethat
Several people have responded to her with stories of cold reading scams where John Edward threw out information to the audience. But she's already stated several times that this isn't the way it went down.
Yes, and to the extent it indicates that skeptics aren't paying attention to what she says you have a point, but your implication that what she says must be taken as factual is way off the mark.

Originally Posted by truethat
She also stated that she didn't talk in the room because she was cynical overall. So the idea that someone listened on the microphone is out.
No, it is not. The number of believers who swear they did not speak or leave information at all available who in fact did both is legion. I speak mainly from personal experience with magic and mentalism and somewhat from my investigations into psychics and mediums.

Originally Posted by truethat
She wasn't pickpocketed and she didn't have her new refrigerator warranty in her purse.
Likely true.

Originally Posted by truethat
Her brother didn't purchase the Valerie Harper tickets himself, a friend got the tickets.
I see no reason to doubt that.

Originally Posted by truethat
Just blowing her off with answers that do not fit her specific scenario is poor debating across the board.
I see your point and agree with your intent, but you miss the important specifics. Some here obviously have not paid attention to what she has said, but most have. Of those, a few have answered in ways that indicate that what she says is as likely inaccurate as it is accurate; your objection seems to take that latter category to task, too, and wrongly so.

Originally Posted by truethat
Since we know that John Edward is a scam artist there must be a logical explanation for what happened.

I'm curious to discover how he did it.
You never will, mainly because we will never know what he actually did. We have a sketchy version of one biased point of view that I would bet the mortgage is highly flawed. There is no way to know if I am right, but there is ample reason to trust that I am. That means anything we come up with will be speculative methods for speculative effects.
__________________
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 26th November 2012, 04:04 PM   #213
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,475
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
While truethat doesn't have a whole lot of room to talk, and probably neither do I, I thought the initial skepticism in the thread was unnecessarily cynical as well.
I don't, but then I stand accused, and I have been guilty more than once of excessive cynicism.

Regardless how it turns out, I am glad I was wrong about it being a drive-by.
__________________
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 26th November 2012, 04:10 PM   #214
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
Well what should we do? Ignore the information we do have?

Here are just two things that are interesting. Once she stated she had just gotten a refrigerator, she then took the statement about fingerprints and further evidence of his psychic abilities rather than a common sense thing that occurs in buying a refrigerator, especially with the popularity of chrome appliances these days.


Her brother on the blog states that there was no way of him knowing about the Valerie Harper connection, but he also states that he saw the ad in the paper.

In addition little details (one I always talk about is how you can tell someone is not from NYC because of the cleanliness of their shoes since city folk tend to walk everywhere) can give the guy a clue.

Salvatore for example is an Italian sounding old school name. Once he got that detail there's stereotypes available as well.

She also mentions the part about someone having a tooth in a pocket and freaks out later when her companion has one. Now most people have batted that away as a plant, but she's become friends with the guy and he's not a plant.

However when she said "tooth" I thought of human tooth. The odds of someone in the room having a tooth on them, when you factor in shark teeth and other totums used by more funky earthy types, is not such an odd statement at all. Not to mention if someone pulled out a set of dentures ?

It's all in the interpretation. Her evidence would give me pause to consider if the only two things he said to her were about the refrigerator and the Valerie Harper tickets.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury
truethat 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 26th November 2012, 04:19 PM   #215
NobbyNobbs
Gazerbeam's Protege
 
NobbyNobbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,617
Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch View Post
You have the knowledge minus the actual personal experience with John Edward which makes me a more qualified judge.
Actually, I think this works against you. You have a vested emotional interest in Edward being able to talk with the dead. If you want a more objective view, arrange to sit in on a reading for someone you don't know, sit out Edward's line of sight, and bring a tape recorder.

Also, at any of these events (and especially private readings) I'll bet that 1 out of 100 participants is actually skeptical; skeptics just don't want to spend money on that kind of thing. The other 99 either believe or want to believe to some extent. The fact that you attend so many suggests to me that you are among the 99.

Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
And then I remember that it really isn't that hard to fool people, not even well-educated laymen.
Amen. I remember at summer camp one year I convinced a coworker I was psychic. It was completely off the cuff and took only a glance at her application and a deck of marked cards. We'd go through the deck, guessing the next card, and making sure I got a better-than-chance average. I'd intersperse the game with comments like "Your mother's name is Sally, isn't it? I just had a feeling." Here's the best part: the entire time, I kept saying there was no such thing as psychics, that they were all frauds, that I had no special abilities, etc. But the more I protested (and the more cards I got right) the more convinced she was that I had some sort of ESP.

Now, if I could convince someone, given five minutes of preparation and absolutely no experience or prior knowledge of hot/cold reading, All the while denying special abilities, imagine what someone with Edward's resources could do.
__________________
I wish someone would find something I wrote on this board to be sig-worthy, thereby effectively granting me immortality.--Antiquehunter
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted years on earth the time spent eating butterscotch pudding.
AMERICA! NUMBER 1 IN PARTICLE PHYSICS SINCE JULY 4TH, 1776!!! --SusanConstant
NobbyNobbs 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 26th November 2012, 04:20 PM   #216
quarky
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 20,135
I'm not normally cruel, but I found the o.p. to be a bit harsh.
I confess to not reading her linked data...and also to a certain prejudice, I guess, when she claimed skepticism herself...via having been to fake psychics.

What sort of person goes for multiple readings from psychics, after encountering fakery? It didn't sound like a journalist. It sounded more like a true believer. Still, I hope she returns.

Truethat, I tend to agree with you that new people are often met with unnecessary harshness. I'm just not sure this time qualifies.
quarky 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 26th November 2012, 04:26 PM   #217
xterra
So far, so good...
 
xterra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: On the outskirts of Nowhere; the middle was too crowded
Posts: 1,428
Originally Posted by NobbyNobbs View Post
Actually, I think this works against you. You have a vested emotional interest in Edward being able to talk with the dead. If you want a more objective view, arrange to sit in on a reading for someone you don't know, sit out Edward's line of sight, and bring a tape recorder.

Hide the tape recorder!!! Don't tell the psychic, don't tell the person being read that you have it. Don't.

Only afterward should you let the ... what's the correct word? "subject" will do .... subject know about the recording. The subject should hear the recording as soon as possible if you want her/him to believe that you haven't edited it.
xterra 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 26th November 2012, 04:32 PM   #218
Agatha
Winking at the Moon
 
Agatha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,712
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Well that's true but I'm more of the mind that actually using the details from the actual story we can take it apart as well.

For example people have argued that they did research on her name. What is this based upon? Did she give out her name? If she didn't give out her name then that's a BS argument.
She says she purchased the tickets with a credit card, though not the one used to purchase the refrigerator. So yes, her name would have been known. For someone accusing others of not reading what Robin has said, you are doing a good job of missing things she has said here, never mind on her blog.

Originally Posted by truethat View Post
In skepticism we need to be accurate and deal with the facts presented to us. We can deconstruct the information to get at the truth of what happened.
Except we won't get facts, we'll get Robin's impressions of the readings.

Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Several people have responded to her with stories of cold reading scams where John Edward threw out information to the audience. But she's already stated several times that this isn't the way it went down.
Well, no. I've asked her several times how the conversation went, but she hasn't responded (not surprising, the thread is moving reasonably fast). FZ posted what I understand is a typical JE reading, I asked her if her reading was similar. No answer that I can see, though admittedly I may have missed it.

Originally Posted by truethat View Post
She also stated that she didn't talk in the room because she was cynical overall. So the idea that someone listened on the microphone is out. She wasn't pickpocketed and she didn't have her new refrigerator warranty in her purse.
Possibly not, though she hasn't actually ruled those out. She said she was sure they didn't chat in the venue, but didn't mention the queue to get in. There are many other ways of getting information, and if all audience members have to check all their coats, large bags etc in a cloakroom, and nothing is taken from those bags, how would they know that they'd been searched?

Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Her brother didn't purchase the Valerie Harper tickets himself, a friend got the tickets.
Which is why I asked for more information about the "connection" JE stated. Did he name other stars of that era? Was the ad for his show next to an ad for Valerie Harper's show in the local paper? We're still waiting for more information, as indeed we are still waiting for more information on the "tooth guy" as the story in the blog comments is missing a lot of vital information on this particular subject.

Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Just blowing her off with answers that do not fit her specific scenario is poor debating across the board.

Since we know that John Edward is a scam artist there must be a logical explanation for what happened.

I'm curious to discover how he did it.
As are the rest of us, which is why we've asked for more information from Robin. So far, we don't have that so can only tell her in generalities some of the ways these frauds use to get information. Without much more information about the events leading up to going to the show, and most importantly a transcript or an unedited video, we only have Robin's (human, therefore plastic and fallible) memory to go on, but I am sure she could share much more information if she chose to.

The main thing I would say is that she has quite a presence on the internet already, plus she tells us she has seen many psychics, mediums etc. Therefore there is a lot of easily obtainable personal information already out there, which JE could get with very little trouble. I would not be in any way surprised, for example, if these frauds shared information between each other.
__________________
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... timey wimey... stuff.
Agatha 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 26th November 2012, 04:48 PM   #219
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,475
I wish I were better at articulating what I am thinking in these threads and at organizing my analysis. Unfortunately, I am not. I therefore get frustrated with myself and with others (my fault, not theirs) when I see flaws in our arguments.

The thing is that the rebuttal to anecdotes such as Robin's is a series of Even Ifs.

Even if she believes she is relating it exactly correctly, it doesn't prove life after death.

Even if she really is relating it exactly correctly, it doesn't prove life after death.

Even if she demonstrates irrefutably that John Edward had no knowledge of her, her brother, her family, or anyone or anything related to her and Even if John Edward did not know she was coming to that session and Even if he said exactly these words: "You just bought a chrome refrigerator, and your brother will go see Valerie Harper's show on Broadway tonight with his friend who has not yet bought tickets," it does not by itself prove life after death.

It is this point that I feel is the largest stumbling block to a believer's objective analysis. Without a controlled environment, or at least a controlled series of readings each of which produced a remarkable reading so that all the readings in toto surpass the level of chance-produced remarkable readings, then the miraculous reading is not proof; it is merely a point of interest, perhaps meriting further investigation.

In threads such as this one, the Even If level we deal with not only fluctuates, it gets separated from the others so that believers begin gto think that if this particular Even If is dealth with then the whole case is proven.

Skepticism ain't easy...
__________________
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 26th November 2012, 04:56 PM   #220
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
tsig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 34,747
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
Well what should we do? Ignore the information we do have?

Here are just two things that are interesting. Once she stated she had just gotten a refrigerator, she then took the statement about fingerprints and further evidence of his psychic abilities rather than a common sense thing that occurs in buying a refrigerator, especially with the popularity of chrome appliances these days.


Her brother on the blog states that there was no way of him knowing about the Valerie Harper connection, but he also states that he saw the ad in the paper.

In addition little details (one I always talk about is how you can tell someone is not from NYC because of the cleanliness of their shoes since city folk tend to walk everywhere) can give the guy a clue.

Salvatore for example is an Italian sounding old school name. Once he got that detail there's stereotypes available as well.

She also mentions the part about someone having a tooth in a pocket and freaks out later when her companion has one. Now most people have batted that away as a plant, but she's become friends with the guy and he's not a plant.

However when she said "tooth" I thought of human tooth. The odds of someone in the room having a tooth on them, when you factor in shark teeth and other totums used by more funky earthy types, is not such an odd statement at all. Not to mention if someone pulled out a set of dentures ?

It's all in the interpretation. Her evidence would give me pause to consider if the only two things he said to her were about the refrigerator and the Valerie Harper tickets.
The information that I have is that the dead stay dead and aren't concerned about kitchen appliances.
tsig is online now   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 26th November 2012, 04:59 PM   #221
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
No it doesn't prove life after death. What I am more intrigued by is her belief in this. If someone asked you what proof you needed to believe in life after death and it happened then to you it's proven.

It's not proven to us.

I still don't know for sure that her credit card was used to purchase the tickets. Agatha if you can provide proof of that I'd appreciate it. If she did use a credit card in her name to purchase the tickets then this entire thread is a complete and total joke.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury
truethat 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 26th November 2012, 05:02 PM   #222
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 14,514
Quote:
I feel compelled to chime in here with my two cents (two cents cash, that is, not credit card, for fear John Edwards' minions will pull my credit report for their nefarious purposes). I am Robin's brother who attended the John Edwards seminar with her that night and was asked immediately by John if I had a Valerie Harper connection. Just to clarify, a mere few hours before the event I was reading the newspaper and saw an ad for a Broadway play that Valerie Harper was appearing in. She had always been one of my absolute favorite actresses since her days playing Rhoda in the 70s when I was just a babe, but I actually hadn't given a conscious thought to her in years until that afternoon. I then called my best friend who I knew was also a fan and discussed coordinating an evening to see her play. BUT NO TICKETS WERE PURCHASED BY ME THAT AFTERNOON, so there was no credit card charge in existence, no receipts to track. It was all simply in my head, or, rather, in my simple head. So it would be truly impossible for John Edwards to have found any information in the physical world about my connection to Valerie Harper, a connection that for me had only played out three hours earlier, for the first time in decades. Cold reading?? Nonsense! As much as I like her, Valerie Harper is simply not that present in most people's daily thoughts in the 21st Century - not even mine, EXCEPT FOR THAT SPECIAL DAY. And weeks later, a good soul actually gave me a free ticket to the play. Thanks, Dad!
I'd be more interested in how she paid for the tickets to Edward's show.
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 26th November 2012, 05:07 PM   #223
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,475
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
I'd be more interested in how she paid for the tickets to Edward's show.
The interesting bit about the comment from her blog that you quoted is that the brother exhibits the tunnel-vision that characterizes believers. Because he eventually got tickets for the show and associated JE's comment with the purchase of the tickets, he retroactively assumes that only that event would validate the comment. If he had never gone to a show he would have said there was a connection with Valerie Harper; he admits it in his own words by saying he had thought she was a babe since her television show and that he had considered seeing her that afternoon.

The "connection with Valerie Harper" comment is a perfect example of confirmation bias that is simultaneously defended as not being confirmation bias.
__________________
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 26th November 2012, 05:16 PM   #224
HotNostril
Thinker
 
HotNostril's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch View Post
Being that I know just as much if not more about the tricks fake mediums use the reason you should seriously examine (and you do need to read ALL the comments for the full picture) my experience with John Edward is the fact that I ACTUALLY had a reading with him whereas I'm guessing most here have not. I have the knowledge of what to look for in a fake medium AND all my experiences with mediums(lots... including James Van Praagh) and in my opinion they were all fake. Except for John Edward. You have the knowledge minus the actual personal experience with John Edward which makes me a more qualified judge.
No, I believe you're a fool that throws good money after bad to psychic shop.
HotNostril 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 26th November 2012, 05:18 PM   #225
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,718
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
I still don't know for sure that her credit card was used to purchase the tickets. Agatha if you can provide proof of that I'd appreciate it. If she did use a credit card in her name to purchase the tickets then this entire thread is a complete and total joke.

Guess you missed it:

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge View Post
... did you happen to purchase tickets for the JE show using the same credit card you used to buy the refrigerator?
Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch View Post
It was a different credit card.
Jack by the hedge 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 26th November 2012, 05:20 PM   #226
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
that doesn't mean it had her name on it. Just want confirmation on that. Also how far in advance she bought the tickets and if it was assigned seating.
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury

Last edited by truethat; 26th November 2012 at 05:22 PM.
truethat 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 26th November 2012, 05:21 PM   #227
HotNostril
Thinker
 
HotNostril's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch View Post
If I am so personally invested and so then cannot use my critical thinking skills properly why then do I believe that ALL the other mediums I've been to are fakes?
Cause there is no such thing as a psychic
HotNostril 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 26th November 2012, 05:24 PM   #228
shuttlt
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,809
How many fraudulent mediums have you been to then?
shuttlt is online now   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 26th November 2012, 05:25 PM   #229
HotNostril
Thinker
 
HotNostril's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch View Post
The comments explain the experience in greater detail as well as give answers to people who point out the tricks of the trade with regard to my experience.
Just wondering if you make money for steering people to your linked blog?
HotNostril 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 26th November 2012, 05:27 PM   #230
desertgal
Illuminator
 
desertgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,091
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
...he admits it in his own words by saying he had thought she was a babe since her television show and that he had considered seeing her that afternoon.
Actually, he didn't say that exactly. He said Harper had long been one of his favorite actresses since the Rhoda days when HE was a babe. (A babe who watched and loved Rhoda, of all shows.)

He went on to say that he hadn't given Harper a conscious thought since those days. Apparently, not during "Valerie's Family" or her newsworthy stint as President of SAG, even.

Originally Posted by truethat View Post
that doesn't mean it had her name on it. Just want confirmation on that. Also how far in advance she bought the tickets and if it was assigned seating.
How would Agatha be able to confirm any of that for you?

Last edited by desertgal; 26th November 2012 at 05:30 PM.
desertgal 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 26th November 2012, 05:28 PM   #231
John Jones
Philosopher
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 7,009
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
While truethat doesn't have a whole lot of room to talk, and probably neither do I, I thought the initial skepticism in the thread was unnecessarily cynical as well.
How much skepticism is unnecessarily cynical?

Different fora have their own rules.

One science/skeptic forum I visit requires that you post your arguments on their forum, and THEN provide links to your own blog if such exists.

Posting "Read My Blog and Prove Me Wrong, Or I Win " type posts is a good way to get your posts deleted on those places.
__________________
NOTE: Spelling errors are left intact for the benifit of those having no other rejoinder.
John Jones 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 26th November 2012, 05:29 PM   #232
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,718
Originally Posted by truethat View Post
that doesn't mean it had her name on it. Just want confirmation on that. Also how far in advance she bought the tickets and if it was assigned seating.
Quite true. I just inferred that it was her own card because she said it was a different card rather than that it was someone else's card. Of course Robin can settle the matter.

There was no assigned seating:
Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch View Post
Seating was random.
Jack by the hedge 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 26th November 2012, 05:36 PM   #233
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 12,475
Originally Posted by desertgal View Post
Actually, he didn't say that exactly. He said Harper had long been one of his favorite actresses since the Rhoda days when HE was a babe. (A babe who watched and loved Rhoda, of all shows.)

He went on to say that he hadn't given Harper a conscious thought since those days. Apparently, not during "Valerie's Family" or her newsworthy stint as President of SAG, even.
Serves me right for reading it quickly. Apologies for that misstatement, but the point stands.
__________________
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 26th November 2012, 05:45 PM   #234
truethat
Penultimate Amazing
 
truethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge View Post
Quite true. I just inferred that it was her own card because she said it was a different card rather than that it was someone else's card. Of course Robin can settle the matter.

There was no assigned seating:
Ok no assigned seating. In my company I regularly have people sign up using someone else's credit card. So until we know for sure I'm going to wait.

If she did sign up with her own name then that's a bit silly Robin, I have to say. If you paid with your name and then the person could do research? Wow.

By the way how were you selected to get a reading. Did he do everyone in the room?
__________________
“People who say they don't have time to read simply don't want to.”

― Julie Rugg, A Book Addict's Treasury
truethat 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 26th November 2012, 06:12 PM   #235
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
Administrator
 
LashL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 34,030
Originally Posted by Robin Stettnisch View Post
And I am sorry if I didn't follow the proper etiquette on this thread..it is new to me.

No apologies necessary, and it's never too late to start. How about just relaying what it is that you wish to discuss about your encounter with John Edward in your own words (without demanding that others go and read a blog and all the comments elsewhere) and then I am sure that people will have questions and input, and a proper dialogue can follow.
LashL 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 26th November 2012, 06:15 PM   #236
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 44,969
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
Skepticism in a skeptic's forum, whatever next? It was just a case of ''Oh no, not another one''. We've been through this so many times before with people who have been fooled by hot and cold readers. Nothing new here.
I get that part. And sometimes I immediately suspect new posters. But it just came across as the usual rude before you know response. Just sayin...
__________________
(*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, Pubbie Party, Repubs "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)
Skeptic Ginger 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 26th November 2012, 06:22 PM   #237
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I get that part. And sometimes I immediately suspect new posters. But it just came across as the usual rude before you know response. Just sayin...
Fair enough. I guess we're just a bunch of curmudgeons! But this thread has been the usual mixture of confirmation bias and selective memory.

Last edited by dafydd; 26th November 2012 at 06:24 PM.
dafydd 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 26th November 2012, 06:27 PM   #238
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 44,969
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
...

Posting "Read My Blog and Prove Me Wrong, Or I Win " type posts is a good way to get your posts deleted on those places.
So do we expect every newcomer to know this?

Here's one of the first replies:
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
I suspect a drive-by spamming, but just in case:

No, thanks. I will read your links after you sufficiently summarize and discuss it here and read the resources we will provide you to describe confirmation bias, the tricks of mediums like John Edward, and other effects that mislead the unsuspecting into erroneous belief. I also ask that you explain how you, personally, distinguish between fake psychics (I assume you acknowledge that some exist) and the allegedly real psychics like John Edward.

Otherwise, not interested, thanks.
It's factually OK but how can we expect every new forum member to understand these issues? If Robin had been a skeptic, or a seasoned poster, sure. But suppose she's just not been exposed to much skepticism or the scientific process?

I think it could have been more politely stated. But, like I said, I probably have no room to talk. I've written similar posts following new member OPs.

Here's a suggested revision:

I suspect a drive-by spamming, but just in case:
It would help if you'd summarize your blog here so we could decide if we want to read it first. We will almost certainly have some resources you should read of ours as well, describing confirmation bias, the tricks of mediums like John Edward, and other effects that mislead the unsuspecting into erroneous belief. I also ask that you explain how you, personally, distinguish between fake psychics (I assume you acknowledge that some exist) and the allegedly real psychics like John Edward.

__________________
(*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, Pubbie Party, Repubs "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)
Skeptic Ginger 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 26th November 2012, 06:30 PM   #239
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 44,969
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
Fair enough. I guess we're just a bunch of curmudgeons! But this thread has been the usual mixture of confirmation bias and selective memory.
Yes, I always have high hopes, cold reading is so obvious you'd think all one needed was to expose the believer to the technique and they'd see the light. But more often than not that confirmation bias is just too powerful.
__________________
(*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, Pubbie Party, Repubs "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)
Skeptic Ginger 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 26th November 2012, 06:33 PM   #240
Robin1
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 749
Ok, Ok...I do know that there is NO way to convince a true non-believer...just take my husband - please. : ) C'mon do any of you ever crack a smile? And not all on here are true non-believers. I've said my piece and I do truly thank you for listening. You will not change my mind and I will not change yours...but I am at peace with that. I will leave you with one final thought...please have someone from here go to a reading with John Edward...must be skeptical yet open-minded, thoughtful, and of course knowledgeable ...I personally nominate "truethat" because that was the one person on this thread who seemed to really pay close attention to the details I provided and "hear" what I was saying while still remaining skeptical (thank you for that). But remember a personal reading will be the true indicator. Then, of course, please let me know what happens! Peace.
Robin1 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 02:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.