Contact with the Great Beyond--Psychics like Praagh

[Meatros]

*Originally posted by GOM *
**2. No. Some “pschics” deceive some of the time. Some of them might even deceive all of the time. But they are not the only ones in the deception business. **

GOM, this isn’t a question directed at you in particular, but in people who believe in psychics.
How do you tell the difference, based on skill (not shady business practices) between psychics who deceive some of the time, all of the time, or none of the time?

If they are indeed psychics, then shouldn’t there be a tremendous difference in the skills of Miss Cleo vs. John Edwards?

Miss Cleo, BTW, still claims to be psychic (as the cite I posted earlier says), she just says she was wrapped up with a dubious manager.

[Apos]

Originally posted by Apos 20 years ago on a stone tablet buried deep in his cluttered basement
**[sub]Prin, long before came to these boards, I recieved a message from my power crystal telling me that my destiny was to come to this board and relieve a poor pedant of his obsessions with vB code. I know how to use the quote function. Maybe I’ll even try. But old habits die hard.[/sub] **

[Mr.Miskatonic]

*Originally posted by lekatt *
**Randi will not allow a disinterested observer to watch the test.

Uh excuse me? Where did you get that? It simply is not true in most circumstances.

So it comes down to Randi and his associates word against the psychic’s.

OK, so when the claimant and the claimant’s lawyer throw in the towel, what does that mean? That’s what happened with a recent claimant and is farily typical of tests. The idea that Randi doesn’t allow anyone in is nonsense, he couldn’t conduct the tests.

Now you have proof. **

Not even close. Your assertion is not proof by any means.

[Mr.Miskatonic]

*Originally posted by lekatt *
**http://www.victorzammit.com/skeptics/larryking.html

Read about Randi.

I’ve read Zammit’s junk. He’s nothing more than a cheerleader, and not very good one. His page is full of assertions and things he blames Randi for doing or not doing. I was especially amused by his “clock” he had up there for a while, it was from a British psychic who demanded Randi come to England on short notice to test him. One of Randi’s British associates had already tested him and found him wanting. Zammit didn’t care about the facts though.

You cling to Zammit as if he actually proves soemthing. He does not.

Oh, yes, don’t forget the million dollars some skeptic can pick up by proving there is no life after death. Should be easy money, the way you post here. **

To prove a negative to anonymous council that is hand picked by Zammit. Yeah right, that’ll be an honest test :rolleyes:. Meanwhile, on the Randi test, you don’t have to convince anyone, you just have to pass a self-apparent test to win. What is Zammit so afraid of?

And that’s ignoring the fact that you cannot prove a negative with something like this (a mistake you’ve made several times lekatt).

[Apos]

I asked before how, when you admit that some psychics are frauds, and, as I noted, the two cannot be told apart by their results alone (since frauds can easily find out key sources of info via modern snooping as well as use cold reading), you can tell that Edward is not a fraud (or at least using a cold reading technique without realizing it, which is quite possible)

But I want to ask a deeper question too, one that is a major problem for all manner of supernatural phenomena. That is: even if something IS going on that is unexplainable, how can you possibly decide WHAT EXACTLY is going on in the way that you have? For any given unexplainable phenomenon, there could be any number of possible reasons behind it, not simply one conclusion. Edward could have the power to read minds. He could have the power to see into the future (and “see” what things will stimulate a good response from an audience member). He could have any number of strange abilities that do NOT involve actually talking to the dead, and he could either be aware of this and exploiting it: or simply assuming (wrongly) that this is what is going on. The question is: how can you tell which explanation is right? You’ve settled on “he can talk to the dead” but why? Once we allow that something we don’t understand is happening, how can you rule out all the other equally plausible possibilities? I don’t see how.

And a further question: what if it turns out that psychics really DO have the power they claim to… but it’s operation turns out to be scientifically explicable? Is that possibility a threat to your embrace of the concept you call “supernatural?”

[lekatt]

*Originally posted by Apos *
**I asked before how, when you admit that some psychics are frauds, and, as I noted, the two cannot be told apart by their results alone (since frauds can easily find out key sources of info via modern snooping as well as use cold reading), you can tell that Edward is not a fraud (or at least using a cold reading technique without realizing it, which is quite possible)

But I want to ask a deeper question too, one that is a major problem for all manner of supernatural phenomena. That is: even if something IS going on that is unexplainable, how can you possibly decide WHAT EXACTLY is going on in the way that you have? For any given unexplainable phenomenon, there could be any number of possible reasons behind it, not simply one conclusion. Edward could have the power to read minds. He could have the power to see into the future (and “see” what things will stimulate a good response from an audience member). He could have any number of strange abilities that do NOT involve actually talking to the dead, and he could either be aware of this and exploiting it: or simply assuming (wrongly) that this is what is going on. The question is: how can you tell which explanation is right? You’ve settled on “he can talk to the dead” but why? Once we allow that something we don’t understand is happening, how can you rule out all the other equally plausible possibilities? I don’t see how.

And a further question: what if it turns out that psychics really DO have the power they claim to… but it’s operation turns out to be scientifically explicable? Is that possibility a threat to your embrace of the concept you call “supernatural?” **

I, and others, know what they know through experience. I see a much different world than you. I have experienced, and experience daily the things I talk about here. My world is not of the intellect, but of the spirit. It really is unexplanable to those without the experience. No offense meant.

I believe science has already proved it, in the Pam Reynolds surgery and other documented NDEs. So, no, I would not be changed any by scientific data. We have always had that anyway.

I will no longer try to “prove” anything to the skeptics, they are better left alone.

Love
Leroy

[Apos]

lekatt, you didn’t even come close to even addressing the quoted section. Personal experience demonstrates the reality of some experience. But it doesn’t demonstrate the correct interpretation of an experience. I’ve had many personal experiences that it turned out I had misinterpreted. Again: even if Edward thinks he’s talking to the dead, why couldn’t the other explanations work just as well, without him even realizing it (especially since it’s all apparently so hazy)? How can you argue EVEN FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE that something else supernatural or unknown is going on that is beyond even your perception?

You claim special insight. Obviously, then, you acknowledge that a person may be lacking a key insight allowing them to see a deeper truth. But why reserve that failing only for skeptics? Why not apply it to yourself? What if there is an experience YOU are missing WITHIN your NDE experiences that reveals a much different truth that you were not ever aware of before, just as you think that WE are missing an experience that would reveal the truth of NDE to US? If you scold us for ruling such things out for lack of evidence, how can you not scold yourself for ruling the same things out in the case of your NDE reality?

—I believe science has already proved it, in the Pam Reynolds surgery and other documented NDEs. So, no, I would not be changed any by scientific data. We have always had that anyway.—

You missed the point. Not data proving THAT it happens. But scientific data showiung HOW it happens.

[lekatt]

*Originally posted by Apos *
**lekatt, you didn’t even come close to even addressing the quoted section. Personal experience demonstrates the reality of some experience. But it doesn’t demonstrate the correct interpretation of an experience. I’ve had many personal experiences that it turned out I had misinterpreted. Again: even if Edward thinks he’s talking to the dead, why couldn’t the other explanations work just as well, without him even realizing it (especially since it’s all apparently so hazy)? How can you argue EVEN FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE that something else supernatural or unknown is going on that is beyond even your perception?

You claim special insight. Obviously, then, you acknowledge that a person may be lacking a key insight allowing them to see a deeper truth. But why reserve that failing only for skeptics? Why not apply it to yourself? What if there is an experience YOU are missing WITHIN your NDE experiences that reveals a much different truth that you were not ever aware of before, just as you think that WE are missing an experience that would reveal the truth of NDE to US? If you scold us for ruling such things out for lack of evidence, how can you not scold yourself for ruling the same things out in the case of your NDE reality?

—I believe science has already proved it, in the Pam Reynolds surgery and other documented NDEs. So, no, I would not be changed any by scientific data. We have always had that anyway.—

You missed the point. Not data proving THAT it happens. But scientific data showiung HOW it happens. **

The spiritual realm is not beyond mine or psychics perception. Actually it is not beyond anyone’s perception.
As for other, alternate explanations, I don’t know about others, but I have worked through that years ago.

The insight is not special, everyone has psychic ability. I know of no test for psychic ability done with cards or computers or whatever that didn’t show positive results. It is not a gift, it is a skill that can be learned by anyone determined enough.

As for the science data, I think we need to prove the “that it happens” before we start to analyze “how” it happens.

Love
Leroy

[BMalion]

*Originally posted by lekatt *
[B everyone has psychic ability. **

I’m not psychic now, but I know I will be in the future.

[Apos]

—The spiritual realm is not beyond mine or psychics perception. Actually it is not beyond anyone’s perception.
As for other, alternate explanations, I don’t know about others, but I have worked through that years ago.—

In other words, you are willing to criticize us for something you refuse to apply to yourself? I understand that you think you percieve a spiritual realm. However, just as I don’t percieve it, could it be that YOU don’t percieve something crucial to understanding what your spiritual realm is?

When you say that you have “worked through that years ago,” can you explain HOW you eliminated ALL other possibilities (even those that you didn’t even happen to think of?) I mean, in science, the true explanation for a phenomena is often something that no one ever even thought to consider before someone finally hit on it and tested it. How can you be certain of your interpretation when you HAVEN’T ruled out everything that’s AT LEAST as divorced from ordinary reality as is a spiritual realm?

For instance, what if losing oxygen sometimes caused the brain, upon awakening, to suddenly and briefly be able to interpret the eletrical impulses of other people’s minds, hence reading them and experiencing their recollections, out of which one’s own recovering brain would coherently interperet as a convincing and perfectly accurate dream? Implausible? Why is it any less plausible than positing an entire spiritual reality? And how can it be ruled out?

—As for the science data, I think we need to prove the “that it happens” before we start to analyze “how” it happens.—

But that’s the point: you’ve ALREADY made conclusions about HOW it happens (via the existence of a spirit world which you can move around in and contains real intelligent beings that communicate things to you), despite providing no evidence that you know how it happens IN YOUR NDE REALITY any better than I know how it is that sound doesn’t ripple in air like it ripples on the surface of in water in my ordinary reality.

(aside: it is an interesting puzzle I still don’t understand: why don’t we hear sounds as ever diminishing echoes, the way that a rock in a pond causes ever diminishing ripples? It has something to do with the air having an odd number of spatial dimensions and hence different wave cancelization properties… but I don’t grasp it yet)

—The insight is not special, everyone has psychic ability. I know of no test for psychic ability done with cards or computers or whatever that didn’t show positive results. It is not a gift, it is a skill that can be learned by anyone determined enough.—

I’ve heard these claims, and I’ve even SEEN people making these claims and thinking that the evidence they are showing me proves them true. But all I’ve ever seen is people mislead by a faulty understanding of statistics: for instance that extremes on a distribution of trials (say, any results outside the 5% confidence level) prove that people are doing better than chance.

[photopat]

*Originally posted by lekatt *
I will no longer try to “prove” anything to the skeptics, they are better left alone.

The problem here is that you haven’t proven anything yet. You’ve offered links to websites that have already been discredited, and you continue to assume that anecdotes constitute proof. A few people on TV say they “never believed in psychics until now” after watching a stage magician do not constitute evidence. You say there’s never been a test that didn’t prove psychic ability. Never? Cite please? Try please, just try to find a site that is actually impartial. I guarantee that the most you will be able to find are sites that indicate that test data was inconclusive.

You continue to criticize skeptics for being “closed minded,” yet you say yourself that you made up your mind a long time ago and no data will change it. What do you call that?

A “long time ago” I used to by into all the paranormal stuff, including Bigfoot , Yeti and Nessie, but then I read (and not incidentally got past puberty) and started to question things. I don’t claim to know everything about the world by a long shot, and I will admit there may be things out there that seem to defy explanation, but I also believe that ultimately they will be explained. Who’s to say there aren’t undiscovered primates or even hominids in the Himalays? Maybe there’s one hell of a big carp in Loch Ness. I would love to see an extraterrestrial starship land. Psychic ability, if it’s ever proven, will be an amazing thing. So far, there’s no verifiable, repeatable evidence it even exists. I don’t insist it’s impossible, but so far the evidence is against it.

Believe what you want, but understand that you may not truly know.

[GOM]

*Originally posted by David B *
**GOM said:

Yeah, and there is some water in the ocean… **

There are also some fraudulent doctors…

Yet you don’t dismiss all doctors as frauds.

[stpauler]

*Originally posted by GOM *
**

There are also some fraudulent doctors…

Yet you don’t dismiss all doctors as frauds. **

:rolleyes:

I’ll just wait for a psychic to be proven not to be a fraud.

[GOM]

*Originally posted by RedFury *
**Besides the fact that that takes us back to square one, what do you mean by “dangerous”? If it’s as in “ripping people off” I’d agree. And wouldn’t you agree that the people they rip off are the ones that already believe in the “spiritual world”?

**

Loss of funds is sad, especially if it’s a large amount, but rarely dangerous.

Dangerous means opening yourself up to infection/oppression/possession from the spirit world. Some people do it by using a ouija board, then learn to strongly regret it. Although remote viewing people apparently all reject the connection to the occult, I conclude that a person like Ed Dames has been deceived into thinking he has some type of psychic powers.

I expect this type of deception to continue to grow.

[stpauler]

*Originally posted by GOM *
**Loss of funds is sad, especially if it’s a large amount, but rarely dangerous.

Dangerous means opening yourself up to infection/oppression/possession from the spirit world. Some people do it by using a ouija board, then learn to strongly regret it. Although remote viewing people apparently all reject the connection to the occult, I conclude that a person like Ed Dames has been deceived into thinking he has some type of psychic powers.

I expect this type of deception to continue to grow. **

The most dangerous thing is to have a person walking around with other people thinking "I wonder how many licks it would take…?"Believing in psychics is sad enough, thinking that a Milton Bradley game is going to corrupt you, well, hand me the tissues. (I don’t know if they’re tears of sadness or laughter at this point.)

[GOM]

*Originally posted by Meatros *
**I was referring to this:
“Do you believe Joe was awarded the Legion of Merit merely for allowing himself to be tested?” **

Please pardon my stupidity…

Where do you see a conspiracy? Do you believe Joe is not a real person? Do you believe Joe lied about his Legion of Merit? I’m completely missing your point.

I would like to try to answer you, but I’m gonna need a roadmap to exactly where you see any conspiracy.

Thanks.

[Azael]

**
I’ll just wait for a psychic to be proven not to be a fraud.

**

Don’t hold your breath.

[GOM]

*Originally posted by stpauler *
**The most dangerous thing is to have a person walking around with other people thinking "I wonder how many licks it would take…?"Believing in psychics is sad enough, thinking that a Milton Bradley game is going to corrupt you, well, hand me the tissues. (I don’t know if they’re tears of sadness or laughter at this point.) **

Indeed…

Glad I could humor you.

Apparently I haven’t been clear. I don’t believe in psychics. I believe they are being deceived.

I take it you have never researched the types of things that have happened to people who play with fire. The ouija board is only one way of opening a spiritual door that you cannot easily close. Some people have been so frightened by an experience with a ouija board that they will not even talk about it.

If you’ve never messed around with one. Good. Learn from the mistakes of others.

[Azael]

**
Loss of funds is sad, especially if it’s a large amount, but rarely dangerous.

Dangerous means opening yourself up to infection/oppression/possession from the spirit world. Some people do it by using a ouija board, then learn to strongly regret it. Although remote viewing people apparently all reject the connection to the occult, I conclude that a person like Ed Dames has been deceived into thinking he has some type of psychic powers.

I expect this type of deception to continue to grow.

**

The world is a pretty scary place when you have been conditioned to see the devil everywhere. It’s disgusting how this attitude can work to give some kind of occult legitimacy to a con.

[GOM]

*Originally posted by BMalion *
**I’m not psychic now, but I know I will be in the future. **

hahaha

I KNEW you were going to say that!!!

nostroGOMus