Found another good link.
How can I make this any more clear? You are the one who is accusing others of fradulent behavior, in that you claim “cold reading” does not exist, despite what the people who practice it say.
Would someone else share an opinion here? If I’m being unclear or inconsistent, please help me to improve my ability to communicate. Thanks.
OK - for starters, I should spell “fradulent” correctly.
One of the oldest tricks in the world is to tell people not to believe in their personal experience, but believe in what they are being told by “whoever.” Any dictator worthy of mass murder knows that, it is a method of manipulation and control.
Like: “Pay no attention to the man behind the wall, only listen to the Great and Wonderful Oz.”
No matter who or how many times I am told, I will stick with my personal experiences, it is actually all I have. If they prove not to be correct on occassion, then I will sooner or later find that out and make adjustments. I have been doing it all my life and it has served me well.
I believe my personal experiences.
Love
Leroy
You will not find in any of my posts where I called anyone fradulent. If you are going to quote me, please do so accurately.
Love
Leroy
Correct me then, please. Have you asserted that “cold reading” does not exist? If you have, would it not follow that those who claim they use the technique of “cold reading” are not telling the truth?
You did not say this on January 15th?
Or this on January 16th?
Or this January 22nd?
Or this January 24th?
January 25th:
Again on the 25th:
I trust I’ve quoted you accurately.
-
Now that’s puzzling to me. Why do you accept God as a spiritual being, but no others?
-
I think that statement is probably valid for the vast majority of us. Perhaps you should be thankful for that. Many times in the Bible when an angel shows up it is a frightening experience for the people involved.
NO, you did not quote me accurately, I said I had called no one fradulent, you showed nothing that I did. I am tired of your constant twisting and changing words to suit what you think. I will no longer answer your posts.
That’s the post you answered. Wake up.
To that last post I have to say: 
I have followed this whole thread for a long time, and I have to say lekatt that you are evading the basic issue: others have had experiences that showed that cold reading does exist, I think Papermache Prince and other skeptics are right.
Lekat,
What’s the difference between calling someone who claims to do cold readings fraudulent and saying that the cold reading don’t exist? Are you using the word fraudulent somehow differently?
Those seem to be exact, direct quotes from you. In what ways are they inaccurate?
You, sir, are a liar. You have made an false accusation. I have quoted you accurately. I have identified when you made those statements. I invite anyone else to check the original quotes, verify if I have changed them in anyway. Show me one quote where I have “changed words.” Show me where I have “twisted your words.”
This seems to me a logical inference from your previous statements. Perhaps you can clarify that for SimonX, and I’ll read your answer, as you are no longer answering my posts.
quote:
Originally posted by SimonX
What’s the difference between calling someone who claims to do cold readings fraudulent and saying that the cold reading don’t exist?
A great deal, in one you are attacking the person and in the other the idea. It is ok to attack ideas in debate, but never ok to attack the person presenting them. Do you get it now!
Cold reading do not exist for psychics, only for skeptics.
Do you think that people who claim to be doing cold readings are using some method other than cold reading?
That would be beyond my knowledge, you need to ask them.
what you think is beyind your knowledge?
I never would have thought to ask a magician what the thoughts of Lekatt were.
I figured that you would be one of the very best primary sources for your thoughts.
Maybe you just didn’t understand the question. Pleas re-read it carefully and try to answer it.
Do you think that people who claim to be doing cold readings are using some method other than cold reading?
I would like to apologize to Leroy of calling him a liar. That behavior was beyond the acceptable standards in Great Debates and I regret it.
Wait… So, you know they aren’t using cold reading, but you don’t know if they’re using some other method to get the information? The two statements do not fit. Either they are using cold reading, or they are using another method. If you say they are not using cold reading, you are saying that they are using a method other than cold reading, even if you don’t know what method that is.
Basic logic, leroy…
Wait… So, you know they aren’t using cold reading, but you don’t know if they’re using some other method to get the information? The two statements do not fit. Either they are using cold reading, or they are using another method. If you say they are not using cold reading, you are saying that they are using a method other than cold reading, even if you don’t know what method that is.
Basic logic, leroy… **
[/QUOTE]
quote:
Originally posted by SimonX
Do you think that people who claim to be doing cold readings are using some method other than cold reading?
As usually twisting words to make brownie points.
I said that cold readings do not exist for psychics, they are a skeptical theory, now how do I know whether this person is a skeptic or what.
cold readings exist for skeptics in the same way demons exist for fundies.
Is that understandable?