Contact with the Great Beyond--Psychics like Praagh

[Truth_Seeker]

This is the funniest thing I have read in a long, long time. Y’all do realize, don’t you, that lekatt has got you guys trying to prove that there is such a thing as a fake psychic?

Lekatt is, of course, perfectly correct. Cold reading is an invention of sceptics. “Real” psychics would never resort to cold reading. I mean, they wouldn’t need to, would they?

Fake psychics do use it, naturally. But, then, there is probably no one more sceptical of psychic phenomena than a fake psychic.

[lekatt]

*Originally posted by SimonX *
**HEY LEKATT !
I have asked a very simple, straightforward question that can be answered with a very simple, straightforward “Yes” or “No”.
The question is about your thoughts, (the thoughts of you, Lekatt). The thoughts I’m asking about are the ones you have about stage magicians who make the claim that the feat they, (the stage magicians making the claim), perform is cold reading. ."

You may consider the part of the question with the words “people who claim to be doing cold readings” to mean that they are claiming that the process they are performing is a cold reading. I’m talking about stage magicians who do psychic acts and tell everyone that it, (their acts/ performances of stage magic), are done by means of the process known as cold reading.

In other words…
Do you think that people who claim to be doing cold readings are using some method other than cold reading? **

If you ask the same question, you get the same answer. I don’t recognize so-called cold readings.

I would like to have a good definition of what skeptics mean when they say cold reading. Can you give me a definition?

[GIGObuster]

*Originally posted by lekatt *
**If you ask the same question, you get the same answer. I don’t recognize so-called cold readings.

I would like to have a good definition of what skeptics mean when they say cold reading. Can you give me a definition? **

http://www.xproject.net/archives/paranormal/coldreading.html

Cold reading is not one simple trick but a number of different methods for gleaning surprisingly accurate information about someone’s personality characteristics and problems, all with ostensibly little effort. By definition this information is gathered on the spot by conversation, keen observation and a good memory. In contrast, the term ‘hot reading’ has been applied to information gathering that precedes visual and physical contact, usually through special databases, directories and other resources. Cold readers, though, do not need to rely on such sources. All that is needed is interaction with the subject. Before any interaction, though, most accomplished cold readers have as an information foundation, knowledge of probability and the common denominators of the human condition.

Probability and statistics enter the picture in ways as simple as knowing that most male names in our culture begin with the letter “J,” while most female names begin with “M.” This can be translated into "I see a woman in your life, her name begins with “M.” Another example is “I see palm trees near the water.” If the subject lives in the north and appears affluent then there is a high probability of a recent or planned tropical vacation, and the reader will be judged correct, especially if there are no temporal limitations like past or future, or perhaps the image refers to a friend of the subjects.

BTW I think it sounds illogical for you to say that you don’t recognize so-called cold readings when you really don’t now the definition.

But more disturbingly you are avoiding the question:

*Originally posted by SimonX *
**Do you think that people who claim to be doing cold readings are using some method other than cold reading? **

Or in yet another(!) set of words:
What IS the method psychics are really using, what is the way that can give us the first clue to get this phenomenon to be used by skeptics and serious researchers alike?

[GIGObuster]

Sorry, that was supossed to say:
“…don’t know the definition.”

My excuse now is that I use more time in Job-hunting than in spelling. :dubious:

[lekatt]

*Originally posted by GIGObuster *
**http://www.xproject.net/archives/paranormal/coldreading.html

BTW I think it sounds illogical for you to say that you don’t recognize so-called cold readings when you really don’t now the definition.

But more disturbingly you are avoiding the question:

Or in yet another(!) set of words:
What IS the method psychics are really using, what is the way that can give us the first clue to get this phenomenon to be used by skeptics and serious researchers alike? **

I always thought James Randi started the phrase “cold reading”, but I could be wrong.

Back on pages 16+ we were discussing the Randi definition of cold reading. Randi said on the Larry King show that the reading, Rosemary (psychic) gave to a call-in subject was a cold reading and that one could take that same reading word for word and give it to 10 other people and get the same results. She hit 100% of the statements she gave to the caller.

Now there is a giant credibility gap between Randi’s definition of cold reading and the one you can provided above.

With the Randi definition it can be done by anyone and anytime, no skill is required. We tried to come up with a suitable cold reading to test, but no one could agree on what that should be.

The definition you give is that cold reading requires a skilled cold reader. The other part of the definition was general statements and vague.

What I am looking for here is a definition of cold reading good enough to give to a research group for a controlled study. We have already established this has never been done.

The term “cold reading” is a concept, a mental construct, a theory of what psychics do when they give their readings. In order to validate that this theory exists we need to define it, and try it out under controlled conditions. Now we want to do this the skeptics way, logical and scientific. It is possible that we may not be able to define it, in that case it is invalid and false. We may be able to define it and discover it doesn’t work, and then we may find that it actually does what the skeptics say it does. We need to find out so good, honest, compassionate people will be vindicated or condemned whichever is correct.

Now one problem I see with the definition above is that if cold readings require a skilled person, how can we tell whether the person has psychic ability or not. Many people have the ability, but don’t know it. How will we know we are not just getting two psychic readings.

Love
Leroy

[GIGObuster]

*Originally posted by lekatt *
**What I am looking for here is a definition of cold reading good enough to give to a research group for a controlled study. We have already established this has never been done.

My last medical cite shows this statement of yours is not true, besides: who is the “we” that established that “this has never been done”?

[GIGObuster]

And speaking of giant credibility gaps: you quoted and posted all that and still managed to avoid answering the last question:

What IS the method psychics are really using? What is the way that can give us the first clue to get this phenomenon to be used by skeptics and serious researchers alike?

[PatriotX]

*Originally posted by lekatt *
**I don’t recognize so-called cold readings.
**

{ A simple “yes” or “no” would suffice. }
So your answer to the question-
Do you* think that people who claim to be doing cold readings** are using some method other than cold reading?
is “yes”?
If this is your answer please let me know. I’d hate to be twisting your words.
If this is not your answer please let me know. I’d hate to be twisting your words.
*Lekatt

**“people who claim to be doing cold readings” refers to stage magicians who do psychic acts and make the claim that the process they are performing is cold reading.

[PatriotX]

*Originally posted by GIGObuster *
**And speaking of giant credibility gaps: you quoted and posted all that and still managed to avoid answering the last question:

What IS the method psychics are really using? What is the way that can give us the first clue to get this phenomenon to be used by skeptics and serious researchers alike? **

GIGO My question isn’t about people who claim paranromal psychic powers. My question is about stage magicians who claim to be doing cold reading and/or “fake psychics”. If cold reading doesn’t exist what are they doing?

[Meatros]

*Originally posted by stpauler *
**Here’s a link about it “Carlos”

Hehe. **

That would be it!

Thanks stpauler!

[Meatros]

*Originally posted by SimonX *
**GIGO My question isn’t about people who claim paranromal psychic powers. My question is about stage magicians who claim to be doing cold reading and/or “fake psychics”. If cold reading doesn’t exist what are they doing? **

Maybe they are ashamed psychics?

[GIGObuster]

I think Meatros is into something!

Of course SimonX, I did not quite have the gist of your question, but bear with me, I have a reason also why also to ask my question; and this means that our amazing question evader has really TWO questions lately that he has avoided.

[lekatt]

*Originally posted by GIGObuster *
**My last medical cite shows this statement of yours is not true, besides: who is the “we” that established that “this has never been done”? **

Please show your cites, if you believe this has been done.
I have been asking for some real research into these skeptical claims all through this thread, but none have been given.

[lekatt]

*Originally posted by GIGObuster *
**And speaking of giant credibility gaps: you quoted and posted all that and still managed to avoid answering the last question:

What IS the method psychics are really using? What is the way that can give us the first clue to get this phenomenon to be used by skeptics and serious researchers alike? **

If you don’t know the method psychics are using, how in the heck do you believe you can debunk it? This points to the complete lack of knowledge skeptics have about psychics. The total lack of willingness to learn. Anyway, I posted this information at least twice in this thread and more times in other threads.

Psychics use the information they get from their inner spiritual senses to give readings.

[lekatt]

*Originally posted by Revtim *
**I apologize if this had been brought up before, I only read back a couple pages, but a recent Penn & Teller ‘Bullshit!’ episode had a man who did just that. He fooled a group with a John Edwards-type act, then admitted he used cold-reading. Lekatt, do you believe this man was actually psychic, and lying about doing cold reading? **

I don’t know what he did, I didn’t see the show, and furthermore I don’t waste my time on vulgar nonsense.

[PatriotX]

HEY! LEKATT!
Do you* think that people who claim to be doing cold readings** are using some method other than cold reading?

{ A simple “yes” or “no” will suffice. }

*Lekatt

**“people who claim to be doing cold readings” refers to stage magicians who do psychic acts and make the claim that the process they are performing is cold reading.

[GIGObuster]

*Originally posted by lekatt *
**Please show your cites, if you believe this has been done.
I have been asking for some real research into these skeptical claims all through this thread, but none have been given. **

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&dopt=r&uid=3360083

Experientia 1988 Apr 15;44(4):326-32:

The cold reading process is shown to depend initially on the Barnum effect, the tendency for people to embrace generalized personality descriptions as idiosyncratically their own. Psychological research into the Barnum effect is critically reviewed, and uses of the effect by a professional magician are described. This is followed by detailed analysis of the cold reading performances of a spirit medium.

Just the summary shows how way off the mark you are in pretending there are no studies.

Please check previous posts so as to not make yourself look inattentive.

[lekatt]

*Originally posted by GIGObuster *
**http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&dopt=r&uid=3360083

Experientia 1988 Apr 15;44(4):326-32:

Just the summary shows how way off the mark you are in pretending there are no studies.

Please check previous posts so as to not make yourself look inattentive. **

OK, you have shown a summary of research claims, but no research, as I have said before, no research has been presented to back up any claims the skeptics have made, and that is still true.

Please show research of the Barnum effect. Knowing how unique people are, I find this assumption quite silly.

I am waiting for your proof.

[lekatt]

Originally posted by SimonX *
HEY! LEKATT!
Do you think that people who claim to be doing cold readings are using some method other than cold reading?

{ A simple “yes” or “no” will suffice. }

*Lekatt

**“people who claim to be doing cold readings” refers to stage magicians who do psychic acts and make the claim that the process they are performing is cold reading. **

I don’t know what I have not experienced. How would I know what they are doing if I can’t see it and examine it. If I said I could I would become like the skeptics who know nothing about the things they are bashing.

[Meatros]

Originally posted by Revtim
[/QUOTE]

**I apologize if this had been brought up before, I only read back a couple pages, but a recent Penn & Teller ‘Bullshit!’ episode had a man who did just that. He fooled a group with a John Edwards-type act, then admitted he used cold-reading. Lekatt, do you believe this man was actually psychic, and lying about doing cold reading? **

*Originally posted by lekatt *
**I don’t know what he did, I didn’t see the show, and furthermore I don’t waste my time on vulgar nonsense. **

Why is this “Vulgar nonsense”? Are you implying that evidence is “vulgar”?