i’m eager for a response from Mr. Olson.
I hope that he can shed some light on how to distinguish a genuine medium from a phony one.
Here’s a copy of the letter that I wrote.
Please email him as well.
Before anyone will believe your accusation, you will need evidence and proof of same. Please show it.
By the way, how many readings have you received from real psychics like James.
Love
Leroy
Here you go, exactly what you asked for. Start at page 1, continue to page 35, ignoring your own posts.
Hey, Lekatt, he’s talkin’ to you! 
How can I tell the difference between a fraud who has fooled me and a genuine psychic?
Wow, this has actually become a Moebius thread. We’re right back at the beginning and Lekatt…Lekatt never got past the beginning.
STAKE
Let’s hope it stays dead this time.
Simon X, nothing personal, but maybe you should start a new thread about that website instead of bringing monsters back to life. Nobody new to this board should have to slog through 35 pages to get to that new topic.
I generally like your posts and your topics, though, so please don’t take this the wrong way.
From: editor@ofspirit.com | This is spam | Add to Address Book
To: “simon moon” <simonwmoon523@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: What are the fifteen points of the test you use?
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:47:08 -0400
Sorry Simon, that is my personal test based on my own experience having over 100 readings from mediums around the world and over four years of research findings. If I revealed my fifteen points, some of them wouldn’t be relevant anymore.
Bob Olson
Editor
How would revealing aspects of his test render them irrelevant?
If it’s his personal test then there’s no way to corroborate his results. In other words, “it’s true because I say it is.”
Legal or illegal aliens?
Simon, I also sent Olson and e-mail. Here’s his response:
It’s still a personal test so there’s no way of independently corroborating his results.
This thread should be left alone. No one is going to read through all the pages to see that the skeptics could not provide any evidence or proof of their accusations about psychics. The fantasy of “cold reading” could not be shown to be effective. No controlled study or even controlled survey could be offered to support their claims. Also no proof was offered that any psychic actually used any of these fantasy “cold reading” claims by skeptics. The skeptics lost this debate soundly. If you think they didn’t then show your proof. No opinions or anedotal material, just facts.
The spirit world exists and strong evidence has been shown. Read the link below:
http://www.ndeweb.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=65&post=730#POST730
Now if you disagree with the findings of the research doctors, then please write them and tell them about it. Don’t write me.
Spirit is a reality and before long will be completely proven by controlled scientific studies.
But, of course, you are free to believe what you will.
Love
Leroy
And now, to paraphrase Lekatt for an alternate view: "This thread should be left alone. No one is going to read through all the pages to see that the believers could not provide any evidence or proof of their claims about psychics. The fantasy of “spirit communication” could not be shown to be effective. No controlled study or even controlled survey could be offered to support their claims. Also no proof was offered that any psychic actually used any of these fantasy “spirit communication” claims by believers. The skeptics won this debate soundly. If you think they didn’t then show your proof. No opinions or anedotal material, just facts.
The spirit world may exist, but no evidence has been shown. Read the link below to see how one man can be deluded:
http://www.ndeweb.com/cgi-bin/discu...ost=730#POST730
Now if you agree with the findings of the research doctors, then please write them and tell them about it.
Spirit is not proven to be a reality and may never be completely proven by controlled scientific studies.
But, of course, you are free to believe what you will."
Now, that sounds better, don’t you think?
How do you type, Leroy, with your fingers so firmly inserted in your ears?
So, is this the longest GD thread ever, or what?
Man!How the hell did I miss THIS beauty?!?
To those who are unaware BTW, James Van Pragh was THE popular psychic back in the mid-late nineties(before Edward came along) but ran into some trouble when he was busted “hot reading” someone(pumping an audience member/readee for info prior to a supposed reading and then trying to pass it off as having been divined through his psychic abilities).I believe Michael Shermer was the one who nailed him.Sylvia Browne has been busted by Randi more times than anyone can keep track of as well but when John Edward came along and reinvorgorated the whole psychic craze, Van Praagh and Browne both capitalized on this and rode his coattails.
Edward was of course caught “hot reading” himself(on an episode of Dateline) but by this time he had achieved such popularity that believers could have seen a videotape of him and Van Prague telling Miss Cleo how stupid and guillible their fans are and they still would defend him.
If no one else has already suggested it www.ian-rowlands.com/ is an excellent site of a world famous magician who literally wrote the book on cold-reading.
Also, Bill Nye(yes THAT Bill Nye) has a show coming to PBS called “Eye on Nye”.In one episode he has guest Michael SHermer(of the Skeptics Society), with less than 24 hours to prepare, pose as a half dozen different types of medium(tarot reader, psychic medium, fortune teller etc.) and read people cold who have no idea they are being read by one of skepticism’s leading proponents.He prepared for the stunt using the “How to become a psychic in 24 hours” guidelines from Rowlands’ * The Full Facts About Cold-Reading* book and also drew from his experience appearing as “vedic psycic guru”, “Sri Leachem Remrash” on radio call in shows where the people calling in were in unanimours agreement that he was the most accurate adn legitimate psychic out there(until he reveals who he really is of course).
Godless, the link didn’t work. This one should.
Of course, Lekatt will claim none of what you’ve talked about actually happened, or was all part of the “hateful skeptical conspiracy.”
Oops!Put a “-” in between Ian and Rowland and pluralised his name for some unfathomable reason.Thanks for the correction.
This one’s gonna need a little stake sauce.
Or some garlic.
Or a silver bullet.
Or all three…