Debunking Psychic John Starkey

[Ludovic]

@Sage_Rat

Step 1: Floyd calls in to station.

It’s a man answering!

[Jackmannii]

@Acsenray

]How do I address my friend’s assertion of belief?

You really can’t convince someone who’s fallen hard for a “psychic” that they’ve been fooled, other than reminding them of the complex of techniques and trickery that such folk employ and seeing if it rings any bells. Ultimately you can’t instill critical thinking capacity into a person who is unreceptive to it. It’s like trying to teach a spaniel puppy to play Brahms.*

If I recall my conversations accurately after all these years, this friend took the position that “just because X psychic has been debunked, that says nothing about whether Y psychic as genuine paranormal abilities. If you’re alleging fraud, then you must prove it from scratch with each new psychic.”

There are those who have the drive and energy to do this. Believers won’t care, and/or they’ll just latch onto the next “true psychic”.

I’ll reiterate that I (and anyone who’s “open-minded”) would settle for the alleged psychic repeatedly demonstrating his/her abilities under controlled conditions (and not making excuses for inevitable failures).

*right now I’d settle for “Chopsticks”, or at least an end to puppy nipping. Those teeth are sharp.

[markn_1]

@Acsenray

If I recall my conversations accurately after all these years, this friend took the position that “just because X psychic has been debunked, that says nothing about whether Y psychic as genuine paranormal abilities. If you’re alleging fraud, then you must prove it from scratch with each new psychic.”

That’s actually not an unreasonable position to take. For example, if I found my accountant was embezzling from me, it wouldn’t be reasonable to conclude that all accountants are crooked. On the other hand, if I’ve tried 5 accountants and they were all crooked, and as far as I can determine based on available evidence, everyone who’s ever used an accountant has been cheated, and there seems to be no good evidence that any accountant anywhere has ever done any good for their client, then it’s time to entertain the idea that the whole profession is a sham. At that point it’s no longer necessary to “prove it from scratch” with each individual; it’s up to the accountants and their apologists to provide some “proof” that one of them is legit.

[KneadToKnow]

@Ludovic

It’s a man answering!

:golf clap:

[TPWombat]

@Zyada

I recommend “Blood Lite” with no reservations - it’s an anthology of humorous horror stories, many of which are absolute gems. “The Ungrateful Dead” works very well as a standalone story in this book.
“No Humans Involved” is also good, but is the 7th book in a series called “Women of the Underworld”, and doesn’t stand on it’s on as well as “The Ungrateful Dead” does.

Thanks, I’ve ordered Blood Lite. I see there’s 2 more anthologies in the series.