Money making 'psychic forums'

artbaron

All psychics are either delusional or fraudulent. Not some, or most, but every single last one of them, with the vast majority of commercially active ones being the latter. Of course these psychic phone lines are the worst example of this but it's amazing how much of this mumbo jumbo goes on. I find it an absolute disgrace that it's legal to target vulnerable people and make money on the back of lies and deceit and I don't understand why the law isn't active in this area.

As an aside, not long ago I complained to Watchdog (and encouraged a number of other people to do the same) about one of their articles concerning a "psychic" who was charging £800 to fix people's "broken aura". The reason I complained was, at the end of the show Julia Bradbury stated, "Of course, there are genuine psychics..." What!? I never got an acknowledgement from the BBC, in contravention of their policy (what do I pay my licence fee for again?) but on the next show Nicky Campbell gave a half-hearted apology where he contrived to miss the point and not address the actual issue. Unbelievable, when a show allegedly dedicated to eradicating fraud actually promotes it.

And for all the people who say oh no, real psychics do exist, then do a bit of reasearch. Read the literature, research cold reading and other techniques, understand how the laws of chance work, and listen to what psychic-busters such as Derren Brown and James Randi say on the matter. The facts are there and cannot be argued with, but then again, most believers aren't interested in facts.

no1catman

Payless wrote: »

It's a bit freaky but also quite comforting to think that the dead can look out for you

But that's the point, having an accurate 'reading' (i.e. not a psychic phone line), validates the concept/idea of an 'aftelife' after physical death.
Now if you are someone who can't accept that possibility, its irrelevant what psychics may say - you'll find a way to explain it away. As happened with James Randi - he assumes that in a psychic experiement there are only two variables - the ability (or not) of the psychic and the subject. I remember a TV programme where he provided the subject, but no 'message' Spirit guided the psychic to give the 'message' to the cameraman instead! Which he accepted, because he could relate to the details given - but Randi - no he wouldn't.

no1catman

artbaron wrote: »

The facts are there and cannot be argued with, but then again, most believers aren't interested in facts.

Most unbelivers aren't also - but that's your opinion, fine.
The final proof will come, when you passover - it may then be a bit of a shock if you are not prepared for the possiblity.

no1catman

meritaten wrote: »

It is regulated - sort of - under the Fraudulent Mediums Act.
unfortunately, its rather difficult to enforce. If they did enforce it rigorously, think of all the stockbrokers they would have to arrest!!! because its so difficult to prove that someone is actually trying to decieve rather than genuinely believes that what they are telling you is the truth.
my advice - dont go anywhere near those psychic phone lines - find a reputable medium through the Spiritualist Church or word of mouth.
personally I just ask one of my twin grand-daughters - they are both psychic!

Well said, good advice. Visit one, listen to the 'messages' given - sure some may be of a general nature, but others will be more personal and specific. Who knows you may get a message youself, maybe a grandfather, or someone who you were in school with. Generally such messages go to those who need it the most.

artbaron

no1catman wrote: »

Most unbelivers aren't also - but that's your opinion, fine

It's my opinion based on 25 years of research, which pretty much ties it up for me. I started out a believer and ended up believing that it's all woo-woo, nonsense, lies and fraud. I can't be 100% certain that this is the correct conclusion but I'm as certain as I possibly can be.

chomsky_2

With respect no1catman, it's fine for people to believe whatever they want, but I personally think it's wrong to profit from grieving or vulnerable people's misery.

alanrp123

:rotfl:The whole thing is a load of old cobblers, like the bible, nothing has ever been proved, and I always think with psychics, you hear w3hat you want to hear from whatever they say.
PROVE TO ME THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING!!!
All the hundreds of millions of people who have died are still dead and gone, and nobody has ever rpoved conclusively otherwise.

jaydeeuk1

Derron brown showed not long ago how easy it is to con people in to believing anything they hear from psychics.

no1catman

alanrp123 wrote: »

:rotfl:The whole thing is a load of old cobblers, like the bible, nothing has ever been proved, and I always think with psychics, you hear w3hat you want to hear from whatever they say.
PROVE TO ME THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING!!!
All the hundreds of millions of people who have died are still dead and gone, and nobody has ever rpoved conclusively otherwise.

And you don't hear what you don't want to hear, no matter what they say.
Still it can happen the other way to - I have heard of devout 'Christians' who though guided by the light, said no we staying untill the 'resurrection'.
I met a man recently, who did 'ghost rescues' (for which he doesn't charge), told me a woman in Newport who work as a nurse in a 'terminal' ward - it seems some who 'passed over' went home with her - rather then follow the 'light'. He found she had twenty-three at her home!
Years ago, it was the case that we would only know, when we died ourselves. However in more recent years, with modern medicine, people do come back from being 'dead' either from no heart, or with no brain activity. Many recall what it was like in the NDE, yet 'scientist' seem obsessed with proving that an afterlife (beyond physical/biological death) could not exist - what is they agenda!?

Mankysteve

alanrp123 wrote: »

:rotfl:The whole thing is a load of old cobblers, like the bible, nothing has ever been proved,

Well some of the bible is provable and has been though archaeological remains and such. Don't get me wrong I am a atheist, but religious are usually attempts to explain past events give meaning at time when we didn't have the tools we have today to explain nature. Those tales and stories have been moulded, changed and embellished to suite certain political and personal view points.

Just watch some Darren Brown lots of plain examples also the million dollar challenge.