Psychics

DjP

Faith177 wrote: »

Did you not read my post?? I said a couple of times she told me several things even I didn't know. She also told me about my future with my then BF and it played out pretty much how she said including timeframes. She told me about a holiday I didn't even know was booked yet too as mentioned previously

If you are going to belittle someone for "wasting money" at least read what they put properly before going in all guns blazing.

Mine was taped btw and I took notes during it I only ever answered yes or no on the rare occasion she asked me anything.

re post #43 not quoted here

Faith – alas I don’t have faith in psychics

I’m a class 1 sceptic

BUT….

You have your reading taped

There’s no way you would lose or record over that

So…

If you link a complete unedited recording of the reading that would prove that this psychic didn’t use cold readings, you haven’t selectively remembered things, etc

Of course if you can’t/won’t put up the recording that would suggest – you might not have taped it – but felt embarrassed by the suggestions you have misremembered things… you want it to be real. Or you have listened to it again and see that it wasn’t how you remembered it to be.

But in this argument that tape is the strongest weapon, as if it is how you said, then many people will have to reconsider their views.

I’m pretty sure that you don’t have the tape, as I am sure the reading didn’t happen how you think it did [do please prove me wrong]

And the most telling thing [that ALL psychics are charlatans] is that the biggest most powerful magician’s [from all eras] have always denounced them as fakes. They have all learned the same tricks [‘mind reading’, cold reading, misdirection, etc]

The magicians [who speak out] are just annoyed at people being takin in when they are most vulnerable.

Anyway Faith I look forward to,

a) Your excuse for why the tape doesn’t exits any more
b)

Your excuse for why you can’t put it up for anyone else to hear the proof
c) You putting it up and making me look stupid and rethink my beliefs

no1catman

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

What are you talking about now?

Are you saying that all mediums work on this voluntary contribution basis? That's patently nonsense.

No, but you were implying they do - at least that was my impression, patently nonsense. I referred to Spiritualist Churches on a number of occasions - will continue to do so.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

no1catman wrote: »

No, but you were implying they do - at least that was my impression, patently nonsense. I referred to Spiritualist Churches on a number of occasions - will continue to do so.

I was implying they do? Where did you get that from? I said nothing remotely like that.

You certainly didn't refer to spiritualist churches in any post I responded to.

midnitegremlin

MarkBargain wrote: »

I think someone charging for a service which is impossible (talking to the dead or predicting the future) is where it gets a bit sticky.

But by that logic, are not all Churches, Mosques, Spiritual Organisations etc offering a "service which is impossible?"

Should holy books carry a "purely for entertainment purposes" label? See what I mean here?

Take these guys, they obviously believe strongly in what they do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM5gffz3cHs

esuhl

The only difference between a belief in psychics and in religion is that the latter has developed a significantly large cult following over a very long time.

In some religions, believers imagine they can speak to invisible beings; clairvoyants to the dead. Faith healers claim to be able to heal by magic, just like various religious figures.

It's all superstition, and not a single believer has ever been able to demonstrate any effect that their imagined invisible entities have on the real world. It doesn't matter how strongly anyone believes.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

midnitegremlin wrote: »

But by that logic, are not all Churches, Mosques, Spiritual Organisations etc offering a "service which is impossible?"

Should holy books carry a "purely for entertainment purposes" label? See what I mean here?

Take these guys, they obviously believe strongly in what they do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM5gffz3cHs

Churches and Mosques don't charge. Not directly, at any rate.
If you do make a donation, they don't make any promises to give you anything in return. So they don't need a disclaimer.

Not these days at any rate, as far as I know, although if the Catholic Church decided to revive the sale of indulgences, that would be interesting.

Malthusian

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

What I question is that the people capable of deluding themselves into such a belief are the same people capable of making a business out of it.

Of course they are. It takes a strong mind to delude yourself, albeit one badly used. There is no contradiction between someone being intelligent enough to run a business, and intelligent enough to invent a web of fantasies about spirits talking to them, and believe it, and steel their mind against any suspicion that it might not actually be true.

As I said before, the ones who believe it don't believe that they would be capable of coming up with something worth paying for EVERY time.

Well, firstly, why not? It's magic! See, you're thinking about it rationally. Haven't you noticed how angry and upset people in this thread get when you try and get them to think about something they refuse to think about? Once you stop using your brain and start deluding yourself - once you start following the process of doublethink I quoted in my last post - anything is possible. Wine may turn into blood, the spirits may talk to you, the blind may be healed, you can rape and murder and steal and God will forgive you.

But leaving that aside, even the best psychics probably have an off day. Now and again they will probably get a skeptic who deliberately resists their attempts at cold reading, or their attempts just don't come off. On those days they put it down to the spirits not talking to them. They may even give a refund in that situation, it would depend on the psychic - most would probably say there are no guarantees. You don't get a refund from the zoo if all the animals are sleeping in their shelters that day.

msallen

midnitegremlin wrote: »

Should holy books carry a "purely for entertainment purposes" label?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM5gffz3cHs

Yes.

http://imgur.com/gallery/qp4f7

MarkBargain

DjP wrote: »

The magicians [who speak out] are just annoyed at people being takin in when they are most vulnerable.

That's right, and Harry Houdini himself spent a lot of time trying to expose psychics. Paul Zenon is a good modern example, he used to do magic and psychic readings but stopped the readings when he realised the harm they can do to vulnerable people. He explains it well in this interesting talk which also goes over the history of psychics and some of the techniques used (you need to forward 1 minute into it for the talk to start): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLRi0UVMkgo

robatwork

So there I was loading the machine with a pile of washing, and this thread popped into my head.

Proof, if any more was needed, that I am psychic.

I predict that by 3pm someone would have replied requesting an "arms length" reading. I will be happy to provide.