Are mediums a hoax??

karynp

When you book an appointment for a reading they dont ask for your full name or your address so I cant accept that they check you out that way,yes,their are cons out there,bad at what they do,BUT on the other hand,there are also very good mediums out there.

karynp

monkeyfudge wrote:

Here it is:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054883158

Personally I'd consider anyone charging for such a service to be dubious whether they are genuine or not.

Well, how do you expect them to live then? Also, theres a thing called exchanging of energies ,creating a balance. God didnt put us here to suffer my friend,if this service is given full time,then a reasonable charge is not an issue for the majority of folk. I respect your opinion but i also ask do you get paid for your work?

karynp

KatieK wrote:

Yes or no answers, with no other information offered, helps stop cold reading, or at least makes it more difficult. Readers going from the vague to the specific (Im seeing a person... a woman...yes...a mother?....no? a granny... eh... an aunt...? etc) are probably not doing so well. A good reader, even if they give the information bit by bit, should be bang on, and not backtrack or make the info 'fit'.

A good medium does not want you to fill in the details,just yes or no if you can or cant accept or understand what they are talking about,as other spirits can come to them during a reading that may not be for you,its best to be honest in your replies without giving the whole story away.

karynp

tuxy wrote:

the thing is you can show evidence to prove a medium is fake.
how could you prove one is real?

A real medium should give you evidence from spirit world from the person they are dealing with. If they cannot give you ANYTHING you understand then they most likely are fake.

karynp

Not everyone who sees a medium does so outve grief ,some just go to see what they have to say, Im wondering has everyone here whos thrown in a negative response been to see one??
If not...........then wheres your argument?

mossieh wrote:

Has there ever been a single documented scientific study of a medium at work that proved that was happening was real and not cold reading or invention? Just one uncontrovertible example?

Occams razor: all things being equal, the simplest explanation is probably the correct one. The simplest explanation for this phenomenon is cold reading.

If people take comfort from it, well and good but for a medium to charge money for this 'service' is taking advantage of the bereaved in my opinion. True comfort and sympathy for a bereaved person should not cost money.

mossieh

karynp wrote:

Not everyone who sees a medium does so outve grief ,some just go to see what they have to say,

No doubt, but many people who do resort to them are bereaved and open to manipulation, this is the bedrock of the profession.

karynp wrote:

Im wondering has everyone here whos thrown in a negative response been to see one??
If not...........then wheres your argument?

Why would someone who believes it's all cynical trickery participate in it? And why would that invalidate my argument? Does the fact that I don't believe in the tooth fairy disqualify me from talking about her/him/it?

I sometimes wonder how, in this relatively enlightened age we live in, with so much information at our fingertips, conmen continue to thrive. I guess as long as a subset of society are happy to operate with their analytical and critical faculties smothered in wishful thinking, they always will.

6th

mossieh wrote:

Which leads back to my first question:
Has there ever been a single documented scientific study of a medium at work that proved that what was happening was real and not cold reading or invention? Just one uncontrovertible example?

To my knowledge, NO. Also there has never been a single documented scientific study of God at work and yet millions of people worldwide not only believe in him (or her etc) but many devote their life to him and his churches.

The role of mediums in peoples lives tends to be minimal in the vast majority of cases. The Catholic Church (for example) asks that its teaching be the guiding light in peoples lives, they also take in alot more public money than mediums as a whole I'm sure.

People turn to mediums and psychics because they believe that these people can give them insight. I am sure i could get a list of a hundred people who will say that a reader has given them information they believe was acquired by 'paranormal means'. Its a belief, and people are intitled to that whether others agree with it or not.

Part of my point is that many people will challenge the belief in paranormal phenomenon as they are relatively easy pickings. God on the other hand tends not to get questioned as much (imo) here on Boards and in alot of places because its a battle that can not be won.

Now I am not the best person to have a debate with over these things because I am not out to convince anyone. I dont believe either side should push their opinions down the other teams throat. I am skeptical myself, where is not for my own experiences I would be as challenging as the yourself.

In the past I have opened up trips and events I have arranged to anyone, giving believers and non-believers the opportunity to possibly experiences paranormal phenomenon for themselves.

Are Mediums a hoax? As stevenmu said above "Certainly some are, and certainly some are not, or at least some genuinely believe in what they are doing." Again its about belief as as I've said before - a hoax is all about the intention to deceive.

6th

mossieh wrote:

Why would someone who *believes it's all cynical trickery participate in it?

For me I would say because I could only accept or respect an informed opinion.

Surely you can see that coming to a judgement without looking at or experiencing all the possiblities could be seen as ignorant and unscientific?

*Again belief comes into it. You have your beliefs based on your experiences, or lack there of, just as anyone else has theirs?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

karynp wrote:

Well, . God didnt put us here to suffer my friend

talked to him, have you?

God on the other hand tends not to get questioned as much (imo) here on Boards and in alot of places because its a battle that can not be won.

ummm..

do you read much of boards at all? I only ask because that is certainly not the impression of peoples attitudes to god that I've gleamed from my time here..

6th

karynp wrote:

Im wondering has everyone here whos thrown in a negative response been to see one?

Well I can say plenty negative about some mediums but I think the fairest way to judge is on a case by case basis.

Sylvia Brown (who I personally believe is a hack) is a psychic & medium who for many years has been held in very high regard by alot of people. Skeptics have always questioned (some would say hounded) her and her claims. Recently (I must find the thread and link to it) she was outed on a very big case for being unethical, uncaring & just plain WRONG ... not a little bit wrong but truck loads of it!

She was hugely popular and was/is very in demand. If she can get to that stage in her career by whatever means she did why should people be expected to in the abilities of people like her? Personally I think its wrong to claim all are bogus based on the likes of Sylvia Brown but people have every reason to be suspicious and skeptical - cynical is another matter.

Best to judge on a case by cases basis and personal experiences where possible.

6th

Mordeth wrote:

do you read much of boards at all?

More than I should I would imagine.

Mordeth wrote:

I only ask because that is certainly not the impression of peoples attitudes to god that I've gleamed from my time here..

I'm sure the religious forums get there fair share of trolls, cynics etc but Paranormal does seem to be one that people regularily feel is easy pickings. Just my opinion of course.

mossieh

6th wrote:

For me I would say because I could only accept or respect an informed opinion.

Surely you can see that coming to a judgement without looking at or experiencing all the possiblities could be seen as ignorant and unscientific?

*Again belief comes into it. You have your beliefs based on your experiences, or lack there of, just as anyone else has theirs?

There is a fundamental difference between a belief based on empirical and reasoned analysis and one based on wishful thinking or lazy-mindedness.

Those who buy into fanciful and utterly illogical explanations for situations they don't understand are quick to accuse those who don't of being close-minded, but the great breakthroughs in human development have been made by scientists, not magicians. Automatically accepting the fantastic explanation over the mundane is how we operated as a society in the dark ages. Imagination is required to make breakthroughs in our knowledge of how the universe works but without a sound basis of logic and common sense, all you're left with is cloud talk and alchemy.

It irritates me, frankly, to hear obviously intelligent people devote so much time to what logic tells me is nonsense. The real, bricks and mortar world we live in is more amazing and exciting than we can yet fathom, it doesn't need to be embellished with angels and bogeymen.

Put down the your necronomicon/bible/koran and pick up A Brief History of Time. And stop wasting yours, life is too short.

6th

I cant (or rather wont) argue with you on this for a few reasons:

1) As I said I am not out to convince or convert anyone.

2) I have yet to have a decent explaination put forward for why, on a regular basis, I have not only seen but interacted with energies (in the paranormal understanding of the word) that could be concidered ghosts, spirits, entities. Its not like I have any medical or mental problem that would cause these happenings - at least I have never been suspected of or tested for any. I am a normal guy with a normal life. Married to the woman of my dreams, a beautiful daughter, a son on the way, a job I enjoy, interests outside of the paranormal area - there is no reason for me to desperately cling to illusions or fanciful notions.

and finally

3) Your agressive tone and choice of language is both offensive and patronizing. Of course I understnad that its born out of frustration, and not malice, which is why I choose not to report it.

I do completely agree that there are undoubtably people who turn to the paranormal and spiritual because their lives might lack excitement or are pushed towards it due to grief. Anyone who thinks this is not the case is fooling themselves. I have refused to talk to some people who have contacted me because I believed they were asking questions for the wrong reasons. I've had PMs from more than one Buffy fan who was out for the trendy factor

6th

mossieh wrote:

Put down the your necronomicon/bible/koran and pick up A Brief History of Time.

I've read none of those books, I live my life mostly *through my experiences of the world, not other peoples.

*Edited because I cant spell after properly midnight.

6th

mossieh wrote:

The real, bricks and mortar world we live in is more amazing and exciting than we can yet fathom, it doesn't need to be embellished with angels and bogeymen.

For most people life is about love. Now I could be wrong but can science say its truely and absolutely understands why we choose to love some people and not others?

I am not talking about the basic urge to continue the species, I understand that there are chemicals at play when it comes to lust etc and that men (for example) might be predisposed to going for a woman who will bare them children ... I get all that. But can science tell me why, lets say, a man or woman would continue to love their partner even in cases where it is know that one or the other can not have offspring? Or why I myself would be willing to lay down my life for my wife, children and possible any other human beings, if put in the position?

mossieh, is there not an illogical side to you that loves or has loved someone so much that you would do things which make no sense? And in the face of such love is the important thing to discover why it is you love them or it it to simple love them?

Are we at a stage in science and life where we can say that the impossible and fantasical of today is not part of the "bricks and mortar" or tomorrow? Is it not possible that (for example) an element of the human "spirit" could transend death and exist on a plane that is currently outside of our understanding and yet some have the ability to experience it at some level?

Aisling&M

Mossieh, does it really have to be a case or one OR the other, regarding Science V's the Paranormal?
In my view as someone who believes in and uses spiritualism most days in my life I've come to accept that is is just as much a part of my make-up physiologically, psychologically, and spiritually. Being able to perceive spirits etc does not come from a sparkly cloud above my head. It comes from me, my atoms, my energy and my sould.........science and spirit go hand in hand in my life and perhaps your anger wouldn't be so strong if you stopped to consider that these experiences that some have and you have not can be attributed in both aspects.

Before it was discovered that the chair you are sitting on contained a many micro-universes of atoms and molecules would you have accepted the possibility? Similarly I do believe that we will discover the scientific source and effect of paranormal phenomenon as we have discovered many other wonderful occurences, like space travel, mobile telephones, x-ray machines..........all of which 1000 years ago would have been laughable subjects.

Good luck with your searchings.

mossieh

6th wrote:

Your agressive tone and choice of language is both offensive and patronizing. Of course I understnad that its born out of frustration, and not malice, which is why I choose not to report it.

I apologise for that, you assessed it accurately.

6th wrote:

mossieh, is there not an illogical side to you that loves or has loved someone so much that you would do things which make no sense? And in the face of such love is the important thing to discover why it is you love them or it it to simple love them?

Yes there is however I think it is not beyond analysis. The reproductive urge operates on a very deep level in the conciousness of an animal and will tend to override reason even in an animal capable of rational thought. It might not sound particularly romantic but there you go. There are also plenty of theories as to why altruistic behaviour may have benefits in terms of natural selection.

6th wrote:

Are we at a stage in science and life where we can say that the impossible and fantasical of today is not part of the "bricks and mortar" or tomorrow? Is it not possible that (for example) an element of the human "spirit" could transend death and exist on a plane that is currently outside of our understanding and yet some have the ability to experience it at some level?

To the first question i would say yes, what is imagined today may be real tomorrow, but if I was looking for concrete examples of that in culture and literature I think Asimov or Clarke or Hawking would be a better bet than Terry Pratchett or Mystic Meg.

To the latter question, I would also say a VERY cautious yes as the empirical evidence is not there, but at this stage of our development we can't expect to know and understand everything.

Our justice system is based on the premise that you are innocent until proven guilty. This is a sound principle. I think it should be applied in the paranormal/spiritual/religious field too, i.e. false until proven true. Unfortunately, (from my point of view) the opposite seems to be the case for many who post here.

6th

mossieh wrote:

The reproductive urge operates on a very deep level in the conciousness of an animal and will tend to override reason even in an animal capable of rational thought. It might not sound particularly romantic but there you go. There are also plenty of theories as to why altruistic behaviour may have benefits in terms of natural selection.

But my point of why some people love and spend their lifes with someone who can not have children (infertility, same sex relationships etc) are not covered by the "continuation of the species" urges.

My point is only that one of the most important factors in how people lives their lives is one that "can" defy logic.

Aisling&M

Just one more quick thought from me to counteract your statement that it was ONLY scientists who discovered the major breakthroughs in history. Well of course, they are the ones equipped with the brainpower to prove what I'm sure a lot of spiritual people and those with a great insight imagined long before.

Also, from your observations of Science, i thought you might like to consider that the ability some have to foresee the future or see spirits is something biological and rational, but as yet unexplained. Almost every person can do simple mathematics in day to day living yet very few are gifted to understand the theories and equations of complex equations.
so too I believe everyone has an 'instinctual' ability they use daily and then a few are able to have this amplified into an ability to see what most cannot.
This applies to any talent/trait......art, music, language........

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Almost every person can do simple mathematics in day to day living yet very few are gifted to understand the theories and equations of complex equations.

yes, because most people are taught how to do simple sums and math, whereas most people wuss out of mathematics before it gets to the good stuff. that is entirely to do with teaching, nothing to do with natural ability. People with natural abilities for maths are very different from the rest of us.

art and music are fine examples of what you were talking about, but language is again something that is learned. If we didn't have people talking at us all the time as we were children, we wouldn't be able to speak or understand anything. Google for feral children and have a look at the proper, natural state of humanity.

mossieh

6th wrote:

But my point of why some people love and spend their lifes with someone who can not have children (infertility, same sex relationships etc) are not covered by the "continuation of the species" urges.

My point is only that one of the most important factors in how people lives their lives is one that "can" defy logic.

I don't think it defies logic though, the reproductive imperative is manifested both as an urge to mate and an urge to bond emotionally with the chosen mate as a means(on an animal level) to ensure a, that you can mate again and b, to prevent your mate procreating with another. The urge itself is blind to whom you choose based on your personal taste or sexual preference. Two gay men having sex are fulfilling the animal need to mate regardless of the fact that offspring will not ensue.

I don't think that the lack of some magical force at play in human relationships makes them any less wonderful for the people concerned.

I think there is a valid point to be found in what you are saying though, in that it is a desire for romance in their worlds that is part of the attraction to the paranormal/arcane beliefs that some people hold.

Nevyn

Irish Skeptics forum.

mossieh

Aisling&M wrote:

Just one more quick thought from me to counteract your statement that it was ONLY scientists who discovered the major breakthroughs in history. Well of course, they are the ones equipped with the brainpower to prove what I'm sure a lot of spiritual people and those with a great insight imagined long before.

With respect Aisling, how does that counteract what I said? You are sure that 'a lot of spiritual people' imagined these breakthroughs long before the scientists? Who are these people? And what did the scientists do? How did they make those breakthroughs without imagination and great insight? Why didn't the 'spiritual' people make the breakthroughs?

Aisling&M wrote:

Also, from your observations of Science, i thought you might like to consider that the ability some have to foresee the future or see spirits is something biological and rational, but as yet unexplained.

You see, I've never heard of a single person who could definitively see the future or spirits in any proveable way. All you ever get are anecdotes. Anecdotes are pretty easy to invent.

Aisling&M wrote:

Almost every person can do simple mathematics in day to day living yet very few are gifted to understand the theories and equations of complex equations.

ok.

Aisling&M wrote:

so too I believe everyone has an 'instinctual' ability they use daily and then a few are able to have this amplified into an ability to see what most cannot.
This applies to any talent/trait......art, music, language........

The talents you've listed, art/music/language are all highly visible, documented and proveable talents. Characteristics that are not shared by so-called psychic abilities.

mossieh

Thaedydal wrote:

Irish Skeptics forum.

Do you want me to leave Thaedydal? If I'm not welcome I will be happy to.

Nevyn

This isn't my forum and I was trying to be helpful and just letting you know that
the forum exsists and you may get a differnt angle and prespective there.

I do have a question for you;

Do you believe that meduimship is possible ?

6th

mossieh wrote:

You see, I've never heard of a single person who could definitively see the future or spirits in any proveable way. All you ever get are anecdotes. Anecdotes are pretty easy to invent.

Aisling, mossieh is absolutely right on this point, 100%. Despite all my personal experiences there is absolutely no reason why I couldn't have made them up?

mossieh, thaedydal is merely pointing out that because of the nature of this forum and its charter that the direction this thread is going in is best suited to the skeptics forum - and she is right in that.

Paranormal experiences are, for the most part, personal and subjective. To state anything else is (imo) wrong.

I do think however that science needs to loook at the phenomenon closely if they want to understand them more or discover what is exactly going on.

On my blog I recently posted an article stated According to noted Skeptic Dr. Richard Wiseman, collaboration with Paranormal Researchers is badly needed.

mossieh

Thaedydal wrote:

This isn't my forum and I was trying to be helpful and just letting you know that
the forum exsists and you may get a differnt angle and prespective there.

I do have a question for you;

Do you believe that meduimship is possible ?

I don't know whether or not it's possible, but based on the complete lack of verifiable evidence I very much doubt it. I that that the most vocal exponents of the 'art' are charlatans and manipulators. I think that some who claim to be mediums or psychics truly believe that they are, but that doesn't mean that they are correct and is more likely to be wishful thinking on their part.

Aisling&M

okay okay, I'm sucked in! I love a good debate.
And I rescind my use of the word counterract......not the right choice.

Are you saying that you will only believe something once a scientist has documentation to show it's existence?

If that is the case, fair enough.

But scientists have in the past and currently find themselves at odds with each other over many paranormal and non-paranormal issues.

How do you feel/what do you THINK about two scientists who both believe they have evidence to prove a case in two different ways?

I have not done the research to give examples but I think I'm accurate enough in saying that scientists do not always agree.....so which scientists will you believe in matters or creditting/discreditting research into the paranormal? Because if your belief system is based firmly in analytical research it should be based entirely on an unfaltering system. I do not believe scientists are 100% accurate or correct in collecting data and analysing it and arriving at a decision 100% of the time.

(I do wish to say here that I have a lot of respect for Scientific research and scientists at large, just addressing their limitations and their fallibility).

And if I was honest, I would not be easily swayed into believe in the paranormal had I not experienced it myself so I can understand where you come from.

Nevyn

There are many things that can be quantified and measured and many thing that can not and they still do effect people everyday.

IF you picked apart the universe or a person sciencifically I doubt you would fine one atom of hope, love, dispair, heartache, empathy, angery, jealsousy ect.

Science is limited by how it define it's self and the rest of the universe.
and it is not like sience was never wrong.
Atoms used to be the smallest thing and then they got better instruments and slpit one open and then the elctron was the smallest thing and opps no it is quarks.

6th

Aisling&M wrote:

How do you feel/what do you THINK about two scientists who both believe they have evidence to prove a case in two different ways?

....so which scientists will you believe in matters or creditting/discreditting research into the paranormal?

In fairness this is impossible to answer without examples.

Many believers say they have no need in science to confirm their beliefs but my god they can jump on the bandwagon as soon as a sniff of confirmation comes along.