Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

3 part Derren Brown Series, Monday C4

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    maccored wrote: »
    i'd say 'hate' is too strong a word. Maybe 'a bit pissed off derren has gone for easy to slag off stuff rather than something substantial' would fit better. Its not about the paranormal - its about general public entertainment.

    What would be something substantial? Mediums/psychics, ghost hunters and faith healers are the most commonly known "paranormal" things. It makes sense to do episodes on them. Not really Derren Browns fault that these things are incredibly easy to slag off and discredit. What "paranormal" subjects could he have done shows on that wouldn't be easy to slag off? Alien abduction, water devining, crystal healing......? Something tells me things wouldn't have went too differently.


  • Options
    #33
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    something about how people see and hear things (emf, infrasound etc) causes for EVPs etc - you know, things actually related to the paranormal and not the standard 'lets slag off a medium' and this man sees orbs and thinks they're ghosts type stuff.

    I hold derren brown in high regard and thats the level I was expecting him to come at this from. Instead its all about proving that mediums mightnt all be the real deal (wow, thats new), mind readers can be con men (who would have thought) and (no doubt) that ghost hunters think orbs are spirits - though I cant comment on tonights show as Im not psychic. Basic, entry level stuff on the paranormal more suited to the pages of the Sun than a C4 series.


  • Options
    #34
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    strobe wrote: »
    Alien abduction, water devining, crystal healing......? Something tells me things wouldn't have went too differently.

    Ifs thats your definition of the paranormal then you have a completely different idea of it than me.


  • Options
    #35
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    maccored wrote: »
    something about how people see and hear things (emf, infrasound etc) causes for EVPs etc - you know, things actually related to the paranormal and not the standard 'lets slag off a medium' and this man sees orbs and thinks they're ghosts type stuff.

    I hold derren brown in high regard and thats the level I was expecting him to come at this from. Instead its all about proving that mediums mightnt all be the real deal (wow, thats new), mind readers can be con men (who would have thought) and (no doubt) that ghost hunters think orbs are spirits - though I cant comment on tonights show as Im not psychic. Basic, entry level stuff on the paranormal more suited to the pages of the Sun than a C4 series.

    If he went straight into "Here is what causes people to think they are hearing voices" or "Here is why people think they are talking to the dead" or some such it would have been dismissed as not being open minded to the idea that paranormal explanations might be real.

    Instead Brown simply went to well know proponents of the paranormal and said "Ok, convince me".

    As strobe said it is not really his fault that when they actually tried they came across as being incredible weak. The evidence for paranormal claims is incredible weak. That isn't Browns fault, but at least he gave them a chance.


  • Options
    #36
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    Im not saying its derren browns fault. Im just commenting that as someone who has an interest in the paranormal, even I find the cases weak, so if his shows dont even convince anyone with a passing interest, they surely wont convince anyone more sceptical or cynical. Thats mainly due to the low quality subjects. theres many other aspects to the paranormal. Havent watched the last one, but if theres one mention of orbs or shadow people then I think my point will be proved.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    pH
    Registered Users Posts: 4,188 ✭✭✭pH


    maccored wrote: »
    Im not saying its derren browns fault. Im just commenting that as someone who has an interest in the paranormal, even I find the cases weak, so if his shows dont even convince anyone with a passing interest, they surely wont convince anyone more sceptical or cynical. Thats mainly due to the low quality subjects. theres many other aspects to the paranormal. Havent watched the last one, but if theres one mention of orbs or shadow people then I think my point will be proved.

    No this last one was spot on - it's hard to see how anyone could be critical of it, the subject was well known and respected, didn't charge for his "services" and yet any evidence he had was incredibly weak.

    Now he may not have been using (in an inappropriate manner) whatever electronic device is currently de rigueur for your current in-group, but he sure knew how to make the most of modern digital cameras and voice activated digital recorders.

    Lou almost certainly was sincere, but when you look at these things with the cold light of reason and rationality there is nothing even to see, let alone be "explained".


  • Options
    #38
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    he passed away last year that fella I think


  • Options
    #39
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    pH wrote: »
    but when you look at these things with the cold light of reason and rationality there is nothing even to see, let alone be "explained".

    I know I've used this argument many times, but if no-one is looking, no-one will find anything. where would science be if people werent out there exploring it? Imagine even if the computer industry, or TV or radio had listened to the early experts who said there was no point to such things. it isnt human nature to say 'ah well, theres nothing to see here' - the human brain sees a mystery and wants to solve it. EVPs are one I like to look at (which I suspect is ionospheric ducting.)


  • Options
    #40
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    maccored wrote: »
    Im not saying its derren browns fault. Im just commenting that as someone who has an interest in the paranormal, even I find the cases weak, so if his shows dont even convince anyone with a passing interest, they surely wont convince anyone more sceptical or cynical. Thats mainly due to the low quality subjects.

    How are you classifying them as low equality subjects? What would be a high quality subject?

    For example, Lou Gentile, the subject from the last show seems quite well regarded in paranormal circles, as least as far as Google goes.

    maccored wrote: »
    theres many other aspects to the paranormal. Havent watched the last one, but if theres one mention of orbs or shadow people then I think my point will be proved.

    The impression you seem to be giving is that there is a really serious side to the paranormal and the stuff Brown is looking at is the less serious obviously fake side.

    Can you give an example of what you would consider high quality side of the paranormal?


  • Options
    #41
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    maccored wrote: »
    I know I've used this argument many times, but if no-one is looking, no-one will find anything.

    It isn't really about finding anything, it is about how you go about looking. The problem that Brown is exposing isn't that nothing is happening, it is that what is happening is not what is claimed.

    To be honest I find things like cold reading and the natural instinct of the brain to pattern match faces far more interesting than the alternative claims put forward by paranormal proponents such as ESP and ghosts.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    you are suggesting there isnt a serious side. How can you know this if its not something you have never looked in detail at? (I am assuming otherwise you wouldnt be asking)

    The effects of infrasound and em frequencies can cause paranormal like experiences. shouldnt that be researched if even to disprove apaprent hauntings? I already mentioned EVPs.

    Or maybe the best idea is sit back, do nothing and shout loudly at people who think there might be something worth finding out? Ive had these circular arguments before mr wicknight and Im not really interested in running around in circles.


  • Options
    #43
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    Wicknight wrote: »
    It isn't really about finding anything, it is about how you go about looking. The problem that Brown is exposing isn't that nothing is happening, it is that what is happening is not what is claimed.

    To be honest I find things like cold reading and the natural instinct of the brain to pattern match faces far more interesting than the alternative claims put forward by paranormal proponents such as ESP and ghosts.

    so the paranormal to you is mediums psychics and mind readers eh? Discussion closed, as your idea of the paranormal is somewhat limited.


  • Options
    #44
    pH
    Registered Users Posts: 4,188 ✭✭✭pH


    maccored wrote: »
    I know I've used this argument many times, but if no-one is looking, no-one will find anything.

    Which is just as good an argument for looking for Leprechaun's Gold at the end of rainbows, but if someone used it on you how would you reply?
    where would science be if people werent out there exploring it? Imagine even if the computer industry, or TV or radio had listened to the early experts who said there was no point to such things.

    Yes, but these things progressed, evidence mounted, what some early nay-sayers thought or said is irrelevant. One of the key indicators that what's happening here is bogus, is "absence of progress".

    Real science develops, and has had some spectacular successes looking at extremely rare events, it's not easy, but with work, some things that happen at vanishingly small frequencies and are incredibly hard to detect for example : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-Kamiokande
    it isnt human nature to say 'ah well, theres nothing to see here' - the human brain sees a mystery and wants to solve it. EVPs are one I like to look at (which I suspect is ionospheric ducting.)

    Well it just shows how you shouldn't rely on your intuition, ionospheric ducting does not explain EVPs, if you're saying that EVPs are voice radio signals being picked up inadvertently by recording equipment, then they could just as easily be local radio signals being picked up. Why couldn't the voice you here be from the local cab company, why unnecessarily complicate it by suggesting it's a cab firm in New York?

    Anyway it's simple to check, first check if your equipment reliably can "hear" a local broadcast on a particular frequency, if it can then you're correct every now and then it might receive a distant broadcast bounced off the ionosphere, but it still would receive local broadcasts as well.


  • Options
    #45
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    pH wrote: »
    I was wondering why the hate for Derren from certain posters, then I saw what he's doing in episode 3 - Ghost Hunties!

    Excellent to see Derren taking up the mantle that Scooby left off, I wonder will Derren figure out it's the janitor in a mask ... if it hadn't been for those pesky kids!

    I dont hate Derren , infact i really enjoy his old stuff.
    What i dont like is him rehashing other people's work as if it was his own and not actually investigating.

    Maybe if he was to bring something to the table it would be worth watching or investigate correctly but he is not going to do that whilst on a prime time slot on TV .


  • Options
    #46
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    maccored wrote: »
    you are suggesting there isnt a serious side. How can you know this if its not something you have never looked in detail at? (I am assuming otherwise you wouldnt be asking)

    I'm suggesting there is no side that is much better supported than the stuff Brown is looking at. I'm suggesting that because I have looked into it.

    I could be wrong of course, by all means give examples of the "serious side" to the paranormal.
    maccored wrote: »
    The effects of infrasound and em frequencies can cause paranormal like experiences.

    What are "paranormal like" experiences? Do you mean unexplained experiences?

    "Paranormal" refers to the explanation not the phenomena.
    maccored wrote: »
    shouldnt that be researched if even to disprove apaprent hauntings? I already mentioned EVPs.

    You can't disprove hauntings because you can't formulate a testable (and thus falsifiable) model of a ghost. As such disproving hauntings is irrelevant. Nothing anyone will do can disprove a haunting because we have no idea what the rules of a haunting are and thus cannot model them and test them.

    What you can do is present natural explanations for what people experience that don't require the massive re-evaluation of current scientific understanding that paranormal claims require.

    But people do this all the time, it seems to have very little effect on the enthusiasm of the paranormal community for paranormal explanations for unexplained phenomena.

    For example you can't prove it wasn't a ghost when you hear an EVP. But equally why entertain that idea in the first place?

    You can show that the human brain is a pattern matching system that is trained to see evidence of humans where none is present, such as seeing faces in random patterns and hearing voices and words in noise.

    This has been well researched and pretty well understood, though you seem to count this as "sitting back and doing nothing"
    maccored wrote: »
    so the paranormal to you is mediums psychics and mind readers eh?

    The paranormal to me are claims explaining phenomena that greatly contradict currently understood scientific theory and thus if correct would require great change in currently understood scientific theory.

    If you have a better definition I'm all ears.
    maccored wrote: »
    Discussion closed, as your idea of the paranormal is somewhat limited.

    Yeah you keep telling everyone that but you aren't exactly over flowing with real examples of this proper paranormal stuff is.


  • Options
    #47
    mayfire
    Registered Users Posts: 165 ✭✭mayfire


    strobe wrote: »
    What "paranormal" subjects could he have done shows on that wouldn't be easy to slag off? Alien abduction, water devining, crystal healing......? Something tells me things wouldn't have went too differently.

    What about this?

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7461912885649996034#


  • Options
    #48
    SkepticOne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,718 ✭✭✭SkepticOne


    Also by James Randi.



    There's another one where Uri Geller is exposed on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson.

    The key feature with this video and the dowsing one above is that they deal with inanimate objects. The psychic can't blame the spirits for not cooperating or the audience for not getting what the spirits are saying. With the second programme, Bronnikov could also claim that his methods were not properly applied in cases where the person remained blind. In other words, where there's others (or alleged others) involved, put the blame on them.

    The likes of mediums, healers and ghost hunters that featured on the Derren Brown shows can't therefore be treated the same way as those who claim powers over the inanimate objects. All he can do is point the camera at the evidence being provided and let the audience decide.


  • Options
    #49
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy




    What are "paranormal like" experiences? Do you mean unexplained experiences?

    Well hes not wrong people who come into contact with infrasound often claim to experience an errie feeling like theres a presence near by ect they then interpret that as a paranormal experience.


  • Options
    #50
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    mayfire wrote: »
    What about this?

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7461912885649996034#

    What about it? Homeopathy, psychics, Atlantis........? Par for the course. Like I said I can't see homeopathy or people that can see diseases inside people fairing any better or being any harder to debunk.


Advertisement