So, uh... scepticism, eh???

??? wrote: »

I was probably a bit rash using the word research!!! It was not controlled or anuthing. But my methods and findings were:

I went in perfectly calm and reasonable, sat down didn't give away any emotion (except through my aura). They started the reading.

Anytime the asked a question I'd reply with something along the lines of 'Is that a question? I'm a little confused, I thought you were telling me things and not the other way round.' and insist that they recognise it as a question. I then obviously didn't answer it. Two of the readings stopped after a bit of this and I was given my money back and asked politely to leave.

The one that carried on moved on to my personality and started saying stuff like 'You are a very considerate person but at times you recognise a selfish streak in yourself.' I replied with stuff like 'Sorry. Are you saying I'm considerate and selfish. I always thought they were mutually exclusive. What do you mean?' That reading ended there with me getting my money back.

You sound like a nightmare, and Id insert a smile here but I know you hate them.

Touche!!! Sorry they were all two were palm readers one tarrot. I'm not using it as an argument against psychics, I'm using it to say I do my own research!!!

Been to three mediums

What is your understanding of the difference between a medium, a psychic, a tarot reader and a palm reader?

Would you consider a statement made, followed by the question 'does that make sense to you?' or 'can you accept that' an aspect of cold reading?

??? wrote: »

Sigh...

Mediums seem to fall into two groups. Those that claim to talk to the dead and then pass on the messages and those that claim the dead talk through them i.e. the dead person uses their body to communicate rather than just pass on messages.

Psychic seems to be a general overterm for a large vareity of things from mediumship to predicting the future. I don't know if there's a specific 'psychic' thing.

Tarrot Cards deal out the cards according to whatever system and based on the position and combination of cards discern information about your past present and future.

Palm Readers use the lines on the palm of your hand, each which supposedly means something to make statements about your personality, past and future.


Again they are all fishing for feedback as far as I'm concerned. And no I've never seen a live medium show though it is something I'd be very interested in seeing. The edited TV one's just annoy me.

Appologies, it was meant as a joke, as was the greasy hands thing! I justy refuse to use smilies!!!

You cant start off wanting precise argument and then resort to sarcasm and jokes when it suits you. I have a sense of humour, and usually what you did would make me laugh, but in your case I have my strict face on and youre getting away with nothing.

And dont sigh at me, youd request elaboration were the situation reversed.

For someone who wishes to debunk (or research) the whole area, and who has clearly got huge knowledge of other paranormal things, what you say here shows huge gaps in your understanding of how the whole psychic arena works, or in your view, supposedly works. I know you would say its all fishing and cold reading, but without understanding the fundamental difference between the different types of reading, how can you hope to know whether the reader youve got is a)doing what their title claims b)producing the evidence their technique is supposed to c)trained according to the standards required by their peers?

Anything edited for TV is false. News, Big Brother, Mediumship. Editing by its nature changes the material.

Again they are all fishing for feedback as far as I'm concerned

Based on anecdotal evidence and shaky research. I would have expected something more thorough from someone of your background.

??? wrote: »

Yes Boss.

Well finally you know your place. (Again, Id smile, were it allowed)

I am no expert on the correct methods of what is claimed. I only go in with the intention of blocking cold reading and it seems to disrupt the reading nicely! Would you mind correcting the 'gaps' in my understanding?

Firstly you said you went to three mediums, but you did not. From your correction, youve never seen a medium work. You went to three psychic readers. Psychics read from the person in front of them, and get information based on the person, using whatever means they choose. Mediums connect to a spirit (ok claim to) and give information from them, which is sometimes about the sitter, sometimes solely about the spirit person. Also, sometimes in the case of tarot and palm, it is simply a psychological tool, giving the sitter insight into their life. Rather like a counselling session, no prediction or past life stuff, just observations based on what is shown.

Mediums never predict. They may also read someone psychically, but that is a separate thing. Psychic readers may or may not predict depending on how they read, but most sitters seem to expect prediction from a reader.
When what I do comes up the most common remark, based on the common misunderstanding is,
-ooh can you read my mind?
-Are you dead? Then no.

Bit exagerated but yeah.

I beg to differ. Just look at Fox News.

I'm reffering to the two statments not psychics in general. That form of asking for feedback is a major part of cold reading, which is where my experience of this lies. It's not anecdotal or shaky evidence.

Yes it is. You said they are all fishing for information. Thats your own experience, ie an anecdote. The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not evidence. Your words.
You may have experience of cold reading but this is just your say so here on what happened.

It's an aspect of cold reading. 'Does that makes sense to you?' is particularly useful because psychologically it pouts the blame on the subject if they can't make sense of it. Anyform of fishing for feedback is ignored.

Im going back to this as I disagree with you based on what happens when I use that statement. Anyone sitting for me has had no problem telling me firmly if Im wrong. Which I have to accept. People are a lot more savvy these days than you give them credit for.

??? wrote: »

Yeah that was a slip of the tongue(finger?) I was using it wrongly because I wasn't really thinking.

Im sure it was you who once told me that in order not to be pulled up for an ill thought out remark, you should think it out properly. I get irritated when people who would rip me apart for a slip of the finger are slip shod themselves.

How is asking a direct question not fishing for information. Any answer you get back is... information! Whether it's deliberatly looking for information because you're cold reading or if you really are psychically reading them and just want to check they're with you it's fishing for information. I'm disdainful of it because in my opinion they should already know!!!

The remark you made about them 'all' fishing is a generalisation which could be taken to mean all readers. If you are happy to correct it to referring only to the people you sat with, great. It still stands as anecdotal though.

Adding an edit here. Readers are not omnipotent, and can get things wrong. Have you got another way for them to check the information given other than actually asking? Are they allowed to request yes/no responses?

I beg to differ. Just look at Fox News.

Well thank Christ that in all this I discover you have a sense of humour. For that alone it was probably worth it.