Why can't a medium PROVE the ability exists?

MrJonDonnis · 23-03-2011 11:09AM

Dave! wrote: »

What did you learn from the second 100 readings that you didn't know from the first 100? Your cold reading abilities must be pretty sharp at this stage.

It is not about learning, it is about trying to understand and experience.
Plus I was running the UK's skeptical network looking at psychics, so it became almost a mission to find a real psychic.

As for my cold reading abilities, I can spot a fake psychic from a mile off, I understand how the trick works, however I am not so good at doing it myself.

Much like any magic trick, you can know how it is done, but performing slight of hand yourself is very difficult.

MrStuffins · 23-03-2011 11:42AM

Deleted User wrote: »

You still here Dave , thought you left 5 posts ago .

OK so back to this and what i was saying before , why would you want to test for somebody or an organisation who has been calling you a lier or a fraud ?

Erm........... to stop them calling me a liar and a fraud!

it's amazing that your argument has now boiled down to "Prove it? Well why should I?"

It's pretty pathetic!

If someone was waltzing around telling everyone I was a liar and a fraud, damn right i'd be out there clearing my name!

Do you actually have anything better to add than this?

Ziycon · 23-03-2011 11:42AM

Dave! wrote: »

Who are all the "militaries around the world"? The US researched it alright, probably because of the Cold War and they wanted to get any angle they could find. Didn't hurt that they had Albert Stubblebine supporting the research, a man who believed he could turn invisible and walk through walls (he bumped his nose many times).

You'll note that in 1995 the project was transferred to the CIA, who determined immediately that it was a waste of money:

Local law enforcement consult psychics from time to time because, just like everyone else, police are superstitious and when they get desperate they'll do anything to help with a case.

Here I was just throwing it out there, I don't personally believe in psychic abilities, just curious to see what people thought.:)

MrStuffins · 23-03-2011 11:50AM

MrJonDonnis wrote: »

I totally agree, Skeptics do need to get off their arses and stop repeating what people like me say.

That would be easy if psychics and mediums were interested in being found out tested

I hate armchair skepticism, I think it is detrimental to the understanding of belief.

If someone was to step forward and prove the ability exists, there would be no need for the term "belief" anymore. It would be a fact. Same as the fact that when I go for a swim, I will end up wet!

I have investigated over a 1000 mediums, more than anyone else I know of.
I have received over 200 readings, I have come face to face and investigated pretty much every mediumship claim.

This is a big claim. Can you provide us with some evidence, some published results please? What were yo0ur methods of investigation exactly?

But not everyone is as proactive as me

This is very true!

MrJonDonnis wrote: »

It is not about learning, it is about trying to understand and experience.
Plus I was running the UK's skeptical network looking at psychics, so it became almost a mission to find a real psychic.

Did you find one?

As for my cold reading abilities, I can spot a fake psychic from a mile off,

Sweet. And how about a real one? Have you come across any?

MrJonDonnis · 23-03-2011 11:59AM

MrStuffins wrote: »

This is a big claim. Can you provide us with some evidence, some published results please? What were yo0ur methods of investigation exactly?

No sorry, I closed down my site, I am retired now.
Methods of investigation was mainly analyses and deconstruction of what they were doing.

I was getting at one point probably 3 emails a day from people who had received readings, i still get about 1 a week even though i been retired for a year now.

Did you find one?

No, and that is one of the saddest things about everything I have done.
Unlike Randi who waited for people to come to him, I went to them.

It is incredibly depressing when your realise that every medium you have ever investigated or met come under just two catagories.
Eyes open mediums and Eyes closed. (Know they are frauds and deluded)

Dave! · 23-03-2011 12:00PM

Ziycon wrote: »

Here I was just throwing it out there, I don't personally believe in psychic abilities, just curious to see what people thought.:)

Ah fair enough

edwinkane · 23-03-2011 02:17PM

Ziycon wrote: »

Here I was just throwing it out there, I don't personally believe in psychic abilities, just curious to see what people thought.:)

But isn't that it. If psychics were able to prove they had psychic abilities, you'd not have to believe in them, as you only have to believe something which is not provable.

I don't believe Anadin works, because I know it works. Many people choose to believe homoeopathy, for example, works, because there is no evidence that it does work.

KeithAFC · 23-03-2011 06:25PM

Mediums only have to do a few things to be able to prove the ability exists with precise information and none of the Barnum statements. They don't need to go to Randi. A normal person with an understanding of psychology could do it.

edwinkane · 23-03-2011 06:35PM

KeithAFC wrote: »

Mediums only have to do a few things to be able to prove the ability exists with precise information and none of the Barnum statements. They don't need to go to Randi. A normal person with an understanding of psychology could do it.

And yet none of them do. A mystery!

07-04-2011 06:14PM

KeithAFC wrote: »

Mediums only have to do a few things to be able to prove the ability exists with precise information

I have not met a cold reader that can do this either , doesnt mean they cant do it .

07-04-2011 06:20PM

MrJonDonnis wrote: »

No sorry, I closed down my site, I am retired now.
Methods of investigation was mainly analyses and deconstruction of what they were doing.

I was getting at one point probably 3 emails a day from people who had received readings, i still get about 1 a week even though i been retired for a year now.

No, and that is one of the saddest things about everything I have done.
Unlike Randi who waited for people to come to him, I went to them.

It is incredibly depressing when your realise that every medium you have ever investigated or met come under just two catagories.
Eyes open mediums and Eyes closed. (Know they are frauds and deluded)

Why did you retire and how long did you do it for ?

MrJonDonnis · 07-04-2011 06:34PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Why did you retire and how long did you do it for ?

I ran the site from 2004 i think, it was started in 2003 by my cousin.

I retired because I became disillusioned by skepticism and the skeptical community as well as tired of the constant threats and daily abuse.

It is hard to take on an entire industry on your own and then have people within the skeptical community attack you too, although the latter was to be expected when I exposed one of them

MrStuffins · 07-04-2011 07:42PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I have not met a cold reader that can do this either , doesnt mean they cant do it .

What does this even mean? What has Cold Reading got to do with hard evidence?

MrJonDonnis · 07-04-2011 07:55PM

MrStuffins wrote: »

What does this even mean? What has Cold Reading got to do with hard evidence?

Stricly speaking a cold read is what a psychic does when they haven't gained prior knowledge of the person they are reading.

Zombrex · 07-04-2011 08:25PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I have not met a cold reader that can do this either , doesnt mean they cant do it .

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this. You could simply be saying you have never met a cold reader. But if you are implying cold readers have never demonstrated cold reading that would be an incorrect statement. Cold reading is pretty well studies abililty.

Zombrex · 07-04-2011 08:27PM

MrJonDonnis wrote: »

I ran the site from 2004 i think, it was started in 2003 by my cousin.

I retired because I became disillusioned by skepticism and the skeptical community as well as tired of the constant threats and daily abuse.

It is hard to take on an entire industry on your own and then have people within the skeptical community attack you too, although the latter was to be expected when I exposed one of them

Exposed them as what? Not skeptical?

MrJonDonnis · 07-04-2011 08:28PM

Wicknight wrote: »

Exposed them as what? Not skeptical?

Not quite, I exposed a pretty well known skeptic who covered up the racist actions of a psychic due in part to the fact he had a book deal and tour planned with said psychic.

Zombrex · 07-04-2011 08:32PM

MrJonDonnis wrote: »

I hate armchair skepticism, I think it is detrimental to the understanding of belief.

I have investigated over a 1000 mediums, more than anyone else I know of.
I have received over 200 readings, I have come face to face and investigated pretty much every mediumship claim.

But not everyone is as proactive as me

I find this attitude mind boggling, I really do.

Its like saying I won't intall a virus checker in my computer unless i have a Masters in Computer Science and have dedicated my life to studying computer viruses. After all who am I, an "armchair" computer user to say that viruses are malicious software trying to steal my information. I really should keep an open mind that the anonymous connection on my SSH port from xxx.sexy.hamster.com is not malicious.

People don't require this in any other walk of life, why then is it a requirement to dedicate your life to the study of individual paranormal explanations to be skeptical of a paranormal explanation?

Zombrex · 07-04-2011 08:34PM

MrJonDonnis wrote: »

Not quite, I exposed a pretty well known skeptic who covered up the racist actions of a psychic due in part to the fact he had a book deal and tour planned with said psychic.

Ah, ok. You exposed him as someone who was in it for the money rather than any ethical notions.

MrJonDonnis · 07-04-2011 09:24PM

Wicknight wrote: »

Ah, ok. You exposed him as someone who was in it for the money rather than any ethical notions.

Yes thats correct

MrJonDonnis · 07-04-2011 09:31PM

Wicknight wrote: »

I find this attitude mind boggling, I really do.

Its like saying I won't intall a virus checker in my computer unless i have a Masters in Computer Science and have dedicated my life to studying computer viruses. After all who am I, an "armchair" computer user to say that viruses are malicious software trying to steal my information. I really should keep an open mind that the anonymous connection on my SSH port from xxx.sexy.hamster.com is not malicious.

People don't require this in any other walk of life, why then is it a requirement to dedicate your life to the study of individual paranormal explanations to be skeptical of a paranormal explanation?

I never said it was a requirement.
My point is that it is easy for someone to sit on their backside and just attack believers, it is easy for someone to say "oh thats rubbish" or "prove it".

But to understand why someone has that belief then you must experience it.

Skepticism is riddled with amateur psychologists, everyone thinks they are an expert, and the condescending attitude is the main thing that alienates believers, and stops them from listening to what very well may be a good argument which could otherwise educate them.

If someone wants to preach about skepticism from an armchair without ever actually looking a psychic in the eye, or without trying it for themselves then fine.

But don't be surprised when a believer doesn't listen to you.

Skepticism right now is full of people patting themselves on the back for how smart they are.

Me personally I like to experience things, I like to understand things from all points of view before making my mind up.

I was once told by a medium "how can you call it bull**** when you have never even tried it" and they were right, so I did try it.
I stood on stage, I gave readings, i "developed" as a medium. I learnt how the process is supposed to work.

And when you give a reading, when you look into someones eyes, and you see the desperation, you see the emotion, you see the tears, you start to understand how addictive this feeling of power is for a medium, how easy it is to convince yourself you really do talk to the dead.

Now ask yourself, as an armchair skeptic, can you truly understand that feeling, can you understand the trigger that starts the delusion, can you understand what it feels to be a "medium"

Cause I dont think you can.

So yes you can have an opinion about things from your armchair, but don't you think you should try and understand the why instead of why not.

Standman · 07-04-2011 09:37PM

MrJonDonnis wrote: »

I never said it was a requirement.
My point is that it is easy for someone to sit on their backside and just attack believers, it is easy for someone to say "oh thats rubbish" or "prove it".

But to understand why someone has that belief then you must experience it.

Skepticism is riddled with amateur psychologists, everyone thinks they are an expert, and the condescending attitude is the main thing that alienates believers, and stops them from listening to what very well may be a good argument which could otherwise educate them.

If someone wants to preach about skepticism from an armchair without ever actually looking a psychic in the eye, or without trying it for themselves then fine.

But don't be surprised when a believer doesn't listen to you.

Skepticism right now is full of people patting themselves on the back for how smart they are.

Me personally I like to experience things, I like to understand things from all points of view before making my mind up.

I was once told by a medium "how can you call it bull**** when you have never even tried it" and they were right, so I did try it.
I stood on stage, I gave readings, i "developed" as a medium. I learnt how the process is supposed to work.

And when you give a reading, when you look into someones eyes, and you see the desperation, you see the emotion, you see the tears, you start to understand how addictive this feeling of power is for a medium, how easy it is to convince yourself you really do talk to the dead.

Now ask yourself, as an armchair skeptic, can you truly understand that feeling, can you understand the trigger that starts the delusion, can you understand what it feels to be a "medium"

Cause I dont think you can.

So yes you can have an opinion about things from your armchair, but don't you think you should try and understand the why instead of why not.

I don't think anyone here is trying to find out what it feels like to be a medium. I think it's irrelevant to the actual issue, which is attempting to get some evidence off these people to back up their claims.

For a medium to say to me "you cant say its bullsh*t until you've tried it" is not "right", it's merely a means of deflecting any difficult questions they can't/don't want to answer.

MrJonDonnis · 07-04-2011 09:49PM

Standman wrote: »

I don't think anyone here is trying to find out what it feels like to be a medium. I think it's irrelevant to the actual issue, which is attempting to get some evidence off these people to back up their claims.

Of course it is relevant. These people will never back up their claims, because their claims are simply not true. The only option left is to try and understand why they make these claims, and why they believe these claims are possible.

100+ Years of real scientific study and 0% proof of anything paranormal. I doubt that will change because some random person on a random forum asks some random nutjob to "prove it"

For a medium to say to me "you cant say its bullsh*t until you've tried it" is not "right", it's merely a means of deflecting any difficult questions they can't/don't want to answer.

Of course you are right. But sometimes these people really do believe the rubbish they are talking, and the only way for you to get through to them, or understand them, is to experience it yourself.

I experienced that exact moment when i could have convinced myself I was psychic, only my understanding of the true meaning of what was going on stopped me.

I experienced the feeling of being a medium.
Hell right now I could be one of the countries most famous mediums if it wasn't for my skepticism and knowledge of how mediumship truly works.

Also keep in mind it was my duty to understand and learn as much as i could, as i was head of the UK's largest skeptical community looking at psychics.

If I don't truly know what I was talking about, then I would be a pretty crap figurehead dont you think.

So perhaps I see things from a different perspective. I was a leader as opposed to a follower in skepticism.

Standman · 07-04-2011 10:57PM

If a person comes up to me and tells me they can grow wings and fly to the moon and back in less than an hour, then refuses to give me evidence for this claim, I'm not going to waste my time trying to figure out the exact reason why this particular person believes what he believes. I'll leave that to the psychiatrists. As part of your official position as head of a skeptical community it may have been worth your while to do what you did, but for me that's well down the list of priorities.

MrJonDonnis · 07-04-2011 11:11PM

Standman wrote: »

If a person comes up to me and tells me they can grow wings and fly to the moon and back in less than an hour, then refuses to give me evidence for this claim, I'm not going to waste my time trying to figure out the exact reason why this particular person believes what he believes. I'll leave that to the psychiatrists. As part of your official position as head of a skeptical community it may have been worth your while to do what you did, but for me that's well down the list of priorities.

The problem is that there are very few people claiming they can grow wings and fly to the moon and back in less than an hour, where as there are thousands of people claiming they can talk to the dead, without doubt the reason that is so is due to the fact you can make money from claiming to talk to the dead, and it is very easy to convince yourself you are doing just that.

Strictly speaking though the claim of speaking to the dead and growing wings and flying to the moon and back in less than an hour are identical when it comes to the possibility.

Well I should say impossibility.

What I did was try to police an industry that was and is still to this day unregulated.

You have to be able to differentiate between the eyes open frauds like Godon Smith, Derek Acorah, Tony Stockwell etc, and the eyes closed frauds like your aunt Elsie who gives readings at her over 60's club.

The actual fraud itself is the same, but the depth is different.

Its the same as the difference between stealing a chocolate bar from a corner shop, and stealing a brand new Lamborgini.

I believe that the punishment should match the crime, but since there is basically no punishment for the crime of mediumship, my only option was to expose without discrimination.

A millionaire like Gordon Smith suddenly becomes equal to the middle aged housewife selling readings out of her front room for £10

I am not saying it is fair, but if you can stop the small time psychics, you stop them potentially becoming big time psychics

Oryx · 08-04-2011 12:13PM

A millionaire like Gordon Smith

Really? Id love to know how you know that.

MrJonDonnis · 08-04-2011 12:20PM

Oryx wrote: »

Really? Id love to know how you know that.

In the immortal words of someone who thinks they are famous
"Don't you know who I am?"

But instead I will use "woo logic" or "Believer thinking" on you.

Can you prove Gordon Isn't a millionaire?

edwinkane · 08-04-2011 12:42PM

MrJonDonnis wrote: »

Of course it is relevant. These people will never back up their claims, because their claims are simply not true. The only option left is to try and understand why they make these claims, and why they believe these claims are possible.

.

The only way to do that is to hazard a guess, as most of them won't be honest about why they do it. Some do it to make money, some because it appeals to their ego, some because they are deluded, and others because they are charlatans. My interest is more to throw light on and expose the deluded and charlatans, and I have little interest to know "why" they do it.

MrJonDonnis · 08-04-2011 12:45PM

edwinkane wrote: »

The only to do that is to hazard a guess, as most of them won't be honest about why they do it. Some do it to make money, so because they are deluded, and others because they are charlatans. My interest is more to throw light on the deluded and charlatans, and I have little interest to know "why" they do it.

Fair enough. Can I ask you what you have done so far to "throw light" on the deluded and charlatans?

Oryx · 08-04-2011 12:56PM

MrJonDonnis wrote: »

In the immortal words of someone who thinks they are famous
"Don't you know who I am?"

But instead I will use "woo logic" or "Believer thinking" on you.

Can you prove Gordon Isn't a millionaire?

And I shall reply skeptically if you do, and dismiss any further statements you make without backing them up.

Why can't a medium PROVE the ability exists?

Comments