Psychics and Missing People

[JPK]

Good morning Hardenbergh.

I'm aware that there are more charlatans than not but I'm confident that there are many that have helped the police. I'm very sorry that the author of this thread has had this experience. I'll say no more about it.

Thank you for understanding. I would be very interested to hear any evidence you have about the real psychics you know, on another thread. Feel free to start one.
JPK

 

[CFLarsen]

I didn't want to provide too many details as this person doesn't like to draw too much attention to himself although I did see an article from the newspaper at the time. I would like to add that he never charged for this service and he is the brother of someone very close to me who has since passed on.

Alex Tanous' brother, Wakine, is an attorney. Both Alex and Wakine were friends of the family I was speaking about above.

None of this answers any of my questions.

In fact, this is the same pathetic drivel we hear, each time people like you tries to perpetuate the myth of psychics being able to talk to the dead.

We hear the grand claims, yes. Boy, do we hear them. But when you and the likes of you are asked - ever so politely - to provide evidence, we hear the same heartless excuses. No, you don't "want" to identify these psychics. No, you want to "protect" their identity.

Don't you understand how much pain you cause people in deep grief, by making these claims you are utterly unable to back up with evidence?

Don't you understand how little credibility you have, when you claim that this person doesn't want to draw "too much attention" to himself, despite the fact that the very same person seeks attention by appearing the the media?

You refuse to identify this psychic, not out of concern for him or the grieving family, but because you know damn well that your claim will be torn apart, if you allow skeptics to investigate your claim. You know that these psychics can't talk to the dead.

Go on, start your whining. Begin to tell us how mean we are, simply because we want to check your claim. Tell your friends, too. We have heard it all before, and we are not impressed. Not at all.

You are the reason why people like Sylvia Browne, James van Praagh, John Edward and Carla Baron can continue to bilk poor, grieving people out of their money, while sucking on their grief.

You protect these scumbags, because you would rather prefer to have your own beliefs untouched, regardless of the consequences.

"There are no greater liars in the world than quacks — except for their patients."
Benjamin Franklin

 

[Hardenbergh]

None of this answers any of my questions.

In fact, this is the same pathetic drivel we hear, each time people like you tries to perpetuate the myth of psychics being able to talk to the dead.

We hear the grand claims, yes. Boy, do we hear them. But when you and the likes of you are asked - ever so politely - to provide evidence, we hear the same heartless excuses. No, you don't "want" to identify these psychics. No, you want to "protect" their identity.

Don't you understand how much pain you cause people in deep grief, by making these claims you are utterly unable to back up with evidence?

Don't you understand how little credibility you have, when you claim that this person doesn't want to draw "too much attention" to himself, despite the fact that the very same person seeks attention by appearing the the media?

You refuse to identify this psychic, not out of concern for him or the grieving family, but because you know damn well that your claim will be torn apart, if you allow skeptics to investigate your claim. You know that these psychics can't talk to the dead.

Go on, start your whining. Begin to tell us how mean we are, simply because we want to check your claim. Tell your friends, too. We have heard it all before, and we are not impressed. Not at all.

You are the reason why people like Sylvia Browne, James van Praagh, John Edward and Carla Baron can continue to bilk poor, grieving people out of their money, while sucking on their grief.

You protect these scumbags, because you would rather prefer to have your own beliefs untouched, regardless of the consequences.

"There are no greater liars in the world than quacks — except for their patients."
Benjamin Franklin

He doesn't advertise the fact that he has psychic abilities and has rarely used it. He is not--I repeat--he is not a scumbag. I'm sure that the article was printed with much reluctance on his part. I said nothing about his communicating with the dead.

 

[JPK]

Would you like me to start the thread for you to disscuss this or would you be good enough to do this on your own?
JPK

 

[Roadtoad]

Well, if he has any credibility, let's see him go for the million. If he wins, he's the real deal. If not, we know he's a scammer.

Since he has yet to try, I go with scammer. He may not get rich from using his "gifts," but he seems to get something from it. Why else would he do it?

 

[Hardenbergh]

Well, if he has any credibility, let's see him go for the million. If he wins, he's the real deal. If not, we know he's a scammer.

Since he has yet to try, I go with scammer. He may not get rich from using his "gifts," but he seems to get something from it. Why else would he do it?

It was in his own community and perhaps he knew the family and wanted to help out.

 

[CFLarsen]

He doesn't advertise the fact that he has psychic abilities and has rarely used it. He is not--I repeat--he is not a scumbag. I'm sure that the article was printed with much reluctance on his part. I said nothing about his communicating with the dead.

I am not interested in your pathetic excuses. Show the evidence, or stop hurting these poor, grieving people.

 

[Roadtoad]

It was in his own community and perhaps he knew the family and wanted to help out.

In other words, he's groovin' on the attention.

He's a scammer.

 

[Hardenbergh]

In other words, he's groovin' on the attention.

He's a scammer.

He's not "groovin" on the attention. He'd be doing a lot more of it. He's not an attention monger, I assure you.

 

[JPK]

Done. I have started a new thread just for you Hardenbergh. Please continue this disscusion there.
JPK

 

[Beth]

We hear the grand claims, yes. Boy, do we hear them. But when you and the likes of you are asked - ever so politely - to provide evidence, we hear the same heartless excuses. No, you don't "want" to identify these psychics. No, you want to "protect" their identity.

You refuse to identify this psychic, not out of concern for him or the grieving family, but because you know damn well that your claim will be torn apart, if you allow skeptics to investigate your claim. You know that these psychics can't talk to the dead.

You protect these scumbags, because you would rather prefer to have your own beliefs untouched, regardless of the consequences.

You are attributing thoughts and motivations to other people that you cannot know if they are true. You don't know what Hardenbergh believes regarding whether psychics can or cannot talk to the dead, therefore you do not know what s/he knows regarding that fact. Further, it's directly contradictory with the next statement I've included. If Hardenbergh knows that psychics can't talk to the dead, there would be no motivation to "protect" that belief regardless of the consequences.

While you may consider reasons of wanting to 'protect' the identity of non-professional self-described pyschics bogus, the truth is that many such psychics do not care to discuss their experiences or even be named as a psychic in a public forum such as this. Thus, if discussing a personal friend who feels that way, such a revelation would be tantamount to betrayal of the friendship and expecting someone to do so despite the objections of their friend is unrealistic and inappropriate.

So basically, I think you've made a bunch of unfounded accusations designed to incite an emotional response or drive the poster away from this forum rather than sparking further conversation and discussion of the matter. You come across as mean and vindictive rather than knowledge seeking. Is this the image you wish to portray?

 

[The_Fire]

Kindly take this little bashfest to the proper thread. ALL of you!

 

[Roadtoad]

So moved. And done.

 

[CFLarsen]

You are attributing thoughts and motivations to other people that you cannot know if they are true. You don't know what Hardenbergh believes regarding whether psychics can or cannot talk to the dead, therefore you do not know what s/he knows regarding that fact. Further, it's directly contradictory with the next statement I've included. If Hardenbergh knows that psychics can't talk to the dead, there would be no motivation to "protect" that belief regardless of the consequences.

Oh, yes, there would: Belief in the supernatural is so captivating that it is impossible to relinquish. Almost. We do see examples, but as a rule, people are not willing to abandon their beliefs.

This isn't just evident in belief in psychics. We see it in all forms of supernatural beliefs: Homeopaths (Dr. MAS and Dr. Sheik), Astrologers (Karen Boesen), Magnetism Healers (Roger Coghill) - you name it: All refuse to provide evidence of their claims, all refuse to have their claims examined, all refuse to give up their false beliefs.

While you may consider reasons of wanting to 'protect' the identity of non-professional self-described pyschics bogus, the truth is that many such psychics do not care to discuss their experiences or even be named as a psychic in a public forum such as this. Thus, if discussing a personal friend who feels that way, such a revelation would be tantamount to betrayal of the friendship and expecting someone to do so despite the objections of their friend is unrealistic and inappropriate.

Sorry, but this psychic is already out in the open. Even if this was not so, the nature of the claim makes it imperative that we investigate it. We are talking about the ability to locate lost children. We simply cannot just let such a claim go untested or unchallenged.

If this person can find them, then we can save lives. If this person can not find them, then he has to be stopped from preying on grieving people. By investigating these claims, we have everything to win. If we don't investigate them, we have everything to lose.

So basically, I think you've made a bunch of unfounded accusations designed to incite an emotional response or drive the poster away from this forum rather than sparking further conversation and discussion of the matter. You come across as mean and vindictive rather than knowledge seeking. Is this the image you wish to portray?

Excuse me if I get a bit upset about the reality of psychics scamming grieving people. Why did you not address that aspect at all? All you did was protect the scammers.

 

[Beth]

Responded in the other thread per request to move this discussion elsewhere.

 

[Katachresis]

Thanks, Beth.

I've been working on a question I want to ask about the relationship between "psychics" and families that have a missing family memeber. I can't get the words or phrases the way I want them yet, but that is the direction we should be moving.

You're right Beth, let's stay on topic.

 

[Dr Adequate]

SkepticWiki now has an article.

[swiki]Psychic Detectives[/swiki]

I found the links by searching this forum for threads with the word "detective" in them.

Ah, yes, I remember Lucianarchy ... oh the fun we had ...

Here's a good bit from one of the links:

Police listened with more that the usual interest to a psychic who told them about a serious industrial fire that he not only predicted with great accuracy, but about which he had supplied important details after the event, details which it appeared he could only know as a result of his special powers. His account was so accurate that he was immediately arrested and an investigation soon reveled that he'd had no need of paranormal powers to produce his visions. His information was essentially first hand: He himself was the arsonist. *

* sniggers *

Professionals Against Confidence Crime is a nice authoritative source.

Please let me know when the projected website is up and running, and about the Tony Youens article when it materializes, and I can add links.

Is there anything else I should add?

 

[Ashles]

Is there anything else I should add?

Just about anything involving Dennis Mackenzie.

A nasty piece of work who everyone should be warned about.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28352&highlight=dennis+mackenzie

Another old thread:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34908&highlight=dennis+mackenzie

I wish psychics could help police. Oh how I wish that.

I just no longer understand how anyone can believe they do.

 

[Luke T.]

There's a few things I would like to have.

1) A dialog between a missing person family and a psychic that shows the methods the psychic uses to extract information and convince the family that they really do have paranormal abilities.

I think you would be better situated to come up with what kind of sales pitch a psychic makes to the family of a missing person. I'm kind of curious myself. It must take incredible nerve for someone to initiate contact with a grieving family.

3) An article about the tricks used by TV psychics: what really goes on behind the scenes

We can only speculate what goes on behind the scenes on a TV show.

4) I don't know much about Remote Viewing, so I'd like an article about what that is and why it's another false claim

An excellent article on Skeptic Report that I mentioned earlier: http://www.skepticreport.com/psychics/psitechsmart.htm

Kelly, I told you in a PM that every time I hear of a psychic on the news being given any credibility, I write to the reporter or editor of the story to give them hell.

I am going to link to a topic on Skeptical Community in which I used some pretty strong language, so you are forewarned.

The topic is here, and I deconstruct the story that was on the news, and then post what I wrote to the reporter.

If you would like me to write a short article about this story to show how the media allows itself to be manipulated and gives psychics validity, as well as an excellent example of how it makes it look like even law enforcement is validating the psychic, I'd be very happy to do so.

ETA: It appears that the Fox web site removed the video which I make reference to. Fortunately, I copied some of the transcript into my post in the aforelinked topic.

 

[Luke T.]

Kelly, if you can ask someone who has been solicited by a psychic to find their missing loved one to recollect as accurately as possible what was said/claimed by the psychic in the conversation, I will be happy to write a Self-Defense Course on how to handle such calls. The more input you can collect from various people, the better. That way we can get an idea of the typical sales pitch.

I imagine the psychics claim to have worked with the police and to have "helped" find missing children/loved ones, and so on.

I would write such an article along these lines:

If a psychic calls you to offer their services, here are the following steps you should take...

1. Hang up.



Of course, I would go into more than that. I would arm them with questions to ask the psychic. Name the children you found. Name the police you helped. Dates, places, etc. Were you credited in any media reports? Which ones? Dates. Do you have ANY references at all, you freaking creep?

You get the idea.