Sylvia Browne - Split from: "Is troy a typical debunker"

[Aphelion]

Because it'll finally shut him up? I can't think of anything else that might do that.

As for "proof", not absolute, but a heck of a lot of evidence:

http://www.stopsylviabrowne.com/home/

Can you show us equivalent evidence that KT and Nico are disinfo agents? Oh, right, you already admited you can't.

RSLancaster: 1 Aphelion: 0.

Next match?

Why should she jump through hoops just to shut up a man who harasses her? If I was in her position I wouldn't take the challenge.

Im not harassing killtown or Nico, thats the difference.

 

[Pardalis]

Can you prove she cant perform paranormal acts?

You'd have to prove the existence of paranormal events first.

 

[Aphelion]

As usual, you have the burden of proof exactly backwards. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. She's making the claims. Ergo, it's up to her to prove it, not us to prove she can't.

Until she proves she can, I won't believe she can.

She's agreed to be tested by Randi, but has avoided actually taking any steps to do this. That, to me, states unequivically, that she's a con, she knows she's conning, and has to keep the con going.

If you can't see this, you're absolutely a rock with legs!

If you are going to harass her then its up to you to prove she cant.

By your logic, it is up to Val to prove her photo is real.

 

[uruk]

Can you prove she cant perform paranormal acts?

If Mrs Brown's claimed abilities were real, her success rate would be close to 100%. But her success rate is actually closer to 50% which is about what you and I can do by guessing blindly and asking questions.

Her failures are well documented. Especially recently with the fireman killed on 9/11 whom she claimed was drowned, and the abducted boy who was found alive although she claimed he was dead. The miners whom she claimed were all alive except for one when it was the other way around.

All the predictions she made on her website that never came true. The list goes on.

I think her bad performance pretty well proves that she is a fraud.
The fact that she makes money from these false claims makes her a criminal.

 

[332nd]

Well in that case it is up to Val Mclatchley to prove her photo is genuine. Is that what you are saying?

Oooo nice try, but no.

You still haven't answered why a woman whos making millions needs Randi's million?

So she could donate it to charity?
So She could have an extra million?
So she can prove that the physic power does exist so the next time she or another proven psychic says there will be a terror attack, or a natural disaster like a tsunami, or man made disaster like Cheyrnobyl people will listen?
So she can prove that she speaks to the dead and can therefore ask the dead about God, thus getting the real scoop and take a major step in ending a huge chunk of the strife in the world?

 

[JimBenArm]

If you are going to harass her then its up to you to prove she cant.

By your logic, it is up to Val to prove her photo is real.

Harass? How is asking her to prove her absurd claims harassment?

You ARE a rock with legs, aren't you?

 

[Horatius]

Why should she jump through hoops just to shut up a man who harasses her? If I was in her position I wouldn't take the challenge.

Im not harassing killtown or Nico, thats the difference.

Nice convolution of two topics there.

As for why should she, well, she already agreed to do it. Doesn't being true to your word count for anything?

And would you consider it harassment if the police were to investigate a criminal? Because that's pretty much what Randi and RSLancaster are doing. They're not calling her up at night and telling her to take the challenge - they've merely accumulating evidence in a public forum.



And no one ever said you were harassing KT or Nico. That's a separate issue. The issue is, why do you hold us to standards of evidence against SB that you don't hold yourself to against KT or Nico? We do have evidence that she's a fraud*, while you admittedly have no evidence whatsoever. No evidence will ever prove it 100%, but by a preponderance of evidence, we feel confident in concluding she's a fraud. If we're wrong, she knows how to prove us wrong, but she won't do it.





*Like, just as an example, her conviction on fraud charges.

 

[Aphelion]

Horatius if you are going to introduce a previous conviction of hers as evidence then I will introduce previous lies by the government as evidence of 911 being an inside job.

 

[J. Arthur Hastur]

Killtown is disgraceful, but I think he's a disinfo artist. Killtown does make one good point though, you lot harass Sylvia Brown.

I've always wondered how exposing the truth is harassment? If Sylvia Brown tells someone their husband drowned and then it turns out he died in a fiery collapsed building, and someone posts her miss on a website, how is that harassment?

Sylvia could easily 'stop the harassment (i.e. truth)' by proving herself. She's the one that claims to have the powers.

 

[Moochie]

Why does she need to prove anything? People are free to pay for her services or not. If she was so bad she would run out of customers.

That's too true. Doesn't make it right, though. And certainly doesn't prove that she's anything other than a con artist exploiting the naive and vulnerable.

I'll add that I think you're a bloody disgrace if you condone this or any other sort of quackery.

M.

 

[Aphelion]

I've always wondered how exposing the truth is harassment? If Sylvia Brown tells someone their husband drowned and then it turns out he died in a fiery collapsed building, and someone posts her miss on a website, how is that harassment?

Sylvia could easily 'stop the harassment (i.e. truth)' by proving herself. She's the one that claims to have the powers.

She has nothing to prove to anybody. She does not claim to be 100% accurate and her clients enter into transactions willingly. If you have evidence of criminality, please hand it to the police. Put up or shut up.

As I said earlier, she doesn't need the million dollars, so why on earth should she take the challenge.

 

[Aphelion]

That's too true. Doesn't make it right, though. And certainly doesn't prove that she's anything other than a con artist exploiting the naive and vulnerable.

I'll add that I think you're a bloody disgrace if you condone this or any other sort of quackery.

M.

But i'm not presumptious enough to right her off as a quack. I can't prove she doesn't have this power.

 

[uruk]

She has nothing to prove to anybody. She does not claim to be 100% accurate and her clients enter into transactions willingly. If you have evidence of criminality, please hand it to the police. Put up or shut up.

As I said earlier, she doesn't need the million dollars, so why on earth should she take the challenge.

To prove she is not a fraud and to shut up anyone who claims otherwise.

If her track record was not so bad, there never would have been a question.

People give thier money willingly to all kinds of scams. Are you saying that these scam artists are not criminals because the people give thier money willingly?

Why is the drug trade illegal? People buy, sell and use drugs willingly.

 

[Moochie]

But i'm not presumptious enough to right her off as a quack. I can't prove she doesn't have this power.

Hence my remark about exploiting the naive and vulnerable.

Browne agreed to undertake the JREF challenge, and has predictably reneged, spectacularly.

She's making outrageous claims without supporting evidence, thus the onus is on her to provide such evidence. She won't, because she can't.


M.

 

[J. Arthur Hastur]

She has nothing to prove to anybody. She does not claim to be 100% accurate and her clients enter into transactions willingly. If you have evidence of criminality, please hand it to the police. Put up or shut up.

As I said earlier, she doesn't need the million dollars, so why on earth should she take the challenge.

No, she publicly claims to be over 80% accurate, yet in looking at what is publicly available she falls far short of that.

Some of what she does is criminal,hence the reason she's been to court , but mostly lying to and deluding people is unethical. I have a code of ethics, I deplore liars.

What she does in her 'readings' are an old established parlour trick, and if she claims to be legit (which she does, constantly) then she should have no problem proving it.

 

[Aphelion]

To prove she is not a fraud and to shut up anyone who claims otherwise.

Why should she? I wouldn't. When sad people gossip about me I feed the gossip to see how obsessed they can be. Sylvia doesn't care what you think of her.

If her track record was not so bad, there never would have been a question.

People give thier money willingly to all kinds of scams. Are you saying that these the scam artists are not criminals because the people give thier money willingly?

Why is the drug trade illegal? People buy, sell and use drugs willingly.

When will you be taking your evidence of her criminality to the police?

 

[Aphelion]

No, she publicly claims to be over 80% accurate, yet in looking at what is publicly available she falls far short of that.

Some of what she does is criminal,hence the reason she's been to court , but mostly lying to and deluding people is unethical. I have a code of ethics, I deplore liars.

What she does in her 'readings' are an old established parlour trick, and if she claims to be legit (which she does, constantly) then she should have no problem proving it.

If you deplore liars do you not think there might be people more deserving of your efforts. Like the government, for example? Leave the woman alone.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

If you deplore liars do you not think there might be people more deserving of your efforts. Like the government, for example? Leave the woman alone.

Can you even point to one thing on http://www.stopsylviabrowne.com/home/ that is not factually accurate?

 

[JimBenArm]

If you deplore liars do you not think there might be people more deserving of your efforts. Like the government, for example? Leave the woman alone.

Nope. She'll do just fine.
She said she'd be tested. To date, she's failed to do that. She has done deplorable things in the meantime, like told parents their child was dead, when he was captive and still alive. She is a loathesome creature, and deserves all the scorn and derision we can heap on her.
Your defense of this pond scum is right in line with your conspiracy thoughts. Defend the disgusting, accuse the innocent.

 

[uruk]

Why should she? I wouldn't. When sad people gossip about me I feed the gossip to see how obsessed they can be. Sylvia doesn't care what you think of her.

Gossip doesn't mean a thing to you or me because we have no vested interest in that gossip.
Brown has a church and a company to run. She has a vested interest.
When a company is hit with bad publicity they can deal with it in two ways.
Ignore it, and hope it goes away. Or address it and negate it.

Clearly Brown has chosen to ignore the criticizims and challenges. She can afford to do it untill it affects her interests. She does, after all, make her living from her alleged abilities.
Recently she has been addressing it. Example, the recent appearance of her PR agent on Cooper 360. The criticizms and challenges are begining to affect her finacially otherwise she would just continue to ignore the criticizims.

It will eventualy come to the point where she will just retire or she'll have to finally prove her claims.
Actually I think she'll be be hit for fraud or tax evasion before any of that happens.

When will you be taking your evidence of her criminality to the police?

There are other people better than I who are working on it.
It's not my place to bring on the convictions. It's her victims who will and who deserve any compensations.

But hey, if you are wrong just admit it rather than trying to change the focus of the argument.