StopSylviaBrowne - I Speak With Sylvia Browne

[Hawthorne]

I think it is a little surprising that she wouldn't want people to ask the "stupid" questions. A "yes" answer to the is-my-loved-one-happy-on-the-otherside question makes everyone feel warm and fuzzy and can't be proven wrong...and she doesn't have to step out on a limb and get creative with it.

 

[Rasmus]

I think it is a little surprising that she wouldn't want people to ask the "stupid" questions. A "yes" answer to the is-my-loved-one-happy-on-the-otherside question makes everyone feel warm and fuzzy and can't be proven wrong...and she doesn't have to step out on a limb and get creative with it.

Yes, but after so many of them it might be a bit too obvious or at least slightly disappointing that the answers lack a certain amount of detail.

That "everybody is fine on the other side" is used as her excuse is just another indicator: If my friends and loved ones ask me how i am, my answer will be slightly more elaborate than just "oh yeah, doing great, thanks!".

Imagine you were dead and your now widowed other half had the rare chance to communicate with you. There would be a million things to say, countless little details that only you two would know about and all the things you used to care about and would now be worried about - and the uniform answer should be no more than "yes, i am well, thank. Loved the service!" I think not!

 

[Hawthorne]

I do see your point, Rasmus. No need for the old toad to get her panties in a twist over it, though.
Perhaps the people that do ask that very general question are secretly afraid to ask anything that would require more detail...they desperately want to believe, and a blatantly wrong answer would wash some sand out from under their foundation. Even if they did ignore it, that doubt would still be in the back of their minds - or at least I hope it would be, swimming around in there somewhere.

 

[Locknar]

The entire point of asking the question is to do exactly what you suggest. He has seen this claim in many, many books, and heard her say it as well. Anyone who listens to the woman for more than 5 minutes would easily doubt this claim. If she got a Masters in English, it is my opinion that she purchased it, because she learned nothing.

So what if she received a honorary Masters in English Literature, or essentially bought one from a unaccredited college/university...would that count?

Her claim is (from what I can tell) pretty straight forward; she claims to have a Masters in English Literature from University of San Fransico, in the 90's.

Anything beyond that (such as you suggest, the quality of her work), I'd suggest is subjective and quite the slippery slope.

 

[ExMinister]

Another reason people might clam up when Sylvia is dead wrong is because they aren't sure right at that second if she IS wrong. Especially when you are self-consciously standing in front of a large crowd of people, it takes a few moments to process what you've heard, and if it's wrong, it is perhaps easier to say nothing, assuming or hoping that maybe if you give it some thought (without all eyes on you, including Sylvia's), it will make more sense. Then, too late, you realize that it is never going to make any sense and you wish you'd said something.

 

[Rasmus]

So what if she received a honorary Masters in English Literature, or essentially bought one from a unaccredited college/university...would that count?

The latter at least would simply be illegal in Germany. Don't know about the US, though, or honorary degrees. But it would be the first time I'd hear of an honorary master's degree. (They seem to exists, but rarely so.)

Her claim is (from what I can tell) pretty straight forward; she claims to have a Masters in English Literature from University of San Fransico, in the 90's.

It might just be me, but I can't even see how you could not know the year in which you graduated? (Maybe I am just too young, though?)

Anything beyond that (such as you suggest, the quality of her work), I'd suggest is subjective and quite the slippery slope.

I think there's nothing wrong with questioning whether someone has a degree if that someone simply fails do display the expertise that usually comes with that degree.

I could prove my degree to you in a matter of a few minutes - I'd just have to take a digital picture of a piece of paper and attach it to a post here. Then it would be relatively obvious what kind of degree I have, who awarded it and what grade I got - never mind the date.

You could then contact the institution and double check with them. You could go to the library and might even be able to find my old thesis - even though I am not sure they keep them for BAs. I could name a couple of my old teachers - some might remember me.

And here we have a woman who has trouble remembering the year in which she graduated? Right.

 

[Locknar]

It might just be me, but I can't even see how you could not know the year in which you graduated? (Maybe I am just too young, though?)

Aye...that does seem odd.

I think there's nothing wrong with questioning whether someone has a degree if that someone simply fails do display the expertise that usually comes with that degree.

I agree there is nothing wrong with this...though it is not proof of anything. There are medical doctors, lawyers, engineers, professional chef's, etc. for example, that have degrees and yet are inept.

I could prove my degree to you in a matter of a few minutes - I'd just have to take a digital picture of a piece of paper and attach it to a post here. Then it would be relatively obvious what kind of degree I have, who awarded it and what grade I got - never mind the date.

That is kind of my point; if you have the credentials it is usually pretty easy to prove it. In SBs case, she has spent a lot of time spewing "claptrap", excuses, etc. vs just answering the question.

And here we have a woman who has trouble remembering the year in which she graduated? Right.

Make no mistake, I have ZERO doubt SB is a fraud in virtually everything she claims....from her "powers" to yes her claimed Masters.

I simply favor the fact based argument (which is difficult to argue with) vs the subjective one (which is enormously easy to argue with).

As a tangent topic...is there any reasonable way that someone could sue SB over this Masters claim, citing say fraud? After all, part of her book marketing is based on her having this degree...otherwise why would she mention it?

 

[pgwenthold]

Recall that SB has been given plenty of opportunity to document her degree. In fact, her staff have actually sent Robert a transcript in response to his inquiry (or is it enquiry ) about her masters degree that does not support her claim. Moreover, Robert can correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK this was the first time she ever has claimed USF as the source of her degree (at least that has been reported).

The fact that she stonewalled and out-and-out botched the initial responses is indeed a reason to question the validity of her claim. Especially since it is a common ruse of charletons to make up things about their educational credentials (as Robert learned very clearly when investigating Kaz, who claims to have a PhD but we have shown it is not from any legimate PhD granting institution in the US - we searched long and hard using every variation on the theme we could; all this could be easily fixed by Kaz providing the information)

 

[Rasmus]

There are medical doctors, lawyers, engineers, professional chef's, etc. for example, that have degrees and yet are inept.

Very true. From what I see it is slightly different with Sylvia, though. It seems to me she really is advertising her degree a lot. A lawyer, no matter how inept, would usually advertise that he is a lawyer and not put any weight on his PhD. (But that's just a gut feeling I have, really.)

I simply favor the fact based argument (which is difficult to argue with) vs the subjective one (which is enormously easy to argue with).

Indeed. I will just wait for the appropriate article from Robert, I guess.

But to me it isn't so much the question if she really has an actual degree. As you said, many people that do aren't any better for it. It's most likely just another lie of hers and exposing it would further solidify the overall picture of her. If she does have the degree, she would't actually gain much from that. Then there is the fact that she is inept when it comes to her alleged subject. That she might not have a degree would be a minor point compared to her inabilities in the language department.

As a tangent topic...is there any reasonable way that someone could sue SB over this Masters claim, citing say fraud? After all, part of her book marketing is based on her having this degree...otherwise why would she mention it?

Like I said, in Germany it's a crime to claim an academic title that you do not have. If I gave out my address claiming I was "Dr Rasmus" that might get me in serious trouble. (I just see that I can use my bachelor's degree, though. I wasn't sure abot that since I got it in the UK)

 

[Locknar]

Like I said, in Germany it's a crime to claim an academic title that you do not have. If I gave out my address claiming I was "Dr Rasmus" that might get me in serious trouble. (I just see that I can use my bachelor's degree, though. I wasn't sure abot that since I got it in the UK)

Total tangent; I seem to recall it is basically illegal for anyone to use the term "Dr" in Germany unless they had recieved their PhD from a German University?

ETA: Make that from a German or EU University

 

[Madalch]

Total tangent; I seem to recall it is basically illegal for anyone to use the term "Dr" in Germany unless they had recieved their PhD from a German University?

I did my post-doc in Germany, and nobody ever gave me any flak for calling myself "Dr. Madalch", regardless of where my PhD came from.

 

[CFLarsen]

I did my post-doc in Germany

What did his wife say to that?

 

[Locknar]

I did my post-doc in Germany, and nobody ever gave me any flak for calling myself "Dr. Madalch", regardless of where my PhD came from.

I seem to recall a new story not to long ago on this, so I did a quick look and found these stories:
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/86/i11/8611notw7.html
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/86/i10/8610notw1.html

I'm guessing you got luckier then those referenced in the second story.

 

[ExMinister]

Sylvia's latest book End of Days is in the stores and I noticed that the statement about her master's degree is nowhere to be found. I checked her last book (I think it was Temples on the Other Side) and the statement (along the lines of "Sylvia has a master's degree in English and will be writing as long as she can hold a pen") was still there - the same statement in most all her previous books. Why is it suddenly absent, I wonder?

 

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Another reason people might clam up when Sylvia is dead wrong is because they aren't sure right at that second if she IS wrong. Especially when you are self-consciously standing in front of a large crowd of people, it takes a few moments to process what you've heard, and if it's wrong, it is perhaps easier to say nothing, assuming or hoping that maybe if you give it some thought (without all eyes on you, including Sylvia's), it will make more sense. Then, too late, you realize that it is never going to make any sense and you wish you'd said something.

Right, and even if you instantly realized that the psychic was wrong and weren't stuggling with confusion, it would be very hard to challenge or even contradict and correct them. It takes alot of nerve (and some suspension of good manners) to make a fuss at any public appearance, let alone one with a well-known celebrity surrounded by his or her fans and even more so if that celebrity is a psychic.

And then there's the fact that cold-reading works because an attendee wants the psychic to be right; they might be in denial of the facts and retrofit them heavily until they fit.

At least when Sylvia was appearing on Montel, she had Montel to shout down anyone who corrected her or talk away her mistakes.

I could be wrong about this but Sylvia's victims sometimes remind me of people affected by Battered Person Syndrome. The way they accept her rudeness towards them, the way they blame themselves for her mistakes, the enormous power she seems to wield over them emotionally...I'd almost call their behavior towards her "cowering" before her.

Have any of you ex-NS folks noticed this? Or am I wrong?

 

[Locknar]

I could be wrong about this but Sylvia's victims sometimes remind me of people affected by Battered Person Syndrome. The way they accept her rudeness towards them, the way they blame themselves for her mistakes, the enormous power she seems to wield over them emotionally...I'd almost call their behavior towards her "cowering" before her.

Have any of you ex-NS folks noticed this? Or am I wrong?

I think it is along those lines.

Most of her victims (such as on Montel, for example) are desperate...they ignore the rudeness as well as her mistakes partially out of shock, partially because they blame themselves (as you suggest).

Even in her Vegas show...most are so excited to get to ask a question, they will explain away (or overlook) things such as her attitude, mistakes, etc.

 

[ExMinister]

I could be wrong about this but Sylvia's victims sometimes remind me of people affected by Battered Person Syndrome. The way they accept her rudeness towards them, the way they blame themselves for her mistakes, the enormous power she seems to wield over them emotionally...I'd almost call their behavior towards her "cowering" before her.

Have any of you ex-NS folks noticed this? Or am I wrong?

No, you're not wrong. There are a lot of reasons, and there is probably a difference between what motivates the ministers versus the public. She was never rude to me, but with the ministers, I think some are motivated because of the power and status they get from being associated with her, but others are convinced that Sylvia's philosophy is genuine, that she really is in direct contact with the Other Side through her spirit guide and they will stay (and overlook the negative) because they really think Sylvia is a prophet and they are part of a mission. Some of them seem firmly convinced they are on a "mission for Azna" and to betray Sylvia or turn away from her gnostic movement would be a betrayal of God herself. For some I really think it's a little of both.

With the public, there's one other thing - Sylvia, with her claim to have a spirit guide she hears chattering in her ear, has managed to convince a lot of them that she is basically the next best thing to having a conversation with God. So they are intimidated from the start. Remember how Montel used to encourage that with his, "Why bother to ask Sylvia if you already think you know the answer"? Which would probably make it even more intimidatinga nd embarassing to contradict anything she said.

 

[RSL's better half]

Originally Posted by Rasmus
I think there's nothing wrong with questioning whether someone has a degree if that someone simply fails do display the expertise that usually comes with that degree.

Originally posted by Locknar
I agree there is nothing wrong with this...though it is not proof of anything. There are medical doctors, lawyers, engineers, professional chef's, etc. for example, that have degrees and yet are inept.

The point is, if she's lying about her degree, she is probably lying about other things. It's another thing to point out to her believers that she may not be what she professes to be.

BTW: I spoke about this at lunch the other day with two people who have Masters degrees. Neither one could recall off the top of their head what year they received it, but they were sure what school it was and didn't screw-up the name by saying it backward (ie, SB saying "San Francisco University" many times, and now is saying University of SF - one exists, the other does not). Now, one of these people went on and got a PhD. I didn't ask if she recalled the year she got that one, but it may be more important in her memory than the Masters was and she may remember that year more clearly because less time has gone by.

 

[Locknar]

The point is, if she's lying about her degree, she is probably lying about other things. It's another thing to point out to her believers that she may not be what she professes to be.

Agreed. I simply suggest her inability to provide any valid credentials to support her claim as proof vs subjective speculation on her lack of ability.

 

[Rasmus]

BTW: I spoke about this at lunch the other day with two people who have Masters degrees. Neither one could recall off the top of their head what year they received it, but they were sure what school it was and didn't screw-up the name by saying it backward (ie, SB saying "San Francisco University" many times, and now is saying University of SF - one exists, the other does not).

Interestingly enough, I make that mistake about my university. The "University of Stirling" is often called "Stirling University", possibly because it's slightly shorter.

Now, one of these people went on and got a PhD. I didn't ask if she recalled the year she got that one, but it may be more important in her memory than the Masters was and she may remember that year more clearly because less time has gone by.

I will try and ask my parents what dates they remember ....