StopSylvia email: Wow, Don't know what to say

[RSLancastr]

Just wanted to share this email I received today. the subject was "Wow, Don't know what to say":

Hi, Mr. Lancaster,

My name is [name], and I have been reading Sylvia's books for a couple years now, and I have most of them in my collection. I went to one of her lectures as a volunteer, and it was disappointing in that she left early and many people (including myself) did not get to meet her and have her sign their books. But I enjoyed the lecture, and since I got to attend for free, I had little to complain about...

Of course, I have an excellent memory and I study everything pretty well, but for some reason I never looked into Sylvia's claims beyond what is said in her books and on her website. I would notice discrepancies and contradictions within her various books, but "no psychic is ever 100%", and after all, she is only human, right? That's what I told myself every time I read something that contradicted something else which she had said in a different book (like I said, I have an excellent memory, so I've noticed every contradiction, but I excused them and continued deluding myself). Then today, out of the blue, I did a google search that led me to your site, and I was skeptical at first. But it didn't take long for me to see it, and I couldn't stop reading your articles, one right after the other, showing me that I could no longer deny the unspeakable things which Sylvia Browne has been doing. And I have to say, as one who believes in psychic ability even still, and one who has always had an unshakable belief in God, I am thoroughly disappointed by what I have discovered in reading the articles you have written.

I have to admit, I do feel foolish for denying the truth of what I already knew in my heart--that Sylvia is a fake--but more than anything, my heart is heavy as I think of all the people who have been conned by her, and I can't even begin to express how I feel right now as this disappointment continues to settle in. I am a very intelligent person, skeptical by nature but always with an open-mind, and though I was not really a "blind-follower" so-to-speak, (I have never been a follower of anyone, excepting my own self and my own heart), I did believe (or tell myself) that Sylvia was a good person and that she was legitimate. Now I see how wrong I've been, and I'm disappointed in myself for not having listened to my inner-self, who saw the discrepancies and who doubted Sylvia's claims almost from the start. I still believe much of what she has put out regarding spirituality, but these are things I already believed before I had ever even heard of Sylvia Browne, and things of which many others have already written and spoken...

I guess I just wanted to thank you for this website, and for helping to open my eyes to the truth concerning Sylvia Browne. You are a good person, and you are truly doing God's work by exposing the lies that woman tells. Like I said, I still believe in psychic abilities to a certain degree, but from now on I will trust my own intuition, and not someone else's unfounded claims.

Sincerely,
and with some heart-felt regret,
[name]

 

[Oualawouzou]

I don't think there is much to say. The seed of doubt has been sown.

 

[RSLancastr]

I don't think there is much to say. The seed of doubt has been sown.

"Wow, Don't know what to say" was the subject of her email to me, not my comment on it. I've updated the OP to clarify this.

 

[ExMinister]

It makes me wonder which articles affected her most and why.

I only wish I could change the last line she wrote. Where she wrote, "From now on I will trust my own intuition and not someone else's unfounded claims," I would wish for her to say: "From now on I will research any claims I hear before I trust them to be factual. Intuition can be deceiving too."

I wish that for her sake. My heart goes out to her for the disappointment she feels.

 

[RSLancastr]

ExM, I thought of you when I read it. By the way, I talked about you (thouh not by name) in today's Resident Skeptic show, in response to a question about how a person becomes a skeptic.

 

[rjh01]

Congratulations. Any plans to update your site in the near future?

 

[ExMinister]

ExM, I thought of you when I read it. By the way, I talked about you (thouh not by name) in today's Resident Skeptic show, in response to a question about how a person becomes a skeptic.

Rats, I would love to have heard that.

We had a belated birthday dinner for my dad last night so I missed it. I am determined to hear #3 next weekend, though. BTW, feel free to mention me by name. I am proud to be a skeptic and happy if I can be a positive example for others. Just don't mention Mr. ExM.

 

[Alice Shortcake]

I only wish I could change the last line she wrote. Where she wrote, "From now on I will trust my own intuition and not someone else's unfounded claims," I would wish for her to say: "From now on I will research any claims I hear before I trust them to be factual. Intuition can be deceiving too."

All credit to this lady for the progress she's made so far, but without trust in her own intuition her "unshakeable faith in God" and belief in at least some of Sylvia's writings on spirituality would be at risk. The old it-feels-right-to-me-so-it-must-be-true mantra is a classic faith-preserving mechanism.

 

[RSLancastr]

I neglected to show this, her reply to my request to share her first email:

I do not have any issues with you sharing my email. Again, thank you for your website. It definitely gives one food for thought, and puts together some very important things one ought to know if considering having a reading with any psychic. Sylvia was always so convincing in her books, but seeing the documented evidence which cannot be refuted, it's hard to deny that she's obviously not as "psychic" as she claims to be. I still believe in many of the philosophies she has taught in her books, but I already believed most of those things anyway, and it's not like she's the first one to come up with these philosophies. It's just so sad that she would use them as a means of lulling people into a false sense of trust; but I suppose she would not be the first person to do such a thing, and she will certainly (and unfortunately) not be the last....

Anyway, thanks again for listening, and for the work you do. I am thankful I never had the money to get a reading from Sylvia (the only psychic I have ever even considered paying for a reading with), and with what I now know, I will never consider it again. After all, what need do we have to know our futures? As Sylvia herself has often said in her books, knowing our futures would be like cheating on a test. And I have never been a cheater.

Still smiling, though greatly disappointed,

[name]

My reply included a bit about how our "intuition" is unreliable, stating that I've often heard from people regretting that they had trusted their intuition, which had told them that Browne was legit. And that, although we all would like to think that OUR intuition is accurate, the sad fact is that we ALL can be fooled.

 

[RSLancastr]

There have been those in this forum (Brattus, are you there?) who have said that even if my site caused someone to lose their belief in Browne's "abilities", that person would simply transfer their belief to another psychic. I think the emails from this woman show that this is not always the case.

 

[ExMinister]

There have been those in this forum (Brattus, are you there?) who have said that even if my site caused someone to lose their belief in Browne's "abilities", that person would simply transfer their belief to another psychic. I think the emails from this woman show that this is not always the case.

Yes, the fact that she said she would never consider a reading again is a good sign that she realizes if she could be deceived once, she could be deceived again.

It sounds like she is still willing to trust other psychics/sources to provide her with spiritual information, though. I was like that too, at first. I had no idea that with enough research, the whole house of cards would collapse. Maybe now that she's seen what a little investigating of Sylvia can reveal, she'll keep going.

 

[RSLancastr]

'tis a consummation devoutly to be wished, Ex-M! (I think that's The Bard, but I'm too pooped to Google at the mo'.

 

[RSLancastr]

Hamlet.

 

[RSLancastr]

Congratulations. Any plans to update your site in the near future?

Still having technical difficulties.

 

[shandyjan]

Hopefully now she will research when a psychic grabs her attention, and realise that most of them have been caught making horrible errors, or cheating.

 

[RSLancastr]

Shandyjan, that was one of my main goals when I created StopSylvia.com. That, by deconstructing what one of the most famous psychic does, it would not only show some the truth about her, but would show them how to deconstruct other psychics and such.

 

[billydkid]

What baffles me is that some skanky, trailer park trash (I have known many fine people who live in trailer parks and do not mean to suggest that living in a trailer park makes you trash) with zero charisma while being ugly as a toad could become a millionaire convincing people that she has a direct line to the spiritual realm. It would be one thing if she had even the remotest bit of personal charm or attractiveness, but she does not. She is personally repellent, yet people flock to her. What's more, her readings are almost guttural in their articulation. I have to think that people are so desperate for validation of their hopes and wishes they will cling to anything. She is evil. John Edward is evil. All of the people of this ilk are evil.

 

[ExMinister]

What baffles me is that some skanky, trailer park trash (I have known many fine people who live in trailer parks and do not mean to suggest that living in a trailer park makes you trash) with zero charisma while being ugly as a toad could become a millionaire convincing people that she has a direct line to the spiritual realm. It would be one thing if she had even the remotest bit of personal charm or attractiveness, but she does not. She is personally repellent, yet people flock to her. What's more, her readings are almost guttural in their articulation. I have to think that people are so desperate for validation of their hopes and wishes they will cling to anything. She is evil. John Edward is evil. All of the people of this ilk are evil.

For people who never had the slightest temptation toward belief, who recognized deception for what it was right from the start, I can see why it would be completely baffling. Ugly as a toad, skanky millionaire - some of that made me laugh.

It is all evil. The whole lot of them and what they do, assuming they are doing it intentionally and not out of some misguided sincerity. It isn't immediately obvious if you are a believer, though.

Over and over again I have heard people say that they love her sense of humor, how down-to-earth, tell-it-like-it-is she seems, and they love her philosophy. Her fans, rightly, don't care about her appearance or her voice.

Only after you figure out it's all lies do you begin to see the evil.

 

[RSLancastr]

And, ExM,you have stated here man times that she is (or was) very charming in person. Hard to believe, but I'll take your word for it.

 

[Trent Wray]

What baffles me is that some skanky, trailer park trash (I have known many fine people who live in trailer parks and do not mean to suggest that living in a trailer park makes you trash) with zero charisma while being ugly as a toad could become a millionaire convincing people that she has a direct line to the spiritual realm. It would be one thing if she had even the remotest bit of personal charm or attractiveness, but she does not. She is personally repellent, yet people flock to her. What's more, her readings are almost guttural in their articulation. I have to think that people are so desperate for validation of their hopes and wishes they will cling to anything. She is evil. John Edward is evil. All of the people of this ilk are evil.

It's simple I think: they can relate to her. She accepts them and exploits their vulnerability.

When you're vulnerable, and ugly as a toad, and repel others, and lack charm ... are you going to flock to the person who is calling you stupid, ugly, delusional, mentally deficient, and mock you for your beliefs and thoughts and feelings? No. You will flock to the one with open arms who listens to you and speaks your language ... who is "like you". And when you are vulnerable, you don't want to be further crapped on ... you don't always even want to be just "stroked" either necessarily. You want someone to give you hope, guidance, and acceptance. If that person you flock to exploits that, then shame on them.

We're not all using the same set of tools in life. Not every woo is a woo because they despise knowledge, or spurn skeptical thinking, or are incomplete human beings. Some of them are simply doing the best they can with the "tools" they have, and changes are difficult and take time. Some have simply never been taught, and need to be taught with much more patience and understanding than other people. People like SB seem like "successful versions of themselves" .... where as someone on this forum, for example, might seem so far removed from what they are used to dealing with, they will be intimidated and unable to find a way to relate.

The woman who wrote that letter showed a lot of courage I think .... opening up to a skeptic about her true thoughts and ideas, and instead of being met with name calling and shame, she was met with patience, understanding, and gentle guidance.

What Gahndi said about Xtianity:

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." can apply to anything, even skepticism. A woo might be turned off to learn a new way of thinking (skepticsim) because of the skeptics. SB and the like won't turn them away .....