John Edward in person

[pakeha]

For a moment, I was very happy.

I thought the title of this thread was "John Edwards in jail".

Same here. Would like to see him and all similar slime incarcerated or ineffectuallized.

You...aren't the only one!

How many people accidentally read the thread title "John Edward in prison" and then were utterly disappointed when they opened the thread? ETA: oh, there's one

Someone got my hopes up when I thought I saw "John Edwards in prison" as the thread title...

And here I am to add to the list!
We've seen professional illusionists out-perform the 'psychics'.
How is it tolerable that these fraud feed off the vulnerable?

 

[EHocking]

I always had an idea that if I want to see a medium I will...

Talk to a Large 8 weeks into their diet...

 

[Kuko 4000]

Yes, Derren may tell his audience he is doing NLP when he is using some sleight of hand.

*Nitpick*

No, he does not tell his audience he is doing NLP. Some people might assume he is using NLP, but that's their problem.

Btw. he pretty much trashes NLP in his book "Tricks of the Mind".

 

[Robert Oz]

*Nitpick*

No, he does not tell his audience he is doing NLP. Some people might assume he is using NLP, but that's their problem.

Btw. he pretty much trashes NLP in his book "Tricks of the Mind".

He certainly has done just that. See this clip with Derren Brown and Simon Pegg:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=befugtgikMg

I realise he trashes NLP when being honest, but he certainly has used it as misdirection in his explanations. I have a fairly good idea how he performed the BMX trick and, obviously, it has nothing to do with throwing in related words while anchoring and decorating the room with subliminal images.

ETA: I am aware he doesn't actually say 'NLP' in his explanation, but it is very obvious that the intention is to describe it.

 

[seacrest]

That's what the JREF $1m challenge does, and that's why performers like John Edwards won't take it.

Where is the $1m challenge test? There isn't one. What is the threshold for proof? JE is expected to work with mr Zwinge to develope it?

 

[Robert Oz]

Where is the $1m challenge test? There isn't one. What is the threshold for proof? JE is expected to work with mr Zwinge to develope it?

Yes, John Edward would have to work with the JREF (not necessarily with James Randi) to develop a protocol that both are happy with.

John Edward would have to state clearly what it is he believes that he can do. He would have to develop a protocol to test this claim objectively (i.e. no judges required, self-evident results). The number of hits that would be required to 'pass' the test would have to be determined.

In addition to the Million Dollar Challenge, there is quite a number of other cash prizes offered by skeptic organisations all over the world. None have been claimed by Edward or any other psychic.

 

[seacrest]

Are you suggesting that you would be able to 'see through' a reading made by Derren Brown or Ian Rowland (who have fooled many people 'in person', but have had the decency to admit that they aren't really psychic)?

You, et al, appear to be nobody's fool. I'm saying JE will provide you personal information that no cold reader ever could.( yes, DB is impressive, from my as yet limited exposure). For best results see JE with just you and yours, and he

 

[seacrest]

So going by your assertion here, you're saying that no person ever fell into a scam when he talked to the scammer in person?

I'm not including everyone, I'm addressing jref posters

 

[Robert Oz]

You, et al, appear to be nobody's fool.

No, that's not my point at all, seacrest. I can be fooled (although I think I'm pretty good at spotting cold reading). Anyone can be fooled.

The only reason I recognise Edward's cold reading is because I have researched cold reading a lot... on the internet, through video clips and even buying and reading books on the subject.

In The Full Facts Book of Cold Reading, Ian Rowland spends over a 150 pages teaching many of the techniques in great detail.

Edward has been accused of using hot reading as well. Researching information before a reading (e.g. on the internet, microphones in the audience, helpers that go around covertly asking questions, etc.).

I'm saying JE will provide you personal information that no cold reader ever could.( yes, DB is impressive, from my as yet limited exposure). For best results see JE with just you and yours, and he

I would sit for John Edward if he wasn't charging exhorbitent prices for his services. If Edward offered, I would be happy to sit for a reading, but I don't think I would see anything that I haven't seen before.

Keep watching Derren Brown on youtube. You'll see some amazing things.

 

[Robert Oz]

seacrest, I highly recommend the following article:

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/john_edward_hustling_the_bereaved/

Regarding Edward's knowledge of very specific information, I offer the following from the above link:

...while the audience was waiting to be seated, Edward’s aides were scurrying about, striking up conversations and getting people to fill out cards with their name, family tree and other facts. Once inside the auditorium, where each family was directed to preassigned seats, more than an hour passed before show time while “technical difficulties” backstage were corrected.

Keep in mind, I'm not saying Edward always does this or that he always does it in the way described above. However, it only takes a handful of very specific examples for reputations to grow. Cold reading does the rest.

And...

Hours before the group reading, Tony had been the cameraman on another Edward shoot (recording him at his hobby, ballroom dancing). Significantly, the two men had chatted and Edward had obtained useful bits of information that he afterward pretended had come from the spirits.

Another thing to keep in mind: when not knowing what to keep an eye out for, cold reading can come across as a delivery of very specific information, when it really isn't.

 

[Pixel42]

Where is the $1m challenge test? There isn't one.

Given that the rules and FAQ and a list of people who have taken it (and failed) can be found on this very site, that's a very odd claim.

What is the threshold for proof?

Obviously that depends to some extent on the claim being tested, but it's usual to set up test conditions that ensure that the chances of guessing right are calculable, and then set the success criteria to be significantly better than that chance result. 1 in 1000 is usual for the preliminary test, i.e. the claimant must produce results that have only a one in a thousand chance or better of being obtained by luck alone.

JE is expected to work with mr Zwinge to develope it?

With JREF. Of course. How else could a test protocol that's acceptable to both him and JREF be arrived at?

For the kind of claim Edwards makes, a test protocol like the following might be suitable:

1. There are five subjects, each of whom has a recently deceased close relative. Each in turn sits close to JE but behind a screen. He is not allowed to question them directly. [Both precautions required to eliminate cold reading]

2. For each subject, JE writes down everything the spirits tell him about the subject and/or their deceased relative. Each account is identified with a number.

3. After the final reading, five copies of the five readings are made and given to the five subjects. Each picks out the reading which they think is theirs. [Note: they are not given their reading alone and asked how accurate it is. See the Forer Effect ].

4. The number of the reading picked by each subject is compared to the number of the reading that is actually theirs. Note that there's a 1 in 5 chance of each subject picking their own reading by chance, but a much lower chance of all five picking their own reading.

5. The test is run however many times is required for JE to beat the set success criteria.

ETA: As an example of the sort of negotiation that might go on before the test protocol was agreed: suppose Edwards objected that he doesn't always get information for a particular subject. The test protocol would be adjusted so that extra subjects are on standby, and Edwards would be allowed to pass on any particular subject for whom he was unable to produce a reading.

 

[Resume]

You, et al, appear to be nobody's fool. I'm saying JE will provide you personal information that no cold reader ever could.( yes, DB is impressive, from my as yet limited exposure). For best results see JE with just you and yours, and he

Like a private reading? Is that an option? If so, what would such a thing cost?

 

[Ocelot]

Like a private reading? Is that an option? If so, what would such a thing cost?

$750 Source

So here's a plan for those impressed by JE's skills.

Hire him for 7 private readings ($5,250 but try to negotiate a bulk discount), but since you're paying, impose the controls mentioned above. He cannot comminucate directly with the sitter, he can only write down what he's getting.

The JREF may wish to impose further conditions - blindfolding, ensuring the sitters and JE have no prior contact etc. If you're wise then you'll have your own conditions such as how the sitters are selected to ensure that they are trustworthy enough to pick the most apt reading - perhaps you'll want to incentivise them to do so.

Then all 7 get to see all 7 readings and pick the one that is closest to their own.

The passmark will be just 5/7. The odds of getting or better by chance alone is roughly 1/1000.

If he suceeds in this preliminary test then you're the first person to pass such a test and you're halfway to a million. If not you're out by $5,250 perhaps Edward would share some of this risk for a share of the payout.

However if he does pass then you just need to repeat this. That'll no doubt cost you another $5,250 but if he's as good as you seem to think he is then your profit will be:

$1,000,000 prize - $10,500 for the overhead - ~$5,000 sundry overheads
= $984,500

#Winning!

I'm guessing that like me you don't have 10 grand sitting in your bank account just waiting for an investment opportunity with a 9376% rate of return but that's what banks are for.

Why sit here trying to convince people well practiced in finding flaws in the very arguments you're making when you could be inviting your bank manager to see John Edward in person and seeing what they say about the million dollar challenge.

 

[Resume]

$750 Source

So he is the biggest douche in the universe.

 

[Pixel42]

If you're wise then you'll have your own conditions such as how the sitters are selected to ensure that they are trustworthy enough to pick the most apt reading - perhaps you'll want to incentivise them to do so.

Alternatively you could just get them to write down a summary of their life history and that of their recently deceased relative before their reading, so you could verify that the reading they select is the one that bears the greatest resemblance to it. Though if past experience of such tests is anything to go by, they will find it hard to find a reading that's any more accurate than any other.

Why sit here trying to convince people well practiced in finding flaws in the very arguments you're making when you could be inviting your bank manager to see John Edward in person and seeing what they say about the million dollar challenge.

I like it. We all know that Edwards would never take a proper test willingly, but if someone convinced of his ability (or even a wealthy sceptic) hired him to do a large number of readings and then insisted on imposing the test conditions necessary to determine if he was a fraud or not I wonder what he'd do. Probably pretend that the spirits weren't being particularly co-operative that evening and return the client's money.

 

[Ocelot]

I dount that Edwards would agree to the conditions in the first place.

This sort of strategy works well for scenarios where the person offering supernatural services doesn't have to be aware of any changes required to control for the various cognitive biases suspected to be in effect.

So for example astrologers will happily make their predictions over email, and we suspect that the Forer effect supplies the illusion that it works.

When we commission a number of readings, the astrologer providing them doesn't have to know that they're part of a study. We can anonymise and strip any reference to birthdays or other giveaways from the written reply before sending them off to to sitters to be matched.

In the actual event astrologers are quite convinced that such tests are fair, will show that astrology works and are preapred to match profiles of test subjects to charts themselves. However even if given everything they think they need to make good predictions effect sizes are insignificant.

http://www.imprint.co.uk/pdf/Dean.pdf

The typical psychic medium on the other hand tends to practice with direct feedback. We suspect that they may be conciously or unconciously using cold reading. However unlike with the astrologers, the controls we'd put in place to eliminate this will significantly affect the way that this type of supernatural service provider practices.

For the concious fraud it's a tip off but even for the self deluded cold reader (or that black swan, a genuine medium) it's a change to the tried and tested modus operandi that may leads relectance to participate and post hoc justifications should (as we all expect) the experiment fail to deliver positive results.

The purpose of my suggestion is not based upon any serious expectation that John Edwards of all people might consent to such a set-up but a gedanken where his suporters consider how he might react to such a suggestion or how a party interested only in the validity of an investment opportunity might consider their unwavering certainty on the basis of a stage show.

 

[cambion]

I think a big part of Edward's appeal is that he IS so unassuming. He has a baby face and an innocent, nice aura (of the personality variety, not the supernatural) which can be disarming.

But he's still at best misguided and (more probably in my view) an outright fraud. He can't do anything the umpteen other retired and admitted phonies were able to do, so I don't see any reason to treat him differently just because he seems like a sweet person.

 

[Resume]

I think a big part of Edward's appeal is that he IS so unassuming. He has a baby face and an innocent, nice aura (of the personality variety, not the supernatural) which can be disarming.

But he's still at best misguided and (more probably in my view) an outright fraud. He can't do anything the umpteen other retired and admitted phonies were able to do, so I don't see any reason to treat him differently just because he seems like a sweet person.

He seems like a smarmy dumb-ass to me.

 

[cambion]

He seems like a smarmy dumb-ass to me.

Well, if you already know he's full of crap he does. But I can definitely see why less incredulous people might be inclined to trust him.

 

[R.A.F.]

I miss-read the title of this thread...I thought it said "John Edward in prison".