• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Proof of Life After Death!!

Robin1 said:
I take it you are a member of the "I'm 100% Certain Club" too, then?
Et tu, Resume, et tu?
Click to expand...

Ask a psychic.

Actually, I'll tell you. I've never seen any evidence that psychic ability exists. My provisional conclusion is that it doesn't. If something were to contradict that conclusion, I'd adjust it. But my gut tells me that's not going to happen.
 
Last edited:
I'm in the 100% certain club too, because I'm 100% certain that sometimes I'm going to be wrong.
 
OK, I've stated many times that EVERY psychic and medium I have been to thus far I believe is a fake. Except for John Edward. Obviously I know the tricks, I'm experienced, I'm knowledgeable ( in this subject anyway), I have half a brain, I can keep my emotion out of it, etc. Yet, even though I warn people on my blog about the frauds, the deluded, etc. most people here will not even entertain the notion I could be right about JE. Or my personal signs. I do get that you don't know me, so here's my question....is there anyone on this forum that you would respect enough to possibly believe if they came back here telling you that they went to JE and think he could be real? Or they had a personal sign that they think could be real. Would ANYBODY actually make you stop and reevaluate? Say it was Meg, or Resume, or, Garrette, or Pixel, or Foolmewunz or ExMinister, or RSLancastr, or Xterra, etc. ...would any of them or anyone else having a paranormal experience they thought was real, would that make you stop and consider the possibility. Or would you just try to convince them it was just a coincidence. Or memory fail. Or hot reading. Or a lucky guess. Or....
 
Last edited:
Robin1 said:
OK, I've stated many times that EVERY psychic and medium I have been to thus far I believe is a fake. Except for John Edward. Obviously I know the tricks, I'm experienced, I'm knowledgeable ( in this subject anyway), I have half a brain, I can keep my emotion out of it, etc. Yet, even though I warn people on my blog about the frauds, the deluded, etc. most people here will not even entertain the notion I could be right about JE. Or my personal signs. I do get that you don't know me, so here's my question....is there anyone on this forum that you would respect enough to possibly believe if they came back here telling you that they went to JE and think he could be real? Or they had a personal sign that they think could be real. Would ANYBODY actually make you stop and reevaluate? Say it was Meg, or Resume, or, Garrette, or Pixel, or Foolmewunz or ExMinister, or RSLancastr, or Xterra, etc. ...would any of them or anyone else having a paranormal experience they thought was real, would that make you stop and consider the possibility. Or would you just try to convince them it was just a coincidence. Or memory fail. Or hot reading. Or a lucky guess. Or....
Click to expand...


No, it is easier than that. We don't need any appeal to authority. All we need from you is a testable claim of what ability John Edward has....then we put it to a test. So far, all we have from you are anecdotes that can be fully accounted for with mundane explanations.
 
Robin1 said:
OK, I've stated many times that EVERY psychic and medium I have been to thus far I believe is a fake. Except for John Edward. Obviously I know the tricks, I'm experienced, I'm knowledgeable ( in this subject anyway), I have half a brain, I can keep my emotion out of it, etc. Yet, even though I warn people on my blog about the frauds, the deluded, etc. most people here will not even entertain the notion I could be right about JE. Or my personal signs. I do get that you don't know me, so here's my question....is there anyone on this forum that you would respect enough to possibly believe if they came back here telling you that they went to JE and think he could be real? Or they had a personal sign that they think could be real. Would ANYBODY actually make you stop and reevaluate? Say it was Meg, or Resume, or, Garrette, or Pixel, or Foolmewunz or ExMinister, or RSLancastr, or Xterra, etc. ...would any of them or anyone else having a paranormal experience they thought was real, would that make you stop and consider the possibility. Or would you just try to convince them it was just a coincidence. Or memory fail. Or hot reading. Or a lucky guess. Or....
Click to expand...

Respect doesn't enter into it, evidence does. Evidence shapes the hypothesis, not vise-versa. If you're hammering the evidence to conform to your conclusion, you're doing it wrong. Stop doing wrong things.
 
Robin1 said:
OK, I've stated many times that EVERY psychic and medium I have been to thus far I believe is a fake. Except for John Edward. Obviously I know the tricks, I'm experienced, I'm knowledgeable ( in this subject anyway), I have half a brain, I can keep my emotion out of it, etc. Yet, even though I warn people on my blog about the frauds, the deluded, etc. most people here will not even entertain the notion I could be right about JE. Or my personal signs. I do get that you don't know me, so here's my question....is there anyone on this forum that you would respect enough to possibly believe if they came back here telling you that they went to JE and think he could be real? Or they had a personal sign that they think could be real. Would ANYBODY actually make you stop and reevaluate? Say it was Meg, or Resume, or, Garrette, or Pixel, or Foolmewunz or ExMinister, or RSLancastr, or Xterra, etc. ...would any of them or anyone else having a paranormal experience they thought was real, would that make you stop and consider the possibility. Or would you just try to convince them it was just a coincidence. Or memory fail. Or hot reading. Or a lucky guess. Or....
Click to expand...

Anybody would have to provide good evidence.
 
Robin1 said:
OK, I've stated many times that EVERY psychic and medium I have been to thus far I believe is a fake. Except for John Edward. Obviously I know the tricks, I'm experienced, I'm knowledgeable ( in this subject anyway), I have half a brain, I can keep my emotion out of it, etc. Yet, even though I warn people on my blog about the frauds, the deluded, etc. most people here will not even entertain the notion I could be right about JE. Or my personal signs. I do get that you don't know me, so here's my question....is there anyone on this forum that you would respect enough to possibly believe if they came back here telling you that they went to JE and think he could be real? Or they had a personal sign that they think could be real. Would ANYBODY actually make you stop and reevaluate? Say it was Meg, or Resume, or, Garrette, or Pixel, or Foolmewunz or ExMinister, or RSLancastr, or Xterra, etc. ...would any of them or anyone else having a paranormal experience they thought was real, would that make you stop and consider the possibility. Or would you just try to convince them it was just a coincidence. Or memory fail. Or hot reading. Or a lucky guess. Or....
Click to expand...

I'm amazed you don't see the disconnect here.

He could be, He isn't and I know, let me write it again KNOW he's a fraud, There are 20+ minute collages of JE's failures all over youtube.

Your statement is leading me to two of many possible hypothesis'

1: Your a shill for John Edward and somehow employed by him to spread the word of how great he is. (Very unlikely)

2: John Edward got his hooks into you so good and made such an impact with a flimsy cold reading, that with each remembering gets better each time, That no matter how many times we lift the curtain you just can't see the guy behind it working the controls. (Much more likely)

Do not take this as an attack, You seem very bright and more than capable of spotting frauds, I think it boils down to this; And this is my opinion only.

By denying John Edwards your not just denying some TV Fraud your also denying that connection you thought you had with your deceased relative and by denying that, That you are losing them all over again.
 
Last edited:
Resume said:
Respect doesn't enter into it, evidence does. Evidence shapes the hypothesis, not vise-versa. If you're hammering the evidence to conform to your conclusion, you're doing it wrong. Stop doing wrong things.
Click to expand...
So you WOULD try to convince them it was just a coincidence, or memory fail, or hot reading...
Because, of course, you are 100% certain it can't be real. Because if it was real it should behave in exactly the way you say it should. Enter the failsafes. Yes, there is a 1 in 100 billion chance of that happening with a non-paranormal explanation, so that is what it must be. Obviously.
Evidence schmevidence...it's there ...you are just too smart to see it.
 
Last edited:
Robin1 said:
So you WOULD try to convince them it was just a coincidence, or memory fail, or hot reading...
Because, of course, you are 100% certain it can't be real. Enter the failsafes. Yes there is a 1 in 100 billion chance of that happening with a non paranormal explanation, so that is what it must be. Obviously.
Evidence schmevidence...it's there ...you are just too smart to see it.
Click to expand...

You seem genuine, so I won't be as arch as normally.

This idea of proof of an afterlife is a giant claim and as evidence . . . you're offering another giant claim, psychic mediums. Attempting to establish an unproven phenomenon with another unproven phenomenon is to bear a Sisyphean burden that's gonna keep rolling downhill.

And to simply claim the evidence is there and skeptics refuse to see it seems a cheap fix. I think you're better than that.
 
Resume said:
You seem genuine, so I won't be as arch as normally.

This idea of proof of an afterlife is a giant claim and as evidence . . . you're offering another giant claim, psychic mediums. Attempting to establish an unproven phenomenon with another unproven phenomenon is to bear a Sisyphean burden that's gonna keep rolling downhill.

And to simply claim the evidence is there and skeptics refuse to see it seems a cheap fix. I think you're better than that.
Click to expand...
First off, thanks for being nice...I do see there were many ways to go with my last statement : ) That being said, I don't think you purposely refuse to see the evidence ...I think you really just don't see it. JE was not the only proof I offered... I seem to remember a personal story or 2 or 3 or 4 or....in here as well. One of those "meaningless" anecdotes even had hard copy evidence...too bad it was just a
coincidence.
 
Robin1 said:
OK, I've stated many times that EVERY psychic and medium I have been to thus far I believe is a fake. Except for John Edward. Obviously I know the tricks, I'm experienced, I'm knowledgeable ( in this subject anyway), I have half a brain, I can keep my emotion out of it, etc. Yet, even though I warn people on my blog about the frauds, the deluded, etc. most people here will not even entertain the notion I could be right about JE. Or my personal signs. I do get that you don't know me, so here's my question....is there anyone on this forum that you would respect enough to possibly believe if they came back here telling you that they went to JE and think he could be real? Or they had a personal sign that they think could be real. Would ANYBODY actually make you stop and reevaluate? Say it was Meg, or Resume, or, Garrette, or Pixel, or Foolmewunz or ExMinister, or RSLancastr, or Xterra, etc. ...would any of them or anyone else having a paranormal experience they thought was real, would that make you stop and consider the possibility. Or would you just try to convince them it was just a coincidence. Or memory fail. Or hot reading. Or a lucky guess. Or....
Click to expand...

Much earlier in the thread a poster (can't remember the handle off the top of my head) admitted witnessing what they considered a "very impressive" hit from John Edward and that they had ruled out, to their own satisfaction at least, any obvious form of trickery. So for the sake of argument let's assume you and they basically had similar experiences. The difference between his (or her) approach and yours, and the reason they would have more credibility than you in relating the same experiences is not because they have super-skeptic credentials and you don't - it's because they admitted they saw an isolated incident they couldn't explain, and they drew no conclusions from it. You on the other hand seem incredibly eager to explain exactly how and why you experienced what you experienced with John Edward with no seeming evidence at all. You've indicated that you know exactly how visitations from the dead work (apparently they are more likely immediately after death?!). They are approaching the issue critically, you are approaching it support a pre-existing conclusion (that dead relatives can communicate arbitrary details through mediums). The poster in question showed that they were capable of approaching the issue critically and skeptically while not dismissing the experience out of hand. This is not something we get from your posts.
 
Robin1 said:
OK, I've stated many times that EVERY psychic and medium I have been to thus far I believe is a fake. Except for John Edward. Obviously I know the tricks, I'm experienced, I'm knowledgeable ( in this subject anyway), I have half a brain, I can keep my emotion out of it, etc. Yet, even though I warn people on my blog about the frauds, the deluded, etc. most people here will not even entertain the notion I could be right about JE. Or my personal signs. I do get that you don't know me, so here's my question....is there anyone on this forum that you would respect enough to possibly believe if they came back here telling you that they went to JE and think he could be real? Or they had a personal sign that they think could be real. Would ANYBODY actually make you stop and reevaluate? Say it was Meg, or Resume, or, Garrette, or Pixel, or Foolmewunz or ExMinister, or RSLancastr, or Xterra, etc. ...would any of them or anyone else having a paranormal experience they thought was real, would that make you stop and consider the possibility. Or would you just try to convince them it was just a coincidence. Or memory fail. Or hot reading. Or a lucky guess. Or....
Click to expand...

Sure.

All they would need is good, solid incontrovertible evidence that can be proven and re-proven time and again, without fail.
 
anazgnos said:
Much earlier in the thread a poster (can't remember the handle off the top of my head) admitted witnessing what they considered a "very impressive" hit from John Edward and that they had ruled out, to their own satisfaction at least, any obvious form of trickery. So for the sake of argument let's assume you and they basically had similar experiences. The difference between his (or her) approach and yours, and the reason they would have more credibility than you in relating the same experiences is not because they have super-skeptic credentials and you don't - it's because they admitted they saw an isolated incident they couldn't explain, and they drew no conclusions from it. You on the other hand seem incredibly eager to explain exactly how and why you experienced what you experienced with John Edward with no seeming evidence at all. You've indicated that you know exactly how visitations from the dead work (apparently they are more likely immediately after death?!). They are approaching the issue critically, you are approaching it support a pre-existing conclusion (that dead relatives can communicate arbitrary details through mediums). The poster in question showed that they were capable of approaching the issue critically and skeptically while not dismissing the experience out of hand. This is not something we get from your posts.
Click to expand...
I think visitations can happen anytime regardless of when the person died. And I have proof of that : )
I think the other poster you mentioned who saw JE have an impressive hit was Remie who used to work for James Randi. Look at her thread "John Edward - Psychic or What?" for important details of the night. She also said the rest of that man's ( he bought a ticket last minute) reading with JE was impressive as well. She even followed up with the man after the event to confirm he wasn't a plant, ask questions etc. James Randi himself and other well-known mentalists/magicians listened to Remie's audio recording of that night and her description of events, and her post-reading interview with the man and decided the only way JE could have known what he did was through hot reading but not sure exactly how he did it. Remie's possible example, if memory serves, would be that the man's wife ( she was not with him on the trip) called JE or his staff and said I really want you to impress my husband so here's some information. No assigned seating so the wife ( I'm saying this part not Remie) would have also had to send JE a picture of her husband cause JE knew the section to go to. Given this scenario or the one where JE can really connect with the dead, I think his connecting with the dead wins hands down. Only because, of course, I started out not being 100% certain of my conclusion.
 
Last edited:
Robin1 said:
Only because, of course, I started out not being 100% certain of my conclusion.
Click to expand...

But you've never seriously appeared open to any other conclusion. At least in your writings and dealings here. You appear massively predisposed to supernatural explanations and entirely uninterested in mundane ones.
 
Robin1 said:
I think visitations can happen anytime regardless of when the person died. And I have proof of that : )
Click to expand...

I think visitations can happen only after the person has been dead for 7 days, up until 70 days, when all possibility of visitation ceases.
As for proof: you show me yours then I'll show you mine.
 
anazgnos said:
Think he answered quite clearly here:

In other words, authentic spiritual revelations are recognizable because they conform to the observer's expectation of what authentic spiritual revelation looks like. Authentic spiritual revelation can only result in you thinking more like me, never in doing or believing something that I would disapprove of. If you come up with a different revelation than I did, it just shows you're doing it wrong.
Click to expand...
But he didn't answer my question, which was how would he convince such a person not to do what they thought they'd been told to do. He can't use evidence and logical argument, he's already ruled them out.
 
Robin1 said:
First off, thanks for being nice...I do see there were many ways to go with my last statement : ) That being said, I don't think you purposely refuse to see the evidence ...I think you really just don't see it. JE was not the only proof I offered... I seem to remember a personal story or 2 or 3 or 4 or....in here as well. One of those "meaningless" anecdotes even had hard copy evidence...too bad it was just a
coincidence.
Click to expand...
Anecdotes are not evidence, they are claims.
None of them have been backed up with anything that sets them apart from coincidence and chance. Until your claimed psychic phenomena are distinguishable from chance, they may as well be chance.
 
Robin1 said:
OK, I've stated many times that EVERY psychic and medium I have been to thus far I believe is a fake. Except for John Edward. Obviously I know the tricks, I'm experienced, I'm knowledgeable ( in this subject anyway), I have half a brain, I can keep my emotion out of it, etc. Yet, even though I warn people on my blog about the frauds, the deluded, etc. most people here will not even entertain the notion I could be right about JE. Or my personal signs. I do get that you don't know me, so here's my question....is there anyone on this forum that you would respect enough to possibly believe if they came back here telling you that they went to JE and think he could be real? Or they had a personal sign that they think could be real. Would ANYBODY actually make you stop and reevaluate? Say it was Meg, or Resume, or, Garrette, or Pixel, or Foolmewunz or ExMinister, or RSLancastr, or Xterra, etc. ...would any of them or anyone else having a paranormal experience they thought was real, would that make you stop and consider the possibility. Or would you just try to convince them it was just a coincidence. Or memory fail. Or hot reading. Or a lucky guess. Or....
Click to expand...

Well, if it was me,.... of course. But I'm a special bunny and they all know it.

Seriously... Robin, we've said this before and so that Mike A gets it, let's use two great possiblities, generally honored among skeptics and critical thinkers as poster children for the Scientific Method:

If either Steven Hawking or James Randi Hisself came in here tomorrow and offered only his word and his reputation to support the contention that James Edward could talk to the dead, Sylvia Browne really has a spirit guide informing her where missing children are, Peter Popov can really cure people through the magic of Teh Lord, or Uri Geller can move magnetic north by the sheer power of his mind....

..... We would ask for evidence. Some people might rally behind their favorite skeptical thinker out of force of habit, but most of us are not so totally rudderless in our lives that we would fall in line behind nonsense just because it was proffered by someone with credentials.
 
:boggled:
Robin1 said:
So you WOULD try to convince them it was just a coincidence, or memory fail, or hot reading...
Because, of course, you are 100% certain it can't be real. Because if it was real it should behave in exactly the way you say it should. Enter the failsafes. Yes, there is a 1 in 100 billion chance of that happening with a non-paranormal explanation, so that is what it must be. Obviously.
Evidence schmevidence...it's there ...you are just too smart to see it.
Click to expand...

Once again you are ignoring the fact that we have an enormous amount of precedent to go by. People who were utterly convinced that they were experiencing something which couldn't' possibly be explained by chance have been proved wrong every single time their belief has been put to the test.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom