Proof of Life After Death!!

[desertgal]

But I was being so kind wth the "might" part

Obviously JE is your saviour and hero as you believe he has given you what you believe to be convincing proof of life after death and an ability to communicate with it (exactly what you were looking for).

Seems to be a rather one sided communication. Dad tells her she bought a new fridge, and Valerie Harper, yadda yadda.

That's it. No questions permitted. Not even so much as a "Hey, Pops, what's it like over there? Seen anyone we know?" Doesn't really qualify as "communication".

I think if there was really life after death, and I was receiving some half assed "communication" from a fraud psychic, I'd at least want to be able to get answers to a couple of questions, or hear something meaningful, like about the grandkids or how proud Pops is. "Nice Frigidaire" just seems incredibly flat and mundane for supernatural contact from the great beyond.

But, I guess if someone like Robin is willing to be conned by a sleaze like JE, the lack of any real substance to the "communication" wouldn't matter.

 

[Robin1]

No. It's a way to explain the alleged Valerie Harper connection, a piece of significant "evidence" supporting the claim of proof of life after death. Care to let us know which one it was? Or shall we protect everyone's privacy (even though we don't have to since the names are relevant to the topic and publicly available) and let that one go as a piece of information that John Edward could have easily discovered with about 5 minutes of research?

DAB.

I believe the following (to start) will be helpful to you.

Go to page 43 here and read OccamJr2 post 1707

and then go to page 44 and read post 1743.

But I really recommend you read the entire thread.

P.S. I am so NOT impressed by what you were easily able to find out...and I would also so NOT be impressed if JE knew it either.

 

[Robin1]

But I was being so kind wth the "might" part

Obviously JE is your saviour and hero as you believe he has given you what you believe to be convincing proof of life after death and an ability to communicate with it (exactly what you were looking for).

I’m assuming that the excitement and comfort this belief has given you has inspired you to start this thread to share your “discovery” and joy with others.

You must have known that the majority of the members of this forum are “nasty sceptics” but you seem to have thought that your “evidence” was so strong and convincing that perhaps it might even convince a few “nasty sceptics”. Not only have you not succeeded in doing this but don’t think you have even gained any support from a single “nice believer”.

Are you capable of at least considering the possibility that your “Proof of Life After Death!!” perhaps isn’t as strong and convincing as you thought it was?

Yes, because delusion can indeed be in the eye of the beholder, ynot.

 

[GeeMack]

DAB.

I believe the following (to start) will be helpful to you.

Go to page 43 here and read OccamJr2 post 1707

and then go to page 44 and read post 1743.

But I really recommend you read the entire thread.

I've read the entire thread. Even the two silly posts you recommend above.

P.S. I am so NOT impressed by what you were easily able to find out...and I would also so NOT be impressed if JE knew it either.

I was easily able to find a Valerie Harper connection, one which brother D apparently can't even recall. Interestingly enough, all the nonsense about tickets to a show wasn't even the most substantial connection. Looks like John Edward could have been going for something altogether different, laid into a coincidence that registered with a gullible mark, then let the mark run with it hook, line, and sinker.

It's exactly the same as when I'm about to do a mind reading card card trick. I peel a card off the top of the deck, ask the spectator to name any card, and flip over the one I just dealt. One out of 52 times it matches. Working a couple nights a week, doing that a couple times each night, I perform a miracle several times a year. When it happens I don't follow up with the trick I was about to show them. Can't do better than a miracle. And when it doesn't match, I chuckle and mention how someday I'll teach them how to read minds like I can. Then I do the trick.

John Edward, like any seasoned magician or con man, isn't an idiot. He counts on the audience to do that part of the job.

 

[Robin1]

I've read the entire thread. Even the two silly posts you recommend above.




I was easily able to find a Valerie Harper connection, one which brother D apparently can't even recall. Interestingly enough, all the nonsense about tickets to a show wasn't even the most substantial connection. Looks like John Edward could have been going for something altogether different, laid into a coincidence that registered with a gullible mark, then let the mark run with it hook, line, and sinker.

It's exactly the same as when I'm about to do a mind reading card card trick. I peel a card off the top of the deck, ask the spectator to name any card, and flip over the one I just dealt. One out of 52 times it matches. Working a couple nights a week, doing that a couple times each night, I perform a miracle several times a year. When it happens I don't follow up with the trick I was about to show them. Can't do better than a miracle. And when it doesn't match, I chuckle and mention how someday I'll teach them how to read minds like I can. Then I do the trick.

John Edward, like any seasoned magician or con man, isn't an idiot. He counts on the audience to do that part of the job.

I really appreciate your reading this thread.

Disagreeing with me is fine with me.

If you haven't already please also read "John Edward-Psychic or What?"

And then we can disagree some more.

P.S. You did read Michael Prescott's article, right?

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Yes, because delusion can indeed be in the eye of the beholder, ynot.

Yes it can, It can be blinding to two threads over 20 pages long breaking down every part of Johnny's con game.

 

[jsfisher]

Yes it can, It can be blinding to two threads over 20 pages long breaking down every part of Johnny's con game.

I think GeeMack just did an excellent job on an important part, but Robin1 will hear none of it.

 

[Stray Cat]

... And I have absolutely no desire to get into endless debates (been there, done that) trying to show how many times people here have been dead wrong...

Saying "you're wrong" isn't the same as showing people why they are wrong.

That is why when one of the nasty sceptics tells you that you may be mistaken in your perception of JE's soopa powerz™, they explain a process of reasoning based upon objective evidence and logic.

When you tell someone they are wrong you just tell them they are wrong because you don't agree with them... Which of course is simply a bare assertion.

 

[ynot]

Yes, because delusion can indeed be in the eye of the beholder, ynot.

That you describe JE as being – “Definitely the real deal!” and other glowing endorsements doesn’t sound like there’s anything in your eye other than a twinkle for JE.

 

[meg]

No. It's a way to explain the alleged Valerie Harper connection, a piece of significant "evidence" supporting the claim of proof of life after death. Care to let us know which one it was? Or shall we protect everyone's privacy (even though we don't have to since the names are relevant to the topic and publicly available) and let that one go as a piece of information that John Edward could have easily discovered with about 5 minutes of research?

Are you referring to her brother being an actor? Or what?

 

[meg]

You keep running off whenever this is brought up, but I really would like to know, Robin..

John Edward and Sylvia Browne are reported to be close friends, and he even dedicated his first book to her. What do you think about that?

 

[pakeha]

...
5) There was indeed a crazy, obsessive, angry, guy on my blog who scared me enough to make me paranoid... probably more than I should be...about Internet strangers. ...

Understandable.
I've had some scares myself and yes, there ARE crazies out there.
But to get back to JE.
And those proofs of after-life.

Did you watch those videos of JE's performances the posters here have presented?

I've read the entire thread. Even the two silly posts you recommend above.




I was easily able to find a Valerie Harper connection, one which brother D apparently can't even recall. Interestingly enough, all the nonsense about tickets to a show wasn't even the most substantial connection. Looks like John Edward could have been going for something altogether different, laid into a coincidence that registered with a gullible mark, then let the mark run with it hook, line, and sinker.

It's exactly the same as when I'm about to do a mind reading card card trick. I peel a card off the top of the deck, ask the spectator to name any card, and flip over the one I just dealt. One out of 52 times it matches. Working a couple nights a week, doing that a couple times each night, I perform a miracle several times a year. When it happens I don't follow up with the trick I was about to show them. Can't do better than a miracle. And when it doesn't match, I chuckle and mention how someday I'll teach them how to read minds like I can. Then I do the trick.

John Edward, like any seasoned magician or con man, isn't an idiot. He counts on the audience to do that part of the job.

Thanks for explaining how stage performers learn to roll with the punches!

 

[greybeard]

To be honest Robin there is no more evidence in this thread that JE is genuine than there is in the emails I get occasionally from Nigerian scammers that they are genuine. On the one hand they could actually be telling the truth. I cannot prove they are not. Experience and logic tell me though that they are just lying to enrich themselves at my expense.
It could also be that the occasional hit that JE has means he really can communicate with the dead. I've watched the videos others have posted in this thread though and seen him grasping at straws most of the time. Also it's perfectly obvious that he uses the same cold reading techniques as other "psychics". The very same "psychics" who you yourself have told us are fakes or even evil. And as Meg says the one you think is evil just happens to be a good friend of JE.

 

[zooterkin]

A number of off-topic posts have been moved to AAH.

Please keep to the topic of the thread, which is not each other. Thank you.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: zooterkin

 

[Foolmewunz]

A number of off-topic posts have been moved to AAH.

Please keep to the topic of the thread, which is not each other. Thank you.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: zooterkin

ETA: Never mind. I see it was dealt with in another fashion. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

 

[greybeard]

I should point out that I am not accusing Robin of scamming. I'm as certain as I can be under the circumstances that she genuinely believes what she posts. I'm just saying that I haven't seen any proof . Just anecdotes. Why should I believe those anecdotes any more than I would believe someone who thinks that Uri Gellar can really perform magic? And I would say that Gellar's act is actually more convincing than JE's act. So the thread title is misleading. There is no proof here. Far from it.

 

[desertgal]

I should point out that I am not accusing Robin of scamming. I'm as certain as I can be under the circumstances that she genuinely believes what she posts. I'm just saying that I haven't seen any proof . Just anecdotes. Why should I believe those anecdotes any more than I would believe someone who thinks that Uri Gellar can really perform magic? And I would say that Gellar's act is actually more convincing than JE's act. So the thread title is misleading. There is no proof here. Far from it.

Robin isn't here to convince us. She's here to convince herself.

 

[Garrette]

I really appreciate your reading this thread.

Disagreeing with me is fine with me.

If you haven't already please also read "John Edward-Psychic or What?"

And then we can disagree some more.

P.S. You did read Michael Prescott's article, right?

1. I know of the connection GeeMack is talking about. Given that it was discoverable and given that there are myriad other explanations besides life-after-death, this apparent hit is eve less remarkable than WD had already demonstrated.

2. I suspect GeeMack has read the other thread. Even if he has not, it does not matter. This hit and the other hits remain unremarkable. Regardless, there is no new or convincing info in that other thread.

3. I read the Prescott article. I dissected the Prescott article. I showed unequivocally how Prescott gives JE credit for things that JE did not say, just as you do regarding your experience. I show other flaws, too. You pointedly and tellingly refuse to address or even acknowledge my points.

You have double standards. You insist we read every word you ever write and every word of your favorite references then refuse to address us when we have done so and refuse to read our comments about it.

Your proof is made of air and wishes, Robin, and the only one with closed eyes and unchangeable mind is you.

 

[Garrette]

I should point out that I am not accusing Robin of scamming. I'm as certain as I can be under the circumstances that she genuinely believes what she posts. I'm just saying that I haven't seen any proof . Just anecdotes. Why should I believe those anecdotes any more than I would believe someone who thinks that Uri Gellar can really perform magic? And I would say that Gellar's act is actually more convincing than JE's act. So the thread title is misleading. There is no proof here. Far from it.

You should believe these anecdotes because Robin cannot be fooled, but others can. She is, after all, a librarian.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Robin isn't here to convince us. She's here to convince herself.

I disagree mainly because it seems to me she strongly believes John Edwards is the real deal. I'm thinking it's more of a "How can you not believe johnny can talk to the dead, listen to this story...."