Proof of Life After Death!!

[Stray Cat]

Read the thread.

How many times would one need to "read the thread" before it magically becomes anything other than your inconsistent and illogical justification of one psychic over the rest of the bunch while totally ignoring all the very relevant points and information provided by the helpful sceptics?

If I watch Close Encounter enough times, will aliens in flying saucers become real?

 

[Foolmewunz]

And step right up folks, here we have desertgal showing her true colors...again.

Although instead of being annoyed...I'm just feeling sorry for her.

True colors? Of a snarky skeptic? Is that a revelation to you? She's said that she's a little quick to drop the bon mot from time to time, as am I.

But I think it's a legitimate question. Just how does that little bit of anecdotal fluff 'n stuff "reunite" you with your father? You, no doubt, have a different definition for reunite than the rest of us (not dissimilar to the disagreement we have on the definition of, say, "proof"?) but I'd think that reuniting would mean that you and dad are sitting around discussing things in matching bentwood rockers, sipping a nice pot of Dilmah Darjeeling and helping the kids or grandkids with their homework. That kind of reuniting?

And precisely which statement of Edward is the one that you feel reunited you? Or do you actually mean that the silly little points he threw out pointed you in the direction of doing more of your own retro-fitting, so you've now found a way to come to terms with your grief over losing your father and attribute it to John, when just like the sessions themselves, you've done all the work, yourself.

 

[Foolmewunz]

You mentioned at some point in the thread (I've skimmed through it, but not read entirely, I admit) that you investigated many false psychics before him. Is he the only one you're aware of that you believe is real? How many other people in the world would you estimate have the same ability? Are you aware of any examples of practical/useful information that JE has communicated?

On a separate note, during the communication (apologies if this has been asked and I didn't see it)... How do you know it was your father? Isn't it just as possible that JE can read minds, or was communicating with something/someone merely claiming to be your father?

Cooler! Thirty days!

 

[Stray Cat]

You're right. That was rude. But I seem to recall some rude comments of your own. If I am confusing you with someone else and you did not deserve that snarky reply, I do apologize.

I was also trying to say that if you really feel I have been "totally ignoring all the very relevant points and information provided by the helpful skeptics," then you also were not "comprehending" what has been going on here.

Then perhaps you could point me directly to the post where you address the critique of the Prescott (?) article that you placed so much faith in that was clearly shown to be nothing more than someone else who had been taken in hook, line and sinker by JE. An internally inconsistent mish mash of confirmation bias and misrepresentation.

As for you own personal stories; You insistence that you remember perfectly the events of years ago are inconsistent with what we know about human memory. Further even your stories have mutated within the relatively short time of this thread being opened.

So yes, I do comprehend what is going on here, it's just that my comprehension of it it based upon the facts in front of me, not a biased and distorted view pulled from edited TV shows, internet stories from credulous gushing JE fans or fallible human memories of a show that is specially designed to have people go away confused at what's just happened.

 

[Robin1]

Then perhaps you could point me directly to the post where you address the critique of the Prescott (?) article that you placed so much faith in that was clearly shown to be nothing more than someone else who had been taken in hook, line and sinker by JE. An internally inconsistent mish mash of confirmation bias and misrepresentation.

As for you own personal stories; You insistence that you remember perfectly the events of years ago are inconsistent with what we know about human memory. Further even your stories have mutated within the relatively short time of this thread being opened.

So yes, I do comprehend what is going on here, it's just that my comprehension of it it based upon the facts in front of me, not a biased and distorted view pulled from edited TV shows, internet stories from credulous gushing JE fans or fallible human memories of a show that is specially designed to have people go away confused at what's just happened.

Ironic to me that you don't "comprehend" that your view is indeed the biased and distorted one.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Ironic to me that you don't "comprehend" that your view is indeed the biased and distorted one.

It's nice to see that you've come up with a civil (and adult) translation of your "I'm rubber and your glue" argument, but it's still polishing a turd.

Perhaps you'd like to address the points StrayCat made? What have you understood of the criticisms of Prescott? If you've understood the posts and checked out the articles provided by DoomMetal, why do you not acknowledge having done so and why don't you chuck Prescott's opinions into the rubbish heap where they belong?

 

[Resume]

Did my critical thinking skills and skepticism cease to exist magically on the day of JE's reading?

Some of them, yes.

JE is about as "impressive" as a Chinese Horoscope placemat at my local Cantonese joint. I was born in the Year of the Cock, and funny thing, about every six months my horoscope changes almost 180 degrees . . . yet it still fits!

I would be amazed if I didn't understand the Forer Effect/Barnum effect, didn't understand cold/hot reading and mentalism, but I do. And so do you Robin.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Ironic to me that you don't "comprehend" that your view is indeed the biased and distorted one.

You seem to be saying, here, that only those who agree with you that (for instance) the information you and your brother provided in response to one of JE's guesses (and the story about which you and your bother cannot seem to be consistent), "comprehend" your point of view.

I beg to differ. I comprehend that you claim that you have "proof" of "life" after "death". I comprehend that your "proof" consists of inconsistent anecdotes about "the dead" being the only possible source of information about your new refrigerator. I comprehend that there has yet to be demonstrated either the existence of, or the suggestion of a mechanism for, a component of the personality with existence independent of the body.

It seems to me that what sets you off is being disagreed with (not having your claims accepted at face value)--especially by people who comprehend your position.

 

[Locknar]

After a culling or two, the bickering, etc. continues; thread is now Moderated pending yet another culling, infractions, etc.

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

 

[DuvalHMFIC]

My biggest concern right now is with the evidence we have at hand.

Robin, if we are to take you at your word that JE was spot on in your reading, that still doesn't explain the obvious instances of cold reading that he has used that have been posted here. Would you not at least be honest and admit that you watched that last clip that has been both posted and transcribed. Would you call those UUU hits?

Like I said, he could have been off that day, who knows. I'm not asking you to discredit YOUR reading, I'm just seeing if you can be intillectually honest when watching the clip or reading the transcript. Would you not admit, at the very least, that he HAS used cold reading at some points?

Perhaps he can't just "turn on the gift", and he's got to use the tricks on his off days. I really don't know. I think your opinion on this subject would be great, though. You have yet to address it, and I've read the thread.

 

[meg]

Robin, could you please share at what theater and when you saw JE?

This is an actual verifiable thing. One of the few bits of evidence there are in your stories. I would think you would jump at the chance to show evidence that anything in your story is verifiable and true.

 

[Robin1]

My biggest concern right now is with the evidence we have at hand.

Robin, if we are to take you at your word that JE was spot on in your reading, that still doesn't explain the obvious instances of cold reading that he has used that have been posted here. Would you not at least be honest and admit that you watched that last clip that has been both posted and transcribed. Would you call those UUU hits?

Like I said, he could have been off that day, who knows. I'm not asking you to discredit YOUR reading, I'm just seeing if you can be intillectually honest when watching the clip or reading the transcript. Would you not admit, at the very least, that he HAS used cold reading at some points?

Perhaps he can't just "turn on the gift", and he's got to use the tricks on his off days. I really don't know. I think your opinion on this subject would be great, though. You have yet to address it, and I've read the thread.

Yes I've read the links...tried to watch video but couldn't get it to work yesterday.

Yes, I do think that some of what JE says can appear to be cold reading.

BUT...

The reason I believe it is not cold reading is because he does sometimes (enough times to be significant) get those UUU hits which are directed at specific people not the entire room. Which in turn leads me to believe he is real . Which in turn leads me to believe he is not cold reading.

However, I think the reason parts of what he says can appear to be cold reading has to do with the way messages from the dead come through to JE...and how JE must interpret what he is being shown, feeling, and hearing . Actually, that link to the Larry King transcript has JE describing how messages come through to him:

"What happens is I see, hear and feel energy, so it's kind of like in your mind, it's like a daydream. I pay attention to the pictures that I am seeing, they're like quick flashes. And then I hear thoughts. Not words, not like verbal, out loud voices. And I just interpret the feelings that I'm getting."

So, from what JE says, communication with the dead is not like talking on your iphone and having a crystal clear connection. He must try to interpret what the message is... and indeed sometimes JE can be wrong in his interpretation...take one example from the Michael Prescott article:


Edward: Two people passed with a sudden impact. Might have been shot...

Woman: I had 2 friends in high school who were shot.

Edward: And you moved, around then?

Woman: No.

Edward: You didn't? Because I'm seeing a Mayflower moving van.

Woman: They were shot on Mayflower Avenue.


In the above example, JE was seeing a Mayflower moving van but he was mistakenly concentrating on the moving part, not the Mayflower part. It was only when he then said that he saw a MAYFLOWER moving van to the woman that the message was interpreted correctly and able to be validated. Again, the spirit was trying to get John to say Mayflower by showing him that Mayflower moving van but JE misinterpreted and thought the spirit was trying to get him to talk about a move. And let's remember what a huge hit this really is...JE spoke about 2 people being shot first and then right after that he gets the name of the street those 2 same people were actually shot on!

It's all in the interpretation and the process of trying to decipher the message which is not being delivered crystal clearly...and yes I can see how sometimes that would look like cold reading.

And that is why I have said that if JE did not come up with those startlingly accurate, personal, specific, unknowable hits...directed at specific people NOT the entire room..then I too would believe he was cold reading and a fraud.

But he does come up with them...REPEATEDLY.

I do also believe that some connections to spirits may be more clear than others. I'm not sure if JE has addressed that in detail but I will look. I want to post this fast because I have a feeling I may be getting suspended...

P.S. Definitely read that link...had other info there that pertains to all of this and I have touched on before...like psychic amnesia (which my brother so aptly demonstrated...sorry Occam), and people not coming through that you want (my friend wanted her sister to come through but she didn't) etc.

 

[Elizabeth I]

You think it is a fairy tale.

I don't.

Agree to disagree...

I'd like to say something about this phrase, and, since this thread is now moderated, I'd like to add that I don't think it's off-topic:

"Agree to disagree" implies that two arguments or points of view are equally valid. In some cases, that's true: I detest cilantro, while other people love it. I like broccoli, and other people hate it. Some people like chocolate ice cream, some vanilla, and there are probably some benighted people who don't like ice cream at all. In all those cases, the differences are just opinions, no one is right and no one is wrong, and you can "agree to disagree."

In other cases, and the question of "psychics," "spiritualists," and "mediums" is one, both sides of the argument cannot be correct (although both could be wrong), so you can't "agree to disagree." One side of the argument is not equally as valid as the other side. (The same goes for evolution versus intelligent design, the age of the earth, the moon landings, 9/11, and a whole bunch of other things.) So a throwaway "agree to disagree" on topics like those is dishonest, and, if it's allowed to stand, gives legitimacy to the wrong side of the argument. Regardless of which side of this argument I'm on, I don't think it should be allowed to stand here, at least without any objection.

 

[steenkh]

In the above example, JE was seeing a Mayflower moving van but he was mistakenly concentrating on the moving part, not the Mayflower part. It was only when he then said that he saw a MAYFLOWER moving van to the woman that the message was interpreted correctly and able to be validated.

This gullibility is what makes JE's work so easy! He throws out something specific with a good chance of getting a tremendous hit, but misses. The mark saves the situation by turning the miss into a hit, and he gets the credit!

He claims that he 'sees' a van, but actually, the spirits tried to convey the image of a road! Well, anybody can make the mistake of seeing a van when a road is meant, right?

 

[Pixel42]

The reason I believe it is not cold reading is because he does sometimes (enough times to be significant) get those UUU hits which are directed at specific people not the entire room.

This is your key claim.

In order to establish whether or not it is true (for yourself as well as for others) you need to:

1. Define what counts as a UUU hit

2. Estimate how often you would expect a good cold reader to produce your definition of UUU hits, i.e. what percentage of the statements he directed towards specific people during a typical performance would be expected to qualify if he was not genuine but just a good cold reader.

[Note that you would expect many many more such hits if you accepted, for example, "Mayflower moving van" as a UUU hit for "Mayflower Street" than if you only accepted "Mayflower Street" as a UUU hit for "Mayflower Street", but in either case you could not trust your instinct as to what that estimate should be as we all tend to vastly overestimate how unlikely coincidences are to occur - it's one of those cognitive biases we've mentioned. So however you come up with this estimate you need to show your working]

3. Set a success criteria that's significantly more than the estimate arrived at in (2). For example if you estimate that 20% of a good cold reader's statements would be UUU hits then your success criteria for a genuine psychic might be 30%.

4. Attend at least half a dozen of John Edward's performances and record them

5. Listen to the recordings and identify and list every statement directed to a specific person that could be a hit or a miss. Count the number of such statements

6. For each statement, decide if it meets your criteria for a UUU hit defined in (1). Count the number of such hits.

7. Work out what percentage of Edward's statements are UUU hits, and show that that percentage is greater than the success criteria set in (3)

Only when you have done all of the above will your quoted claim be justified.

 

[Recovering Agnostic]

The reason I believe it is not cold reading is because he does sometimes (enough times to be significant) get those UUU hits which are directed at specific people not the entire room. Which in turn leads me to believe he is real . Which in turn leads me to believe he is not cold reading.

Even if this is true (and Pixel42 has shown why it needs careful justification), all it shows is that he isn't just cold reading. There are other methods which have been mentioned repeatedly throughout the thread (warm reading, hot reading) which would be able to explain even the most precise, detailed hits without any need to appeal to psychic abilities.

 

[greybeard]

Yes I've read the links...tried to watch video but couldn't get it to work yesterday.

Yes, I do think that some of what JE says can appear to be cold reading.

BUT...

The reason I believe it is not cold reading is because he does sometimes (enough times to be significant) get those UUU hits which are directed at specific people not the entire room. Which in turn leads me to believe he is real . Which in turn leads me to believe he is not cold reading.

However, I think the reason parts of what he says can appear to be cold reading has to do with the way messages from the dead come through to JE...and how JE must interpret what he is being shown, feeling, and hearing . Actually, that link to the Larry King transcript has JE describing how messages come through to him:

"What happens is I see, hear and feel energy, so it's kind of like in your mind, it's like a daydream. I pay attention to the pictures that I am seeing, they're like quick flashes. And then I hear thoughts. Not words, not like verbal, out loud voices. And I just interpret the feelings that I'm getting."

So, from what JE says, communication with the dead is not like talking on your iphone and having a crystal clear connection. He must try to interpret what the message is... and indeed sometimes JE can be wrong in his interpretation...take one example from the Michael Prescott article:


Edward: Two people passed with a sudden impact. Might have been shot...

Woman: I had 2 friends in high school who were shot.

Edward: And you moved, around then?

Woman: No.

Edward: You didn't? Because I'm seeing a Mayflower moving van.

Woman: They were shot on Mayflower Avenue.


In the above example, JE was seeing a Mayflower moving van but he was mistakenly concentrating on the moving part, not the Mayflower part. It was only when he then said that he saw a MAYFLOWER moving van to the woman that the message was interpreted correctly and able to be validated. Again, the spirit was trying to get John to say Mayflower by showing him that Mayflower moving van but JE misinterpreted and thought the spirit was trying to get him to talk about a move. And let's remember what a huge hit this really is...JE spoke about 2 people being shot first and then right after that he gets the name of the street those 2 same people were actually shot on!

It's all in the interpretation and the process of trying to decipher the message which is not being delivered crystal clearly...and yes I can see how sometimes that would look like cold reading.

And that is why I have said that if JE did not come up with those startlingly accurate, personal, specific, unknowable hits...directed at specific people NOT the entire room..then I too would believe he was cold reading and a fraud.

But he does come up with them...REPEATEDLY.

I do also believe that some connections to spirits may be more clear than others. I'm not sure if JE has addressed that in detail but I will look. I want to post this fast because I have a feeling I may be getting suspended...

P.S. Definitely read that link...had other info there that pertains to all of this and I have touched on before...like psychic amnesia (which my brother so aptly demonstrated...sorry Occam), and people not coming through that you want (my friend wanted her sister to come through but she didn't) etc.

Thanks for your detailed response Robin. I was perhaps a little more impressed with the Mayflower "hit" you described than some might be although I would still agree that one hit that wasn't a 100% hit anyway doesn't constitute proof of life after death. However having read Michael Prescott's blog I am much less impressed. He was only describing what he saw on a tv programme. So what we have is some quotes from a programme, and the author admits he is paraphrasing anyway, of a show made for entertainment purposes that is heavily edited. That can't possibly constitute proof by any definition of the word because:-
a) It isn't even an exact transcript. MP says so in the blog.
b)Even If it was an exact transcript that doesn't mean it happened just how MP describes. At least one person claims that when he was on the show a miss was converted to a hit by editing.
c)Even if it happened exactly as MP describes it could be that JE found out about the Mayflower link by other means than the paranormal. There are several ways he could have done this and that is still a lot more likely than dead people told him.

 

[xterra]

This is your key claim.

In order to establish whether or not it is true (for yourself as well as for others) you need to:

1. Define what counts as a UUU hit

[other steps omitted for brevity]

Only when you have done all of the above will your quoted claim be justified.

Robin1,

I urge you to do this, for your sake, even if you never tell us that you've done it or tell us the results.

What Pixel42 didn't say is that you must be rigorously honest with yourself when you do the counting -- and maybe even have someone else count also. It is too easy to decide something is a hit when it is really only a partial hit. This is not a situation for benefit of the doubt.

xterra

 

[Robin1]

My biggest concern right now is with the evidence we have at hand.

Robin, if we are to take you at your word that JE was spot on in your reading, that still doesn't explain the obvious instances of cold reading that he has used that have been posted here. Would you not at least be honest and admit that you watched that last clip that has been both posted and transcribed. Would you call those UUU hits?

Like I said, he could have been off that day, who knows. I'm not asking you to discredit YOUR reading, I'm just seeing if you can be intillectually honest when watching the clip or reading the transcript. Would you not admit, at the very least, that he HAS used cold reading at some points?

Perhaps he can't just "turn on the gift", and he's got to use the tricks on his off days. I really don't know. I think your opinion on this subject would be great, though. You have yet to address it, and I've read the thread.

In my haste yesterday to respond to your very valid and important point...I forgot to thank you for helping me realize I did need to make my view on this clear. I should have done that a long time ago.

And thank you for reading the thread!

 

[FluffyPersian]

Robin, do you have any thoughts on this question that I asked earlier. How do you feel about spending $300 for this medication based on the evidence the company gave?

Robin, I have a question for you that involves a thought experiment. It takes the current discussion and extends it to a contexts that's less emotionally fraught than mediumship.

Let's say you heard about a flu medication called FluCure that claims to eliminate all flu symptoms within 12 hours. (If this is true, FluCure is much better than existing flu medications, which merely shorten promise the duration of symptoms.) The medication costs, say, $300. It's not covered by insurance, but I--and probably many others--would be happy to pay if the medication delivered on its claim.

The company that makes FluCure has two spokespeople who have used the medication. Each of them has taken the medication and has a story about how that he felt better hours later and their flu quickly cleared up within 12 hours. That's all the evidence the company has regarding FluCure's effectiveness.

Would you pay $300 for FluCure given the above information? Why? If not, what additional evidence would you want from the company before coughing up the cash?