• 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,

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

I think this is the problem we face with all True Believers. An objective scoring system would, in my mind, be 0.5 for a partial hit, 1.0 for a miss. And then you take ten (or twenty) consecutive statements in his rat-a-tat delivery. Not one statement. Not selected statements. But 10/20 consecutive, unedited shots at it by JE.

And if he scores even 5 out of 10, (10 of 20), I'd be shocked. We've seen this sort of analysis done on lengthier segments and he comes our something around 30 or 40%, even allowing "partials" as full hits. In his heavily edited television show he comes out looking like he's 70 to 95% correct, depending on the category of the attempt (they constantly edit around all his stabs at names and initials - one of his favorite cold-reading ploys, and on Crossing Over, someone scored the televised hit rate for name attempts at well over 90%, yet on Larry King he's more like 50% and in other unedited tapes even lower).

But the problem is that Robin's scoring is something like:

Misses - ignore
Hits - 1 point
OMG, that's me Hits - 213 points

You can't win for losing with that kind of scoring system.
 
Robin1,

I urge you to do this
She can't. For one thing Edward refuses to allow his performances to be recorded. For another I can think of no way to calculate (2) reliably, and I doubt Robin will be able to either. This sort of investigation would be very difficult for even a trained scientist to do.

There is a much much easier way for a trained scientist (and Robin and everybody else) to find out if John Edward is genuine, but he refuses to do that (submit to testing in a controlled environment) as well.
 
Oh, crud.... difficult to correct a typo or omission in a moderated thread!

My above post should have said, 0.5 points for a partial hit, 1.0 points for a hit, 0.0 points for a miss.
 
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!

Yet given that pleasant response, you failed to make your view clear. Why?
 
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.
Greybeard, you've raised an important point in both threads and it is important that my response is on the record in both places.

I can totally understand where you are coming from. For me, it was my personal experience which absolutely proved to me JE was real.

Just reading articles, or his books, or seeing his TV shows, etc. only, would not have made me certain he was real. I did actually see some of the shows and hits that Michael Prescott discusses in his article. It was precisely those type of hits that intrigued me.

All of the above made me think he might be real...might. But like you said, shows could be edited to make him look good, he could have used hot reading, etc.

So, I wanted to find out for myself.

And I did find out - JE delivered startlingly specific, personal, unusual, unknowable hits directly to me and to my brother. Directly...NOT thrown out to the entire room. And as I've said before, I was very educated and experienced in the tricks of fake mediums, and as such made sure I safeguarded against any tricks. I now predict someone will say confirmation bias, Forer effect etc. Nope, not it.

I'd also like to point out, once again, that for those who say for instance, my just buying a new refrigerator hit was so general, that if I didn't just buy a new fridge JE would have tried for another appliance. Point is...he didn't have to try for another appliance. Because he was spot on! He got it from the get-go. And he does that a lot. Mathematical equations to define a lot? Don't need 'em, common sense, with regard to mediums, helps me define what is not only a lot, but also unusual.

I mean really, look at the Prescott article and just pretend for a moment that you believe it is pretty much an accurate description of JE's hits. Would you consider that a lot? And remember that is only a sampling...some drops in the big "hit" bucket in the sky.

So, I would say to anyone out there who is knowledgeable about the tricks of fake mediums, yet can remain open minded, and thinks JE may be real - or if anyone out there simply can't figure out how he gets so many, specific, personal, unusual, unknowable hits - Go see him. But you do need to be personally read by him, and if you are, you'll know the truth too - JE is real.

And there is indeed...life after death.
 
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?
FluffyPersian, No, I wouldn't spend the $$ on the flu medication as described in your scenario.

More than the possible waste of $$, I'd be worried that it may not be safe and worried about the side effects, even long term ones.

I'd need to know a lot more.

Same reason I didn't give my kids the swine flu shot that was first rushed into production a few years ago. But perhaps, if my kids had other health issues, I might have...dunno.

I believe I see your intentions...but I believe the situations are too dissimilar with too many different variables to be able to compare them in a productive way.
 
Greybeard, you've raised an important point in both threads and it is important that my response is on the record in both places. <snipped for brevity>

In other, and less, words, as Garrette has pointed out

As I have said repeatedly, and I mean it seriously and exactly as I say it, Robin's entire argument boils down to her belief that she, and she alone, cannot be fooled.
 
Greybeard, you've raised an important point in both threads and it is important that my response is on the record in both places.

I can totally understand where you are coming from. For me, it was my personal experience which absolutely proved to me JE was real.

Just reading articles, or his books, or seeing his TV shows, etc. only, would not have made me certain he was real. I did actually see some of the shows and hits that Michael Prescott discusses in his article. It was precisely those type of hits that intrigued me.

All of the above made me think he might be real...might. But like you said, shows could be edited to make him look good, he could have used hot reading, etc.

So, I wanted to find out for myself.

And I did find out - JE delivered startlingly specific, personal, unusual, unknowable hits directly to me and to my brother. Directly...NOT thrown out to the entire room. And as I've said before, I was very educated and experienced in the tricks of fake mediums, and as such made sure I safeguarded against any tricks. I now predict someone will say confirmation bias, Forer effect etc. Nope, not it.

I'd also like to point out, once again, that for those who say for instance, my just buying a new refrigerator hit was so general, that if I didn't just buy a new fridge JE would have tried for another appliance. Point is...he didn't have to try for another appliance. Because he was spot on! He got it from the get-go. And he does that a lot. Mathematical equations to define a lot? Don't need 'em, common sense, with regard to mediums, helps me define what is not only a lot, but also unusual.

I mean really, look at the Prescott article and just pretend for a moment that you believe it is pretty much an accurate description of JE's hits. Would you consider that a lot? And remember that is only a sampling...some drops in the big "hit" bucket in the sky.

So, I would say to anyone out there who is knowledgeable about the tricks of fake mediums, yet can remain open minded, and thinks JE may be real - or if anyone out there simply can't figure out how he gets so many, specific, personal, unusual, unknowable hits - Go see him. But you do need to be personally read by him, and if you are, you'll know the truth too - JE is real.

And there is indeed...life after death.

Yes we can, I honestly don't know what more you want out of this discussion other then for people to just agree with you, You have repeatedly ignored any and all attempts to explain how John Edward does his act.

I restate a much earlier sentence, Unless you have something more substantial then a TV cold reader bit that you found personally riveting, then you have no evidence for life after death.
 
From Iain Banks' last interview :

Banks may have displayed a lack of anger at his diagnosis, but that does not mean that his righteous ire is extinguished. As we chat, he frequently loops off into hilarious denunciations. "I can understand that people want to feel special and important and so on, but that self-obsession seems a bit pathetic somehow. Not being able to accept that you're just this collection of cells, intelligent to whatever degree, capable of feeling emotion to whatever degree, for a limited amount of time and so on, on this tiny little rock orbiting this not particularly important sun in one of just 400m galaxies, and whatever other levels of reality there might be via something like brane-theory [of multiple dimensions] … really, it's not about you. It's what religion does with this drive for acknowledgement of self-importance that really gets up my nose. 'Yeah, yeah, your individual consciousness is so important to the universe that it must be preserved at all costs' – oh, please. Do try to get a grip of something other than your self-obsession. How Californian. The idea that at all costs, no matter what, it always has to be all about you. Well, I think not."

Seemed apposite.
 
Anyone else notice how JE’s patter is similar to that of an auctioneer?

Auctioneers talk fast and chant in a rhythmic monotone to lull their customers into a conditioned pattern of call and response - just like JE does. Auctioneers use their patter to pressure people to give them higher bids, JE uses a similar patter to pressures people to give him “yes” answers.

I also notice the way JE often puts pressure on the “readee” by saying they can only give yes or no answers. He then throws quick questions at them and pressures them for immediate “yes or no’” answers. The people being under so much pressure and discomfort usually give a reluctant “yes” but their facial expression is usually clearly saying “I don’t know. I’m not sure. I need to think about it”.

Yes.
Patter is an excellent description of JE's performance technique.



[FONT=Verdana, serif]Let's see if [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, serif]Robin1's[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, serif] claim that “JE says the right ("STARTLINGLY SPECIFIC") thing DIRECTLY to the right people.” has any merit. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]Transcribed form this video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx0Jt2jnLOQ[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]I don't have time to do the whole thing and I don't guarantee everything is transcribed perfectly but it should be good enough. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]Skip intro . . .[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]JE - “There's a younger male energy in this section that makes me feel like this would be son, nephew, grandson” - FAIL (not specific and not addressed to a particular person)[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]JE – “There's a cancer connection that comes up here. Does that make sense?” FAIL (not specific and not addressed to a particular person)[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]JE – “Where's Robert, Robbie, Rob. Where's the R?” FAIL (not specific and not addressed to a particular person. Two ladies in group of four hold their hand up so JE now knows there is at least an R connection with them.)[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]JE – “Can I get that from you guys over her? The four of you altogether, or three of you. Okay , Robert?”. PASS (correct name)[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]Lady - “My Father” FAIL ( not a son, nephew, grandson as first stated)[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]JE (talking to Lady) - “Past?” [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]Lady - “Yes” PASS (but that was a given)[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]JE (talking to lady 1) - “Okay. Cancer?”[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]Lady - “No” FAIL[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]JE - “Where is the bone issue?” [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, serif]Lady - “There's two. My grandfather and his Mum” (points to Guy next to her) FAIL ( not a son, nephew, grandson as first stated)[/FONT]

Sorry for any errors but really had to rush this.


Thanks for taking the trouble to do that transcription.
Of course it confirms what's shown on the vids that have been posted up.



...None of that explains how spot-on JE can be at other times, again and again.

When you successfully show me how JE achieves those startlingly specific, unique, personal, unknowable hits directed at specific people NOT thrown out to the entire audience....then I shall consider JE is a fraud.

And it is important to remember, Michael Prescott's article rings true to me because I lived it.

But, it is worth noting that even if JE is a fraud, I would still believe the dead can communicate with us...because it's happened to me personally...and repeatedly.

Time for another story? ;)


No.
Time to wonder how a free piña colada can be so convincing.


...Seriously, Robin is a person, not an idea, however much the idea dominates the exchange. If you all you do is chant an unbending challenge to the idea you will not engage with the person and you will consequently not change the idea.

You have a good point, jiggeryqua.
How would you engage with a person who thinks JE communicates with the dead?

A "known" fraud?

Because of some anecdotes? ...

No, Robin1.
Because of the transcripts and and the unedited vids.
There's a lot information there.
Why aren't you paying attention to it?
For example:
Just for the sake of curiosity and thoroughness I’ve listed how much information people gave JE in this short clip - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx0Jt2jnLOQ

There is a Robert
Robert is dead
Robert was a ladies father
Robert was a fireman
Robert didn’t die of cancer
A dead grandfather and a mother had bone issues
The mother died from bone cancer
Robert died September 11th
A lady is only girl and oldest child in family
Robert died on the first day of work after surgery
Robert was working at a different fire station the day he died
A lady had three sons but one died
Son died after father Robert died
Son wasn’t killed by anyone else.
Son didn’t die from an illness

That’s a hell of a lot more information than JE provided (if he actually provided any).
 
Robin1 didn’t provide proof of life after death regardless of how much she claimed she did.

“We” provided proof of JE not being a genuine psychic regardless of how much she claimed we didn’t.

Next . . .
 
Robin1 didn’t provide proof of life after death regardless of how much she claimed she did.

“We” provided proof of JE not being a genuine psychic regardless of how much she claimed we didn’t.

Next . . .

Minor nitpick:
"We" did not privide proof of JE not being a genuine psychic. We can't.
What we did, is provide ample alternative, mundane, and far more likely explanations for the observed phenomena, that make them indistinguishable from non-paranormal phenomena.
 
You have a good point, jiggeryqua.
How would you engage with a person who thinks JE communicates with the dead?

Go back several pages, to where I was trying to treat Robin like a human being, rather than just chant "we are skeptics, you are ****!" at her. Unfortunately, as has happened in these forums before, my failure to toe the party line got me targeted by the stone-throwing mob. If you're not sufficiently against something, you must be a supporter of it... But as I've mentioned in a previous post, if your aim is to change someone else's mind, you have to move far enough from your own position to recognise that they honestly hold a different position. Of course, here it's usually enough to demonstrate that they haven't changed *your* mind, and thus *you* are still a good skeptic and (hopefully!) nobody will throw stones at you.
 
Minor nitpick:
"We" did not privide proof of JE not being a genuine psychic. We can't.
What we did, is provide ample alternative, mundane, and far more likely explanations for the observed phenomena, that make them indistinguishable from non-paranormal phenomena.
True - My bad.
 
Originally Posted by Cainkane1 View Post
Wheres Harry Houdini when you need him?>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>
He's with the entire cast of Bonanza.:D
 
Jeez, even in the afterlife, those poor souls can't get a woman. :D
>>>>>>>

Pretty strange family for sure, Ben the Dad was as young as his eldest son, Hoss. Michael Landon was asked about women and he said "Hop Sing was talented more than cooking". Tongue in cheek (but who knows where else).
 
Time to wonder how a free piña colada can be so convincing.
I wonder this too! For my own part, it would take at least six free pina coladas before I found John Edwards convincing :D
 

Back
Top Bottom