Looking for Skeptics

Status
Not open for further replies.
In the UK you can certainly bring one extra person to a GP consultation with you, probably more (I think practicalities of space would be the only consideration). In fact, all the GP surgeries I've been in have a notice prominently displayed to say that if you want a chaperone with you for a medical examination, just ask, and they'll find you a nurse or someone to go in with you.
 
torifrog said:
Excellent post!!

This is my 1st post in this thread, but I've read the entire thing. Is there any possibility Alderbank could video the meeting between flaccon, scrappy and the two Revs?
Click to expand...

abaddon said:
I doubt it.

1. Everyone would have to agree, including public release afterwards.
2. The presence of a camera will affect behaviour
3. Alderbank may not be suitably equipped.
4. Flaccon will claim the camera scared the spirits off, or whatever.
Click to expand...

First things first, abaddon, Point No 1 should be that the meeting actually happens.

I accepted on the forum and sent a PM confirming and to discuss time and place, but since then flaccon has stopped posting and has ignored my PM
 
Biscuit said:
No I wasn't assuming bad faith on the GP's part. Though I see how you could reach that conclusion. Let me rephrase what I meant using your own words,




I disagree with others on here that the GP is frantic to meet with flaccon because he is afraid she will go tot he media and there will be some sort of blow back on him. The GP can only advise a course of action to flaccon, he can not force her and perhaps no action need be taken in his professional opinion. I agree with you completely.

I will go even further and suggest that the GP and the church's renewed interest in flaccon's claim are exaggerated at best.
Click to expand...

I don't think the GP was frantic at all, quite the opposite. He was relieved to hear that Tracey doesn't now need to go to the press. She herself is relieved as she didn't want to go down that route either. The GP gave Tracey some very good advice, and she will be taking the advice.

There is no "renewed" interest, its as it was 6 months ago.
 
Last edited:
Alderbank said:
First things first, abaddon, Point No 1 should be that the meeting actually happens.

I accepted on the forum and sent a PM confirming and to discuss time and place, but since then flaccon has stopped posting and has ignored my PM
Click to expand...

Hi Alderbank, flacon is not ignoring. I am online more than her just now, please PM me anytime. I will let her know you have PM'd her (she doesn't know) She's asked me to look out for a post from you. I have to go back to Notts but I'm sure flacon would seriously value your take on these new-found voices on my laptop.
 
scrappy said:
I don't think the GP was frantic at all, quite the opposite. He was relieved to hear that Tracey doesn't now need to go to the press. She herself is relieved as she didn't want to go down that route either. The GP gave Tracey some very good advice, and she will be taking the advice.

There is no "renewed" interest, its as it was 6 months ago.
Click to expand...
What? The meeting of Alderbank, scrappy, flaccon and the two revs is now off?

scrappy said:
Hi Alderbank, flacon is not ignoring. I am online more than her just now, please PM me anytime. I will let her know you have PM'd her (she doesn't know) She's asked me to look out for a post from you. I have to go back to Notts but I'm sure flacon would seriously value your take on these new-found voices on my laptop.
Click to expand...
How do you know she does not know?

And why is it you abandoned our email exchange of audio files?
 
abaddon said:
What? The meeting of Alderbank, scrappy, flaccon and the two revs is now off?

How do you know she does not know?

And why is it you abandoned our email exchange of audio files?
Click to expand...

Tracey actually prefers Alderbank to observe any such meeting. The meet is long overdue and yet to be arranged between her and the Rev. I know she didn't know about the PM because I have just told her about it. She has been asking me to keep an eye out for any posts from Alderbank.

I didn't abandon your files. Before you sent anything through, Tracey decided to stop annoying posters here and go down the next route (the press)
 
scrappy said:
Tracey actually prefers Alderbank to observe any such meeting. The meet is long overdue and yet to be arranged between her and the Rev. I know she didn't know about the PM because I have just told her about it. She has been asking me to keep an eye out for any posts from Alderbank.

I didn't abandon your files. Before you sent anything through, Tracey decided to stop annoying posters here and go down the next route (the press)
Click to expand...

You just posted that she is not going down that route.
 
scrappy said:
Hi Alderbank, flacon is not ignoring. I am online more than her just now, please PM me anytime. I will let her know you have PM'd her (she doesn't know) She's asked me to look out for a post from you. I have to go back to Notts but I'm sure flacon would seriously value your take on these new-found voices on my laptop.
Click to expand...

scrappy said:
Tracey actually prefers Alderbank to observe any such meeting. The meet is long overdue and yet to be arranged between her and the Rev. I know she didn't know about the PM because I have just told her about it. She has been asking me to keep an eye out for any posts from Alderbank.

I didn't abandon your files. Before you sent anything through, Tracey decided to stop annoying posters here and go down the next route (the press)
Click to expand...
:confused:
 
I never meant to imply that the GP isn't doing his job, or doing it poorly. I have no idea, since flaccon's and scrappy's posts certainly don't paint a clear or even handed picture of what may have occurred.

The only doubt I expressed was concerning the language of the redacted letter flaccon posted. It didn't seem consistent with the ways I've seen medical professionals present a case in writing. I stand by my opinion. Otherwise, I apologize if I seemed to slur the doctor. It was not intentional.
 
desertgal said:
I never meant to imply that the GP isn't doing his job, or doing it poorly. I have no idea, since flaccon's and scrappy's posts certainly don't paint a clear or even handed picture of what may have occurred.

The only doubt I expressed was concerning the language of the redacted letter flaccon posted. It didn't seem consistent with the ways I've seen medical professionals present a case in writing. I stand by my opinion. Otherwise, I apologize if I seemed to slur the doctor. It was not intentional.
Click to expand...

I don't think you were out of order. The GP letter was so heavily redacted that one could not formulate an opinion on what the GP actually said, and hence whether the GP was good, bad or indifferent. I believe there is good reason to suspect that the redacted sections reveal more than flaccon wishes to reveal. I believe the GP has stated out front what he/she really thinks and flaccon is uncomfortable with that.
 
scrappy said:
Alderbank, I just replied so will stay online until you respond. Hopefully we meet.
Click to expand...

I would in fact advise against it, as I suspect flaccon's intention is most likely to construct Alderbank into a supporting character in her charade.
 
Last edited:
abaddon said:
I don't think you were out of order. The GP letter was so heavily redacted that one could not formulate an opinion on what the GP actually said, and hence whether the GP was good, bad or indifferent. I believe there is good reason to suspect that the redacted sections reveal more than flaccon wishes to reveal. I believe the GP has stated out front what he/she really thinks and flaccon is uncomfortable with that.
Click to expand...

There may also be the possibility that the redacted sections of the purported GP's letter contain claimed commitments by a third party (the GP) for which flaccon is not willing to face liability. Or in other words, that the purported letter from the GP is fraudulent.
 
Last edited:
scrappy said:
Tracey actually prefers Alderbank to observe any such meeting. The meet is long overdue and yet to be arranged between her and the Rev. I know she didn't know about the PM because I have just told her about it. She has been asking me to keep an eye out for any posts from Alderbank.

I didn't abandon your files. Before you sent anything through, Tracey decided to stop annoying posters here and go down the next route (the press)
Click to expand...

What an absurd mess.

Once again- specifically- what evidence do you require in order to cast doubt on your claims? Why can't you answer this simple question? What do your meetings with doctors or reverends and your ridiculous listening parties have to do with paranormal activity? Just tell me what condition needs to occur to invalidate the supernatural claim. Give me a test, which has both a pass/fail structure, and which does not depend on subjective experience to determine the outcome. This is the only thing that matters, yet you avoid it like the plague.

The truth is that these are religious beliefs, not claims based on verifiable observation. The claimant and her friends wish to build some sort of show business operation out of this, complete with newspaper stories and theater presentations.
 
flaccon said:
Lately I've been working on how to get the story out via the media. It isn't as simple as reporting it. I do understand that wherever I go with this it is judged as some crazy delusion. Now that I'm ready for the media, Rev B has decided to further investigate, which is all I'd requested in the first place. This is a weight off my mind.
.

.
Click to expand...

scrappy said:
I don't think the GP was frantic at all, quite the opposite. He was relieved to hear that Tracey doesn't now need to go to the press. She herself is relieved as she didn't want to go down that route either. The GP gave Tracey some very good advice, and she will be taking the advice.

There is no "renewed" interest, its as it was 6 months ago.
Click to expand...

Ummm WTF changed? :confused:

I don't think you should speak for other people.
 
Daylightstar said:
There may also be the possibility that the redacted sections of the purported GP's letter contain claimed commitments by a third party (the GP) for which flaccon is not willing to face liability. Or in other words, that the purported letter from the GP is fraudulent.
Click to expand...

Let us be honest. Who knows what the GP really said? The redaction is such that the GP could have said anything.
 
scrappy said:
Tracey has just given me permission to write what I thought about her appointment with the GP.

I,ve just come back from observing the appointment between the GP and Tracey. I sat quietly in the background. I was brought into the conversation a few times. I did not feel any appeasement from her GP, very the opposite. He knows what he has witnessed, and he knows Tracey does not elaborate or seek attention if she doesn't need any. He spoke with her on a level I have never known before. He also looks forward to her updates. Either way, he certainly understands that something supernatural is happening and needs investigating by the church and not psychiatry. Only time will unfold this situation.
Click to expand...

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Look what you wrote!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom