Psychics and Missing People

[JPK]

Good morning Hardenbergh.

I'm aware that there are more charlatans than not but I'm confident that there are many that have helped the police. I'm very sorry that the author of this thread has had this experience. I'll say no more about it.

Thank you for understanding. I would be very interested to hear any evidence you have about the real psychics you know, on another thread. Feel free to start one.
JPK

 

[CFLarsen]

I didn't want to provide too many details as this person doesn't like to draw too much attention to himself although I did see an article from the newspaper at the time. I would like to add that he never charged for this service and he is the brother of someone very close to me who has since passed on.

Alex Tanous' brother, Wakine, is an attorney. Both Alex and Wakine were friends of the family I was speaking about above.

None of this answers any of my questions.

In fact, this is the same pathetic drivel we hear, each time people like you tries to perpetuate the myth of psychics being able to talk to the dead.

We hear the grand claims, yes. Boy, do we hear them. But when you and the likes of you are asked - ever so politely - to provide evidence, we hear the same heartless excuses. No, you don't "want" to identify these psychics. No, you want to "protect" their identity.

Don't you understand how much pain you cause people in deep grief, by making these claims you are utterly unable to back up with evidence?

Don't you understand how little credibility you have, when you claim that this person doesn't want to draw "too much attention" to himself, despite the fact that the very same person seeks attention by appearing the the media?

You refuse to identify this psychic, not out of concern for him or the grieving family, but because you know damn well that your claim will be torn apart, if you allow skeptics to investigate your claim. You know that these psychics can't talk to the dead.

Go on, start your whining. Begin to tell us how mean we are, simply because we want to check your claim. Tell your friends, too. We have heard it all before, and we are not impressed. Not at all.

You are the reason why people like Sylvia Browne, James van Praagh, John Edward and Carla Baron can continue to bilk poor, grieving people out of their money, while sucking on their grief.

You protect these scumbags, because you would rather prefer to have your own beliefs untouched, regardless of the consequences.

"There are no greater liars in the world than quacks — except for their patients."
Benjamin Franklin

 

[Hardenbergh]

None of this answers any of my questions.

In fact, this is the same pathetic drivel we hear, each time people like you tries to perpetuate the myth of psychics being able to talk to the dead.

We hear the grand claims, yes. Boy, do we hear them. But when you and the likes of you are asked - ever so politely - to provide evidence, we hear the same heartless excuses. No, you don't "want" to identify these psychics. No, you want to "protect" their identity.

Don't you understand how much pain you cause people in deep grief, by making these claims you are utterly unable to back up with evidence?

Don't you understand how little credibility you have, when you claim that this person doesn't want to draw "too much attention" to himself, despite the fact that the very same person seeks attention by appearing the the media?

You refuse to identify this psychic, not out of concern for him or the grieving family, but because you know damn well that your claim will be torn apart, if you allow skeptics to investigate your claim. You know that these psychics can't talk to the dead.

Go on, start your whining. Begin to tell us how mean we are, simply because we want to check your claim. Tell your friends, too. We have heard it all before, and we are not impressed. Not at all.

You are the reason why people like Sylvia Browne, James van Praagh, John Edward and Carla Baron can continue to bilk poor, grieving people out of their money, while sucking on their grief.

You protect these scumbags, because you would rather prefer to have your own beliefs untouched, regardless of the consequences.

"There are no greater liars in the world than quacks — except for their patients."
Benjamin Franklin

He doesn't advertise the fact that he has psychic abilities and has rarely used it. He is not--I repeat--he is not a scumbag. I'm sure that the article was printed with much reluctance on his part. I said nothing about his communicating with the dead.

 

[JPK]

Would you like me to start the thread for you to disscuss this or would you be good enough to do this on your own?
JPK

 

[Roadtoad]

Well, if he has any credibility, let's see him go for the million. If he wins, he's the real deal. If not, we know he's a scammer.

Since he has yet to try, I go with scammer. He may not get rich from using his "gifts," but he seems to get something from it. Why else would he do it?

 

[Hardenbergh]

Well, if he has any credibility, let's see him go for the million. If he wins, he's the real deal. If not, we know he's a scammer.

Since he has yet to try, I go with scammer. He may not get rich from using his "gifts," but he seems to get something from it. Why else would he do it?

It was in his own community and perhaps he knew the family and wanted to help out.

 

[CFLarsen]

He doesn't advertise the fact that he has psychic abilities and has rarely used it. He is not--I repeat--he is not a scumbag. I'm sure that the article was printed with much reluctance on his part. I said nothing about his communicating with the dead.

I am not interested in your pathetic excuses. Show the evidence, or stop hurting these poor, grieving people.

 

[Roadtoad]

It was in his own community and perhaps he knew the family and wanted to help out.

In other words, he's groovin' on the attention.

He's a scammer.

 

[Hardenbergh]

In other words, he's groovin' on the attention.

He's a scammer.

He's not "groovin" on the attention. He'd be doing a lot more of it. He's not an attention monger, I assure you.

 

[JPK]

Done. I have started a new thread just for you Hardenbergh. Please continue this disscusion there.
JPK

 

[Beth]

We hear the grand claims, yes. Boy, do we hear them. But when you and the likes of you are asked - ever so politely - to provide evidence, we hear the same heartless excuses. No, you don't "want" to identify these psychics. No, you want to "protect" their identity.

You refuse to identify this psychic, not out of concern for him or the grieving family, but because you know damn well that your claim will be torn apart, if you allow skeptics to investigate your claim. You know that these psychics can't talk to the dead.

You protect these scumbags, because you would rather prefer to have your own beliefs untouched, regardless of the consequences.

You are attributing thoughts and motivations to other people that you cannot know if they are true. You don't know what Hardenbergh believes regarding whether psychics can or cannot talk to the dead, therefore you do not know what s/he knows regarding that fact. Further, it's directly contradictory with the next statement I've included. If Hardenbergh knows that psychics can't talk to the dead, there would be no motivation to "protect" that belief regardless of the consequences.

While you may consider reasons of wanting to 'protect' the identity of non-professional self-described pyschics bogus, the truth is that many such psychics do not care to discuss their experiences or even be named as a psychic in a public forum such as this. Thus, if discussing a personal friend who feels that way, such a revelation would be tantamount to betrayal of the friendship and expecting someone to do so despite the objections of their friend is unrealistic and inappropriate.

So basically, I think you've made a bunch of unfounded accusations designed to incite an emotional response or drive the poster away from this forum rather than sparking further conversation and discussion of the matter. You come across as mean and vindictive rather than knowledge seeking. Is this the image you wish to portray?

 

[The_Fire]

Kindly take this little bashfest to the proper thread. ALL of you!

 

[Roadtoad]

So moved. And done.

 

[CFLarsen]

You are attributing thoughts and motivations to other people that you cannot know if they are true. You don't know what Hardenbergh believes regarding whether psychics can or cannot talk to the dead, therefore you do not know what s/he knows regarding that fact. Further, it's directly contradictory with the next statement I've included. If Hardenbergh knows that psychics can't talk to the dead, there would be no motivation to "protect" that belief regardless of the consequences.

Oh, yes, there would: Belief in the supernatural is so captivating that it is impossible to relinquish. Almost. We do see examples, but as a rule, people are not willing to abandon their beliefs.

This isn't just evident in belief in psychics. We see it in all forms of supernatural beliefs: Homeopaths (Dr. MAS and Dr. Sheik), Astrologers (Karen Boesen), Magnetism Healers (Roger Coghill) - you name it: All refuse to provide evidence of their claims, all refuse to have their claims examined, all refuse to give up their false beliefs.

While you may consider reasons of wanting to 'protect' the identity of non-professional self-described pyschics bogus, the truth is that many such psychics do not care to discuss their experiences or even be named as a psychic in a public forum such as this. Thus, if discussing a personal friend who feels that way, such a revelation would be tantamount to betrayal of the friendship and expecting someone to do so despite the objections of their friend is unrealistic and inappropriate.

Sorry, but this psychic is already out in the open. Even if this was not so, the nature of the claim makes it imperative that we investigate it. We are talking about the ability to locate lost children. We simply cannot just let such a claim go untested or unchallenged.

If this person can find them, then we can save lives. If this person can not find them, then he has to be stopped from preying on grieving people. By investigating these claims, we have everything to win. If we don't investigate them, we have everything to lose.

So basically, I think you've made a bunch of unfounded accusations designed to incite an emotional response or drive the poster away from this forum rather than sparking further conversation and discussion of the matter. You come across as mean and vindictive rather than knowledge seeking. Is this the image you wish to portray?

Excuse me if I get a bit upset about the reality of psychics scamming grieving people. Why did you not address that aspect at all? All you did was protect the scammers.

 

[Beth]

Responded in the other thread per request to move this discussion elsewhere.

 

[Katachresis]

Thanks, Beth.

I've been working on a question I want to ask about the relationship between "psychics" and families that have a missing family memeber. I can't get the words or phrases the way I want them yet, but that is the direction we should be moving.

You're right Beth, let's stay on topic.

 

[Dr Adequate]

SkepticWiki now has an article.

[swiki]Psychic Detectives[/swiki]

I found the links by searching this forum for threads with the word "detective" in them.

Ah, yes, I remember Lucianarchy ... oh the fun we had ...

Here's a good bit from one of the links:

Police listened with more that the usual interest to a psychic who told them about a serious industrial fire that he not only predicted with great accuracy, but about which he had supplied important details after the event, details which it appeared he could only know as a result of his special powers. His account was so accurate that he was immediately arrested and an investigation soon reveled that he'd had no need of paranormal powers to produce his visions. His information was essentially first hand: He himself was the arsonist. *

* sniggers *

Professionals Against Confidence Crime is a nice authoritative source.

Please let me know when the projected website is up and running, and about the Tony Youens article when it materializes, and I can add links.

Is there anything else I should add?

 

[Ashles]

Is there anything else I should add?

Just about anything involving Dennis Mackenzie.

A nasty piece of work who everyone should be warned about.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28352&highlight=dennis+mackenzie

Another old thread:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34908&highlight=dennis+mackenzie

I wish psychics could help police. Oh how I wish that.

I just no longer understand how anyone can believe they do.

 

[Luke T.]

There's a few things I would like to have.

1) A dialog between a missing person family and a psychic that shows the methods the psychic uses to extract information and convince the family that they really do have paranormal abilities.

I think you would be better situated to come up with what kind of sales pitch a psychic makes to the family of a missing person. I'm kind of curious myself. It must take incredible nerve for someone to initiate contact with a grieving family.

3) An article about the tricks used by TV psychics: what really goes on behind the scenes

We can only speculate what goes on behind the scenes on a TV show.

4) I don't know much about Remote Viewing, so I'd like an article about what that is and why it's another false claim

An excellent article on Skeptic Report that I mentioned earlier: http://www.skepticreport.com/psychics/psitechsmart.htm

Kelly, I told you in a PM that every time I hear of a psychic on the news being given any credibility, I write to the reporter or editor of the story to give them hell.

I am going to link to a topic on Skeptical Community in which I used some pretty strong language, so you are forewarned.

The topic is here, and I deconstruct the story that was on the news, and then post what I wrote to the reporter.

If you would like me to write a short article about this story to show how the media allows itself to be manipulated and gives psychics validity, as well as an excellent example of how it makes it look like even law enforcement is validating the psychic, I'd be very happy to do so.

ETA: It appears that the Fox web site removed the video which I make reference to. Fortunately, I copied some of the transcript into my post in the aforelinked topic.

 

[Luke T.]

Kelly, if you can ask someone who has been solicited by a psychic to find their missing loved one to recollect as accurately as possible what was said/claimed by the psychic in the conversation, I will be happy to write a Self-Defense Course on how to handle such calls. The more input you can collect from various people, the better. That way we can get an idea of the typical sales pitch.

I imagine the psychics claim to have worked with the police and to have "helped" find missing children/loved ones, and so on.

I would write such an article along these lines:

If a psychic calls you to offer their services, here are the following steps you should take...

1. Hang up.



Of course, I would go into more than that. I would arm them with questions to ask the psychic. Name the children you found. Name the police you helped. Dates, places, etc. Were you credited in any media reports? Which ones? Dates. Do you have ANY references at all, you freaking creep?

You get the idea.

 

[Mariah]

Kelly, I told you in a PM that every time I hear of a psychic on the news being given any credibility, I write to the reporter or editor of the story to give them hell.

Oh yes, yes. Would that we would ALL do that. Oh, let's. LET'S!!!!

 

[Luke T.]

Here's the really sick part, Kelly, which I am sure you know: Psychics count on the missing person and person who took them never being found. The odds are in their favor. They can make all kinds of wild claims about activities that occurred surrounding the disappearance with the knowledge that the odds are in their favor. And even if the missing person is found, or the kidnapper caught, no one will remember how far off the psychic was except the immediate family and they aren't going to have the resources to make that knowledge public.

That's what makes the Elizabeth Smart Psi-Tch case so great. She was found alive and none of the events Psi-Tech remotely viewed were remotely correct. It was a spectacular and public failure. And boy did they scurry to cover it up! To no avail.

So use it. Like a hammer.

 

[Luke T.]

Okay, Kelly. I have just written a two page article on the Kimberly Forbes missing person case and the psychic hired by the TV station.

I titled it "But The News Said Psychics Are Real!"

Just tell me where to email it if you want it.

You can do whatever you want with it. All rights, etc., etc., are yours.

All I ask is that if you credit it to me, that the byline say "Luke T." I don't use my whole name in public venues for personal security reasons.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Just about anything involving Dennis Mackenzie.

A nasty piece of work who everyone should be warned about.

I found a piece by Tony Youens about him and have put in a link.

 

[Kelly]

Wow!
I leave for the evening and come back to find all of this wonderful help! I just came back from the wrap-up meeting from the search I was assisting with this past 3 days. Let me unwind and catch up with urgent emails, and I will be back to reply.

(Maybe I should leave again??)

Thank you all!

 

[Mariah]

Hurry up, Kell!

You're getting Left Behind!

 

[Dr Adequate]

Oh for pete's sake.

Mckenzie's own website includes:

(1) One of the three different pictures he made of BTK:

(2) A photograph of BTK:

(3) A claim that he was "incredibly accurate and correct".

So it turns out he's insane ... but it's a profitable sort of insanity. Meanwhile here am I stuck with this crazy urge to howl and bang my head against a wall, and can I make a thin dime out of that?

 

[Ducky]

Hurry up, Kell!

You're getting Left Behind!

I'm sorry, I didn't see the post where Kelly said she believed in the rapture. Perhaps you could point that one out? Or how that joke is relevant to this thread's purpose and discussion?

 

[Mariah]

I'm sorry, I didn't see the post where Kelly said she believed in the rapture. Perhaps you could point that one out? Or how that joke is relevant to this thread's purpose and discussion?

Kelly enjoys a little humor every once in a while. She told me so in a PM. I've helped her plenty, myself.

 

[Ducky]

I'm sorry, I didn't see the post where Kelly said she believed in the rapture. Perhaps you could point that one out? Or how that joke is relevant to this thread's purpose and discussion?

Kelly enjoys a little humor every once in a while. She told me so in a PM. I've helped her plenty, myself.

While I am not opposed to a little humor, I am a bit sensitive about the appearance of attacking's someone's beliefs off topic from their purpose in posting here. Kelly was rather nervous posting on a board with so many athiests that she would be under attack for her religion. I just wanted to be sure it was clear to her that no one's intent is attacking beliefs off topic or without the invitation of debate.

I apologize for the rash response, and I hope you understand my concern. Kelly's contributions here are important and welcome, and I want to be sure she knows that her religion is not under attack.

 

[Luke T.]

From the article I just wrote, an excerpt:

There are a lot of ways a news outlet can redraw attention to a missing persons case. Publish the missing person’s photos. Give all the details of the disappearance that are known. Interview the police to see what progress has been made. Be factual. A responsible news organization does not aid and abet the criminal by tripping the light fantastic through the Twilight Zone, casting suspicion on innocent people and relating events which in all likelihood contradict what was seen by potential witnesses in the viewing audience, thereby discouraging them from coming forward. Not when a life is at stake. Such gross irresponsibility is beyond the pale.

 

[Ducky]

From the article I just wrote, an excerpt:

Excellent.

 

[Mariah]

I believe Kelly knows I'm THE LAST person who would ridicule her beliefs, and here, of all places.

 

[Hawk one]

OK, so it's kiss and make up time, and then back on track. Right?

 

[Ducky]

OK, so it's kiss and make up time, and then back on track. Right?

But I have a cold sore!




Sorry for the derail.

 

[Mariah]

Seriously... there's nothing worse than a "butthead for Jesus".

???

 

[Ducky]

Seriously... there's nothing worse than a "butthead for Jesus".

???

I'm missing the point there. Perhaps we can avoid derailing the thread further and you could PM your question about things in my sig line.

 

[Kelly]

Ok, I'm back and will work to catch up with everyone here.

Just to set the record straight, I have conversed with several of you about my beliefs, and yes, that nervousness about being in the "lion's den". Those fears were unfounded, and no one has fired a volley my way. The lions ended up being pussycats.

You guys will really get a kick out of this, but I had posted the same post#1 on a major Catholic forum, and only had a few responses! Sometimes people just don't know what to say, I guess. I make them nervous in a different way. No one wants to be me, and sometimes it seems like having a missing child might be contagious.

I do indeed have a sense of humor. Check out the humor thread if you don't believe it.

Oh, and Left Behind is a silly, overwrought brand of Christian literature which has no basis in truth. Catholics do not believe in the "Rapture" in that way.

I did find humor in Mariah's post. I was also very touched by FowlSound's care of my feelings.

Everyone here has just been really wonderful to me. Thank you.

Back to work for me now........

 

[Ducky]

Ok, I'm back and will work to catch up with everyone here.

Just to set the record straight, I have conversed with several of you about my beliefs, and yes, that nervousness about being in the "lion's den". Those fears were unfounded, and no one has fired a volley my way. The lions ended up being pussycats.

You guys will really get a kick out of this, but I had posted the same post#1 on a major Catholic forum, and only had a few responses! Sometimes people just don't know what to say, I guess. I make them nervous in a different way. No one wants to be me, and sometimes it seems like having a missing child might be contagious.

I do indeed have a sense of humor. Check out the humor thread if you don't believe it.

Oh, and Left Behind is a silly, overwrought brand of Christian literature which has no basis in truth. Catholics do not believe in the "Rapture" in that way.

I did find humor in Mariah's post. I was also very touched by FowlSound's care of my feelings.

Everyone here has just been really wonderful to me. Thank you.

Back to work for me now........

We're nowhere near as cute as pussycats. I do, however, enjoy a ball of yarn occasionally...

I can empathise with the feeling that it may be contagious. I have a post in my blog about ridiculous reactions to cancer that is similar.

I am surprised though, that the Catholic forum did not offer a big response. I can't imagine that they wouldn't see this as the opportunity this forum has to do something to make a difference for the better.

Oh well.

Where's my yarn?

 

[Kelly]

SkepticWiki now has an article.

[swiki]Psychic Detectives[/swiki]

I found the links by searching this forum for threads with the word "detective" in them.

Ah, yes, I remember Lucianarchy ... oh the fun we had ...

Here's a good bit from one of the links:


* sniggers *

Professionals Against Confidence Crime is a nice authoritative source.

Please let me know when the projected website is up and running, and about the Tony Youens article when it materializes, and I can add links.

Is there anything else I should add?

Both good links.

I really liked the second one as it is LE (Law Enforcement) related. This is the first I have seen of this type of article. I think it also plays a part in adding credibilty to the voices of reason. The last line of the article said it all.

Thanks, Dr. A.