Best Cold Reading demo?

[Clancie]

Posted by Thanz

I think that the difference between mediums, palm readers, tarot card readers, crystal ball gazers, etc. is just the schtick that they employ.

"Their schtick." Yes, I think you've zeroed in on a fundamental difference between what I look at in mediumistic readings and what many here see when they look. In fact, I found skeptics' focus on "style" in discussing ersby's cold reading thread very puzzling for the same reason. Yes, we all need to recognize the style. But the important thing is to look at the content, the evidential information. That is the only important thing.

Each needs a prop that they connect to the messages that they get, whether it be the cards, the crystal ball or the spirit world, or any combination thereof.

Again, I admit I find this point of view baffling.

Tarot readers...astrologers...can satisfy the customer by telling them things about their lives that are generally true for most people, by building on hits, by building on sitters' comments, by being observant, by telling people what they want to hear.

In a mediumship reading we can also look at statements and, perhaps, classify them as one of the above, no different. But, imo, there is a fundamental difference between the tarot reader and astrologer and a medium....the medium has 30 minutes to an hour to fill with detailed information about specific deceased people the sitter is hoping to hear from (it's a short list, too...and sitters want to hear unusual and specific incidents and details, specific names and relationships, and information that directly links and identifies a particular deceased.

Yes, the "message" part might seem like generalities if the medium says, "she sends her love", but that's not what most people go to mediums for I think (or at least its not what has interested me the most in exploring the idea of survival). As Cleopatra said (in her award-winning post on this ), we already know those things anyway. But is there evidence of survival (not laboratory evidence, but evidence-as-a-judgment-call by the sitter)? Is there evidence (same meaning as above) of communication between the medium and the deceased?

These cannot be answered, cannot be demonstrated, imo, as easily as the tarot reader and astrologer can reassure you by offering generalities and cold reader-style guesses about your job...your love life...your family.

Please explain why you think it is more than just style, as you seem to.

You're right, Thanz. I do think its more than style. I think you have to understand and ignore the style and just concentrate on evaluating the content, and see if it is specific to the deceased. I hope I have explained why that kind of information is so narrowly focused (when its correct) that it isn't comparable to me to tarot or astrology readings--at all.

 

[T'ai Chi]

No, I am asking you if you feel a partial transcript would be sufficient. Please answer the question.

As I can't say what is or is not on the transcripts, it is best for you to just provide whatever you think is the best example of cold reading.

Again, since you might be slow, I asked: "What is the best cold reading demo?", and you provided a reference to some transcripts. I'm asking you if you consider those transcripts to be the best. If they are not the best, I don't want to waste my time. Therefore, I am asking you the questions here.

Yes, I have, T'ai Chi. You have just refused to even look at it.

I already mentioned my thoughts on evaluating it. You must have missed it.

So thanks for the reference to a transcript or whatever. I'm still looking for:

a) a concensus from the skeptics on what the best cold reading demo(s) is(are), and

b) videos of the demo(s)

With this statement, you have made it clear that you are not interested in seeking evidence. You want to play games. Not with me, T'ai Chi.

Not with me.

Please cease being dramatic, troll. No one is buying it.

Again, a) and b), please.

 

[CFLarsen]

"Their schtick." I think you've zeroed in on a fundamental difference between what I look for (and sometimes see) in mediumistic readings and what many hear look at. I found the constant focus on "style" on ersby's cold reading thread puzzling for the same reason.

I find style irrelevant, except in that you have to be aware of it, from medium to medium, in order to discount it or ignore it.

Again, I admit I find this point of view baffling.

Tarot readers...astrologers...can satisfy the customer by telling them things about their lives that are generally true for most people, by building on hits, by building on sitters' comments, by being observant, by telling people what they want to hear.

In a mediumship reading we can also look at statements and, perhaps, classify them as one of the above, no different. But, imo, there is a fundamental difference between the tarot reader and astrologer and a medium....the medium has 30 minutes to an hour to fill with detailed information about specific deceased people the sitter is hoping to hear from (it's a short list, too...and sitters want to hear unusual and specific incidents and details, specific names and relationships, and information that directly links and identifies a particular deceased.

Yes, the "message" part might seem like generalities if the medium says, "she sends her love", but that's not what most people go to mediums for I think (or at least its not what has interested me the most in exploring the idea of survival). As Cleopatra said (in her award-winning post to me ), we already know those things anyway. But is there evidence of survival (not laboratory evidence, but a judgment call by the sitter)? Is there evidence (same meaning as above) of communication between the medium and the deceased?

These cannot be answered, cannot be demonstrated, imo, as easily as the tarot reader and astrologer can reassure you by offering generalities and cold reader-style guesses about your job...your love life...your family.
[/b]
You're right, Thanz. I do think its more than style. I think you have to look through the style to see the content that is specific to the deceased. I hope I have explained why it isn't comparable to me to tarot or astrology readings--at all. [/B]

........huh??

 

[voidx]

I am, and I will check it out eventually. I do find it quite interesting that my proposal of the Conscious Universe as logging some evidence for psi was heavily criticized though, and now the same criticizer is recommending I go get a book.

Also, I'm still waiting on:

a) a concensus from the skeptics on what the best cold reading demo(s) is(are), and

b) videos of the demo(s) [/B]

What good does concentrating on the best do? One good cold reading would do no more to convince you that said cold reader could perform as good as JE, as one good JE reading would convince us he's talking to dead people. In cold readings of all kinds we find simularities with what JE and JVP do. If you truly want to find out what most of our opinions are here regarding cold reading, read both these threads:

[url]http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29974&highlight=twins+AND+cold+reading[/URL] http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23922&highlight=twins+AND+cold+reading

If your interest is merely a debating war of sorts with Larsen, then I'll gladly lock the door to the little debating room so you two can duke it out.

 

[Clancie]

Posted by T'ai Chi

....a) a consensus from the skeptics on what the best cold reading demo(s) is(are)....

Yes. I'm curious from the comments in this thread (or absent of comment).

Is that the consensus here? That Ian Rowland's tarot and astrology transcripts in "The Full Facts Book of Cold Reading" are the best cold reading demos?

Maybe it would be a good topic for a poll. (I'd make one myself, if anyone can tell me where the feature is. I don't see it)


edited to add....

voidx,

People talk very confidently here about how impressive cold reading is. Don't you think that people who say that should at least have in mind some specific examples of cold reading that lead them to be so impressed by it? I think its a perfectly valid question--what cold reading demos are these strong convictions based on?

 

[T'ai Chi]

What good does concentrating on the best do?

*sigh*, I don't want to analyze sub-par transcripts.

If your interest is merely a debating war of sorts with Larsen, then I'll gladly lock the door to the little debating room so you two can duke it out.

I didn't mention him in my opening post at all; I could care less. If he has actual evidence and could possibly answer my question, then I would care.

We'll see..

 

[CFLarsen]

As I can't say what is or is not on the transcripts, it is best for you to just provide whatever you think is the best example of cold reading.

And, I have already explained to you, that providing the full transcript would be a violation of not just forum rules, but also international law.

Do you accept this, yes or no?

I already mentioned that I will evaluate it. You must have missed it.

Good. I will await your evaluation of the transcripts in the book, then.

So thanks for the reference to a transcript or whatever. I'm still looking for:

a) a concensus from the skeptics on what the best cold reading demo(s) is(are), and

b) videos of the demo(s)

Read the book.

Please cease being dramatic, troll. No one is buying it.

Again, a) and b).

Again, answer the questions put to you first:

• Have you read Ian Rowland's book? Yes or no?
• Do you admit that no good demo of mediumship exists? Yes or no?
• Do you consider a partial transcript sufficient? Yes or no?
• Do you accept that providing the full transcript from Rowland's book would be a violation of not just forum rules, but also international law? Yes or no?
• What would be the purpose of providing transcripts or videos of what anyone consider the best cold reading demo(s) from someone who doesn't claim to be a medium?
• Have you, in the past, referred to books as reference? Yes or no?
• Why are books not sufficient anymore?
• Do you deny that Rowland's 99.9% accuracy statement is far, far better than any psychic claims? Yes or no?

 

[voidx]

"Their schtick." Yes, I think you've zeroed in on a fundamental difference between what I look at in mediumistic readings and what many here see when they look. In fact, I found skeptics' focus on "style" in discussing ersby's cold reading thread very puzzling for the same reason. Yes, we all need to recognize the style. But the important thing is to look at the content, the evidential information. That is the only important thing.

Only important thing? Hardly. In that thread which I've just linked for T'ai above. The point is made that in the case of all those readings, we all thought that content wise they were rather poor. That they were all possible within the realms of cold reading. So the content did nothing itself to tell us if they were done by cold readers, or mediums. That distinction came down to a matter of style. Style is obviously important because it can influence how we perceive that the information was garnered from the sitter, or spirit.

Again, I admit I find this point of view baffling.

Almost as baffling to say style is of no importance at all. If the content produced is of the same level across all styles of mediumship, then the content can only tell us so much because of the subjectivity involved.

Tarot readers...astrologers...can satisfy the customer by telling them things about their lives that are generally true for most people, by building on hits, by building on sitters' comments, by being observant, by telling people what they want to hear.

And in our opinion we've seen psychic mediums like JE, JVP do the same thing. I believe your opinion at the time was rather indifferent to these cases as you thought there were enough special hits to over-shadow the many poor quality performances. We all seemed to disagree with that based on the transcripts we reviewed.

In a mediumship reading we can also look at statements and, perhaps, classify them as one of the above, no different. But, imo, there is a fundamental difference between the tarot reader and astrologer and a medium....the medium has 30 minutes to an hour to fill with detailed information about specific deceased people the sitter is hoping to hear from (it's a short list, too...and sitters want to hear unusual and specific incidents and details, specific names and relationships, and information that directly links and identifies a particular deceased.

Yes, the "message" part might seem like generalities if the medium says, "she sends her love", but that's not what most people go to mediums for I think (or at least its not what has interested me the most in exploring the idea of survival). As Cleopatra said (in her award-winning post on this ), we already know those things anyway. But is there evidence of survival (not laboratory evidence, but evidence-as-a-judgment-call by the sitter)? Is there evidence (same meaning as above) of communication between the medium and the deceased?

So then your saying that mediums also toss out generalities like astrologers and tarot readers, but its the special specific hits that make them different. That's not much of a distinction.

These cannot be answered, cannot be demonstrated, imo, as easily as the tarot reader and astrologer can reassure you by offering generalities and cold reader-style guesses about your job...your love life...your family.

Your exactly right, however, in many cases psychic mediums weren't very successful in our opinion at getting to these specific bits of information. They started with generalities and narrowed in for specifics. So they took the tactic of tarot readers and astrologers, and took it a step further. I don't think this makes what they do an over-ridingly unique thing from the others.

You're right, Thanz. I do think its more than style. I think you have to understand and ignore the style and just concentrate on evaluating the content, and see if it is specific to the deceased. I hope I have explained why that kind of information is so narrowly focused (when its correct) that it isn't comparable to me to tarot or astrology readings--at all.

And what about when the content is not specific to the sitter, what about when its not correct? Its even worse than the generalities of tarot and astrology because it was a guess, and its patently wrong, or people try rather weakly to make it fit. So its only incomparible when its focused and correct, when its wrong it would seem it is on some level comparable.

 

[Ed]

Yes, thanks for bringing this up again! It seems skeptics don't want to give specifics (except ersby), and yet how many times have we heard or read, "Any good cold reader could do what that "medium" does?" Or, "That's obviously just cold reading."

I think that since these statements are made, that people who feel this way should have some knowledge that cold readers have -actually- done this, gotten mediumistic-types of validations by cold reading, and been convincing.

Its fine to criticize mediumship and its explainable as cold reading. But people who believe that mediumship is "just what a cold reader could do" should have some reason for believing that, shouldn't they?

Why can't anyone here answer your question, T'ai?

Clancie,

A couple of years ago I gave a try on Paltalk to someone or other. Actually I tried it 3 or 4 times. I had a standard line of patter some rather general but dramatic claims of what I saw. I will admit that I had one disaster (I did not to the JE deal of moving on to another dupe) two were good, one was fabulous. I nailed all sorts of stuff and had the person in tears. Denise was there and can verify what I say.

Having done that, as I have said on numerous occasions, I felt dirty, as any reasonably ethical person would. I promised myself that I'd never pull a manipulative trick like that again.

My point is that I, a reasonably glib and aware of nuances kind of guy, could pull this off with absolutely no practice, training or warmup. Imagine is I did practice. Imagine if there was a profit motive. Imagine if I were an unethical vampiric son of a bitch like JE.

I say to all that think there is a scintilla of truth to this particular manifestation of woo: "Try it yourself".

It is easy. Just try it. I'd be happy to offer pointers.

 

[voidx]

*sigh*, I don't want to analyze sub-par transcripts.

Even when they demonstrate many common tactics that "Good" mediums like JE use? Even when a cold reading transcript (NoZed's) was deemed of better quality than one done by James Van Praagh, even by Clancie? So you would rule them completely useless and without merit for discussion? If you won't even read that thread to get a basis of what our opinion is, then I have to assume your not really that interesting in finding out why we have the opinion of cold-reading and mediums that we do.

You're just using an argument used by certain posters here to flip our arguements around on ourselves.

I didn't mention him in my opening post at all; I could care less. If he has actual evidence and could possibly answer my question, then I would care.

We'll see..

No, but this thread follows from the thread regarding Mrs. Piper, where Clancie and Larsen were having an exchange similar to your intial post here, except in reverse. Knowing Larsen sticks in your craw as much as you do in his, its rather safe to assume your intent in starting this thread. My opinion of course.

 

[Clancie]

Posted by voidx

So the content did nothing itself to tell us if they were done by cold readers, or mediums.

That distinction came down to a matter of style.

They were snippets, but I based my rating of them on the kinds of hits and misses (content), not the style.

So then your saying that mediums also toss out generalities like astrologers and tarot readers, but its the special specific hits that make them different. That's not much of a distinction.

I'm saying you may (may) find things in various mediums transcripts that, to you, would sound like a cold reading patter. (whether you would be right or wrong about that would, btw, be a judgment call. If mediumship is real, there's no reason a medium couldn't be experiencing waves of intense love--as Laurie Campbell said she was when reading for GS's wife and feeling she was communicating with Russek's deceased father. To you that might just confirm it was cold reading. To Linda Russek, looking at --all-- the information that came through and knowing the personality of her father, it might have seemed very convincing. Judgment call.)

Perhaps cold readers imitate mediumship (without the evidential content) rather than the other way around.

And what about when the content is not specific to the sitter, what about when its not correct? Its even worse than the generalities of tarot and astrology because it was a guess, and its patently wrong, or people try rather weakly to make it fit.

There's always misses and confusing information, always. How much? Why? What does it mean?

There are many explanations bandied around by both believers and skeptics alike. Again, based on what else is in the reading...imo, "misses" don't invalidate a reading, if you assume ADC is not just like picking up a telephone. Does the presence of wrong information in a reading make it implausible that -any- of the good information is coming through from your loved one?

Again, imo, you have to weigh it out and make a judgment call.

 

[Clancie]

Ed,

I have heard this Paltalk story so many times! lol.

You don't know how ANNOYING it is that you didn't keep a transcript! (I mean, seriously, don't I say the same thing every time you mention it?! )

I got a chance to try my hand at giving a reading at a "Mediumship development workshop" once. I had a cooperative "sitter" (classmate) and tried to use everything I knew about cold reading. It was fun to have the freedom to try it without worrying about someone's feelings, and she was kind about the results, but...seriously...they weren't very good.

Be honest now. Do you really think that what you brought through for your sitter was highly evidential...specific names of the deceased...shared experiences...very unique items or images associated with him....Any of that?

We all know people -can- be fooled when they want to be. That doesn't mean that everyone is equally gullible, though, or that you wouldn't have eventually had sitters who would have been dissatisfied and told you why.

And, btw, was it psychic readings or mediumship? Did you actually say you were connecting them with particular deceased people?

(I really wish you'd at least saved the "fabulous" one. All the best cold readers seem to be JREF-ers, lol).

 

[renata]

......

.....the medium has 30 minutes to an hour to fill with detailed information about specific deceased people the sitter is hoping to hear from (it's a short list, too...and sitters want to hear unusual and specific incidents and details, specific names and relationships, and information that directly links and identifies a particular deceased.

.....

Specific names, specific hits, unusual information- how well do mediums do?


Let's compare these readings for specificity about the deceased. I am not concealing identity of the readers, because these readings have been posted here already.

NoZed's reading

“medium” or “M” = person performing reading
“sitter” or “S”= person claiming reading
“host/hostess” or “H” = people hosting event
“unidentified”or “U” = partygoer; other than the host.

{snip some information about background of the event-r}

M: Okay. Let me start out by saying that I have no real control over the impressions I get. Sometimes I feel things strongly, but sometimes- sometimes not as well. I’m . . I’m getting though a strong impression of an older lady, and I’m seeing a strong picture of roses. The roses are very strong, and I’m getting a definite feel that there is a strong connection to someone here. Is that making sense to anyone?
S: [Raised hand] My grandmother was named Rose.
M: Okay. Okay. Now you’re- ? [question]
S: Jan [changed].
M: Okay. But I am getting a very strong impression that you are connected to this energy – more than just your grandmother.
[pause]
M: Were you named after her, in fact?
S: [laughing] Yes, I was.
M: Middle name?
S: Yes.
M: Okay, because I’m seeing the connection there. I’m also seeing two roses together, two of them . . .and I’m seeing like- I’m seeing a picture of the symbol for Gemini, like there are twins involved. Does that make sense to you?
[unidentified]: Her grandmother was a twin.
S: She had a twin sister.
M: Okay. That makes sense, because I am seeing these two roses together. I am also getting a “6” connection – either a connection to June or the sixth of the month?
S: No. . . No.
M: Are you sure? This would be an anniversary or special occasion, and I want. . . I want to say this is for June.
[pause]
M: This would be a connection to the grandmother, not to you directly. It seems more like something important to her than to you directly, but it is an anniversary or something like that, something every year.
S: I can’t think of anything.
M: Okay. I may be wrong, but I get a definite impression there, and so- And you may want to ask about that, okay?
S: Okay.
M: Now your grandmother, she is on your father’s side?
S: Right.
M: Okay, because I am sensing that the connection is through your father. And I’m seeing a little boy fishing. Is there someone who – is fishing important to anyone?
S: My father.
M: Okay, because I am seeing a little boy fishing, and getting a feeling like almost exasperation. It- It isn’t anger or anything like that. More like “oh, he’s fishing again” kind of thing. Like he was always doing it, or always wanting to do it. And I’m getting a picture of a dark green or dark fishing pole. Either dark, dark green or black with green on it, and I want to say it is connected to the boy. Does that make sense?
S: [laughs]
[pause; nothing audible]
M: Do you have a sister?
S: Yes. Linda. [changed]
M: Younger sister?
S: Yep.
M: Because I am getting a sense that she wants me to acknowledge you and a smaller girl, Linda. And I’m also getting some concern- Mild concern about you- Not about anything really serious, but its connected to your finances or your job. I’m seeing children connected to your work, but not directly. Not like you’re a teacher, but somehow connected to schools or schoolwork. Do you understand that?
[unintelligible sounds] [From memory, I do not know if sitter answered or how]
M: And its like- its like you want to be more creative and do something more creative, like your job is not allowing you that, and you are sometimes frustrated with it, but you are concerned about making it, or being a success. Does that make sense?
S: Some. [laughing]
M: I believe that this is related to your job, that she feels that you have been dissatisfied with some parts of your job, because- I feel there was a big change within the last year or so? There was some kind of change in how you have been looking at your job and the chance to do something else or make a change related to that?
S: Yeah.
M: And I think that your grandmother is picking up your concerns, and she wants you not to worry about success, you know?
S: Mmmm. [I think; non-commital grunt sounds]
M: And success in the future depends on how everyone defines success, you know?
S: Yeah.
M: Success means just having more money to some people, but others would be happy to have things published or- Or just know that they have created something new for themselves, even if no one else saw it. Does that make sense?
S: Yes.
M: Because I get the feeling that she understood success and the real meaning; and I am getting- getting a real feeling that she wants you to know that understanding too.
S: Okay.
M: And let me just say, to end this- I get a very strong impression that you are independent- a very independent thinker, but you sometimes let yourself be talked into listening to other people and go against your instincts, but then you usually regret not just going with your gut. Do you understand that?
S: Yes. [laughing]
M: Okay, and she is telling you to trust yourself more and your own decisions more. Okay.
S: Okay.
[end]

KING: Old Bridge, New Jersey, hello.
CALLER: Hi. This is Peter.
KING: Hi, Peter.
CALLER: I'm looking about -- asking about my brother Michael.
EDWARD: OK, hold on Peter. Again, I get a lot of information through dates. The first thing that's coming through is I'm getting the feeling that April or the fourth of a month holds some type of a meaning. In the family does April have a meaning? Birthday or anniversary?
CALLER: No.
EDWARD: On your mom's side of the family, Peter. They're telling me "April."
CALLER: Not that I know of.
EDWARD: Hold that thought. On your mom's side of the family there's an older female who has crossed over. It's either her aunt or your grandmother. There's an M-sounding name that's attached to this, besides your brother, who you said is Michael,
CALLER: Mavis.
EDWARD: And they're telling me that there's something to do with the fourth month or the fourth of a month, and I'm also getting the feeling of being out of state, so I don't know if your brother was away from you or at a distance from you, but I see something as being debilitating and affecting the body. But I think your brother is OK.
CALLER: That's good to know.
EDWARD: All righty. Also, there's a congratulations going out to the family, which is either a happy birthday or some sort of a wedding thing that's coming out.
KING: Now that comes through you how?
EDWARD: I see pictures. Like the pink rose on the video is their way of expressing their love. When I see like a white flower, that means happy birthday or congratulations.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, let's go back to the lines. Let's go to Nazareth, Pennsylvania. Go ahead, caller. Nazareth, Pennsylvania? I think we've lost..
CALLER: Hi, this is Denise. I'd like to get in touch with my brother Brian.
EDWARD: Hi Denise, how are you?
CALLER: Good, how are you?
EDWARD: Who's got the M-name like Michael?
CALLER: Which name?
EDWARD: Like Michael?
CALLER: No one that's passed away.
EDWARD: That's OK. Is there a living Michael or Mike?
CALLER: Yes.
EDWARD: OK. Did your brother know Mike or Michael?
CALLER: Yes.
EDWARD: OK, because he's making the reference to Mike or Michael.
CALLER: OK.
EDWARD: Why is he showing me you having his sock? Do you have his socks?
CALLER: My brother's?
EDWARD: Yes.
CALLER: No. He was a baby when he passed.
EDWARD: That doesn't matter. Do you have his socks?
CALLER: No.
EDWARD: He's making -- booties? He's making me feel like there's something that would be connected to the feet -- there's something that they want me to acknowledge for you. So that, to me, would be socks, or booties, or -- it's not shoes; it's got a soft feeling to it. That's what comes through in relationship to this.
I'm glad you called, because this is something I want to say, if you're -- if this was a baby brother that might have been 1 years old, 3 years old, 3 months old, I have no idea -- the energy is not that age on the other side. We age here in the body physically, and we age on the other side through experience and energy. However if they do come through, they might come through -- if a child was 5 years old when they passed on Earth, and it's five years later, and they go -- the parents might go for a reading, the child might come through to the medium as a 10-year-old, or might choose to come through as the 5- year-old that it was. So it's just an example

Ersby's reading

ME: Okay, well first I’m getting a father figure. A father, step father, father in law, grandfather, someone like a father to you.
HIM: That’ll be my grandfather. But he wasn’t like a father to me.
ME: And they’re telling me a name. I don’t know if it’s their name or they’re telling me about someone, but who is… Steven?
HIM: I don’t know.
ME: A Stefan or Stan? An S-t name.
HIM: I do have a friend called Stefan.
ME: Why would you grandfather be talking about him? (laughter) Anyway, there’s someone else coming through. A mother figure, like a father, step mother, grandmother.
HIM: Ooh, could be my grandmother.
ME: There's someone on the other side who says they had pneumonia (note: I made a mistake here. Mediums are not usually so specific. I should’ve just said “Who had pneumonia?” and got a big hit with the response concerning the mother)
HIM: My grandfather did have pneumonia, but funnily enough my mother had pneumonia two weeks ago and nearly died.
ME: Oh, well they’re probably talking about that then. And now I’m being drawn towards a female energy on the other side. This’d be about your grandmother. I’m getting a name, but I don’t know if it’s hers or someone she’s connected to… it’s something like… a B name, Betty, Becky, Barbara… Who is this?
HIM: There is a Betty, but I don’t know who she is. Betty was the person my grandmother would talk to in her later stages of senile dementia.
ME: Okay, well, she’s with Betty now. (laughter) Anyway, this woman on the other side was very loving. She was a safe haven in a storm. Very trusting. Very honest.
HIM: (laughing) No, not really.
ME: Never mind. Now I’m being shown a place. A house. I don’t know where this is, or the connection. Let me describe it to you. Go through the front door and almost the first thing you see is some fruit and there’s a door to the left. This leads to the living room and the dominant feature of this room on the left is there’s a lot of earth tones, browns, beiges
HIM: That sounds a bit like my grandmother’s house.
ME: In what way?
HIM: Well, when you entered it, you’d go straight into the kitchen, where there was always fruit. The door on the left lead to a large hall which lead to the living room. As for the living room, well, yes, it had a kind of musty, brown décor.
ME: Okay, fair enough. I’m being drawn away from the house. Because now there’s a strong presence on the other side. Very strong, and determined. This person must have been quite a person to know! I’m sensing an aunt.
HIM: No. No aunts.
ME: The spirits are communicating two more names to me. There are two people with names like John, Joan, a J-o name.
HIM: Two people?
ME: Yes.
HIM: (after much umming and ahhing) No, I don’t think so.
ME: One person?
HIM: Actually, no.
ME: Not to worry. Is there a joke or story about going to the supermarket and always coming back with a lot more stuff than you needed?
HIM: No. My dad always made lists.
ME: Oh, well. Now I’m getting an eight, so is there a birthday or anniversary in August or on the eighth of a month?
HIM: August…
ME: Or the eighth of a month.
HIM: The ninth?
ME: Never mind, now they’re –
HIM: August was the time we’d go and see my grandmother.
ME: That’ll do. Now, they’re telling me that you’re concerned about a dependant. I don’t know if it’s a child or a pet, but there’s someone that depends on you for support and right now they’re causing you some worry.
HIM: Yes. My girlfriend. (some laughter, as the girlfriend was there)
ME: Now, they’re showing me a money sign. Somebody works in banking or finance.
HIM: That’ll be me.
ME: Now they’re talking about somebody, I don’t know if this person is still with us or has passed to the other side, but this image is coming through quite strongly. Who knew a lot?
HIM: Ah, my brother. (note: this may seem like a weak hit, but later on I discover that my friend’s brother is something of a genius.)
ME: Well, they’re very proud of you both. Now I’m getting something a little peculiar, Not the run-of-the mill type of communication. They’re trying to tell me something quite specific. Who saw the bad leg?
HIM: Who SAW the bad leg? My grandfather had a bad leg and had trouble walking.
ME: That’s fine. So now lastly they’re showing me a younger energy. Again, I don’t know if this person is alive or has passed. Who is the girl that was in a play or film?
HIM: Well, she’s not a younger energy, but Auntie Eunace was in a film. She was a Bond girl.
ME: I’ll take that. Thank you very much.
HIM: No, thank you.

KING: Easton, Pennsylvania, hello.
CALLER: Hi, this is Cindy. I would like to talk with my grandfather and ask him a question.
KING: Can she ask him a question?
EDWARD: She can if he comes through.
KING: What's the question?
CALLER: I just want to know if he can see if we're going to have any kids in the future.
EDWARD: The first thing that I'm seeing is they're talking about -- and don't get alarmed, I think this has already happened -- they're talking about something burning. I don't know if there was a burning thing or if somebody had a fire in their house, or this is going back a few years. But they're telling me to talk about something that I would see as being like a fire or a barn fire or some type of a fire- type thing. Is there anything that used to happen in the backyard or something that he used to do?
CALLER: No.
EDWARD: Some type of outside fire or a fire thing?
CALLER: No.
EDWARD: OK. This is what t they're talking about something burning hey're showing me, so remember what the symbol is to me, I'm interpreting this as being some type of fire, or like fire-thing, but that's what's coming through. As soon as you -- as soon as I listened to your voice, and I'm tuning into your vibration, this is what's coming through. And I know you're asking me about kids, but I'm seeing boxes, and when they show me boxes it's their way of telling me that you're moving. Or that there's a move that's coming up.
CALLER: Uh-huh, yes, we just moved.
EDWARD: c OK, so that's a confirmation of what they're telling me.
KING: But his -- her late grandfather couldn't tell her if she's going to have children or not.
EDWARD: I'm not getting...
KING: Or could he?
EDWARD: He could. He could.
KING: The spirits would know that.
EDWARD: They could come through and say stuff like that.

JE readings taken from this thread This thread also gave the following results- when I roughly analyzes 5 LKL appearances

Total guesses 476
48 hits, 10.1%
118 weak hits 24.8%
171 misses 35.9%
102 not validated 21.4%
35 not scored 7.4%
2 strong hits .4%



Ersby's and NoZed's reading from
here
To me it seems that their readings were rather better and more specific than some JE readings- like the 3 I quoted above. I think NoZed's reading is acutally on par with some of the best JE LKL readings.

 

[voidx]

They were snippets, but I based my rating of them on the kinds of hits and misses (content), not the style.

Damn snippets. As did everyone, but when it came time to decide which of the 5 anonymous readings were done by mediums, and which by cold readers, are you saying you based this on content alone? I find this hard to swallow. Read that thread again, none of the snippets were impressive enough content wise to be an arguement for mediumship, this was done on style. On patterns.

I'm saying you may (may) find things in various mediums transcripts that, to you, would sound like a cold reading patter. (whether you would be right or wrong about that would, btw, be a judgment call. If mediumship is real, there's no reason a medium couldn't be experiencing waves of intense love--as Laurie Campbell said she was when reading for GS's wife and feeling she was communicating with Russek's deceased father. To you that might just confirm it was cold reading. To Linda Russek, looking at --all-- the information that came through and knowing the personality of her father, it might have seemed very convincing. Judgment call.)

I'm saying we do find those things in mediums. No matter what your judgement call is, they are in there. That was my point. They use them the simular to how astrologers and tarot readers might use them. They use them differently, and one might argue successfully, but they use them all the same. Obviously its a judgement call based on your own bias' but you were making it out that only astrologers and tarot readers used these kind of generalities and platitudes. Saying someone had a problem with their heart, when its entirely likely someone who died could have had heart problems, is as much a generality as telling me I'll have success at work if I'm more aggressive with my supervisor.

Perhaps cold readers imitate mediumship (without the evidential content) rather than the other way around.

Which came first? The chicken or the egg. What's evidential is very subjective. Because psychic mediums are so reluctant to come out with completely specific bits of information right out of the blue with no fishing, its open to interpretation. I'd have to reread the whole thread again, but NoZed could have been said to get some slightly evidential information in his reading, althought it would be of poor quality. Where's the cut off at which something becomes clearly evidential content?

There's always misses and confusing information, always. How much? Why? What does it mean?

There are many explanations bandied around by both believers and skeptics alike. Again, based on what else is in the reading...imo, "misses" don't invalidate a reading, if you assume ADC is not just like picking up a telephone. Does the presence of wrong information in a reading make it implausible that -any- of the good information is coming through from your loved one?

Again, imo, you have to weigh it out and make a judgment call.

Bolding is mine. I still find this a completely baseless assumption. No one has given a thorough reasoning as to why mediumship as a process must be difficult. Anyway, moving on. Misses don't invalidate a reading persay, however, they do put it in context as to how it might apply to cold reading and/or chance. If you only look at the evidential content of the hits, your at risk of seeing it out of context in my opinion. It doesn't make it implausible that good info is coming from a loved one, just as a good hit does not mean it is coming from a loved one either.

 

[Ian Rowland]

And, I have already explained to you, that providing the full transcript would be a violation of not just forum rules, but also international law.

My thanks to CF Larsen for wanting to respect the copyright laws and not reproduce any of the material in my book here.

I have no idea whether I am the best, worst or least impressive cold reader in the world, nor do I think cold reading is a competitive event, like ice-dancing or log-rolling. I really have no idea how the questioner in the OP is defining 'best'.

Just for the record, it is, to the very best of my knowledge, a fact that I am the only person in the world who has given 'test conditions' demonstrations for the media using all four of the main cold reading disciplines - tarot, astrology, clairvoyance and spirit mediumship. If you want to know what I mean by 'test conditions' in this context, I explain more on my website where I also provide further details of almost all the demonstrations and the results. I have not yet added the 'ABC Primetime' demo of spirit mediumship to the website, but I hope too at some point.

 

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

Cold reading is the only explanation with mediumship!

 

[Ed]

Ed,

I have heard this Paltalk story so many times! lol.

You don't know how ANNOYING it is that you didn't keep a transcript! (I mean, seriously, don't I say the same thing every time you mention it?! )

I got a chance to try my hand at giving a reading at a "Mediumship development workshop" once. I had a cooperative "sitter" (classmate) and tried to use everything I knew about cold reading. It was fun to have the freedom to try it without worrying about someone's feelings, and she was kind about the results, but...seriously...they weren't very good.

Try it with a person whom you do not know. Try to be "on". If you did it enough I gaurentee that I could edit a 1/2 hour show that would make you look fabulous, dahling

Be honest now. Do you really think that what you brought through for your sitter was highly evidential...specific names of the deceased...shared experiences...very unique items or images associated with him....Any of that?

I will pay you if you can find a case where ome phony came up with "Byron Robert Posilthwaite" a "B" name perhaps. Also nothing ethnic... ever hear of a "Balthezzar Aristotle Thucydidies"? No. never will. I did describe in rather bloody detail the death of a loved one. Pretty simple if you nail a symptom, jut make it sound as bad as they "recall". Recall also, the words of Master Topcliffe to the unfortunate Antony Babington:

"Death is always quick, it is the road to death that can be tedious long"

So, if you say "he passed quickly" and you get an affirmative, you know accident (if young) stroke or heart attack if old. Saying you "see blood" you are right in all of these cases. Elaborate as needed. Recall also that there are often symptoms before someone croaks. aches, abscent mindedness, vision problems are good. Never give the symptom, talk about how those symptoms are manifested ... "he wants you to know that he is more comfortable now about the car ...do you understand?" Sure, cuz the poor dead bastard was very uneasy about driving cuz of vision, dizzyness and so on. You can not have shame.

if, on the other hand, you get a no, or better, hesitation (cuz if they hesitate, they tell themselves that they never gave you info) you quote Topcliffe and elaborate. The bonding thing is a useful manipulative tool.

We all know people -can- be fooled when they want to be. That doesn't mean that everyone is equally gullible, though, or that you wouldn't have eventually had sitters who would have been dissatisfied and told you why.

Sure. I did 4 (or so). If I did 4000 I have no doubt that 1000 would have been killer and 100 or so would have had groupies soiling themselves. The beauty of being a fraud here is that YOU have the bully pulpit, not the occasional disaffected mark. Someone dosen't like it? F 'em.

And, btw, was it psychic readings or mediumship? Did you actually say you were connecting them with particular deceased people?

My dear, I don't pretend to understand my gift (and often it is a burden to be borne, not a gift ...alas) images come, thoughts intrude, often I am not aware it is happening. I, like you, must simply accept until the time of our own passing and enlightenment


(I really wish you'd at least saved the "fabulous" one. All the best cold readers seem to be JREF-ers, lol).

Read some basic demo info (statistical abstract of the US), read up on what kills people and when and what it's like. Know your birthstones. Know your teams. Know your hobbies. Loose any sense of propriety. Shoot for an audience, not the sitter. Practice not laughing at yourself.

 

[magicflute]

Let me tell you a funny story.
Halloween was aproaching and my daughter wanted to go her office party as a fortune teller/Psychic so she came over to see me to see if I had a crystal ball (I used to be a magician) I did not but I gave her a 99 cent round fishbowl to use. I gave her a few pointers on cold reading. Armed with this and dressed as a gypsy, she headed for the party. The next day she called me. She said "Dad, you wont believe this! But alot of people there believed that I was for real!! They told me how good and acurate my reading were! All I was doing was repeating stuff I had heard them talk about and a little bit of what you taught me to do and that did the trick!"
That is not the end of the story. At the next gathring, they asked her to repeat the performance, and she repeated her success. For quite some time after that day, people would come up to her on lunch hours and breaks to ask her for "quickie reading" She was having a hard time getting some time for herself. She asked me what to do. I said (as an experiment on my part) "Tell them whatever comes to mind regardless of whether it makes sense to you or not" Well, as expected by me, and not by her, according to the responce of her coworkers, she was still very successful!. So to stop them from bugging her she started to explain to them how she did her psychic tricks and she told me and I quote "Dad, they refused to believe me!" They kept telling her that she must have a 'real' gift because she was "so acurate"
Needless to say she told everyone that she was 'hanging up her crystal ball' and believe it or not she said some people were annoyed because 'she would not share her gifts!'
People hear what they need to hear and will interpret just about anything you say as positive if you don't get too specific.
My daughter is not a practicing skeptic and at the time this occured she even thought that there was something to JE, but after this experience she has listened to JE again and can clearly see process. I don't need to repeat what her opinion of psychic in general is now.

 

[T'ai Chi]

And, I have already explained to you, that providing the full transcript would be a violation of not just forum rules, but also international law.

Do you accept this, yes or no?

As I already said, provide whatever evidence you want, your idea of the best cold reading examples, using your best judgement. Using your best judgement means hopefully you chose not to be stupid and post copyrighted material, obviously.

Can you find the best cold reading transcripts that are not copyrighted?

Read the book.

That's your evidence? That's it??

Again, answer the questions put to you first:

• Have you read Ian Rowland's book? Yes or no?
• Do you admit that no good demo of mediumship exists? Yes or no?
• Do you consider a partial transcript sufficient? Yes or no?
• Do you accept that providing the full transcript from Rowland's book would be a violation of not just forum rules, but also international law? Yes or no?
• What would be the purpose of providing transcripts or videos of what anyone consider the best cold reading demo(s) from someone who doesn't claim to be a medium?
• Have you, in the past, referred to books as reference? Yes or no?
• Why are books not sufficient anymore?
• Do you deny that Rowland's 99.9% accuracy statement is far, far better than any psychic claims? Yes or no?

I'm only interested in what skeptics (this might apply to you) consider the best examples of cold reading, and the actual transcripts and videos of it. I'm interested in the actual evidence, not your questions.

Got any?

 

[T'ai Chi]

Even when a cold reading transcript (NoZed's) was deemed of better quality than one done by James Van Praagh, even by Clancie? So you would rule them completely useless and without merit for discussion? If you won't even read that thread to get a basis of what our opinion is, then I have to assume your not really that interesting in finding out why we have the opinion of cold-reading and mediums that we do.

Who said I'd rule them completely useless and without merit?

Anyone can post some transcript that was supposedly actually recorded from a real live event when it actuality we don't know if it was or not. There has to be stronger evidence than some chatroom reading that may have really occured. Also, is there a video? With current mediums we get videos, with cold readers this doesn't seem too common.

You're just using an argument used by certain posters here to flip our arguements around on ourselves.

Providing evidence is hard, ain't it?

Knowing Larsen sticks in your craw as much as you do in his, its rather safe to assume your intent in starting this thread. My opinion of course.

I'm sure I'm on his mind more than he is on mine. Anyway, your opinions aside, you have any evidence in the form of the best cold reading transcripts or videos?