wardenclyffe, Why do I keep going back to psychics and mediums when every one I've been to so far in my opinion has been fake? I'll answer your question with another question... Why do people keep playing the lottery?
Mostly because people don't understand odds, somewhat because people want the fun of an inexpensive daydream, and partly because the lottery, while ridiculously stacked against any individual, is at least honest, factual, and subject to actual winning. It is also not fraudulent.
Robin Stettnisch said:
And, I'm fascinated by the subject and always open to the possibilities..and for me, it's fun. A night out with friends or my brother Occam Jr. and always the possibility of "What if.." At the very least I always have a funny story to tell after the fact.
That's actually a fine answer. The subject fascinates me, too, and I have visited psychics and mediums. Visiting them isn't the issue. Even believing in them isn't the issue. Passing off your belief as proof is the issue.
Robin Stettnisch said:
OMG, I went to a small psychic gathering last week with friends and learned that in a past life I was a Scottish male midget...a very happy Scottish male midget...my biggest question after that is why must I be short every time I am reincarnated : ) And just to be clear to those of you with no sense of humor, Garrette et al., no, I did not believe it.
I'm glad you clarified that, but why do you assume we/I have no sense of humor? Can only those who agree with you have a sense of humor? In all seriousness and without humor: You are jumping to that conclusion with even less evidence than that on which you base your conclusion about John Edward.
Robin Stettnisch said:
More happened that night but I digress. Agreed it is NOT fun for people who are desperately seeking comfort and answers and who then end up at a James Van Praaghy event.
Really? How on earth can you say that no one at a JVP event is comforted? Don't they believe as strongly as you?
Robin Stettnisch said:
But what I find just as reprehensible as fake mediums preying on the bereaved
So you understand some of the ire directed at JE. Good.
Robin Stettnisch said:
are those non-believers who try to convince someone who has found comfort through a medium or personal signs from their deceased loved one that it was not real.
You mean like you just did with those who believe in JVP. Do you really not see a problem here?
Robin Stettnisch said:
Because I know it can be real.
The comfort? Of course it can be real, or at least as real as it can be when not addressing truth. Or did you mean the claimed communication with the dead? Then, no, it isn't real. At least it has never been shown to be real, your dodges here notwithstanding.
Robin Stettnisch said:
And even though I enjoy the debate, there are others out there who can truly be hurt by the insistence that the comfort they've found is an illusion.
Once again the thought that you are the one who can tell the difference, who cannot be fooled, arises, but you add to it the new virtue that you can handle the dispute while others cannot. Where, exactly, does your high opinion of yourself end?
Robin Stettnisch said:
And what gets me the most about that is non believers think they are helping by spreading their non belief and negativity...
Like you do with James Van Praagh, right?
Robin Stettnisch said:
when in reality they are just as hurtful as any fake medium.
"they" are not monolithic. Skeptics are not a conglomerate speaking with one voice.
Robin Stettnisch said:
And I know non- believers feel they are enlightening others by showing them that once you are dead you are really most sincerely dead...BUT you're WRONG...and possibly hurting others...and yes THAT annoys me.
Possibly? Can "possibly" apply to you and to John Edward or are you the only one who can dole out "possibly" while everything you claim is certain?
Robin Stettnisch said:
James Randi annoys me. A lot.
Who cares? Truth is not contingent upon one's pleasing manner.
Robin Stettnisch said:
And if I were John Edward I would never agree to the million dollar challenge he proposes...
I wouldn't, either, because I would know I could never pass it regardless how fair it was made. A fraud knows not to place a bet on truth.
Robin Stettnisch said:
I wouldn't trust James Randi as far as I could throw him...
And I wager you base this distrust on absolutely no demonstrable fact, unless you care to enlighten me.
Robin Stettnisch said:
and NO matter what the evidence would show the skeptics would attempt to explain it away.
Then you don't know skeptics. Your description applies far better to believers. Show me where in your case we (the skeptics) have not followed the evidence.
Robin Stettnisch said:
Just as they try to do with regard to the testing done in the "Afterlife Experiments."
And you say this without having even discussed it with us. I, at least, read the book and looked at the evidence before I judged it.
Robin Stettnisch said:
Which by the way , Garrette, Dr. Schwartz does respond to Randi's and your concerns...
I have read his responses, too. I'm not a fly-by-night skeptic in this matter. Schwartz's responses are aimed at soothing his audience and have nothing to do with facts. Something which I can demonstrate if you care to actually discuss it.
Robin Stettnisch said:
just google it and you can have your endless debate with him, not me.
Ah, but of course you won't discuss it. I wager if it had turned out that we are not familiar with Schwartz you would be quoting him left and right. Schwartz is a liar and fraud. His book and his defense of it are full of fundamental flaws that would shame an undergraduate student. He knows this. He also knows it won't matter to those who wish to believe.
Robin Stettnisch said:
Ward, I think it's great you are open to the possibility ...
Why just Ward? Others have expressed that openness. I have expressed it myself. I used to share your belief. It is conceivable that I could share it again. You, however, have made it clear that you are most definitely not oppen to the possibility of being wrong, and yet you claim to be the open midned one.
Robin Stettnisch said:
and remember for me it is not that big of a stretch to believe John Edward can communicate with those who have crossed over because I absolutely communicated with my Nana that night...she proved it.
No, she didn't. You created an emotional response that supported the belief you wanted.
Or perhaps you are right, and she did communicate with you. Unfortunately, the evidence you have presented falls far, far short of demonstrating it.