Simply TLN its no where. We have none, the only testing as far as anyone here can tell me that JE has been involved in is the Schwartz experiments which everyone seems to agree are suspect. So we're left sifting through transcripts which I agree aren't objective in proving his abilities, and spinning our wheels all day long.TLN said:
John Edward Sets Off The Baloney Detector
- Thread starter TLN
- Start date
-
- Tags
- john edward
Thanz said:
Aw, crap. Now you've done it, Jim. You have mentioned O'Neill and provided a link to the Shermer article. I know that you are a newbie, and therefore don't know what has gone on before, but I don't think that I will shock you when I say that O'Neill and this article have been dissected to death by both sides.
I expect it to happen again here too, however. It is kind of hard to resist commenting on it when it comes up. But when this thread hits 15 pages, don't be surprised.
lol Thanz. I'll take a pass on this, since I just responded to it on the other thread where Jim mentioned it.
.......neoDarat said:
No point, I guess, since you put it that way.
I just thought, from this quote...............that you were suggesting that all mediums should be able to bring across a lot more specific information than they seem able to do. Since not all mediums claim the same things,
you obviously then meant that "some" mediums, i.e., the ones that claim to be able to do these things, should be able to bring across a lot more specific information than they seem able to do. I understand. Got it.
.....neoClancie said:
Clancie, I don't think they've ever broken up a long reading and used it in two different shows, except in cases of a follow-up segment. Do you remember the "Tarnished Silver" reading? There was a young man who was killed in a motorcycle accident that JE brought through to his mom and two sisters in the gallery.
It was a good reading, and one of the sisters, the one I exchange e-mails with who works in law enforcement on Long Island, posted that there was a lot more to her family's reading that she would have loved to have had included in the show that aired, but it was cut out because of time restraints, even though she said there were many good hits in what was cut.....neo
RSLancastr
www.StopSylvia.com
Is Graham Bishop dead? Otherwise, his ability to speak to and hear mediums isn't so impressive.CFLarsen said:
voidx said:
Voidx, I don't think I agree with your characterization that if this is indeed a true process, that it cannot be subjective. It's highly subjective. And I disagree with you even more if you are assuming that it's however each medium wants to decide it will work". I don't think the medium "decides" how it will work at all. It just works however it works. I don't know how much of this the medium can actually control, if anything.
Entirely untrue, Voidx. If it's a thread that I've posted on, you can be fairly sure that I've read all the posts. I like this stuff. The excerpt you quoted, was re-posted here at JREF by Instig8R, but it was originally typed from the book by me, and posted by me over at tvtalkshows.
Sure, I'll comment on it. Voidx, I think you are not taking into consideration that the average JE reading does not, I repeat, does NOT, consist of merely one spirit energy coming through, but several. So your criticism makes no sense to me. If the reading is twenty minutes, it's not twenty minutes with only the one spirit coming through. Capisce?
We definitely disagee on that one! JE has passed on many significant messages, including advising a young woman to see the grief counselor on the set, because he was told by her dead fiance that she had been considering suicide, which she admitted was indeed true. There are plenty of good examples of important messages.
I have ackknowledged on a regular basis that John simply passes on to the sitter whatever image he gets, and the sitter is the one who applies it to themselves, and let's everyone know what it means to them. Yes. I acknowledge that. Some messages are more clear to him than others, but still, John only sees the image. Only the sitter knows precisely how it applies to themselves. Yes. You call this a major kink in the process. In any case, it is what it is. A kink to you, a reality of mental mediumship to others.
Many times the sitters are very surprised by who comes through, Voidx, and are not always happy to be hearing from people whom they did not even like or get along with in life. It doesn't stop them from coming through, though, and the sitters certainly didn't know what they wanted to hear from these people, because in truth, they didn't even want to hear from them at all.
Done. Consider it acknowledged then.
......neoSumming up:
We now know that:
We also know that JE is lying about the shows being edited for content. They are.
You had this to say about me:
Who was delusional, neo? Who was unreasonable? Who was dishonest? You or me?
We now know that:
- The shows are most decidedly edited for content.
- The seminars are most decidedly edited for content, as well as making the hits look better.
We also know that JE is lying about the shows being edited for content. They are.
You had this to say about me:
Who was delusional, neo? Who was unreasonable? Who was dishonest? You or me?
.....neoCFLarsen said:
Uh......you? Listen. We've gone over and over this, Claus, but you will never get it because you don't want to get it. And regardless of what you may think, I do understand why this is.
Naturally if you believe unconditionally that JE is a fake, phoney and fraud, you will look at not just the editing, but at every single aspect of what goes on in a reading and see it as suspect. Since that is what skeptics do, I have absolutely no problem with that.
What I do have a problem with is your looking at all these things, and being so darn sure that you and only people who think like you are right, regardless of the fact that there is no hard evidence to back up your allegations of cheating and selective editing etc.
Other intelligent people look at the same things that you are looking at, and come to completely different conclusions. That does not necessarily mean that we are wrong and you are right. Or vice versa, I realize that.
So you say that they edit for content. I already know exactly what you mean when you say this, which is why I never concede this point to you. Not because I'm unreasonable, but because I do not agree with you that the content that is edited out, is edited out because of the reasons you believe.
Whatever is edited out, is done because there is no possible way to have a successful television show if the readings themselves do not flow quickly and include a lot of less than interesting details that are of no interest to anyone, or include long drawn-out parts where the sitter is trying to connect the dots and fails.
So yes, that sort of stuff is probably edited out at times, I'm sure. But as long as they include the moment when the pieces finally do fall together and make sense to the sitter, then the essence of the reading is intact, and it makes for far better viewing.
In other words, I disagree that the editing is utilized in such a way as to to rearrange portions of the reading to misrepresent anything. For example, a yes or no response from the sitter is not edited out from one part of the tape, and spliced into another portion, so as to dishonestly change a "no" answer to a question, to a "yes" response, and I think in your head, that is what you mean by editing for content, which is why I say that they don't do that......neo
juninho
Thinker
- Joined
- May 28, 2003
- Messages
- 182
Lot of less interesting details to anyone? What the heck are you talking about, these readings are in there very nature meant to be personal to the sitter.neofight said:
So its perfectly acceptable then for JE to say: "Do you know a Geoff?"
Sitter: "No"
JE: "Do you know a Kevin?"
Sitter: "No"
etc. etc. until
JE: "Do you know a Mark?"
Sitter: "Yes that was my Grandfather's name"
And, in your words, when the " long drawn-out parts where the sitter is trying to connect the dots and fails." are excluded it becomes;
JE: "Do you know a Mark?"
Sitter: "Yes that was my Grandfather's name"
Do you not see how bad this can appear? You're virtually stating that the man is a fraud and the whole CO with.. is a sham.
Hoisted on one's own petard me thinks.
neofight,
First, I would like you to drop the insults. They are quite unnecessary and only reflect badly on yourself. I'm not the only one you hurl insults at, so don't even try this "I only do it because it's Claus!" crap.
Second - I have to admit that your post stunned me. You admit freely that the misses are edited out, because they don't make the show "flow". You want to argue that the things that are edited out are not "interesting" to anyone but the sitters - yet you forget that nobody really cares what JE gets a hit with. All that matters is that he does get hit - that's what you are saying. What spiritual meaning could it possibly give you that a sitter, unknown to you, can validate a recipe? We don't know these people, so why should any of their validations mean anything to us? What matters is, that they can validate, right?
Third, you are flat-out lying when you say that the readings are not rearranged to "misrepresent" anything. By your own account, we know this is happening. You retold the Malibu Shrimp reading in one way, and - after the reading had been edited to show something different - you changed your account to fit it.
Fourth, that is not just what I mean about "edited for content". Don't try to imagine you can read my mind. What I mean is: Misses edited out. Silences edited out. Hits rearranged. Sentences rearranged. It's a puzzle, meant to make JE look good. It's entertainment, neo.
That your memory is faulty is one thing. That only makes you human. But that you willingly change your memory, just so that JE does not look bad, is downright disturbed.
I was not delusional. I was not unreasonable. I was not dishonest.
You were. And still are. You have gone from pure belief to monstrous fanaticism.
First, I would like you to drop the insults. They are quite unnecessary and only reflect badly on yourself. I'm not the only one you hurl insults at, so don't even try this "I only do it because it's Claus!" crap.
Second - I have to admit that your post stunned me. You admit freely that the misses are edited out, because they don't make the show "flow". You want to argue that the things that are edited out are not "interesting" to anyone but the sitters - yet you forget that nobody really cares what JE gets a hit with. All that matters is that he does get hit - that's what you are saying. What spiritual meaning could it possibly give you that a sitter, unknown to you, can validate a recipe? We don't know these people, so why should any of their validations mean anything to us? What matters is, that they can validate, right?
Third, you are flat-out lying when you say that the readings are not rearranged to "misrepresent" anything. By your own account, we know this is happening. You retold the Malibu Shrimp reading in one way, and - after the reading had been edited to show something different - you changed your account to fit it.
Fourth, that is not just what I mean about "edited for content". Don't try to imagine you can read my mind. What I mean is: Misses edited out. Silences edited out. Hits rearranged. Sentences rearranged. It's a puzzle, meant to make JE look good. It's entertainment, neo.
That your memory is faulty is one thing. That only makes you human. But that you willingly change your memory, just so that JE does not look bad, is downright disturbed.
I was not delusional. I was not unreasonable. I was not dishonest.
You were. And still are. You have gone from pure belief to monstrous fanaticism.
Not that it cannot be subjective, that it is entirely subjective at this point. And you're missing my other point. You often toss at us the idea that we're not taking the viewpoint of believers. I've been careful to do that when presenting other views. Now take a step into my shoes. Believers argue that there is a process to mediumship, and indeed there must be, but everytime you try and nail down similiarities in this process between mediums, it doesn't jive. Then we get instances where JE contradicts himself in how his own process works. This is intentionally vague, as is your explanation. "They have no control I think", to me is an excuse for, they can say it works however they want, cuz telepathy is subjective. Again we're assuming its a difficult and subjective process, but since no one knows how it might even potentially work, the actual communication process, then taking these mediums at their word is purely ancedoytle, and again you must admit that you're belief in mediumship is based upon equal parts faith and "science cannot account for this yet", and on nothing factual.
So are you saying you haven't posted anything in the "The process of John Edward" thread? Care to retract that statement? I know where it was posted orginally and by whom, doesn't change the fact that its still a JE quote, unless you're admitting its not an accurate quote, what does it matter? Aside from not answering the question.
How many spirits in a 20 minute reading then, on average. Does he stop part way through readings to rest, being this is oh so strenous? He still says it can only be sustained for a few minutes, so what, can he get 4 spirits in one sitting? 5? Any transcripts to support this? I quite refuse to take anyones word on this without some kind of backup.
A young grieving woman seeks to contact her obviously recently dead fiance and JE brings through the ultra amazing message of, see a counselor, I think you're considering suicide. Wow. Who would have thunk it! This is exactly my problem. How is this a good hit? This is just plain old deductive reasoning, now if the message had included some detail about her specific thoughts of when and where and how she was committing suicide it would be somewhat more impressive. And while we're on this, what if she only ever thought of suicide? Can spirits read our minds? Or do they simply observe us? I don't think anyone has clarified this either. I'm sorry, I just fail to see if you're at least considering the possibility that JE might be a cold-reader, which if you're objective, you'll always keep in mind, and still consider this hit significant. The chances of her being suicidal over her fiances death are probably pretty good.
Ok fine given, now quit deflecting. I'm not talking about when they don't get the person their trying to contact, I'm talking about when they do. And besides, I think this is again another fine tactic by JE. If he's a cold-reader, and a smart one, then he realizes he can't take the bait of, "I want to talk to my mother" all the time because its to obvious he's just taking information from the sitter. I think you'll notice most times when the sitter comes out and blurts out at the start who they want to talk to, JE doesn't grab it, its to obvious, so he goes for a different, although still closely related relative. One that could potentially know most of the same things, and again potentially bring across whatever validation the sitter is seeking. You can't deny that everyone going there is looking to hear something specific from someone in particular. I believe this is just a smart tactic by JE to find a round about way of giving it to them sometimes without taking the initial information of, "I want to talk to my mom".
So you agree that the length of the readings, and how JE handles them could be seen either way then? That its possible he's using the time to simple use cold-reading and observation to hone in on the sitter. That it is in fact every bit as possible as the paranormal explanation, despite your own personal opinion.
Not that we have any way of verifying besides the sitters own recolletion of how good these hits were, which relies far to heavily on their own subjective opinion of the reading, which makes them basically irrelevant. I bet the good hits that were left out in her opinion were not as good as the few "left" in. This paragraph itself shows us that yes it is edited for content. Here we have potential good hits that could help us analyze his ability more, yet their cut.
And you seem to miss why this is important to us. I have no idea or proof that JE intentionally changes the meaning of readings with his editing, but it wouldn't surprise me. However, I by no means cannot rule it out, and in some cases must suspect it quite strongly. Less than interesting details would include misses neo, and fishing for information which would make it much more obvious that what JE is doing resembles cold-reading. Its of interest to people skeptical of his abilities. Those dots that fail to connect are again misses, which if there are more misses before the dot gets connected, its obvious he's cold-reading. The essence is not intact if all we get is the moment when JE's misses turn to hits. You've called Claus to task for basing all of his assumptions on the fact he thinks JE is a fraud. Don't you think you're doing the same here by refusing to see why any missing content, good or bad, does not give us the true essence of the reading? Because while it makes for far better viewing for the masses, its at the same time potentially bad viewing for anyone trying to analyze or criticize what he does.
True, I don't know that that happens, but it would need to. My concern is we don't ever see that particular question, whether it was yes or no.
neofight said:
No point, I guess, since you put it that way.
.....that you were suggesting that all mediums should be able to bring across a lot more specific information than they seem able to do. Since not all mediums claim the same things,
you obviously then meant that "some" mediums, i.e., the ones that claim to be able to do these things, should be able to bring across a lot more specific information than they seem able to do. I understand. Got it.
No problem, I've also got the "wrong end of the stick" of someone else's post more then once.