Looking for Skeptics

[Foolmewunz]

A lot of healthy scepticism in these replies.


My Dear Daughter (DD) called me this morning to ask if I knew (floccan's real name) who had called our home and made an offensive call. DD was angry rather than traumatised. I don't yet know what was said but I'm sure I will get full details at dinner tonight. I am unlikely to get an accurate transcript so I won't share any of it here.

You can say what you like to me personally in the open forum and I will reply in the same way where others can read and judge. I don't expect members of this forum to communicate privately with me or my family disrespectfully and I'm surprised that anyone finds that acceptable.

I don't want any more private correspondence with floccan and yes I do think she should say sorry. I also do not want to derail this thread any further.

Anything further on the details of the call?

Alderbank, please believe me that I am sympathetic to you on this. Anyone so much as looks crossly at my kid and I eat their face. And, as I said, we have no reason to distrust you. You've made level-headed decisions throughout this little adventure, and shown cool when some posters were chomping at the bit for something more active/aggressive.

But we know that flaccon communicates in riddles and strange phrases, sometimes. Is it possible that it was just "a weird call" and the daughter reads/interprets "weird = rude"? Note that around that time flaccon reported some kind of new communication with her father. Maybe she called to do a Robin1, "Neener neener neener, I've got a ne-e-w messsss-age!" I think she might be capable of a little boasting and poking.

Thing is.... I can't say. flaccon has not exhibited that sort of snark nor shown any real "mean streak" thus far. The closest she's gotten is when she got testy a couple of times when (IMHO) her faith in Reg's spirit was shaken. Thing is... I can't say either way. That's why I'd like to know more of the details, even realizing that it's hearsay (a repetition of someone else's recollection of a call) and would like to know flaccon's version of the story.

She could've just called and said, "A wet bird never flies at night". That sort of thing would be more in keeping.

 

[IXP]

I too, am waiting to see if this could be a misunderstanding. flaccon has been remarkably reserved in her posts on this forum, taking in stride whatever we could throw at her. I consider myself a pretty good judge of character, and what has happened now, barring misunderstanding, is a complete surprise to me.

IXP

 

[Apology]

I had a bad feeling about Alderbank's direct contact with flaccon, but I put it off to me transferring my own personal fears and vulnerabilities onto Alderbank. I hope that there's been some misunderstanding and flaccon doesn't start harassing you, Alderbank

 

[trustbutverify]

Is it still there?

In my heart.

(I see the face too... it's a really good one... )

Your testimonial has now been documented. Thanks for participating in my test.

 

[trustbutverify]

It's THEM!!!!

Documented.

 

[Stray Cat]

Please document me as a witness too. I had my eyes on and the face wasn't even entangled in any other facial frequency.
It seems I have caught pareidolia.

 

[Vortigern99]

Please document me as a witness too. I had my eyes on and the face wasn't even entangled in any other facial frequency.
It seems I have caught pareidolia.

You forgot to say "quantum".

Other than that, yeah, me too.

 

[Maurice Ledifficile]

Please document me as a witness too. I had my eyes on and the face wasn't even entangled in any other facial frequency.
It seems I have caught pareidolia.

:

 

[pakeha]

I've had a peculiar week which had as its highlight reading this thread.
Where can it possibly go from here?


Added:
The thread, not my week.

 

[asydhouse]

I think we're all waiting for Alderbank to clue us in to what happened.

In your own time and way, Sir.

 

[Alderbank]

I think we're all waiting for Alderbank to clue us in to what happened.
In your own time and way, Sir.

Oh? Are you all waiting for me? I thought everyone was responding to Pixel42's wise request yesterday

<snip>
I think we should all stop posting on this thread until flaccon can bring herself to acknowledge the possibility that the spirits aren't real, and commits to such a test in order to find out.

Also these below: not my words but I fully agree with them

I am not saying I don't believe Alderbank, but we have been quick to demand evidence of flaccon. We wanted both accounts of what happened when the visit occurred before we commented (most of us, I think).
I will wait to hear her side of this story, and will weigh up what is presented. I know this will be 'he says / she says', but that's what happens an awful lot of the time. We should be wary of making a judgement on one person's comments alone.

Flaccon, can you take a deep breath and calmly let us know what's going on with you just now?

 

[Foolmewunz]

Oh? Are you all waiting for me? I thought everyone was responding to Pixel42's wise request yesterday



Also these below: not my words but I fully agree with them

Huh?

I'm not sure you got the gist of the questioning. You'd said that you would learn more of the nasty phonecall at dinner. We're curious as to what you made of the details (and what the details are) upon discussing with your daughter.

It just seems out of "character" for flaccon, even admitting that said "character" could just be an internet persona. Hitherto, she hasn't really crossed over to "nasty streak" and we're curious as to just what transpired. With flaccon away for the weekend, we'll have to wait for her version of things, but we thought your side would be made clearer after you spoke with your daughter.

Again - I/we have no reason to disbelieve you. This is just a strange wrinkle that curious skeptics want to solve.

 

[Donn]

Darn, no new show tonight! I was looking forward to a new episode of my soap, "Seeking skeptics in sanguine sounds" - it's a doozy.

I'll wait. Really.

 

[Pup]

Huh?

I'm not sure you got the gist of the questioning. You'd said that you would learn more of the nasty phonecall at dinner. We're curious as to what you made of the details (and what the details are) upon discussing with your daughter.

It just seems out of "character" for flaccon, even admitting that said "character" could just be an internet persona. Hitherto, she hasn't really crossed over to "nasty streak" and we're curious as to just what transpired. With flaccon away for the weekend, we'll have to wait for her version of things, but we thought your side would be made clearer after you spoke with your daughter.

Again - I/we have no reason to disbelieve you. This is just a strange wrinkle that curious skeptics want to solve.

Agree with all the above. So far, it could be anything from some idiot blathered on about nonsense for an hour and wasted my time, to veiled threats, to extreme obscenities, to... I can't even guess, after flaccon's reasonably polite behavior in this thread.

I'd be curious about just a general summary of what type of offensiveness the call contained, and of course am curious about flaccon's explanation when she gets online here again.

 

[Empress]

Alderbank has already stated that since he cannot reasonably expect to get a verbatim account, he won't post any of the specifics. He's made a charge, and I think at this point we need to hear from flaccon, if she chooses to address the allegations, and get her side of the story. If she doesn't come back, then I think the thread will die a natural death.

 

[asydhouse]

To Alderbank

Indeed, we need flaccon to explain her side of this, but we need to hear your side too... and it would seem a good time while she's away for you to let us know what actually happened, so that when (if) she comes back we'll be able to follow her "explanation" with a reasonable chance of figuring out what she's saying!


ETA

Empress posted while I was typing the above. Alderbank said he wouldn't be able to get a verbatim "transcript" style of report, but a little bit more detail as to the nature of the call, and whether he reckons it really was flaccon, would be useful... not to mention I for one am curious as hell about what happened!

 

[Alderbank]

Huh?

I'm not sure you got the gist of the questioning. You'd said that you would learn more of the nasty phonecall at dinner. We're curious as to what you made of the details (and what the details are) upon discussing with your daughter.

It just seems out of "character" for flaccon, even admitting that said "character" could just be an internet persona. Hitherto, she hasn't really crossed over to "nasty streak" and we're curious as to just what transpired. With flaccon away for the weekend, we'll have to wait for her version of things, but we thought your side would be made clearer after you spoke with your daughter.

Again - I/we have no reason to disbelieve you. This is just a strange wrinkle that curious skeptics want to solve.

What I said was

I don't yet know what was said but I'm sure I will get full details at dinner tonight. I am unlikely to get an accurate transcript so I won't share any of it here.

Several reasons why I said that

First, what ever the content I always assume that phone calls and PMs are private unless explicitly agreed otherwise. Even if I'm sure I have it accurately I wouldn't share content on a public forum without the other party's consent.

Next, I can't come anywhere near the (rightly) high evidential standards of this forum. All I've got is hearsay. I can't even evidence there actually was a call.

Next, I am not interested in getting into the he says/she says debate referred to by Chillzero, especially at third hand

Finally and most importantly for me I can't figure it myself. I've met flaccon. You haven't. As I said she is a nice lady. She was never less than courteous. During our 90 minute meeting I felt that she was convinced she had been given a revelation and was struggling to find a way to share that with the world. She really had expected me to hear the voices she hears. If I challenged anything she said she would stop and think then quietly restate her belief.


Help me with this question which I have been pondering, please - why did she phone me at all? I realise I have no evidence of a call so the simplest answer is that she didn't. Accepting for the sake of argument that she did, what would be the purpose? I have made only a few posts following my visit, mainly to answer a direct question from another post. flaccon does not react to my posts either to confirm or deny. I have had no PMs. Is it common on this forum to phone rather than post or PM?

 

[Foolmewunz]

What I said was


Several reasons why I said that

First, what ever the content I always assume that phone calls and PMs are private unless explicitly agreed otherwise. Even if I'm sure I have it accurately I wouldn't share content on a public forum without the other party's consent.

Next, I can't come anywhere near the (rightly) high evidential standards of this forum. All I've got is hearsay. I can't even evidence there actually was a call.

Next, I am not interested in getting into the he says/she says debate referred to by Chillzero, especially at third hand

Finally and most importantly for me I can't figure it myself. I've met flaccon. You haven't. As I said she is a nice lady. She was never less than courteous. During our 90 minute meeting I felt that she was convinced she had been given a revelation and was struggling to find a way to share that with the world. She really had expected me to hear the voices she hears. If I challenged anything she said she would stop and think then quietly restate her belief.


Help me with this question which I have been pondering, please - why did she phone me at all? I realise I have no evidence of a call so the simplest answer is that she didn't. Accepting for the sake of argument that she did, what would be the purpose? I have made only a few posts following my visit, mainly to answer a direct question from another post. flaccon does not react to my posts either to confirm or deny. I have had no PMs. Is it common on this forum to phone rather than post or PM?

I didn't expect a transcript. I expected, though, a clearer narrative as to how/when the call was received, if your daughter was certain it was flaccon, etc...

With all due respect (uh oh, you know **** is coming when someone opens a paragraph with that line), if you weren't willing to divulge more of the details or back story, you shouldn't have made the discussion public. I don't think anyone expects a verbatim transcript. We do actually trust your judgment. This is not an evidentiary hearing, but a bunch of people hanging out and chatting on the internet. If you feel you've checked into it and are fairly certain that it was flaccon and was a call as you initially described it, then I think most of us will be content to await flaccons explication.

 

[jsfisher]

Help me with this question which I have been pondering, please - why did she phone me at all?

I am not a psychologist, I have no qualifications to make such assessments, but I will nonetheless share with you my impressions of what I think is driving flaccon.

flaccon is highly invested in these spirits and their messages. She desperately wants to / needs to share the experience of contact with the afterlife or whatever it is. Unfortunately, friends and family, although supportive, haven't been convinced for whatever reason.

The voices are clear and unmistakable, yet she has not been able to get anyone she knows to admit that. Remember how she kept trying to steer things towards someone here simply coming to listen, and he or she would be convinced? Sure, sure, we can do tests, but you'd really be there just to listen "hands-on", then you'd know the truth.

I don't think she understood how skepticism works, and she still doesn't. She assumed we were simply more immune to the fear and faith barriers that were preventing her friends and family from experiencing what she knows to be true.

Coming here, flaccon didn't get what she hoped for -- a hands-on convertee -- and she got something she didn't expect -- some indications that her beliefs may be less true than she had assumed. I think she is shaken and saddened by the experience, and the phone call may have been nothing more than a grasp at another straw of hope.

Well, those are my thoughts. This may all be just great fiction and nothing more.

 

[Daylightstar]

...
First, what ever the content I always assume that phone calls and PMs are private unless explicitly agreed otherwise. Even if I'm sure I have it accurately I wouldn't share content on a public forum without the other party's consent.

Next, I can't come anywhere near the (rightly) high evidential standards of this forum. All I've got is hearsay. I can't even evidence there actually was a call.
...
... I realise I have no evidence of a call so the simplest answer is that she didn't. ...

And yet:

Flaccon

My daughter has rung me at work to say that you have made an offensive call to her on our home phone. I have not shared my home phone number with you although I am easy to find, and this is completely unacceptable.

I have never been other than polite and respectful to you. I can only think that your action is because moral pressure from other posters here has forced you to take down your disgraceful website.

Please confine your future communication to the open forum. If you make another call like that to my home I will go straight to the police.

I, and I hope other posters here, expect an apology from you

Alderbank, may I suggest you formally issue a proper retraction of your statements immediately and possibly consult with the moderators here about any relevant moderator action to be taken.