Looking for Skeptics

Status
Not open for further replies.
IXP said:
I wonder if she would be able to identify each of several of her recordings if ...
Click to expand...

Teflon rubber duck excuse alert! I suspect she'd simply hear new stuff. I think the spirits are flexible enough to complain loudly in her ears at all this disbelief.

I'm not really sure we can convince her it's all in her head. However, I suppose, evidence of actual voices would change my tune.
 
Donn said:
Teflon rubber duck excuse alert! I suspect she'd simply hear new stuff. I think the spirits are flexible enough to complain loudly in her ears at all this disbelief.

I'm not really sure we can convince her it's all in her head. However, I suppose, evidence of actual voices would change my tune.
Click to expand...

I'm always open to the idea of the supernatural, but it would take much more than voices on a recording made by a scammer to change my tune, sorry.
 
Maurice Ledifficile said:
I'm always open to the idea of the supernatural, but it would take much more than voices on a recording made by a scammer to change my tune, sorry.
Click to expand...
You misunderstand. I mean I'd have to agree there are voices on the recording. I would certainly exclude spirits.
 
If she is a scammer, she is an incompetent one.

IXP
 
If she is a scammer, she is an incompetent one.

IXP
Click to expand...

I totally agree. I just have a personal beef with the sort of claims I see on her website. I've been trying to let the process happen here, but I can't help myself at times.

imnshu, her only saving grace is that I feel she is a victim in the first place. I have serious doubts about her being undiagnosed. I don't see this escalating to a preliminary test with a skeptics group.

I'm only a jerk about her website because of the fraudulent claims advertised. I don't put her in the same category as Sylvia and John "tbditu" Edward, because they actually know better.
 
Last edited:
Maurice Ledifficile said:
I just have a personal beef with the sort of claims I see on her website. I've been trying to let the process happen here, but I can't help myself at times.
Click to expand...
I hear you. Her about "us" page reeks of woosploitation in nascent form, like the pupa of some creeping maggot that's boiling-up and shifting into a splendid flying pig.

Still. There's a very small fraction of hope that a sensible butterfly may emerge instead.
 
Donn said:
I hear you. Her about "us" page reeks of woosploitation in nascent form, like the pupa of some creeping maggot that's boiling-up and shifting into a splendid flying pig.

Still. There's a very small fraction of hope that a sensible butterfly may emerge instead.
Click to expand...

Yet they haven't failed a single demonstration to prove their presence yet.
 
flaccon said:
Yet they haven't failed a single demonstration to prove their presence yet.
Click to expand...

What???? They're not doing that well on this thread...

And the claims on your website are fraudulent and illegal. Nice budding scam.


ETA: Flocon would be a better name than Flacon.
 
Last edited:
Maurice Ledifficile said:
I totally agree. I just have a personal beef with the sort of claims I see on her website. I've been trying to let the process happen here, but I can't help myself at times.

imnshu, her only saving grace is that I feel she is a victim in the first place. I have serious doubts about her being undiagnosed. I don't see this escalating to a preliminary test with a skeptics group.

I'm only a jerk about her website because of the fraudulent claims advertised. I don't put her in the same category as Sylvia and John "tbdbitu" Edward, because they actually know better.
Click to expand...

Yes a victim, but I am a witness too, and I prefer to handle this as a "witness" that has gathered evidence.

No one has the right to establish me a fraud without proving so. Again this is guess work, and again, no site will be advertised until it is shaped up, through listening to opinion. Coming here has given me idea's for alteration's, but one thing I can't do, is alter the claims, or play down the story. By doing so, I would not be telling the whole truth.

I have easier ways of earning a living. Now may I ask you, why would I go through 15 days of intense writing (however amateur, the point needs making) and why please would I advertise it to a group of sceptics? for petrol money? Make sense of that before you insult.

As for Sceptic society's that would likely dismiss my claim, is a cop out if ever I heard one.
 
flaccon said:
Yet they haven't failed a single demonstration to prove their presence yet.
Click to expand...

There's a huge gulf between people imagining they hear words in noise and "proving the presence" of some mysterious conscious entity actually speaking those words.

If you want to prove the presence of some intelligent agent responsible for the words you think you hear, try concentrating on demonstrating they're actually intelligent. Subjective stuff about which words might or might not be there isn't going to do it.
 
Donn said:
Yeah, I wasn't talking about your spirits. Sorry flaccon, but your website is dodgy.
Click to expand...

Of course it's dodgy, I've never put a website together in my life. I spend 22 years with my nose in Antique books.
 
This whole thing reeks of incompetence and dishonesty.

Turning up amps to max on ordinary speakers? I'd be shocked if you *didn't* hear distortion artefacts and ambient noise below the hearer's threshold at the time of recording.

Throw in pareidolia, a bunch of pre-formed conclusions, and overt intentions to make money from the claim... no. Not today, not tomorrow, not ever.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
There's a huge gulf between people imagining they hear words in noise and "proving the presence" of some mysterious conscious entity actually speaking those words.

If you want to prove the presence of some intelligent agent responsible for the words you think you hear, try concentrating on demonstrating they're actually intelligent. Subjective stuff about which words might or might not be there isn't going to do it.
Click to expand...

Proving it to the people was not the initial plan, it required Church intervention.

Here's a truth to ponder on, d'you see the site? all the names in the story have been changed, unless permission was granted. Go check if Bishop P Forster exists, and Rev'd Beauchamp. I did not alter their names. Protection denied works both ways in my eyes. Whether they take legal action, or just simply forgive, is irrelevant. I forgive them whatever the outcome.
 
flaccon said:
Yes a victim, but I am a witness too, and I prefer to handle this as a "witness" that has gathered evidence.
Click to expand...


Your evidence is stupendously weak.

No one has the right to establish me a fraud without proving so. Again this is guess work, and again, no site will be advertised until it is shaped up, through listening to opinion. Coming here has given me idea's for alteration's, but one thing I can't do, is alter the claims, or play down the story. By doing so, I would not be telling the whole truth.
Click to expand...

I don't know that you're a fraud. And I have nothing to prove. You don't have to advertise your site to make it fraudulent. You (and over a thousand spirits) guarantee contact with dead loved ones. That is not the truth. In fact it's pretty far from it. It is a despicable claim. I's a big fat lie and you have not come anywhere near the proximity of the vicinity of the ballpark of proving that you can contact spirits.

I have easier ways of earning a living. Now may I ask you, why would I go through 15 days of intense writing (however amateur, the point needs making) and why please would I advertise it to a group of sceptics? for petrol money? Make sense of that before you insult.
Click to expand...


I'm not suggesting you're here to look for customers. But you do offer services you cannot actually deliver.

My suggestion: Follow Pixel or Stray Cat and prove your ludicrous claims, or shut down you business. You still keep your website, but you make it about your struggle with spirits. Like a blog or a forum. Without the snake oil.

But that's just me.



As for Sceptic society's that would likely dismiss my claim, is a cop out if ever I heard one.
Click to expand...

I was trying to politely suggest that you may not pass certain requirements. And that your evidence is so weak after all this time, it's almost embarrassing to debunk. No one is copping out. You have nothing.
 
Last edited:
flaccon said:
Proving it to the people was not the initial plan, it required Church intervention.

Here's a truth to ponder on, d'you see the site? all the names in the story have been changed, unless permission was granted. Go check if Bishop P Forster exists, and Rev'd Beauchamp. I did not alter their names. Protection denied works both ways in my eyes. Whether they take legal action, or just simply forgive, is irrelevant. I forgive them whatever the outcome.
Click to expand...

On a final note, if I may thank the people here who helped with certain issues. If I don't hear from Alderbank, I shall understand why.

Unprocessed records, still express a turbulence within, but is better quality than processed. I could still continue to upload certain files to be heard, there are clearer ones, but more distant, I don't see the point to that.

I doubt I shall continue to justify myself here, that was not my intention.

I stepped from a delusion, not created one. Good luck and thank u for the chat.
 
All this and it turns out to be same old EVP crap we've been fed from a thousand other fools?

Again, I suggest everyone read the two chapters on her website under "Spirits in the Blood" or something like that.

We're dealing with a True Believer with some, shall we say, "issues". Evil demons destroying lives. Evil demons who turn out to be Judas. A believer in Christianity who finds spirits who inform her that it's The Church that needs to be alerted because it's a Church issue. A spirit that uses The DaVinci Code as a reference guide! And a whole lot of what she believes is evidence of her struggle to bring out the truth that really is sort of a play-by-play on how to alienate people and get them very concerned about your mental health.

The artwork blew me away. Not that it even remotely resembles the things she sees, but that it turns out to be magic blood droplets! Artists and toddlers have been dropping some form of liquid color onto various mediums for centuries - just to get that amazing effect that she sees as divine intervention. Try it at home. Take some fabric or really fibrous paper and drop a few drops of food color or ink on it. Tiny drops. As the liquid disperses, some sort of patterns will evolve. I've got a coffee stain on my best cotton beach shorts that looks like Charlie Chaplin!

(In fact, I own a couple of pieces by Francois Aubrun that were done with just this effect in mind. I only realized what he'd done when I went to have them re-framed. He put a lot of dark blue and black onto blotter paper and then turned it over to find patterns that look like a 16th century Chinese woodcut. It's just the colors seeping through to the other side of the blotter paper! They're quite evocative (I wouldn't have bought the pieces otherwise), but it was just some stuff he was noodling with to see the properties of various paints or inks reacting to the nature of the paper.)

Sorry to see you go, Flaccon. But I generally qualify True Believers as people unable to be turned. I fear that we'll just be Chapter Three in a long list (and growing longer) of people who try to convince you that this is actually all very real to you because it's coming from you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom