Looking for Skeptics

Status
Not open for further replies.
scrappy said:
why should I butt out? flacon asked me not to get involved because it floods the thread with nonsense. The right direction in my opinion is the Church hood.
Click to expand...

You should butt out because you bring nothing to the thread but your own opinion and try and pass it as fact. It's you who creates the nonsense that flaccon speaks of scrappy and you've managed it again with just one post.

I know you think that you are supporting flaccon but be assured that you are more than just a little responsible for her current mindset. You are an enabler who is supporting her self destructive behaviours and ultimately will be partly responsible for her coming down to earth with a massive bump at some point in the future.

This is not going to be as cinematic as you have fantasised, the reflected glory that you have been imagining, if this ever does hit the media, is guaranteed to fail to materialise and she is very likely to be subject to derision. I hope you stick around to help her then...........

I know where I'd put my money on you being.
 
bluesjnr said:
You should butt out because you bring nothing to the thread but your own opinion and try and pass it as fact. It's you who creates the nonsense that flaccon speaks of scrappy and you've managed it again with just one post.

I know you think that you are supporting flaccon but be assured that you are more than just a little responsible for her current mindset. You are an enabler who is supporting her self destructive behaviours and ultimately will be partly responsible for her coming down to earth with a massive bump at some point in the future.

This is not going to be as cinematic as you have fantasised, the reflected glory that you have been imagining, if this ever does hit the media, is guaranteed to fail to materialise and she is very likely to be subject to derision. I hope you stick around to help her then...........

I know where I'd put my money on you being.
Click to expand...

Flaccon was advised by the sceptics to have a supporting friend on here, and I will be there when ever she needs me for the right reasons, what ever they turn out to be. And yes I will take your bet.
 
Vortigern99 said:
It bears noting that, for what it's worth, Tracey is not alone in hearing spirit voices through electronic devices, including phones. In Rosemary Guiley's Encyclopedia of Ghosts and Spirits (Checkmark Books, NYC, 2nd edition, 2000) under the entry "phone calls from the dead" (pp. 286 - 288), the following information is offered:...
Click to expand...

^ This was a great post.
 
For two (ostensibly) strangers to share such an odd phrase is .. odd. I suppose it could be a local flavour thing.

It could also be a kind of learning (by scrappy) of flaccon's phrases, which further dilutes any sceptical hope for him.
 
Ha ha! Yes, indeed.

Bishops in da hood! We'll make you an altar you can't resist.
 
Last edited:
scrappy said:
Flaccon was advised by the sceptics to have a supporting friend on here, and I will be there when ever she needs me for the right reasons, what ever they turn out to be. And yes I will take your bet.
Click to expand...

Which would be great if you were here for the right reasons. But you aren't. You are an enabler, encouraging her to believe something that doesn't exist. The skeptics didn't ask her to have a supporting friend on here. They asked if there was anyone who could provide conclusive evidence to support her claims. You haven't done that.

You should be ashamed...but I guarantee you will respond that you aren't, followed by yadda yadda bullpiss yadda yadda.

Very sad situation.
 
The GP and the Reverend are paying attention again because if flaccon goes to the press with this story, it reflects badly on them. They're both going to try a Hail Mary pass in order to dissuade her from going to the press with these stories, and they're concerned because her problem has worsened since the first time she contacted them.

I wish them both luck, but it's crystal clear to me that flaccon will not be persuaded under any circumstances. Hopefully the information that was redacted from the GP's letter is enough to cover his butt from liability in this case. He'd have a lot to explain to the medical board if it doesn't.

The Rev. is a little better off in this situation, since, as someone said, belief in imaginary characters is already his bread and butter. It's still kind of an embarrassment to him that he didn't put more effort into guiding flaccon towards a more constructive solution to her problems. I'm pretty sure flaccon's spirits aren't canon. The Bible doesn't say anything about your dead relatives visiting you. It's pretty clear that if you want to see or hear from your dead relatives ever again, you're going to need to get yourself into heaven. If there were a cheap, easy way to hear from your dead relatives again (such as phone calls and laptop messages from the dead) it would completely undermine the Church's authority and reason for being.

Pretty sure both of them (or all 3? I thought there was 2 religious people involved in this sideshow) are going to give talking her out of going to the press one last try in order to save face, or at least get their names taken out of the mix.
 
Donn said:
Vortigern99 said:
It bears noting that, for what it's worth, Tracey is not alone in hearing spirit voices through electronic devices, including phones. In Rosemary Guiley's Encyclopedia of Ghosts and Spirits (Checkmark Books, NYC, 2nd edition, 2000) under the entry "phone calls from the dead" (pp. 286 - 288), the following information is offered:...
Click to expand...

^ This was a great post.
Click to expand...

Thanks! It seemed like it got lost in all the silliness. Guiley's book is very informative on a variety if ghostly subjects, including electronic voice recordings by alleged spirits. I'll post info from that entry next.
 
flaccon said:
A thorough investigation by the correct department/s.

If this turns out to be as genuine as I believe it to be, then everything they have told me is true, including that this is the age of experiences, and everyone is going to have them.
Click to expand...

I don't understand.

Specifically, what results or observations or data would you require to at least begin to consider the possibility that you are wrong in your conclusions?
 
Apology said:
The GP and the Reverend are paying attention again because if flaccon goes to the press with this story, it reflects badly on them. They're both going to try a Hail Mary pass in order to dissuade her from going to the press with these stories, and they're concerned because her problem has worsened since the first time she contacted them.

I wish them both luck, but it's crystal clear to me that flaccon will not be persuaded under any circumstances. Hopefully the information that was redacted from the GP's letter is enough to cover his butt from liability in this case. He'd have a lot to explain to the medical board if it doesn't.

The Rev. is a little better off in this situation, since, as someone said, belief in imaginary characters is already his bread and butter. It's still kind of an embarrassment to him that he didn't put more effort into guiding flaccon towards a more constructive solution to her problems. I'm pretty sure flaccon's spirits aren't canon. The Bible doesn't say anything about your dead relatives visiting you. It's pretty clear that if you want to see or hear from your dead relatives ever again, you're going to need to get yourself into heaven. If there were a cheap, easy way to hear from your dead relatives again (such as phone calls and laptop messages from the dead) it would completely undermine the Church's authority and reason for being.

Pretty sure both of them (or all 3? I thought there was 2 religious people involved in this sideshow) are going to give talking her out of going to the press one last try in order to save face, or at least get their names taken out of the mix.
Click to expand...

I think this is a bit unfair on the priest. Most or all priests regularly get approached by those who are mentally ill and/or have a - different - perspective on reality. As this thread proves, direct challenge to those experiencing delusions, of whatever type, rarely works, and is in fact directly advised against in guidelines for working with people suffering from psychosis, for instance. You can't know from flaccon's account what the priest did or didn't say and what he was trying to achieve. Most priests I know would try to get someone who was experiencing delusions to see their doctor, but there are many people who see reality differently who don't fulfill the criteria for any mental illness, and there are those who are mentally ill who do not recognize the fact or get appropriate help, and/or for whom appropriate help cannot get rid of the symptoms entirely.

Under these circumstances, what would you have a priest do? Most have the sense not to reinforce delusions, but to offer what supportive listening they can to help the person keep safe. And to offer ritual, blessings or prayer where that seems appropriate as they would for anyone who consulted them (bearing in mind that this will not include exorcism, as that is only done by the diocesan exorcist).

A good friend of mine is a priest, and last time I visited her she, in quick succession, received a phone call from 'The King of Africa' and a knock on the door from a parishoner in the manic phase of bipolar who wanted to talk and talk and ... She dealt kindly and compassionately with both.
 
scrappy said:
I am relieved that flacon has finally made progress in the right direction, its good news.
Click to expand...

Once again, specifically what evidence would you require before you would seriously consider the possibility that you are wrong concerning these "supernatural" events?

Why can't either of you provide a simple, direct answer to this question?
 
Tracey has just given me permission to write what I thought about her appointment with the GP.

I,ve just come back from observing the appointment between the GP and Tracey. I sat quietly in the background. I was brought into the conversation a few times. I did not feel any appeasement from her GP, very the opposite. He knows what he has witnessed, and he knows Tracey does not elaborate or seek attention if she doesn't need any. He spoke with her on a level I have never known before. He also looks forward to her updates. Either way, he certainly understands that something supernatural is happening and needs investigating by the church and not psychiatry. Only time will unfold this situation.
 
Scrappy, as someone who knows the Church of England well, I strongly doubt that they will do anything other than show due care, compassion and pastoral support to Tracey. You are highly unlikely to find any priest who will agree that her laptop and phone are 'haunted', but you might find some who will gently listen and try to help with her fears.
 
The spirits have just given the bishop permission to tell me what he thinks about Mr. Bulger's thoughts on Tracey's visit with the GP but only after Alderbank admits that he's scared of spooky voices.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom