Medium Colin Fry

[scepticuk2]

Have any of you seen the debate about the 'media medium' Colin Fry going on on a website that reveals the accusations about fraud mediumship in the past. This guy really knows how to wriggle. Looks like a few sceptics have him on the hop. Well worth a look just to see how he tries to explain away his self evident fraud.

Colin Fry has decided to answer some of his critics and it is turning into a very interesting debate. It really is a hoot. Please take a look.

Here's the link:
http://members.lycos.co.uk/colinfry/

Thanks

Gary Allen
http://members.lycos.co.uk/colinfry/

 

[Darat]

…snip…
http://members.lycos.co.uk/colinfry/

Thanks

Gary Allen
http://members.lycos.co.uk/colinfry/

I went to the site and looked in the forum and saw what I think is a post from you i.e.

From the forum at the site Gary links to http://pub14.bravenet.com/forum/show.php?usernum=1144043067&cpv=1

Dictionary word for psychic 'someone having mental abilities unexplainable by natural science' and sceptic means 'I can't
accept and I won't accept, no evidence is good enough, pretend the SPR have no evidence in their archives, never mention the Scole report just in case someone twigs it, have selective memory, never mention any of the great minds, writers and artists who believed in the paranormal such as Keats, Shakespeare, Bacon, Milton, Dante, Goethe, Blake, Newton, Di vinci, Van Dyck, even Churchill to name but a few, ignore any written or anecdotal evidence from history or otherwise, hope the ITC stay biased against the truth, always say the psychic is cold reading, its not a ghost its a breeze, always say 'it's interesting' on tv when you haven't got a bloody clue how to explain it, I know everything and nothing,
editing tv programmes really helps in our argument, spend a lifetime finding no evidence, get paid plenty of public money for so called research, appear on countless tv and radio programmes pretending you are an expert, despite the world and his dog knowing the truth
never admit you really know the paranormal exists, always reduce the old dear to tears on tv programmes like Kilroy by saying its all delusion,
use zener cards as the ultimate test for psychics even though they are about as much use in psychical research as a snowboard in the sahara, only tell the public when you find a fraud and never disclose details of the genuine ones
(cica Wiseman-his book 'testing psychic claimants'), debunk everything in sight, be close minded, join the magic circle and impress your pals down the pub with your box of tricks, write books no one reads and lastly give up the ghost(pardon the pun)
and just remind yourself life is the great unexplained, science isn't the be all and end all and being sceptic is unhealthy when you are blinded by ignorance.

I have looked up the definitions of sceptic many, many times and I've never seen a definition given like yours, what dictionary is it from?

Whilst I am normally willing to give new posters the benefit of the doubt your posts on the site you link to show that you are a closed-minded and very cynical person and therefore I doubt that you are really interested in a full and frank and open debate.

If you are at all interested in an open and honestly motivated debate I would like to understand how you know :

…snip…

The truth is the sceptics know the paranormal exists ie Wiseman 'the scole report' and much evidence held in the vaults of the SPR of which Wiseman sits on the committee or at least he did,
if he does not now.

…snip…

Or is it just hyperbole?

 

[UKBoy1977]

Absolutely incredible!

Colin Fry holds a seance where he is strapped into a chair. The room is pitch black but then a luminous trumpet starts floating around the room. But someone switches the lights on and there is Colin standing there holding the trumpet!

So what is the official statement from the believers? Some vague rubbish about 'anomalies' occurring from time to time in psychic demonstrations. However they don't for a minute think Colin is guilty of deception. How could he be, he was in a trance at the time?!!

And how to explain the broken straps that should have held him securely in the chair?

Quote :

'In Mr Thompson's opinion the deception was the work of an intruding entity, "who should not have been able to gain entry," and that no conscious fraud was perpetrated by either the organisers or the medium.'

So basically an 'intruding entity' released Colin from the chair and impelled him to start waving the trumpet around.

The power of belief. Unbelievable, absolutely unbelievable!!

 

[Darat]

Absolutely incredible!

Colin Fry holds a seance where he is strapped into a chair. The room is pitch black but then a luminous trumpet starts floating around the room. But someone switches the lights on and there is Colin standing there holding the trumpet!

So what is the official statement from the believers? Some vague rubbish about 'anomalies' occurring from time to time in psychic demonstrations. However they don't for a minute think Colin is guilty of deception. How could he be, he was in a trance at the time?!!

And how to explain the broken straps that should have held him securely in the chair?

Quote :

'In Mr Thompson's opinion the deception was the work of an intruding entity, "who should not have been able to gain entry," and that no conscious fraud was perpetrated by either the organisers or the medium.'

So basically an 'intruding entity' released Colin from the chair and impelled him to start waving the trumpet around.

The power of belief. Unbelievable, absolutely unbelievable!!

It does pose "believers" with a conundrum to think about.

On the one hand you have perhaps (and as far as I can see only alleged) fraud from a medium such as Colin Fry who in every other way sounds, looks and walks like all the other "genuine" mediums and on the other hand a way has to be found to ignore the possibility that all the others who look, sound and walk like Colin Fry are also (allegedly) frauds.

 

[Stumpy]

Colin Fry

For those of you who don't know who Colin Fry is; he is the British equivalent of John Edwards or Van Praagh (in many ways!).
He has his own TV show on cable. He also claims to be able to perform physical mediumship!
In fairness to him he is willing to engage in on-line discussions with skeptics (unlike the vast majority of mediums). I am currently in the midst of an exchange with him regarding his apparent unwillingness to prove his claims. He also gives an explanation for the "trumpet" incident. If you are interested you can follow the exchange here:

http://www.livingtv.co.uk/ubb/Forum19/HTML/004237.html

A poster on the JREF forum (Druid) has previously ellicited a broader response from Colin Fry in relation to the "trumpet" incident and posted Fry's explanation on this board.

Within the Colin Fry forum generally it is interesting to note the number of threads wherein CF's supporters publicly exchange private information in advance of attending CF's shows. Can't imagine how this might be useful to Mr Fry though!

Stumpy

 

[Darat]

Re: Colin Fry

For those of you who don't know who Colin Fry is; he is the British equivalent of John Edwards or Van Praagh (in many ways!).
He has his own TV show on cable. He also claims to be able to perform physical mediumship!
In fairness to him he is willing to engage in on-line discussions with skeptics (unlike the vast majority of mediums). I am currently in the midst of an exchange with him regarding his apparent unwillingness to prove his claims. He also gives an explanation for the "trumpet" incident. If you are interested you can follow the exchange here:

http://www.livingtv.co.uk/ubb/Forum19/HTML/004237.html

...snip....

Stumpy

Hi Stumpy - nice reponses and I'm glad to see both you and Colin Fry have ignored the attacks on even discussing this matter by the "believers" on the forum. I'll keep my eye on it but please do post any snippets of interest...

 

[De_Bunk]

Stumpy...

Im impressed...the exchanges between you and Fry are worth reading all the way through...

But i must admit...at least he actually goes online to try and save his a**

Apart from that, he is completely delusional...

DB

 

[Yahweh]

Apart from that, he is completely delusional...

Delusional? Probably not. He knows full and well what he's doing, he just doesnt want to be caught (actually, he has already been caught, he's just looking for every in and out he can so it looks "genuine").

 

[showme2]

Oh yes, skepticUK2 ... that'll be the Lycos forum set up to do a hatchet job on Colin Fry, will it ?

You know the one I mean ... the one where anyone saying anything in support of Fry has their IP number banned from the forum very quickly.

Yeah, right. Not worth wasting your time on.

 

[Psiload]

Posted by UKBoy1977

Quote :

'In Mr Thompson's opinion the deception was the work of an intruding entity, "who should not have been able to gain entry," and that no conscious fraud was perpetrated by either the organisers or the medium.'

So, when my 4-year-old was standing over the smashed vase, and I asked her who had broken it, and she replied, "Mr. Grumpy did it." She was actually telling the truth? Her imaginary friend/intruding entity, Mr. Grumpy was really to blame? I'll have to run right home and apologize for doubting her.

Believerworld is a scary place.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Oh yes, skepticUK2 ... that'll be the Lycos forum set up to do a hatchet job on Colin Fry, will it ?

Colin deserves every "hatchet job" he recieves. I have no sympathy for cheats.

 

[De_Bunk]

I can't wait till the next time one of his "friends" help out at a seance...

Maybe a hidden Infra-red cam...

Thinking about it...i know some complete and utter bast**d journo's at a couple of national newspapers...I'll see if they're interested...

Just an idea for another story...

Fry is defrauding the general public by claiming he is speaking to the dead. He is making money from his deception and now he's been exposed once...it will only take a second big expose to finish him...especially caught on hidden cam..

And whoever does it....They'll know where to send it...

Fry...Who is it...who was it out of your friends that set you up...maybe they are going to do it again...

DB

 

[showme2]

De bunk
No, actually Colin Fry has not been "exposed" at all - ever.
Allegations are not proof.
Every medium since 1848 has been accused of fraud.

Come back when you know what you're talking about so far as Scole is concerned ... or when one of your journo friends is prepared to back your version of events.

Hey - if you can establish that Colin Fry is a fraud, I can guarantee to get you £100,000 from the News of the World for the exclusive.
So come on - let's hear from you. What evidence do you have ?

 

[thaiboxerken]

Colin Fry refuses to be tested by CSICOP or JREF. Proof enough that he's a fraud.

 

[SteveGrenard]

He also refuses to be tested by open minded investigators from the SPR and by Montague Keen. When I arranged for my wife to attend a seance with him and he didn't show up and sent a substitute in his place and she reported back some shenanigans(*) to me, I complained to him and he accused me of "testing" or investigating him as well even though I was not actually doing it. Banned for life from ever seeing him again. He wasn't even present. Oh, and he sent me a refund check which I will keep for posterity and not cash.


(*)She felt the voices of the spirits sounded like a phonograph recording playing. In addition she was upset that she was required to leave her handbag outside the seance room and was not warned in advance this would be required so she could keep her keys, wallet and money in a pocket. One of th aleged spirits to show up was Quentin Crisp whom she knew personally in his NY years. He not only didnt acknowledge her but couldn't answer any questions accurately put to him about Crisp. I heard later this medium did a seance in Australia and Crisp was featured in that as well but the skeptical radio talkshow host down under was convinced it was real. The sitters were also exhorted to sing and sing as loud and boisterously as possible which could have been a ruse to cover up any noises made by the medium in moving from his chair.

 

[jallenecs]

De bunk
No, actually Colin Fry has not been "exposed" at all - ever.
Allegations are not proof.
Every medium since 1848 has been accused of fraud.

Come back when you know what you're talking about so far as Scole is concerned ... or when one of your journo friends is prepared to back your version of events.

Hey - if you can establish that Colin Fry is a fraud, I can guarantee to get you £100,000 from the News of the World for the exclusive.
So come on - let's hear from you. What evidence do you have ?

I don't understand, showme. If he's genuine, then why not go ahead and take the test? He has everything to gain and nothing to lose: he can get a million dollars. He can get a TON of free publicity. He can set the scientific world on its ear.

If it were me, I'd test in a minute. I could certainly use the million bucks.

 

[showme2]

He won't take Randi's test because the conditions imposed are so partisan in Randi's favour that nobody will ever be able to claim the money.

And if thaiboxerken's demonstration of logic is typical of skeptics on this forum (see above - "that's proof enough" - it's actually proof of nothing whatever !) well, bang goes any pretence to be looking at these issues "scientifically".

 

[Martin]

Every medium since 1848 has been accused of fraud

But not every medium since 1848 has been caught waving a trumpet about in the middle of a session.

 

[Martin]

He won't take Randi's test because the conditions imposed are so partisan in Randi's favour that nobody will ever be able to claim the money

Your evidence for this claim?

 

[Clancie]

Posted by Martin

Your evidence for this claim?

Martin,

Looking at several aspects of the JREF challenge so far, why would anyone have confidence that JREF could design, conduct, document and honor a scientifically valid test?

For example, suppose we take Randi's proposed "Sylvia Challenge" as a prototype of what Randi considers a good test.

It has several flaws that are stunning, but one of the worst is that there's no safeguard against collusion (either Randi and Sylvia or Randi and the 10 participants, or the 10 participants among themselves).

You may say, "Well, Randi can be trusted", but isn't that one of the flaws with Schwartz's testing, that some of it relies on trust? No scientifically valid test should include "trusting the participants' honesty" as a basic feature.

You might say, "Well, the claimant can help design a better test", but...maybe they feel totally unqualified/incapable of doing that.

Beyond that, the Yellow Bamboo saga (and the lack of adequate documentation of -all- previous preliminary tests conducted by JREF) could raise serious and legitimate doubts for any claimant about the integrity and sincerity of the whole testing process.