Hardenbergh
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2004
- Messages
- 1,073
I found this website last week. It does sound like he has quite a track record.
Norm Pratt: Split from: Psychics and Missing People
- Thread starter Hardenbergh
- Start date
I found this website last week. It does sound like he has quite a track record.
Did you note the reference to the thread on this forum which shows Brian lying about his lottery number prediction?
I went to his site and clicked on the first of his "Found Persons" cases.
Here's the picture:
Tell me, please. Right now, within a couple of minutes of my posting this so that you can't do a web search, where the missing person is located.
---
Brian definitely does NOT have an impressive track record.
What he has is an unsubstantiated CLAIM of an impressive track record.
sophia8
Master Poster
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2003
- Messages
- 2,457
he can't even write legibly.
All I can make out is:
They missed
the
bramyou can find
her
11
12
trust your sift
purvis henns
EC
Can't he use a keyboard?
You're obviously closed-minded.
Who authored the web site that would lead you to believe that he has "quite a track record?" Or have you independently confirmed all of the claims on the website?
Is there any evidence (other than his website) that this picture or any other information provided by Brian aided the police in any way?
Not bad! According to the website, it says:
"die mar 26, they missed them, bran you can find, trust your gift purvis henng ec"
It says the picture "may be about two missing boys," but I see the words "her" and "bra" in there that might indicate otherwise. There is also nothing in the drawing that would lead Brian to believe that it was about two boys, unless of course he drew it AFTER seeing a story of two missing boys named Purvis Parker and Quadrevion Henning on CNN, and then posted it to his website the day AFTER the CNN story came out.
It is extremely suspicious that he posted this drawing on 3/23/06 but claimed that he had drawn it a week earlier, while a story of the two missing boys appeared on CNN on 3/22/06 AND WAS APPARENTLY SENT TO HIM BY A FAN THAT SAME DAY (the day before he posted the drawing).
The drawing has a stamp on it that says "Mar 21 2006" as if that's somehow proof that the drawing was made before the boys disappeared (but oddly several days after he claims to have drawn it).
This is so silly it would be funny if people like Hardenbergh didn't believe everything they read.
-Bri
Last edited:
Hardenbergh
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2004
- Messages
- 1,073
I have to admit it's very funny. I just hadn't taken the time to really look over the website. I just saw the long list of names of people that he supposedly had successfully found. What a joke! You can't judge a book by its cover. I guess I'm not a good little skeptic. I'm usually good with details but not about everything (just about things that aren't really important in the first place).
Thank you for that admission; many people would not do that.
However, it does no good if you do not take it as a lesson learned.
Your failure to look beyond the claim is typical of the believer community. There are some who can talk specifics and have made an attempt at research, but they are the exceptions.
What you may begin to notice if you stick around this forum (I hope you do) is that when a believer makes a claim, it is almost always the case that the skeptics immediately begin to investigate it and it quickly becomes apparent that the believer never did.
If they can find "even one" then why not any of the other missing people?
Logical Muse refers (I think) to Madeleine McGann, the three year old who went missing in Portugal three or four months ago. Despite an incredibly high profile press campaign and the attentions of various predatory UK psychics who rushed to the scene to "help", her whereabouts remain a mystery.
You seem to think that one claimed success based on little more than anecdotal evidence is sufficient reason to believe in psychic detection. Personally I'd need a lot more than that to convince me.
Both.
Somehow I knew you'd say that, but I don't think that was the question. Here's a hypothetical. Your loved one is missing. There is a note which says that your loved one is buried in a box with limited oxygen. The police believe the location of the box to be in one place through traditional police work, but a psychic says no, it is in another place. The police have the time and resources to dig in only one place before your loved one suffocates to death. Which do you choose? Time is running out.
-Bri
-Bri
logical muse
LogMu
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2005
- Messages
- 2,050
Yes.
You know, Bri, that's a very plausible scenario, which has probably happened a countless number of times . . . But, actually, it would depend on the particular police department and the particular psychic. Hopefully, I would know something about their respective track records, and could make an informed judgement.
Now, let me ask you a question: Suppose, in your scenario, there was enough time to look in both locations. After the location suggested by the police turned out to be wrong, would you look in the location suggested by the psychic?
Actually, I doubt seriously it has ever happened, however it's an extreme example of the possible hindrance a psychic could cause the police.
So in this thread you've been contending that the report indicates a "hit" for Pratt. Would you then trust Pratt to find your loved one before they suffocated, or would you trust the police? Which will it be? Quick, your loved one doesn't have long to live. If you avoid the question for another post, let's assume you couldn't decide and your loved one dies. Which will it be, Rodney?
You answer my question and I'll answer yours.
-Bri
So in this thread you've been contending that the report indicates a "hit" for Pratt. Would you then trust Pratt to find your loved one before they suffocated, or would you trust the police? Which will it be? Quick, your loved one doesn't have long to live. If you avoid the question for another post, let's assume you couldn't decide and your loved one dies. Which will it be, Rodney?
You answer my question and I'll answer yours.
-Bri
Are you talking about psychics or the police?
In some cases, police work appears breathtaking, and a missing person is found with only the slimmest evidence. In other cases, despite what seems substantial evidence, the search is fruitless. I don't know why psychics often fail, but the evidence suggests to me that they sometimes succeed.I've already answered that it would depend on the facts. To be more specific, if the police had a highly plausible scenario and there was no evidence that the psychic had performed above random chance in the past, I would go with the police. If, on the other hand, the police had a highly speculative scenario and there was evidence that the psychic had performed above random chance in the past, I would go with the psychic.
I said that the psychic was Pratt. Do you think that Pratt performed above random chance in the report posted earlier?
It's a simple question. Let's say that the police used DNA evidence from the place from which your loved one was kidnapped and want to search the house of the person whose DNA was found. The police feel this is the most likely place to find your loved one before she dies, but are far from absolutely certain. Pratt, on the other hand, says that your loved one is buried elsewhere.
I'll give you one more chance to save your loved one. You have to choose one location. Now answer the question. Another non-answer indicates that you are so far gone that you allowed your loved one to die instead of deciding.
-Bri
ETA: I find it interesting that you would require evidence that the psychic had performed above random chance in the past. How would you determine that? You're not advocating that psychics actually be tested are you?
Last edited:
logical muse
LogMu
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2005
- Messages
- 2,050
Rodney, Hardenbergh,
How do you reconcile the fact that there are so many missing persons, with your belief that psychics can find them? Why haven't the psychics found any? Why does their failure to find even one missing person not seem to indicate to you that perhaps they can't find missing people?
How long can you keep up your belief? I'm being serious here. How long can you keep believing that psychics can find missing persons when clearly they can't?
I have no agenda. If Mr. Pratt were to turn around tomorrow (today would be better) and tell the suffering parents of that poor girl where she is, I would be among the first to acknowledge the amazing power he possesses.
Why can't he, or any of the other psychics, find her, or any of the other missing persons?
How do you reconcile the fact that there are so many missing persons, with your belief that psychics can find them? Why haven't the psychics found any? Why does their failure to find even one missing person not seem to indicate to you that perhaps they can't find missing people?
How long can you keep up your belief? I'm being serious here. How long can you keep believing that psychics can find missing persons when clearly they can't?
I have no agenda. If Mr. Pratt were to turn around tomorrow (today would be better) and tell the suffering parents of that poor girl where she is, I would be among the first to acknowledge the amazing power he possesses.
Why can't he, or any of the other psychics, find her, or any of the other missing persons?
chillzero
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2002
- Messages
- 15,547
Hardenbergh
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2004
- Messages
- 1,073
Well, in the case of Kimberley Anne Sarjeant (in the OP), her body was found.
Also, my neighbors sought the assistance of Alex Tanous many, many years ago. Their daughter and her boyfriend had run away and eloped and they hadn't heard from them. Alex told them that they were in the Boston area. The teenagers later contacted their families. I've already mentioned this before. I don't know if Alex actually pinned it down to a specific area in Boston. Maine is in close proximity to Boston so it wouldn't be terribly unusual for the runaway couple to start their life's journey in Bean Town. It could have been an educated guess but I don't think that is true, at least in the case of Alex. He had very unusual gifts.
Wakine G. Tanous, an attorney from Millinocket, Maine and former state senator, (Senate Sessions 104th, 105th, and 106th), was Alex Tanous' brother. He was the attorney of one of my closest friend's parents as well as a personal friend. Wakine was often a guest in their home and Alex would often come with him. From what I have heard, Alex was the real deal.
I just read in the Bangor Daily News that Wakine's wife, Anna, died on August 25th. They had been married 52 years.
Last edited: