Re: Underdown and Release Form (name changed at request of thread starter)

[Garrette]

Originally posted by neofight

What I am trying to say, however, is that unless you at least have a elementary grasp of how the process is supposed to work, regardless of whether or not you accept the concept, it's impossible to debate it with you.

Neo, I know you posted this for Voidx, but I'm going to jump in.

I disagree. (sooprize sooprize sooprize...)

Voidx (I think) and I (I know) might refer to 'the process' to indicate that your descriptions of it are inconsistent, but the thrust of our arguments is that the result is not what you or JE claim it to be.

Imagine for a moment that we're married (but don't imagine too deeply--I am really extremely cute while simultaneously being devastatingly handsome) and that the plumbing is broke. We hire a new plumber, conveniently named JE, to fix the pipes because there is no water coming out of the tap.

"Wife" sez I. "Wife, this plumber has not plumbed at all, there are but a few drops coming from the tap, and they come exceeding slow and unpredictable."

"But, husband," sez you, "unless you've looked at the pipes and seen the flow from the main line under the street, then memorized the inventory of JE's tools in his little red box, you can't possibly understand how he actually has plumbed."

"Nonsense, woman. He said he could make water flow normally from the tap, and it isn't happening. He's a fraud. A non-plumber. Sure, he carries a monkeywrench, and sure he can point to the main feed coming into the house, but there is no water flowing from the tap!"

"Yes there is, husband. You admitted yourself there are a few drops."

"Nemmind."


----

Process is irrelevant. What does he claim to do? Does he do it?

I think I'll ask this question in another thread; you and Clancie are perhaps the only two who can help get it started. Hope you'll join.

 

[CFLarsen]

neofight,

Where in the Ginger reading does spirit communication occur?

 

[renata]

I located additional JE readings where, at least according to my untrained eye, I could not locate an identified spirit, no evidence presented for a specific communicator, but rather a more general "they" for the spirits. Is he still doing mediumship in those readings?

KING: Old Bridge, New Jersey, hello.
CALLER: Hi. This is Peter.
KING: Hi, Peter.
CALLER: I'm looking about -- asking about my brother Michael.
EDWARD: OK, hold on Peter. Again, I get a lot of information through dates. The first thing that's coming through is I'm getting the feeling that April or the fourth of a month holds some type of a meaning. In the family does April have a meaning? Birthday or anniversary?
CALLER: No.
EDWARD: On your mom's side of the family, Peter. They're telling me "April."
CALLER: Not that I know of.
EDWARD: Hold that thought. On your mom's side of the family there's an older female who has crossed over. It's either her aunt or your grandmother. There's an M-sounding name that's attached to this, besides your brother, who you said is Michael,
CALLER: Mavis.
EDWARD: And they're telling me that there's something to do with the fourth month or the fourth of a month, and I'm also getting the feeling of being out of state, so I don't know if your brother was away from you or at a distance from you, but I see something as being debilitating and affecting the body. But I think your brother is OK.
CALLER: That's good to know.
EDWARD: All righty. Also, there's a congratulations going out to the family, which is either a happy birthday or some sort of a wedding thing that's coming out.
KING: Now that comes through you how?
EDWARD: I see pictures. Like the pink rose on the video is their way of expressing their love. When I see like a white flower, that means happy birthday or congratulations.

KING: Easton, Pennsylvania, hello.
CALLER: Hi, this is Cindy. I would like to talk with my grandfather and ask him a question.
KING: Can she ask him a question?
EDWARD: She can if he comes through.
KING: What's the question?
CALLER: I just want to know if he can see if we're going to have any kids in the future.
EDWARD: The first thing that I'm seeing is they're talking about -- and don't get alarmed, I think this has already happened -- they're talking about something burning. I don't know if there was a burning thing or if somebody had a fire in their house, or this is going back a few years. But they're telling me to talk about something that I would see as being like a fire or a barn fire or some type of a fire- type thing. Is there anything that used to happen in the backyard or something that he used to do?
CALLER: No.
EDWARD: Some type of outside fire or a fire thing?
CALLER: No.
EDWARD: OK. This is what they're showing me, so remember what the symbol is to me, I'm interpreting this as being some type of fire, or like fire-thing, but that's what's coming through. As soon as you -- as soon as I listened to your voice, and I'm tuning into your vibration, this is what's coming through. And I know you're asking me about kids, but I'm seeing boxes, and when they show me boxes it's their way of telling me that you're moving. Or that there's a move that's coming up.
CALLER: Uh-huh, yes, we just moved.
EDWARD: OK, so that's a confirmation of what they're telling me.
KING: But his -- her late grandfather couldn't tell her if she's going to have children or not.
EDWARD: I'm not getting...
KING: Or could he?
EDWARD: He could. He could.
KING: The spirits would know that.
EDWARD: They could come through and say stuff like that.

 

[voidx]

Neo, I know you posted this for Voidx, but I'm going to jump in.

I disagree. (sooprize sooprize sooprize...)

Voidx (I think) and I (I know) might refer to 'the process' to indicate that your descriptions of it are inconsistent, but the thrust of our arguments is that the result is not what you or JE claim it to be.

Imagine for a moment that we're married (but don't imagine too deeply--I am really extremely cute while simultaneously being devastatingly handsome) and that the plumbing is broke. We hire a new plumber, conveniently named JE, to fix the pipes because there is no water coming out of the tap.

"Wife" sez I. "Wife, this plumber has not plumbed at all, there are but a few drops coming from the tap, and they come exceeding slow and unpredictable."

"But, husband," sez you, "unless you've looked at the pipes and seen the flow from the main line under the street, then memorized the inventory of JE's tools in his little red box, you can't possibly understand how he actually has plumbed."

"Nonsense, woman. He said he could make water flow normally from the tap, and it isn't happening. He's a fraud. A non-plumber. Sure, he carries a monkeywrench, and sure he can point to the main feed coming into the house, but there is no water flowing from the tap!"

"Yes there is, husband. You admitted yourself there are a few drops."

"Nemmind."


----

Process is irrelevant. What does he claim to do? Does he do it?

I think I'll ask this question in another thread; you and Clancie are perhaps the only two who can help get it started. Hope you'll join.

I agree with this post although at times I do indeed concetrate more on the specifics of the process as I find people just assume it works and is consistent and fine, and there have been many examples where I've thought this wasn't so. No one really bothered trying to clarify for me in another thread (will have to find the link) about my questions of how clairaudience specifically works, when you think about it, it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense. But yes JE makes claims as to what he does, and if he isn't doing them on a consistent basis, then that's a problem. To me he's not coming through with these big special hits I always hear about.

 

[voidx]

I located additional JE readings where, at least according to my untrained eye, I could not locate an identified spirit, no evidence presented for a specific communicator, but rather a more general "they" for the spirits. Is he still doing mediumship in those readings?

Dead on Renata, as far as I can tell. JE does not validate or identify a specific spirit entity in either of these readings. Clancie, I'd be curious to hear your explanation for this. Also note in the second reading, a sitter asks a specific question, wanting an answer. JE avoids it entirely. I'd be curious to tally this as well. For every specific question JE is presented with by the sitter, how many times does he even attempt to answer it, and how many times does he avoid it completely. Its obvious why he would avoid it, because missing the answer on such a question would outweigh any benefit of getting it right I would think. He plays it safe and floats "spirit communication difficulties". Also another example of his imagery. He couldn't explain it any better than outside fire, a fire thing? This is as clear an image as he frame of reference could provide? What possible message would they be trying to get across? I'm finding that people spend a huge amount of time seeing how the imagery either fits or doesn't fit for the sitter, but sometimes you need to take a step back and just look at the imagery he's describing and ask, "what the hell?".

 

[renata]

I agree with this post although at times I do indeed concetrate more on the specifics of the process as I find people just assume it works and is consistent and fine, and there have been many examples where I've thought this wasn't so. No one really bothered trying to clarify for me in another thread (will have to find the link) about my questions of how clairaudience specifically works, when you think about it, it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense. But yes JE makes claims as to what he does, and if he isn't doing them on a consistent basis, then that's a problem. To me he's not coming through with these big special hits I always hear about.

Voidx, with paranormal claims, I frequently feel we work backwards. One approach I personally find useful is this:

1. Describe what JE does- in this case, the process, based on current understanding of mediumship and his descriptions of it
2. Make any predictions as to what how you expect him to perform, given understanding of the process.
3. Observe what JE does, so in this case, LKL, etc
4. Does what he do match with what he is supposed to be doing? Do we see the hits?
5. Revise 1 and 2 as necessary, repeat

(not quite strictly scientific, but orderly, at least for me)

Instead what we sometimes see happening is kind of the reverse
1. Watch CO, see a reading
2. Describe the process based on the hit and prior knowledge
3. See a reading that does not match symbols previously seen (like the man who does not like to hug- two people hugging with a rex X)
4. Add a new wrinkle to the process
5. And so on.

In this case, it seems people are working backwards. In other words, the process is becoming more and more complicated, layers of rationalizations are added, all discrepancies explained away retroactively or ignored.

Of course, on the skeptic side, sometimes we also see this
1. Set out to prove JE is a fraud
2. Repeat

 

[Iamme]

Steve grenard---The third parties are: Newspaper obits columns...Or neighbors of the to-be sitter who gave their name and address out to get tickets and the show calls the neighbor up to 'ask questions' about the sitters...or the microphone holder...or the fake fuller Brush salesman that comes up to the door of the sitters house to peek inside the house and note what is hanging on the walls or mantles, like Mets banners, or Disney World memorabilia...and the sitters themselves.

I believe one could argue that JE is the first party; The network/show/producers are the second party; anybody else is the third party. (One and two could be switched).

. The smiley face is for Neofight. Hi Neo! Go get 'em!

 

[renata]

Also note in the second reading, a sitter asks a specific question, wanting an answer. JE avoids it entirely. I'd be curious to tally this as well. For every specific question JE is presented with by the sitter, how many times does he even attempt to answer it, and how many times does he avoid it completely. Its obvious why he would avoid it, because missing the answer on such a question would outweigh any benefit of getting it right I would think.

Hey! Post in the count thread, you

One of the several glaring trends is that almost always the caller tells JE who they want to connect with, and almost inevitably he does not connect with the person who they want. I suspect it is indeed because he tries to get away from areas that are too specific.

Sometimes, he actually gets snippy about it

CALLER: Hi, my name is Julie, and I'm trying to contact my mom.
EDWARD: OK, Julie, the first thing that's coming through is not your mom. Sorry, sometimes I gotta talk to them; I'm not an operator; I can't place calls.

But this is why there is a danger to connect to someone caller has in mind, instead of dictating his own energies to the caller. You see, there might be weirdnesses about the person the caller wants to contact with, and JE might teeter on the brink of disaster, like he did here.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, let's go back to the lines. Let's go to Nazareth, Pennsylvania. Go ahead, caller. Nazareth, Pennsylvania? I think we've lost...
CALLER: Hi, this is Denise. I'd like to get in touch with my brother Brian.
EDWARD: Hi Denise, how are you?
CALLER: Good, how are you?
EDWARD: Who's got the M-name like Michael?
CALLER: Which name?
EDWARD: Like Michael?
CALLER: No one that's passed away.
EDWARD: That's OK. Is there a living Michael or Mike?
CALLER: Yes.
EDWARD: OK. Did your brother know Mike or Michael?
CALLER: Yes.
EDWARD: OK, because he's making the reference to Mike or Michael.
CALLER: OK.
EDWARD: Why is he showing me you having his sock? Do you have his socks?
CALLER: My brother's?
EDWARD: Yes.
CALLER: No. He was a baby when he passed.
EDWARD: That doesn't matter. Do you have his socks?
CALLER: No.
EDWARD: He's making -- booties? He's making me feel like there's something that would be connected to the feet -- there's something that they want me to acknowledge for you. So that, to me, would be socks, or booties, or -- it's not shoes; it's got a soft feeling to it. That's what comes through in relationship to this.
I'm glad you called, because this is something I want to say, if you're -- if this was a baby brother that might have been 1 years old, 3 years old, 3 months old, I have no idea -- the energy is not that age on the other side. We age here in the body physically, and we age on the other side through experience and energy. However if they do come through, they might come through -- if a child was 5 years old when they passed on Earth, and it's five years later, and they go -- the parents might go for a reading, the child might come through to the medium as a 10-year-old, or might choose to come through as the 5- year-old that it was. So it's just an example.

For further analysis of this and other readings- http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24032&perpage=40&pagenumber=4


No more hijacking of this thread with this issue.



I would like to get the explanation about the spirit communicator, though, as it appears the key to mediumship is missing from at least 4 JE readings posted here.

 

[Leroy]

Leroy,

Mark Tidwell and Lurker are skeptics. SteveGrenard is a believer in some types of mediumship. I do know they went to seminars, but do not recall their individual impressions of them, perhaps it is best to ask them to comment on their impressions. Another person who went to a seminar is Instig8r. I asked her in this thread http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27590 Just so you know, one of the readings is very contentious on this board, and there is a lot of disagreement between Neo and Instig8r who were at the same seminar as to how much editing went on. It is not my intentions to stir it up, but you might as well know that not everybody comes out of the seminar with the same opinion! You have been warned

I am interested in hearing from the skeptics who attended these seminars. It is interesting that Instigator and Neo both came out with different views. I think that is common though, both probably went in looking for different things. My opinion is that if you go in as a believer you will be looking for things to validate your beliefs, and if you go in as a skeptic you will be looking for all of the tricks.

 

[renata]

I am interested in hearing from the skeptics who attended these seminars. It is interesting that Instigator and Neo both came out with different views. I think that is common though, both probably went in looking for different things. My opinion is that if you go in as a believer you will be looking for things to validate your beliefs, and if you go in as a skeptic you will be looking for all of the tricks.

Lurker posted very detailed notes of the seminar he went to here http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27913 I thought it was fascinating. I think a thread asking seminar attendees some same questions to compare and contrast their impressions would be interesting, but there are about half dozen active JE threads right now. Perhaps in a week

By the way, (cue shameless plug) I finally finished 2 more LKL transcrips http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24032&pagenumber=4 if you would like to see more examples of unedited readings

 

[alfaniner]

I believe JE is scheduled to be on Larry King Live tomorrow (Thursday). I can't wait. (Well, actually I'll wait for the transcripts -- just watching that fraud JE bugs me.)

 

[Leroy]

I had expected there to be a lot more misses in the live seminar that I attended. But there were still plenty of misses and really no "special hits".

I went into the seminar very, very skeptical. I came out skeptical. I still think JE is a fraud but I am a bit less sure of my conclusion and would like to see more corroboration either way.

My wife went in a believer and now she is a skeptic. Funny that, huh?

Lurker

That's a kicker! You went in extremely skeptical and came out less skeptical, she went in as a believer and came out a skeptic.

 

[Leroy]

So we've established that this male spirit is likely her dead husband. Now I know you want to further validate this with a name, but technically the spirit would see that his wife accepted the communication with JE so I don't see why if this process is real he would go about trying to give his nickname. Now.

If this all were real and I were the spirit trying to communicate with my living son. I would want to validate exactly who I was so as to leave no doubt for my son. Just getting through that this is a "father" figure wouldn't be enough, in my opinion. I know my son would wonder later if It were really me, so I would want to get that through up front "This is dad, Leroy."

The spirit gives him the name of her dead brother, why, who knows

According to JE, it is the spirits way of validating that the information is for this person. As he put it "That's just his way of confirming that I am with the right person." On readings like this one, I can't help but wonder how much investigation JE does prior to the readings. But I have a suspicious mind.

I wouldn't say, "Anthony's with me and would you please acknowledge Anthony and Tim." I'd likely say ,"Anthony an myself", since my wife has already guessed its her dead husband (me) and she's already gotten my miscilaneous clue of her dead brothers name

We're all different. I would handle probably much like JE described. I'd mention every name my son knew of, like Jake, your grandfather, Maria, your grandmother, Lizzy, your great aunt, to make sure my son had little doubt left about whether I was really coming through.

Lets say I died, found out that my beliefs were incorrect, and that I could communicate a message back to my son through another living person. Knowing my son shares my beliefs and is a skeptic, I know that if someone told him that a male father figure was coming through, that wouldn't be enough. Even giving my name as Leroy would still leave doubt with my son. I would want to give every name of every person we both knew so my son would finally be convinced that it was real. I would try and give details of specific events that were significant to both of us. At least that is how I think I would be.

To me that sentence just doesn't read like the second name was meant for the spirit, it looked to me like he was just tossing out a second name, whoever it might belong too.

He might have been. If the sitter didn't verify it, someone close by probably would have, I guess I was thinking more on the lines of him having prior information, but I agree that he gets lucky guesses.

 

[Leroy]

originally posted by CFLarseon - Wrong. You cannot rule out Neil's reading solely because you know how it was done. You don't know how JE does his readings, so it would be very unfair of you to dismiss Neil's reading because of this.

You would be correct in that statement if Neo did not know how JE's readings were done, but she has stated numerous times that she has attended several of his seminars so she does know how at least some of his readings are done.

BTW, several times now I have seen John get names of pets, without knowing that it's a pet name. And he's right, from the many times it's happened on "CO", the spirit energy will often times make a mention of a pet that has been acquired after they passed, just to acknowledge that they see what is going on around their family.....neo

Neo, I admit that I haven't seen the show in awhile, but I don't recall JE getting 'exact' names of pets. He came close but I don't remember any occasions where the names matched perfectly. For example he might say "Pepi" when the name was "Pepper." or he may have said he was seeing salt and pepper and a pets name was pepper.

posted by lamme - *I* believe they could have said that the intent of the show is real, but that JE, the producers, network, etc. are not liable for any interpretations derived from the readings.

That is true.

 

[Leroy]

I think a thread asking seminar attendees some same questions to compare and contrast their impressions would be interesting, but there are about half dozen active JE threads right now. Perhaps in a week

By the way, (cue shameless plug) I finally finished 2 more LKL transcrips http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24032&pagenumber=4 if you would like to see more examples of unedited readings

That is an excellant idea!

Yes, I'd like to see more examples. So far I am not impressed with any of his LKL readings.

 

[voidx]

If this all were real and I were the spirit trying to communicate with my living son. I would want to validate exactly who I was so as to leave no doubt for my son. Just getting through that this is a "father" figure wouldn't be enough, in my opinion. I know my son would wonder later if It were really me, so I would want to get that through up front "This is dad, Leroy."

According to JE, it is the spirits way of validating that the information is for this person. As he put it "That's just his way of confirming that I am with the right person." On readings like this one, I can't help but wonder how much investigation JE does prior to the readings. But I have a suspicious mind.

We're all different. I would handle probably much like JE described. I'd mention every name my son knew of, like Jake, your grandfather, Maria, your grandmother, Lizzy, your great aunt, to make sure my son had little doubt left about whether I was really coming through.

Lets say I died, found out that my beliefs were incorrect, and that I could communicate a message back to my son through another living person. Knowing my son shares my beliefs and is a skeptic, I know that if someone told him that a male father figure was coming through, that wouldn't be enough. Even giving my name as Leroy would still leave doubt with my son. I would want to give every name of every person we both knew so my son would finally be convinced that it was real. I would try and give details of specific events that were significant to both of us. At least that is how I think I would be.

I see where you're coming from. And I'll agree that makes some sense. However, my big problem with JE readings in general is that this is always where it seems to end. They toss out names, they validate, they verify using names and objects and other things who their talking too, and then...JE says their ok and their watching. So you as this newly dead spirit goes through all this malarky identifying yourself to your son, so that you can pass on...I'm Ok, I'm here, and I'm watching. Seems rather pointless doesn't it?

 

[CFLarsen]

You would be correct in that statement if Neo did not know how JE's readings were done, but she has stated numerous times that she has attended several of his seminars so she does know how at least some of his readings are done.

Does she? Judging from her account of what goes on at the seminars, compared to others, I think it is safe to say that neofight is incredibly biased in favor of JE getting the best of his readings.

 

[Leroy]

I see where you're coming from. And I'll agree that makes some sense. However, my big problem with JE readings in general is that this is always where it seems to end. They toss out names, they validate, they verify using names and objects and other things who their talking too, and then...JE says their ok and their watching. So you as this newly dead spirit goes through all this malarky identifying yourself to your son, so that you can pass on...I'm Ok, I'm here, and I'm watching. Seems rather pointless doesn't it?

It does seem pointless in most of the readings I have seen. I wonder why, if such communication is possible, that there isn't more. What about "Son I am sorry that I wasn't there for you while you were growing up." "Sorry I missed all of your games." "btw, I hid $1000.00 under the floor board at the top of the stairs."

 

[Clancie]

Posted by Leroy

What about "Son I am sorry that I wasn't there for you while you were growing up."

Yes, this is what I call "warm reading" and I agree with you Leroy that it can be very compelling for a sitter to hear. JE says he doesn't like to do much of that (other than the occasional roses symbol, etc.) because it doesn't really convince people that the medium isn't just "saying things that would be emotionally true for most people." Instead, he says that he tries to bring out evidential information that a living person would be able to identify as being more specific than "Don't blame yourself for not doing enough", etc.

 

[Leroy]

originially posted by CFLarsen - Does she? Judging from her account of what goes on at the seminars, compared to others, I think it is safe to say that neofight is incredibly biased in favor of JE getting the best of his readings.

Yes, I think she still has an advantage over me, since I have not been to any JE seminars and do not have a clue how he does his live readings. She has seen them done so she does know how he does them.

I haven't posted much to Neo or read many of her post, but from the short conversations we have had, I think she is a bit biased concerning JE. But perhaps if I had been to as many seminars as she has, I might be a little more biased too ...... against him