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

[Leroy]

TLN, that is the cold-reading done by Neil that I referred to in my other post. The one that he did on-line, over a few days, with some internet research. That is not a spontaneous reading done right on the spot as JE does his readings, so it is hardly comparable to one of his......neo

I have to agree with Neo on this one. To do a real comparison we would need to have unedited tapes of readings done by both parties. Readings that were done in front of an audience.

 

[neofight]

This is a tad ridiculous. Firstly he's said to be "acknowledging" a red rose. Now I suppose you think this means that he's acknowledging the red rose symbol of JE's as a symbol for birthday/wedding anniversary/recent death. Well gee that sure is vague and covers a lot of ground. And how exactly do spirits know JE's symbol system? Do they get JE symbol translation books? Or is this again all part of the magically vague "process" of telepathy mediumship? In this case JE says the spirit is acknowledging a red rose, so that would inidicate JE showed him a red rose, and he acknowledged it as the JE symbol du jour he is trying to get across. So I guess my question is, when the spirit comes through, how does it know a red rose means birthday/anniversary/recent death to JE? And if they just give the birthday/anniversary/recent death to JE, how does his "mediumship" translate this into red roses? How does it know what connects with what?

Voidx, I have to say something to you that I'm afraid you will take the wrong way, so I'll preface my response by saying that I truly mean no disrespect whatsoever. I'm just being frank, okay?

Reading your above comments, I realize that there is absolutely no sense trying to discuss this subject with you because there is just too much about mediumship and the way it's professed to work, that you know nothing about.

Now, that does not mean that you have to agree with everything a believer says, or that you have to buy into the idea that there is anything real about mediumship, because that would not be necessary in order to discuss it intelligently.

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.

I would respectfully suggest that if you are interested in discussing this topic, you go to the library and get some sort of a primer on mediumship, JE's "One Last Time" or anything else that would bring you up to speed on how a mental medium like JE gets images which he then has to interpret into messages for the sitter. This book would answer just about all of the questions that you asked above.

I'm assuming that those questions are sincere on your part and that you would really like to know the answers to them, although I admit that your referring to these symbols as "ridiculous" might indicate otherwise. In any case, if you simply want to call them ridiculous, and have no desire to look further into what it is that mediums claim to do, then what can I say?

And, btw, I believe that birthdays are represented by a "white" rose, not a "red" one. ......neo

 

[Leroy]

Originally posted by NeoSteve, Lurker and Mark have all attested to the fact that they didn't see much of a difference between the quality of readings they watched on the edited television show, and readings they saw JE give in person both at the "CO" taping that Steve went to, and the two separate seminars that Lurker and Mark attended.......neo

Are they believers in mediumship, skeptics, or in-between?

Originally posted by Garrette - Spirits can put a bix X through an image, but they can't spell a name?

That is a good point.

 

[renata]

Are they believers in mediumship, skeptics, or in-between?

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

Here are my questions, just to begin with
-of the seminar readindgs, how many were televised for CO
-how extensive was the editing?
-how did the seminar readings compare to LKL or CO? What were they closer to?
-were you allowed to bring an audio recorder in?

This is what she said

-of the seminar readings, several were televised for CO. The two that I have seen were "Malibu Shrimp" and "Girls Gone Wild".

-how extensive was the editing: The "Malibu Shrimp" reading was drastically edited, but the "Girls Gone Wild" reading was not significantly edited. (It was a reading of 4 sisters whose mom died of ovarian cancer -- although JE incorrectly called out for breast cancer, he allowed them to claim the reading.)

-seminar readings compared to LKL or CO: The Malibu Shrimp reading prior to editing was very comparable to a LKL reading (if not worse). The Girls Gone Wild reading was very comparable to a big family reading in the CO Gallery, because JE had lots of sisters to claim initials, significant dates, etc.

-No audio recorders could be brought into the seminar -- There were actually handbag searches -- and the audio quality would not have been good anyway.

 

[Lurker]

Neill's on-line attempt at cold-reading was done over a time span of a few days, with some internet researching, so neither of those are really worth anything in the way of being "comparable" to a JE reading, even a LKL JE reading.

Neo, I would not mention Neil's Internet searches as something derogatory about his reading. Remember the Internet search he did came up with the dog reference which turned out to be a miss. Thus, his cold reading was not helped in any way by using the Internet and actually hurt his reading.

Just trying to clear the air so nobody thinks otherwise.

Lurker

 

[voidx]

Voidx, I have to say something to you that I'm afraid you will take the wrong way, so I'll preface my response by saying that I truly mean no disrespect whatsoever. I'm just being frank, okay?

Reading your above comments, I realize that there is absolutely no sense trying to discuss this subject with you because there is just too much about mediumship and the way it's professed to work, that you know nothing about.

Now, that does not mean that you have to agree with everything a believer says, or that you have to buy into the idea that there is anything real about mediumship, because that would not be necessary in order to discuss it intelligently.

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.

I would respectfully suggest that if you are interested in discussing this topic, you go to the library and get some sort of a primer on mediumship, JE's "One Last Time" or anything else that would bring you up to speed on how a mental medium like JE gets images which he then has to interpret into messages for the sitter. This book would answer just about all of the questions that you asked above.

I'm assuming that those questions are sincere on your part and that you would really like to know the answers to them, although I admit that your referring to these symbols as "ridiculous" might indicate otherwise. In any case, if you simply want to call them ridiculous, and have no desire to look further into what it is that mediums claim to do, then what can I say?

And, btw, I believe that birthdays are represented by a "white" rose, not a "red" one. ......neo

Firstly, nice job of concentrating on one point of my reply, while ignoring all the others. I realize how the symbols works, the problem being is that I'm looking in depth to see why they work or how. Yes when a spirit brings across anniversary JE gets the mental frame of reference of a red rose, when its love its pink, birthday white, yah got it, and actually Leroy was much more helpful in clarifying that than yourself. Regardless, I understand that he gets symbols in his frame of reference, its not rocket science. My problem being is, how is all this achieved? You probably think I'm way overthinking this, but if this is a real process then it should make sense, and you having read his books should be able to shed some light for me. Does the spirit consciously know that when they send JE the message of anniversary that he will see a red rose? Do they send him the message for anniversary, or do they send him the red rose? Do the spirits do all the communicating then? From all I've seen it appears so, they show stuff to JE and he interprets it for them, can he do nothing to prompt them back? If its a form of communication I don't see why not. What stops this from happening if anything, do you know yourself? Yes, I've been told many times to go educate myself by buying John's book and boning up on what he says the process is, but I've got a good grasp of the basics, more than enough to debate with you on here. So my above questions, can you answer them being someone who has read his books? Can you also answer my question regarding your hypothetical hugging people crossed out example? You chide me above for not knowing the "process" so explain to me why my scenario could not have been pictured, and why you think yours could have.

 

[CFLarsen]

It's not just the lack of a name, Archangel (and "welcome!" ). There is no spirit identification.

No, I don't consider it adequate for any medium to say "I'm getting spirits with you telling me...." Or "there's an older lady, just slightly stout as with age, with shortish graying hair...Do you know who that is, please?"

There is nothing evidential in the above at all. All Neil did was say "I've got spirits here" then go on to give a psychic cold reading, i.e. "This is you and your life."

No spirit connection was established at all.

This is factually wrong. It doesn't matter if you claim there is no spirit communication, because there is! Neil gets "D-N", a dead relative.

Of course it would be different, Thanz. "Spirit identification" is the key to mediumship (or to "cold reading demonstrations just like JE").

In the opinion of many here, JE is just a cold reader, too, like Neil. The point is, whether cold reading or not, if there is no spirit identified, nothing evidential presented to establish a specific "communicator", then it isn't mediumship (or fake mediumship).

Its not a question of style at all. It is the key difference between mediumship and a "psychic" reading/cold reading.

So, Neil was doing a psychic reading? In the LKL example, JE was doing a psychic reading?

 

[Lurker]

Steve, Lurker and Mark have all attested to the fact that they didn't see much of a difference between the quality of readings they watched on the edited television show, and readings they saw JE give in person both at the "CO" taping that Steve went to, and the two separate seminars that Lurker and Mark attended.......neo

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

 

[neofight]

Neo, I would not mention Neil's Internet searches as something derogatory about his reading. Remember the Internet search he did came up with the dog reference which turned out to be a miss. Thus, his cold reading was not helped in any way by using the Internet and actually hurt his reading.

Just trying to clear the air so nobody thinks otherwise.

Lurker

Understood, Lurker. I was just pointing out the differences between the two. I think the two formats were too different to make true comparisons is all. ......neo

 

[voidx]

In the actual show, that was spoken of as something John wasn't sure about, first he said "Did he do this, or was he involved with this?" than he said, "HE PLANNED?" or "YOU PLANNED? as questions, which in my opinion opens the door wider by putting both HE and SHE, in there. It gives it a bigger chance of being validated. But, I think it's risky for a cold reader to say "planned street party" not too many of us PLAN street parties.

Yes and as I've said I think sometimes JE does take a risk, with the way many people dismiss his misses its perhaps not as risky as we might think for him to take a chance on something, and to note, in this case, it did NOT pay off, she, nor he had anything to do with the planning that we know of.

What do you mean "Fishes out" he didn't fish for that name, he stated it matter of factly, "John: (looking askance) I'm gonna disagree with ya! (laughter) Where's Anthony?" "Woman: Anthony's my brother, passed."

No fishing there, probably a lucky guess, or prior investigation?

I could have used a better term, what I meant is he just threw the name out there, and got a hit.

Ralph was what he was called, not Frank. His friends didn't call him Frank they called him Ralph, short for his last name Raphaeli. If my fathers name was Robert, but all of his life he was called Bob, I'd be suspicious if JE said "Robert is coming through"

Your missing my point. I realize his friends called him Ralph based on his last name. This is what I'm getting at. At the start of the reading JE goes:

...snip...I've a male figure who's coming through that would be husband or brother, but it's a male figure that's coming through in this area. So it's gotta be the husband/brother figure over here. Do you understand this?

and the sitter replies:

Woman: Um hmm, husband.

ok? 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. The spirit gives him the name of her dead brother, why, who knows. She validates it for JE and tells him its her dead brother, and THEN JE says, cuz he's there with Anthony. Now again why the spirit didn't make this obvious in the first place is beyond me but whatever. Then JE says this:

John: Anthony's here with him, because he's telling me to acknowledge Anthony. And Ralph.

If I'm a spirit, and my name is Tim and this is me talking to JE in this scenario 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. Call it semantics if you like, but to me that doesn't read like the spirit meant the second name to be connected to himself.

How do you know he wasn't expectiong it to be validated? If he did prior research [ I say IF ] than he may have known the mans last name was Raphaeli, and Ralph was a good shortened version to use. He may have had inside info also that they nicknamed him Ralph. When you say JE wasn't expecting the name to be validated, you confuse me, how would you know what JE expected or didn't expect?

Lazy typing on my part then, add "I wouldn't think JE..." in front of it. 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. I agree that if he had prior knowledge of the last name that would make this easy to dismiss, but while not being able to rule that possibility out, I also cannot assume it too strongly either.

He's putting a big "V" over the family which means that somebody has the "V" name, okay?

To a believer this may seem like a hit. A "V" name!, but notice he leaves it open to the entire family, he doesn't say the immediate family, he say's the family. I bet if we search we can all find someone in the family with a V name. I can think of two as I type this, in my family.

I got that the "V" over the family meant a "V" name in the family. I reread this part of the reading. JE referred to the family of 7 only, it was the sitter that then said, yes, I'm 1 of 7, but there's no "V" meaning none of her siblings had "V" names. JE didn't relate the "V" to the 1 of 7, so my mistake. But yes I agree, its very broad to toss a single letter out for a whole family.

A red rose marked their anniversary, [which was clear in the episode] pink roses meant love, if I remember the show correctly. They always showed him pink roses to express their love to the living, even if they never gave a rose in their lifetime in this show, he said that he was showing him a red rose which meant an anniversary of something, [their anniversary was that day] then he was showing pink roses to express his love. Even if their anniversary had not been that day people who believe would still say it fit because they had an anniversary sometime during the year, so JE can't lose with that one either.

Yes this became clear to me after re-reading the transcript, and your post. Although I still question how the base of this frame of reference type of communication works.

 

[CFLarsen]

Understood, Lurker. I was just pointing out the differences between the two. I think the two formats were too different to make true comparisons is all. ......neo

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.

We have to look at the readings as they are. What, then, is the difference?

 

[neofight]

Firstly, nice job of concentrating on one point of my reply, while ignoring all the others.

Sorry, voidx. I kind of purposely didn't address all of what you wrote, because frankly, I felt like.....where would I begin?

But okay, that being said, I'll try to address some of what you asked then, but I just made a couple of lengthy posts, and I really got some other things to do today. lol

Anyhow, okay, since you say you do understand how the symbols work, that he is shown images of things within his own frame of reference, (not rocket science, true, but a bit esoteric none-the-less) let's see what else you are asking here......

Okay, you ask how is this all achieved? Well, as far as I remember, and Clancie can jump in here and correct me if I get anything wrong, it is, indeed, the spirits who are letting John know what they want to reference.

John has talked about this, and he says that some spirits seem to be stronger energies, and are better at conveying messages than other spirits. Kind of like here on earth. Some people can just communicate better than others.

He's also said that his own spirit guides, whom he refers to as "the boys" are helpful in deciding which images to send to JE, from within the "file cabinet" of his own life experences and knowledge of pop culture etc.

Does the spirit consciously know that when they send JE the message of anniversary that he will see a red rose? Do they send him the message for anniversary, or do they send him the red rose?

Not to presume that I know definitively one way or another, voidx, I believe, as I stated above, that they probably are helped by JE's guides in this respect, so it makes sense that the spirits who are connected to people other than JE, probably send him thoughts about what they want to say, and that is somehow translated into something that JE can relate to and understand.

.....can he do nothing to prompt them back? If its a form of communication I don't see why not. What stops this from happening if anything, do you know yourself?

From everything that I've heard JE say, voidx, I'd have to say that yes, he can and does do his best, telepathically, to prompt them. Oftentimes when the sitter appears to be stuck, and is having trouble identifying a spirit energy, or validating some piece of information, John says that he does mentally ask them to give him something more to help clear the "logjam", and more often than not, they do that, and the reading then progresses.

Can you also answer my question regarding your hypothetical hugging people crossed out example? You chide me above for not knowing the "process" so explain to me why my scenario could not have been pictured, and why you think yours could have.

Okay, I'll do my best. Most of the time, from everything I've ever heard John say, he does not have visions. That is, he does not actually have a "video-like" insight into the memories and experiences of other people, alive or dead. He only can envision his own past, and scenes from movies, references from books, music, plays, life etc. So, unless he can be shown, say a scene from a movie that he saw, and remembered, where, as you describe, "a woman trying to hug a man on a hospital bed, and he cringes in pain when she tries and she looks sad because of it."

Unless John actually has a similar memory on which he can draw, voidx, this would seem to be quite a complicated image for a spirit to convey to him. Would it have been so much easier for him to understand if this were possible? Of course. But from everything I hear about this process, "easy" is not one of the words I ever hear thrown around.

As far as my hypothetical "still" image of two people hugging with an "X" superimposed over it, the reason I said that was because I do remember John once describing some image, I do not remember what it was, with a big "X" over it. So, although John did not specify what he actually saw in this particular case, I was just speculating on what it might have been.

I hope that helped, voidx, and again, I really did not mean to blow off your questions earlier. I just thought from my cursory reading of your post, that you were a bit under-informed about the subject, and it was not worth my while to engage with you on those points. Perhaps that was not the case. ......neo

 

[Archangel]

It's not just the lack of a name, Archangel (and "welcome!" ). There is no spirit identification.

No, I don't consider it adequate for any medium to say "I'm getting spirits with you telling me...." Or "there's an older lady, just slightly stout as with age, with shortish graying hair...Do you know who that is, please?"

There is nothing evidential in the above at all. All Neil did was say "I've got spirits here" then go on to give a psychic cold reading, i.e. "This is you and your life."

No spirit connection was established at all. [/B]

Ok I dont want to be pedantic about this (I dont think the forum needs another Claus or TBK), but what is the difference between that and:

CALLER: Hello?
EDWARD: Hello.
KING: Hello.
CALLER: Good. How are you doing, John?
EDWARD: I'm doing good.
CALLER: Good. I'm just seeing if you can connect with anything?
EDWARD: The first thing -- actually, a couple of things. Somebody's got a nickname after a spice, like pepper?
CALLER: I'm sorry?
EDWARD: Somebody has a nickname after a spice, like pepper? Who's got a spice name?
CALLER: Spice name? Don't know.
EDWARD: Salty or pepper, cinnamon.
CALLER: Oh, my dog.
EDWARD: OK. What's the name?
CALLER: Her name is Ginger.
EDWARD: Has that dog passed?
CALLER: No.
EDWARD: OK. Then you got that dog after somebody passed. Because they're making me feel like I need to bring up the dog, because they're bringing up the spice name. I'm also going to tell you that -- I think what I'm supposed to tell you is that there is either there's a boyfriend who passed for you, or a husband that's passed for you. But I don't feel it now.

Which is an excerpt from Renatas thread on JEs LKL appearance (taken from here)

In this reading JE doesnt mention that he is getting "spirit energies", and the "energy" he appears to get is actually a living dog, and in the reading itself he doesnt actually refer to bringing through anyone who is deceased (although he does reference "the energy" as mentioning a male to the callers side).

So the argument that you seem to be making (and I may be wrong here) is either;

1) that Neil was an admitted cold reader and thus didnt have "spirit energies" coming through, but JE claims to be a medium, thus unless it can be proven that he is cold reading/hot reading, he really is getting "spirit energies" and should be given the benefit of the doubt in his readings?
or
2) that JE is really a medium, but his "powers" come and go and so he needs to fill in his readings with some Cold Reading?

If its the former, why should JE get this benefit of the doubt? if its the latter, how do we distinguish between his Cold Reading and his "powers" especially when they look so similar?

btw thanks for the welcome.

 

[voidx]

2) that JE is really a medium, but his "powers" come and go and so he needs to fill in his readings with some Cold Reading?

Good point. We've seen many examples of JE resembling cold-reading, in the LKL transcripts in particular. However I rather doubt it will be admitted that its a possibility he's filling in with cold-reading. Its always suggested that the LKL format is not conducive for good JE readings, so its not his fault yah know. I would actually give believers more credit if they subscribed to an opinion like the one above. "Ok that one was obviously nothing special, he probably just cold-read on that one, but this one over here I think is special".

 

[voidx]

Sorry, voidx. I kind of purposely didn't address all of what you wrote, because frankly, I felt like.....where would I begin?

But okay, that being said, I'll try to address some of what you asked then, but I just made a couple of lengthy posts, and I really got some other things to do today. lol

Anyhow, okay, since you say you do understand how the symbols work, that he is shown images of things within his own frame of reference, (not rocket science, true, but a bit esoteric none-the-less) let's see what else you are asking here......

Okay, you ask how is this all achieved? Well, as far as I remember, and Clancie can jump in here and correct me if I get anything wrong, it is, indeed, the spirits who are letting John know what they want to reference.

John has talked about this, and he says that some spirits seem to be stronger energies, and are better at conveying messages than other spirits. Kind of like here on earth. Some people can just communicate better than others.

He's also said that his own spirit guides, whom he refers to as "the boys" are helpful in deciding which images to send to JE, from within the "file cabinet" of his own life experences and knowledge of pop culture etc.

The problem with how strong a person's communication is usually has very little to do with how they physically communicate, its usually a problem of what they communicate that makes someone better at communication than another. I still fail to see how this explains any of his "I'm getting a G connection, Garry, Gene, George?" tidbits. I know you have no way of answering this, you only have JE's take on it, but it does not make a bunch of sense that the spirit should have this amount of difficulty relaying a name or what have you to JE.

Not to presume that I know definitively one way or another, voidx, I believe, as I stated above, that they probably are helped by JE's guides in this respect, so it makes sense that the spirits who are connected to people other than JE, probably send him thoughts about what they want to say, and that is somehow translated into something that JE can relate to and understand.

So its your tentative position then that either the spirits themselves, or spirits that act as guides on JE's behalf choose the frame of reference that JE gets, so rather than pass on information about a birthday, they pass on the white rose to him, knowing he'll know what its to signify correct? If not the spirits then what does the translating, this isn't clear. And it appears you're not super clear on how it is achieved either, which is what I was trying to get at all along.

From everything that I've heard JE say, voidx, I'd have to say that yes, he can and does do his best, telepathically, to prompt them. Oftentimes when the sitter appears to be stuck, and is having trouble identifying a spirit energy, or validating some piece of information, John says that he does mentally ask them to give him something more to help clear the "logjam", and more often than not, they do that, and the reading then progresses.

Any example at all where JE acknowledges that he is indeed prompting the spirits for additional, or rather, clear references? I've never seen an inkling of this in the LKL appearances and transcripts I've seen so far. One would think there'd be one example of him going, "I'm having some trouble with their references, I'm asking them for something more clear...hold on...yes, I'm getting blahblahblah". He does it all in his head and never acknowledges that he does so except when asked about it later, I find this odd.

Okay, I'll do my best. Most of the time, from everything I've ever heard John say, he does not have visions. That is, he does not actually have a "video-like" insight into the memories and experiences of other people, alive or dead. He only can envision his own past, and scenes from movies, references from books, music, plays, life etc. So, unless he can be shown, say a scene from a movie that he saw, and remembered, where, as you describe, "a woman trying to hug a man on a hospital bed, and he cringes in pain when she tries and she looks sad because of it."

Yes we've been over his frame of reference thing before and I'm quite clear on it, but it seemed like you weren't following this when you mentioned your example.

Unless John actually has a similar memory on which he can draw, voidx, this would seem to be quite a complicated image for a spirit to convey to him. Would it have been so much easier for him to understand if this were possible? Of course. But from everything I hear about this process, "easy" is not one of the words I ever hear thrown around.

I'm sure some movie reference/book section/play/life experience could easily be put together to create a mostly coherent recreation of this event. At the very least something could have been given to him that would have been clearer than him interpreting, "He wasn't a big hugger?" which was completely wrong.

As far as my hypothetical "still" image of two people hugging with an "X" superimposed over it, the reason I said that was because I do remember John once describing some image, I do not remember what it was, with a big "X" over it. So, although John did not specify what he actually saw in this particular case, I was just speculating on what it might have been.

Ahhh but he would have had to have some frame of reference for the superimposed "X". Are you then assuming that somewhere in his life experience JE has come across a "No hugging" sign depicting to people hugging and then crossed out? Come on, as complicated as mine might seem, it'd be easier to reference than what you suggest in your hypothetical situation, why not just admit that he most likely was just completely wrong in this instance.

 

[neofight]

In this reading JE doesnt mention that he is getting "spirit energies", and the "energy" he appears to get is actually a living dog, and in the reading itself he doesnt actually refer to bringing through anyone who is deceased (although he does reference "the energy" as mentioning a male to the callers side).

Hello, Archangel! Actually, if you look both at the beginning of the reading, and the end, it appears that JE is initially getting two pieces of information. Here are the two quotes......

EDWARD: The first thing -- actually, a couple of things. Somebody's got a nickname after a spice, like pepper?

AND......

EDWARD: OK. Then you got that dog after somebody passed. Because they're making me feel like I need to bring up the dog, because they're bringing up the spice name. I'm also going to tell you that -- I think what I'm supposed to tell you is that there is either there's a boyfriend who passed for you, or a husband that's passed for you. But I don't feel it now.

Here's how I understand what occurred. John began the reading, and it looks like he got the sense of a male figure to the side, either husband or boyfriend, AND he was getting something about a "spice" name. Those are the two things that he referenced.

He was probably not necessarily expecting that the spice name had to do with a dog, so when the sitter finally connected the spice name with her dog, he got distracted by that, asking if the dog was living etc., and by then he was losing the connection with the spirit energy. He mentioned it anyway, but it looks like nothing else was coming through by then.

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

 

[Ed]

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

That is to say that the mark fills in the blanks, no?

 

[Jeff Corey]

Fact. Edward has been proven to do hot reading. Tony the cameraman.
Fact: His cold reading is cheesey when given no feedback. Larry King.
And I'm getting an M or a N and what does the number seven mean?

 

[Iamme]

Everybody has a right to their opinion. I guess J.E. hasn't been caught OFTEN enough, or it is contested...whether or not he was ever caught with his hand in the cookie jar, so to speak. JE was tested at U of A with other noted mediums and was considered to have done respectably well, I guess.

So, what do we have to go on that is of concrete proof and requires no anecdotal evidence: The shows own disclaimer. It ends by saying that the show is not even INTENDED to be a factual statement in any way, and is for entertainment purposes only. And, that third parties have been relied upon, heavily. HELLO!!!!! Anybody home?

That's not much less than the show saying that the show is a put on. We have argued this disclaimer. Believers believe that it is necessary. *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. But NOOOOOOO....they have to tell us it's not even INTENDED to be factual statement!

How can you argue on JE's behalf when they tell you right out, that....oh, forget it.

 

[SteveGrenard]

Who are the third parties?