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

[Leroy]

Originally posted by Voidx Also being live at a reading goes both ways. In one case yes you can see firsthand how he does things and keep track and tally them before they are edited, however, you are also stepping into JE's arena of influence, and you might be affected by the presentation as a whole and miss out on things, or be distracted from them, like at any good magic show. Just something to remember I think.

Thats a good point, one I never thought of.

Clancie Posted

1. Neil used the Internet for the reading, over several days

2. Neil knew the sitter's full name (an unusual one) in advance

3. Neil honestly admitted using the Internet to research the sitter (he used "border collies" but what if he also found "Bill Quist", explaining the hit with the husband's name?)"

4. Neil could not see/hear the sitter=no physical cues"

5. Quoting Dogwood, "Neil had the luxury of considerable time to analyze the sitters responses and form his next question, much more than Edward has during a live reading.""

6. Neil uses a lot more "weasel words" than JE: "spirits giving me mixed messages"; "could be for someone else entirely"; "...or at least three who are like children to you"; "I'm not in control of the information I'm getting"; "work with me so it goes better"; "what is your connection to the older male?""

7. Neil also uses Psychic-Babble that JE doesn't, meaningless or universal generalities: "getting a free spirit energy"; "don't worry about house"; "don't worry about money"; "you've had your problems; "better times ahead financially"; "lots of romance in your marriage".."

I agree with those that are in blue. I have to give her credit for those.

I don't think the JE verses Cold Reader can be compared fairly unless they both Read before a live audience. If one is reading before a live audience, and the other is reading over the internet in a space of three days, with time to do research, I don't think that is fair.

If it were the opposite, JE was doing the reading online over a space of three days, and the other person had to read before a live audience I feel certain that many skeptics would shout "NOT FAIR." I know I would.

 

[NoZed Avenger]

If that was all that JE did (like it was all that Neil did), then I'd say there was no difference.

But, unlike Neil, JE often -does- present messages directly linked to a specific spirit. Which is why, if cold readers can do that too, I'd like to see it.

I must admit that I do not see the big distinction that you make with regard to a "specific" spirit or how it helps distinguish cold reading from true psychic/mediumistic ability.

I can see -- in limited circumstances -- that this type of information might be considered a specific, "quality" hit. I.e., if the medium, without prompting, says "I am getting your father, James" and that is validated, then it is a stronger "hit." But it seems to be just one more area of hits or misses - not really different than any other.

A series of "I am getting an older man. It could be your brother, or your parents' brother, or the brother of someone important to you. I am getting an 'M' connection, too" type readings seems every bit as cold-readerish as any other vague hit. Even if you can say that the above makes the reading a "medium" one rather than a "psychic" one, what's the real difference that helps us distinguish either from a cold reading version of the same thing?

It seems to be a distinction without difference, with regard to the real question: Can it be distinguished from cold reading?

N/A

 

[Leroy]

Leroy, JE appearances on Larry King Live are live television, unedited, and we have transcripts of it. However, when people go to seminars, they are not allowed to record them, so we are only allowed to rely on memory, and people's impressions differ. Crossing over cannot be relied on, because it is edited. So while some television (edited) cannot be relied on, LKL (Larry King Live) is unedited, unfiltered, just like we see it, and more reliable than memory and recollection of one person at a seminar.

I read those transcripts from LKL and I can't help but feel that something is missing, something got cut off during commercial break maybe?

I still say that I have been to Zero JE seminars or shows, and I haven't read anything he has written from front to back. I seldom watch the show, so, I consider Neo more of a J.E. Expert than myself. Why should I pretend to know more about JE than she does? My opinions of J.E. are based on my own belief system, and what little I have seen of him. Hers is based on her belief system and the fact that she has done much reading, and attended many seminars of his. I give her credit for that.

 

[renata]

I read those transcripts from LKL and I can't help but feel that something is missing, something got cut off during commercial break maybe?

I still say that I have been to Zero JE seminars or shows, and I haven't read anything he has written from front to back. I seldom watch the show, so, I consider Neo more of a J.E. Expert than myself. Why should I pretend to know more about JE than she does? My opinions of J.E. are based on my own belief system, and what little I have seen of him. Hers is based on her belief system and the fact that she has done much reading, and attended many seminars of his. I give her credit for that.

Leroy, it is a live one hour interview show on CNN. Have you ever seen it? I only listed the readings themselves, from where the call begins to where the ends, I cut out the chatter, but the links to the complete shows are in the thread. Nothing is missing.

 

[voidx]

Posted by me:

When shown that JE himself does not do this consistently Clancie had to state that she might not have been perfectly clear on what he states he can do in this regard.

Posted by Clancie:

Actually, I said I might have misrepresented what he claims to do, voidx.

I'm rather unclear how my statement is different from yours. I stated that you might not have been perfectly clear (misinterpreted) what JE states he can do ("claims" he can do).

Posted by Clancie:
Those examples -were- comparable to Neil's and, like Neil's, I think could pass for "psychic reading" (or psychic cold reading), but not mediumship.

If that was all that JE did (like it was all that Neil did), then I'd say there was no difference.

But, unlike Neil, JE often -does- present messages directly linked to a specific spirit. Which is why, if cold readers can do that too, I'd like to see it.

Yes, sometimes JE does get messages linked to specific spirits, but we're not talking about those at this point in time. We were discussing the ones in which he does NOT specify a specific spirit, and were asking for an explanation for THOSE readings in particular. And the idea that perhaps their psychic rather than mediumistic seems rather weak and unconvincing to myself personally. As I stated before it appears to me that psychic abilities are just a fall-back for when mediumship abilities fail in their stated consistency. And again...where does the information come from that is garnered in a "psychic" sense? sitters mind? The future? What is meant by getting things "intuitively"?

Edited to add a thumbs up to NoZed Avengers post.

 

[renata]

And again...where does the information come from that is garnered in a "psychic" sense? sitters mind? The future? What is meant by getting things "intuitively"?

That is a good point. Where did he get all that information- fire, etc. He did not claim not to connect, like he did with some other callers. So, obviously he saw something. So if he got it "psychicly" was he reading the callers, or the future? I mean this kind of throws the whole process, the whole "key to mediumship" out the window.

 

[voidx]

That is a good point. Where did he get all that information- fire, etc. He did not claim not to connect, like he did with some other callers. So, obviously he saw something. So if he got it "psychicly" was he reading the callers, or the future? I mean this kind of throws the whole process, the whole "key to mediumship" out the window.

My main problem with the "psychic" fallback to "medimship" is that he never states when, if ever, he's switched. We never get an example of, "Oh..hold on...I've lost my spirit connection, however, I'm seeing, I'm feeling psychically something about fire as it pertains to you." I've not seen an example of this. If JE knows he uses both styles of communication, then he knows when he's using one over the other as for one he's connected to a spirit, and the other he's not, so why does he not state this or clarify this during the reading? Its just not a valid excuse in my books, and its not consistent in my opinion with any of the transcripts or LKL appearances I've watched him do.

 

[Clancie]

Yes, sometimes JE does get messages linked to specific spirits, but we're not talking about those at this point in time. We were discussing the ones in which he does NOT specify a specific spirit, and were asking for an explanation for THOSE readings in particular.

I understand that. I just think its important to point out that, unlike Neil, JE apparently does both.

 

[Thanz]

I understand that. I just think its important to point out that, unlike Neil, JE apparently does both.

Clancie -

I think that you are really struggling here. Neil only did the one reading (as far as I know) and I really do believe that it is a matter of style.

I think that it is always the sitter who specifically identifies the "spirit" that comes through. JE will make a suggestion (older male, or male to the side, or whatever) but it is the sitter that will say "that is my husband, Robert". Once the sitter makes the connection, then JE can simply say that the information comes from the specific deceased relative. If no specific connection is made, JE can just use "they are telling me". It makes a difference only in style.

So, you agree that some of what JE does on LKL is indistinguishable from cold reading. If we accept that a specific spirit is a matter of style, I submit that all of what we see on LKL is indistinguishable from cold reading. I could be forgetting something, but I don't recall any "dazzle shots" from LKL.

What does that leave us with? CO, seminars, and private readings. We have already discussed how the editing of CO makes it problematic at best, and useless at worst, as evidence of any JE abilities. I haven't been to a seminar myself, but the opinions of those that have tend to vary in the extreme. And quite frankly, the prohibition on recording devices in a private reading disturbs me. I can see no reason for it other than JE counting on confirmation bias and he doesn't want an analysis done of the reading by the sitter.

The evidence in favour of JE is, shall we say, sparse. Keep arguing in favour of him though, if you wish, as we need some people to tilt at the windmill thinking it is a dragon. If we all just said "hey that's a windmill" it would get quite boring around here.

 

[voidx]

I understand that. I just think its important to point out that, unlike Neil, JE apparently does both.

Fair enough, so long as we bold and bracket "apparently" .

Posted by Clancie
Those examples -were- comparable to Neil's and, like Neil's, I think could pass for "psychic reading" (or psychic cold reading), but not mediumship.

What's psychic cold reading? Is it not just cold reading? Is there any difference? To me I'd have to ask this question, that if those examples are comparable to Neil's, how do you explain them? I've not heard psychic cold reading brought up until now. If their comparable, then he's pretty much cold reading isn't he? If their comparable and produce the same results, why posit the paranormal for these examples?

If that was all that JE did (like it was all that Neil did), then I'd say there was no difference.

While I realize that its the special hits and other points that tip your belief towards JE I find this a little odd. Surely you must have a clear excuse or idea as to what happens, or whats going on in these examples where he appears to produce nothing more significant than normal cold reading? If I was you, I know this would cause me hesitation and questions. Perhaps you're explaining what "psychic cold reading" is will clarify this for me.

But, unlike Neil, JE often -does- present messages directly linked to a specific spirit. Which is why, if cold readers can do that too, I'd like to see it.

I'd like to see it done too, just for the sake of seeing them do it exactly as JE does it. But it would hardly be convincing evidence of anything for either side.

 

[Leroy]

Leroy, it is a live one hour interview show on CNN. Have you ever seen it? I only listed the readings themselves, from where the call begins to where the ends, I cut out the chatter, but the links to the complete shows are in the thread. Nothing is missing.

Nothing is missing according to what you viewed, live and unedited. They have breaks, what happens during those? I still say that seeing him live, in person, would be more of an advantage. You can take in everything, not just what the camera angles reveil. Body language, facial expressions (not just what the camera shows). And a phone reading and live face to face reading would surely be different. I don't put much into anything I view on television, be it live and unedited, or pre-recorded and edited, but that's just me.

 

[Leroy]

So if he got it "psychicly" was he reading the callers, or the future? I mean this kind of throws the whole process, the whole "key to mediumship" out the window.

How does it throw the whole key to mediumship out the window? Is there a claim that mediums cannot be psychic too? Where does the term Psychic Medium come from? Does JE claim to be a psychic medium? If my memory is not failing, didn't they introduce JE as a Psychic Medium on CO?

 

[CFLarsen]

Nothing is missing according to what you viewed, live and unedited. They have breaks, what happens during those? I still say that seeing him live, in person, would be more of an advantage. You can take in everything, not just what the camera angles reveil. Body language, facial expressions (not just what the camera shows). And a phone reading and live face to face reading would surely be different. I don't put much into anything I view on television, be it live and unedited, or pre-recorded and edited, but that's just me.

Witnesses are notoriously unreliable. It is far better to have everything recorded.

There is no way you will be able to keep up with a professional scam artist. You will be suckered, if you rely on yourself.

 

[Leroy]

Witnesses are notoriously unreliable. It is far better to have everything recorded.

Damned right it is good to have everything recorded. But if I had the choice of watching something that someone else recorded, or seeing it live, I would rather see it live. What have I missed during the recording? What happened during break? What expressions did I miss when the camera was filming someone else's face?

There is no way you will be able to keep up with a professional scam artist. You will be suckered, if you rely on yourself.

Not everyone is so easily fooled, sorry if that has been a problem in your life

 

[voidx]

How does it throw the whole key to mediumship out the window? Is there a claim that mediums cannot be psychic too? Where does the term Psychic Medium come from? Does JE claim to be a psychic medium? If my memory is not failing, didn't they introduce JE as a Psychic Medium on CO?

It was being claimed that without spirit communicator identification, there could be no true verifiable mediumship involved. What Renata is getting (correct me if I'm wrong) at is that if he gets things psychically sometimes instead, and this information is garnered from the callers mind or the future or wherever and NOT a spirit, then this whole claim about what makes true mediumship would seem to be full of logical holes and easy outs.

 

[BillHoyt]

Not everyone is so easily fooled, sorry if that has been a problem in your life

Excellent suggestion, leroy. Perhaps you should bring this to the attention of all those science-administrator-types who keep funding studies that attempt to confirm or refute previous findings. Let them know that if they just picked better scientists the first time they wouldn't have papers needing confirmation or refutation. It is so easy!

 

[renata]

How does it throw the whole key to mediumship out the window? Is there a claim that mediums cannot be psychic too? Where does the term Psychic Medium come from? Does JE claim to be a psychic medium? If my memory is not failing, didn't they introduce JE as a Psychic Medium on CO?

Leroy, read back in this thread. Particularly this post by Clancie

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.

As there was no spirit identification, there was no mediumship. The whole question is if JE was not doing mediumship during those 4 LKL reading, what was he doing? Just "psychic" readings?

 

[Leroy]

It was being claimed that without spirit communicator identification, there could be no true verifiable mediumship involved. What Renata is getting (correct me if I'm wrong) at is that if he gets things psychically sometimes instead, and this information is garnered from the callers mind or the future or wherever and NOT a spirit, then this whole claim about what makes true mediumship would seem to be full of logical holes and easy outs.

Now that I can agree with, full of holes and easy outs.

 

[renata]

Nothing is missing according to what you viewed, live and unedited. They have breaks, what happens during those? I still say that seeing him live, in person, would be more of an advantage. You can take in everything, not just what the camera angles reveil. Body language, facial expressions (not just what the camera shows). And a phone reading and live face to face reading would surely be different. I don't put much into anything I view on television, be it live and unedited, or pre-recorded and edited, but that's just me.

Have you ever seen the Larry King Live, Leroy? The callers call in during the show, not the breaks. Since JE is the only guest, the camera is always on JE and LK. I do not see how their talk during breaks is going to influence what happens during call in readings, which is the only thing we are looking at.

As to live readings- JE does not allow even one on one readings be taped, or seminar readings. Witness memory is notoriously unreliable, and I do not see how you can expect to catch everything in a room with thousands of people, eager to catch JE's attention, where you are not allowed to examine the transcript later. Furthermore,whereas the phone readings are one on one, in a huge room, a comment- Richard, James, Lung Cancer, son in a car accident, etc are a guaranteed hit by somebody. And still, Instig8r and Lurker say the quality is quite worse than CO.

 

[Leroy]

Excellent suggestion, leroy. Perhaps you should bring this to the attention of all those science-administrator-types who keep funding studies that attempt to confirm or refute previous findings. Let them know that if they just picked better scientists the first time they wouldn't have papers needing confirmation or refutation. It is so easy!

Whoa there charlie. It wasn't suggested that nobody could be fooled. Read CF's statement again

There is no way you will be able to keep up with a professional scam artist. You will be suckered, if you rely on yourself.

There is NO WAY, I will definetly be suckered!! It sounds like this poor man has been fooled many times and is now paranoid.

We all make mistakes, we have all been fooled at one time or another, but that doesn't mean I will be fooled by a professional scam artist each time I come across one, and I have come across many.

You sound as paranoid as your buddy.