RSLancastr
www.StopSylvia.com
I received the following email at StopSylvia.com with the subject "sylvia browne":
Before I had even read it, the same person had sent a second email with the subject "ps sylvia browne":
Here is my reply to both:
I stumbled on your website concernng Sylvia Browne and I have to write that its ironic anyone would spend that much time on something or someone they hate. Only you or someone like James Randy who I have also heard from would do such a thing.
Its rude in the fact how I found your website was thru a tweet on her tweeter page. Then when lookng at the site read where you imposed yourself numerous times in her space. Its mere stalking and weird. Your agnostic so you think everyone should think lke you's. News flash ...... never going to happen your a mere parasite in a cesspool and as in any cesspool eventually they dry up.
She didn't hunt you down, you hunted her. And if I was her I would worry for my welfare knowng you did that and report it as such so if anythng does happen to her.
I agree with her, you have a nasty website. Much like a bully trying to take down a woman that has done no one harm. People go to her, she doesn't go to them and if she makes them feel good for 2 mins, so what. Who exactly have you made happy by what you claim. My guess would be James Randy no one else.
God bless you, and I will pray for you as I am certain Sylvia does.
[name]
Before I had even read it, the same person had sent a second email with the subject "ps sylvia browne":
You didn't even have guts enough to allow anyone to post anythng on your website, no guest book, no nothng. So publiclly theres no way to make a fool of you as you tried to do Sylvia ... I call that cowardly
That old woman has more balls then you.l
Here is my reply to both:
[name]:
Thank you for writing and sharing your thouhts with me.
I will answer your questions and address your comments below.
<< its ironic anyone would spend that much time on something or someone they hate >>
Ironic? No. But it is unfortunate that, in order to present the facts about someone or something one finds distasteful (in this case, Sylvia Browne), one must first examine those facts, no matter how distasteful they might be.
<< Its rude in the fact how I found your website was thru a tweet on her tweeter page >>
I am not certain how that is "rude" and even if it is, it was not me who made the tweet in question, as I don't recall ever seeing her Twitter feed, let alone tweeting to it.
<< Then when lookng at the site read where you imposed yourself numerous times in her space. Its mere stalking and weird. >>
"numerous times"? I went to ONE of her public shows. One. And I only went to that one, (as you already know if you bothered to read the article about it) because many of her fans were telling me that I had o right to form an opinion of her unless I saw her in person.
So now, if I go to see ONE of her PUBLIC performances, I am "stalking" her? You have an odd concept of stalking.
<< Your agnostic so you think everyone should think lke you's >>
No, but I do think that my opinions are based on an examination of the facts, so I share those facts with my readers and invite them to examine those facts and come to their own conclusion.
And the only conclusion that the facts support is that, at best, there are far more reasons to doubt SylviaBrowne's claims to have "psychic powers" than there are reasons to believe those claims.
<< News flash ...... never going to happen your a mere parasite in a cesspool and as in any cesspool eventually they dry up. >>
Yes, a collection of the facts about Sylvia Browne IS much like a cesspool.
<<
She didn't hunt you down, you hunted her. And if I was her I would worry for my welfare knowng you did that and report it as such so if anythng does happen to her. >>
I'm sorry, but report WHAT? That someone paid money to attend a public show, and spoke with her at her invitation?
Rest assured, if I had done anything reportable to the authorities, Sylvia Browne would have reported it.
As it was, all she could do was lie to Hotel Security and tell them that I had made a disturbance of some kind - a lie that others in the audience would not back up.
<< I agree with her, you have a nasty website. Much like a bully trying to take down a woman that has done no one harm. >>
If the facts about Sylvia Browne are "nasty", who is to blame for that?
I doubt that people such as Pam and Craig Akers (the parents of then-missing Shawn Hornbeck, who she told on the Montel Williams Show that their son was dead (something Pam Akers later described as "the hardest thing we went through") when Shawn was actuall alive, would agree that Browne has done "no harm" to people.
Watch the video of
<< People go to her, she doesn't go to them and if she makes them feel good for 2 mins, so what >>
Watch the video of her telling them their son was dead. Pay attention to their reaction. Then tell me again that she harms no one, and that she just "makes people feel good". And this is only one of MANY such times documented on my site. MANY. Who knows how many other people Browne has cruelly hurt with her con game when they had the misfortune of asking her for help in their time of need?
<< Who exactly have you made happy by what you claim >>
I "claim" nothing, I just present facts and evidence.
I don't know if anyone has been "made happy" by this evidence, but I have certainly heard from many former fans of Sylvia Browne who were glad to finally realize the sad truth about her. And certainly many skeptics have been made happy by the fact that the evidence about her and her nonsense is now so publicly accessible.
<< God bless you, and I will pray for you as I am certain Sylvia does. >>
I thank you for your prayers.
As for Sylvia Browne's prayers for me, I have been told by people working in her headquarters that she has stated that my current serious medical condition is a result of her praying to Azna (her supposed "Mother God") that I be stopped.
How...spiritual of her.
As for your "ps" email:
I have been asked both by Browne's supporters and her detractors to allow comments on m site, but I made a conscious decision back when I started the site that I wanted the tone of the site to be as matter-of-fact and evidence-based as possible, and to avoid name-calling and such. And I knew, from past experience, that any public debating between Browne's fans and detractors soon deteriorated into name-calling on both sides, and I felt that would detract from the tone I was trying to establish.
That you consider that "cowardly" is something I can live with.
Best regards,
Robert S. Lancaster
Founder & Webmaster,
www.StopSylvia.com