• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

StopSylvia email: "About Browne"

What might be 'missing' from Browne's Hornbeck reading that would make her answer anything less than completely made up? From her Opal Jo reading that makes her answer anything less than a vicious assault on the family?
 
azzthom said:
It seems we also need one for 'point-and-laugh'.
Click to expand...

Not exactly a smiley, but this one works for me.

Nelson.gif


Norm
 
I wonder if the text was typed on a phone, considering some periods followed by capitals.
Still a strange email though.
 
That email doesn't read as if the writer learned English as a second language. I've tutored both ESL students and English-speaking low-literacy adults, and that email is a classic textbook example of the writing style of the latter. Often, even, adults with poor reading and writing skills are actually of normal intelligence, but as children, education passed them by. It's usually a combination of learning disabilities and a chaotic and impoverished childhood.

In this case though, I suspect something's going on past mere functional illiteracy: the writer seems a little unbalanced.

And college student doesn't mean much: there are unaccredited "colleges" out there that will take the money of anyone. Disgusting, exploitative little con artists. And that includes a whole lot of rinky-dink little "Bible colleges."
 
To me this doesn't read as angry, merely curious and willing to enter into discussion. Her concern about good versus evil (and her desire to be good) sounds to me like she's struggling to understand herself and her 'abilities'. Her level of education makes it difficult to understand her, but i think she is trying to have a dialogue at least.

I'm very glad that the ever-kind Robert will be answering her. There may be a chance to win her over, even if it's just a little bit.
 
I think the only people who deserve a facepalm or anything similar would be people who are laughing or otherwise making fun at the e-mail. I agree with sugaree it is written by someone whose spelling is poor.

I would love to read Robert's reply. I am sure he will get another e-mail when he does.
 
Well, here is my reply:

[name]:

Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts with me.

Thanks also for your permission to post your email. Unfortunately, I am currently unable to post anything on the StopSylvia site, although I hope to have that straightened out soon.

I have received many emails here over the years from people who say that they are psychic.

Some say "I know that Sylvia Browne is really psychic - I can tell because I'm psychic too!"

Others say "I know that Sylvia Browne is a fraud - I can tell because I am a REAL psychic!"

I take them all "with a grain of salt" as they say, but I find no reason to believe that ANYONE is a "real psychic", if such a thing even exists.

To your email:

I am glad to hear that you are a skeptic (you keep saying "skept", but the word is "skeptic"), but I myself - as should not surprise you, am a skeptic about your claim to be a psychic.

I am a bit confused when you say that you have made voice recordngs, but then you say the spirits can be SEEN in the recordings. What do you mean by "voice recordings"? To me, a "voice recording" s a sound-only (audio) recording, and I don't know how ANYTHING can be "seen" in a sound-only recording! Perhaps I misunderstood you?

You go on to make other claims (healings and such). No disrespect intended, but you must know that ANYONE can make claims about ANYTHING in an email, so I cannot simply accept that the things which you say happen, really happened - sorry.

And that does not mean I am accusing you of lying! You could honestly believe those things happened, but could be honestly incorrect about them.

You wrote "I have been to theology collage, evengelist collage and so on. ( only because the goverment requested that I get certified )"

Not to nitpick, but I find it difficult to believe that you attended a theology college and evangelist college, but do not know how to spell the words "college" (or "evangelist"). But then, I'm a skeptic.

Also, the government requested that you get certified in what, exactly? For what purpose?

You wrote "When posting emails or segments of her shows you leave out parts that may be a help in getting an accurate conclusion."

Can you give me an example of where you believe I have left something out? I obviously cannot include EVERYTHING in every article, but I have made an honest effort to include everything in them which would be helpful to the reader in judging for themself how Browne did in each case. If you can point out a specific place where you feel I left out something important, I would greatly appreciate it.

Again, I thank you for writing.

Best regards,

Robert S. Lancaster
Founder & Webmaster,
www.StopSylvia.com
Click to expand...
 
She states she didn't find evidence that Brown is a fake?

I would rate her reading comprehension to be at about the same level as her spelling.
 
I do not like the reply. In two places you criticised her spelling. It is not relevant that she is remedial in spelling so should not be mentioned. It would only subtract from the message you want to give her, which is to ask for more details.

If you are not accusing her of lying what are you accusing her of? I am sorry but I do not think this is up to your usual standard of writing.
 
rjh01 said:
I do not like the reply. In two places you criticised her spelling. It is not relevant that she is remedial in spelling so should not be mentioned. It would only subtract from the message you want to give her, which is to ask for more details.

If you are not accusing her of lying what are you accusing her of?
Click to expand...

I am not accusing her of anything. I am trying to point out to him or her, As I said, that she might honestly be wrong about those things.

I am sorry but I do not think this is up to your usual standard of writing.
Click to expand...

Well, I am a tad out of practice.
 
I hope you get a reply soon, Robert. And Julia...I'd be busted along with you! Lol!

I don't think your response is harsh and I think the intent is clear. But I can see how rjh01 could read it in such a way. As usual in typing; it is often difficult to discern meaning with only the printed word. We can only do our best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom