StopSylvia Email: "Confused"

[sadhatter]

I don't think I knew all this about you, 'hatter! Thanks for "coming clean" as it were. I'm trying to imagine your inner dialog when you stumbled upon the Stop Sylvia threads.



If you recall the name of the book, I'd like to hear what it was.

Yeah i have mentioned it once or twice, but unless it really needs to be, i tend to leave it vague, lol.

And i mean, i talk about everything, my geeky hobbies, my previous weight, drunken idiocy committed by myself, how crap films i have been in are, pretty much anything at the drop of a hat but the specific utterance that i once was indeed, enamored with sylvia browne ( ...not in that way, i always actually had my current view on her level of attractiveness.) just makes me cringe to this day, lol.

And the stop sylvia threads were a big thing, i posted about this a bit ago, but to make a really long post shorter, it really sucked at the time. I mean quite literally everything i believed in ( you know, besides obvious basic facts) was destroyed in a way that was quite reasonable to me. ( also a mind ****, to be honest. I always liked evidence, and thought when i found some it would support me. ) I went through some down times, but as you can see, after that ( i think, that this is a big reason a lot of people don't want to get out of woo. )it all worked out fairly well.

And as far as that book, i would love to know as well, it was my first taste of skepticisim, ( the end of the book gave some basic ways to tell if something is a hoax.) , what i can remember is it was canadian, and one story involved a party of people and a haunted bed, ( i remember because it was the biggest, most seemingly real story.), turns out, the people were all simply making **** up for a very specific reason.

It was old too, i got it from goodwill ( a thrift store around here.) and in the early ninties it was beat up as hell, my guess would be 80's maybe seventies. And i am almost positive the word "Canadian" was in the title.

I would , honestly , even now that i am looking for work pay 60 dollars for a copy.

 

[sadhatter]

We'll never know, I guess.

I'll admit, there are times I'm tempted to snap back, but I don't think I've ever given in to that temptation.

I wouldn't, you have a good " track record" so to speak as far as being blameless in your interactions, and ruining that wouldn't be worth the giggle.

That, and some people are just not good at certain styles, i know i certainly wouldn't be able to make my points in your style, ( which isn't to say my "style" is just being insulting or anything for example, evidence is always key, but i personally rely on a lot shock value , humor and screwing with someones preconceptions of a figure, self depreciation and vulgarity. While i am a fairly eloquent speaker i find a well placed f-bomb can express more than its non offensive counterparts.) , and i would assume, since it is not the style you use, that making points in mine wouldn't work out as well for you.

Though i can't deny you could probably make enough money to cover all your bills for the next couple of years by "renting" your e-mail account for me to run my psychological experiments from, lol.

 

[RSLancastr]

I wouldn't, you have a good " track record" so to speak as far as being blameless in your interactions, and ruining that wouldn't be worth the giggle.

No, someone would have to press pretty hard, and catch me on a REALLY off day, for me to do that.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Here was my second reply:

I still love reading your attorney's response. That's known as a legal "smackdown".

 

[RSLancastr]

I still love reading your attorney's response. That's known as a legal "smackdown".

Yes, that is indeed a classic.

Yesterday I read through all of the SSB-tagged threads here. A long, strange trip

 

[RSLancastr]

And here is my reply to that:

Ms. [name]:

Thanks for the reply.

I sent you some links in a second email. Whatever you decide to read, I will be interested in your thoughts on it.

Enjoy that pasta and wine. My wife and I are going out to dinner tonight to celebrate our wedding anniversary. I'll probably have some fettucine Alfredo. Probably no wine though. Never been much for wine.

I do enjoy my life, Ms. [name]. And one thing I enjoy very much in my life is warning people about frauds, such as Sylvia Browne.

And I am not "trying to discredit someone's life." I am showing the facts about a public figure. If those facts do not show her in a positive light, whose fault is that?

I understand that you don't approve of the site. But can you point to anyhing on the site which is untrue or inaccurate? If you can, please do, and I will remove or correct it as soon as I can. If you CANNOT point to anything on it which is untrue or inaccurate, then what exactly is your problem with the site?

Best regards,

Robert S. Lancaster

 

[rjh01]

You know, i always wonder what would happen if your responded in kind ( using the emotional argument).

" Dear confused:

Why would i attack Sylvia for no reason? I have a busy life, not to mention a rather serious medical condition, if i did not think, for very valid reasons that she was harming the world, i would not waste time doing it. "

As an example.

As much as i know arguments of this nature are full of it, i can't help but wonder what the reaction would be if you answered the question in the content free way it was written. More than likely accused of being a jerk, or tossing out a canned response would be my guess, oh the irony.

I doubt that a response like this would convince anyone. A response like RSLancastr's response has been shown to convince several people. Why change a winning formula?

 

[RSLancastr]

rjh, I don't think SadHatter was suggesting I try it. Just saying he wonders what would happen if I did!

 

[ExMinister]

And here is my reply to that:

I admit it's been a long day but I scrolled up and didn't see his or her reply to your first 2 responses (?).

 

[RSLancastr]

Okay, here are the emails in order:

Her first email to me:

I just flicked onto your webpage and now I’m just confused and depressed. Why would you waste your time, energy and life in trying to bring down someone who is just trying to help and makes millions of people feel better, sleep better and wake up with hope.

How can you do this? Why don’t you just stop it and try to live your life as fully as you can. You’re not hurting Syliva Browne, or anybody else, only yourself by having this weird obsession with her.

I hope you can stop soon.

My Reply to her first email:

Ms. [Name]:

Thanks so much for taking the time to write.

I think that if you take the time to read much of the site, you will understand why I believe that Browne should be stopped. She is making millions of dollars from lying to people, pretending to be psychic. Reading my site should show that there are far more reasons to doubt her claim to be psychic than there are to believe it.

If you'd rather I show you links to a handful of articles which best illustrate why I believe she should be stopped, just let me know.

For starters, go to the sites, Articles page, and scroll down almost to the bottom, where you will find an article about "Opal Jo Jennings".

Please read that article, watch the video linked within it, and perhaps you will better understand my "weird obsession".

Robert S. Lancaster

My follow-up when I had more time:

Ms. [Name]:
Here is a (hopefully) more well-thought-out reply to your email.

1. I firmly believe (and the evidence pretty clearly shows) that Sylvia Browne is not psychic at all. (If you believe you have evidence that she IS psychic, I would be very interested in seeing it.) If I am correct in this, then she is a fraud, making MILLIONS of dollars from lying to people.

2. You say that she gives millions of people hope. She also takes hope away from people, in a cruel and heartless way, and hurts many. Here are a handful of articles on my site which show this very clearly:

http://www.stopsylvia.com/articles/montel_amandaberry.shtml

http://www.stopsylvia.com/articles/email_whatsylviatoldmygrandma.shtml

http://www.stopsylvia.com/articles/email_hewilllivealonglife.shtml

http://www.stopsylvia.com/articles/email_notagoodwoman.shtml

http://www.stopsylvia.com/articles/scorecard_missingmurdered.shtml

3. You say that the site will not hurt her. The truth is, her popularity and media presence have sharply declined since my site went up. how much (if any) of that is due to my site? Hard to say. She evidently wanted it taken down, and sicced an attorney on me:

http://www.stopsylvia.com/articles/browne_attempttosilence.shtml

My attorney replied:

http://www.stopsylvia.com/articles/response_attempttosilence.shtml

I never heard from the attorney again.
She also hired a Private Investigator to "dig up dirt" on me, hoping, it seems, to discredit me:

http://www.stopsylvia.com/articles/browneandthepi.shtml

So, whether the site has hurt her or not (and I have been told, by some in her office, that it has), she seems to want it shut down.

I have also been told by some in her office that when I nearly died of a stroke in 2008, she bragged that it was a result of her praying to her Goddess Azna. How...spiritual.

There is much, much more. Browse around the site and you will see.

Again, thanks for sharing your thoughts with me. If you have any more questions or comments, please let me know.

Best Regards,

Robert S. Lancaster

Her second email to me:

Hi Robert,

Fair call. I’ll read what you want me to read. But then I’ll go out for lunch and have a pasta and a glass of wine. And then maybe watch a movie. And then spend my time enjoying my life, not trying to discredit another person’s life.

I hope you squeeze in time to enjoy your own life too, friend.

Best wishes to you

[Name]

My Reply to her second email:

Ms. [Name]:

Thanks for the reply.

I sent you some links in a second email. Whatever you decide to read, I will be interested in your thoughts on it.

Enjoy that pasta and wine. My wife and I are going out to dinner tonight to celebrate our wedding anniversary. I'll probably have some fettucine Alfredo. Probably no wine though. Never been much for wine.

I do enjoy my life, Ms. [Name]. And one thing I enjoy very much in my life is warning people about frauds, such as Sylvia Browne.

And I am not "trying to discredit someone's life." I am showing the facts about a public figure. If those facts do not show her in a positive light, whose fault is that?

I understand that you don't approve of the site. But can you point to anyhing on the site which is untrue or inaccurate? If you can, please do, and I will remove or correct it as soon as I can. If you CANNOT point to anything on it which is untrue or inaccurate, then what exactly is your problem with the site?

Best regards,

Robert S. Lancaster

 

[s_pepys]

S_Pepys was trying to start up an argument which he and I had (at great length) in another thread. This time, I chose not to feed the troll.

hi all

roberts answer to everyone who questions or disagrees with him is that they are a troll. fine, id rather be a troll than a hypocrite. heres a link to the thread in question so you people can make up your own mind about our sainted mr lancaster. his avoidance of answering questions in that thread is quite stunning. i think he and sylvia are actually quite similar. see for yourselves.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=205688


lxxx

 

[ExMinister]

hi all

roberts answer to everyone who questions or disagrees with him is that they are a troll. fine, id rather be a troll than a hypocrite. heres a link to the thread in question so you people can make up your own mind about our sainted mr lancaster. his avoidance of answering questions in that thread is quite stunning. i think he and sylvia are actually quite similar. see for yourselves.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=205688


lxxx

I think this warrants clarification.

Fair enough would be to say that you and Robert had a disagreement in that thread. You are both entitled to your respective opinions.

Not accurate to claim your questions weren't answered. On review of the thread it is clear that they were; he disagreed with you, but he answered you. So just for the record it is inaccurate to claim that your questions were avoided.

It is also a gross inaccuracy to claim that Robert calls troll on everyone who disagrees with him. Check almost any Browne thread and you'll see that people disagree with him quite often.

Fact (if I understand correctly): You feel Robert was being hypocritical in befriending one psychic and stopping another. You and Robert discussed the issue. You still feel that way. Fair enough. Doesn't matter; belongs in that other thread anyway, but had you limited your post to making this statement it would have made you seem more like a throughtful critic and less like a troll.

But what you say instead here - at least the parts that can be verified - is untrue.

 

[sadhatter]

I doubt that a response like this would convince anyone. A response like RSLancastr's response has been shown to convince several people. Why change a winning formula?

I think i explained, in detail that it was a simple curiosity, not a suggestion to rsl to change up his methods.

Did you miss this or anything i could point you to the post in question if you would like.

 

[sadhatter]

hi all

roberts answer to everyone who questions or disagrees with him is that they are a troll. fine, id rather be a troll than a hypocrite. heres a link to the thread in question so you people can make up your own mind about our sainted mr lancaster. his avoidance of answering questions in that thread is quite stunning. i think he and sylvia are actually quite similar. see for yourselves.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=205688


lxxx

BWAHAHAHAHA , oh it wasn't a joke?

I have disagreed with rob many times, heck in this very thread i explain a difference in our respective styles, and lookit me i am not on ignore.

Don't try and cover up your own less than awesome posting tendencies by claiming rob is oversensitive.

 

[RSLancastr]

BWAHAHAHAHA , oh it wasn't a joke?

I have disagreed with rob many times, heck in this very thread i explain a difference in our respective styles, and lookit me i am not on ignore.

Don't try and cover up your own less than awesome posting tendencies by claiming rob is oversensitive.

Well, I am ticklish - does that count?

And I read the S_Pepys quote in your post. I avoided answering questions in that thread? Reading the thread would disabuse anyone of THAT particular notion. And I am "like Sylvia" exactly how? Our dainty femininity?

 

[aggle-rithm]

And I am "like Sylvia" exactly how? Our dainty femininity?

NAILED it!

 

[aggle-rithm]

hi all

roberts answer to everyone who questions or disagrees with him is that they are a troll. fine, id rather be a troll than a hypocrite. heres a link to the thread in question so you people can make up your own mind about our sainted mr lancaster. his avoidance of answering questions in that thread is quite stunning. i think he and sylvia are actually quite similar. see for yourselves.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=205688


lxxx

You tried to post this in all caps, didn't you?

 

[sadhatter]

Well, I am ticklish - does that count?

And I read the S_Pepys quote in your post. I avoided answering questions in that thread? Reading the thread would disabuse anyone of THAT particular notion. And I am "like Sylvia" exactly how? Our dainty femininity?

Your like sylvia, because whomever said it thought that it would be the worst thing they could say to you.

The problem is your being held to a standard that "regular" folk wouldn't be. You have a friend who happens to be a psychic, big deal, i have a friend who is a preacher, and one who is a scout leader. My personal issues with their choice of entertainment or belief ( both are excellent guys, i dislike scouting because of the whole anti gay and anti atheist thing. But he is awesome with the kids, and it is his business.) , take a back seat to the fact they are decent guys. Something i would be praised for being an " open minded guy" for, and your getting **** upon for.

Now if one of those guys asked me to promote one of their hobbies, " as a friend" the same way i would promote, a film project by a friend, i would tell them no. And i assume that you would do the same if this psychic, for example asked you to advertise her on your site.

It is perfectly reasonable to be friends with someone who has views you terribly disagree with. And one is not a turncoat, hypocrite, etc. Unless one helps promote this aspect of the person.

 

[RSLancastr]

NAILED it!

So to speak. Which reminds me: When I was in the hospital after the stroke, my nails started growing at an alarming rate. (Maybe from the meds, or from the change in my diet, or both). One day I was in bed examining my nails when it occured to me: "My nails are getting long. I need a wheelchair - Holy crap, I'm turning into Sylvia!!"

I never got the urge to lie to the parents of missing children, though...

 

[Brown]

It's nice to know that this kind person is actually looking out for YOUR interests, as efforts to expose charlatans are always futile.

And I'm sure that this same individual has written similar letters to folks like Anderson Cooper and Mike Wallace and the folks at Consumer Reports and Jon Stewart and numerous others who publicly point out the methods of charlatans and hold the charlatans up to ridicule.

Or perhaps she has written ... I'm assuming it's a "she" ... only to YOU. Given the possibilities that (1) this individual targets a wide selection of people or organizations that challenge hucksters, or (2) this individual is only targeting you, I have a good idea which way I'd bet my money if I were so inclined.

But perhaps such selectivity may evidence a concern for your well-being. As "confused" so helpfully pointed out, efforts to try to make the world better are simply "weird," and are a waste of time.

Yes sir, the best advice I ever got in my life was, "Don't bother trying to criticise charlatans, because charlatans will always be with us." The same injunction applies to trying to do anything with respect to the poor, victims or creators of injustice, the prey of aggressors, the greedy, the ill-mannered, cowards, hypocrites, racists, gossips, the lazy, the violent, drug addicts, thieves, those without self-control, blowhards, bullies, tax cheats, jaywalkers.... They will be with us always, so don't bother trying.

(And if anyone believes that what I just wrote was in utter earnest, then perhaps you might be interested in buying a famous bridge that I own, at a very cheap price.)