StopSylvia email: "Hummmmmm"

Squeegee Beckenheim said:
So, just to be clear, you are calling Robert a liar WRT what he's said on the subject of positive emails? On what are you basing that? What evidence do you have that he is lying about the emails he receives?
Click to expand...

Well, he did say that there were only hypocrites on this site ...
 
Do you think a site with the tagline

"Is she a well-intentioned spiritual leader, with actual psychic powers? Is she a fraud, making money by callously manipulating and using the bereaved? Or is she something else entirely?"

and then proceeds to post only negative stories recieved via anonymous email and only verified by facebook and gut feeling fair?

And before you start, i know there are other sites with say nice stuff about her, however, we are talking about this site. So far, as far as i can see, you can't excuse it so you go round in circles and try to derail the thread.

You would laugh if some Conspiracy theorist tried to do this. Thats why you are all hypocrites.
 
mushy said:
Do you think a site with the tagline

"Is she a well-intentioned spiritual leader, with actual psychic powers? Is she a fraud, making money by callously manipulating and using the bereaved? Or is she something else entirely?"

and then proceeds to post only negative stories recieved via anonymous email and only verified by facebook and gut feeling fair?

And before you start, i know there are other sites with say nice stuff about her, however, we are talking about this site. So far, as far as i can see, you can't excuse it so you go round in circles and try to derail the thread.

You would laugh if some Conspiracy theorist tried to do this. Thats why you are all hypocrites.
Click to expand...

Yes, i think it is fair.

It is not Robert's fault or responsibility that his chosen method ends up not producing any nice results about SB. Maybe if she was a nicer person that would be different!

The method Robert uses is not biased! The results are, and SB has no one to blame but herself!
 
mushy said:
Do you think a site with the tagline

"Is she a well-intentioned spiritual leader, with actual psychic powers? Is she a fraud, making money by callously manipulating and using the bereaved? Or is she something else entirely?"

and then proceeds to post only negative stories recieved via anonymous email and only verified by facebook and gut feeling fair?

And before you start, i know there are other sites with say nice stuff about her, however, we are talking about this site. So far, as far as i can see, you can't excuse it so you go round in circles and try to derail the thread.

You would laugh if some Conspiracy theorist tried to do this. Thats why you are all hypocrites.
Click to expand...

Not the questions I asked.

To be absolutely clear: you are calling Robert a liar WRT his post documenting the 3 positive emails he's received, correct? What evidence do you have supporting this claim of yours?
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Not the questions I asked.

To be absolutely clear: you are calling Robert a liar WRT his post documenting the 3 positive emails he's received, correct? What evidence do you have supporting this claim of yours?
Click to expand...

So we are clear, if we can prove he recieved emails claiming that sylvia was a true medium and helped them or something to that degree you will agree that Robert is a Liar?
 
mushy said:
So we are clear, if we can prove he recieved emails claiming that sylvia was a true medium and helped them or something to that degree you will agree that Robert is a Liar?
Click to expand...

Not the question again.

The question is: Are the three e-mails posted by Robert fake? If so, can you back that up?
 
mushy said:
So we are clear, if we can prove he recieved emails claiming that sylvia was a true medium and helped them or something to that degree you will agree that Robert is a Liar?
Click to expand...

That's still not actually answering the questions. Please answer them.

If you have evidence that Robert is lying, then please provide it. If the evidence is convincing and Robert doesn't have a good explanation for the disparity between his version of events and your evidence then, yes, I will consider that Robert is lying in this matter.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
That's still not actually answering the questions. Please answer them.

If you have evidence that Robert is lying, then please provide it. If the evidence is convincing and Robert doesn't have a good explanation for the disparity between his version of events and your evidence then, yes, I will consider that Robert is lying in this matter.
Click to expand...

Yea, you want me to sit here all day and answer questions so you can nit pick. Why don't you answer a simple question? Rather hide behind your wall like everyone else on this site?

I'll break it down for you and you can play along.

I said that Robert does not post any good emails.

Robert says he does not get any

You butt in and say i'm calling Robert a liar.

Now, for you to believe i was calling him a liar, you would have to think that Him saying he has not recieved good emails, when he has was a lie.

Sooooooo

If we can prove he has recieved good emails, you would agree he is a liar right?
 
Also in the interest of fairness, i'll ask robert again, has he ever recieved ANY emails that praised Sylvia ?
 
mushy said:
Do you think a site with the tagline

"Is she a well-intentioned spiritual leader, with actual psychic powers? Is she a fraud, making money by callously manipulating and using the bereaved? Or is she something else entirely?"

and then proceeds to post only negative stories recieved via anonymous email and only verified by facebook and gut feeling fair?

And before you start, i know there are other sites with say nice stuff about her, however, we are talking about this site. So far, as far as i can see, you can't excuse it so you go round in circles and try to derail the thread.

You would laugh if some Conspiracy theorist tried to do this. Thats why you are all hypocrites.
Click to expand...
You do know there's more than just "negative stories recieved via anonymous email and only verified by facebook and gut feeling" on RSL's site, right? Have you actually spent any time to read it? There are fully researched, backed up investigations taken directly from transcripts of Sylvia's own words and then verified through reliable sources (police reports, etc.). You seem to think StopSylvia just consists of emails when that's REALLY not what it's about at all...
 
mushy said:
Yea, you want me to sit here all day and answer questions so you can nit pick.
Click to expand...

You'd have spent less time if you simply answered the questions than you have in dancing around not answering them. And if you give good answers, then I wouldn't be able to nitpick.

Just for context, I am broadly in support of Robert's site, but I'm far from some blind supporter. I've contributed to discussions with and about him and his site 3 times to my knowledge. Out of these three times two have been criticising his site or aspects of his method, or confronting him about perceived inconsistencies in his views and/or words and actions. If I think that there is a good case that he has lied, I will have no hesitation whatsoever in declaring him to be a liar.

I am not partisan, and I have no vested interest. I'm simply concerned with accuracy.

Why don't you answer a simple question?
Click to expand...

I did answer your question. You, however, have still not answered mine.

To repeat them: are you calling Robert a liar? On what evidence are you basing this claim?

I said that Robert does not post any good emails.

Robert says he does not get any

You butt in and say i'm calling Robert a liar.
Click to expand...

You missed out an important part of that break down. You said that Robert does not post the positive emails he receives. As part of this claim, you said that you "know" - not think, but know - that he does receive such emails.

Robert documents the three such emails he can remember receiving, and gives reasons why he hasn't published 2 of them.

You then, again, make the claim that he receives positive emails.

It is because of this third part that I asked you to clarify whether you were calling Robert a liar. I have never said that you are calling Robert a liar, I have asked you to clarify and confirm that that is what you are doing. Your claim is that the truth of the matter is that Robert receives many positive emails that he does not publish. Robert's statement is in direct contradiction to your version of events. I can't see how repeating your version of events after Robert has presented his is doing anything other than calling him a liar, but I'm open to your clarification on the matter. This is why I've repeatedly asked you to clarify the matter - a request you've refused.
 
mushy said:
Also in the interest of fairness, i'll ask robert again, has he ever recieved ANY emails that praised Sylvia ?
Click to expand...

Did anyone see my goalposts?

Praising Sylvia is not the issue here, is it?

Here is what he said just now:

Not only have I NEVER received an email which described any reading Browne has ever given regarding a missing or murdered person which later was shown to be meaningfully accurate, I have NEVER received a single email in which the sender even THOUGHT they knew of such a case (with one exception which I will describe below). I have mentioned in another thread here that I can only remember receiving emails from only three people who were pleased with a reading they had received from Browne.
Click to expand...
Robert's site is about her abilities as a medium and her track record of honesty. It is not about whether SB is an otherwise nice or pleasant person.

But instead of playing games, why don't you just post your evidence?

I will certainly not agree to some abstract definition of what would make Robert a liar just to then wait until you produce some evidence tailored to that definition and your grand gotcha-moment.
 
Last edited:
Rasmus said:
Did anyone see my goalposts?

Praising Sylvia is not the issue here, is it?

Here is what he said just now:

Robert's site is about her abilities as a medium and her track record of honesty. It is not about whether SB is an otherwise nice or pleasant person.

But instead of playing games, why don't you just post your evidence?

I will certainly not agree to some abstract definition of what would make Robert a liar just to then wait until you produce some evidence tailored to that definition and your grand gotcha-moment.
Click to expand...

So you dont want to answer the question because its possible i could produce evidence and you dont want to call him a liar? lol
 
mushy said:
So you dont want to answer the question because its possible i could produce evidence and you dont want to call him a liar? lol
Click to expand...

Why don't you just present the evidence you have in an open and honest way?

I find that just about every poster I've ever seen who requires others to agree "If I can show X, then will you agree it proves y?" is creating the set up for some kind of equivocation or dishonest word play.

If you have a case to make, just make it.
 
mushy said:
So you dont want to answer the question because its possible i could produce evidence and you dont want to call him a liar? lol
Click to expand...

I don't want to be tricked into having to call him a liar because of a silly word game or other technicality.

Show us the evidence! I might call him a liar yet, or possibly end up contesting your definition of "liar" as well. (And I think there is a big chance that Robert would be more than happy to commit any errors he might have made or further explain why he doesn't think an e-mail you will undoubtedly quote any moment now is not "positive" or at least not worthy of further consideration for quoting.

We're all waiting!
 
Just waiting for Robert to respond first. Your childish "pressure" wont work on me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom