Clairvoyance/ Second Sight/ Psychics/ Spiritualism

[DarkstarIII]

Polite request again

 

There's 3 active threads discussing psychics now. Please try to keep it all in one place as if folk are interested in psychics, it's hard to follow the discussion

 

Which place?! you better lock the other 2!

 

Aye ... I am starting to get dizzy here...

[Evil Inky]

that all men are potential rapists...

At least one woman has been convicted of rape in this country, so logically all women are potential rapists as well.

[DarkstarIII]

that all men are potential rapists...

At least one woman has been convicted of rape in this country, so logically all women are potential rapists as well.

 

Shocking!

 

8O

[Fjool]

Charlie Brooker of The Grauniad has written an interesting article on this topic.

 

When it comes to psychics, my stance is hardcore: they must die alone in windowless cells.

[Njugle]

Quotes from the "Comments" on the article.

 

Isn't it strange how Guardian journalists indulge in sadistic fantasies about vengeance when someone offends them?

 

have you never read a Brooker column before? Being rude is what they pay him for. He's so good at it, you see. (that sounds kinda sarky but I'm entirely sincere -- CB is my favourite columnist).

I confidently predict, using my psychic powers, that Charlie Brooker and Derek Acorah are not friends...

 

I had to chuckle myself at CB's "desire to punch a jar of Hellman's Mayonnaise in the face"

 

Strong words!

 

I didn't know of this "Baby Psychic" programme, but it does sound a pretty vile and cynical entertainment ploy.

[peeriebryan]

Charlie Brooker doesn't hold back! I do agree with the jist of what he's saying, but I'm not as angry as him

 

 

I've never fully understood the public's docile acceptance of psychics, or why, when it comes to their supposed abilities, the burden of proof is assumed to lie with the sceptic, as opposed to the sort of shrieking idiot who claims to be able to contact the spirit world

But don't accuse anyone with the temerity to question your sad supernatural fantasies of having a "closed mind" or being "blind to possibilities". A closed mind asks no questions, unthinkingly accepting that which it wants to believe. The blindness is all yours.

 

Indeed. I'm very sceptical of folk who aren't sceptical about their own "beliefs"

[tarotangel]

Good grief who rattled Charlie Brookers case? A guy who is so angry about the subject has obviously had some dealings with the subject which has hurt him a lot I'd imagine. A lot of people don't believe in this stuff but aren't as umm virtiolic about it. As for saying everyone that believes it is either desperate or deluded- well what a well thought out reasoned argument - bravo - I think not.

 

Personally I do believe in all the "psychic" stuff (yeah, I can tell you are shocked by that statement ) but if someone came along with good evidence and said that this is how you do it then fine I'd be happy with that. There is a great belief that one day soon everything will be explained by science. A vague example - it wasn't that long ago people who had fits were thought to be possessed by the devil now we know it's called epilepsly.

 

I've seen the programme concerned and yes it did disturb me that Channel 5 were allowed to broadcast this. The thing that gets me is this was first broadcast way back in the summer - why is Charlie Brooker waiting until now to get on his high horse about it. Having a slow news day are we? Having never seen any more of Derek Ogilvie I can't really comment if he is like that the whole time or if it was edited for a specific shock value.

 

While I can see his viewpoint about this he has gone about it half ersed if you ask me it's a lot of venting rather than reasoned argument. I agree that there are a lot of charlatons and frauds out there specifically because they can make a quick buck out of people because it's so easy. I think the Mediumship Act should be tightened up and the charlaton given fines, it would be hard to patrol (it could be run by well known non charaton psychics) but for the ones that come out with you or your partner/sibling is going to die in XXX years should be brought down on hard I think.

[Fjool]

if someone came along with good evidence and said that this is how you do it then fine I'd be happy with that.

 

That's partly the problem. All these 'psychics' are using techniques that do have mundane explanations and yet people still believe them. You cannot rationalise with a 'believer' because they simply wont consider the possibility that it's not paranormal.

 

As CB points out, you attempt to shift the burden of anti-proof to the sceptic. The honest and credible way to do this is for the psychic to prove that they have the ability they claim; Inky's Law of Chainsaw-Juggling.

 

Edit: emphasis adjustment

[Evil Inky]

The thing that gets me is this was first broadcast way back in the summer - why is Charlie Brooker waiting until now to get on his high horse about it. Having a slow news day are we?

I think Mr Brooker was reacting to the news that Ofcom had decided that the programme in question wasn't in breach of its guidelines, which, according to the article, happened last week.

[ewenutz]

Well i can only speak for myself, but i've seen 3 clairvoyants. And it was all very spooky, She told me stuff, really private stuff. And it was very very specific indeed. The kind of thing you couldn't just guess. Then I watched a thing on tv about how some clairvoyants do it. they research the people they are giving a reading for weeks before hand so they know a bit about them, however, i decided about 20 mins before i went to see her that i was gonna go. So its wasn't a question of her learning stuff about me. But then again, thats just one example. A lot of people said to me after, "och, she was just reading your mind!"

 

'just reading my mind'? well if she was, is that no pretty amazing? almost as amazing as, lets say..............being clairvoyant?

 

Theres a lot of stuff humans don't understand and can't explain. so its easier for everyone to say, "och, what a load of sh*te"

 

The fact is, in this day and age, with all the technology, scientists still can't fully explain it all. they can give their 'theories' but can't seem to 101% proof anything. But that also goes for clairvoyants.

 

All I can do, Is explain my experience, its just one example. But it certainally made me think different about life. Believer? lets just say i'm not a disbeliever.

 

Anyone else had a spooky experience?

[Fjool]

'just reading my mind'? well if she was, is that no pretty amazing? almost as amazing as, lets say..............being clairvoyant?

 

It's known as Cold Reading and is a well understood technique. To someone who knows what to look for you are giving away a lot more than you think.

 

I agree though, it is amazing and very impressive. But it is not paranormal.

 

Theres a lot of stuff humans don't understand and can't explain. so its easier for everyone to say, "och, what a load of sh*te"

 

True, but for those things that we don't understand there are ways to go about investigating the phenomena so that we can hope to understand. Unfortunately psychics are careful to avoid being subject to such scrutiny.

 

Would we know as much about the world of quantum mechanics if Heisenburgh, Pauli and Schrodinger based all their theories on hand-wavings and saying 'ooohh... must be mystical'?

 

But that also goes for clairvoyants.

I would be impressed if you could name even one clairvoyant who can repeatedly demonstrate their abilities in a controlled environment.

[ewenutz]

Well I don't know what i could have given away, i sat in silence as i was told the things. And i when i said she was specific, i really do mean specific. It was actual things only i know. Things about the past, I don't want to go into detail on here, But in my eyes, I am the only one who knows these things. I can't see how anyone could have known that, it was absolutely impossible to have just 'guessed' it. So how do you think it was done Fjool?

[Fjool]

Well I don't know what i could have given away, i sat in silence as i was told the things

 

You don't need to say anything with words to give away a whole lot of information. Whether you realise it or not you are giving out all kinds of non-verbal cues; pupils dilate\contract, eyes flicker, your skin flushes\pales, you shift your body weight, pull at your ears, rub your nose, cough, and many other things. People respond much more predictably than they'd like to believe.

 

A person skilled in such techniques can quite quickly refine some initial guesses, leaving their 'client' to fill in the blanks and even give them credit for saying something which they haven't explicitly said.

 

Obviously I cannot comment on your particular experience (I'm not psychic!) but this method has been demonstrated quite routinely.

[Evil Inky]

Well I don't know what i could have given away, i sat in silence as i was told the things. And i when i said she was specific, i really do mean specific. It was actual things only i know. Things about the past, I don't want to go into detail on here, But in my eyes, I am the only one who knows these things. I can't see how anyone could have known that, it was absolutely impossible to have just 'guessed' it.

 

I'm not being funny, but why would you go to a clairvoyant in order to be told things you already know ?

[ewenutz]

lol, i think we'll just agree to disagree, I have had many online readings, all of which were 100% truthfull, not face to face, not on the phone, just on a chat based thing. so it was absolutely impossible to give anything away. I have never said yes/no, nodded or done anything to the ones i've seen in person. I have just been told very secret and private things.

 

Can you quite honestly say there isn't even a 1% chance it could be true? are you so sure?