South Jersey isn't Wawa's only area. I'm in SE PA, and I can rattle off 10 locations easily. You use the term 'Wawa' when you mean 'convenience store' (much to 7-eleven's chagrin)
You are right - there's no way for me to know that he has or has not hired shills to further his claim. However, it seems to me that he would have to pay off at least a dozen people per episode. That's a lot of people to pay to say what you want and to keep quiet.
I read your link to his suspicious behavior, but just as you believe JE is likely faking, I believe a lot of 'skeptics' relish their positions so much they themselves slant the information they collect to further their own cause. this particular author seems like he was happy to expose JE, and clouds his report with his disdain for him. I'd like to see an investigation by someone who doesn't already have a strong prejudgement either way.
One of the posters here must have read the article you pointed to and paraphrased it as his own opinion. That's scary.
The only point I'm trying to make is that we should all keep an open mind. You personally have at least engaged me in intelligent dialog and have provided good arguments. It's people who have already closed the door and refuse to even peek around the side that concern me.
I honestly don't know. Lots of factors involved there, including the critical notion of whether or not psychics exist at all or if they are ALL fake. I wish I could answer that. What irks me is that many people have already decided that ALL psychics ARE fakes using very flimsy and circumstantial evidence. I don't think you can draw a conclusion without hard evidence either way. I think an investigative team should check him out, see if he's rigging the whole thing. Shouldn't be that hard to verify that. But if they find nothing, it would still not prove or disprove.
I like to think that there's more to our universe than we've already discovered (think of all the stuff we've uncovered in the past 100 years...) and as such I find it close minded to dismiss psychic ability without first researching the dickens out of it.
fair enough, evidence only. Then rephrase it to read ".. then you need to show evidence that a) and b) are true first."
There is testimonial evidence that he is a psychic (people he has read will vouge for his accuracy) and circumstantial evidence against (other people can do similar readings but either admit to it being a trick like cold reading or are caught doing sleight-of-hand. But just because others do this is not proof that JE is doing it).
How do you weigh the evidence? It's all subjective for either side. So as far as I'm concerned the jury's still out. I'm puzzled by people who consider it a foregone conclusion that he's a fake, without offering any evidence (other than showing that fake psychics exist). If you can show hard tangible evidence that JE (not others) is faking, I'll be sold. Catch him in the act, don't associate him with others.
In the absence of conclusive, unbiased evidence (either way), we should refrain from depicting our conclusions as facts.
to me this illustrates that you get out of the show what you expect. You obviously believe he's a fraud, then you speak of segments of his show where his readings are lame (and your example is valid). Do you not see the parts where he says stuff like "There's someone above you like an aunt, whose name is Jane, Jean or some J, who wants you to remind you about the picnic last summer where you tripped and your skirt flew up?" Some of his quips are very general, yes, but some are very accurate. Agreed that the show is edited to make it seem better, and I can't comment on the pre-show (never been there, and I doubt you have either), but at least approach it with an open mind before you pass judgement.
Nice link on cold reading, but lousy information in the 'FACT' section. It was written not by an impartial person but by someone who desperately wants to show that all psychics are fakes, the end, no discussion. Reads like an isolationist pamphlet.
FACT 1 is just wrong (he uses 'showing' and 'telling' fairly equally)
FACT 2 is fairly irrelevant to JE, and is not backed up with any report (may be right -- shouldn't call it a fact without documentation)
FACT 3 is rambling and changes subject halfway. yes, guessing someone's birthday (particularly just the month as JE often does) is not very convincing. AFAIK, JE is 'wrong' on many tidibits too. this could mean he's a fake, or he misinterprets. This doesn't disprove psychic ability, just accuracy.
FACT4 implies that he only uses generic facts (and the argument thereafter is valid). But he often uses very specific facts that would require the readee to spill ahead of time, or his alledged crack team of investigators would have to break into people's homes to get details.
FACT5 states it was on the SciFi channel, therefore MUST be FICTION. Brilliant....
FACT6 the guy is running out of straws. He was a ballroom dance instructor, therefore CANNOT be psychic. If I recall, there was this German patent clerk who made a pretty significant career change....
Now that I've totally debunked the debunker, it is absolutely clear that you must now completely believe everything I have written, and you no longer need to think, as I have done it for you!
Honestly, I don't know if the guy is on the level or not, but I'd like to keep my mind OPEN to the possibility.
BTW: his name is John Edward. not Edwards. If you investigated him at all you should know that.
If he is a fake, then I totally agree with you. The problem is that you call him a fake without even checking him out. It's sad to see people of high intelligence like the slashdot crowd (shameless gathering of support, i know) throw away proper scientific method such as 'research'. Most psychic research has only rendered inconclusive results: it hasn't disproven a thing.
So if you call JE a fake simply because you believe that a) there is no life after death and/or b) there can be no communication between living and passed people/souls, then you need to prove that a) and b) are true first. AFAIK, no one's been able to do that. Your personal assurance that all psychics are fakes because you just simply know is no better than any religous person insisting that there absolutely IS a God simply because it says so in a book.
It's easy to close your mind, call him a 'fake', and dismiss the argument. What's hard is trying to discover what it is he's actually doing. Perhaps he is a fake, but maybe he's in touch with types of energy that our white coats haven't discovered yet. As you poo-poo that statement, try to remember that only 100+ years ago, our best and brightest only knew of two types of energy, and now we know of four. How can you say that aren't more? Did you look? Can you disprove their existence? If so, publish your findings; I'd love to read them.
A respectable scientist would look at what John Edward does with curiosity and study it, then either prove it, disprove it, or draw no conclusion. To make the blanket statement "All psychics are fakes" without even meeting one is not worthy of a true scientist. INVESTIGATE FIRST!
You may be modded as 'troll', but I believe your point is good. At first I found myself saying "hey, they should have said something..." but as I read your comments on being an aggressive/smart capitalist, I realized you are correct, and I was guilty of becoming what I dislike in our society -- the lazy consumer who demands protection instead of a wily hunter who takes responsibility for his/her actions. We do have a responsibility to be smart consumers, understand the product you intend to purchase, ask questions, haggle (if possible), and make informed decisions. We are not children.
Television and other media have bred us to be the 'buy NOW' consumer, hooked on the quick fix of an impulse purchase. It's tough to stand back and recognize that and change your ways. But we all must if we intend to NOT be screwed by hungrier and hungrier companies.
Slashdot Mirror
South Jersey isn't Wawa's only area. I'm in SE PA, and I can rattle off 10 locations easily. You use the term 'Wawa' when you mean 'convenience store' (much to 7-eleven's chagrin)
(yes, I meant vouch -- my bad)
You are right - there's no way for me to know that he has or has not hired shills to further his claim. However, it seems to me that he would have to pay off at least a dozen people per episode. That's a lot of people to pay to say what you want and to keep quiet.
I read your link to his suspicious behavior, but just as you believe JE is likely faking, I believe a lot of 'skeptics' relish their positions so much they themselves slant the information they collect to further their own cause. this particular author seems like he was happy to expose JE, and clouds his report with his disdain for him. I'd like to see an investigation by someone who doesn't already have a strong prejudgement either way.
One of the posters here must have read the article you pointed to and paraphrased it as his own opinion. That's scary.
The only point I'm trying to make is that we should all keep an open mind. You personally have at least engaged me in intelligent dialog and have provided good arguments. It's people who have already closed the door and refuse to even peek around the side that concern me.
no fair! you peeked!
I like to think that there's more to our universe than we've already discovered (think of all the stuff we've uncovered in the past 100 years...) and as such I find it close minded to dismiss psychic ability without first researching the dickens out of it.
fair enough, evidence only. Then rephrase it to read ".. then you need to show evidence that a) and b) are true first."
There is testimonial evidence that he is a psychic (people he has read will vouge for his accuracy) and circumstantial evidence against (other people can do similar readings but either admit to it being a trick like cold reading or are caught doing sleight-of-hand. But just because others do this is not proof that JE is doing it).
How do you weigh the evidence? It's all subjective for either side. So as far as I'm concerned the jury's still out. I'm puzzled by people who consider it a foregone conclusion that he's a fake, without offering any evidence (other than showing that fake psychics exist). If you can show hard tangible evidence that JE (not others) is faking, I'll be sold. Catch him in the act, don't associate him with others.
In the absence of conclusive, unbiased evidence (either way), we should refrain from depicting our conclusions as facts.
to me this illustrates that you get out of the show what you expect. You obviously believe he's a fraud, then you speak of segments of his show where his readings are lame (and your example is valid). Do you not see the parts where he says stuff like "There's someone above you like an aunt, whose name is Jane, Jean or some J, who wants you to remind you about the picnic last summer where you tripped and your skirt flew up?" Some of his quips are very general, yes, but some are very accurate. Agreed that the show is edited to make it seem better, and I can't comment on the pre-show (never been there, and I doubt you have either), but at least approach it with an open mind before you pass judgement.
Nice link on cold reading, but lousy information in the 'FACT' section. It was written not by an impartial person but by someone who desperately wants to show that all psychics are fakes, the end, no discussion. Reads like an isolationist pamphlet.
FACT 1 is just wrong (he uses 'showing' and 'telling' fairly equally)
FACT 2 is fairly irrelevant to JE, and is not backed up with any report (may be right -- shouldn't call it a fact without documentation)
FACT 3 is rambling and changes subject halfway. yes, guessing someone's birthday (particularly just the month as JE often does) is not very convincing. AFAIK, JE is 'wrong' on many tidibits too. this could mean he's a fake, or he misinterprets. This doesn't disprove psychic ability, just accuracy.
FACT4 implies that he only uses generic facts (and the argument thereafter is valid). But he often uses very specific facts that would require the readee to spill ahead of time, or his alledged crack team of investigators would have to break into people's homes to get details.
FACT5 states it was on the SciFi channel, therefore MUST be FICTION. Brilliant....
FACT6 the guy is running out of straws. He was a ballroom dance instructor, therefore CANNOT be psychic. If I recall, there was this German patent clerk who made a pretty significant career change....
Now that I've totally debunked the debunker, it is absolutely clear that you must now completely believe everything I have written, and you no longer need to think, as I have done it for you!
Honestly, I don't know if the guy is on the level or not, but I'd like to keep my mind OPEN to the possibility.
BTW: his name is John Edward. not Edwards. If you investigated him at all you should know that.
If he is a fake, then I totally agree with you. The problem is that you call him a fake without even checking him out. It's sad to see people of high intelligence like the slashdot crowd (shameless gathering of support, i know) throw away proper scientific method such as 'research'. Most psychic research has only rendered inconclusive results: it hasn't disproven a thing.
So if you call JE a fake simply because you believe that a) there is no life after death and/or b) there can be no communication between living and passed people/souls, then you need to prove that a) and b) are true first. AFAIK, no one's been able to do that. Your personal assurance that all psychics are fakes because you just simply know is no better than any religous person insisting that there absolutely IS a God simply because it says so in a book.
Doubt, but do not discount without hard evidence.
It's easy to close your mind, call him a 'fake', and dismiss the argument. What's hard is trying to discover what it is he's actually doing. Perhaps he is a fake, but maybe he's in touch with types of energy that our white coats haven't discovered yet. As you poo-poo that statement, try to remember that only 100+ years ago, our best and brightest only knew of two types of energy, and now we know of four. How can you say that aren't more? Did you look? Can you disprove their existence? If so, publish your findings; I'd love to read them.
A respectable scientist would look at what John Edward does with curiosity and study it, then either prove it, disprove it, or draw no conclusion. To make the blanket statement "All psychics are fakes" without even meeting one is not worthy of a true scientist. INVESTIGATE FIRST!
Read the link in the review
Now where's the f**king DO NOT SPAM list for my email?
send out another multi-million dollar spacecraft out toward Pioneer 10 that will send a signal yelling "WHAT????"
care to elaborate? Got a link?
You may be modded as 'troll', but I believe your point is good. At first I found myself saying "hey, they should have said something..." but as I read your comments on being an aggressive/smart capitalist, I realized you are correct, and I was guilty of becoming what I dislike in our society -- the lazy consumer who demands protection instead of a wily hunter who takes responsibility for his/her actions. We do have a responsibility to be smart consumers, understand the product you intend to purchase, ask questions, haggle (if possible), and make informed decisions. We are not children.
Television and other media have bred us to be the 'buy NOW' consumer, hooked on the quick fix of an impulse purchase. It's tough to stand back and recognize that and change your ways. But we all must if we intend to NOT be screwed by hungrier and hungrier companies.
can I come work for you?