JJ: John Edward (not Edwards) has had his abilities tested under controlled conditions in a laboratory setting by a scientist with an immaculate academic pedigree. I want to know exactly why you are calling him a "fraud." I hope it's for a really good reason.

Some of the people on the recording side of his Sci-Fi show busted him. It was revealed that he had private investigators looking into the people in the audiance for easy marks/targets. That is why the show was canceled and not aired anymore.

It was also revealed on episode that I actually watched. He was giving a 'reading' to a very specific (targeted person) when another person in the audiance had a felt it was for them, because it mirrored the non-selected person. But he would not deviate from the selected person and for good reason. He knew the choosen person and had to stay there. This is when the show began to slowly started to go into questions being raised.

As the old saying goes, "If it's too good to be true...."

Oh and aparently - (2nd hand information) - the scientist that 'tested him' was just one guy, as you even pointed out and was not "open" to peer review. This raised red-flags too. Just because they "immaculate academic pedigree" doesn't mean they cannot be "bought". It is no small red flag that he was only tested by one person.... no small red flag. Besides - let me ask a question - how would one Scientist "test" John Edward? Think about that for 10 seconds.

Your "2nd hand information" about the circumstances under which Edward was tested is completely incorrect, and your implication that the principal investigator was "bought" is completely unfounded. You do not seem to mind saying nasty, baseless things about people in public.

So it will not surprise me at all if you're unable to precisely document the accusations you've specified above, but I'll ask anyway.

I'll also ask how you justify demolishing someone's character in writing based on "2nd hand information," whatever that means.

Not that JJ needs anyone to speak for him but I thought his demolishing of this persons character was based primarily on this bit of the post:

Some of the people on the recording side of his Sci-Fi show busted him. It was revealed that he had private investigators looking into the people in the audiance for easy marks/targets. That is why the show was canceled and not aired anymore.

It was also revealed on episode that I actually watched. He was giving a 'reading' to a very specific (targeted person) when another person in the audiance had a felt it was for them, because it mirrored the non-selected person. But he would not deviate from the selected person and for good reason. He knew the choosen person and had to stay there. This is when the show began to slowly started to go into questions being raised.

With the bit about the test being something of an afterthought. That is how i interpreted it anyways.

Jjbreen people do trust liars, they trust them everyday in every social setting; economic background, strangers, friends, family we all lie to each other. From the out right bold face lie of "vote for me because while I'm in office" to "no honey, you look the same as when I married you".

Liar/s is a strong term and while I think that you mean people who knowingly commit fraud (pretending gifts of a psychic nature to con innocent people out money or goods) it would be nice if you would make that distinction. Honest mistakes are honest mistakes and someone who makes one doesn't need to be called a liar just because they were wrong.



A part of the problem is no one knows how this works there are theories but so far no proof. A dishonest person who claims to be psychic that preys on the bereaved is a low bottom feeder they deserve to be called liars and frauds. These would be the kind of charlatan who keeps the client coming back stating they grown too tired to continue and that if they come back next week they're sure that they can talk to X again but have another client waiting. People are easily fooled sometimes because they want to be or because they are greedy too. One of the oldest cons that is pulled in this area/field is bring me $2000.00 and the spirits will bless it and give you $20,000.00 or more, the amount changes with the times but it's still taking advantage of someone's greed. IMHO I really don't have much sympathy for people who let their greed get the better of their common sense. You don't get something for nothing. LOL!

A doctor will very rarely tell you to get a second opinion or refer you to another doctor if they think that it is out of their league same with a broker. People want you business and it depends if they consider your life or your money more important to them. A doctor who takes their profession seriously and feels they had a calling to medicine will work a lot harder than a doctor who went to medical school to get the title after their name so they could make the big bucks. The difference is there is a regulating body that ensures even the ones in it for money have to comply to a set standard, when they fail they pay for it, either by time in jail or monetarily.

Honest people who are 'gifted' are just as capable of having a bad day or be wrong. Sure everyone has a bad day and a psychic should tell you if they can't read you or for you (depending on their method). They also shouldn't charge you for that sitting either.
(Just to clear things up I am of the opinion that people should charge if they feel like it for a sitting/reading. Some people (myself included) consider this a gift but it is a gift that is no different than an artistic gift, a gift of music etc. I also am of the opinion that it shouldn't be a crazy amount, no more than a decent meal or a haircut. Average meal or haircut!)

And don't forget that ego plays a part in this too. No one likes being wrong, sure at one time or another everyones going to be but liking it and owning it are two different animals. I don't know anyone who likes being wrong. Admitting mistakes can be difficult or detrimental to someones reputation. How many doctors say "I was wrong"? They couch it in the term "your condition was misdiagnosed". Imagine a psychic who is talented and then gets a reputation for being infallible, they begin to believe their own reputation and begin a slippery slide toward charlatan. They make up stuff instead of saying they can't read that day or get so greedy that they don't want to turn people away even when they are not charging for their service. Anyone can still get caught up in the power of it. People even good people fall for it sometimes.


Mabon.

Spanky, I know what JJ wrote, because it's right there. I'm asking what that is based on.

And afterthought or not, his remarks about the research and the researcher are incorrect, unfounded, thoughtless, and careless. So I don't expect a lot in terms of documentation, but it's the least JJ can do if he's going to accuse people of fraud and of being bought.

Hey -

Ok - I andmitted it was 2nd hand information on the part of the scientist. That is why I posted the 2nd part exactly that way .... thus why is was last ..... so I don't take total stock in it -- but I will also not dis-miss it either. The Jury is still out on that one.

But the first part was stated as true - from SCI-FI channel at the time of the revelation. That is why it was canceled and no longer aired. Sorry but somone on the 'inside' of the show busted John Edward ... don't shoot me, I didn't do it!

Also did you ever wonder why he just 'went off the face of the map'? With the popularity that he had -- he just 'fall off the map'.

ANSWER: That was the reason, he was busted! The con was exposed.

As I stated:
I personally found it strange on the episode that I watched, that he did NOT deviate from the one 'target', which it seems to strike no small emotional cord w/another person in the audiance. I had to ask, "how is it he knew w/such certainity that this was the right person?"
Especially since he does do what I call "phishing" at the opening w/vague 'impressions/feelings/thoughts' - to more specific. That one episode as a few number after that left me going, "something is not right!" It seems the feelings were right.

Again I apologize for your "hero" falling - but it does happen!

I would suggest you check out the following websites as well:

Site 01

Did you also know:


From: Site 02

All one needs to do is do some investigation then watch re-runs if you can find them and look at what he does.... It's not talking to the dead - no, some investigation of your audiance and the laws of probablity and you have the makings of - "CROSSING OVER".

But as stated, one (1) scientist 'tested him' - I'm sorry -- but I'll ask you this .. do you have a site where this 'testing' was done and what was done? Because I did an internet search: Did a scientist test John Edward? and came up with NOTHING - except what tests some would like to w/John Edwards.

See this is the bottom line of this thread: Should there be testings of people like Sylvia Brown, Debbie W. John Edward, Miss Cleo and so on. Because they will and do prey on people w/emotional needs that need to be filled.

As stated: We have no problem calling on the carpet: Sylvia Brown ... but what about other's like her, who mirror her and other con's and frauds....

Why are not ALL held to the same 'standard'?

Hey even superman and captain america fell sooner or later

Exactly the amount of documentation I was expecting, JJ: none.

As for standing by this hearsay "information" of yours in any way, that's shameful. You should not allege nasty things about people in public when it's just something you heard, and you have no idea whether it's true or not, or even who or what you're talking about.

John Edward isn't my hero. Don't put words in my mouth. I have just had it with people making unfounded accusations in public. You don't seem to see a problem with it, as long as we're accusing someone you don't agree with. But I would have the same objection if somebody sat here calling Carl Sagan a fraud and a liar without something to back it up. And he was a cofounder of CSICOP and actually was a hero of mine.

Again, document the evidence for the accusations you're making, or else it's just libel.

May I ask what your feelings are on the other stuff? The bit about him using private investigators to look into the people in the audience for easy marks/targets. That is a little unethical in my opinion, not to mention unnecessary, if he has the powers he claims to have.

It'd be a little unethical to say the least. If John Edward is deliberately tricking people, then I would be happy to punch him in the nose myself.

Where is the evidence that he did what you're saying? Such a claim shouldn't be made without evidence. That's all I'm saying.

As for Jj, to whom I was responding, he is making false statements about the research done with Edward and the researcher who did it. John Edward may prove to be a fraud, but to condemn a scientist and his work without reason, based on hearsay, is also a lie.

As Jj himself said: "If she is doing exactly what other frauds and liars are doing - that makes her one too! Nothing more and nothing less! There can be no double standards here."

It's probably just heresay that he was spying on people in line for his show. It's obvious he is a great cold reader, but I agree that it's not cool to accuse someone of cheating that way when there is no evidence to prove it.

Ok, as I stated on a prior post - I did a search for "Did a scientist test John Edward" - I got NO find on that. I did get hits on what tests some would like to put John Edward through - so I would ask you ---> Can you provide a site or the name of this Scientist? Cause I found NADA.....

I reposted this here in that my g'daughter is in my lap and gets me easily distracted.

This post in again NOT about John Edwards - but a standard ... that even John Edwards should be set too - yes? no?

The name of the Scientist was Gary Schwartz.

go

I found this write up on him in which he apparently admits he had some prior info on a cameraman before giving him info that he passed off as coming from spirit . i think it mentions the scientist who ran the test shwartz i think it is i could be wrong .

Yes I read prior knowledge too --- seems there are a 'few' little bits here and there that, well --- we wouldn't accept this from other's like Sylvia Brown .... so again ... what is the standard of who's a con/scam/fraud and who isn't? Why does it seem to be a difference of who gets labeled Fraud and who doesn't?

OK, I read the report of Gary Shwartz and his testing of John Edward and one other "Pyschic/Medium".

To be honest - the test is 'inconclusive' based on peer review. So I'm not sure we can take this "test" as valid proof to validate John Edward.

Source Link:

So again -- Should the standard by which we call Sylvia Brown a Fraud - be the same standard all across the board? Why? Why not?

Jj, the same issue of Skeptical Inquirer in which your Joe Nickell editorial appears also contains a critique of the studies in which Edward participated. Schwartz et.al.'s studies make good reading, as does Wiseman's and O'Keeffe's critique and in turn Schwartz's defense.

You will see that the things you said about the research on Edward were false, and you wrote them without knowing what you were talking about.

The substance of Joe Nickell's diatribe against Edward (which you linked) is that Edward and his staff use a mix of cold reading, hot reading, and selective editing to appear as if he is communicating with spirits. That may be true. So how do we test it? Simple. We put him in a laboratory under circumstances where he cannot have advance knowledge of the "sitter" or communicate with him in any way during the reading. And of course, no edits. Those are the circumstances under which Schwartz and his team tested Edward and other purported psychics.

The experiments may be subject to criticisms such as Wiseman and O'Keeffe's, against which Schwartz et. al. may or may not be able to adequately defend. After all, that's how science works. But as it stands, the procedure has demonstrated several important things.

The first is that Edward is willing to undergo controlled testing of his abilities under laboratory conditions. I have always seen him as an embarrassing cheeseball, but his willingness to put up deserves some respect. It is not the behavior of a fraud or a con man.

Second, in these experiments, Edward produced results that are inconsistent with the cold reading, hot reading, and pure chance hypotheses. We might quibble with the method, as Wiseman and O'Keeffe have done, but as it stands, there is at least cause for further investigation, which is the best that could be hoped for at this stage.

Both these points apply equally to the other purported mediums who participated in the study. So far, the findings are not consistent with allegations of fraud.

Furthermore, Schwartz has invited cold readers to reproduce the same results under the same conditions, and they have declined. It is not true that cold readers can do what these "psychics" have demonstrated in the laboratory.

Note that not even Joe Nickell calls John Edward a "fraud." He says that Edward was "caught cheating" on Dateline because Edward had previously chatted with his camera man on a different shoot, on a different day, dealing with a different subject. Edward says he does not keep all this stuff in mind while reading and was not doing so at the time. If that is true, then Edward should be able to demonstrate the same ability under controlled laboratory conditions where he could not possibly be recalling a previous chat with the sitter. And so he has done. At the very least, he's shown a willingness to be tested in this way.

So when you are willing to call Edward a fraud and a liar and a con-man based on this Joe Nickell editorial, where not even Joe goes that far, that looks like a very weak basis for a very serious accusation. I think you should reconsider. You should at least care enough to look at the scientific work that was done in this area.

It is understandable that you are not aware of the research. It is less understandable to me that you present yourself as a rational person who is deeply interested in this subject and yet are not aware of the research. And least understandable of all to me is that you are willing to disparage the research and the researcher without knowing anything about either. Your willingness to condemn without sufficient information places you on the same footing as the cheats and liars you rail against.

And of course you can fix that simply by retracting the remarks. Maybe you still think Edward is crap and the research is flawed. That's fair enough, but baseless accusations aren't.

Peer review means that there are measurable peers or understanding of the abilities. When the understanding of psychic abilities, they are measurable/ provable and when a standard test that everyone can agree on (from scientist to the average person) then psychics can be tested. Until then people will have to look for conventional means of determining who is resorting to cold reading to preselecting their audiences or bilking their customers. Fraud regardless of whether a person charges money or not, or toys with peoples emotions are still held accountable under law. It's whether or not people want to pursue it is more the question.

Mabon.

Ok, my 2nd hand information - that was stated as such, certainly appears for the most part to be faulty.

As to why the show was canceled - that is not faulty in that it was for a very short time stated on SCI-FI channel and other sources as to why the show was no longer being carried. I'm sorry if that bothers you - but that was what was stated as to the cancelation of the show. I remember even first hand not only reading it but hearing it on TV (Sci-Fi).

Now as to the the "Shwarts Test" - here is the problem I have w/this - I didn't see how many times the testing was conducted. It reads like it was only done one time. IF that was the case, I'd have to say, I would have serious problems w/a test of this nature only being done 1 time. That isn't a test to validate anything at all. AGAIN - if indeed the test was only done 1 time. Which again it reads as though the John Edward test was done just one time.

But I also want to point out the "flaws" that were presented in this test. To see what other's think. R these valid points or not?



Source of Above:

2-B continued: Dinner Calls. -- Jj

EDITED:
I highlighted some major points that are rather serious.

Funny...Hillary Clinton is using the same tactics with plants in her audience (allegedly).

And we are suppose to be surprised by this possiblity? LOL .....

A few years back it was even thought that some politicians actually planted those who would speak out "against" them - just to create attention... Which again I would not be overly surprised by that either, IF it was true.... Who knows....

But again the bottom line is --- why all the double standards with Mediums and Psychics? Why is one a fraud when another who does the same thing not?? This is where I see no small 'double standard' -- that has yet to be answered but clearly avoided....

Yep, agree as well...

You'll be happy to know that 100% of all psychics and mediums consistently fail at all properly conducted double blind studies (double blind studies being the tests which personal opinions CANNOT influence)

I heard Allison Dubois being interviewed on the radio the other day. The real life medium who truly works with the police in court room cases. She seemed like a very nice woman and the was she explained her "powers" it sounded like they were discussing something no more amazing than being able to pick up a cup from a desk with your hand. But i'm willing to put money on the face that in a properly conducted scientific study she would fail exactly like every other medium or psychic.

I have no doubt that these people are super sensitive to body language and social moods and motives, but these are not supernatural powers.. they are just particularly GOOD at interpreting very subtle emotional data. Hearing voices from the dead telling under what motive they were murdered? Nup... just particular areas of the brain having hyperactive body language interpretive abilities. Just like some child prodigy are capable of doing incredibly large and complex mathematical sums in their heads or learning 20 languages in a year. Some people are just wired to process some data way better than the average person. It doesn't need a paranormal explanation.. just good investigation and science.

One of the most frustrating things about the interview was that she claimed her whole family had powers. Specifically she claimed that her daughter could make objects move without touching them. She even said that they were working with scientists to analyze it. Do you think, that if a correctly conducted scientific test was performed on this daughter, which beyond all doubt proved that without external stimulus an object could be moved by the human mind we wouldn't have heard about it in a "HOLY SH*T!! We've discovered an unexplainable source of energy! We're re-writing all the laws of physics!!!" type way?

So skeptics claim that they are happy to be proven wrong is false?
They wish to see people fail at their claims so that they can gloat?

You are so gullible aren't you. lets just say someone genius invented a car that could basically run on water...do you honestly believe the petroleum companies would let it be just like that so scientist all around the world can study it day and night. Now if you had any idea about how the an internal combustion engine works, you would know that it's not the most efficient of designs by a long mile, only converting roughly 17 or so percent of fuel into usable energy. That's gotta be pretty appalling considering today's science and technology standards I would think. Makes you wonder why the internal combustion engine has been around for quite some time doesn't it, ever since the motor vehicle was invented actually, and not much has changed since except maybe now when fuel resources are starting to deplete. Now I'm not saying that what she says is true, but say if her daughter really had those powers to move objects, even slightly, do you honestly think our governments would leave it be so everyone can know about it. That's just my opinion though, now back to cramming for my exams arrgg

Gullible? no.. no i'm not... and i'm not a conspiracy theorist either..

Yes the most powerful companies in the world would try to dampen a water running car as long as they could, which is fairly obvious considering where they get all their money from. But we all know that a car running on water is not feasible using current technology.. not by a long shot.. so in essence what most of your apparent supporting evidence for my gullibility is A. not relevant B. not based on any real life events and C. not addressing the question of my gullibility.

So what your argument is called is a "straw man argument" where you have constructed an argument to hold up which has little to no relation to anything i've been saying.

If correctly performed tests revealed that 'mind powers' existed and were able to be peer reviewed the "big bad government of conspiracies" would NOT be able to stop that information from being revealed. What your basically saying is a world famous woman is free to travel around the world and make fantastic claims about her daughters paranormal powers on popular national broadcasting media.. but if anyone investigate & found her claims to be true then somehow the information would be bottled up & kept from the world?

Please... stop living in the x-files and join the real world..

Wrong its not a straw man arguement. there are many different ways to arguing with you and this is only one of them.
Yes if she want to make claims about her daughter she can do as she wishes.
And no nobody would even bother to find out if her daughter has powers or not what people are interested in is only weather those powers can benefit them in some way nobody would ask to see someone moving small little things around people just don't like to waste time seeing her doing some things.
There is a thin line between X files and our world its only that our world does not accept "these powers".

lol, such an ideal world we live in isn't it. Let me see, how do you remove or prevent evidence from escaping...must be pretty hard eh. Now I can truly imagine a world where people can use their minds to move objects at a distance, would make for an interesting place really. I guess though everything would have to be now changed for security measures. I don't know, which would be the harder thing to do, that or removing evidence hmmm

Oh and the car running on water... that was just a *hint hint* example

Commercial break!! JK

Sorry to interupt the argument but talking about moving objects with mind power, reminded me of this woman (how I remembered her name is a mystery) and I thought ya'll might enjoy this little video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L61RptUUEqU&NR=1

No. We like the truth. Not fiction.

Thanks for the Link Jennie.

Nina Kulagina is one of the only people who have demonstrated an unusual ability that has been studied by Scientists (not just Russian Scientists either) and has always baffled both them and onlookers. I did look at a few of the other links on YouTube with regard to this woman and they are quite fascinating.

You're welcome Lotus!!

Sorry everyone, I didn't mean to kill the thread.

I think it killed itself . I thought JJ was gonna put some pics up for the mediums to have a go at . . must be busy

No, he closed his account, by the looks of it.

OMG really . ok thanks lotus .

Awww! That's too bad, I really liked JJ's posts!!

Yeah me too .

Yeah. It sucks. He was an incredible poster.

Yea, one of the few I actually enjoyed reading. I'm sure he has his reasons, reasons I respect.

AWWWWWWWWWWW I am sad to see him leave, as he brought so much to the forum. Maybe at some point in time he will come back. JN

Over time I am slowly developing mediumship. I can't tell you how it happens or why I know the things I know sometimes but I do. I can't tell you how you could validate it either sometimes the only proof for me that I am not stark raving mad is validation from the person that what I am telling them makes sense. I am starting to see spirits alot now and it bothers me less and less. Although sometimes it would be nice if they would GO AWAY (hint hint any spirits out there planning to or already annoying the shat out of me). This is not something I ask for or am trying to do its just happening of its own accord but I suppose I have to live with it.

By the way I think some mediums are hoaxes but alot of people say that I am wrong. The number one medium I think is a hoax is John Edward he is either a hoax or his face just pees me off.

UUhhh...