Dutch psychic Jomanda & Breastimplants: The True Story

6th

FE, can you prove this chick performs miracles?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

wth? as soon as you leave the paranormal board you start demanding proof of people?

ISAW

FE30033 wrote:

Not farcical or hypocritical (speaking of ad-hominems), but realistic and 'skeptical'. I see your fantasy apart from the one, supposed by you, Jomanda has. Trying to hide/link it behind others (fantasies) does not make it less of a fantasy.

shifting the burden. You cam in claiming "i believe in Jomandas powers" someone else says "I dont ! I prefer to believe it an scientific alternative." You then ridicule the scientific alternative! It isnt for them to prove science. they didnt arrive here making claims about Jomanda. YOU did! they don't have to prove an alternative.

I do not believe you. Where is the evidence of your claim/belief 'not suitable'?

Same again. shiften the burden! It isnt for then to show PEAR up as a bad source (although they might well do so). YOU supplied PEAR and when asked how PEAR in any way supports claimms that Jomanda has phychic powers you uttserly (i mean utterly) failed!

See the earlier presented evidence to support this belief:

What earlier "evidence"? You havent shown any supporting scientific evidence for you claims about Jomanda. where is the evidence about Randi?

'Randi is in my opinion not a reliable option' Others are, in my opinion. Randi was some kind of magician.

the point isnt about the PERSON it is about the foundation JREF whcih has legal documentation which offers the million dollars and which proposed an OBJECTIVE test for which Randi does not even have to be present!

Prof. Piet Borst e.g. is a wellknown highly respected researcher.

Argument from authority. Scientists can and have been fooled by magicians parlour tricks.

If you really (not just find a stick to hit the dog) want to know how Jomanda feels about it, contact her.

Sorry that is shifting the burden. YOU made claims YOU support them. dont ask others to supply the research for YOUR claims! I may as well ask you to go and research the Unicorns on my front lawn.

I really do not know and I do not care,

What you know or care is beside the point1 If you claim Jomanda had powers then it is for you to supply evidence. You havent done so! In the absence of evidence it is reasonable for people to assume she hasnt any powers.

It seems to me that everybody and everything that does not match you believeconviction is warded off. Maybe you (to protect your belief) even belief the Chinese-government is crazy.

What the chinese government believe is a Red Herring (or where Falun gong is concerned probably a good straw man for your detractors unless of course the chinese government made a statement about Jomanda). did the chinese government say anything about Jomanda? If they didnt then shut up about them.

China Accepts The Paranormal: amazing Powers of New Children
"Since 1974 the Chinese government has discovered over 100.000 children who have extraordinary psychic powers. These children, when blindfolded, can "see" with either their ears, nose, mouth, tongue, armpits, hands or feet.

Oh they did! Well start another thread on this unsupported rubbish then! Unless it has to do with Jomanda. It is clearly argument from authority.

The "New Children" have come to Earth with a clear purpose. These kids know who they are and why they are here. They carry a new vibration and have come to transform the consciousness of humanity"
http://www.linkgrinder.com/articles/Super_Psychic_Kids_Amazing_Powers_of_New_Children_1714_0_article.html

LOL! Please please please start another therad on this subject. we all need a laugh now and again.

By the way the Weekly world News once ran a headline "Marilyn Monroe returns to Earth - As a Lettuce! if and when jomanda arrives here: http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/
(ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weekly_World_News) her incarnation will be complete

Maybe so in some cases or in fantasy. In other cases reality seems different and reality proves that people in some cases are not willing to research and only able to act in cases which are complying with own beliefs. Sadly, because when Jomanda had healings in Tiel, sometimes 12.000 visitors cam a day !

Where is your evidence that
1. healings happened that day
2. 12,000 people came that day

DUTCH MINISTRY HEALTHCARE (VWS)
http://www.minvws.nl/en/
( source - letter, 2 February 2004, director Innovatie, professions and ethics, drs. N.C. O.) -
...snip...What counts is, if a treatment method after tests has shown to be effective, whether the method is alternative or not"[/i]

Note the bit after the snip?

DUTCH HEALTH COUNCIL (GR)
http://www.gr.nl/index.php?phpLang=en
( source - letter, 16 April 2004, Dr. M. v. L., general secretary) - ...There is thus no Health point of view in this matter"[/i]

NO point of viev is not supporting evidence.

CARE RESEARCH NETHERLANDS (ZONMW) I
http://www.zonmw.nl/en/home.html ( source - letter, 26 april 2004, H.J.S. director ) -
"Concerning the by Jomanda applied treatment ZONMW has the point of view that all new treatments thoroughly must be examined on their effectiveness, before applying these on patients and to link health-claims to them. This research has to take place according to the standards in the scientific world in an independent and controllable manner and must also be repeatable"

Yes. where and when did this ever happen in the case of Jomanda? that would then be evidence.

ARE TO LIMIT OURSELVES TO DCOTORS who practition acupuncture, homeopaths and naturemedicine"[/i]

Because they wont waste their resourses testing Jomanda is no reason why Jomanda couldnt pay for the tests herself!

DUTCH MINISTER OF HEALTH HOOGERVORST
( source- 15 july 2004, ouf of name, director Innovation, drs.N.O.)
- "In my opinion it is to the practitioners themselves to show effectiveness of their methods. For this they can apply researchproposals with the organisations mentioned earlier in my letter from 2 february 2004 (RGO, GR, ZonMw)"

exactly! Why cant jomanda fund the research herself. Offer to pay for non biased scientific research?

DUTCH GOVERNEMT: PVDA PARTY
Sent: friday 17 september 2004
RE: - KNMG (as everybody) is silent concerning Jomanda
..snip... The public governing board then tries consequently also to watch the public interest a bit. I think honestly that we do not differ about that from opinion.

Exactly ! for "the public interest" please dont confuse it with "what the public is interested in" or "what is popular" . Try using "purse" instead of "interest". why should the State fund research into the paranormal?

[/quote]

X.X.
Member PVDA-party

Nothing was heard ever again from PVDA on this matter. Claiming....words...but deeds....

Really? How do I know? I note you dont use the actual name. You seem to be happy to suggest people contact Jomanda but you fail to supply the name of the person in the PVDA party. who was it? Again in the absence of a name how am I to know any such correspondence ever occurred? since yu are so happy to claim that this letter was sent and nothing happened since how is it you refuse to say the persons name?

# The Case of Royal Raymond Rife
Royal Raymond Rife was the inventor of the Universal Microscope which he presented to the world in 1933. The scientist who discovered that the unique electronic 'signature' of each specific disease can be modified to eliminate nearly every affliction known to man
- Why is the pharmaceutical industry afraid of this man ?
...snip

dont know if they are but it has nothing to do with Jomanda has it?


Drifting and shifting the burden as a world's voice on matters scientific was not the matter at hand. And it has no impact, when you think unlawfull handling is okay.
DUTCH CODE OF LAW: ORAL AGREEMENT


PROF. PIET BORST & HEALTHCARE GAMBLING
Prof. Piet Borst took on a bet, on national television (12 August 2000), in the tv programme 'The Black Sheep' of bco VARA, with Jomanda, to research Jomanda's energised water with the following words: - [Piet Borst]-"..May I make a proposal, a proposal that you (Jomanda) energise 1000 bottles of water, and that we then take a 1000 bottles which are not energised, and that we look, if there is any difference..." -[Jomanda ] - "Gladly" -[Piet Borst[/quote]

Great! this IS a test. What was the outcome?

Quackbuster organization Skepis twist and turn the facts. Because in reality Jomanda did and does dare, but Prof. Piet Borst chickened out. It does have impact when one 'claims' to be a quackbuster, which in reality one is obviously not in this case. Put up or shut up, is a well heard statement by the quackbusters.

Okay so where is the 1000 bottles of "energised" water? When did jomanda supply them?

I am Irish skeptics will gladly take say 100 bottles. could you actually supply a litre of "energised" water and we can seperate it into 100 bottles and test it? Better yet. we supply the water and jomanda energise it and send it back! then in a double blind test we both analyse the water and test it on 200 people and look to see if there is any differences.

What does Jomanda claim the "enigerised" can do that normal water does not do?

If under proper test conditions you cant tell the difference and it does not have any significant difference from the placebo (normal water) will you then accept this is NOT evidence of Jomanda having powers.

Now all you have to do is supply a liter of "normal" water and a liter of "energised" water taken from the same source as the normal water. Two kilos- that wont cost you ten euros to post to ireland I would not think.

I think we could get someone to run them through a HPLC machine with a multi channel analyser. We might also get some medical doctors to give it to patients though you would have to get an MD to collect the water (even if only buying it in a shop) and seal it and make sure it is not tampered with. Actually it might even be done by a legal officer who buys two bottled of sealed shop water hands one to Jomanda to "energise" takes it back and marks both bottles (say bottle A and and then gives then to skeptics to test. The skeptics wont know what bottle is what and they will test them.
How does that sound? My expecvtations are that there wont be any difference between the water in the two bottles.

So what is "energised" water?

ISAW

FE30033 wrote:

Some people seem to be more troubled and worried about how much money a person earns, that thousands and thousands of women including Sylvia Millecam: the matter/claim/argument at hand.

Skeptics may think it is silly but they do not usually mind when people have personal beliefs in aliens /religion/ paranormal etc. skeptics begin to get concerned when people make CLAIMS about these so called "paranormal" powers and skeptis REALLY GET CONCERNED when people CHARGE FOR their services.

Usually if someone claims to practic astrology/healing etc. and do it anonomously and dont contradict medicine skeptics are happy to tolerate them. when they claim science is wrong and that they have powers and when they charge money or make material gain based on their claims then skeptics are interested.

ISAW

FE30033 wrote:

Not farcical or hypocritical (speaking of ad-hominems), but realistic and 'skeptical'. I see your fantasy apart from the one, supposed by you, Jomanda has. Trying to hide/link it behind others (fantasies) does not make it less of a fantasy.

shifting the burden. You cam in claiming "i believe in Jomandas powers" someone else says "I dont ! I prefer to believe it an scientific alternative." You then ridicule the scientific alternative! It isnt for them to prove science. they didnt arrive here making claims about Jomanda. YOU did! they don't have to prove an alternative.

I do not believe you. Where is the evidence of your claim/belief 'not suitable'?

Same again. shiften the burden! It isnt for then to show PEAR up as a bad source (although they might well do so). YOU supplied PEAR and when asked how PEAR in any way supports claimms that Jomanda has phychic powers you uttserly (i mean utterly) failed!

See the earlier presented evidence to support this belief:

What earlier "evidence"? You havent shown any supporting scientific evidence for you claims about Jomanda. where is the evidence about Randi?

'Randi is in my opinion not a reliable option' Others are, in my opinion. Randi was some kind of magician.

the point isnt about the PERSON it is about the foundation JREF whcih has legal documentation which offers the million dollars and which proposed an OBJECTIVE test for which Randi does not even have to be present!

Prof. Piet Borst e.g. is a wellknown highly respected researcher.

Argument from authority. Scientists can and have been fooled by magicians parlour tricks.

If you really (not just find a stick to hit the dog) want to know how Jomanda feels about it, contact her.

Sorry that is shifting the burden. YOU made claims YOU support them. dont ask others to supply the research for YOUR claims! I may as well ask you to go and research the Unicorns on my front lawn.

I really do not know and I do not care,

What you know or care is beside the point1 If you claim Jomanda had powers then it is for you to supply evidence. You havent done so! In the absence of evidence it is reasonable for people to assume she hasnt any powers.

It seems to me that everybody and everything that does not match you believeconviction is warded off. Maybe you (to protect your belief) even belief the Chinese-government is crazy.

What the chinese government believe is a Red Herring (or where Falun gong is concerned probably a good straw man for your detractors unless of course the chinese government made a statement about Jomanda). did the chinese government say anything about Jomanda? If they didnt then shut up about them.

China Accepts The Paranormal: amazing Powers of New Children
"Since 1974 the Chinese government has discovered over 100.000 children who have extraordinary psychic powers. These children, when blindfolded, can "see" with either their ears, nose, mouth, tongue, armpits, hands or feet.

Oh they did! Well start another thread on this unsupported rubbish then! Unless it has to do with Jomanda. It is clearly argument from authority.

The "New Children" have come to Earth with a clear purpose. These kids know who they are and why they are here. They carry a new vibration and have come to transform the consciousness of humanity"
http://www.linkgrinder.com/articles/Super_Psychic_Kids_Amazing_Powers_of_New_Children_1714_0_article.html

LOL! Please please please start another therad on this subject. we all need a laugh now and again.

By the way the Weekly world News once ran a headline "Marilyn Monroe returns to Earth - As a Lettuce! if and when jomanda arrives here: http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/
(ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weekly_World_News) her incarnation will be complete

Maybe so in some cases or in fantasy. In other cases reality seems different and reality proves that people in some cases are not willing to research and only able to act in cases which are complying with own beliefs. Sadly, because when Jomanda had healings in Tiel, sometimes 12.000 visitors cam a day !

Where is your evidence that
1. healings happened that day
2. 12,000 people came that day

DUTCH MINISTRY HEALTHCARE (VWS)
http://www.minvws.nl/en/
( source - letter, 2 February 2004, director Innovatie, professions and ethics, drs. N.C. O.) -
...snip...What counts is, if a treatment method after tests has shown to be effective, whether the method is alternative or not"[/i]

Note the bit after the snip?

DUTCH HEALTH COUNCIL (GR)
http://www.gr.nl/index.php?phpLang=en
( source - letter, 16 April 2004, Dr. M. v. L., general secretary) - ...There is thus no Health point of view in this matter"[/i]

NO point of viev is not supporting evidence.

CARE RESEARCH NETHERLANDS (ZONMW) I
http://www.zonmw.nl/en/home.html ( source - letter, 26 april 2004, H.J.S. director ) -
"Concerning the by Jomanda applied treatment ZONMW has the point of view that all new treatments thoroughly must be examined on their effectiveness, before applying these on patients and to link health-claims to them. This research has to take place according to the standards in the scientific world in an independent and controllable manner and must also be repeatable"

Yes. where and when did this ever happen in the case of Jomanda? that would then be evidence.

ARE TO LIMIT OURSELVES TO DCOTORS who practition acupuncture, homeopaths and naturemedicine"[/i]

Because they wont waste their resourses testing Jomanda is no reason why Jomanda couldnt pay for the tests herself!

DUTCH MINISTER OF HEALTH HOOGERVORST
( source- 15 july 2004, ouf of name, director Innovation, drs.N.O.)
- "In my opinion it is to the practitioners themselves to show effectiveness of their methods. For this they can apply researchproposals with the organisations mentioned earlier in my letter from 2 february 2004 (RGO, GR, ZonMw)"

exactly! Why cant jomanda fund the research herself. Offer to pay for non biased scientific research?

DUTCH GOVERNEMT: PVDA PARTY
Sent: friday 17 september 2004
RE: - KNMG (as everybody) is silent concerning Jomanda
..snip... The public governing board then tries consequently also to watch the public interest a bit. I think honestly that we do not differ about that from opinion.

Exactly ! for "the public interest" please dont confuse it with "what the public is interested in" or "what is popular" . Try using "purse" instead of "interest". why should the State fund research into the paranormal?

[/quote]

X.X.
Member PVDA-party

Nothing was heard ever again from PVDA on this matter. Claiming....words...but deeds....

Really? How do I know? I note you dont use the actual name. You seem to be happy to suggest people contact Jomanda but you fail to supply the name of the person in the PVDA party. who was it? Again in the absence of a name how am I to know any such correspondence ever occurred? since yu are so happy to claim that this letter was sent and nothing happened since how is it you refuse to say the persons name?

# The Case of Royal Raymond Rife
Royal Raymond Rife was the inventor of the Universal Microscope which he presented to the world in 1933. The scientist who discovered that the unique electronic 'signature' of each specific disease can be modified to eliminate nearly every affliction known to man
- Why is the pharmaceutical industry afraid of this man ?
...snip

dont know if they are but it has nothing to do with Jomanda has it?


Drifting and shifting the burden as a world's voice on matters scientific was not the matter at hand. And it has no impact, when you think unlawfull handling is okay.
DUTCH CODE OF LAW: ORAL AGREEMENT


PROF. PIET BORST & HEALTHCARE GAMBLING
Prof. Piet Borst took on a bet, on national television (12 August 2000), in the tv programme 'The Black Sheep' of bco VARA, with Jomanda, to research Jomanda's energised water with the following words: - [Piet Borst]-"..May I make a proposal, a proposal that you (Jomanda) energise 1000 bottles of water, and that we then take a 1000 bottles which are not energised, and that we look, if there is any difference..." -[Jomanda ] - "Gladly" -[Piet Borst[/quote]

Great! this IS a test. What was the outcome?

Quackbuster organization Skepis twist and turn the facts. Because in reality Jomanda did and does dare, but Prof. Piet Borst chickened out. It does have impact when one 'claims' to be a quackbuster, which in reality one is obviously not in this case. Put up or shut up, is a well heard statement by the quackbusters.

Okay so where is the 1000 bottles of "energised" water? When did jomanda supply them?

I am Irish skeptics will gladly take say 100 bottles. could you actually supply a litre of "energised" water and we can seperate it into 100 bottles and test it? Better yet. we supply the water and jomanda energise it and send it back! then in a double blind test we both analyse the water and test it on 200 people and look to see if there is any differences.

What does Jomanda claim the "enigerised" can do that normal water does not do?

If under proper test conditions you cant tell the difference and it does not have any significant difference from the placebo (normal water) will you then accept this is NOT evidence of Jomanda having powers.

Now all you have to do is supply a liter of "normal" water and a liter of "energised" water taken from the same source as the normal water. Two kilos- that wont cost you ten euros to post to ireland I would not think.

I think we could get someone to run them through a HPLC machine with a multi channel analyser. We might also get some medical doctors to give it to patients though you would have to get an MD to collect the water (even if only buying it in a shop) and seal it and make sure it is not tampered with. Actually it might even be done by a legal officer who buys two bottled of sealed shop water hands one to Jomanda to "energise" takes it back and marks both bottles (say bottle A and and then gives then to skeptics to test. The skeptics wont know what bottle is what and they will test them.
How does that sound? My expecvtations are that there wont be any difference between the water in the two bottles.

So what is "energised" water?

6th

Mordeth wrote:

wth? as soon as you leave the paranormal board you start demanding proof of people?

Check every post I've ever made .. I never tell people what to believe. In this case the OP is presuming that if people cant prove he's wrong then he must be right.

6th

ISAW wrote:

Skeptics may think it is silly but they do not usually mind when people have personal beliefs in aliens /religion/ paranormal etc. skeptics begin to get concerned when people make CLAIMS about these so called "paranormal" powers and skeptis REALLY GET CONCERNED when people CHARGE FOR their services.

Usually if someone claims to practic astrology/healing etc. and do it anonomously and dont contradict medicine skeptics are happy to tolerate them. when they claim science is wrong and that they have powers and when they charge money or make material gain based on their claims then skeptics are interested.

Perfect post. 100%

My problem with Jomanda, is that she offering her "healings" as an alternative to medicine. As ISAW has poited out, most dont have a problem with Complimentary treatments as long as science and medicine isnt throw aside.

Again with regards to Mordeths post, my beliefs are my beliefs.

ISAW

FE30033 wrote:

Sorry, but is is. That 'something' (medical records, testiomonials) is not good enough for you (as you stated) has to do with you, and only you. Thus your problem.

Testimonials are NOT scientific evidence! they are advertising. They are not reliable! Under strict controlled conditions what people see is reliable. Otherwise, as I have already pointed out, millions of people can testify that they saw the statue of Liberty disappear! Do you believe it did?

As for medical records. Yes they ARE evidence. But they must show for example that someone had cancer that they had no other medical treatment and that the cancer disappeared. If you could produce five such cases I would be really convinced that this should be tested.

But you have not produced any medical evidence.

All you have done is suggest that there is medixcal evidence. Please

1. Name five people
2. name their general practitioner.
3. list when they were first diagnosed and what they were diagnosed with
4. list any treatment they had and the medical doctors involved
5. list when they met jomanda, how many times and what she did.
6. state if they are alive today

Now I assume if people really believe they were cured by Jomanda ( which is not proof they were cured it is just their belief) you could supply their names. given you claim 12,000 people arrived in a single day you should be able to supply FIVE cases of miracle cures. Can you do that? You clainm you have medical evidence. where is it?

#(1)# In daily life, when you e.g. take medicine, do you also check the 'evidence' whether or not it has been proven effective ? Do you ask your prescribing doctor to 'show you where it is' ?

i am not the one claiming the Medicine works. YOU are! The company claiming the medicine works has strict legal guidlines to follow, the medicine MUST be tested under law! those tests ARE available!

You seem to forget that what you are saying, is exactly a point of me, in my very first posting. Your believeconviction - VS- Jomanda, mine, thousands of Jomanda-visitors. But your belief is not supported by nothing (only fantasy, which could be right, but because you have nothing in hand, no research, no evidence), while the believeconviction of Jomanda, me and thousands of Jomanda-visitors is supported by proof (medical records, testiomonials, doctors/visitors) which could and should be investigated so that scientific evidence can be obtained, because only then, and only then you are and should be able to draw a conclusion Jomanda does or does not work.

this is nonsence! It isnt a case od "balance" Skeptics are not making the claim YOU are! You are claiming that that Jomanda hads powers. it is for YOU
to supply evidence to prove it! You cant claim that skeptics have to prove the negative i.e. she has NOT powers!

Put it this way. Suppose I claim Jomanda caused someones death. i get the State to put her in court and accuse her of causing someiones death. I claim I believe she caused a death and she says she believs she didnt cause the death. Should she have to prove she didnt cause the death or should the State (who claims she DID cause it) have to assume the negative until proof positive arrives to prove she did cvause death? It isnt a case of "balancing beliefs" it is a case of those making the claim having to prove it and the negative being assumed if evidence is absent.

Similarly one can assume she does NOT have powers until proof positive arrives!

A cancertumor is gone or it is not. Simple as that.

What is the name and case history of the patients whers cancer tumors have gone? What is the name and contact addresses of their doctors? YOU claimed to have medical records. Where are they?

So where does it not say ? Jomanda claims, see her website, her books. Thousands of Jomanda visitors, testimonial-doctors etc experience personally these powers.

What medical doctors have evidence for these powers?

When you presumptively assume she does not have these powers, at a distance without having personally experienced Jomanda,

When Jomanda was in court accused of causing the deqath of Millicam do you think it was wrong to assume she did NOT cause the death and to expect others to provide evidence?

#(2)# What do you think and claim about paranormal powers in general ?

2.1
I am a skeptic. I believe claims require supporting evidence if they wish to be validated. In this case YOU havent provided any convincing supporting scientific evidence.

PEAR confirmed (see earlier postings) that phenomena such as those demonstrated by Jomanda is supported by collective scientific evidence. e.g.
- Information, Consciousness, and Health -

that is just a listing of a URL. WHERE in that document is any confirmation of what was claimed? I suspect you didnt even read the documents you listed did you? It is a standard requirement of citation that one had read and understood the earlier work.

Jessica Utts confirmed.....etc etc.

But like saying "doctors claimed" this is just an unsupported claim. WHERE does this confirmation take place? Where in the publication? Where is the actual test Utts did and how can one repeat that test?

You seem to think that people that references to someone like "a scientist" who is continually listed in Weekly World News is evidence. It isnt! you have to show the publication and WHERE in the publication the test was done which specifically supports what you claim!

If you really (and not just want to find a stick in your mind to think you are able to hit the dog with) want to know (more) 'where', contact PEAR, Jessica Utts. If you do not like the message, do not shoot the messenger.

No sorry this isnt good enough! YOU made the claim. First Saying "Jessica Utts did research into the paranormal" proves nothing about Jomanda. But it proves nothing about the paranormal either. You have to show specifically WHAT Utts tested, how it was tested and where and when the test was done and what conculsions can be drawn for it. Otherwise you are just cutting and pasting a reference. If you tride to publish a parer by following this method or if you tried to do it in a thesis your supervisor would find out by using exactly the same methods I am doing or you would be exposed by not actually having read the sources you claim as back up.

In short .
1. Utts is not backup for jomanda is she?
2. You didnt read any of Utts research and are ignorant of it arent you?

Please go and read it.

#(3)# Do you think, claim that you know it better than PEAR ?

3.1. At lease I have heard of PEAR before. Your "argument from authority" will not work. In any case
You have not shown PEAR confirms Jomanda.
You seem not to have read anythinr by PEAR as you only refer to titles and dont seem to be able to quote from the sources you provide.

#(4)# Are you aware, that the scientific evidence you are asking for in Jomanda's case is in fact an unreality, a fantasy ?

4.1 So you therefore admit that there is NO scientific evidence for Jomandas so called powers. If there is no evidence for Jomanda cousing a death ( maybe she did cause it but there is no convincing evidence) we can assume she is NOT guilty and leave it at that. But if there is no scientific evidence for her powers you insist we assume she has then and we dont leave it at that? dont you note a logical contradicion here?

#(5)# Or do you believe there is scientific evidence / research done into Jomanda ?
- If yes, how do you know ? Where is it ?
- If no, why do you ask for it, if you know it is not there ?

You claim she had powers. It is for you to produce the evidence. Otherwise the claim falls. Just as otherwise the claim she caused a death falls. One can assume innocence ie. that she is NOT guilty if there is no evidence. One can also assume she has NOT powers if there is no evidence. Maybe she DID cause the death and maybe she HAS powers but until we see the evidence we cant assume she did can we?

Well, in reality the book is, the medical record is, the doctor is, ...

What are the names of these doctors and patients that were involved in miraculous cures. since you claim 12,000 visited her on one day surely you can produce FIVE medically doccumented cases. Can you?

#(6) Would you put in a book for the whole world to read that you have performed a miracle if you knew it were untrue, while also very very awarely knowing the whole of the country is breathing down you neck and trying to bring you down on the slightest mistake ?

What I would do is beside the point. whether others have done it :
http://www.amazon.com/Flim-Flam-Psychics-Unicorns-Other-Delusions/dp/customer-reviews/0879751983

I am not responsible for your bad sight or lack in reading. Source is mentioned earlier.

You ARE responsible for showning you actually READ and UNDERSTAND your source!

#(5)# Why is that relevant to you ? What will it show you ?

Good Grief!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citation
"Citations permit readers to put claims to the test by consulting earlier works."

Have you consultedd the earlier work or just cut and pasted it?

#(6)# Why should I belief any word you say ?

Because you can consult the earlier work!
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/106318/statue_of_liberty/

That is full of testimonials!

One great quote from an observer "I have never a Statue of Liberty disappear as much as this one did!"

If you are so very good at saying e.g. things are wrong, not true, not real, what you did not say, what can not happen and what is not possible, you surely must have a very good expert opinion about things which are right, true, real, waht you did say, what can happen and what is possible.
#(7)# What is to your opinion real evidence made out off ?
#(8)# What will satisfy you ? What will be 'good enough for you' ? What do you need , what will it take so that you will belief Jomanda. so that you will belief a fellowhuman ?

What I believe does not come into it! What is an objective measurement that anyonme can look at does. Make a claim about Jomanda. Suggst a test she can do which will show if she has power or show she has not the power she claims. Then we can do the test. What powers do you suggest Jomanda has?

#(10)# Where did I say that was evidence of Jomanda curing anything ?

Hey what happened to #(9)# ? You jumped from #(8)# to #(10)#!
You claim Jomanda has powers. wher is the EVIDENCE?

I presented the 'S.M.-case' as a matter of discussion and look where you end up. I like to stick to the point presented initially. The matter at hand. I do not like shifting and drifting away in fantasy, before you know it it will be 'two weeks later' (see Fairytale), and before I'll know it a UFO might even land.

Who is shifting topic now. If you want to start a discussion on evidence for UFOs start another discussion. This one is about providing evidence that Jomanda has powers!

You do not belief people and maybe even belief anything, as you state continuesly, unless certain conditions are full-filled which are 'good enough for you'.

Wrong! Objectively verfiable empirical evidence is what I require form you. where is it?

you really might mean, claim/state Jomanda does not work, because if you would believe Jomanda did work, you wouldn't constantly ask for evidence.

You are at it again! Trying to shift teh burden to getting me to prove the negative. I have asked you before several times and you didnt answer me. where idid I say jomanda is not performing miracles? You refused to answer because I didnt fall into that trap! Not dont try to shift the burden onto what I believe! What I believe does not matter! YOU claim Jomanda has powers. Provide evidence or withdraw the claim!

#(11)# If this conclusion is wrong, do you mean to say (based on what you have read) Jomanda does work or could work ?

I really think you should look up what skeptics are! You didnt do that either did you? Try looking up "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

Not speaking out, not making a claim, not taking a stand, not answering questions, drifting and shifting, can speak, claim, answer lots and lots of things on itsself.

It avoids the shifting of the topic to definding personal beliefs and proving negatives and shifting burdens. YOU made the claims about Jomanda. YOU supply the evidence! What anyone else believes has nothing to do with YOU providing back up for YOUR claims!

I presented 'S.M. The True Story' as a matter of discussion. If you do not believe it and/or all you can say/claim is 'where is the evidence' (see Fairytale), good for you, if that makes you feel very happy and good about yourself, who am I to contradict you. I did not present this case to convince you, if you should think that. The only one who can convince you, is you, yourself ! Not others ! Not evidence !

this is nore rubbish. what i feel about things makes NO DIFFERENCE! What the EVIDENCE suggests is what is important. You havent presented any! SM is a case about whether Jomanda caused a death. It isnt proof of Jamandas powers! the evidence was not there to say Jomanda caused the death. so it was assumed she didnt. The evidence isnt there to show she has psychic powers so one can assume she hasnt until evidence arrives!

ISAW

FE30033 wrote:

#(1)# Do or do you not think Jomanda miracles can take place ?

You diodnt look up whay a skeptic is did you?
skeptics dont know. If paranormal powers exist they push science to extraordinary leimit. But YOU are making the claim. It is for YOU to support it. Please dont try to turn supporting YOUR claim into a personal attack on people asking you to back it up.

According to your own way of reasoning, if you do not answer this question, I will just as easily assume (based on what I have read from you) you realy claim 'Jomanda miracles do not take place'.

somebody must have put a logic bomb in your head! Please look up "proving a negative" One can ASSUME the neagtive however in the absence of evidence. This is true across science. One assumes a theory to be true unless some test falsifies the theory.

I can and will only be able to change my mind, see that my assumption is wrong, if you provide, your own argument: 'the evidence' of that assumption being wrong.

shifting the burden again. Believe what you want. that is your OPINION. But when you come here and claim opinion is FACT you have a problem. I can claim unicorns on my lawn and believe it. I can come here and insist it! I can say any test people suggest is not working becausr the measurements dont show up unicorns because the Unicorns have ways of making it look like ther is nio evidnece. So, what is the difference between no evidence for unicorns and NO UNICORNS?

Both are unrealistic.

It isnt a balance of opinions! You claim a fact and you can support it!

Scientific evidence, that's what Jomanda has been asking for 30 years, as stated in my very first posting,

so what? asking for a test isnt doing one is it?

while proof (but not scientific) of miracles is present (e.g. confirmation by a Dutch Healthcare Inspcetion doctor).

dont come to a skeptic group and claim "proof" but no "scientific proof"
What is the name of the doctor?

... one scientific studie has been performed (332 cases),

Where is the study published. If you cant produce it then what is the difference between claims of a study (unicorn) and no study?

If you really, and not just trying to find a stick with which you think in fantasy you can hit the dog with, want to know contact Jomanda for names of doctors and their qualifications.

Shifting the burden again! YOU claim it! YOU support it!

Okay then NASA have done experiments into dragons it is in an obscure part of nasa called the Carl Sagan Dragon In My Garage institute. If you dont believe me contact NASA.

Why not publish ? Some have been published (including names/qualifications), and guess what happened.... no-one seemed to be actually 'really' interested after all. E.g.

Since you claim it please care to supply the names as published?

mr. H. E. (pg.61) - "Dear Jomanda,... I am a heart patient, who had to be in the academic hospital in Maastricht on Wednesday at 9 o'clock on an empty stomach

this is just a story in a book by Jomanda. It is not a medical record verified by a doctor. Self published books are notoriously bad sources of scientific empirically verifiable evidnnce. What is the name of the patient and the doctor whho handled her?

Ms T.S. (p. 51)[/b] - " Dear Jomanda, in St.Lucas Andreas hospital in Amsterdam,...
mr. E.W.B. (pg. 24) -"diabetic patient....

Ditto. Where is the earlier medical records of these patients? Plenty of fakes have done the same thing ( published records which were untrue). where is hte evidence which actually shows these patients medical records?

#(4)# If someone goes to a doctor, and being refered to a hospital, where a heartattack is being ascertained, and a appointment is made for a second research later, and a person goes to a healing of Jomanda in the place of that sick-person (note - also for Sylvia Millecam people went to healings), and the sick-person after that goes to the second appointment in another hospital, and there after research it shows that 'nothing can be seen anymore of a heartattack', conclusion ?

What is the name of the patient and wher are the actual medical records. what are the names of the doctors. since the patient is cured she cant be worried about paying higher insurance or anything about that and having been cured she should be prepared to release the records. so where are they?
If you cant produce them it is only a heardsay storyand not verifiable evidence.

#(5)# Provide me the evidence of what you claim, otherwise I do not believe you, what did I claim to be true in reference to PEAR as you make this claim as an answer to my PEAR quote ? You should be able to support this! If you cant you should admit it and withdraw the claim!

LOL! sorry that wont work either! I made a COUNTER CLAIM i.e. YOU made the claim and in the absence of evidence the counter claim is assumed true!

it is clear that you seem not to have actually read any PEAR research. If you had you would be familiar with it. All you have posted is titles and pressreleases and you havent shown any understanding of the detail of the research since you havent quoted from it! the support for my counter claim come from the fact that you listed several PEAR papers but you supplied no quotes form any of them which showed anything to back up any argument.

You seem to be confused a bit. I quote PEAR.

No you dont! you cite titles of PEAR. Where did you supply a quyote from any of you citations which show that it supports the argument you are making and that you understand the actual research?

I quess I could quote them a hundred times if necessary. PEAR claimed that they have "amassed an immense body of empirical evidence that indicates that effects such as those described are empirically demonstrable under controlled laboratory conditions. PEAR speaks of collective scientific evidence supporting phenomena such as those demonstrated by Jomanda, even so much evidence that the term "paranormal" should be inappropriate" and "normal" is more upto reality.

Even this above quote attributed to PEAR is questionable. Where does PEAR state the above i.e. that PEAR state that " <quotation>".

Clkkearly you have misquoted PEAR and not quoted from any research by them but by cut and pasted third hand sources.

Where does PEAR support phenomena such as (or even anything like that ) demonstrated by Jomanda ?

To maybe make it more understandable, PEAR speaks of that phenomena such as those demonstrated by Jomanda are "normal", in their expert opinion.

WHERE does PEAR state that?

That does not mean PEAR have researched Jomanda. But I guess you could have figured that out by yourself.

So what? what powers does Jomanda claim to have demonstrated and where did this demonstration happen? Where do PEAR confiorm similar powers demonstrated by ANYONE anywhere?

FE30033

6th wrote:

FE, can you prove this chick performs miracles?

Can you prove she can not ?

I do not feel like keep repeating earlier mentioned matters due to others lack of reading, ignorance, unwillingness or not knowing how to deal with these matters else than shifting, drifting or headstrong keeping repeating questions which have been answered earlier.

I write. I am no researcher. I do not have to proof anything: a desperate straw to try to shoot the messenger so that the own imagination or believe-conviction can be kept up as a pink elephant that the message might be worthless or justifies ignoring the message, the content. I presented the 'Sylvia Millecam-The True Story' as a matter of discussion in which claims are made and out of which many things could be concluded in and out of readers (not mine) own judgement, belief and responsibility. Readers can do with the story as they like. I think I have make myself/this story very clear, supported the case enough and answered enough questions. At least an attempt, tried to. Beter 'something' than 'nothing'. And if that is 'not good enough'. So what. Fine. Not my problem. Life is a bitch, goes on and then we die.

If this (question) bothers you the most, you made yourself and your priorities (in life) very clear. I just think and belief different.

JOMANDA: PARALYSED & WALKING AGAIN
( source - Tv-programme 'Hier en Nu', bco NCRV, 28 dec 1992)
[ Voice over ] -"About two years ago M.C. got paralysed to both legs, doktors could not help him because it would be mental, that's how he came to Jomanda with his father, he was treated on stage, and what exactly happened he does not remember" -[ M.C ] - "the first time at Jomanda, then is still getting used to it, you see several things happening, people falls in trance, some people sit laughing, you experience all kind of things, the first time it is getting used to it" ....... "after treatment....then after some time I got out of the 'spiritual narcosis', Jomanda helped with that, and then Jomanda grabbed me by my feet, and at first I thought 'would do I feel now?', and then I realised, I had feeling back in my legs, what you can not believe in that moment.." - [ Father M.C.] - "Yes, I did not know what I was seeing, just like my son is saying, the crazy things you see at Jomanda, I repeat again, this you can just not tell to the outsid world, I must believe in it, while rahter you can not, I have for 1,5 years in the kitchen, I have caried him everywhere and then suddenly he can just walk again, I tell you, a miracle has just taken place, yes, honestly"

CHILD MIRACLE HEALING BY JOMANDA
(source- dutch Tv-programme 'RondomTien', bco NCRV, 15 febr 1994, Violet Falkenburg)
[VF] - " Hello Mrs Schierboom, when your son Peter was born, he seemed very sick. What was wrong ? -[MS]- "He had the disease of recklinghouse? and in a severe bad way. Thereby he has several diseases and disorders" -[VF]-"How long did they say he would life ?" -[MS]-"That was not really to predict, with recklinghouse, but the forsights were very sad" -[VF]-"But an indication has been given, with a few years you should have been very happy and gratefull. How old is Peter now ? -[MS]- "Yes, and he is 4,5 years old" -[VF]- "What has happened ?' -[MS]-"We met medium Jomanda 3 years ago and that has done great deeds for us but especially for him" -[VF]-"What is exactly been healed with Peter, if you can call it that ?" -[MS]-"He had 2 brain-tumors and the one which was the most threathening danger has disappeared, they can not find anymore" -[VF]-"On the photograph's that were taken ?" -[MS]- "Yes" - [VF]-"First Peter had 2 braintumors and now only 1 ? " -[MS] - "Yes" -[VF]-"And there was also a warning for epilepsy-attacks ?" -[MS]-"Yes, those Peter should have had years ago already and he still does not have them" -[VF]-"And did you go with Peter to Jomanda in Tiel or did it occur in another way ?" -[MS]-"We went every time to Jomanda in Tiel, every week in the beginning and lateron every two weeks" -[VF]-"And I have understood that Jomanda telephoned you sometimes ?" -[MS]-"Yes, one and a half year ago, when it suddenly went worse with Peter, which Jomanda could not have know because I did not have personal contact with Jomanda then, and then Jomanda suddenly telephoned me 'Se had gotten the message from the Divine World that is was going worse with Peter', and Jomanda asked me if she was right, and she was right. We just had had that morning the information that Peter's sickness was spreading, and was also now starting in his back, and Jomanda said 'I have got the message that I must help him personally', and that she has done for weeks, every day, she treated Peter trhough the telephone" -[VF to Peter]-"Peter, when Jomanda called you, what did she do ?' -[Peter]-"throw away the 'aaaaauuuw'" -[VF]-"Did that happen, Peter ? and how old are you ?" -[Peter]-"nnnjaa, and next moth I will nicely become this" (Peter sticks up 5 fingers).

6th

Answering my question with a question is only showing both you and your arguement up for what they are.

Now again I ask: Can you prove that Sylvia Millecam performs mircles? Yes or No.

I ask because you have made claims that she has/can. I have not stated my beliefs either way so it is up to you to back up for statements.

If you are of the opinion that I am challenging your statements as a nonbeliever then I suggest you chech out this forum: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=446

Now answer the questions put to you and stop dodging them.

Btw, have you personally meet this woman or experienced her powahs first hand?

ISAW

FE30033 wrote:

Can you prove she can not ?

How many times must you be told?

Shifting the burden
proving a negative

Have you learned anything?

Please please plaese explain to me what "shifting the burden" adn "proving a negative " means so i know you understand it. Can you do that?

I write. I am no researcher. I do not have to proof anything.

Actually you have been tolfd several times now when you come to a skeptics forum and make claims you DO hae to provide evidence or withdraw the claim. You seem to ignore what you are informed. you keep resorting to the same logical fallacies and ignoring the advice you are given. this amounts to time wasting.

Now you have left off the personal attacks. they are not nearly so blatent. so I suggest you now stop the trolling and timewasting before someone complains about you ignoriong answers and asking the same questions over and over.

a desperate straw to try to shoot the messenger so that the own imagination or believe-conviction can be kept up as a pink elephant that the message might be worthless or justifies ignoring the message, the content.

I suggest you also look up "mixed methphors". If you write for a living you have a problem.

I presented the 'Sylvia Millecam-The True Story' as a matter of discussion ...

along with a load of seemingly unresearched references and claims about Jomanda's paranormal powers

snip more claims based on TV footage which prove nothing. Need i post the statue of liberty disappearing on TV again?

FE30033

ISAW wrote:

Same again. shiften the burden!

I do not want to repeat myself (see post to '6th'). All you seem te be able to do is headstrong bleating out and repeating about only one sentence. If you yourself are not able to answer my simple questions and/or ignore them selectively, I see no reason why I should make an effort to answer your questions. Most of your questions can be found in earlier postings and/or on the internet, if you do not want to make an effort to find the answers to the questions YOU ask, I will assume you are not really interested, but only want to find a stick to hit the dog with (in your fantasy), to make it go away, as you stated, but it is a fantasy to think that the matter presented will go away with me.

I have stated the matter. Do with it as you like.

ISAW

Unnecessary header in bold which claims to mean something
[quote= http://www.spaink.net/parool/20000815.html]
We received gifts we had brought ourselves. Everyone had to bring something that was collected at the entrance, and later distributed by Jomanda, who was ''led from above'' as to what gift to give to each person. Each gift came with a message. "A bottle. I am getting that it has something to do with drinking. Do you perhaps drink too much? The message is that you'd better drink a little less.'' The recipient shakes her head: no, she doesn't drink alcohol. ''Someone close to you, perhaps?'' The recipient insists. Nobody she cared much about imbibed too much. Quickly Jomanda faces the hall. ''Who brought this gift? Ah, you. Do you perhaps have problem with alcohol? Of someone close to you?'' In concentration, the giftgiver nods. Yes, she has a nephew who drinks too much. ''Well, than then message is for him. Tell him that it is not good too drink too much.'' In the hall, respect rose. That she, Jomanda, knew this about the nephew...
Lourdes in the Betuwe (Dutch) Karin Spain, Het Parool, Aug. 15, 2000.
[/quote]

Un official translation. thanks to the apologetics index for these quotes.

Jomanda's web site includes a recipe claimed to heal cancer.
[quote= http://krant.telegraaf.nl/cgi-bin/nieuwsarchief?http://www.telegraaf.nl/krant/archief/20000520/teksten/bin.jomanda.html]
A recipe by Jomanda purported to heal cancer, posted on the internet, has incurred sharp reactions from the medical community. According to Jomanda, known as a healing medium, a mixture of codliver oil, honey, and sage is enough to control and get rid of cancer

The Netherlands Cancer Institute is angry over Jomanda's recipe, because her advice is complete nonsense.

Woede over recept Jomanda tegen kanker (Dutch) De Telegraaf, May 19, 2000
[/quote]

Jomanda may have edited the website but one can not escape the long arm of the wayback machine
April 28 1999 (note the Us flag instead of the Union Jack)
http://web.archive.org/web/20000419211648/www.jomanda.nl/english.html
Heres where you get a union jack:
http://web.archive.org/web/20051025054624/http://www.jomanda.nl/

Anyone game for searching Wayback machine and checking out the "recipe" claim?

It is my sincere belief that Jomanda is not in any way paranormally gifted.
The Phenomenon - Jomanda, Ewald Vervaet,

ISAW

FE30033 wrote:

I do not want to repeat myself (see post to '6th'). All you seem te be able to do is headstrong bleating out and repeating about only one sentence. If you yourself are not able to answer my simple questions and/or ignore them selectively, I see no reason why I should make an effort to answer your questions.

Exactly! You dont see reason! The point has been made several times pointing you to logical fallacies in your reasoning.

THIS ISNT A TIT FOR TAT FORUM!

YOU CAME HERE MAKING A CLAIM. Others asked you to prove it. Asking others to prove you are wrong is SHIFTING THE BURDEN. Refusing to put up or shut up and claiming that the reason you wont put up is because others wont take the burden off you or others refuse to prove a negative is NOT a reasonable way to behave.

Most of your questions can be found in earlier postings
...
I have stated the matter. Do with it as you like.

you have been asked for evidence. yu failed to provide any. you are fast becoming a joke. please dont also become a nuisance by re posting unsupported claims.

If you wont answer the questions i have nothing further to say to you. please dont persist in reposting the same unsupported claims and asking others to prove them wrong or I will complain about you.

FE30033

6th wrote:

Perfect post. 100%
My problem with Jomanda, is that she offering her "healings" as an alternative to medicine. .

Jomanda has been calling out for 30 years for co-operation with regular medicine AND / AND. Not OR / OR. Jomanda insisted to Sylvia Millecam she visited regular doctors, which Jomanda also says at all her healings "never to exclude regular medicine".

JOMANDA: WORKING TOGETHER
( source - newspaper 'De Gelderlander', 13-04-2002 ) [ Jomanda ] - "That is very easy: there MUST be made a bridge between alternative- and regular medicine. I look at that especially because I have been busy with that for 26 years. A lot must change in that area in the Netherlands. From te reactions of people it seems that there is a lot of need to that. I do make that opening to regular medicine. I work already for years with a few doctors who are pen minded to that. But they on their turn have problems with their colleahues. I find that that batlle fight should be over for once"

JOMANDA: PSYCHIATRIC COOPERATION
(source - Dutch Tv-programma 'Big Entertainer Club', bco RTL4, 18 march 1999) - [Jomanda]- " Furthermore I work outside Netherlands, abroad, I am allowed much easier to get into hospitals. In Here in the Netherlands you have some kind of threshold to get over, while abroad I can walk over intensive cares" - [Threshold?] - " I think struggle against doctors, while it is during the years a little bit improved, but it is really struggle agianst walls, and not getting any further"- [ Due to Unbelieve?] - "I think people are afraid, that there territory is touched, while that is not true, because there will always be sick people, also in psychiatric-clinics, as I have stated before, I am allowed to do much about taking away negativity / entities from people, which is very succesfull. It seems impossible to get into psychiatric-clinic's. People just stop me, while many many people are behind iron-bars, and maybe it is thus too simple to solve somethings through the Divine World through me as medium to rescue, free these people, because the physicians are yet not able to do anything, but I am stopped, I can not go through them, and I am very sorry about that"

6th

I beg for people not to post on this anymore. The comments I would like to make about FE and his arguements (or lack of) would get me banned.

FACT is that no one here will get answers from the OP as he said he is just putting the story forward and has nothing to add to it or to back it up.

robindch

This thread is going nowhere -- closed!