I challenge any Psychic on boards.ie

watty

iamhunted wrote: »

i am assuming youve investigated every known case of reported EVPs etc to be able to make such general assumptions?

No, I didnt think so.

You actually read the entirety of the links I posted?

Your reply isn't actually relevant to what I posted.

oceanclub

If there is such a thing a psychic, and presumably at least some are interested in either (a) money or (b) proving their powers, then how come they've never passed even the preliminary tests of James Randi's $1m challenge?

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

P.

watty

There are at least two possible explanations.

1) A condition of being a Real Psychic is that you must not tell anyone, certainly not publicise it. There is a kind of logical consistency to this.
OR
2) No-one is a Psychic.

I do not have the evidence to prove which of these alternatives is true.

There may be other possible reasons. Such as
3) The Psychic powers only work if not being tested. That view is consistent with Biblical Judeo-Christian viewpoints on God's powers. Thus a "double blind" trial of prayer for healing ought to fail, even if prayer for healing does work. like a sort of Hiesenberg principle in the religious realm.


Success with Randi's Challenge would make it probable that Psychic powers do exist. A lack of people passing the 1st stage actually doesn't really prove that Psychics don't exist, though it makes a likely scenario, unless (1) or (3) is enforced in some strong fashion.

If you are writing a fantasy, making (1) or (3) or both true of course helps suspend disbelief.

oceanclub

watty wrote: »

There are at least two possible explanations.

1) A condition of being a Real Psychic is that you must not tell anyone, certainly not publicise it. There is a kind of logical consistency to this.

Do you mean to say that if a real psychic indicates in any way they are a psychic, they lose their powers?

I didn't think there was anything consistent between Christianity (or at least Catholicm) and clarvoyancy:

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2116.htm

"All forms of divination are to be rejected: recourse to Satan or demons, conjuring up the dead or other practices falsely supposed to ‘unveil’ the future. Consulting horoscopes, astrology, palm readings, interpretation of omens and lots, the phenomena of clairvoyance, and recourse to mediums all conceal a desire for power over time, history, and, in the last analysis, other human beings, as well as a wish to conciliate hidden powers. They contradict the honor, respect, and loving fear that we owe to God alone"

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2117.htm

All practices of magic or sorcery, by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at one's service and have a supernatural power over others - even if this were for the sake of restoring their health - are gravely contrary to the virtue of religion. These practices are even more to be condemned when accompanied by the intention of harming someone, or when they have recourse to the intervention of demons. Wearing charms is also reprehensible. Spiritism often implies divination or magical practices; the Church for her part warns the faithful against it. Recourse to so-called traditional cures does not justify either the invocation of evil powers or the exploitation of another's credulity.

P.

watty

oceanclub wrote: »

1) Do you mean to say that if a real psychic indicates in any way they are a psychic, they lose their powers?

2) I didn't think there was anything consistent between Christianity (or at least Catholicm) and clarvoyancy:

1) No, I didn't say that. I advanced it as a possible theory as to why no-one has got past stage 1 on Randi's challenge. A mind experiment.

2) Well both involve the Paranomal. Water to Wine, or Elijah & Prophets of Baal.

Actually Necromancy is forbidden, though King Saul practised it. Which suggests the writers believed in it. But that was not my thinking. I was thinking of various Tenach passages where testing God is forbidden (Job?). Also the Temptation of the Messiah in Gospels. Satan is rebuked for demanding God be tested (Throw yourself down and the Angels will save you).

There are several different reasons why Christianity (Catholics, Evangelicals and Anglicans are curiously united on this) might be opposed to Clairvoyants, Mediums, Spiritualists, Tarot, Astrology, Charms, divination, certain "traditional" cures and other sundry paranormal things.

It can be equally valid opposition no matter if it's all materialistic fakery, paranormal, Demonic or pagan, real or imagined, so the Christian opposition doesn't help the debate unless there is some proof as to the "why" of the opposition. But Orthodox Rabbinic view is that is wrong question, as faith is accepting God's ordinances without asking for an explanation.

In summary, if the Spiritualist explanations are true then Judeao-Christian is opposed because it's forbidden, possibly Demonic and not from God.

If on the other hand the paranormal mostly doesn't exist and it's all fakery then Judeao-Christian is opposed because it's deception.

RLJ

Tellox wrote: »

Typically in this case, if your eyes were to look towards the left, you're thinking of the music. If you eye went to the top left (or top right in some cases), you're thinking of a person. This is normally an involuntary reaction. Ask someone to think strongly of a person, and imagine theyre standing right next to them, and they'll look to the top left or right - try it!.

The eye accessing clues of nlp have no basis in fact and are not as described here anyway.The claim was that when you remember something in pictures you know like the colour of your car you look up to the left as this is a remembered picture

if you imagine what your car would look like a different colour you look up to the right constructed picture

There is no real evidence it is true

smithcity

I think that people like Derren Brown have been invaluable in showing how talented cold readers can manipulate people into believing they are talking to psychics.

I think it's still possible that there could be people who can unconsciously cold read. Such people would know things, without knowing how or why. They might think to themselves that they are psychic.

By and large I believe that most mediums and psychics are frauds, but I would still like to believe in psychic phenomena.

SV

I'm not sure how many people here have offered people money but I am offering 5000euro to anyone who can give me an accurate reading.

Not vague and hit and miss crap that they're used to but absolute dead on stuff and in a controlled enviroment.

You win, you get the 5000euro.
You lose, I get to tell everyone what a fraud you are.

of course, if, after meeting me you feel like you won't be able to 'read me' then nothing else will be said and I'll simply move on to the next 'psychic' who thinks they can do it.




edit: and this is stemming from me having a free 'reading' done by a family member, who, after about 30 minutes named out about 100different things and was 100% on one thing, very vague on about 10% of the stuff and completely off on the rest. the rest was put down to "Oh, that must be about to happen in the future" :rolleyes:
however, they view the singular 100% reading as the one that proves themselves..oh well :rolleyes:

smithcity

smithcity wrote: »

I think that people like Derren Brown have been invaluable in showing how talented cold readers can manipulate people into believing they are talking to psychics.

Derrin Brown is the Derrick Acorah of the skeptic world. Never trust people that are on TV .

SV

Deleted User wrote: »

Derrin Brown is the Derrick Acorah of the skeptic world. Never trust people that are on TV .

What's not to trust in what he has shown us all?

pH

SV wrote: »

What's not to trust in what he has shown us all?

He's still using misdirection in his 'reveal' shows, for example the cold reading shown in Messiah is definitely not cold reading, yet Derren makes a big deal about saying it is.

iamhunted

watty wrote: »

You actually read the entirety of the links I posted?

Your reply isn't actually relevant to what I posted.

i did read your links, yes. plus my answer is relevant to your belief that people have it all wrong and that evps can all be explained. I only asked you a simple question. pity you couldnt answer it.

iamhunted

you know what? I wont even rise to wicknights bait.

Genghiz Cohen

SV wrote: »

I'm not sure how many people here have offered people money but I am offering 5000euro to anyone who can give me an accurate reading.

Not vague and hit and miss crap that they're used to but absolute dead on stuff and in a controlled enviroment.

You win, you get the 5000euro.
You lose, I get to tell everyone what a fraud you are.

of course, if, after meeting me you feel like you won't be able to 'read me' then nothing else will be said and I'll simply move on to the next 'psychic' who thinks they can do it.

I'd love to go in with you on that.
Sadly my current financial situation is not so flexible at the moment...
Someday...

Zombrex

iamhunted wrote: »

you know what? I wont even rise to wicknights bait.

But thankfully you can share with everyone this fact ... go on, tell everyone this forum bores you again :rolleyes:

SV

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

I'd love to go in with you on that.
Sadly my current financial situation is not so flexible at the moment...
Someday...

hell I'll up it to 10,000 if anyone wants to bite.
Not a problem at all.

Oryx

It strikes me as odd that the bidders here seem to feel that if they hit a magical financial number, psychics will suddenly volunteer. Guys, this does not leave your initial problem behind. This whole thread does come across as tainted with an anti psychic bias. You have a very limited number of practicing psychics reading this anyway, and many who do read it dont want your money. In fact those who do offer are more likely to be fraudulent the higher the figure goes. Money is not the key thing here. Changing tack to a less confrontational approach to psychics might be.

And cos Ive written it so much Ive remembered how much the vague label 'psychic' irritates me too

Overblood

Oryx, what if I offered 5,000 euro to anybody who could prove that they can cycle with no hands? Is this tainted with anti-nohands-bias? Would you describe it as confrontational? Assumiing you can cycle with no hands, would you step up and try it for the money?

Trail_Blazer

If psychic's really existed, how come you never read the newspaper headline:

"Psychic wins the lottery"?

Oryx

Trail_Blazer wrote: »

If psychic's really existed, how come you never read the newspaper headline:

"Psychic wins the lottery"?

I did, once.

Overblood, it must be just me thats not feeling the love here then. If you post your offer as you just said it over in cycling youll lose your money before the day is out. But if you posted a slightly different and Id say better analogy which said right cyclists, if you can cycle blindfold around these cones then youll get 5k, but if you fail were all going to point and laugh and make sure youre called fraud. Thats a closer analogy.

iamhunted

Wicknight wrote: »

But thankfully you can share with everyone this fact ... go on, tell everyone this forum bores you again :rolleyes:

you do know that what you're by posting that is called trolling? From now on I'll just report such posts and say nothing.

Oryx

iamhunted wrote: »

you do know that what you're by posting that is called trolling? From now on I'll just report such posts and say nothing.

Youd better. Wicknight and iamhunted your ongoing cross-thread argument is beyond dull now. Take it somewhere private or get banned from here.

Overblood

Oryx wrote: »

Overblood, it must be just me thats not feeling the love here then. If you post your offer as you just said it over in cycling youll lose your money before the day is out. But if you posted a slightly different and Id say better analogy which said right cyclists, if you can cycle blindfold around these cones then youll get 5k, but if you fail were all going to point and laugh and make sure youre called fraud. Thats a closer analogy.

OK, I'm not sure if I get your analogy either... why should the cyclists be blindfolded?

Hopefully this one is more accurate.

Cyclists can: cycle bikes.

Psychics can: predict the future, read minds, talk to ghosts, whatever. One or all of the above.

Therefore, the two following scenarios are the exact same:

• A prize of €5,000 for any cyclist who can prove that they're able to cycle a bike.

• A prize of €5,000 for any psychic who can prove that they can read my mind.

Obviously the cyclist would win my €5,000 in about four seconds. Why can't psychics do this?

(the amount of times I nearly typed "psychlist"....:pac:)

Oryx

Overblood wrote: »

OK, I'm not sure if I get your analogy either... why should the cyclists be blindfolded?

Hopefully this one is more accurate.

Cyclists can: cycle bikes.

Psychics can: predict the future, read minds, talk to ghosts, whatever. One or all of the above.

Therefore, the two following scenarios are the exact same:

• A prize of €5,000 for any cyclist who can prove that they're able to cycle a bike.

• A prize of €5,000 for any psychic who can prove that they can read my mind.

Obviously the cyclist would win my €5,000 in about four seconds. Why can't psychics do this?

(the amount of times I nearly typed "psychlist"....:pac:)

Proving you ride a bike can be done online in a 10 second youtube link. Psychic stuff is more subjective and harder to prove absolutely. Why else does Mr Randi have to go to such bother planning his challenges? Neither of our analogies work really. We need new ones.

Overblood

Oryx wrote: »

Proving you ride a bike can be done online in a 10 second youtube link. Psychic stuff is more subjective and harder to prove absolutely. Why else does Mr Randi have to go to such bother planning his challenges? Neither of our analogies work really. We need new ones.

Psychic stuff shouldn't be harder to prove. People do it on telly the whole time. We have a psychic forum here with people posting card readings and predictions. It's all gravy baby when nobody is testing them. It shouldn't be objextive and harder to prove. Just tell me which movie I'm thinking about. Or what's in my pockets. Or tell me the lotto numbers. Very simple questions for a "psychic".

mister gullible

Cyclists can: cycle bikes.

Psychics can: predict the future, read minds, talk to ghosts, whatever. One or all of the above.

Therefore, the two following scenarios are the exact same:

• A prize of €5,000 for any cyclist who can prove that they're able to cycle a bike.

• A prize of €5,000 for any psychic who can prove that they can read my mind.

Obviously the cyclist would win my €5,000 in about four seconds. Why can't psychics do this?

[/quote]


Spot on Overblood.
Is your head getting sore yet, how's that wall standing up to it?

Oryx

Overblood wrote: »

Psychic stuff shouldn't be harder to prove. People do it on telly the whole time. We have a psychic forum here with people posting card readings and predictions. It's all gravy baby when nobody is testing them. It shouldn't be objextive and harder to prove. Just tell me which movie I'm thinking about. Or what's in my pockets. Or tell me the lotto numbers. Very simple questions for a "psychic".

The lotto numbers are: 7, 14, 28, 36, 42, 12. Im just not saying when theyre gonna come up.

Youve got fluff in your pockets.

Youre thinking of the hangover. Or at least you were a week ago.

Prove anything? Nope. Its arbitrary, its loose, and its not the way to test or analyise any kind of psychic ability. And to be honest the only way to do it is face to face, with a set of say, 20 statements, to see if the answers are correct above the percentage that would be chance.


PS. No psychic ability was used in the making of this post.

Overblood

Oryx wrote: »

The lotto numbers are: 7, 14, 28, 36, 42, 12. Im just not saying when theyre gonna come up.

Youve got fluff in your pockets.

Youre thinking of the hangover. Or at least you were a week ago.

Prove anything? Nope. Its arbitrary, its loose, and its not the way to test or analyise any kind of psychic ability. And to be honest the only way to do it is face to face, with a set of say, 20 statements, to see if the answers are correct above the percentage that would be chance.

So it should be pretty simple to test going by your criteria. It's not as if we're looking for the higgs boson in the LHC or anything.

Somebody says they can do X. Do X so, and you win €5,000.

The reason James Randi doesn't have the million dollar prize for testing cyclists who say they can cycle is because people are actually able to cycle bikes.

SV

I'm not even looking for famous people here.
i'll accept anyone.

Hey, spread the word..
E10,000 could be theirs.

Dave!

SV wrote: »

I'm not even looking for famous people here.
i'll accept anyone.

Hey, spread the word..
E10,000 could be theirs.

I'll do it

Do I have to really be psychic to try???