Do people actually go to "Palm readers" or fortunetellers/psychics?

[Chandrasekhar]

I like to see science advance but I'd also like to see people be free to explore other areas of study that are of interest to them. Most of the scientist who embark on a crusade to debunk claims of the paranormal never really accomplish much. I think their time would have been better spent on doing some real research.

Here's something they accomplish: getting people to stop chasing rainbows and pixies and start doing something contructive with their life.

 

[Murky]

Here's something they accomplish: getting people to stop chasing rainbows and pixies and start doing something contructive with their life.

You can't force belief or disbelief onto other people. The only people they convince are already skeptical. They sometimes draw a following of skeptics. The group spends their time exposing easy targets such as people who are mentally ill. Most of their "controlled" studies are so biased that the results are stated before the study really begins. It's all just a huge waste of time.

 

[King Flevance]

But the theory of relativity was supported by evidence when it was published. It wasn't something based on hearsay.

Yes, if someone guessed a theory with no evidence that later turned out to be true, they would have been right all along - but the point you are missing is that the probability of this happening is extraordinarily small.

You could be correct, but the point is that it is extremely unlikely that you are.

But in the example we are discussing the Theory of Relativity. Which we happen to have evidence of. Those who mock it because of lack of evidence mock it because they don't want to be the fool. Yet, it is them who is wrong. Because the Theory of Relativity exists.

 

[Murky]

But in the example we are discussing the Theory of Relativity. Which we happen to have evidence of. Those who mock it because of lack of evidence mock it because they don't want to be the fool. Yet, it is them who is wrong. Because the Theory of Relativity exists.

Do you think Einstein would have discovered the Theory of Relativity if he wasted his time on debunking superstition instead of doing real research?

 

[King Flevance]

Do you think Einstein would have discovered the Theory of Relativity if he wasted his time on debunking superstition instead of doing real research?

Do you think the world was not the fool when they called Einstein a fool?

 

[warpus]

You are missing the point. My viewing it as fact or not of course does not alter reality. However, "My 'knowing' what I think is the truth" if it is the truth means I know the truth.

Yeah, but only if it is the truth. The way it stands right now, you think you know the truth and I think I know the truth. My truth is supported by evidence, while your truth is supported by speculation.

Yet, the Threory of Relativity is considered fact. If it was only based on heresay when it was introduced, that would not make it less true. You would be wrong. Science would be wrong.

Forget the Theory of Relativity... you're not really getting it. Pretend we're talking about the Theory of the World on a giant Turtle. That was based purely on testimony and speculation.

Point is that testimony means nothing if we're talking about scientific theories. If Einstein did not use physics or math to come up with the Theory of Relativity, but he rather heard from his grandma that everything is relative and that gravity is caused by Thor. that would be a poor theory

And?

And if 99% of the people who were claiming that the Theory of ______ was true were debunked as frauds who simply made it all up, the THeory of ______ would not be considered very solid.

Life doesn't hand you a slip of paper titled 'proof' you are suppose to go hand in to a local scientist when you encounter such things and they are legit. I wouldn't doubt most people don't fully understand how it was possible when witness to it.

Yeah, but when you encounter something strange, something that has not been explained yet, what makes you think that simply your intuitin is enough to explain it? Introducing the supernatural "just because it's a nifty explanation of what happened" doesn't cut it.

Society labels me as a naive fool. But I am not about to disregard something shown to me about life by my God because some fellow human is telling me I don't have enough proof to prove it to humanity. Well, neither did Jesus. But it is He that will end up winning that debate in the end.

Just because Jesus might have been the son of God (which I so not believe, but that's beside the point).. but assuming that it's true, that has no impact whatsoever on whether psychics are true.

That's like saying.. Jesus didn't have enough proof to prove that he was the son of God, and he was anyway, therefore the world lies on a giant turtle. Just because we don't have evidence for it doesn't make it false.

Yeah, but unless you have evidence you can't say it's true either[/ b].

No, at the beginning of such tests the results are that they do not exist. When the results come back murky and undeterminable, the results must stay the same as it began.

Yet there is nothing conclusive that would ever support such a statement. When you test the theory of relativity you dont end up with 'murky and undeterminable' results, each and every time.

The Theory of Psychics (imagine for a second that that's what you're claiming is called) has to make predictions. These predictinos were tested for in a lab - yet the results did not back up the predictions, statistically. That's the point - if there was any truth to this, we would at least have some sort of positive data that this isn't just BS.

I know because I have proof. I cannot provide anything for you though. Sorry.

If you couldn't use this proof to make a solid case that this thing is real, then your proof is worthless.

Off to work I go.

 

[Atlas14]

The level of foolishness here is amazing. I can accept that this Atlas fellow saw an amazing show, and that this show had an impression on him, but these people that discard simple logic in favor of rampant mysticism make me sick.

Let me clarify something for you: scientific proof does not mean that some scrawny men in white labcoats are using some high tech truth-o-meter based on experimental quantum physical abstractions to determine the truth. It does not mean that they're pointing some sort of surgical raygun at a potential psychic's head and looking for abnormalities. Scientific proof is simple, really; just pure, untainted logic.

Step one: obtain the services of someone who calls themself a psychic.
Step two: take this potential psychic into a controlled environment.
And by "controlled environment" I don't mean anything really technical. I just mean that certain safeguards should be used. Ideally, these scientists will have a list of all known tricks that fake psychics use to give the impression that they're psychic. Countermeasures will be used to ensure that the psychic isn't using one of these tricks. I'm talking about simple stuff here, camaras and cards from locked boxes. Very simple, you see?
Step three: have this potential psychic do their stuff. If the psychic manages to do this without using any of the previously mentioned "tricks," go to step four. If not, go to step five.
Step four: do a more detailed analysis of the phenomenon. Search exhaustively for every single possible way that this could be explained by common sense logic and proven physical theories. If a natural explanation is found, go to step five. If not, go to step six.
Step five: repeat steps one to three ad infinitum.
Step six: publish your findings in every scientific journal you know. Go find a new job.

Is that so terrible to do? If psychic powers really did exist, I'd think some scientist would have gotten to step six by now. Anecdotes aren't proof, and neither is blind faith.

What makes you think everyone wants to be the object of a scientific interrogation, or "study" as you call it?

Guess what call Atlas foolish or illogical all you want. His critics have provided ZERO evidence against him other than lame cop-outs such as "well if it was real it would be scientifically proven" "if it was real, she would be a millionaire".

So go ahead, keep providing zero evidence, it doesn't really bother me because I know what I saw, and there was absolutely no chance for it to have been "trickery" or a fake. End of story. Be skeptical all you want, you were not there. Some people are so ignorantly stubborn about accepting observations as truth.

 

[Swedishguy]

Do you think the world was not the fool when they called Einstein a fool?

Do you refer 'all the world' as everyone at the planet Earth? When I can assure you that there was relatively few people that have actually heard of him, let alone called him a fool. So if I would be so cheeky as to answer the question, I would answer 'no'.

 

[Woodgar]

1. The dollar bills with serial numbers came from the pockets of my fellow college student audience. Zero chance for pre-memorization. No souveneirs or whatever were handed out either. The psycic was 30 meters away from the people who had the serial numbers, and she was blind folded, and had her back turned, again, zero chance for "knowing" or "seeing" them.

They may have come from the pockets of the students, but how did they get there?

Are you suggesting that every student who was asked to produce a dollar bill managed to pull out a brand new note that had just taken out of a cash machine? The critical, and central part, of my possible explanation was a plausible way of getting a known set of bills into the hands of the audience members without them realising this.

I am not suggesting that the money was simply given to them, but that it was offered as change from a purchase prior to the performance.

This way the psychic could have been in a separate country, let alone blind folded on a stage thirty metres away. She did not have to see the notes, she knew what they would be in advance.

2. The photographs were from the college students' wallets, one was from my friend, I think she would have remembered showing someone else these random, old photos. Not to mention there were other people that would have found something fishy as well.

The whole purpose of socially engineering information out of someone is to do so without them realising it is being done.

Were the students asked in advance to bring along old photographs to the performance, or were the old photographs produced by students that always carry them in their wallets? If the latter, then it's quite conceivable that access was granted or obtained to them without raising suspicion.

Remember here that a large number of people may have been surreptitiously approached in the days or weeks prior to the performance and only those more susceptible to the techniques being employed, ie those who are generally more forthcoming or open, were chosen on the night of the performance itself. Anyone approached in advance who showed any kind of suspicion or hesitated to respond would have been ruled out.

3. She guessed an oddball car, and the exact year the person would have liked for it to be made, which wasn't the current or past 2 years. Secondly, she guessed what the person was going to say for the lottery question in advance. Who the heck only picks $50 K !!!!!??!?! I mean that is weird that she would have known he was going to pick such a low amount, and the exact amount. And for guessing the number of people in the audience before hand, that is unexplainable. There were no tickets to get into the show, the amount of seating was not filled, so it was an odd amount, making it even stranger that she could guess it.

As said before, these kind of tricks are common place.

By subtle hinting and directing a persons thoughts along a given path you can easily get them to say what you wish them to say, even if that something seems totally out of order with what anyone watching would have expected them to say.

Note, when I say "easily" I mean easily for someone who does this type of thing as a profession rather than something I could do myself. Actually, it's this ease with which professional illusionists can perform this kind of trick without the rest of us catching on to it that makes it look so impressive.

As for guessing the number of people at the performance, I will grant that this is not something that could have been predicted prior to the show but is obviously something that is trivial to obtain after the show starts. Demonstrating your psychic ability to foresee that number is then reduced to nothing more than a sleight-of-hand trick.



Please be aware that I not saying that my explanations are the exact methods by which the psychic performed all of her illusions, but I merely offer them as viable and more credible alternatives to that of the psychic possessing supernatural abilities.

I hear that Occam has a sale on at the moment. Maybe you should go and buy one of his razors.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

My parents go just to have a little fun. Strangely enough when my mom walked in and sat down, before my mom said anything other than her name, the first statement the "fortune teller" said was: Your son will finish college, go on for yet more education, and then start a business in the computer field.

Strangely enough, I am finishing college soon, and I was thinking about continuing my education at ITT technical college and getting a computer animation degree. Even more strange was that I AM thinking about opening a computer animation business when I finish. Sheer luck? Perhaps, but to that level of detail?

I still don't really believe it is "magic" though.

 

[Spartan117]

Some people are so ignorantly stubborn about accepting observations as truth.

first because someone's "observation" isnt necessarily true. It was their persepective. Hence, why eye witness reports are not so reliable.

 

[Atlas14]

Double Post

 

[Atlas14]

first because someone's "observation" isnt necessarily true. It was their persepective. Hence, why eye witness reports are not so reliable.

That is why I am allowing people to point out flaws in the psychic's work, to make my observation more reliable.

 

[Atlas14]

They may have come from the pockets of the students, but how did they get there?

What are you implying?

Are you suggesting that every student who was asked to produce a dollar bill managed to pull out a brand new note that had just taken out of a cash machine? The critical, and central part, of my possible explanation was a plausible way of getting a known set of bills into the hands of the audience members without them realising this.

Are you suggesting a conspiracy theory as the explanation? The psychics arrived that day, they were not camped out for weeks in Bridgewater Virginia trying to distribute bills with serial numbers they know. Even if they did, there is no way for them to have known which students were going to the show.

I am not suggesting that the money was simply given to them, but that it was offered as change from a purchase prior to the performance.

No, these bills were not "offered" at any point in time. Even if so, there is no way for the psychic to have known which bill's serial number she was trying to regurgitate. She was blind folded, and faced the other way, and 30 meters away.

This way the psychic could have been in a separate country, let alone blind folded on a stage thirty metres away. She did not have to see the notes, she knew what they would be in advance.

1. I know nobody who would go to such great lengths for such a performance.

2. She had no idea who was coming to the show, she'd be giving away millions of dollars just in the Bridgewater area, I think we'd be in the news by now if that were the case.

The whole purpose of socially engineering information out of someone is to do so without them realising it is being done.

Were the students asked in advance to bring along old photographs to the performance, or were the old photographs produced by students that always carry them in their wallets? If the latter, then it's quite conceivable that access was granted or obtained to them without raising suspicion.

Nobody was asked in advance to bring anything at all. People would remember telling someone who random people in their photos are when suspisciously asked. Some of the photos were recently taken, like digital photos from that day. Nobody would have been able to ask them in advance.

Remember here that a large number of people may have been surreptitiously approached in the days or weeks prior to the performance and only those more susceptible to the techniques being employed, ie those who are generally more forthcoming or open, were chosen on the night of the performance itself. Anyone approached in advance who showed any kind of suspicion or hesitated to respond would have been ruled out.

Nobody was "approached" or "chosen" in advance. My friends would have told me about such a thing. I was with them 2 hours prior to the show, then we arrived at the show. Nobody was interviewed or anything.

As said before, these kind of tricks are common place.

Common place does not mean not true.

By subtle hinting and directing a persons thoughts along a given path you can easily get them to say what you wish them to say, even if that something seems totally out of order with what anyone watching would have expected them to say.

But predicting it on the plane ride before the show? I mean that is nuts. The responses were to odd to have been "directed". I have forgotten the car response one, but it was a lot more detailed and odd than I explained in this thread. I just remember asking myself if I had ever even heard of this car.

As for guessing the number of people at the performance, I will grant that this is not something that could have been predicted prior to the show but is obviously something that is trivial to obtain after the show starts. Demonstrating your psychic ability to foresee that number is then reduced to nothing more than a sleight-of-hand trick.

I am not quite sure if I understand what you are trying to say here.

 

[.Shane.]

Still waiting for you to produce her name. That should be extremely easy to do. Yet, you refuse to do it. Hmmm...

Honestly, I think most of you should quit arguing with him until we can at least know the name of this person. Because, if they are any good at all, they'll have a website.

 

[Atlas14]

Still waiting for you to produce her name. That should be extremely easy to do. Yet, you refuse to do it. Hmmm...

How many times do I have to tell you, there was no reason whatsoever for me to consciously think that night to remember her name.

 

[.Shane.]

How many times do I have to tell you, there was no reason whatsoever for me to consciously think that night to remember her name.

What a cop out. Ask any of your similarly astounded friends who were there. Go to the venue and simply ask "who was the pyschic you guys had X months ago?" There are so many easy ways to find out, yet you refuse to bother. It really casts a ton of doubt on your story.

 

[Atlas14]

What a cop out. Ask any of your similarly astounded friends who were there. Go to the venue and simply ask "who was the pyschic you guys had X months ago?" There are so many easy ways to find out, yet you refuse to bother. It really casts a ton of doubt on your story.

Fine then, I will. Since it will make so much of a friggin difference. You're the cop out. Providing zero counter points other than "You don't know their names!"

 

[.Shane.]

You're the cop out. Providing zero counter points other than "You don't know their names!"

Not at all, at least then we'll have a way to verify this and maybe understand the trick she is performing.

But, honestly, I can't argue against something of this nature based on how you describe it in an internet forum. You could be misremembering something, right? You can't even remember the name of a performer who blew your mind, so why should I believe you can remember EVERYTHING about the details of what she did? How do I know you're not embellishing? Etc.. etc...

But, yes, getting the name will be a great start!

 

[Babbler]

I like to see science advance but I'd also like to see people be free to explore other areas of study that are of interest to them.

What are skeptics doing to stop believers from studying their areas of study (if they actually do research; I doubt many do)? They are as free as anybody to study what they want.

Most of the scientist who embark on a crusade to debunk claims of the paranormal never really accomplish much.

What crusade?!? There is no crusade; the only problem is factuality of the claims.

I criticize your ideas and you cry foul. What's up with the prosecution complex?