Tony, you are reading what you want to read. Randi will be the first to say that phony psychics, healers, etc. use other means. What I said was that he has never accused a specific person of using a specific method. He makes general statements which are absolutely true. Will you sit there and deny that there are no psychics out there that use trickery?

My statement that he doesn't accuse a specific person of using a specific method is correct. Even with Uri Geller he never outright said "this is how HE bends a spoon". He showed how a spoon can be bent WITHOUT using mental powers. Again tony, BIG difference. He even said that if Geller is bending spoons with his mind, he's doing it the hard way.

The part about Randi being alive in the 1900's........ok, I'll give you that one. I was referring to Barnum not being alive in the 1900's.

What I was saying is that the astrology test you gave as an example of Randi's evil shenanigans were actually being done in 1949, long before Randi started going after criminals. He had nothing to do with that. In 1949 he was escaping from trunks under the name Randall Zwinge.

I am fully aware of how you feel about Randi and the issue in general and I respect your views.

For the record, I didn't come on here to debate or defend Randi. My goal is much more personal. With or without Randi or the JREF, I will continue however I can to prevent innocent people from getting their lives ruined by con-artists that lack the moral integrity of an insect.

Tony, I'm sure that you are against the type of thing that $ylvia put that poor family through.

The good new is that the backlash from her appearance on Montel has convinced many state and local officials to question if psychics are going too far. I strongly feel that major changes are coming this way over the next few years. It's about time. We are in the 21'st century


By the way Tony, I'm pretty sure you're not out there scamming old ladies out of their social security checks, so I don't consider you the enemy...LOL

Take care.

See ya,


Jeff

Mota,

What is with all your personal attacks on Randi? Why do you feel it necessary to call him a liar and a con artist? And what is your basis for doing so? Your constant ad hominem attacks and wholesale dismissal of the many valid points made on this board without addressing them substantially undermines your arguments.

As for the test you have proposed, I don't see how it would support your claim. Cold readers make use of observations about their subjects and employ psychological techniques to convince the subject that they are revealing personal information the cold reader couldn't otherwise know. From the subject's point of view, the experience would be indistinguishable from a reading by a true psychic. The subject would have no basis for comparison other than who "seemed" to read them more accurately.

As an example, you could take two admitted cold readers, neither of whom claims psychic powers, and have them each read the same subject. What question would you then pose to the subject to distinguish the two readers? The only one I can think of is "whose reading was more accurate?" But the answer doesn't mean that the person chosen actually has psychic powers -- only that his technique was better. If you posed the question "which of these people actually has psychic powers?" you are making an unwarranted assumption.

And that is just the assumption your test makes. It would in no way prove that you have any psychic powers -- only that your performance was more convincing. I'm not saying the test would prove that you didn't have such powers, as it could be that the reason your performance was more convincing was because of true psychic ability, but that is by no means the only explanation. So the test you propose would prove nothing.

Lumberjohn, I've been trying to explain the same thing to him a few times in this thread, but he doesn't seem to understand those flaws you mentioned. Comparing 2 readings to see which one was better, is not less than challenging someone on the basketball court for 1 on 1 to see who is better.

Mota, if your powers are so amazing and out of this world, than why won't you just have a reading alone without comparing anyone? I asked you that question earlier, but looks like you avoided that.

Thanks

Jeff:

I didn't use an astrology example. Perhaps that was from someone other than me.
The Barnum effect is the name of the principle that Randi uses for his cold readings. (Look up the term Barnum Effect, it will explain all)

My point was that he made sweeping statements and claims.
And just like the ones he goes after for making such claim's, he too could be a target, and the arguments that are used, especially here, to mock those who do not go for the challenge can be used against him as well.

No, I don't scam little old ladies out of their checks. But we do have the collection basket.

No enemies here, just differing points of view.

Tony

Yes, DJM, I know. I thought I'd take one more shot since it still hasn't gotten through. Those who are attacking Randi just keep beating the same drums. While all their points have been directly responded to by numerous people, and quite effectively at that (in my humble opinion), they simply ignore the responses or casually dismiss them en masse.

What is people's problem with randi? Is it because he exposed Gellar's magnet methods? Ooh how our profession has crumbled since then!
That he exposes spoon bending, by Gellar again? Ooh how Banachek feels the pinch,hell he's practically bankrupt!!

Or that he doesn't stand for any psychic nonsense,which some on here proclaim to practice(without proof I hasten to add);which downright niggles people!!

he is a respected magician and is written about in history books on the subject.Are any of you? Long after his death Randi will be remembered for what he has achieved.Maybe he is a modern day Houdini,maybe just a cantekerous thorn in psychic's sides;whatever he practices what he preaches.It's about time so called "psychics" on here did the same,or just quietly go away confident that Randi has them beat.

I practice what I preach, well, at least I try to.
And I'm not going away.

As I stated earlier, exposure takes away the mystery. It is hard to perform "Mystery " Entertainment without the mystery.

Yes, I've said that I disagree with some of his actions and statements. I've stated why and given reasons. I can disagree with these and argue my points and keep these separate from the man. And I think if you go through this thread, you will see evidence of that. The only personal statements on Randi that I recall making were not negative, but rather positive and hopeful.

Tony

It could be called the "James Randi Exposer Foundation".

Exposure does not equal education, period.

Harry H; it's hard for me to believe that you can stand there and say who should leave the Café, and accept defeat. C'mon. This is ridiculous.

Randi never "beat" anyone. I think Geller and his success is proof enough of this. Besides, why does it have to be "us" or "them" again? You tend to treat others on this forum as if they are scamming people out of money.

I keep hearing, "There's no proof, there's no proof". Well, how do you know? How do you know there is NO proof? I guess all the people that myself and others have assisted over the years (free of charge) are wrong? Again? If tens of thousands (if not millions) of people with positive experiences with psychic's and healers do not count as "proof", I don't know what else to say . . .

Regards,
J.

TT2, there are thousands of people who have had "positive" experiences with Sylvia Browne. Does it mean it's proof that she really has sepical powers?

It's pretty easy to fool people who don't understand what's really going on. It's been like that for decades.

I would agree with Tony, who has been very courteous throughout this discussion and has refrained from employing the tactics of others, on this point. But if Randi is exposing some effects, he is not the person with whom we as magicians should be angry.

I used to work at a great job. The employees were allowed a great deal of freedom and autonomy in getting their work done. Our employer provided all the resources we needed and rarely got in our way, as our performance numbers were excellent. But over time, some people began to take advantage of the freedom and caused some real problems. Because of this, our employer eliminated many of our privileges and cracked down hard. We lost much of the autonomy we had previously enjoyed, and it became like any other job.

In the aftermath of this, we the employees did not blame our employer for making what we all saw as understandable changes. We blamed the people who had taken advantage of the system to make those changes necessary.

Likewise, if Randi feels it is necessary to expose some tricks of the trade to combat the con artists who make their living by deceiving the public and praying on the emotionally vulnerable, then with whom should we really be angry? None of those who have so vehemently attacked Randi have expressed outrage or even disapproval of obvious frauds such as Sylvia Brown and John Edwards. Instead, they focus their venom on Randi alone, as if he is truly the source of the problem. The actual sources of the problem are the fraudulent psychics whose continued success in destroying people's lives has brought about this change in Randi's tactics. How about some redirection of this anger to the ones that really deserve it?

DJM,
I see what you're saying, but did she help them? And if so, who are you (or anyone else) to deny them that? I'm not saying the end justifies the means. I just want to look at this objectively without making accusations and judgement calls on a person's moral character.

Is it proof that she has special powers? I don't know, that's a lot of people!



J.

Lumberjohn,
I have a serious problem with the statement, "If Randi is exposing some effects, he is not the person with whom we as magicians should be angry."

I would LOVE to hear the reasoning behind this! Holy s***t! That's classic!

This is blame shifting (and is exactly like those who denounce believers for going to a psychic, and then getting scammed . . .), he did this, so I did this, I was forced to . . . etc. I'm not wrong, he was wrong, that's why I did it, ad nauseum. According to this line of thought, Randi should not be so upset at the psychic's, but at the "fools" who gave them their money. See? I can do it too.

If Randi exposes, then it is RANDI I will be angry with. Not Geller for supposedley MAKING him expose, etc. What kind of a reactive existence is this for Randi? That I should be angry at anyone OTHER THAN the man exposing is laughable.

Thanks,
Jerome.

TT2, did she help the parents of the little girl when she said the girl was kidnapped and became a slave in Japan, and 4 years later it turned out that it was not true? How about the parents of the boy who was found alive, after she told them that he was dead and they were never going to see him again? How about when she told a young widow that her husabnd was drown in the water and never going to be found, while in fact he died on 9/11 and they already buried his body? And those are only some things that she had on the Montel show. I have a feeling that there are hundreds of stories like that we don't know of.

Does it help to give false hopes to people? Or even worse, shatter their hopes?

What's so helpful about that, TT2? I'd really like to know.

Jerome,

I addressed this in an earlier post, but I will restate here. Your basic argument appears to be that two wrongs do not make a right, which is true as far as it goes. But few actions are 100% right or 100% wrong. Virtually all actions have myriad consequences, some positive, some negative, some neutral -- all depending on your perspective. The position of the JREF is that false "psychics" do tremendous harm to the public, and there can be little doubt that there are many con artists out there fleecing the vulnerable whose scams are not effectively addressed by government agencies and the courts. Randi has tried many methods to expose these charlatins for what they are, but the more prominent ones are still operating. And as the recent news media of Sylvia Brown has revealed, she and others like her continue to cause enormous pain in the lives of innocent people.

I suspect that Randi is fully aware that any exposure of magical methods will negatively impact some magicians who rely on those methods. But he apparently feels that the good that can be accomplished by LIMITED exposure of a few methods used by well known con artists outweighs the harm. We must keep in mind that by opinion polls, millions of people believe in alleged psychics such as Brown, Geller, and Edwards and thus are potential victims for their theivery. Stories abound of people that clean out their savings to pay "psychics" for weekly readings and do not make a significant move without their psychic advisor. Compare this to the relatively negligible number of people whose lives will be only minimally impacted (in any sort of negative way) by revealing that Uri Geller uses a m****t to move a compass.

The issue, therefore, can't be reduced to such simple statements as "all exposure is wrong." Some exposure, if done in a certain way and to a certain audience, can be very beneficial. And the greater good may in fact be served. We could certainly argue all day about whether the good of such exposure does outweigh the bad, but that was not my point. My point was that everyone unhappy about Randi's planned exposure was attacking Randi, but none of those folks were critical of the false psychics who have convinced Randi that the positive effects of this exposure on the general public will outweigh its negative effects on the magic community (at least that portion of the magic community that stakes its income and reputation on perfoming the same effects as Uri Geller and calls it true psychic ability).

Tony, I was referring to this thread you wrote:

"After giving the students the questionares and having recieved the responses as to how accurate each of the individual tests were to each person, then he tells the students that they are all the same test. and states that it is the Barnum effect, and this is how psychic perform their readings. This same example was repeated on several televison appearences and presented in live school visits."

That was Randi doing one of many versions of the Barnum effect using astrology/horoscopes that is done by many educators. I thought that was your response to my post on Randi not accusing a certain person of a certain method.

Sorry if I misunderstood. Maybe that's why all the confusion.

Jeff

DJM,
Of course Sylvia did not help the people you cited. I thought we were talking about the thousands you yourself said she has helped. I'm not defending Sylvia.

Likewise, lumberjohn, I am not saying anything is right, or wrong, exposure included.

"But he apparently feels that the good that can be accomplished by LIMITED exposure of a few methods used by well known con artists outweighs the harm."

IT'S NOT FOR HIM TO DECIDE. James Randi, self appointed World Hero. Spare me, please. I don't see people beating Randi's door down with praise for "saving" or "protecting" them. He is not even educating them . . . he is neither magician nor scientist, he is an exposer only. I don't care what his past is, he chose to leave that behind after he saw his own $$$ in exposing. His work is as fraudulent to me as Geller's.

Also, he is not protecting the "public", as it is not the general public who seek out a psychic reader or healer, but a minority of the populace.

I have nothing against Randi as a person . . . I frown on some of the ways he does business, as you frown on the means and methods of some psychic flavored artists. It's a difference of opinion. Nothing more, and not at all personal.

Welcome to the Café

Regards,
Jerome.

TT2, I said that some people have had "positive" readings from her. What I meant by that is that even though they think it's positive at the moment, it doesn't mean it's really like that. For example, Sylvia gives a medical advice to someone, so that person thinks that the problem is going to be solved. But after a few weeks when things are still the same, then the reading isn't as positive as he thought at first. That's the same with finiding love, career moves and things like that. Just because people feel they had a positive reading, doesn't mean it really is. It's more like a wishful thinking.

Awhile ago I heard that Sylvia told a woman that she would meet a man with a certain name pretty soon. That woman waited for someone like that for a long time, and was disappointed it never happened. So during the reading she probably felt very positive about it.. but I don't think she still feels the same way right now.

Like I said in the other post, it's very easy to fool people who don't know what's really going on.

What do you guys think if Sylvia got her own talk show? lol

So, by default, ALL skeptics must also be magicians, so they may further catalogue the truth when they see it?

In my experience, it's easier to "fool" a person who has it all "figured out".

By all measures, this woman should be finished. The mistakes and atrocities you mention are enough to sink a battleship (B-6, HIT!).

We can never know how many received "positive" readings that really DID help. Also true, we will not know the many other mistakes she has undoubtedley made.

My bottom line is simple: not all who do this work, do it as Sylvia or Edwards. Let their be some distinctions made, because it seems a lot of the time, those of us here are automatically put into the same boat.

Peace,
J.

I suppose you could make the same argument against Martin Luther King, Susan B. Anthony, or any number of self appointed reformers. Their actions surely impacted many people negatively, especially white businessmen who were comfortable with the status quo for any number of reasons. I'm sure there were many cries, like yours, of "IT'S NOT FOR HIM TO DECIDE" if I should be able to send a black man to the back of the bus.

Now, before I go further, I want to be clear. I am not calling you or anyone else on this board a racist. Nor am I saying that Randi is the next Martin Luther King. I am only saying that it is a specious argument that people seeking to address the victimization of innocents have no right to take any action that might negatively affect any person in the advancement of that goal. Under that rule, the status quo would never have been challenged and we would still be living in the stone age.

Nor does it advance your argument that people are not lining up at Randi's door to "praise" him. It just shows that he is engaging in a thankless task for reasons other than the love of the masses. In fact, this point undercuts your argument that Randi is doing his thing for anything other than selfless reasons.

You say he is not educating people, but that is the primary purpose of the JREF and what Randi does constantly on its behalf. If Randi were not educating, then the JREF would have a difficult time maintaining its tax-exempt status with the goverment. If you have inside information about that, you might want to share it with the IRS. Otherwise, I wouldn't be making that claim.

You say his work is as fraudulent as Geller's. We all know about Geller, but what is your basis for saying that Randi's work is fraudulent? I have seen this claim stated in various ways throughout this discussion, but have seen absolutely no evidence to back it up. Fraud is a serious charge. It is illegal and, if proven, would spell trouble for the JREF. If you have proof, let's see it.

You say he is not protecting the public, but isn't that really a matter of opinion? You say it is a minority of the public that seeks out help from psychics, but as recent polls show, it is a large minority constituting millions of people. You may not believe that is a minority worth protecting, but I suspect others, including James Randi, would disagree.