Derek I know the name of your Grandmother on your mothers side, as well as how and where she died.
I am thinking of the answers right now
Was I right?

No, you were way off the mark, I think you were guessing

Ba Humbug, must have been a rougue elemental from the lower astral plane messing with me.
Thanks anyway.

Please forgive me for being dense but I would like to return to a discussion of the original post as I'm still not getting the basis for the accusation.

What is it about the video clip that betrays Paul Zenon as a pseudo skeptic?

As I pointed out in an earlier post, nowhere does he say that he is talking about all readers/psychics. Saying, "Well, yes, that's true but we know that's what he means," can no longer wash in a thread where clearly people have no compunction agaisnt obsessing on exact wording, phrasing, even spelling!

A user indicated that Mr. Zenon's prefacing his statement with something explicit like, "I can't say that all readers do this but..." would not help. Why not?

Bob. You know all about me and I know all about you. I shall send you a private message to clarify things. I did type out a lengthy reply answering every question raised but accidentally deleted it. I have no energy to do so again. Perhaps later. I shall simply say for the moment that Bob's definition of "cold reading" is exactly the same as Richard Webster's and mine too. In fact EVERY psychic does it this way. It is simply that you read someone cold without knowing anything about them. But that is merely a semantic discussion and it is NOT the definition espoused in the Ian Rowland book which is full of word trickery and deception. Richard has expressed irritation in print that what he thinks of as "cold reading" is not what magicians/mentalists define it as. And they generally define it as the word manipulation and deceptive trickery espoused in the Rowland book. And I maintain that only a tiny minority of psychics do things that way. And this minority are usually magicians or mentalists. For example I have a tape by the inimitable Ford Kross using this kind of thing. I do not recommend it even though I am sure it worked for him. He asked a lot of questions to elicate feedback from the client. When I do a reading the client hardly says a word. I feel that I should be telling them rather than them telling me.

The vast majority of psychic readers have no access to literature which is published for magicians only. It is therefore only logical that the methods they use are not those of magicians and mentalists but are described in thousands of books on metaphysical subjects. They are experts in palmistry, tarot and other divination systems and no deception of any kind is necessary. I maintain strongly that not a single psychic of my acquaintance uses a single technique in the Ian Rowland book unless they happen to be a magician. And yes. I do believe that mentalism is simply another branch of magic although that is another discussion for another time.

And a note to Kinesis. A good psychic NEVER responds to challenges. They are too busy looking for their lost keys. And his question should be addressed to a psychic medium rather than a private reader.

Visionquest-

I've PM'd you.

So would it be correct to say, then, that when you stated that 85% of readers don't use cold reading, you were referring to "cold reading" as described and explained in books written for mentalists.

I would agree that many straight readers to not use those specific techniques consciously, but would suggest that they use many of them just the same. I have found that many straight non-magician readers use shotgunning techniques, personality stereotypes, etc. without even realizing that they are employing them. This is not to say, however, that they don't often do genuinely insightful "psychic" readings.

I am glad to see, thought, that this thread seems to be returning to a reasonable discussion.

Good thoughts,

Bob

I just went on to a well known online magic book store and was able to access 31 books and pdfs on cold reading. I had the potential to purchase these without question. What is stopping a psychic doing the same?



In other words you don't know the answer. That's what I thought.

To Bob's point....

I agree with him - as a psychotherapist type, I basically developed "cold reading / warm reading" skills, although I hadn't thought about it that way, just by working in the field for years and building internal templates and profiles... things one uses for engagment, concepts for people to bounce against etc. Probe lines, questions, etc. one matches to context and the person's demographics and background... etc.

Afetr reading BAUTA, I really got into tarot reading as a psychological reflective tool for some folk... I never claimed anything supernatural nor see the future - but "cold reading" is likely a bad term - I think using a system/approach is what many use - not as "shuteyes" - such as if one was going to do something like psychotherapy - principles and approaches but flexible to go with people.

I think most people think Cold Reading is memorized stock fortune cookie lines ones uses without consideration of context... if that is the case, I'd say most people don't use that who actually do the work!

IMHOOOOOO

Kinesis. I DO know the answer. And I just gave it to you. A good psychic NEVER responds to challenges and in fact they resent them because it shows a biased attitude on behalf of the challenger. Challengers are not going to give us any money so what is the point of interacting with them? However, I would be delighted to show a change of attitude if you send me some money up front. I do accept Paypal. I suggest a fee of 30 good Scottish Pounds would be ample.

In any event the psychic world does not work that way. If you challenge me to tell you what colour suit you are wearing today I would have no idea. However, if I were doing a reading for you then once in a rare while I would get a vibe telling me the colour. When I get that vibe I announce it and I will invariably be right. However, it is not something you order up as if on a menu.

And no. There may well be 31 books on the subject but I can assure you the average psychic knows nothing about them and even if they did would not purchase them. In fact I have seen psychics get very irate on the rare occasion they come across them. They are, in the main, honest sincere people who are aghast at the very suggestion of trickery. In any event 90 percent of the literature out there on cold reading is garbage anyway. Even though I personally rarely use the techniques I do know all about them.

I am afraid Kinesis needs to develop his own psychic ability a bit more. He is actually a fan of mine but it hasn't dawned on him yet how much of a fan he is. And so is Bob Cassidy.

I prefer not to discuss matters as sensitive as this by private messages on the Magic Café system but alas I am not able to contact Bob by e-mail because his address does not seem to be on his website. No doubt he expects the people who book him for events to be as psychic as he is so no contact information is necessary. Still, I know that he is very psychic himself and will figure out how to contact me by regular e-mail. And he will not use a single cold reading technique to do so. He will do it by the method I have been advocating all along. Gut feeling and intuition. I expect I will hear from him today.

And yes. I do agree that many shut eye psychics use cold reading without knowing they are cold reading. But they STILL don't use a single technique from the Ian Rowland book, excellent as that book may be for those magicians and mentalists who think they are being let into a big secret but aren't really. Don't get me wrong. It's a great book as long as you don't take it too seriously and believe 85% to 95% of psychics actually use anything from it. They don't.

I know these things.

Visionquest - I'm getting an image of a Canadian maple leaf and the initials ML. Would that mean anything to you?

Been away for a week. Thought these kind of threads had kind of finished for ever.

Guess some things never change.

Nothing. Except you're assuming that they 1) know about that site or 2) would bother doing a web search for something that doesn't interest them because they have the explicit desire to rip people off.

No, a good (as in "effective") FAKE psychic NEVER responds to challenges.

Dmkraig

I think what kinesis was pointing out is that anyone "can" have access to those publications. I thought the same thing when I read visionquest's comment about "having no access".

Tony

Cheers Tony

Please note that there is not ONE explicit response. If someone says, "XYZ" and the criticism is "Nope," as the criticism is here, it shows a total failure to do anything in a last-ditch attempt to support one's person fundamentalist religious beliefs.

A religious fundamentalist might say, "I don't care how much evidence you have to support your position, I know what is true!" This is exactly what happened here with the "argument" of "I stand by what I said," refuting not one word of what I posted.

:You say you don't have time for "endless investigations." This, again, is typical of a person who has not argument. You want to commit the error of generalizing from the specific. Your logic is, "if I prove X, Y, and Z are fake, then since they are examples of something, that something must also be fake.

Similarly, if three people perform "Twisting the Aces" using gaffed cards, obviously the only way to do the trick is with gaffed card. Well, tell that to Vernon!

This moving to the general from the specific without justification is typical of fundamentalist religionists. If something shows that one event in the Bible may have actually occurred, then the entire Bible must be true!

Sorry. As much as you want that to be true, it's not.

There is no need for your MacGuffin of "endless investigation." One only needs to explore one phenomenon until it is proven to be real or not. It's called "The scientific method." Does that prove anything else? Nope. Do you want it to prove anything else, such as a generalized support or denunciation? That's what fundamentalist religionists do. And that appears to be what you want.

You wrote, " How much investigation should one do into ghosts...." which assumes that ALL ghosts are the same. You might also ask "How much investigation should one do into cancer" because, after all, IT HAS THE SAME NAME! Therefore, all cancers are the same. The treatment for prostate cancer should be the same as for leukemia, and if it isn't then it's all a fraud!

Other tricks of the debunkers/pseudo-skeptics
1) Demand evidence without saying what you'll accept as evidence
2) Ignore arguments that don't fit into your dogmatic model of the universe
3) Use generalizations instead of specifics
4) Move the goalposts

But perhaps most importantly, the refusal to answer one simple question: Who the heck are you? Why should ANYONE waste their time proving anything to you since you've already made up your mind anyway? And if I spent my time proving to you that yes, indeed, ghosts (or some other paranormal phenomena) exist, what will you do? Will you say publicly admit you were 100% wrong and spend one hour a day going to every website, newspaper, magazine, and other form of communication telling people that you were a dogmatic fool and that, indeed, some paranormal property is real? Of course not. Virtually every pseudo-skeptic thinks that the world spins around them and they DESERVE to have others prove something to them even though they don't care about it at all.

Oh, you just don't want people to get ripped off? How about spending one hour a day helping out a charity? You'll be doing a lot more to help the world than trying to have someone waste their time trying to disprove your limiting beliefs.

Actually even a good genuine shut-eye psychic would never respond to challenges. In fact I have seen them become quite aggressive and irritable when it happens. I do agree, however, that no psychic will go looking for magic sites with books on cold reading when they have literally hundreds of books available online and in bookshops which tell them how to do it without trickery of any kind.

I stated previously that I did not think Sally Morgan would be daft enough to use an earpiece a la Peter Popoff. Alas, I am now convinced otherwise after seeing a video clip. That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard of. Doris Stokes, Sylvia Browne and the rest of that ungodly bunch would never show such a lack of astuteness. I am quite surprised at the stupidity of that kind of thing.

Here is the videoclip in question. Interestingly enough I have been interviewed by Joe Duffy myself. I remember him being very aggressive and sceptical indeed. It was on Friday 13th. I remember him bringing a ladder into the studio and deliberately walking under it to show his defiance of superstition. And it was a radio show! The viewers couldn't even see him walking under the ladder but he insisted on doing it anyway!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiQF-NR6h8M

I love Mr. Vision Quest's input here! He reflects what I've observed over the last 10 years. What He Said!! If you would ask the best Psychics about the books we all have been exposed to, they'd say... WHAT?

They'd say... WHAT?
Who's the Psychic here? How did you know I had them on my book shelf!!

Bit of fun Slim to ease us gently into Monday evening, this side of the pond.......

Visionquest-

I already PMed you here BEFORE you stated that you can't get in touch with me. (Also, note that I don't use my website to book shows. My bookings are strictly referrals and agent sourced.)

Good thoughts,

Bob

About ready to mix a Rum and diet with my Alchemical Perscription myself.