More on TV mediums, psychics

I guess ultimately doing this stuff on tv is hugely challenging to keep it interesting without dramatizing it.
How many times can one watch a medium transmit messages before they switch to another channel. (unintended pun there)

It's always fun to see interviews, though. And hear personal experiences from readers.

[Native spirit]

The three mediums are british.i havent seen them live but my friend has and says they are good, the trouble with tv mediums there shows are really edited so you only see the hits. i like john edward i think hes very good no frills with him.

Namaste

[Nameless]

Originally Posted by psychoslice

I use to think the same thing as you, but after watching his shows I realized that he was generally wanting evidence, like come on, you don't believe anything that is told to you, do you ?. There are many that came onto his show to wine the money, but they all failed, even Guirie Geller or whatever his name is, I like to think that these things are true, but without proper evidence how can any intelligent person believe it ?. these people use those who are suffering from loss of loved ones, to me its disgusting.

I think it is disgusting he makes his money on attempting to discredit something that is unproveable. But until you believe in it, it is unbelievable. And no one else on Earth can change your beliefs but you - and I don't mean you personally - I mean everyone. Just because it may seem unproveable doesn't mean it's not true. And watching the relief that comes over someone when they connect to their loved ones makes one realize that the opposite is happening. It is solace for the one who has lost a loved one and reconnected with them. But this is for another thread. Sorry Henri.

[psychoslice]

Originally Posted by Nameless

I think it is disgusting he makes his money on attempting to discredit something that is unproveable. But until you believe in it, it is unbelievable. And no one else on Earth can change your beliefs but you - and I don't mean you personally - I mean everyone. Just because it may seem unproveable doesn't mean it's not true. And watching the relief that comes over someone when they connect to their loved ones makes one realize that the opposite is happening. It is solace for the one who has lost a loved one and reconnected with them. But this is for another thread. Sorry Henri.

And believing it doesn't prove that it is true either, also if you can do it why not prove it, but no there is always an excuse, there is no need to get up on your high horse just becuae your beliefs are threaten, this is the problem when we have beliefs, we will guard them at all cost, if there true or not.

John Edwards made the comment he likes skeptics, as we're all skeptical about things we cannot understand or accept.

Yet cynics have made up their mind what's impossible and no evidence will ever be sufficient... they , like Randi try to destroy or discredit anything that they can't accept ... Often in the name of "truth".

This history of science has many many examples, as does religion. Persecution of those who see differently.

How arrogant it seems to believe your truth is the final word, arrogant and sadly narrowminded. I find the SF ignore function the best way to avoid pointless debate with cynics.

Genuinely wise, enlightened teachers typically don't waste energy debating with others viewpoints, as they understand the universe is far vaster than any single human perspective.

How dull it'd be if there were only one species of butterfly, tree, flower or sentient lifeform..

Pizza? , shure, will it be mushroom,mushroom or mushroom, take yer choice.

[psychoslice]

Originally Posted by Henri77

John Edwards made the comment he likes skeptics, as we're all skeptical about things we cannot understand or accept.

Yet cynics have made up their mind what's impossible and no evidence will ever be sufficient... they , like Randi try to destroy or discredit anything that they can't accept ... Often in the name of "truth".

This history of science has many many examples, as does religion. Persecution of those who see differently.

How arrogant it seems to believe your truth is the final word, arrogant and sadly narrowminded. I find the SF ignore function the best way to avoid pointless debate with cynics.

Genuinely wise, enlightened teachers typically don't waste energy debating with others viewpoints, as they understand the universe is far vaster than any single human perspective.

How dull it'd be if there were only one species of butterfly, tree, flower or sentient lifeform..

Pizza? , shure, will it be mushroom,mushroom or mushroom, take yer choice.

He he, is this another exscuss just full of emotion, if he likes sceptics, why then will he not go to someone like Randi and prove the sceptic wrong, its pretty simple isn't it?.

[magonia]

Ive seen one TV Psychic live performance on stage, not convincing, it was filmed and I sensed, staged to some degree.

Anyway this is a fun thread so let's share what we DO care about.
I have a different thread about fictional tv psychics (look for it soon) slightly off this topic.

Also if one knows of a fun spoof on mediums-psychics feel free to share a clip.
I recall Jonny Carson had one as well
2 I just found

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FanBdPS8HT0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXNTl...eature=related

Originally Posted by magonia

Ive seen one TV Psychic live performance on stage, not convincing, it was filmed and I sensed, staged to some degree.

The UK has a much longer history of performers, psi research, and no doubt, fakery as well.... compared to the US.

The only live stage show I'd ever seen was mentalist Kreskin many yrs ago.
Pretty convincing , to my view.

If I'd never done telepathy, mediumship, or psychic readings myself, I might have looked for possible means of fakery ... but what we did was well within my understanding though amazingly accurate.

[Nameless]

Originally Posted by psychoslice

He he, is this another exscuss just full of emotion, if he likes sceptics, why then will he not go to someone like Randi and prove the sceptic wrong, its pretty simple isn't it?.

Henri is right. Most mediums are not bothered by skeptics and I admit I have not met many skeptics here, and here is where I started...and i think skepticism is healthy, everyone needs it to survive, so that is not the issue. And I don't personally don't care what anyone thinks about me or what I do. The issue is James Randi, that's what I got my danger up about. Most skeptics don't get paid to be skeptical - you gotta admit that's a true statement. He has deliberately made a career out of it, and I find that simply offensive, that's all. If there were no mediums, he would be out of a job. So, skeptic away...