[Echolima]

Originally Posted by Katster

I see..so being wrong is not allowed...

No, being wrong is not allowed when it deceives.

If mediumship is not 100% accurate, then it should not be used publicly in cases such as that of Shawn Hornbeck.

I have already said that the only people that an individual should give any information to in police cases is the police investigation team itself. That includes information that is claimed to have gained psychically.

I feel very strongly that information of that type should never be given to family members, friends, or television programmes.

Emma

[Katster]

God grant you safe journey Echolima

Katster xxxxx

[Echolima]

Originally Posted by Katster

God grant you safe journey Echolima

Katster xxxxx

I'm sure that was meant well Katster, but I am a pagan

Blessed be
Emma

[J-lynn]

Good points everyone.

How I feel: It's very hard to tell whether they're fake or not. I don't think one mishap should make one be known as being a 'fake'. However, it was very wrong for these psychics to release information like that and cause more heartbreak. But, like someone said before, they could have picked up on some other boy.-- Oh and as I forgot to mention I am not defending or against them.

[Madame Sosostris]

"Did you see that psychic on Entertainment Tonight in December, James Van Praagh? He had one of Marilyn Monroe's hair curlers ? it even had a Marilyn hair on it ? and this guy was listening to Marilyn talk to him right on the air. Spooky!

Those curlers are a highlight of "Marilyn Monroe, The Exhibit," a display that opened November 11, 2005, on the Queen Mary in Long Beach, California; advertised as the largest private collection of Marilyn memorabilia ever assembled, a collection with the claimed worth of $10 million dollars.

But I have a small problem with those hair curlers: it took only the briefest Internet research and a call to Clairol to establish that they were first manufactured in 1974. Marilyn passed away in 1962. I wonder which dead blonde Van Praagh WAS talking to."








http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/02/06/132111.php

[UrbanMedium]

Hi , Im new to the board ...


I never liked Silvia Brown , precisely because I felt she was not correct in her practices.Now I see that it was because she was not fully develpoed or developed at all. Lying makes me not appreciate people.

Things like this make me upset because it gives us psychics and developing mediums like myself a bad name.

[Echolima]

Originally Posted by Madame Sosostris

But I have a small problem with those hair curlers: it took only the briefest Internet research and a call to Clairol to establish that they were first manufactured in 1974. Marilyn passed away in 1962.

That is typical of the results of my researches into people like Acorah. Their own research simply is not good enough.

I wonder which dead blonde Van Praagh WAS talking to."

How can we believe that anybody's spirit was talking to HIM? If, as I suspect, and others aver, he IS a fake, then he was talking to thin air, just like Acorah.

Emma

[Madame Sosostris]

Caught Cheating

Even for seasoned observers it is remarkable how Van Praagh appears to get hits, even when he doesn't. When we were filming the 20/20 piece, I was told that he had not done all that well the night before, but that he got a couple of startling hits--including the name of a woman's family dog. But when we reviewed the videotape, here is what actually happened. Van Praagh was bombing in his reading of a gentleman named Peter, who was poker-faced and obviously skeptical (without feedback Van Praagh's hit rate drops by half).

After dozens of misses, Van Praagh queried, "Who is Charlie?" Peter sat there dumbfounded, unable to connect to anyone named Charlie, when suddenly the woman sitting next to Peter (and a complete stranger), blurted out "Charlie was our family dog." Van Praagh seized the moment and proclaimed that he could see Charlie and Dad taking walks in heaven together.

The highlight of the 20/20 piece, however, was the blatant exposure of Van Praagh cheating, and then caught in a bald-faced lie. On a break, with the video camera rolling, he turned to a woman named Mary Jo and asked: "Did your mother pass on?" Mary Jo nodded in the negative and said "Grandmother." A full 54 minutes later Van Praagh turned to her and said: "I want to tell you, there is a lady sitting behind you. She feels like a grandmother to me.

He was caught cheating red-handed but when confronted by the 20/20 correspondent Bill Ritter, he lied, insisting that he got the grandmother without cheating. When they showed him the video clip, he proclaimed: "I don't cheat. I don't have to prove... I don't cheat. I don't cheat. I mean, come on." As if repeating it enough times would make it go away.

Yet, even after we busted Van Praagh for both cheating and lying, Barbara Walters concluded in the wrap-up discussion:

I was skeptical. I still am But I met James Van Praagh. He didn't expect to meet me. He knew that my father's name was Lew--Lewis he said and he knew that my father had a glass eye. People don't know that.

Ritter, doing his homework on this piece to the bitter end, replied:

You told me the story yesterday and I told you I would look and see what I could find out. Within a few minutes I found out that your father' name wasn't Lew and that he was very well known in show business. And this morning I was looking in a book and found a passage that says he was blind in one eye -- accidental -- and he had a glass eye. If I found that out, then he could have.

While Walters flustered in frustration, seemingly groping for some vestige of hope, Hugh Downs declared without qualification: "I don't believe him."

Where have we heard all this before? A hundred years ago, when mediums, seances, and spiritualism were all the rage in England and America, Thomas Henry Huxley concluded, as only he could in his biting wit, that as nonsensical as it was, spiritual manifestations might at least reduce suicides: "Better live a crossing-sweeper than die and be made to talk twaddle by a 'medium' hired at a guinea a seance."

[Madame Sosostris]

Originally Posted by Echolima

Speaking more generally now, if an individual is found to have lied/cheated on one occasion in order to gain fame or money, it is highly likely that it is not the only time.

Trust is hard won, and destroyed quickly.

Emma

There's nothing more detrimental to pure psychic insight than ego, fame and money, except a clogged up chakra system full of congested energy.

[White Summer]

I don't really know if Sylvia Browne is actually psychic, but I have read several of her books and I like her ideas on spirituality, personally.