hello believer newbie

[donnygirl]

hi i came here by accident hope you don't mind the fact i am a believer but with an open mind
i will argue my case if need be
but
also in the same respect
will also listen to you
think i will look forward to meeting you all hope you don't mind the fact i believe in spirtualism and the other side but i have a sceptical husband so know how to argue about it love a good discussion and reading other views as long as you don't mind mine:smiley:

[tkingdoll]

Welcome :)

Good on you for joining here, hopefully we have a lot to learn from you as well as putting (sometimes throwing) a lot of questions and things your way. Believers are as welcome here as skeptics but it does get a little heated occasionally. Sounds like you're well practiced in addressing demands for evidence though :)

You will also find there are several ex-believers of one sort of another here. We have ex-religious folk, ex-psychics, etc (that's a pun if you read it out loud :cheesy:).

I would be interested to know if you are familiar with the origins of Spiritualism and the history of the Fox sisters?

[donnygirl]

have heard of the fox sisters
glad you don't mind me being here i just love a good discussion. you have far side of the moon to blame for getting me here,he posted something on another site i am a member of and a thread i started and i was intruiged and..... hey ho here i am

[Zaira]

donnygirl,

I look forward to sharing with you here.

It's late, I'll check in with you tomorrow. :smiley:

[donnygirl]

thanks Z
catch up with you later i have to be at work at 6
think i may stuggle;)

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

have heard of the fox sisters
glad you don't mind me being here i just love a good discussion. you have far side of the moon to blame for getting me here,he posted something on another site i am a member of and a thread i started and i was intruiged and..... hey ho here i am

I'm getting blamed for everything now ^-^

[Zaira]

Not necessarily. We have already established that we are all entitled to our beliefs. You have yours, I have mine, and they each have theirs. I know they all appear to be coming from the same direction but they're not and yet they, me included, still manage to discuss things and share stuff with each other without coming to blows. You popped in and your very first post was very hostile on a very sensitive subject, especially (if I may say) for woman. You then apologised for your bluntness. No matter how strong we feel about our beliefs, surely we must take into consideration the sensitiveness of the topic and the vulnerability of the person before spouting that we think they are talking rubbish?

Personally I think you posted without due care and attention and I think you have learn your lesson.

I would like to welcome you onboard this thread that donnygirl started.

It could be interesting. :smiley:

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

Personally I think you posted without due care and attention and I think you have learn your lesson.



Well, not really because I don't retract anything I've said. I still find pretending to get messages from embryos, in an attempt to enhance standing in an internet forum, to be repulsive.

I respect the right for people to have different beliefs, however I still find those beliefs ridiculous, repulsive and absurd.

It is a fallacy to assume that different points of view carry equal weight and should all be respected.

[Zaira]

I posted this on the other forum and I want to post it here in order for anyone, interested in the debate that is taking place here and on the other forum, to see where I'm coming from.

Sammi posted about Silvia Brown being accused of being a fraud. What follows was my reply to her post.

I'm going to come clean here and will no doubt get yelled at but hear me out folks. I don't like psychics, especially those in the media. What they do we can do too but they get the rest of us a bad name. They get their agents and their bookings and their books published and they get carried away with the limelight. Meantime us poor saps are turning ourselves inside out trying to convince people that we have (for want of a better word) spiritual experiences. I am not a psychic and have refused the title many, many times.

Sammi, If you have had 'spiritual experiences' have faith in them, have faith in yourself. The psychics in the media have these experiences I have no doubt but they have lost their way. The real path for this 'stuff' is a spiritual one not a financial one. I have nothing against a psychic giving readings, giving comfort. All I ask is that you keep it in perspective. A lot of you talk about wanting to help people and you can, so much can be done quietly in the background, you don‘t need an audience. I help people all the time just by being myself and passing on a little advice and guidance occasionally to those who ask for it. The media psychics may have started off wanting to help people but then they began to believe their own publicity hype. Too many of them are being classed as frauds and this reflects very badly on the rest of us. It makes us look like nut jobs.

Okay. Rant over. Sorry if I upset anyone but its the truth and it's time we faced it. :smiley:

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

The media psychics may have started off wanting to help people but then they began to believe their own publicity hype. Too many of them are being classed as frauds and this reflects very badly on the rest of us. It makes us look like nut jobs.



Hi Zaira,

I think you are possibly being too generous here. I'd say most, if not all, media psychics have been in it for themselves right from the start.

If you take the case of Sylvia Browne, she is a convicted fraudster and has been exposed as a complete fraud in her psychic career. (I'll remind anyone that doesn't know already, go visit stopsylviabrowne.com)

I'd be surprised if at any point she actually believed she had any psychic powers. Same goes for all the other ones you see on the telly etc, the skills they use now to generate the illusion are the same ones they used at the start. These people must know beyond any reasonable doubt that the abilities they are pretending to portray are completely false.

The Psychic Barber for instance is another one that is supposed to be convincing and have real ability, however if you pop over to badpsychics, you will see some transcripts of his readings which show he resorts to cold reading (badly) when he has to. And that suggests that when he is being accurate, he must be using another method, which surely must be hot reading. My point again, is that he must have been using these techniques right from the start.

[Zaira]

FarSideOfTheMoon,

Okay. You stand by what you said. I get it. But what about a little compassion for the feelings of the other people participating on that forum.

"I still find pretending to get messages from embryos, in an attempt to enhance standing in an internet forum, to be repulsive."

If that was the case then I agree. But how do you know that was the case? What if she wasn't pretending? What if she really believed it? Wouldn't a more gentle approach have been in order when trying to point out where someone might be mistaken about something?

"I respect the right for people to have different beliefs, however I still find those beliefs ridiculous, repulsive and absurd."

Which beliefs exactly?

"It is a fallacy to assume that different points of view carry equal weight and should all be respected."

I'm not assuming anything. But help me out here. What about devils advocate? Isn't that a way of putting forward different points of view that have equal weight? Personally, respect, like my advice is given very sparingly. The only respect I feel of any importance here is the respect shown to another person while they put forward their views in a debate. Then we can go on to disagree as strongly as we want without disrespecting the person. Or if we do, we keep it to ourselves and focus on the topic of debate.

:smiley:

[Zaira]

We are out of sync. Go get a coffee and give me time to catch up. :smiley:

[Zaira]

FarSide,

"I think you are possibly being too generous here. I'd say most, if not all, media psychics have been in it for themselves right from the start."

Perhaps. But I'm a nice person, I don't like trashing people.

"If you take the case of Sylvia Browne, she is a convicted fraudster and has been exposed as a complete fraud in her psychic career. (I'll remind anyone that doesn't know already, go visit stopsylviabrowne.com)"

I understand that. And I would have got to it eventually but I was taking it easy over there. They are nice people, like myself. And like me, or like I used to be, they have their own way of doing things. I attempted a few times to explain that I believe they have stuff going on but they simply don't have the whole picture. I tried but I have this 'big yellow car clamp' in my brain that stops me from interfering in other people's lives. I put forward a few theories and asked some questions in the hope that something would click with someone and they would get curious enough to ask about it. I got a few PMs asking for more information but no one seemed to want to commit themselves to a discussion.

Don't worry, I haven't forgotten that you don't believe in this stuff. I just thought it would be nice if we could all discuss it without blowing each other's heads off.

".. Same goes for all the other ones you see on the telly etc, the skills they use now to generate the illusion are the same ones they used at the start. These people must know beyond any reasonable doubt that the abilities they are pretending to portray are completely false."

See that's where I come in.... I understand what they are talking about on the forum when they share their 'strange' experiences, I do too. But I get lost when people start talking about having powers and special gifts, I know it's only words but they are very misleading - and off putting. I have an explanation and I have shared it before with favourable reaction. I planned to share it there too when I had got enough people interested in looking at what happens from a different perspective. I'll probably get kicked off there now and that would be an awful shame.

"The Psychic Barber for instance is another one that is supposed to be convincing and have real ability, however if you pop over to badpsychics, you will see some transcripts of his readings which show he resorts to cold reading (badly) when he has to. And that suggests that when he is being accurate, he must be using another method, which surely must be hot reading. My point again, is that he must have been using these techniques right from the start."

I really can't comment on that because I haven't read any of his books or seen any of his shows. I hadn't even heard of him till I went to that forum. Now it's a case of 'nice party shame about the host'. He's never there. I don't even think he knows about that forum. But I could be wrong.

Hell! I could be wrong about all of this!

[Tin Lizzie]

Hey Zaira I doubt you'll get kicked off and I hope you don't. You are right to withold critical discussion from that forum and I respect you for doing so - the spirit world, synchronicity etc, is after all the greatest 'unexplained' and if people know things then it is not for me to question or accuse them. There is much to learn on both sides of this! :smiley: Tin Liz

[Zaira]

I have just checked out the last thread you were on. Wow! I take it you've come over here in order to get your second wind. :smiley:

Did you get my message?

[Dr B]

Hiya Zaira


We have already established that we are all entitled to our beliefs. You have yours, I have mine, and they each have theirs.

I would just like to make a small observation on points like this. You are of course quite correct that we are entitled to our beliefs - absolutely! However, that does not make them true.

I am entitled to believe the earth is flat, is at the centre of the universe, and was constructed by a fairy named Cecil. However, my entitlements to hold those views does not make them correct and in fact does not make them equally viable with other more evidenced opinions.

Remember, logic teaches us that not all opinions are equal!
There is a paper on the main UKS website that tackles this - take a look O0

[Cuddles]

the spirit world, synchronicity etc, is after all the greatest 'unexplained' and if people know things then it is not for me to question

If you don't question them, how do you think we will ever get from "unexplained" to "explained"?

[vbloke]

Hey Zaira I doubt you'll get kicked off and I hope you don't. You are right to withold critical discussion from that forum and I respect you for doing so - the spirit world, synchronicity etc, is after all the greatest 'unexplained' and if people know things then it is not for me to question or accuse them. There is much to learn on both sides of this! :smiley: Tin LizThe whole point about knowledge is the learning of things previously unknown.

If we are to acquire knowledge about the paranormal, then it must be shown and demonstrated in order to be understood properly.

It is quite right to question (but not accuse) in order to learn more and understand. Without questioning, we would not be typing these exchanges on a computer over the internet.

[Tin Lizzie]

The whole point about knowledge is the learning of things previously unknown.

If we are to acquire knowledge about the paranormal, then it must be shown and demonstrated in order to be understood properly.

It is quite right to question (but not accuse) in order to learn more and understand. Without questioning, we would not be typing these exchanges on a computer over the internet.

absolutely, we must question things. The sad thing is that much of this universe; this 'life' can't be explained, and sometimes our knowledge leads us to think we know more than we actually do - this is clear in the case of 'rogue' psychics and mediums also.

I am in no way seizing on emotions here and i do not intend to offend - this is directed at anyone reading, not just yourself - but have you ever felt the desire to communicate with a departed loved one / friend / ancestor? I know that scientific method demands redproducibility, and that seeing a medium may not guarantee a message, but supposing you had a private session and you received a message, something that only you could have understood the significance of, and something which the medium could not possibly have any prior knowledge of? what would you think then?

[donnygirl]

good question
should have some intersting answers:smiley:

[Tin Lizzie]

hopefully so

*massaging wrist* ;)

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

I am in no way seizing on emotions here and i do not intend to offend - this is directed at anyone reading, not just yourself - but have you ever felt the desire to communicate with a departed loved one / friend / ancestor? I know that scientific method demands redproducibility, and that seeing a medium may not guarantee a message, but supposing you had a private session and you received a message, something that only you could have understood the significance of, and something which the medium could not possibly have any prior knowledge of? what would you think then?

I can't think of many people who wouldn't want that type of situation to be true.

However, and you know there is a however, we can't work on anecdotal evidence.

As vBloke has mentioned as well, all these supposed talents disappear when put under scrutiny. That leads to only one conclusion - that they don't exist.

The only time they do work, is in uncontrolled conditions.

You only have to look at transcripts or listen to recordings of accurate readings to see that there has been a large element of retrofitting or confirmation bias in the reading. Memory is not infallible, what people remember from a reading is not what always has happened.

Of course if you can provide readings where this is not the case, then I'm certainly interested.

Then there are all those questions about why the spirits don't give us full names - it is always a 'J' or a 'M', or 'Joe' or 'Mary' (the common names). And why do mediums fall down when reading people from other countries where they aren't familiar with the popular culture and names from that country? And why do they use such vague and wide-ranging statements which can apply to a large proportion of the population?

[donnygirl]

hopefully so

*massaging wrist* ;)
tin lizzyO0

[Tin Lizzie]

I can't think of many people who wouldn't want that type of situation to be true.

However, and you know there is a however, we can't work on anecdotal evidence.

As vBloke has mentioned as well, all these supposed talents disappear when put under scrutiny. That leads to only one conclusion - that they don't exist.

The only time they do work, is in uncontrolled conditions.

You only have to look at transcripts or listen to recordings of accurate readings to see that there has been a large element of retrofitting or confirmation bias in the reading. Memory is not infallible, what people remember from a reading is not what always has happened.

Of course if you can provide readings where this is not the case, then I'm certainly interested.

Then there are all those questions about why the spirits don't give us full names - it is always a 'J' or a 'M', or 'Joe' or 'Mary' (the common names). And why do mediums fall down when reading people from other countries where they aren't familiar with the popular culture and names from that country? And why do they use such vague and wide-ranging statements which can apply to a large proportion of the population?

yes that is interesting, and disappointing from my point of view, that these things apparently don't work under controlled conditions.

just a little example here - a friend of mine visited a medium years ago. the medium began by giving a description of a man with dark hair and stubble (my friend has blonde hair), who was constantly scratching his chin. my friend's deceased dad fitted this bill, as he was a 'hairy' type with almost constant '5 o'clock shadow', and he would always be scratching it when he came home from work.
so, an interesting start - my friend had been brought up near Leeds and her father had died there. the reading took place in London with someone whose name she had found in a magazine.
Apparently he was as surprised by it all as she was - indeed he had always been an atheist.
He was insistent that this message was passed: my friend was, in the future, going to travel to the far east, with 'some friends that she did not yet know', and she would contract a severe illness and come close to death. He told her not to worry, and to remember what he was telling here here, because she would live and make a full recovery. she had all this recorded on a casette tape.
three years later my friend went to thailand with people she had met some months before at university. She contracted 'Denghi fever' and spent weeks in a thai hospital, losing vast amounts of weight and fearing that she would die.
needless to say, she recovered fully and is fine. She's now training to develop her own abilities as a medium, but at the moment she is admittedly to scared to talk to the dead. with things like this, the failure of mediums to meet scientific criteria is indeed disappointing, but ultimately irrelevant to me.

The vagueness of messages often has something to do with the different frequencies on which we and the other side exist. It takes them a lot of energy to slow down to our level, and this is probably also why messages may not always come across.

[Tin Lizzie]

If you don't question them, how do you think we will ever get from "unexplained" to "explained"?

well to be honest cuddles, i think it's a case of different wavelengths. perhaps the tools we have available aren't right for the job in hand?

as i mentioned to farside though, it is disappointing that psychic/medium sessions seem unable to stand up to scientific scrutiny. maybe it's because the spirits object to this intrusion????

[Cuddles]

The sad thing is that much of this universe; this 'life' can't be explained

No. There is much that hasn't been explained yet. As soon as you say that something can't be explained you are effectively closing your mind to any explanation that is later found. No scientist ever claims that we know everything, that is simply a popular straw man from those who don't understand what science is. However, scientists must keep an open mind to the possibility of an explanation being found. Closing your mind not only to possible explanations but also to the possibility of an explanation is not science, it is pretty much the definition of woo.

[Cuddles]

well to be honest cuddles, i think it's a case of different wavelengths. perhaps the tools we have available aren't right for the job in hand?

as i mentioned to farside though, it is disappointing that psychic/medium sessions seem unable to stand up to scientific scrutiny. maybe it's because the spirits object to this intrusion????

This is a popular misrepresentation of science. Science is not a tool, it is a method. Science actually consists of a few very basic steps:

1) Observe phenomenon.
2) Come up with theory to explain it.
3) Test theory with new observations.
4) Repeat.

That is it. If a phenomenon exists, it can be observed and is therefore open to study by science. The only way something can be closed to science is if it is unobservable, and if this is the case, why would anyone think it exists?

[Zaira]

Dr B,

"I would just like to make a small observation on points like this. You are of course quite correct that we are entitled to our beliefs - absolutely! However, that does not make them true."

Well it doesn't make them fact, no. But they are true to the person with the beliefs. I don't believe you half the time, but I bet what you believe is true for you. It's the fact, the proven, the ultimate truth Skeptics seek. I'm happy if something I believe helps me to make it through the night.

"I am entitled to believe the earth is flat, is at the centre of the universe, and was constructed by a fairy named Cecil. However, my entitlements to hold those views does not make them correct and in fact does not make them equally viable with other more evidenced opinions."

I accept that but we are not all into 'advanced opinions'. I talked before about having 'stuff' going on. For the most part I was too busy bringing up three children and taking care of my wounded soldier hubby to go into the whys and wherefores. Now that I am on my own. I can do all the reading and all the researching and surfing the net I want. And, before I pop off this mortal coil, I would just like some answers.

"Remember, logic teaches us that not all opinions are equal!"

Again this may be true but we were not all brought up with logical and reasoning minds, some of us had to learn about reason and logic the hard way. And sometimes dealing with logic and reason just gives us a headache. So be patient and bear with us. Okay? :smiley:

[Lord Muck oGentry]

Well it doesn't make them fact, no. But they are true to the person with the beliefs. I don't believe you half the time, but I bet what you believe is true for you. It's the fact, the proven, the ultimate truth Skeptics seek. I'm happy if something I believe helps me to make it through the night.



To amplify the point that Dr B is making:

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=8625

The trouble with talk of what is true-for-me is that it undermines not just science but also everyday communication. It empties the word true of meaning.

[Julia]

Absolutely! The idea that we create our own reality is one of the banes of early 21st century existence.

[Zaira]

Lord Muck oGentry,

Thank you. I'll check that link. :smiley:


Julia,

Thank you for your reply. :smiley:

I explored many things in my search for answers to what was going on with me. Along with cultivating positive thinking and practising visualisation, relaxation and meditation, I also explored through a book called The Masterkey the theory of creating our own reality. Today, I'm into Zen and meditation. It's been a long hard journey at times but whatever is going on with me is becoming old, I would still like some answers but it's less of a spiritual desire these days and more out of simple curiosity.
:smiley:

[Zaira]

Lord Muck oGentry,

"Both sides at least agree that there is a right and wrong in each case. But there are those who think that all of them are right, in their own way. These are the relativists.”

“There is no truth, they say, only truth-for-me; and what is true-for-me can be false-for-you. And this, they say, is just as it should be, because the validity of what we believe is always a function of our standpoint.”

I recon I have been a relativist then without knowing it. For instance I believed this to be true....

How you think will depend on whether you are an optimist or a pessimist; one differs from the other as night from day and yet both are right, each is right from his own point of view, and this point of view is the determining factor in the life of each.

I believed everyone was entitled to believe whatever they wanted to believe, and live their life however they wanted to live it, so long as they didn‘t hurt themselves or anyone else in the process.

Bear with me, I’m still working on this one. Feel free to correct me and show me the error of my ways. ;)

"The first way to argue against the relativist is to point out that if there is no such thing as truth, except from a given perspective, then one must accept one of the following three assertions: the claim "there is no truth except from a given standpoint" is true only from a given standpoint, or it is self-refuting, or it is a very special kind of truth in being the only one that is true from all standpoints. Each of these makes a nonsense of the original claim, so the relativist position is incoherent."

I think this may be something that I have yet to take onboard. I feel some new reading matter coming on. Thank you for your patience. ;)

[Lord Muck oGentry]

Zaira, I'm happy to see you find the Grayling link interesting. Best of luck with your reading.

[Zaira]

Thank you. :smiley:

[Tin Lizzie]

Again this may be true but we were not all brought up with logical and reasoning minds, some of us had to learn about reason and logic the hard way. And sometimes dealing with logic and reason just gives us a headache. So be patient and bear with us. Okay? :smiley:

ROFL!! 8)

[Zaira]

"ROFL!!"

Exqueeeeze me! You laughing at me?!!!!!!!!! ;)

[Tin Lizzie]

who? me? laughing? at you? you must be bonkers ::)

[Zaira]

Okay then. Just so as we understand each other. :smiley:

[Tin Lizzie]

now, are you trying to say i'm bonkers too, as in 'it takes one to know one'? :cheesy:

[Zaira]

You claiming to know me? :smiley:
I hated school! And I hated teachers, especially science and geography teachers.

Which are you again? ;)

[Tin Lizzie]

doesn't matter. hate doesn't come by degrees :'(

[Zaira]

Only joking.
You have been very helpful. Thank you. :smiley:

[Tin Lizzie]

That's okay, i was just adopting the 'tears' technique often employed by girls to try & wrap me around their little finger! it never ever works of course....

[donnygirl]

tin you probably have more queing than you realise to be wrapped around your fingerO0

[Tin Lizzie]

ooh now that's a nice thought! if only i knew (then my head would probably pop, but hey)