View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Googling "debunking sceptics"

Discussions about Psychics and Psychic Phenomena, Extra Sensory Perception, Telepathy, Psi, Clairvoyancy, 6th Sense, Psychokinesis, etc.

Re: goggling "debunking sceptics"

Postby ProfWag » 24 Apr 2012, 20:45

NinjaPuppy wrote:
ProfWag wrote:
NinjaPuppy wrote:Awwwww crap man! The bottom line is that a police official says that a psychic helped solve a case.

Awe Crap what Ninja? Hell even I have helped solve a case Ninja, but it doesn't mean that paranormal psychic abilities actually solved it.

You are correct. It does NOT mean that paranormal psychic abilities solved squat BUT... since she calls herself a psychic, then we can safely claim that a psychic helped solve a case.

Or more correctly--it can be said that a person who claims to be a psychic helped solve a case. :-)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54






Re: goggling "debunking sceptics"

Postby Twain Shakespeare » 25 Apr 2012, 05:57

ProfWag wrote:This statement is from Nancy's own website.

"Nancy has assisted in the investigations of over 767 homicides. 90% of
the time Nancy has given the officers new, accurate information about
the case that helps in the search for a resolution."

Thoughts anyone?

Personally, I find that the statement "over 767" is a bit odd. Why not just say "768?" And then "90% of the time..." Does anyone but myself wonder what data she is using to back up that claim?


Twain replies:
My assumption is that she meant she had been consulted in homocide investigations 767 times, but of course it is extremily unlikely that all the "homocides" were homocides (lowering the number to some degree) and some of the investigations would have been of an undeterminable number of multiple homocides. (raises the number) That assumption would have been unconscious if you had not pointed out the lack of clarity, but I would have probably said it the same way if I weren't so agnosiac I don't recognize "How are you?" is rhetorical, so I am not inclined to go to the default of "deluded fool" in her case.
As far there being an article you read once that said she had cheated, you will notice what I suspect may be the same article about her is the subject of the "Refutation" I posted. The author of the article I posted is contending Joe Nickell, who made that appearently uncertifiable statement, is a pseudoskeptic variety of deluded fool with an ax to grind, and evidentally a liar who did not hesitate to blacken her name.

This is the article he was refuting. Do you recognize it, Prof?

http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/s ... ng_process

Haven't read it yet, and I don't won't to be completely pseudo-skeptical about the Saganites, but I suspect my opinion after reading it will be, "So much for the validity of authorized anecdotes." Nice day.
"What's so Funny about Peace, Love, and Understanding?"
User avatar
Twain Shakespeare
 
Posts: 375
Joined: 20 Jul 2010, 05:19
Location: El Paso Del Norte on the sunny Jornada del Muerta

Re: goggling "debunking sceptics"

Postby Twain Shakespeare » 25 Apr 2012, 06:31

Read it. A hatchet job which assumes she is a liar since she claims to psychic, and a fraud because she is divorced. He went on to say that all she did was, at most, say which of the theories was correct and possibly not that. That makes her possibly helpful, while arguably irrelevent, but does not make her a liar or a cheat.

The only obvious lies to me were the lies of a skilled pseudoskeptical propagandist set on blackening someone's name regardless of facts.
"What's so Funny about Peace, Love, and Understanding?"
User avatar
Twain Shakespeare
 
Posts: 375
Joined: 20 Jul 2010, 05:19
Location: El Paso Del Norte on the sunny Jornada del Muerta

Re: goggling "debunking sceptics"

Postby ProfWag » 25 Apr 2012, 21:25

Twain Shakespeare wrote:As far there being an article you read once that said she had cheated, you will notice what I suspect may be the same article about her is the subject of the "Refutation" I posted.

It was actually this one:

"The story

Sometime between Saturday, October 30, 2004 at 10 p.m. and the following morning, a 48 year old Hood River, Oregon woman, Kimberly Forbes, disappeared. Her disappearance has still not been solved as of this writing.

There are a lot of ways a news outlet can redraw attention to a missing person case. For example, they can publish the missing person’s photos, give all the details of the disappearance that are known, and interview the police to see what progress has been made. Stick to the facts. With any luck, such a report might trigger a memory in the mind of a witness in the viewing audience and lead to a break in the case.

A responsible news organization does not aid and abet the criminal responsible for the missing person’s disappearance by tripping the light fantastic through the Twilight Zone, casting suspicion on innocent people and relating events which in all likelihood contradict what actually occurred, thereby discouraging witnesses from coming forward. Not when a crime of such terrible proportions is at stake. Such gross irresponsibility would be beyond the pale.

But that is precisely what one news outlet chose to do. To highlight the anniversary of Kimberly Forbes’ disappearance, Fox affiliate KPTV hired Nancy Myer, who they referred to as a “nationally known psychic.” Myer has appeared on “Unsolved Mysteries” and “Sightings”, has authored the book “Silent Witness: The True Story Of A Psychic Detective”, and purportedly has “a long, distinguished history of assisting police and law-enforcement officials on both homicide and missing-person cases — over 500 of them to date.” (Source ). Not “solving” cases. Assisting.

One can only guess how deeply KPTV investigated to see how much assistance Myer had been in murders and missing persons cases.

Myer claimed to be able to “read” Forbes’ photo and gather magical insight into Kimberly’s disappearance. Myer then proceeded to give KPTV her impressions.

In the report Myer claimed Forbes was kidnapped by a married co-worker and taken into the hills and shot to death.

KPTV is now complicit in the implication of every married man Forbes ever worked with in the matter of her disappearance and possible murder. Without a shred of evidence, KPTV and Myer have cast a shadow on several innocent people. Very nice.

Then, according to the report, despite being from the exotic and remote location of Pennsylvania, Myer was miraculously able to pinpoint the exact location where Forbes’ car was found in Oregon a year prior. Myer then drew a map of where she believes Forbes’ body is located.

So what do the police have to say about this bounty of information provided by a woman who it is claimed has assisted police in over 500 murder and missing person cases?

The police said the map was too vague. So Myers told KPTV that the body won’t be found by the police. She said the body would be found by hunters in the fall. That was over a year ago now. Fall has come and gone twice. No Kimberly Forbes. No body.

If Kimberly Forbes has been murdered, it is certainly not to be expected that the police are still searching the countryside over a year later. If her body is ever found, it will be found by chance, or after her murderer has been caught and led police to the location.

As for Myer pinpointing the exact location where Kimberly’s car was found, according to KPTV the police “were amazed”. In the video report, Detective Sergeant Gary Tiffany said, “You know, you talk about where the car was parked, all the media coverage on that was after the car had already been moved from that spot. So she really keyed in on that for whatever reason. That’s kind of an uncanny thing.”

Myer pinpointed not just a general area. Not just an address. Myer pinpointed the very spot where the car belonging to Kimberly Forbes was found.

Another victory for psychics? A validation from the police. The police were amazed! Do we have have a genuine “psychic detective” here?

Do you suppose they have the internet in Pennsylvania?

Do you suppose they have the internet in Pennsylvania? Call me psychic, but I sense that they do.

Let’s take a look at the following news item which appeared three weeks after Kimberly’s disappearance in The Outlook Online.

The article gives a pretty precise location of where the car was found. “Meanwhile, Pedro Sanchez noticed a red car in a vacant lot behind his restaurant Don Pedro in the 18800 block of Southeast Stark Street.”

A quick search on Mapquest reveals the location of the restaurant.

But Myer was more accurate than an address. According to the news report, she gave a pinpoint location of where the car was parked. So take a look at the photo accompanying the article. It shows a policeman collecting evidence from where her car had been parked.

Folks, I found that article showing the pinpoint location of Kimberly Forbes’ vehicle in less than a minute.

Did Nancy Myer divine the location of Kimberly’s car by supernatural or electronic means? Was she perhaps given clues by the reporter of the story? As Fox News says, “We report, you decide.”

If Nancy Myer was able to give a pinpoint location of an object whose exact location was public knowledge for a year, why was she unable to give a pinpoint location of Kimberly Forbes, whose location is unknown to anyone but the person responsible for her disappearance? Why was Nancy Myer only able to draw a scribble of an excuse for a map which no one could interpret?

What else that Nancy Myer claimed about events surrounding the disappearance of Kimberly Forbes can be verified? Nothing. A psychic can depend on that.

Not only has Kimberly Forbes’ kidnapper and possible murderer gotten away with his crimes up to now, so has Nancy Myer, with the able assistance of a news program."

http://www.skepticreport.com/sr/?p=422
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: goggling "debunking sceptics"

Postby Twain Shakespeare » 02 Jun 2012, 07:14

ProfWag wrote:
Twain Shakespeare wrote:As far there being an article you read once that said she had cheated, you will notice what I suspect may be the same article about her is the subject of the "Refutation" I posted.

It was actually this one: http://www.skepticreport.com/sr/?p=422



Sorry I missed this when you first posted it Prof, and thankyou for the follow up.

The article you posted justifies your conclusions much better than the one I thought you might have been referring to, and validates the respect i have for your integrity.
"What's so Funny about Peace, Love, and Understanding?"
User avatar
Twain Shakespeare
 
Posts: 375
Joined: 20 Jul 2010, 05:19
Location: El Paso Del Norte on the sunny Jornada del Muerta

Re: goggling "debunking sceptics"

Postby ProfWag » 02 Jun 2012, 09:30

Twain Shakespeare wrote:
ProfWag wrote:
Twain Shakespeare wrote:As far there being an article you read once that said she had cheated, you will notice what I suspect may be the same article about her is the subject of the "Refutation" I posted.

It was actually this one: http://www.skepticreport.com/sr/?p=422



Sorry I missed this when you first posted it Prof, and thankyou for the follow up.

The article you posted justifies your conclusions much better than the one I thought you might have been referring to, and validates the respect i have for your integrity.

Thanks and I respect your opinions as well. Unfortunately I do usually check the skeptical side of an article before the believer side, but the internet has so much freakin information that both sides of an argument are often hard to determine who is being the most honest.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: goggling "debunking sceptics"

Postby NinjaPuppy » 02 Jun 2012, 09:44

How odd. I spent some time on Skeptico blog today and was happily reading away. One of the entries that I really enjoyed was "The Dr. Phil Reading". It's basically a very well done debunking of a few of the better known psychics. Thanks for that article ProfWag.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: goggling "debunking sceptics"

Postby oyehoye » 25 Sep 2013, 21:48

These days while surfing on internet a planty of psychic found available 24/7, ORanum and all other guys who ask you questions and then in response to that gives you hope and etc. But the fact is i feel that it is more of a trick then some spiritual stuff. Maybe they do possess something extra ordinary but after a few encounters i have realized that most of them are same using same figures of speech which obviously does not makes any sense. so far i have tried many both paid and free psychics most of the time i wasted money but their is one exceptional case and [name removed by Moderator]. I tried his [url removed by Moderator] text a psychic service and for the first time or maybe the last time i was sure that i am talking to someone who truly holds some authority
Last edited by NinjaPuppy on 25 Sep 2013, 22:21, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: URL removed by Moderator
User avatar
oyehoye
 
Posts: 1
Joined: 25 Sep 2013, 21:32

Previous

Return to Psychic Phenomena / ESP / Telepathy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron