Although magicians, including Randi, have duplicated spoon bending none of them have done it as convincingly as Geller. When Randi does it, it looks like a trick which can easily be worked out. Whatever Geller does, is extremely clever which is why he's remained popular.
Well that is according to you. I do not find Geller convincing at all.
Whilst I applaud the efforts of those who debunk the charlatans who prey on the vulnerable, It's a shame that by so doing they also damage the reputation of those with genuine psychic abilities who do so much to help these same people. Mud tends to stick, as they say and there is a tendency for all to be tarred with the same brush, unfortunately.
Instead of just talking about these thieves, people should be made aware they may now actually DO something positive. Join with Stephen Fry Paul Danieals et cetera. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPBK08wAArw
I'm getting an S coming through, could be a female, Shona (scanning audience) could be Sharon (still scanning audience) no wait it's maybe Sheena (scanning audience sees someone react) oh is it you love?
Yes, we know a Sheena.
and has she passed over my love? (emm are you not supposed to know?)
Yes
and was she your gran my love? Mum? Daughter?
Auntie.
ah that's right your auntie Sheena. She's coming through very strongly my love.
HA HA HAAAAAAAA if you believe these charlatans you're either deluded and/or in need of professional help. They often prey on the impressionable and/or vulnerable in society and i don't subscribe to 'what's the harm if it brings people peace??' as it's based on conning people pure and simple.
Smdh at people that still fall for this its just like the Nigerian email scamster contact enough stupid people and some of them will believe aka suckers.
Instead of just talking about these thieves, people should be made aware they may now actually DO something positive. Join with Stephen Fry Paul Danieals et cetera. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPBK08wAArw
Let everyone know epeition now available first time ever!
What is the current law on this? Are "psychics" allowed to charge for their services? Or are they classed as entertainers and therefore in the same category as comedians, actors, clowns etc?
What is the current law on this? Are "psychics" allowed to charge for their services? Or are they classed as entertainers and therefore in the same category as comedians, actors, clowns etc?
The latter (especially the clowns and actors bit). Morgan has to include some sort of clause in her advertising to the effect that her act is for entertainment purposes.
Whilst I applaud the efforts of those who debunk the charlatans who prey on the vulnerable, It's a shame that by so doing they also damage the reputation of those with genuine psychic abilities who do so much to help these same people. Mud tends to stick, as they say and there is a tendency for all to be tarred with the same brush, unfortunately.
No one has "genuine psychic abilities".
See this is the up-hill battle where some just have to believe in claptrap no matter what reality check you give them.
All people who claim any special powers is a con artist. That IS the difference between one of them and a magician/mentalist who does a show entirely for entertainment and tells you that of course they don't really have any powers.
What is the current law on this? Are "psychics" allowed to charge for their services? Or are they classed as entertainers and therefore in the same category as comedians, actors, clowns etc?
All their advertising blurb must have "For Entertainment Purposes" on it, but you can be sure it's going to be as small as they can get away with and lost in a load of small print at the bottom.
But then they do attract people who do believe no matter what and so they are already catering for the terminally stupid. Many have been caught red handed cheating and faking it and yet they still have sell-out shows.
It's a religion and as genuine as that! (So not at all)
Anyone watching this film with no prior knowledge of Randi would be left with no idea that he is a hugely divisive figure who has been accused of using his own brand of deceit over the years to 'debunk' paranormal claims. It became obvious toward the end of the film that it wouldn't exist without Randi's say-so, since his participation was clearly based on him approving the finished result.
Lip-service was paid to the various people who have disagreed with his methods, via a few clips of angry people confronting him on a couple of TV shows. The reasons for those disagreements were not shown, and they were all dismissed immediately afterward by having Randi say something to the effect that those people only opposed him because they refused to accept his version of the 'truth'. Given that the whole tenor of the piece was 'Randi right - everyone else wrong', and given that all but one of the interviewees were professional sceptics (denialists is a better word, to be honest), it was no surprise that Uri Geller's contributions came off looking feeble by comparison. I don't know if his abilities are genuine, but he was basically shafted by this hatchet job.
Randi's dishonest approach to 'debunkery' is well-documented online, particularly the nonsense surrounding his bogus $1 million 'challenge', but suspicions about his lack of integrity pre-date the incident with his partner. The film made it clear that theirs is a genuine, loving relationship, and none of my own doubts about Randi's behaviour has anything to do with what Jose did, for two reasons: First, despite wishful thinking on the part of 'believers', there is no evidence whatsoever that Randi knew about Jose's deception and colluded in fraud. And second, if I was in his situation and he DID commit fraud, I'm not sure I wouldn't have done exactly the same thing. Love will always trump commitment to a cause.
In the final analysis, Randi and his followers are too dogmatic in their approach. Instead of seeking after truth, they start from the vantage point of total disbelief in any and all paranormal claims and seek only to disprove them. Worse still, they believe that gives them the right to abuse, disparage and humiliate anyone who disagrees with them, especially in Internet debates. Debunking charlatans is one thing (and quite necessary, too), but lording it over anyone who disagrees with Randi's utter denialism is quite another. Try going toe-to-toe with one of these online bullies, and you'll quickly see what I mean.
As for this film: Worthless and misleading, unless you happen to be an uncritical adherent to Randi's particular worldview.
the nonsense surrounding his bogus $1 million 'challenge'
Having read a very thorough article about this, following a link in another thread, I think the word "challenge" is a big mistake. Isn't it actually called a 'prize', or maybe 'promise' or 'gift' would do as well?
The point is that it's a promise that anyone who claims to have a paranormal ability, and can demonstrate it, will be paid $1M. Nothing more complicated than that. In particular, and despite the way some people refer to it, it's not trying to 'prove' anything.
Obviously there's a proviso about the word 'paranormal' , and some reasonable exceptions.
The conditions under which the demonstration will take place, and a definition of what would be "success", are proposed by the claimant, and agreed between them and the JREF.
All very straightforward, I'd have thought. If you don't like Randi, or feel the JREF's cheating, there are various other prizes on offer around the world.
Instead of just talking about these thieves, people should be made aware they may now actually DO something positive. Join with Stephen Fry Paul Danieals et cetera. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPBK08wAArw
Let everyone know epeition now available first time ever!
That's an interesting petition. It speaks of "vulnerable people" and then in the next breath calls them "feeble minded". I'm sure the government await the results with bated breath.
The latter (especially the clowns and actors bit). Morgan has to include some sort of clause in her advertising to the effect that her act is for entertainment purposes.
The latter (especially the clowns and actors bit). Morgan has to include some sort of clause in her advertising to the effect that her act is for entertainment purposes.
All their advertising blurb must have "For Entertainment Purposes" on it, but you can be sure it's going to be as small as they can get away with and lost in a load of small print at the bottom.
But then they do attract people who do believe no matter what and so they are already catering for the terminally stupid. Many have been caught red handed cheating and faking it and yet they still have sell-out shows.
It's a religion and as genuine as that! (So not at all)
Unfortunately, they also cater for the terminally ill, fleecing them of their last dollars and pounds, and as a man who follows science and is an atheist, I can say there is a special place in hell for such people.
Comments
Well that is according to you. I do not find Geller convincing at all.
Seriously?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPBK08wAArw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wlm_AWM-v6A
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/70539
Let everyone know epeition now available first time ever!
Yes, we know a Sheena.
and has she passed over my love? (emm are you not supposed to know?)
Yes
and was she your gran my love? Mum? Daughter?
Auntie.
ah that's right your auntie Sheena. She's coming through very strongly my love.
HA HA HAAAAAAAA if you believe these charlatans you're either deluded and/or in need of professional help. They often prey on the impressionable and/or vulnerable in society and i don't subscribe to 'what's the harm if it brings people peace??' as it's based on conning people pure and simple.
Smdh at people that still fall for this its just like the Nigerian email scamster contact enough stupid people and some of them will believe aka suckers.
Ay, don't shoot the messenger"
What is the current law on this? Are "psychics" allowed to charge for their services? Or are they classed as entertainers and therefore in the same category as comedians, actors, clowns etc?
I find him really unpleasant.:(
The latter (especially the clowns and actors bit). Morgan has to include some sort of clause in her advertising to the effect that her act is for entertainment purposes.
No one has "genuine psychic abilities".
See this is the up-hill battle where some just have to believe in claptrap no matter what reality check you give them.
All people who claim any special powers is a con artist. That IS the difference between one of them and a magician/mentalist who does a show entirely for entertainment and tells you that of course they don't really have any powers.
All their advertising blurb must have "For Entertainment Purposes" on it, but you can be sure it's going to be as small as they can get away with and lost in a load of small print at the bottom.
But then they do attract people who do believe no matter what and so they are already catering for the terminally stupid. Many have been caught red handed cheating and faking it and yet they still have sell-out shows.
It's a religion and as genuine as that! (So not at all)
Lip-service was paid to the various people who have disagreed with his methods, via a few clips of angry people confronting him on a couple of TV shows. The reasons for those disagreements were not shown, and they were all dismissed immediately afterward by having Randi say something to the effect that those people only opposed him because they refused to accept his version of the 'truth'. Given that the whole tenor of the piece was 'Randi right - everyone else wrong', and given that all but one of the interviewees were professional sceptics (denialists is a better word, to be honest), it was no surprise that Uri Geller's contributions came off looking feeble by comparison. I don't know if his abilities are genuine, but he was basically shafted by this hatchet job.
Randi's dishonest approach to 'debunkery' is well-documented online, particularly the nonsense surrounding his bogus $1 million 'challenge', but suspicions about his lack of integrity pre-date the incident with his partner. The film made it clear that theirs is a genuine, loving relationship, and none of my own doubts about Randi's behaviour has anything to do with what Jose did, for two reasons: First, despite wishful thinking on the part of 'believers', there is no evidence whatsoever that Randi knew about Jose's deception and colluded in fraud. And second, if I was in his situation and he DID commit fraud, I'm not sure I wouldn't have done exactly the same thing. Love will always trump commitment to a cause.
In the final analysis, Randi and his followers are too dogmatic in their approach. Instead of seeking after truth, they start from the vantage point of total disbelief in any and all paranormal claims and seek only to disprove them. Worse still, they believe that gives them the right to abuse, disparage and humiliate anyone who disagrees with them, especially in Internet debates. Debunking charlatans is one thing (and quite necessary, too), but lording it over anyone who disagrees with Randi's utter denialism is quite another. Try going toe-to-toe with one of these online bullies, and you'll quickly see what I mean.
As for this film: Worthless and misleading, unless you happen to be an uncritical adherent to Randi's particular worldview.
Having read a very thorough article about this, following a link in another thread, I think the word "challenge" is a big mistake. Isn't it actually called a 'prize', or maybe 'promise' or 'gift' would do as well?
The point is that it's a promise that anyone who claims to have a paranormal ability, and can demonstrate it, will be paid $1M. Nothing more complicated than that. In particular, and despite the way some people refer to it, it's not trying to 'prove' anything.
Obviously there's a proviso about the word 'paranormal' , and some reasonable exceptions.
The conditions under which the demonstration will take place, and a definition of what would be "success", are proposed by the claimant, and agreed between them and the JREF.
All very straightforward, I'd have thought. If you don't like Randi, or feel the JREF's cheating, there are various other prizes on offer around the world.
Oh that nasty Randi must let us do things our way or it won't work. That's usual claptrap for the psychic believers.
They make up nonsense as they can't cope with reality and then think that they have a bargaining position when in fact they have none.
Psychic? Then simple: Prove it or shut up! No one needs to cater to your delusions.
That's an interesting petition. It speaks of "vulnerable people" and then in the next breath calls them "feeble minded". I'm sure the government await the results with bated breath.
In April, possibly after this film was made (?)
Seth Raphael claims Randi's Million Dollar Challe…: http://youtu.be/c_0E1XJP33E
Who is Morgan?
Sally Morgan I presume.
I will expand my question, then: Who is Sally Morgan?
OK, no need to bother - I see she has a Wikipedia entry and is a TV personality. Presumably on a channel I don't watch.
According to the comments, that was an April Fool's Day prank!
Ahhh, you debunked me...
Last five mins are quite good
Unfortunately, they also cater for the terminally ill, fleecing them of their last dollars and pounds, and as a man who follows science and is an atheist, I can say there is a special place in hell for such people.
This one Sally Morgan