Critic’s “Top 15” claims by psychic detective Noreen Renier

[fls]

Norman Lewis disappeared in March 1994. Noreen Renier was called in to assist in July 1995. Are you saying that the police were still exploring some likely places to look in July 1995 after 16 months of fruitless searching?

I don't know what they were doing, since this is undocumented. In retrospect, if they were still thinking about it (if they brought in a psychic, it suggests that this is the case), searching nearby bodies of water seems obvious. It isn't clear why they just didn't do that. They seemed to act like they needed an excuse to do so and used Renier's reading as that excuse. But it's pretty clear even looking at the edited version that the reading provided no direction as to where a search could be focussed, so the choice of where to look had to have come from the police.

Linda

 

[fls]

You might want to give this up. Nothing paranormal to see. Perhaps, perhaps a lucky guess.

Huh? Which part of the reading are you thinking can even be considered accurate enough to serve as a "lucky guess"?

Linda

 

[Resume]

Huh? Which part of the reading are you thinking can even be considered accurate enough to serve as a "lucky guess"?

Linda

How about a retrofitted postdiction?

 

[fls]

How about a retrofitted postdiction?

 

[Garrette]

Norman Lewis disappeared in March 1994. Noreen Renier was called in to assist in July 1995. Are you saying that the police were still exploring some likely places to look in July 1995 after 16 months of fruitless searching?

Since the remains weren't found until April 1996 (9 months after Renier was called in to assist) you have to grant either that it is reasonable that the search was continuing or that no search based on Renier's comments were happening in April 1995.

 

[fls]

Since the remains weren't found until April 1996 (9 months after Renier was called in to assist) you have to grant either that it is reasonable that the search was continuing or that no search based on Renier's comments were happening in April 1995.

Did you mean April 1996?

Linda

 

[Rodney]

searching nearby bodies of water seems obvious.

Why -- is every missing person found in a body of water? And why was it that police identified the correct body of water (out of countless nearby bodies of water) only after Renier's readings?

 

[Garrette]

Did you mean April 1996?

Linda

I was post-predicting.

 

[Garrette]

Why -- is every missing person found in a body of water? And why was it that police identified the correct body of water (out of countless nearby bodies of water) only after Renier's readings?

1. They didn't "identify" the correct body of water in that they did not say "This is the one he's in." Instead they said, "This is the one we're going to search 9 months after talking to Renier; oh, look, we found him."

2. It was 9 months after Renier's readings. Why stop there? Why not go back to something they learned 10 months before as the reason for finding him? Or 25 months?

 

[Garrette]

Why -- is every missing person found in a body of water? And why was it that police identified the correct body of water (out of countless nearby bodies of water) only after Renier's readings?

More retrofitting. Renier did not say Lewis would be found in a body of water. She said she saw him traveling toward one. Had Lewis' remains been found at the edge of the quarry I have no doubt you would still be crediting her with a hit. Had he been found a hundred yards away, I have no doubt you would still be crediting her with a hit. Had he been found in the pit to the east of his home (the one that better fit the clues), I am certain you would be loudly proclaiming it as a hit.

The fact is that if the sheriff had found the remains almost anywhere in or near Williston, what Renier said could be retrofitted to call it a hit.

 

[fls]

Why -- is every missing person found in a body of water?

There's just a limit to where a truck and body can remain undiscovered for months or years. Where I live, it would be "heavily wooded area".

And why was it that police identified the correct body of water (out of countless nearby bodies of water) only after Renier's readings?

Countless? It didn't sound like there were that many choices nearby from the description, but I don't know the area. Like I said, I don't know how they chose one place, but Renier's reading didn't choose that spot regardless.

Linda

 

[fls]

I was post-predicting.

Oh. I would have guessed "pre-postdicting".

Linda

 

[Garrette]

Oh. I would have guessed "pre-postdicting".

Linda

Typical skeptic. You'll never learn.

 

[Rodney]

There's just a limit to where a truck and body can remain undiscovered for months or years. Where I live, it would be "heavily wooded area".

First, there are wooded areas in the vicinity of Lewis's home. Second, there are too many bodies of water in the vicinity of his home to search all, or even most, of them. Third, the police did not know for sure that he would be found in the vicinity of his home. All of which explains why the investigation into Lewis's disappearance had gone absolutely nowhere for 16 months, and why police at that point were open to the possibility of a psychic becoming involved.

Countless? It didn't sound like there were that many choices nearby from the description, but I don't know the area. Like I said, I don't know how they chose one place, but Renier's reading didn't choose that spot regardless.

Depends what you mean by "choose that spot". Police listened to her readings, took notes, explored the possibilities, and correctly chose the spot where Lewis and his truck were.

 

[GeeMack]

Depends what you mean by "choose that spot". Police listened to her readings, took notes, explored the possibilities, and correctly chose the spot where Lewis and his truck were.

But the information was so poor and so vague that it took them many months to work out how to make it useful?

And as for them finding Lewis after they had talked with Renier? They found Lewis after they had done a lot of various kinds of standard police work, too. It would be silly to attribute the ultimate discovery to Renier's consultation any more than to any other event that occurred prior to the discovery.

 

[Rodney]

But the information was so poor and so vague that it took them many months to work out how to make it useful?

No, the sequence of events was this:

March 1994: Norman Lewis disappears from Williston, FL.

July 1995: Noreen Renier paid by Lewis' family to assist the Williston police investigation.

August 1995: Detective Brian Hewitt of the Williston police department discovers, in accord with Renier's July reading, a buried railroad track near the Whitehurst pit. Williston Police Chief Olin Slaughter calls in some local divers to search the pit, but they don't find anything.

September 1995: Chief Slaughter observes, again in accord with Renier's reading, an old (weigh) bridge near the Whitehurst pit. Slaughter then has Hewitt write a letter to the U.S. Department of Navy seeking the assistance of U.S. Navy divers in searching the pit.

April 1996: After a delay of more than six months, the Navy divers finally arrive to search the Whitehurst pit and quickly locate Lewis's truck and remains.

And as for them finding Lewis after they had talked with Renier? They found Lewis after they had done a lot of various kinds of standard police work, too. It would be silly to attribute the ultimate discovery to Renier's consultation any more than to any other event that occurred prior to the discovery.

Except that the police did not focus on the Whitehurst pit until after Renier's reading. They did not order a search of it until discovery of the railroad tracks provided partial confirmation of her reading, and they did not solicit the assistance of Navy divers until Slaughter's sighting of the weigh bridge provided additional confirmation.

 

[GeeMack]

Except that the police did not focus on the Whitehurst pit until after Renier's reading. They did not order a search of it until discovery of the railroad tracks provided partial confirmation of her reading, and they did not solicit the assistance of Navy divers until Slaughter's sighting of the weigh bridge provided additional confirmation.

Who cares? They probably solved a lot of other crimes after they talked to Renier, too. Solving crimes and locating missing people/bodies/etc. is part of what police departments do. It seems you want to draw a correlation where a correlation hasn't been demonstrated to actually exist. The fact that it seems unlikely to a handful of people is just an argument from incredulity.

Without evidence, some kind of scientific evidence, quantitative, objective, and repeatable, it can all be written off as lucky guesses, uncanny coincidences, or some combination of the two. Big deal. There are over 6 billion people on this planet. If there's a one in a million shot of something happening to somebody, it will happen to 6 thousand people.

 

[Garrette]

Who cares? They probably solved a lot of other crimes after they talked to Renier, too. Solving crimes and locating missing people/bodies/etc. is part of what police departments do. It seems you want to draw a correlation where a correlation hasn't been demonstrated to actually exist. The fact that it seems unlikely to a handful of people is just an argument from incredulity.

Without evidence, some kind of scientific evidence, quantitative, objective, and repeatable, it can all be written off as lucky guesses, uncanny coincidences, or some combination of the two. Big deal. There are over 6 billion people on this planet. If there's a one in a million shot of something happening to somebody, it will happen to 6 thousand people.

Exactly. Rodney chooses to ignore the cases which Renier demonstrably did not solve (though she claimed she did) and to ignore the things in the reading that don't match up and to ignore that this case is a series of retrofits and to ignore that it would have been counted a hit if the remains had been found in any pit or near any pit or far from any pit in or around Williston.

We're back at exactly the point that I said in the other thread (maybe this one, too; I forget): No one has proven that Renier did not use psychic abilities to solve this case, but no one has remotely proven that she did.

What Rodney is relying on is a grand case of post hoc ergo propter hoc wrapped in lots of language.

 

[fls]

First, there are wooded areas in the vicinity of Lewis's home.

I wasn't suggesting that there weren't other places he could remain hidden in the area, only that we already know of some obvious places.

Second, there are too many bodies of water in the vicinity of his home to search all, or even most, of them.

Where are you getting that from? I'm looking at a satellite map of Williston and the only water it shows are the east pit, the Whitehurst pit, and then a small pit in the southeast part of the town.

Third, the police did not know for sure that he would be found in the vicinity of his home.

Right, but what does that have to do with it? If he's nearby, it has to be somewhere he can remain undetected for over a year. If he's further away, then the possibilities are too numerous to count.

All of which explains why the investigation into Lewis's disappearance had gone absolutely nowhere for 16 months, and why police at that point were open to the possibility of a psychic becoming involved.

It does explain why they chose to bring in divers and search one of the two larger bodies of water in the area.

Depends what you mean by "choose that spot". Police listened to her readings, took notes, explored the possibilities, and correctly chose the spot where Lewis and his truck were.

Right. But it clearly wasn't because of what Renier said. The information she gave them not only was wrong, it indicated so many possible directions and interpretations that there would be no way to use it to do a directed search.

Linda

 

[GeeMack]

Right. But it clearly wasn't because of what Renier said. The information she gave them not only was wrong, it indicated so many possible directions and interpretations that there would be no way to use it to do a directed search.

Unless, of course, your interpretations are done after the discovery because you really really believe in psychic powers and want it to be true so badly you apply some pretty extreme confirmation bias.