Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Nap, interrupted.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Messages
- 19,141
Now you are just making stuff up. You have no idea how it got there.
~~ Paul
Mediumship
- Thread starter Lorri
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mediums spiritualism
~~ Paul
Interesting Ian
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2004
- Messages
- 7,675
Lorri said:
Even if it were not possible to contact the deceased, the survival hypothesis (life after death) would be an eminently reasonable one. After all, there is no compelling evidence to suggest we cease to exist when we die. Correlations between brain processes and mental processes are equally explicable with the transmission theory.
Interesting Ian
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2004
- Messages
- 7,675
Interesting Ian said:
From the link:
Yes indeed
I do not understand this attitude.
If you discovered a cure for cancer, would you treat a few select people for free in your own home, or would you offer the discovery to all mankind, allowing everyone to benefit from this massive breakthrough?
I see your claim in a similar light. You claim to have evidence of survival after death. This would be a discovery of outrageous proportions! How can you possibly live with yourself knowing that you are hiding an important discovery that would enrich the world?
I only see two possibilities:
1- You don't have the ability you claim.
2- You do have the ability, but are selfish to a degree that is near incomprehensible.
Think about it.
apoger,
Exactly.
By keeping it to themselves, psychics either are fundamentally deluded or incredibly selfish. I also find it very problematic that, if they are to show their ability, you have to pay for it, one way or another. With money, and/or buying into their beliefs. They won't show it to critics, only to believers.
Exactly.
By keeping it to themselves, psychics either are fundamentally deluded or incredibly selfish. I also find it very problematic that, if they are to show their ability, you have to pay for it, one way or another. With money, and/or buying into their beliefs. They won't show it to critics, only to believers.
TheBoyPaj said:I have discovered a way to cure all disease. I am satisfied that it works and I have cured many of my friends' ailments. But I'm not going to tell any of you lot how I do it. I just thought you might like to know.
From this post I presume that I should not have shared my experiences with you because you are obviously of a closed mind. I cannot cure all grief, I am one person in my small corner doing my work, helping where I can.
And I do help, of that I am sure, and I am proud of what I do. I shared a small amount with you.
Lorri said:
How mean of you!
Intangibles like love are hardly woo woo.Well, it seems you've come here to assert your belief in mediumship and don't want to discuss it, so consider yourself heard, and I'm still looking for evidence that mediumship is anything other than suggestion and wishful thinking.
Have a happy!
Good evening, Lorri
I read you have much personal confirmation. But, as I'm sure you've heard before, the plural of "anecdote" is not "evidence".
You are certainly under no obligation, but would you be interested having your mediumship tested? I imagine a general testing procedure would probably be arranged like this:
10 stangers are randomly plucked off the street.
Of the 10, you are randomly assigned 1 to read.
The reading is recorded.
Then the recording is played to all 10 strangers.
Confirmation should occur as follows: The recording is played to each of the 10 individuals (they will not know if they've been chosen), the individuals will report if they believe the reading was for them. Of the 10, the one you were assigned will say "yes, this reading is spot on", and the others will say "no, thats not for me".
I read you have much personal confirmation. But, as I'm sure you've heard before, the plural of "anecdote" is not "evidence".
You are certainly under no obligation, but would you be interested having your mediumship tested? I imagine a general testing procedure would probably be arranged like this:
10 stangers are randomly plucked off the street.
Of the 10, you are randomly assigned 1 to read.
The reading is recorded.
Then the recording is played to all 10 strangers.
Confirmation should occur as follows: The recording is played to each of the 10 individuals (they will not know if they've been chosen), the individuals will report if they believe the reading was for them. Of the 10, the one you were assigned will say "yes, this reading is spot on", and the others will say "no, thats not for me".
Re: Re: Mediumship
Thank you Ratman, and I do hope that you find your own evidence, I really do.
Ratman_tf said:
How mean of you!
Well, it seems you've come here to assert your belief in mediumship and don't want to discuss it, so consider yourself heard, and I'm still looking for evidence that mediumship is anything other than suggestion and wishful thinking.
Have a happy!
Thank you Ratman, and I do hope that you find your own evidence, I really do.
Yahweh said:
Hi Yahweh
I understand what you are saying and why you are saying it but - no - it is not for me. I know my worth and I know the evidence that I am able to give to individuals. To them my gift is invaluable. I do not give generic messages - i refuse towork that way. The person that works with me from the spirit world is well aware that I will question and re-question him until I get something that is absolute proof of evidence of survival.
Hi Lorri,
First, welcome to the forum! re: mediumship, I post here with the feeling that, "There might be something to it." So I -definitely- hope that you will stick around--and not be put off by calls to provide "proof", or "evidence" (i.e. lab tests) by others for your supposed "claims".
Very few people here know what mediums actually claim to do, or how they claim to work. Or, if they -do- know it, they dismiss it because it is not infallible enough...not predictable enough...not used enough (i.e. why find one missing child? why not all?)...not tested enough, etc.
I have my own doubts simply because I have likewise concluded that, if one doesn't experience ADC for themselves (for example, the "knowing" that would come for a genuine medium), that you can never have that 100% certainty.
But, even without that certainty, based on experience and reading, etc, I still -do- think (unlike most here) that "there might well be something to it."
I would like to know more about what you do, but posting here as a believer can quickly leave one overwhelmed trying to answer all the responses you'll get--so I'll wait a while.
Anyway, good to have a "practitioner's" point of view for a change--if you can pace yourself, I hope you'll stick it out!
First, welcome to the forum! re: mediumship, I post here with the feeling that, "There might be something to it." So I -definitely- hope that you will stick around--and not be put off by calls to provide "proof", or "evidence" (i.e. lab tests) by others for your supposed "claims".
Very few people here know what mediums actually claim to do, or how they claim to work. Or, if they -do- know it, they dismiss it because it is not infallible enough...not predictable enough...not used enough (i.e. why find one missing child? why not all?)...not tested enough, etc.
I have my own doubts simply because I have likewise concluded that, if one doesn't experience ADC for themselves (for example, the "knowing" that would come for a genuine medium), that you can never have that 100% certainty.
But, even without that certainty, based on experience and reading, etc, I still -do- think (unlike most here) that "there might well be something to it."
I would like to know more about what you do, but posting here as a believer can quickly leave one overwhelmed trying to answer all the responses you'll get--so I'll wait a while.
Anyway, good to have a "practitioner's" point of view for a change--if you can pace yourself, I hope you'll stick it out!
