StopSylvia email: "Thank You"

[RSLancastr]

Another interesting email I received this week, with the subject "Thank You":

Dear Mr. Lancaster--


I am sorry to read about your health problems. I wish you well as you recover.


I only just found StopSylvia.com this morning, so I haven't followed this story long and certainly

haven't read everything on your site. But I've learned enough, and I want to thank you for this

project.


Recently the idea occurred to me that I could increase the effectiveness of my work using

acupuncture to help with emotional distress if I also added in hypnosis. So I started looking for

hypnotherapy training programs. I located Sylvia Browne's hypnosis training website and was

at first favorably impressed. On the other hand, I found many other similar sites and began to

question the quality control behind this business. So I've been taking the next step and looking

for background on the training programs, which was when I came across your website.


What you've pulled together convinces me that it would be a big mistake to train through Ms.

Browne's institution. Sadly, I'm also wondering where one finds truly reputable training in the

field, since it seems to attract a lot of people long on claims and short on meaningful

credentials. In any event, your well-documented and evenly presented website provided what I

needed to rule out the Sylvia Browne program and so helped me a avoid what probably would

have been a disastrous choice.


I want to end by suggesting that your site is already complete. It doesn't need any more

information to be persuasive. You could let it stand as-is for perpetuity (or until SB no longer is

making money off her claims), and it would still be a great service to the world. It seems like

your health has really slowed you down in this work, but I would suggest it's already been

completed. In which case, you can rest assured that you have done something truly productive

for the world, an accomplishment that many never achieve.


Of course I hope you recover and pick this all up again if that's what you want. But there comes

a point in every body of work when it is sufficient to its task, and I think your website is already

there.


By the way, I am not a skeptic myself. I believe in a certain level of spiritual momentum in the

universe, in occasional intrusions of knowledge inexplicable by purely material means, and so

on. And yet I detest overblown and fraudulent claims about these things. If there are truly

psychic phenomena at play they occur intermittently, randomly, an cannot be reliably

harnessed for profit. Skeptics who maintain fairness and openly admit the limits of their own

evidence play a valuable role in advancing true knowledge. Thank you.


Sincerely,


[ Name ]

My reply:

[ name]:

Thank you for your kind wishes regarding my health. It continues to slowly improve, and I hope

to get back to my skeptical work (including the StopSylvia site) soon.

I'm glad to hear that the site was sufficient to make you reconsider enrolling in Browne's

Hypnosis Training program.

As to your contention that the site's work is completed, I'm not sure that I agree. With almost

every article I have added to the site, I have received an email saying, in effect, "Okay, I give

up - you're right, Browne is a fraud!"

While I was pleased to receive each of those emails, I confess that some made me think

"Really? THAT was the article that did it for you? The first 75 (or however many) articles were

not enough to convince you?"

For whatever reason, most every article was apparently the "last straw" for SOMEONE. And

many of those someones, I would imagine, took their new-found conviction about Browne and

passed it on to their friends and relatives. Or, at least, stopped promoting Browne and her

"abilities" to their friends and relatives. Also, I think it is a very human tendency to give more

credence/authority to a recently-written article than to an older one.

Also, some, upon finding that the site has not been updated in so long, might mistakenly think

"This guy hasn't found any mistakes she has made in all this time, so maybe she is getting

more accurate!"

For these and other reasons, I plan/hope to keep adding articles to the site so log as Browne

is plying her fraudulent trade.

I also thank you for acknowledging the role that fair and honest skepticism can play in

researching claims of the paranormal. It is what I have tried to do in some small way with this

site.

By the way, may I have your permission to publish your email on the site, once I'm to a point

where I can do so? (I would, of course, first remove your name and email address).

Warm regards,

Robert S. Lancaster

I chose not to address the efficacy of acupuncture and/or hypnosis.

So, what do you all think? Is the site complete?

Should I, once I am able, move on to another StopSite topic, and let StopSylvia stand as is?

 

[Bram Kaandorp]

I think you should continue, for all the reasons you gave.

Not more to say, other than that I wish someone would do this for mediums in the Netherlands, if there isn't already.

 

[RSLancastr]

I think you should continue, for all the reasons you gave.

Thanks for weighing in, Bram.

Not more to say, other than that I wish someone would do this for mediums in the Netherlands, if there isn't already.

StopDutchWoo.com, perhaps?

 

[Fascination]

I love your website and I think you should continue if you are able (and have the time). You have accomplished a lot with your website!
No matter what you decide though, thank you for helping to expose that fraud!!

 

[rjh01]

You gave two options. I give you a third. Do both. That is keep updating stopsylvia and start on other stopsites. You could for example just put your correspondence on your site. That will never end. I believe it would also tell Google that your sites should still be on the top of their answers.

As for being told it was this story that was the final straw, I must ask, how many pages of your site did they read? One? Have you ever asked that question? Or maybe they read several and the last one was the one that broke the camel's back. Or in other words you can show a person to be wrong a few times, but show they are wrong too many times and then they are not reliable.

 

[RSLancastr]

I love your website and I think you should continue if you are able (and have the time). You have accomplished a lot with your website!
No matter what you decide though, thank you for helping to expose that fraud!!

Thanks for the Fascinating post!

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Should I, once I am able, move on to another StopSite topic, and let StopSylvia stand as is?

I believe your plan (pre-stroke) was to start other sites, but get help in writing the articles, with yourself serving as sort of a managing editor (while continuing to write some articles yourself). I think you should do this next. There are so many frauds to take down, and so many talented writers out there (myself excluded), and so little time to do it all yourself. That's what I think you should do next.

 

[RSLancastr]

You gave two options. I give you a third. Do both. That is keep updating stopsylvia and start on other stopsites. You could for example just put your correspondence on your site. That will never end. I believe it would also tell Google that your sites should still be on the top of their answers.

That is indeed what I hope to do, once I have the energy and solve the technical issues at hand.

As for being told it was this story that was the final straw, I must ask, how many pages of your site did they read? One? Have you ever asked that question? Or maybe they read several and the last one was the one that broke the camel's back. Or in other words you can show a person to be wrong a few times, but show they are wrong too many times and then they are not reliable.

Some times it was not clear, nor did I always ask. But I remember, more than once, people writing something like "I have followed your site from the beginning, and was having my doubts about Sylvia Browne, but this most recent article was just too much! How could she do such a thing?!"

It puzzled me at times, RJ. But I learned/decided, as I said above, that just about every article on the site - even the weaker ones - was the "last straw" for at least one person.

 

[RSLancastr]

I received this Reply to my reply:

Hi Robert--


Thank you so much for your reply.


When I said your website is sufficient to its task, I did not mean to imply that it would't benefit from continuing. It's just that my own career as a subspecialty surgeon was cut short by neck disease, so I know how ill health can derail one's work. And yet, sometimes (not necessarily in my own case) the work itself has actually been completed. But if you feel it needs to be extended, and you have the drive to continue, I think that's terrific and admirable.


Although I don't define myself as a skeptic, I do believe evidence should be evaluated on its merits. It surprises me to hear that people aren't automatically convinced by what's already on your site. It seems pretty compelling to me.


But of course I came from a scientific background and have only adopted my belief in a (deeply enigmatic) spiritual realm on the basis of a lot of reading in the field, ranging from the writings of those who refuse to distinguish between empiricism and conjecture, to those who reject all evidence that runs counter to their preformed opinions. I don't claim to know the answer for sure, but I also don't think anyone else can say, either. This includes skeptics as well as the spiritually inclined. All we can do is hold the beliefs that best fit our experience, learning, and observations about life.


That said, I resent it when people of any opinion claim unassailable truth. Ms. Browne seems to do that; you, despite your avowed skepticism, do not.

More than anything, your balanced tone in deconstructing Ms. Browne's claims is what prompted me to write. You clearly don't like what she's doing, but your critique sounds well-reasoned and evidence-based. After just a few articles I already knew she was not someone I would trust to run a hypnotherapy training. I kept reading simply because the stories are interesting.


Before I came across her hypnosis site, I'd heard her name but knew nothing about her. Coincidentally, after writing you today I was looking at the new books section in my local library and saw a book by SB that appears to be a rundown of her 'knowledge' about how fifty dead celebrities are doing in the afterlife. I wouldn't have needed a skeptic to make me doubt that piece of work by her. It's a shame that there are apparently people out there who are sufficiently gullible to buy into such (dare I say) nonsense.


Anyway, I enjoyed my brief visit to your site. I'll repeat what I said before: you've done the world a service.


And sure, feel free to quote me on your site in your customary way.


Best Wishes,


--[ name ]

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I think you should reply and talk to her about hypnosis and acupuncture. By which I don't necessarily mean go on a long diatribe about them, but mention the issues with them to her, and maybe give her a link to their entries on www.skepdic.com, or similar. She says she's from a scientific background, so I'd have thought that hearing that studies have repeatedly shown the acupuncture performs no better than placebo would do her a great service.

 

[DJW]

I hope you can appreciate what this person is writing to you. It's quite a compliment. You deserve it too.

My .02 is that Scrut is right. IMHO--It's time to hire/find/mold/coerce someone or a few someones to join you in your projects. If you could focus your efforts on other Stop Sites, you'll broaden your impact. Again, just my opinion, but your way of doing things works with people who get caught up in the woo.

This forum is rich with people who write very well and also have some extra time on their hands. Maybe it's time for you to reach out?

Regardless, I wish you and Susan well.

 

[RSLancastr]

I think you should reply and talk to her about hypnosis and acupuncture. By which I don't necessarily mean go on a long diatribe about them, but mention the issues with them to her, and maybe give her a link to their entries on www.skepdic.com, or similar. She says she's from a scientific background, so I'd have thought that hearing that studies have repeatedly shown the acupuncture performs no better than placebo would do her a great service.

Great minds, and all that.

I sent this reply before reading your post:

[ name ]:

Thanks, you're very kind.

I think that you and I may have differing definitions of the word "skeptic". You seem to use it in the sense of "someone who doubts a particular thing" or perhaps even "someone who doubts EVERYTHING". Both of these senses of the word (or at least the first one) are common, and even found in many dictionaries.

To me however - and, I think, to most who call themselves a "skeptic" these days - a "skeptic" is someone who tries to use critical thinking (and at least some approximation of the scientific method) when examining claims, particularly claims they consider to be "extraordinary", such as claims of speaking with the dead. A "skeptic" will, it is hoped, approach such claims from a provisional position of doubt, but will (again, it is hoped) examine all evidence on BOTH sides of the issue, and will follow them to their logical conclusion, even if it leads him or her to believe the claim.

You say that you subscribe to the scientific method, so I am curious as to what has evidently convinced you of the efficacy of acupuncture. I have not looked into it in any depth, but it is my impression that controlled, double blind studies have not proved it useful other than in some limited anasthetic applications. Not to mention that it is based on both Qi and "meridians", two things which, to my knowledge, have yet to be proven to exist.

Thanks for your permission to quote you on the site. If/when I am in a position to do so, I will try to first run the article by you before making it available to the public.

Best,

Robert S. Lancaster

 

[RSLancastr]

I hope you can appreciate what this person is writing to you. It's quite a compliment. You deserve it too.

Thanks, DJ! I did appreciate it and took it as quite a compliment.

My .02 is that Scrut is right. IMHO--It's time to hire/find/mold/coerce someone or a few someones to join you in your projects. If you could focus your efforts on other Stop Sites, you'll broaden your impact. Again, just my opinion, but your way of doing things works with people who get caught up in the woo.

Yes, this was my intent. At TAM 5.5 (January '08), I announced my intent to become a sort of editor for a suite of StopSites. I would solicit articles here (and possibly elsewhere), and would edit them to make sure, among other things, that they fit the tone I have established with StopKaz and StopSylvia (Straightforward, evidence-based, a minimum of snark, simply presenting the evidence and inviting readers to make up their own mind on the topic, etc). I knew that I would not have the time nor energy to write all of the articles myself, and figured that being the editor was more manageable (and this was before the stroke!). The idea was very well received at TAM5.5 (even my mockup slide of a supposedly-planned "StopPhilPlait.com" got a cheer... Many people there (and here) expressed an interest in submitting articles for the proposed sites, but my stroke sorta threw a spanner into the progress.

Again, I hope/plan to return to it. Whether I will continue adding articles to the StopSylvia site at that point is still an open question.