Unedited John Edward Transcripts

[TLN]

Does anyone have any of these? Transcripts should be:

1. Complete per sitter from start to finish and unedited.
2. From a verifiable source.
3. Not from Larry King Live as renata's already done a great job there.
   [/list=1]
   Are there any other crucial criteria I've missed that someone else wants to remind me of?

 

[Walter Wayne]

Does anyone have any of these? Transcripts should be:

1. Complete per sitter from start to finish and unedited.
2. From a verifiable source.
3. Not from Larry King Live as renata's already done a great job there.
   [/list=1]
   Are there any other crucial criteria I've missed that someone else wants to remind me of?

1. Not just complete per sitter, but complete over an entire session. I'm sure you knew that, but it wasn't explicit that I couldn't just choose the best examples from your post above.
   
   Walt

 

[TLN]

Not just complete per sitter, but complete over an entire session.

Whoa, and the semantic festival begins!

Can you clarify what you mean by "session"? By "sitter" I mean a single person getting a reading from Edward.

I'm sure you knew that...

Never assume I know anything as I can be as thick as the next guy.

 

[renata]

Just so you know, there are 2 more LKL transcrips I am working on. Let's see if the patterns hold.
I have been a tad busy, but look for them tomorrow evening!

And I agree per session. What I have seen with LKL readings is that believers take one lucky reading from 10 or so he does from his appearance and use it as a hit (cigarettes, Timothy). However, if you analyze the whole LKL appearance, you see it was the best reading, and he did quite poorly overall. Therefore, if you have a transcript from a seminar, one cannot extract reading for a single good reading and disregard all others, one must analyze performance for the whole seminar. Of course, that assumes such a transcript is available at all.

 

[neofight]

Does anyone have any of these? Transcripts should be:

1. Complete per sitter from start to finish and unedited.
2. From a verifiable source.
3. Not from Larry King Live as renata's already done a great job there.
   [/list=1]
   Are there any other crucial criteria I've missed that someone else wants to remind me of?

1. 
   
   The only person I know of who supposedly has something like this, TLN, is Jim Underwood. Isn't he going to share them with the skeptic communitiy in their entirety? If not, why not???
   
   I've never been to a "CO" taping, and I never taped any of the seminars I've gone to, although I sure wish I had a copy of the half-reading that I got in Philadelphia last Fall.
   
   All of the transcripts that I've made and posted over at tvtalkshows, I made from the edited readings on "CO"......neo

 

[TLN]

The only person I know of who supposedly has something like this, TLN, is Jim Underwood. Isn't he going to share them with the skeptic communitiy in their entirety? If not, why not???

I don't know as I'm not him and I haven't read the article in question. Since you insist on turning every conversation towards it though, I will.

I've never been to a "CO" taping, and I never taped any of the seminars I've gone to, although I sure wish I had a copy of the half-reading that I got in Philadelphia last Fall.

All of the transcripts that I've made and posted over at tvtalkshows, I made from the edited readings on "CO"

If you don't even know what a full-length unedited JE reading might look like, who are you to even comment, let alone put a label on me?

So, you have no problem with chastising me for not having seen a full-length unedited Edward reading, but you can't tell me where to find one? How can you scold me for not having researched that which isn't there?

 

[Bentspoon]

actual JE hit

I was looking for Rockford Files the other day and thumbed the remote by JE on Sci-Fi. I haven't seen it in a while. Not much point after you get his obvious schtick.

However, in the few minutes I lingered he was reprising a big hit from the week before. He was making a big deal about it so I waited. They put this lady on that got the big hit and this is what she said:

"He said March 3rd and then he said March 5th an that is when I knew he was talking about my husband. JE conspicuously skipped over March 4th and that was when my husband died"

Typical - nuff said.

I feel sorry for people that accept this buffoon. It is so obvious it is silly.

And to think that I missed the opening phone call of Rockford for this big hit

Bentspoon

 

[Dogwood]

Other than LKL, I don't think they exist. I did my best to transcribe some of the readings I witnessed at the seminar I attended as have many others. But I would never hold these up as accurate transcripts due to the failings of human hearing, memory and writing very damn fast.

 

[TLN]

Other than LKL, I don't think they exist.

Neither do I, which makes me wonder where neo gets off browbeating me for not having seen one.

 

[Walter Wayne]

Whoa, and the semantic festival begins!

Can you clarify what you mean by "session"? By "sitter" I mean a single person getting a reading from Edward.



Never assume I know anything as I can be as thick as the next guy.

I guess what I was trying to get at, was to get transcripts from a cross section of sitters, not one sitter from a session of several readings. I guess I was forgetting that sometimes JE reads one person.

Walt

 

[neofight]

So, you have no problem with chastising me for not having seen a full-length unedited Edward reading, but you can't tell me where to find one? How can you scold me for not having researched that which isn't there?

As I've said more than once, anyone who is truly interested in seeing what an unedited JE reading looks like, so they can fairly evaluate whether or not they're so very different from the edited readings they see on "CO", should try to attend a seminar, like Instig8R, Lurker and Mark Tidwell did.......neo

 

[neofight]

Neither do I, which makes me wonder where neo gets off browbeating me for not having seen one.

Well, I don't have my quote handy, TLN, but I probably didn't so much browbeat you for not having seen one, as much as criticizing you for opining about it as though you had. .......neo

 

[neofight]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by TLN


Neither do I, which makes me wonder where neo gets off browbeating me for not having seen one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

originally posted by neofight

Oh really, TLN? And how many live seminars have you seen that you're such a know-it-all? If you don't even know what a full-length unedited JE reading might look like, who are you to even comment, let alone put a label on me?......neo

 

[TLN]

As I've said more than once, anyone who is truly interested in seeing what an unedited JE reading looks like, so they can fairly evaluate whether or not they're so very different from the edited readings they see on "CO", should try to attend a seminar, like Instig8R, Lurker and Mark Tidwell did.......neo

Attending a seminar would not guarantee me an unedited reading unless I packed a tape recorder. My mind edits as I go and is not to be trusted.

Do they allow those in the seminars?

 

[renata]

Attending a seminar would not guarantee me an unedited reading unless I packed a tape recorder. My mind edits as I go and is not to be trusted.

Do they allow those in the seminars?

Even if they allowed tape recorders, your tape recorder would also have to be sure to record over the noise of the large crowd, and when he read people in other areas. And, without a recorder, as we saw from different impressions from Mark, Lurker, Neo and Instig8r, believers and skeptics come with very different impressions from the seminars. Sometimes even from the same one! And, as we saw with the infamous malibu shrimp case with Neo and insrig8r, and Caltech reading with me and Clancie, memory fails all of us- sometimes to make readings better than what we thought they were, and sometimes worse than what we thought they were.

Anyway, didn't we have a believer say she was going to post some other transcripts or is my memory playing tricks on me?

 

[Pyrrho]

As I've said more than once, anyone who is truly interested in seeing what an unedited JE reading looks like, so they can fairly evaluate whether or not they're so very different from the edited readings they see on "CO", should try to attend a seminar, like Instig8R, Lurker and Mark Tidwell did.......neo

Begging your pardon, but large group sessions such as seminars virtually guarantees hits for JE. For one thing, regardless of who he's supposed to be reading for, someone else is going to find a "match". For another, there are probably people in such groups who will claim hits just for the sake of claiming a hit, whether there was a hit or not. Someone described a seminar on this board some time ago, and there were people actively vying for JE's attention when he was reading for a specific person. "Yo, John, it was my grandpappy with the peg leg!"

Nah, such places are bound to be chaotic crapshoots.

 

[TLN]

And, without a recorder, as we saw from different impressions from Mark, Lurker, Neo and Instig8r, believers and skeptics come with very different impressions from the seminars.

Just for clarity neo, I don't trust skeptics anymore than I do believers on this issue. I need a recording or transcripts made from one. Otherwise the bias of the observers creeps in.

Some of you went to the same seminars and guess what? The believers bought (some of) it and the skeptics didn't. What a surprise.

Just so you don't think I'm bashing believers, I don't trust skeptics either.

 

[TLN]

Begging your pardon, but large group sessions such as seminars virtually guarantees hits for JE. For one thing, regardless of who he's supposed to be reading for, someone else is going to find a "match". For another, there are probably people in such groups who will claim hits just for the sake of claiming a hit, whether there was a hit or not. Someone described a seminar on this board some time ago, and there were people actively vying for JE's attention when he was reading for a specific person. "Yo, John, it was my grandpappy with the peg leg!"

Nah, such places are bound to be chaotic crapshoots.

Agreed, but in order to start evaluating these things we need some transcripts.

But yes, seminars are not the best source and are bound to be the hit farms you describe.

 

[renata]

Anyway, didn't we have a believer say she was going to post some other transcripts or is my memory playing tricks on me?

Quoting myself...first sign of insanity...

It was not my memory playing tricks!
Clancie said this here 7/24/03
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870016414

btw, voidx, I may have some other live and unedited readings that we can actually watch here, but will post them next week when neo's back.

Unless she posted them when I was away for 3 weeks. If she did, can someoine point me to it? If not, maybe this is what you are waiting for, TLN

And, TLN, I agree with you on observer bias. I think skeptics, just like believers exhibit it. It would be great if skeptics and believers watched several presentations not knowing who was an alleged medium and who was an acknowledged cold reader. I believe skeptics will grade mediums low and cold readers high, and believers will do then opposite

 

[Clancie]

Posted by renata

It was not my memory playing tricks!
Clancie said this here 7/24/03
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/show...stid=1870016414
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

btw, voidx, I may have some other live and unedited readings that we can actually watch here, but will post them next week when neo's back.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unless she posted them when I was away for 3 weeks. If she did, can someoine point me to it? If not, maybe this is what you are waiting for, TLN

Yes, renata, while you were away I started the thread. Unfortunately, when I went to FOJE for the link they had decided not to host it any more. (It was JE doing readings, live and unedited, on Wayne Brady's show). I wrote the mods, asking if it could still be available for us to look at somehow, but...no such luck.

Posted by renata

And, TLN, I agree with you on observer bias. I think skeptics, just like believers, exhibit it. It would be great if skeptics and believers watched several presentations not knowing who was an alleged medium and who was an acknowledged cold reader. I believe skeptics will grade mediums low and cold readers high, and believers will do then opposite

Well, in the case of a "medium" I'm not sure believers would rate someone high just because they say what they are doing is mediumship, if they don't have some decent hits in the process. (And people forget that much of the audience on PrimeTime thought Ian was a cold reader, not a medium, according to participants in the-untelevised-discussion afterwards). But, yes, it would be interesting to see confirmation bias at work both ways.