0
Debunking psychics
01 August 2010
Why aren't all psychics filthy rich? I mean, if you can predict the future, surely something as basic as the stock market's rise and fall should be a snap. Surely they can predict the winning lottery numbers, too. I never buy lottery tickets because there's always a lineup of psychics ahead of me, cashing in their winnings. No wonder there's never any money left for me...
Why don't all psychics drive BMWs and live in $3 million waterfront condos? Why do psychics get caught in traffic jams? Why do psychics lose bids on eBay? Would a psychic smoke of he or she could see the future with lung and other cancers?
There is an endless supply of such questions no one (especially not self-proclaimed psychics) can effectively answer, paralleled by an equal number of jokes about psychics.* And some pretty funny truths, too: in 2009, psychic Rosemary Altea found out she had been scammed by her bookkeeper, who stole more than $200,000 from her over seven years. Her alleged psychic powers weren't much good in protecting her own money!
A psychic, Wikipedia tells us, is "a person who professes an ability to perceive information hidden from the normal senses through extrasensory perception (ESP), or is said by others to have such abilities." Most psychics are self-professed. They claim to possess these abilities or powers. There isn't an institution that grants a degree or diploma in psychic powers.
In my experience, people call themselves psychics first, and do it often enough that others start to use the term. And people are generally too polite to respond to such a self-imposed title with the more appropriate response, "bullshit."
You might correctly gather I'm a skeptic when it comes to so-called psychics. As I am to a wide range of things that go bump in the night: ghosts, goblins, spirits, tooth fairies, speaking in tongues, Easter bunnies, UFOs, Sasquatches, crystal power, reincarnation, aromatherapy, haunted houses, Atlantis, astrology, Loch Ness monsters, creationism, poltergeists, dragons, telepathy, Feng Shui, demons, witches, faith healing, séances, clairvoyants, ectoplasm, telekinesis, angels, clairvoyance, haunted houses, dowsing, palmistry, phrenology, spirits, and vampires.
For me it's simple: only when they pass rigid scientific tests and are recorded or captured in some irrefutable way will I believe. I like empirical proof, validity.
And don't hedge your bets with that flaccid line about science can't prove, or explain, everything. What it can't explain is why some people are more superstitious - or gullible - than others. But psychic powers, like ghosts and ESP have been investigated to the nth degree for the past century, and scientists still come short of anything even close to proof. We have thick tomes documenting the lack of proof for psychic powers, and not a single sheet of irrefutable proof in its favour.
But, as Witter Bynner said in his introduction to the Tao Teh Ching, "Everywhere men yearn to be misled by magicians." We want to believe in Harry Potter and his magical tricks because it's a more entertaining, interesting world than one ruled by boring old Newtonian physics. And we want to believe in psychics because we want to believe that someone can look at us (or at our palm or that aura we - conveniently - can't see) and give us some comfort about our lives. After all, it's a scary world out there , and it keeps getting more complex, which means scarier.
In Demon-Haunted World, Carl Sagan wrote:
Magician James Randi made a $1 million dollar challenge to any psychic who could demonstrate, "under controlled conditions," that they have supernatural abilities. All you need to do to get $1 million US is to prove it. The downside is that if you can't or you're found to be a fraud, you get written up in his journal, your story widely publicized in the media, and you will be generally ridiculed. That could really crimp your income.
Don't ever lose sight of the reality that psychics are running a business. It may not be as large scale as, say, the Nigerian bank scam, but for a lot of people it's a comfortable living they don't want to see reduced.
To date, no major North American psychic, including popular TV and newspaper psychics, has agreed to take part in the test. If psychics were real, it would be not only be an easy $1 million, but it would be a slap on the noggin for all us skeptics. So why has no one stepped forward to take the challenge? Or taken any of the dozen or so other challenges that offer big cash payouts for just a teensy bit of proof? Is it because psychics are too busy cleaning up on lottery winnings to bother with penny-ante scientific challenges? Or are they simply aware they'd fail?
Randi, on the other hand, has made a career out of successfully debunking psychics and other flim-flammery. Many of his entertaining results are on YouTube. An article in the UK Guardian notes that true believers claim Randi has fixed the test so no one can win, and have likened him to Satan (always blame the Adversary when things don't go your way...). But in the rigidly-conducted test the Guardian describes, the so-called psychic failed miserably, and only afterwards complained about the conditions.
TV hosts and former magicians, Penn and Teller, have also made careers out of debunking a wide variety of topics, including the paranormal and psychics. Their popular, award-winning TV series, Bullshit!, is in its eighth year. While not exclusively aimed at psychics, the show has taken them on several times. They too can be seen on YouTube, including one amusing episode where they caught Rosemary Altea cheating.
And this isn't new - as far back as 1922, Scientific American offered a big (for its day) cash prize for any authentic "spirit photograph". No one claimed it. Around the same time, magician Harry Houdini put a lot of his time into debunking spiritualists of the day and exposing the tricks of séances. He, too offered a reward for proof of spiritual contact, but it was never claimed.
The Independent Investigators' Group (IIG) has a current offer of $50,000 to "anyone who can prove paranormal abilities under scientific testing conditions." But, as the IIG notes on its Web site, "Most people who inquire about our challenge do not end up being tested, usually because they will not agree to the protocols designed for the test. Of those who have completed a test, not a single one has yet demonstrated any paranormal powers."
Maybe self-described psychics are shy because under the scrutiny of scientific reason, they come up a bit short in the proof department and that could hurt their revenue stream if made public. No one seems to have ever won any of these major rewards. But that doesn't stop people from believing in so-called psychics and giving them money.
Which begs the question, "why?" Despite all the evidence to the contrary, and even proof some are frauds, people still happily give them money. Apparently many feel they got their money's worth from the transaction. As this ezine article points out,
Psychics, in other words, are not reading your mind or that aura no one else but they can see, but rather - like a good poker player - reading your body language and fishing for clues. They're not in contact with some astral plane persona, your dead ancestors, or some spirit that dogs your earthly steps. They're often carnies, playing you like a fish on a hook.
To be fair, some may have extraordinary skills at reading someone's body language. That's no small talent. But it's not psychic. My dog is remarkably skilled at reading my mood, telling when I plan to take her for a walk or when I plan to get her a treat. I doubt she's psychic - just using her heightened senses.
In a similar vein, a good psychologist or psychiatrist can extract information of a similar sort from you, and probably tell you as much and likely more about yourself, your relationships, your family and your love life, without, of course, the comfort of telling you what you want to hear (and without the cornball sideshow or the hookum about angels, crystals, spirits or ghosts).
A couple of years ago, an article in the local paper, noted that,
Well, aside from the inappropriately subjective nature of those claims - blessed? the editor allowed the reporter to write blessed without qualifying it? - did the reporter actually interview anyone who was "helped out" 30 years ago? Or even today? Was there any research or investigation of these claims?
No: it's more of the same bunkum. What proof was provided of any "special ability"? It's not a story: it's a press release given credibility by having a reporter's name on it, with erroneous information to boot. **
Surfing several psychic Web sites, I found all sorts of claims, from teaching you about your "Guardian Angels" and "Spirit Guides" to the importance of understanding your aura, and the value of the nebulous psychometry. Apparently some sort of pseudo-scientific or religious aura makes it more attractive to be bilked.****
Most police services ignore or refuse to use self-proclaimed psychic detectives or self-styled psychic investigators. Despite some impressive claims they make for their own successes, independent analysis of the claims shows a less-than-spectacular rate. One example is Carla Baron, a self-proclaimed psychic who claims to have "solved" 50 police cases in the past 20 years - a claim refuted through considerable research done by the Independent Investigators' Group.
Even some of the more reputable (if I can use that term) psychics admit police don't use their services (see, for example, the UK Psychics and Mediums Network page which notes: "... of the 46 UK Police Forces actively participating; none have used psychics within their jurisdiction during the course of an investigation. This is a significant indicator that psychics are not used routinely or otherwise by UK police forces. ...psychics may actually hinder effective investigations by the provision of useless information that must be taken into account in investigations thus wasting valuable police resources.")
In an article on the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI) site, Joe Nickell writes:
And what about those famous, annual predictions of psychics who follow in the footsteps of long-debunked, fantasy-prone Edgar Cayce or the generally erroneous Jean Dixon*****? Several sites like CSICOP list the last year's major predictions and you can enjoy a laugh at how many seem fatuous today, and how few - how very, very few - actually happened (and generally those are couched in the most general terms - life forest fires in California or the stock market will rise and then fall...).
Keep tabs on these predictions for 2010 and see how many actually came true by year's end. I am particularly looking forward to seeing some of these come true (most are from a Toronto-based self-professed psychic called Nikki, "psychic to the stars"):
I am, however, a firm supporter of research into parapsychology because I believe we should never limit our scientific studies simply because something seems silly or pointless. After all, the more we learn, the more we understand our universe and learning what isn't right is as important as learning what is. It's unfortunate for its believers that so far all the research hasn't proven any of the claims. In fact after a century of academic studies and research, almost every American university that had a department of parapsychology closed it because none had produced any significant results - aside from debunking most of the claims, that is. It's like creationism: just because it's silly doesn't mean we shouldn't take the time to debunk it, because unless we do, a less skeptical person may fall for it.
So let's keep the lines open and research psychics and the paranormal, if for no other reason to say "I told you so" to their believers and practitioners.
I'm sure there are a lot safer and saner places to spend your money than on psychics. But if you really, really must know your future, I'd recommend the inexpensive yet always correct Magic 8 fortune-telling ball. better yet, use this online version. Ask your question, click submit, and reveal the answer! It's accurate at least as often as any psychic and probably more so. And a lot cheaper!
I don't mean to suggest that all psychics are fraudulent, chasing your money and scamming folks, just that you really have to be careful about charlatans. Some self-described probably - and sincerely - believe they have powers and abilities - but simply don't understand why these can't be proven or demonstrated in any scientific, controlled format. Some may also actually believe in angels, auras, crystal balls, spirit guides, reincarnation and psychometry - although that pushes credibility and starts to set off the alarm bells.
After all, if your car mechanic told you an evil spirit haunted your muffler and needed an exorcist to fix, how would you react? If your doctor prescribed crystal therapy and a séance to fix your broken leg, would you go back? If your boss told you you didn't need a vacation because your aura was already green, would you stay at work? If a police officer gave you a ticket because your spiritual guide was speeding, would you pay it?
Sure, there may be a lot more to this world than we can measure or quantify with our current equipment and psychics may actually have some touchstone to reality, however slim it seems to me. But as my grandfather used to say, "Pigs might fly, my boy, but they make damned unlikely birds."
~~~~~
* "I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met." Steven Wright. But think about it: who could really have a psychic friend? All those nasty little comments and thoughts that rattle around in our heads, those unflattering things we want to say to others but don't; opinions of our in-laws, our neighbours, or our relatives' cooking, opinions about our buddy's golf swing, our boss' warped political perspective, and whether those pants really do make our partner look fat - stuff we clamp off before they reach our tongues. They'd be plucked from our brains like ripe tomatoes by a psychic and spouted aloud. And that's not even getting into the steamier stuff that goes on. No, dear, that thong looks very modest... Psychics would flee in horror at some of the stuff in our heads.
One online psychic whines, "My spirit guides are pretty much responsible for all the work I do as a Medium and for protecting me from negative or evil spirits and energy. But they can only do so much. Spirit has been pushing me into a smoke free lifestyle for quite some time now. They even gave me a dead line to quit, but did I listen, NO! I thought about it and did attempt to try a few times with no success." So you not only ignore all the ads, all the evidence, that smoking is both stupid and lethal, but you also ignore your imaginary friend when he/she warns you about it. As a potential customer, would you trust the advice from this psychic, when he doesn't even pay attention to his own inner voices?
** Tarot cards have not "always" been anything - the earliest examples date from the mid-15th century and their original purpose was for playing card games. They're uniquely European (any claim to be Egyptian is spurious). Tarot didn't really come into popularity as a fortune-telling or divination device (or "tool" as the writer says) until the late 18th century. That's not nearly as long as, say, Greek philosophy, Roman roads or Sumerian cuneiform tablets. They're not even vaguely "ancient" by any standards .
Popular? Madonna was popular. So were the Spice Girls. What defines popularity? I've actually studied the tarot a bit (from a Jungian or historical perspective) and I am disappointed, but not surprised, that many writers, rather than actually research the information, merely parrot what the psychics describe as both a history and powers that don't reflect anything close to the truth for either. But I suppose it's not good form to blame the self-professed psychic for the sloppy faults of the reporter.
**** Wikipedia defines psychometry as: "...the claimed ability to make relevant associations from an object of unknown history by making physical contact with that object." In other words, give a psychic your old underwear and he or she can tell you about your love life. Well, I guess that's what happened to Bill Clinton... but without the spiritualists.
***** The "Jean Dixon effect" refers to a tendency to promote a few correct predictions while ignoring a larger number of incorrect predictions. Somewhat like the tendency of the majority of Collingwood Council to ignore the reality of predictions about the public reaction to curbside patios and promote a few bad ideas.
Why don't all psychics drive BMWs and live in $3 million waterfront condos? Why do psychics get caught in traffic jams? Why do psychics lose bids on eBay? Would a psychic smoke of he or she could see the future with lung and other cancers?
There is an endless supply of such questions no one (especially not self-proclaimed psychics) can effectively answer, paralleled by an equal number of jokes about psychics.* And some pretty funny truths, too: in 2009, psychic Rosemary Altea found out she had been scammed by her bookkeeper, who stole more than $200,000 from her over seven years. Her alleged psychic powers weren't much good in protecting her own money!
In my experience, people call themselves psychics first, and do it often enough that others start to use the term. And people are generally too polite to respond to such a self-imposed title with the more appropriate response, "bullshit."
You might correctly gather I'm a skeptic when it comes to so-called psychics. As I am to a wide range of things that go bump in the night: ghosts, goblins, spirits, tooth fairies, speaking in tongues, Easter bunnies, UFOs, Sasquatches, crystal power, reincarnation, aromatherapy, haunted houses, Atlantis, astrology, Loch Ness monsters, creationism, poltergeists, dragons, telepathy, Feng Shui, demons, witches, faith healing, séances, clairvoyants, ectoplasm, telekinesis, angels, clairvoyance, haunted houses, dowsing, palmistry, phrenology, spirits, and vampires.
For me it's simple: only when they pass rigid scientific tests and are recorded or captured in some irrefutable way will I believe. I like empirical proof, validity.
And don't hedge your bets with that flaccid line about science can't prove, or explain, everything. What it can't explain is why some people are more superstitious - or gullible - than others. But psychic powers, like ghosts and ESP have been investigated to the nth degree for the past century, and scientists still come short of anything even close to proof. We have thick tomes documenting the lack of proof for psychic powers, and not a single sheet of irrefutable proof in its favour.
But, as Witter Bynner said in his introduction to the Tao Teh Ching, "Everywhere men yearn to be misled by magicians." We want to believe in Harry Potter and his magical tricks because it's a more entertaining, interesting world than one ruled by boring old Newtonian physics. And we want to believe in psychics because we want to believe that someone can look at us (or at our palm or that aura we - conveniently - can't see) and give us some comfort about our lives. After all, it's a scary world out there , and it keeps getting more complex, which means scarier.
In Demon-Haunted World, Carl Sagan wrote:
Quote
...there are so many of us who want so badly to be jolted out of our humdrum lives, to rekindle that sense of wonder we remember from childhood, and also, for a few of the stories, to be able, really and truly, to believe in Someone older, smarter, and wiser who is looking out for us. Faith is clearly not enough for many people. They crave hard evidence, scientific proof. They long for the scientific seal of approval, but are unwilling to put up with the rigorous standards of evidence that impart credibility to that seal.Quoted on Skeptic.com
Magician James Randi made a $1 million dollar challenge to any psychic who could demonstrate, "under controlled conditions," that they have supernatural abilities. All you need to do to get $1 million US is to prove it. The downside is that if you can't or you're found to be a fraud, you get written up in his journal, your story widely publicized in the media, and you will be generally ridiculed. That could really crimp your income.
Don't ever lose sight of the reality that psychics are running a business. It may not be as large scale as, say, the Nigerian bank scam, but for a lot of people it's a comfortable living they don't want to see reduced.
To date, no major North American psychic, including popular TV and newspaper psychics, has agreed to take part in the test. If psychics were real, it would be not only be an easy $1 million, but it would be a slap on the noggin for all us skeptics. So why has no one stepped forward to take the challenge? Or taken any of the dozen or so other challenges that offer big cash payouts for just a teensy bit of proof? Is it because psychics are too busy cleaning up on lottery winnings to bother with penny-ante scientific challenges? Or are they simply aware they'd fail?
Randi, on the other hand, has made a career out of successfully debunking psychics and other flim-flammery. Many of his entertaining results are on YouTube. An article in the UK Guardian notes that true believers claim Randi has fixed the test so no one can win, and have likened him to Satan (always blame the Adversary when things don't go your way...). But in the rigidly-conducted test the Guardian describes, the so-called psychic failed miserably, and only afterwards complained about the conditions.
TV hosts and former magicians, Penn and Teller, have also made careers out of debunking a wide variety of topics, including the paranormal and psychics. Their popular, award-winning TV series, Bullshit!, is in its eighth year. While not exclusively aimed at psychics, the show has taken them on several times. They too can be seen on YouTube, including one amusing episode where they caught Rosemary Altea cheating.
And this isn't new - as far back as 1922, Scientific American offered a big (for its day) cash prize for any authentic "spirit photograph". No one claimed it. Around the same time, magician Harry Houdini put a lot of his time into debunking spiritualists of the day and exposing the tricks of séances. He, too offered a reward for proof of spiritual contact, but it was never claimed.
The Independent Investigators' Group (IIG) has a current offer of $50,000 to "anyone who can prove paranormal abilities under scientific testing conditions." But, as the IIG notes on its Web site, "Most people who inquire about our challenge do not end up being tested, usually because they will not agree to the protocols designed for the test. Of those who have completed a test, not a single one has yet demonstrated any paranormal powers."
Maybe self-described psychics are shy because under the scrutiny of scientific reason, they come up a bit short in the proof department and that could hurt their revenue stream if made public. No one seems to have ever won any of these major rewards. But that doesn't stop people from believing in so-called psychics and giving them money.
Which begs the question, "why?" Despite all the evidence to the contrary, and even proof some are frauds, people still happily give them money. Apparently many feel they got their money's worth from the transaction. As this ezine article points out,
Quote
There seems to be several common factors in psychic readings. The psychic usually:
Skillfully extracts information from non verbal cues such as breathing patterns, voice, dress, skin color, and body language.
Makes statements that seem to give information when they are actually out to fish for it. E.g. Prompts feedback from sitters by saying "I see a man in uniform, why would that be?"
Feeds back to the subject what the latter wants to hear
Makes general "Barnum statements" such as "You are worrisome on the outside but insecure on the inside."
Skillfully extracts information from non verbal cues such as breathing patterns, voice, dress, skin color, and body language.
Makes statements that seem to give information when they are actually out to fish for it. E.g. Prompts feedback from sitters by saying "I see a man in uniform, why would that be?"
Feeds back to the subject what the latter wants to hear
Makes general "Barnum statements" such as "You are worrisome on the outside but insecure on the inside."
Psychics, in other words, are not reading your mind or that aura no one else but they can see, but rather - like a good poker player - reading your body language and fishing for clues. They're not in contact with some astral plane persona, your dead ancestors, or some spirit that dogs your earthly steps. They're often carnies, playing you like a fish on a hook.
To be fair, some may have extraordinary skills at reading someone's body language. That's no small talent. But it's not psychic. My dog is remarkably skilled at reading my mood, telling when I plan to take her for a walk or when I plan to get her a treat. I doubt she's psychic - just using her heightened senses.
In a similar vein, a good psychologist or psychiatrist can extract information of a similar sort from you, and probably tell you as much and likely more about yourself, your relationships, your family and your love life, without, of course, the comfort of telling you what you want to hear (and without the cornball sideshow or the hookum about angels, crystals, spirits or ghosts).
A couple of years ago, an article in the local paper, noted that,
Quote
Blessed with "second sight," for over 30 years (she) has been helping clients through her special ability to read cards, tea cup, palms, the crystal ball and psychometry - the reading of pictures, articles and items that belong to someone that hold sentimental value.
While tarot cards have always been a popular tool, in recent years (she) has found the ancient traditional decks are restricting with cards no longer detailed enough to deal with problems and issues of the people who seek her out.
While tarot cards have always been a popular tool, in recent years (she) has found the ancient traditional decks are restricting with cards no longer detailed enough to deal with problems and issues of the people who seek her out.
Well, aside from the inappropriately subjective nature of those claims - blessed? the editor allowed the reporter to write blessed without qualifying it? - did the reporter actually interview anyone who was "helped out" 30 years ago? Or even today? Was there any research or investigation of these claims?
No: it's more of the same bunkum. What proof was provided of any "special ability"? It's not a story: it's a press release given credibility by having a reporter's name on it, with erroneous information to boot. **
Surfing several psychic Web sites, I found all sorts of claims, from teaching you about your "Guardian Angels" and "Spirit Guides" to the importance of understanding your aura, and the value of the nebulous psychometry. Apparently some sort of pseudo-scientific or religious aura makes it more attractive to be bilked.****
Most police services ignore or refuse to use self-proclaimed psychic detectives or self-styled psychic investigators. Despite some impressive claims they make for their own successes, independent analysis of the claims shows a less-than-spectacular rate. One example is Carla Baron, a self-proclaimed psychic who claims to have "solved" 50 police cases in the past 20 years - a claim refuted through considerable research done by the Independent Investigators' Group.
Even some of the more reputable (if I can use that term) psychics admit police don't use their services (see, for example, the UK Psychics and Mediums Network page which notes: "... of the 46 UK Police Forces actively participating; none have used psychics within their jurisdiction during the course of an investigation. This is a significant indicator that psychics are not used routinely or otherwise by UK police forces. ...psychics may actually hinder effective investigations by the provision of useless information that must be taken into account in investigations thus wasting valuable police resources.")
In an article on the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI) site, Joe Nickell writes:
Quote
Actually, the case against psychics is worse than just their inability to provide information that actually solves crimes. A far more serious problem exists with regard to the wasted resources of police departments who expend precious time and human activity in following up on a psychic's meaningless "clues." In one instance the Nutley, New Jersey, police spent the whole of an afternoon in digging up a drainage ditch that Dorothy Allison mistakenly thought contained the body of a missing boy. In another case, the fire department pumped the water from the flooded basement of an abandoned building in a fruitless search for a boy's remains that eventually were discovered across town. Even worse, psychics have wrongfully accused persons of committing crimes, a memorable example being that of Peter Hurkos, "the man with the radar brain," who mistakenly identified an innocent man as the notorious Boston Strangler. These examples answer the question that is often asked by those who defend the use of psychics, "What harm can it do?"
And what about those famous, annual predictions of psychics who follow in the footsteps of long-debunked, fantasy-prone Edgar Cayce or the generally erroneous Jean Dixon*****? Several sites like CSICOP list the last year's major predictions and you can enjoy a laugh at how many seem fatuous today, and how few - how very, very few - actually happened (and generally those are couched in the most general terms - life forest fires in California or the stock market will rise and then fall...).
Keep tabs on these predictions for 2010 and see how many actually came true by year's end. I am particularly looking forward to seeing some of these come true (most are from a Toronto-based self-professed psychic called Nikki, "psychic to the stars"):
- Trouble on the moon's surface and atmosphere (which is amusing, since the moon has NO atmosphere! So it needs to develop one before it can have atmospheric trouble...).
- The Lost City of Atlantis will be found (Edgar Cayce predicted that, too - he claimed a new land would appear in 1968 or 1969 off the east coast of North America, which, he said, was the "rising of Atlantis." We're still waiting.)
- A worldwide power blackout (how? since electrical networks are not interconnected...).
- Giant bats will attack a city in South America (an obviously new species, since most bats in this hemisphere are quite small, and generally insectivores... )
- Two cruise ships will collide in the Caribbean.
- A famous Las Vegas casino hotel will burn to the ground.
- The possible assassination - or attempted assassination - of President Obama.
- Sarah Palin will pose nude (probably at a Tea Party shindig where they get all Libertarian about the restrictions clothes present to free expression).
- Treasure from a Spanish Galleon Ship will be found under the sea. (as opposed to on the land where they had wheels...)
- Reptiles invading El Paso, Texas (not merely Republicans, but actual reptiles...).
- A terrorist attack in British Columbia.
- A mysterious insect will kill the corn crop in Iowa, USA.
- A huge breakthrough in the cure for Diabetes through stem cell research (which, of course, the fundamentalists in the USA will prevent from being used...).
- A fire at the home of the Wall Street Journal.
- A commercial airliner crashes over the state of Arizona.
- A plane will be hijacked at Toronto International Airport.
- Many rare white lions will be found in Africa (as opposed to France? or Australia?).
- A major coffee chain will go bankrupt (Starbucks: watch out!).
- A blimp exploding over a stadium. (Interesting since blimps use inert helium, not flammable hydrogen...)
- Yet another sex scandal in Washington, DC. (Wow, like no one could have predicted a sex scandal in Washington...)
- More exotic insects in fruits and vegetables which are imported attacking people. (Are the insects imported or the fruits? And are the fruits attacking people or the insects?)
- Giant earthquake in California. (A major theme in psychic predictions since the Great Quake...)
- Giant earthquake in Los Angeles, San Francisco and San Diego (which one supposes is separate from the one that hits the rest of California, above...)
- A devastating earthquake in Rome and Naples, Italy (as opposed to Rome and Naples, New Jersey...).
- A fire at the famed Redwood Forest north of San Francisco, California. (Somehow predicting forest fires in California doesn't seem to surprise me...)
- Danger around the Dahlia Lama. (from the Chinese? Gee... they've been giving him grief since he fled Tibet in the 1950s, after the Chinese invaded. Amazing that a psychic finally notices the headlines...)
- Trouble and explosion at the Ambassador Bridge (you mean aside from the excessive waits?).
- A terrorist attack in Dubais (sic -maybe the psychic is aware of multiple copies of Dubai).
- Serious injuries to a Hollywood movie star on an amusement ride at a theme park.
- A cure for the disease Lupus.
- A plane crashes at a major airport because of a computer glitch and problems (a computer glitch AND problems?)
- A disease will kill maple trees. (Duh, it does that every year across North America...)
- An ocean liner will sink like the Titanic. (What, hitting an iceberg?)
- Air Force One will be hijacked.
- A famous Hollywood actor will be held for ransom.
- An insect will destroy lilac trees. (Okay, they do that every year, too...)
A major heist at a New York museum. (Give me all your dinosaur bones and no one gets hurt...) - An explosion on the New York subway (sorry, that was my lunch going off...).
- An explosion at Rockefeller Center. (New Yorks gets a lot of these explosions...)
- A daredevil will attempt to climb the Empire State Building.
- A worldwide computer virus. (Duh, again... every 15 minutes we have one... most, fortunately, blocked by AV programs)
- More ancient dinosaur fossils will be found. (Double duh... as opposed to recent dinosaur fossils? Or perhaps as opposed to simply ancient dinosaurs...)
- A sea serpent will be found off the coast of Japan. (A snake swimming in the ocean?)
- China and Tibet at war. (Sigh... China owns Tibet after it invaded the previously independent nation.)
- Hillary Clinton has to watch her health and an assassination attempt. (I'll bet she has to watch an assassination attempt... and her health)
- Invasion of Iran by the US. (While I have little sympathy for the crazy-as-drugged-rats Iranian government, I can't see the US invading while they are still mired in Afghanistan)
- Iran will attack another country (Iran shares borders with seven nations - you want to clarify which one?)
- A biological attack on the US( what: anthrax? H1N1? AIDs? a cold?).
- Sarah Palin will divorce (before or after she poses nude?).
- Uprising in Venezuela (at last...).
- A daredevil will scale the Eiffel Tower (detect a theme here?)
- Another planet with life will be found in the Universe. (Carl Sagan rolls over in his grave... but how can we prove it has life...?)
- Problems with North Korea. (Triple duh...)
- North Korea will launch a missile towards Japan and South Korea. (It does so regularly, all of which fall into the ocean).
- A terrorist attack in London, England, Los Angeles, New York, Scotland, Ireland, Toronto, Florida, and Chicago (all at once? in order?).
- The Sydney Opera House in Australia will have a massive fire.
- An assassination attempt around the Queen of England. (around? or against?)
I am, however, a firm supporter of research into parapsychology because I believe we should never limit our scientific studies simply because something seems silly or pointless. After all, the more we learn, the more we understand our universe and learning what isn't right is as important as learning what is. It's unfortunate for its believers that so far all the research hasn't proven any of the claims. In fact after a century of academic studies and research, almost every American university that had a department of parapsychology closed it because none had produced any significant results - aside from debunking most of the claims, that is. It's like creationism: just because it's silly doesn't mean we shouldn't take the time to debunk it, because unless we do, a less skeptical person may fall for it.
So let's keep the lines open and research psychics and the paranormal, if for no other reason to say "I told you so" to their believers and practitioners.
I'm sure there are a lot safer and saner places to spend your money than on psychics. But if you really, really must know your future, I'd recommend the inexpensive yet always correct Magic 8 fortune-telling ball. better yet, use this online version. Ask your question, click submit, and reveal the answer! It's accurate at least as often as any psychic and probably more so. And a lot cheaper!
I don't mean to suggest that all psychics are fraudulent, chasing your money and scamming folks, just that you really have to be careful about charlatans. Some self-described probably - and sincerely - believe they have powers and abilities - but simply don't understand why these can't be proven or demonstrated in any scientific, controlled format. Some may also actually believe in angels, auras, crystal balls, spirit guides, reincarnation and psychometry - although that pushes credibility and starts to set off the alarm bells.
After all, if your car mechanic told you an evil spirit haunted your muffler and needed an exorcist to fix, how would you react? If your doctor prescribed crystal therapy and a séance to fix your broken leg, would you go back? If your boss told you you didn't need a vacation because your aura was already green, would you stay at work? If a police officer gave you a ticket because your spiritual guide was speeding, would you pay it?
Sure, there may be a lot more to this world than we can measure or quantify with our current equipment and psychics may actually have some touchstone to reality, however slim it seems to me. But as my grandfather used to say, "Pigs might fly, my boy, but they make damned unlikely birds."
~~~~~
* "I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met." Steven Wright. But think about it: who could really have a psychic friend? All those nasty little comments and thoughts that rattle around in our heads, those unflattering things we want to say to others but don't; opinions of our in-laws, our neighbours, or our relatives' cooking, opinions about our buddy's golf swing, our boss' warped political perspective, and whether those pants really do make our partner look fat - stuff we clamp off before they reach our tongues. They'd be plucked from our brains like ripe tomatoes by a psychic and spouted aloud. And that's not even getting into the steamier stuff that goes on. No, dear, that thong looks very modest... Psychics would flee in horror at some of the stuff in our heads.
One online psychic whines, "My spirit guides are pretty much responsible for all the work I do as a Medium and for protecting me from negative or evil spirits and energy. But they can only do so much. Spirit has been pushing me into a smoke free lifestyle for quite some time now. They even gave me a dead line to quit, but did I listen, NO! I thought about it and did attempt to try a few times with no success." So you not only ignore all the ads, all the evidence, that smoking is both stupid and lethal, but you also ignore your imaginary friend when he/she warns you about it. As a potential customer, would you trust the advice from this psychic, when he doesn't even pay attention to his own inner voices?
** Tarot cards have not "always" been anything - the earliest examples date from the mid-15th century and their original purpose was for playing card games. They're uniquely European (any claim to be Egyptian is spurious). Tarot didn't really come into popularity as a fortune-telling or divination device (or "tool" as the writer says) until the late 18th century. That's not nearly as long as, say, Greek philosophy, Roman roads or Sumerian cuneiform tablets. They're not even vaguely "ancient" by any standards .
Popular? Madonna was popular. So were the Spice Girls. What defines popularity? I've actually studied the tarot a bit (from a Jungian or historical perspective) and I am disappointed, but not surprised, that many writers, rather than actually research the information, merely parrot what the psychics describe as both a history and powers that don't reflect anything close to the truth for either. But I suppose it's not good form to blame the self-professed psychic for the sloppy faults of the reporter.
**** Wikipedia defines psychometry as: "...the claimed ability to make relevant associations from an object of unknown history by making physical contact with that object." In other words, give a psychic your old underwear and he or she can tell you about your love life. Well, I guess that's what happened to Bill Clinton... but without the spiritualists.
***** The "Jean Dixon effect" refers to a tendency to promote a few correct predictions while ignoring a larger number of incorrect predictions. Somewhat like the tendency of the majority of Collingwood Council to ignore the reality of predictions about the public reaction to curbside patios and promote a few bad ideas.
What did you ingest today???