[JimmytheT]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

I believe everyone has some psychic ability in them, some just more then others.
There have been many times when I've been thinking something, and then I will hear or see something about it right away out of the blue. I consider that to be more then a coincedence.

I think these famous psychics work the same way, they're just a bit better at it then most. They don't actually know everything, and they certainly make mistakes, but they do get hunches about things that are often close to the truth.

Just a couple of days ago my GF went to see a psychic in Thailand, who told her she has a boyfriend of a different ethnicity. This is true. Could just be a lucky guess, but it seems like a strange thing to guess IMO. If he just says things to scam peoples money, that certainly doesn't seem like a high probobility thing to say.

Its called subjective validation, selective thinking and confirmation bias. Look them up for more info.

And ask yourself this: Why do so-called psychics always seem to tell you things you already know, yet provide no tangible predictions regarding important matters such as these:

-Natural disasters
-Terrorist activities
-the location of Osama bin Laden
-Oil spills
-The explosion of the space shuttle
-Betting on sports teams (if your psychic you should know who's gonna win)
-Being able to definitively help solve a crime
-Knowing what the winning lottery numbers are going to be

I can go on and on and on. The truth is "psychics" do not win the lottery more then any other person, they cannot tell us where Osama bin Laden is hiding, they do not predict disasters before they happen (they only claim they do after the fact, its called retrodicting). If psychics do have some sort of magical brain power then they are certainly using it in the wrong places.

But the thing is all psychics do is this:

*They rely on credulous persons, who subjectively validate vague things that are said
*People who believe in psychics will remember the times the psychic is right and forget the numerous more times more the psychic was wrong.
*People then believe the psychic was bang on

Below is a complete quoted example taken from the following link:
http://www.randi.org/jr/2006-04/042106edward.html

Let’s examine this item, the “Crossing Over” show of December 19th, 2000. Edward began the session with a warning to the audience that he couldn’t meet their specific expectations, a technique that excused in advance what actually turned out to be a rather bad guessing game. Remember, every member of his audience, self-selected to consist of persons who sincerely want to make a connection with the spirit of a deceased relative or friend, sits and waits for a comment from Edward, an initial, name, suggestion, relationship, or situation that they can in some way relate either to their lives or to the life of the deceased. They search frantically for that connection which Edward is constantly urging them to make. Here are the first 50 seconds of that show:

John Edward: The person that’s coming through back here, they’re telling me to acknowledge I have a male figure who’s coming through and he’s coming through with a younger male. So I have a father figure who’s coming through, coming through with a person that would be below him and it’s like there’s some sort of connection between October, or the 10th of a month having some type of meaning, and there’s a feeling of somebody either working in transit, being involved with busses or trains, there’s something like “transit” feeling that comes up with that, because they’re showing me somebody with a transit connection, so I don’t know exactly where this goes. [He points into the audience.] It’s like I’m in the back, two rows back there. Do you understand this? [He points to a man, 70 years or so in age, who has indicated his interest.]

Just to bring a bit of clarity to this drivel, here it is again, the redundancies and the “stuffing” removed. It’s about a quarter of the original size, and much clearer:

A male father figure with a younger male, a connection between October, or the 10th of a month, and somebody working in transit, involved with busses or trains. [He points into the audience.] Two rows back. Do you understand?

This was delivered rapidly, with no pauses, not providing any opportunity for a denial. The question, “Do you understand this?” is a cold-reading technique; of course these simple words are understood, but affirmation of that fact can – and does – appear to indicate that all the items in this rambling sequence are being accepted by the victim, not just “understood.”

The chap “two rows back” indicated that he wanted to hear more of this:

Man: Yes.
JE: Okay. Your dad passed?
Man: Yes.
JE: Okay. And is there a younger male for him who’s crossed over, like his son or a younger brother?
Man: My son.
JE: Okay. Your dad and your son are coming through together. There’s a “D” connection that comes up around this, that either means that your dad is the “D,” your son is the “D,” there’s someone with a “D” connection around this. You understand that?

Again, the “Do you understand” ploy, even though the victim denies any suggested connection. And the identification of the father with “his son or a younger brother” is wrong. It turns out to be the victim’s son.

Man: Not a “D.”
JE: Okay, keep thinking about it.

We have here another common cold-reading move, in which the victim is told to continue to try to come up with a connection, and the implication is that Edward will return to the guess and further develop it. And he does, though the victim’s wife supplies the connection, as someone frequently does, trying to help the scam artist:

Man: [interrupts when his wife whispers to him]… mother-in-law.
JE: Who’s passed?
Man: [nods yes.]
JE: Okay.
Man: Dottie.
JE: That’s a “D”!

Next, following this clutch-at-a-straw, Edward reminded the man, in a quick re-cap, what he’d told him. He said he’d “brought through” his dad, and a “younger male,” plus the month of October, and the 10th of any month (either of which he then suggested to the man might mark a birthday or anniversary, but neither did), and insisted that at least the number “10" was “marking” something or someone, extending the field now to include “an uncle or uncle-in-law.” Still no connection. He then asked if the family consisted of three children, or perhaps one child “and two others.” Both those guesses were also met with a blank stare and denial.

But remember, in the case of his “bringing through” the father, Edward didn’t give a name or even a correct initial, though he tried! The “younger man” he had introduced, he guessed was either the man’s brother or his uncle, but it wasn’t; it was his son. Note, too, the gimmick of instant correction used by Edward: he guessed the wrong relationship here, but as soon as the man corrected his guess for him, he incorporated it immediately by saying, “Your dad and your son...” All that long attempt to connect the transit industry with the man or with the deceased – 9 seconds out of the 20 seconds of “fishing,” – also failed, and though Edward, before leaving the man and moving on, tried the “transit” reference once more, it was a total washout and was then ignored. The month of October, or the 10th of any month – giving him 42 days out of the year! – didn’t fit any angle, and Edward didn’t find anyone with a “D” name until the man’s wife suggested her own mother, who up until then had not even been mentioned. Edward accepted it eagerly as fitting the “D” guess.
This was a resounding failure as a reading, but the subject of all this guesswork was reduced to sobs and tears by the experience, and the audience was impressed.

Response
(1) There is a male figure? Yes
(2) There is also a younger male figure? Yes
(3) There is significance to the month of October? No
(4) There is significance to the 10th of any month? No
(5) There is a transit industry connection? No
(6) Busses are involved? No
(7) Trains are involved? No
(8) Your father is deceased ? Yes
(9) The younger man is your brother? No
(10) The younger man is your uncle? No
(11) There is a “D” connection? No
(12) Your son is the “D”? No
(13) Your father is the “D”? No
(14) Can you identify with any “D” person in your life? No
(15) The 10th of a month — any month — is a birthday? No
(16) The 10th of a month — any month — is an anniversary? No
(17) There’s a birthday — of anyone — in October? No
(18) There’s an anniversary — of anyone — in October? No
(19) The number 10 “marks something”? Anything? No
(20) An uncle is “connected” with the number 10?No
(21) An uncle-in-law is “connected” with the number 10? No
(22) Your family has three children? No
(23) Your family consists of one child and two others?No

3 right 20 wrong

End Quote